I believe one of the earliest references to the problem of 'quantifying'
effort and effect is:
Gazdar, G. & Good, D. (1982) On a notion of relevance: comments on Sperber
and Wilson's paper. In: Smith, N. (ed.) Mutual knowledge. London: Academic
Press. 88-100.
The following is forwarded on behalf of Kent Bach:
---- Original message ----
> It's interesting that people seem to think that I think
> that what I called the "most obvious" problem is the
> biggest problem. I'd say the second problem of the
> five I mention is the biggest:
> 2. Then there is the uniqueness problem: since
> relevance is a function of two variables (however
> they are measured), in particular a ratio, there is
> no unique way to maximize relevance or, indeed, to
> achieve any specific degree of it. Any increase or
> decrease in processing effort can be offset by a
> corresponding increase or decrease in cognitive
> effects, and vice versa. So there is no unique
> answer to the question of what is the most relevant
> interpretation of a given utterance.
Received on Sun Oct 15 19:45:19 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Oct 15 2006 - 19:49:31 BST