A: Ah , so comfortable .
F: Smooth .
A: Mm - hmm .
A: Good .
A: I know that he 's going to like , Taiwan and other places to eat .
A: So .
D: On ?
D: Am I on ?
D: I think I 'm on ?
A: Yep . Yep .
B: Yeah .
D: Good . Good .
B: Actually A: Bye .
F: I just had one of the most frustrating meetings of my career .
D: You a
A: It 's definitely not the most frustrating meeting I 've ever had .
D: You 're you remember you 're being recorded at this point .
F: Yeah .
E: Yeah .
A: Oh , yeah , so , w we didn't yet specify with whom .
E: Right .
A: But um .
E: Uh , right .
E: Uh .
A: So that 's why Keith and I are going to be a little dazed for the first half m the meeting .
F: Huh .
F: Yeah , I 'm just gonna sit here
F: and
E: Right . Yeah , I I I avoided that as long as I could for you guys ,
F: growl .
F: Yeah .
E: but , uh A: Mm - hmm .
F: For which we thank you , by the way .
A: Are very appreciative ,
A: yeah .
E: Right .
F: I know you were you were doing that ,
F: but , anyway .
D: Oh yeah , how di how d exactly did , uh , that paper lead to anti - lock brakes ?
F: Oh , I could tell you had a rough day , man !
D: Nah .
A: What ?
D: I love that story .
F: Yeah ,
F: it 's a great story .
C: OK .
F: Oh my goodness .
C: Oh yeah , um , Liz suggested we could start off by uh , doing the digits all at the same time .
A: What ?
D: All at the same time .
D: I don't know if I would get distracted and confused , probably .
E: e
A: Really ?
A: Do we have to like , synchronize ?
E: Well , I think you 're supposed to F: Are you being silly ?
E: OK . We can do this .
D: Oh wait do we have t
E: Everybody 's got different digits ,
E: right ?
F: Uh .
C: Yep .
D: Yeah , do we have to time them at the same time or just overlapping A: You 're kidding .
E: No .
C: No , no , just just start whenever you want .
E: e
E: yeah , the
A: And any rate ?
F: Alright .
E: Well , they they have s they have the close talking microphones for each of us ,
A: Yeah , that 's true .
E: so F: Alright .
E: yeah , there 's separate channels .
C: Yeah .
A: OK .
E: So when I say
F: Just plug one ear .
C: Yeah .
E: OK .
A: You lose .
F: OK , bye !
F: That was a great meeting !
E: Right .
F: So - Now , uh , why ?
D: Alright .
C: Just to save time .
F: OK .
C: Does matter for them .
A: Are we gonna start all our meetings out that way from now on ?
E: No .
A: Oh . Too bad .
A: I kinda like it .
F: Well , could we ?
D: It 's strangely satisfying .
A: Yeah . It 's a ritual .
D: Are we to r Just to make sure I know what 's going on , we 're talking about Robert 's thesis proposal today ?
D: Is that
C: We could .
D: true ?
A: We are ?
C: We might .
A: OK .
E: Well , you you had s you said there were two things that you might wanna do .
D: Is E: One was rehearse your i i talk D: Oh yes , and that too .
C: Not not rehearse ,
C: I mean , I have just not spent any time on it ,
C: so I can show you what I 've got , get your input on it , and maybe some suggestions ,
C: that would be great .
C: And the same is true for the proposal .
C: I will have time to do some revision and some additional stuff on various airplanes and trains .
C: So , um .
C: I don't know how much of a chance you had to actually read it
A: I haven't looked at it
C: because A: yet ,
C: but you could always send me comments per electronic mail
A: but I will .
C: and they will be incorporated .
A: OK .
C: Um , the C: It basically says , well " this is construal " ,
C: and then it continues to say that one could potentially build a probabilistic relational model that has some general , domain - general rules
C: how things are construed ,
C: and then the idea is to use ontology , situation , user , and discourse model to instantiate elements in the classes of the probabilistic relational model to do some inferences in terms of what is being construed as what
A: Hmm .
C: in our beloved tourism domain .
C: But , with a focus on
A: Can I s
F: I think I need a copy of this , yes .
A: Sorry .
C: Hmm ?
F: I is there an extra copy around ?
D: OK , we can we can we can pass pass my , uh we can pass my extra copy around .
A: Uh . He sent it .
A: OK . You can keep it .
F: Alrigh
D: Er , actually , my only copy , now that I think about it ,
A: OK .
D: but . I already read half of it ,
C: Um , I don't I , uh I don't need it .
D: so it 's OK .
F: OK .
C: Um , actually this is the the newest version after your comments ,
C: and E: Yeah , no I s I s I see this has got the castle in it , and stuff like that .
C: Yeah .
E: Yep .
D: Oh , maybe the version I didn't have
D: that I mine the w
D: did the one you sent on the email have the E: Yeah .
D: That was the most recent one ?
E: Uh , yeah , I think so .
D: OK .
C: Yep .
D: Cuz I read halfway but I didn't see a castle thing .
A: I 'm changing this .
A: Just so you know .
C: Yeah ,
A: But , anyway .
C: um , if you would have checked your email you may have received a note from Yees asking you to send me the , uh , up - to - d
A: Oh . Oh , sorry .
A: OK .
A: Sorry .
C: current formalism thing that you presented .
A: OK . I will .
A: OK . OK .
A: OK .
C: But for this it doesn't matter .
C: But , uh A: We can talk about it later .
A: That 's not even ready ,
A: so . Um ,
A: OK ! Go on t to , uh , whatever .
C: And A: I 'm making changes .
A: " Don't worry about that . "
A: OK . Mmm - mmm .
A: Oh ! OK , sorry ,
A: go on .
C: And any type of comment whether it 's a spelling or a syntax or
A: Mm - hmm .
F: There 's only one " S " in " interesting " .
C: readability C: Hmm ?
F: There 's only one " S " in " interesting " . On page five .
C: Interesting .
A: Anyway .
A: And y uh , email any time ,
A: but most usefully before D: The twenty - first I 'm assuming .
A: The twenty - first ?
C: Twenty - ninth .
E: No , this is the twenty - first .
F: That 's D: What ,
D: today 's the twenty - first ?
F: Well , better hurry up then !
D: Oh , man !
C: The twenty - ninth .
A: Before the twenty - ninth ,
A: OK .
D: OK .
C: That 's when I 'm meeting with Wolfgang Wahlster to sell him this idea .
A: Mm - hmm .
A: OK .
C: OK ?
C: Then I 'm also going to present a little talk at EML , about what we have done here
C: and so
C: of course , I 'm I 'm gonna start out with this slide ,
C: so the most relevant aspects of our stay here ,
C: and um ,
C: then I 'm asking them to imagine that they 're standing somewhere in Heidelberg
C: and someone asks them in the morning The Cave Forty - Five is a is a well - known discotheque
C: which is certainly not open at that that time .
F: OK .
C: And so
C: they 're supposed to imagine that , you know , do they think the person wants to go there , or just know where it is ?
C: Uh ,
C: which is probably not , uh , the case in that discotheque example ,
C: or in the Bavaria example ,
C: you just want to know where it is .
C: And so forth .
C: So basically we can make a point that here is ontological knowledge
C: but if it 's nine nine PM in the evening then the discotheque question would be , for example , one that might ask for directions instead of just location .
C: Um , and so forth and so forth .
C: That 's sort of motivating it .
C: Then what have we done so far ?
C: We had our little bit of , um , um , SmartKom stuff , that we did ,
C: um ,
C: everth
F: Oh , you 've got the parser done .
F: Sorry .
C: That 's the not the construction parser .
F: OK .
C: That 's the , uh , tablet - based parser ,
A: Easy parser .
F: OK .
C: and
C: the generation outputter .
D: Halfway done ?
D: Yeah .
C: That 's done .
A: Mmm .
C: You have to change those strategies ,
D: OK .
C: right ?
D: Yeah .
C: That 's , ten words ?
D: Well , i it , you know .
D: Maybe twelve .
C: Twelve ? OK .
C: And , um , and Fey is doing the synthesis stuff as we speak .
C: That 's all about that .
C: Then I 'm going to talk about the data ,
C: you know these things about C: uh , actually I have an example ,
C: probably .
C: Two s
C: Can you hear that ?
F: Mm - hmm .
C: Or should I turn the l volume on .
A: I could hear it .
D: I I can hear it .
F: I heard it .
D: They might not hear it in the D: well maybe they will .
D: I don't know .
A: This was an actual , um , subject ?
A: Ah .
C: Mm - hmm .
F: Sounds like Fey .
A: Yeah .
C: But they 're they 're mimicking the synthesis when they speak to the computer ,
F: Oh , OK .
C: the you can observe that all the time ,
F: Oh really .
C: they 're trying to match their prosody onto the machine .
F: Interesting .
F: Oh , it 's pretty slow .
C: Yeah , you have to A: Wh
F: The system breaking .
A: What is the s ?
A: Oh !
C: OK . And so forth and so forth .
C: Um , I will talk about our problems with the rephrasing ,
C: and how we solved it ,
C: and some preliminary observations ,
C: also , um ,
C: I 'm not gonna put in the figures from Liz ,
C: but I thought it would interesting to , uh , um , point out that it 's basically the same .
C: Um , as in every human - human telephone conversation , and the human - computer telephone conversation is of course quite d quite different from , uh , some first , uh , observations .
C: Then
C: sort of feed you back to our original problem
C: cuz , uh C: how to get there ,
C: what actually is happening there today ,
C: and then maybe talk about the big picture here ,
C: e tell a little bit as much as I can about the NTL story .
C: I I wa I do wanna , um C: I 'm not quite sure about this , whether I should put this in ,
C: um , that , you know , you have these two sort of different ideas that are or two different camps of people envisioning how language understanding works ,
C: and then , talk a bit about the embodied and simulation approach favored here
C: and as a prelude , I 'll talk about monkeys in Italy .
C: And , um , Srini was gonna send me some slides
C: but he didn't do it ,
C: so from but I have the paper ,
C: I can make a resume of that ,
C: and then I stole an X - schema from one of your talks I think .
A: Oh .
A: I was like , " where 'd you get that ? "
F: Yeah , that looks familiar .
A: OK .
A: " Looks familiar . "
C: I think that 's Bergen , Chang , something , or the other .
A: Uh .
E: Whatever .
A: OK .
C: Um , and that 's C: now I 'm not going to bring that .
C: So that 's basically what I have , so far ,
C: and the rest is for airplanes .
C: So X - schemas , then , I would like to do C: talk about the construction aspect
C: and then at the end about our Bayes - net .
A: Mm - hmm .
C: End of story .
C: Anything I forgot that we should mention ?
C: Oh , maybe the FMRI stuff .
C: Should I mention the fact that , um , we 're also actually started going to start to look at people 's brains in a more direct way ?
E: You certainly can .
E: I mean I y I you know , I don't know A: You might just wanna like , tack that on , as a comment , to something .
E: Right ,
E: um .
C: " Future activities " something .
E: Well , the time to mention it , if you mention it , is when you talk about mirror neurons ,
E: then you should talk about the more recent stuff , about the kicking
E: and , you know , the C: Yeah .
E: yeah , yeah E: and that the plan is to see to what extent the you 'll get the same phenomena with stories about this ,
E: so that C: Mm - hmm .
E: and that we 're planning to do this ,
E: um ,
E: which , we are .
E: So that 's one thing .
E: Um .
E: Depends . I mean , there is a , um , whole language learning story ,
E: OK ?
C: Yeah .
E: which ,
E: uh , actually , i i
E: even on your five - layer slide , you you 've got an old one that that leaves that off .
C: Yeah , I I I do have it here .
A: Hmm .
E: Yeah .
C: Um .
C: And , of course , you know , the the big picture is this bit .
E: Right .
C: But , you know , it would C: But I don't think I I am capable of of do pulling this off and doing justice to the matter .
C: I mean , there is interesting stuff in her terms of how language works ,
C: so the emergentism story would be nice to be you know , it would be nice to tell people
C: how what 's happening there ,
C: plus how the , uh , language learning stuff works ,
E: OK , so , so anyway , I I agree that 's not central .
C: but E: What you might wanna do is ,
A: Mm - hmm .
E: um ,
E: and may not ,
E: but you might wanna this is rip off a bunch of the slides on the
E: anal
E: there the there we 've got various i generations of slides that show language analysis , and matching to the underlying image schemas ,
E: and ,
E: um , how the construction and simulation E: that ho that whole th
C: Yeah , th that that 's c that comes up to the X - schema slide ,
A: OK , right .
C: so basically I 'm gonna steal that from Nancy ,
C: one of Nancy 's st
A: OK , I can give you a more recent if you want A: well , that might have enough .
C: Uh , I C: yeah , but I also have stuff you trash you left over ,
E: OK .
C: your quals and your triple - AI .
E: The quals w the the the quals slides would be fine .
A: Yeah .
E: You could get it out of there , or some
A: Which I can even email you then ,
A: you know , like there probably was a little few changes ,
A: not a big deal .
A: Yeah , you could steal anything you want ,
A: I don't care .
A: Which you 've already done , obviously .
A: So .
C: Well , I I don't feel bad about it at all
A: Sorry
A: No , you shouldn't .
C: because because you are on the , uh , title .
C: I mean on the the , you 're that 's see , that 's you .
A: Oh , that 's great , that 's great .
E: Yeah .
A: I 'm glad to see propagation .
E: Yeah .
A: Mmm .
C: Hmm ?
C: Propagated ?
A: Yes .
C: I mean I might even mention that this work you 're doing is sort of also with the MPI in Leipzig ,
C: so .
A: It 's it 's certainly related ,
A: um ,
C: Because , um , EML is building up a huge thing in Leipzig .
A: might wanna say .
A: Is it ?
C: So it C: It 's on biocomputation . Would E: Yeah , it 's different ,
E: this is the , uh , DNA building , or someth the double helix building .
E: Yeah .
C: Yeah .
A: Kind of a different level of analysis .
E: The yeah it was it turns out that if if you have multiple billions of dollars , y you can do all sorts of weird things ,
E: and D: Wait , they 're building a building in the shape of DNA ,
A: What ?
D: is that what you said ?
E: Roughly , yeah .
F: Oh ! Oh boy !
E: Including cr cross - bridges ,
A: O
E: and
A: What ?
F: That 's brilliant !
A: Oh my god !
F: Hhh .
E: You d you really now I I spent the last time I was there I spent maybe two hours hearing this story
E: which is , um A: Of what
D: Y You definitely wanna w don't wanna waste that money on research ,
A: the building ?
D: you know ?
E: Right .
D: That 's horrible .
E: Right .
E: Well , no , no , y i there 's infinite money .
E: See
E: you th you th you then fill it with researchers .
A: And give them more money .
A: They just want a fun place for them to to work .
E: Right .
E: Right .
F: And everybody gets a trampoline in their office .
C: Well , the the offices are actually a little C: the ,
C: think of um , ramps , coming out of the double helix
C: and then you have these half - domes , glass half - domes ,
C: and the offices are in in the glass half - dome .
A: Really ?
F: Alright , let 's stop talking about this .
E: Yeah .
A: Does it exist yet ?
E: Yeah .
C: Uh , as a model .
A: They are w now building it ?
A: Hmm .
C: But I th
E: So , yeah , I think that 's that 's a good point ,
E: th th that the date , the , uh ,
E: a lot of the this is interacting with , uh , people in Italy
E: but also definitely the people in Leipzig
E: and
E: the E: the b the combination of the biology and the Leipzig connection might be interesting to these guys ,
E: yeah .
E: OK .
E: OK .
E: Anyway ! Enough of that ,
E: let 's talk about your thesis proposal .
C: Yeah , if somebody has something to say .
E: Yep .
F: You might want to , uh , double - check the spellings of the authors ' names on your references ,
F: you had a few , uh , misspells in your slides , there .
F: Like I believe you had " Jackendorf " .
E: Um .
F: Uh , unless there 's a person called " Jackendorf " ,
E: No , no , no .
F: yeah .
A: On that one ?
F: But that 's the only thing I noticed in there .
A: In the presentation ?
F: In the presentation .
A: I 'll probably I c might have I 'll probably have comments for you separately ,
A: not important .
A: Anyway .
C: Oh , in the presentation here .
A: Yeah , that 's what he was talking about .
F: Yeah .
C: I was ac actually worried about bibtex .
C: Uh . No , that 's quite possible .
C: That 's copy and paste from something .
E: So I did note
E: i i it looks like the , uh , metaphor didn't get in yet .
C: Uh , it did ,
C: there is a reference to Srini E: Well , s reference is one thing ,
E: the question is is there any place E: Oh , did you put in something about ,
A: Metonymy and metaphor here ,
A: right ?
E: uh , the individual ,
E: we 'd talked about putting in something about people had ,
E: uh E: Oh yeah , OK .
E: Good . I see where you have it .
E: So the top of the second of pa page two you have a sentence .
C: Mm - hmm .
E: But , what I meant is , I think even before you give this , to Wahlster , uh , you should ,
E: unless you put it in the text ,
E: and I don't think it 's there yet ,
E: about we talked about is the , um , scalability that you get by , um , combining the constructions with the general construal mechanism .
E: Is that in there ?
C: Yeah ,
C: mmm . Um .
E: Uh , OK , so where where is it ,
E: cuz I 'll have to take a look .
C: Um , but I I did not focus on that aspect
C: but , um Ehhh ,
C: um , it 's just underneath , uh , um , that reference to metaphor .
C: So it 's the last paragraph
C: before two .
C: So on page two ,
C: um , the main focus E: Uh , OK .
E: Yeah .
C: But that 's really A: That 's not about that ,
C: Yeah .
A: is it ?
E: No , it it it s says it
E: but it doesn't say it doesn't it d it d
C: Why .
E: yeah , it doesn't give the punch line .
C: Mm - hmm .
E: Cuz let me tell the gang what I think the punch line is ,
E: because it 's actually important ,
E: which is , that , the constructions , that , uh , Nancy and Keith and friends are doing , uh , are , in a way , quite general
E: but cover only base cases .
E: And to make them apply to metaphorical cases and metonymic cases and all those things , requires this additional mechanism , of construal .
E: And the punch line is , he claimed , that if you do this right , you can get essentially orthogonality ,
E: that if you introduce a new construction at at the base level , it should com uh , interact with all the metonymies and metaphors
E: so that all of the projections of it also should work .
F: Mm - hmm .
E: And , similarly , if you introduce a new metaphor , it should then uh , compose with all of the constructions .
F: Mm - hmm .
F: Yeah .
E: And it to the extent that that 's true then then it 's a big win over anything that exists .
D: So does that mean instead of having tons and tons of rules in your context - free grammar you just have these base constructs and then a general mechanism for coercing them .
F: Yeah .
E: Mm - hmm .
E: So that , you know , for example , uh , in the metaphor case , that you have a kind of direct idea of a source , path , and goal
E: and any metaphorical one and abstract goals and all that sort of stuff <comment> you can do the same grammar .
E: And it is the same grammar .
D: Mmm .
E: But , um ,
E: the trick is that the E: the way the construction 's written it requires that the object of the preposition for example be a container .
E: Well , " trouble " isn't a container ,
E: but it gets constr construed as a c container .
D: Right .
E: Et cetera .
E: So that 's that 's where this , um ,
D: So with construal you don't have to have a construction for every possible thing that can fill the rule .
E: Right .
E: So 's it 's it it 's a very big deal , i i in this framework ,
E: and the thesis proposal as it stands doesn't ,
E: um , I don't think , say that as clearly as it could .
C: No , it doesn't say it at all . No .
C: Even though  One could argue what if there are basic cases , even .
C: I mean , it seems like nothing is context - free .
E: Oh , nothing is context - free ,
E: but there are basic cases .
E: That is , um , there are physical containers ,
E: there are physical paths ,
E: there E: you know ,
E: et cetera .
C: But " walked into the cafe and ordered a drink , " and " walked into the cafe and broke his nose , "
C: that 's sort of E: Oh , it doesn't mean that they 're unambiguous .
E: I mean , a cafe can be construed as a container , or it can be construed you know as as a obstacle ,
C: Mmm . Yeah .
F: Uh - huh .
E: or as some physical object .
E: So there are multiple construals .
E: And in fact that 's part of what has to be done .
E: This is why there 's this interaction between the analysis and the construal .
C: Mm - hmm .
C: Yep .
E: The b the the double arrow .
C: Yep .
E: So , uh , yeah , I mean , it doesn't magically make ambiguity go away .
C: No .
E: But it does say that , uh , if you walked into the cafe and broke your nose , then you are construing the cafe as an obstacle .
C: Mm - hmm .
E: And if that 's not consistent with other things , then you 've gotta reject that reading .
C: Yep .
D: You con you conditioned me with your first sentence ,
D: and so I thought , " Why would he walk into the cafe and then somehow break his nose ? "
F: He slipped on the wet floor .
D: uh , oh , uh E: Right .
C: You don't find that usage ,
C: uh uh , I checked for it in the Brown national corpus .
E: Yeah .
C: The " walk into it " never really means , w as in walked smack E: But " run into " does .
C: Yeah , but , y y if you find " walked smacked into the cafe " or " slammed into the wall " E: Yeah , no , but " run into " does .
C: Mm - hmm .
E: Because you will find " run into , "
E: uh ,
D: Cars run into telephone poles all the time .
E: well , or " into the cafe " for that m
E: you know C: Right .
E: " His car ran into the cafe . "
C: Yeah . Or you can run into an old friend , or run .
E: Well , you can " run into " in that sense too .
E: But , uh ,
A: Yeah , " run into " might even be more impact sense than , you know , container sense .
E: Right .
F: Depends .
E: But Like , " run into an old friend " , it probably needs its own construction .
E: I mean , uh , you know , George would have I 'm sure some exa complicated ex reason why it really was an instance of something else
A: Mm - hmm . Mm - hmm .
E: and maybe it is ,
E: but , um ,
E: there are idioms
E: and my guess is that 's one of them ,
E: but , um I don't know .
A: All contact .
A: I mean , there there 's contact that doesn't social contact ,
A: whatever .
A: I mean .
E: Uh .
F: Sudden surprising contact ,
F: right ?
E: Yeah , but it 's it 's it 's it 's Right . i Yeah , it 's more A: Forceful .
F: But of course , no ,
F: i i I mean it has a life of its own .
F: It 's sort of partially inspired by the spatial E: Well , this is this motivated E: but yeah F: Yeah .
E: oh yeah , mo for sure ,
E: motivated ,
E: but then you can't parse on motivated .
F: Yeah .
F: Yeah . Right .
E: Uh ,
A: Too bad .
D: You should get a T - shirt that says that .
E: OK .
A: There 's there 's lots of things you could make T - shirts out of ,
A: but , uh ,
A: this has gotten A: I mean wh
A: We don't need the words to that .
C: Pro - probably not your marks in the kitchen , today .
A: What ?
C: Not not your marks .
A: Oh , no no no no no no no no no , we 're not going there .
A: OK .
F: In other news .
E: OK , so , um ,
E: anything else you want to ask us about
E: the thesis proposal , you got C: Well ,
E: We could look at a particular thing and give you feedback on it .
C: Well there actually C: the i what would have been really nice is to find an example for all of this , uh , from our domain .
C: So maybe if we w if we can make one up now , that would be c incredibly helpful .
A: So , w where it should illustrate
E: OK .
C: How A: uh wh when you say all this , do you mean , like , I don't know , the related work stuff ,
A: as well as , mappings ?
E: Right right r
C: w Well we have , for example , a canonical use of something
C: and y it 's , you know , we have some constructions
C: and then it 's construed as something ,
C: and then we we may get the same constructions with a metaphorical use that 's also relevant to the to the domain .
E: OK , f let 's let 's suppose you use " in " and " on " .
E: I mean , that 's what you started with .
C: Mm - hmm .
E: So " in the bus " and " on the bus , "
E: um , that 's actually a little tricky in English
E: because to some extent they 're synonyms .
E: OK .
C: I had two hours w with George on this ,
E: OK , what did he say .
C: so it ,
A: Did you ?
C: um Um .
A: Join the club .
E: Right . Oh , h that 's C: " On the bus " is a m is a metaphorical metonymy
C: that relates some meta path metaphorically
C: and you 're on on that path
C: and th w I mean it 's he there 's a platform notion ,
E: Yeah , I I believe all that ,
E: it 's just C: right ?
C: " he 's on the standing on the bus waving to me . "
E: Yeah .
C: But th the regular as we speak " J Johno was on the bus to New York , "
E: Yeah .
E: Yeah .
C: um , uh ,
C: he 's C: that 's , uh ,
C: what did I call it here ,
C: the transportation schema , something ,
E: Yeah .
C: where you can be on the first flight , on the second flight ,
E: Yeah .
C: and you can be , you know , on the wagon .
E: Right . So so that that may or may not be what you what you want to do .
E: I mean you could do something much simpler
C: Yeah .
E: like " under the bus , " or something ,
E: where C: But it 's it 's unfortunately , this is not really something a tourist would ever say .
C: So .
E: Well , unless he was repairing it or something ,
E: but yeah .
C: Yeah .
C: But um .
E: Uh , but OK .
C: So in terms of the this A: I see .
C: We had we had initially we 'd started discussing the " out of film . "
E: Right .
C: And there 's a lot of " out of " analysis ,
C: so , um ,
E: Right .
C: could we capture that
C: with a different construal of A: Yeah , it 's a little it 's ,
A: uh we 've thought about it before , uh t uh to use the examples in other papers ,
A: and it 's it 's a little complicated .
F: Out of out of film , in particular .
A: Cuz you 're like , it 's a state of there 's resource ,
F: Yeah .
A: right ,
A: and like , what is film ,
A: the state you know . You 're out of the state of having film , right ? and somehow film is standing for the re the resour the state of having some resource is just labeled as that resource .
F: It 's F: yeah , I mean ,
A: I mean .
F: but F: and plus the fact that there 's also s
A: It 's a little bit F: I mean , can you say , like , " The film ran out "
F: you know ,
F: or , maybe you could say something like " The film is out "
A: Yeah , is film the trajector ?
F: so like the the film went away from where it should be ,
F: namely with you , or something ,
F: right ?
F: You know .
F: The the film the film is gone ,
F: right ?
F: Um ,
F: I never really knew what was going on ,
F: I mean I I find it sort of a little bit farfetched to say that that " I 'm out of film " means that I have left the state of having film or something like that ,
A: It 's weird .
A: That F: but .
E: Uh .
A: Or , " having " is also , um , associated with location ,
F: Yeah . Yeah .
A: right ?
A: so if the film left ,
A: you know state is being near film .
C: So running running out of something is different from being out of somewhere .
E: Or being out of something as , uh as well .
E: So " running out of it " definitely has a process aspect to it .
A: Mm - hmm .
A: But that 's from run , yeah .
F: Mm - hmm .
E: So ,
E: b that 's OK ,
E: I mean b but the difference
A: Yeah .
C: Is the d the final state of running out of something is being out of it .
E: is F: Yeah .
E: Right .
A: Yeah . So th
F: You got there .
A: That part is fine .
F: You got to out of it .
E: Yeah .
F: Yeah .
E: But , uh F: Hmm !
E: Yeah , so so nob so no one has in in of the ,
E: uh ,
E: professional linguists ,
E: they haven't A: Uh .
E: there was this whole thesis on " out of " .
A: There was ?
E: Well , there I thought or there was a paper on it .
A: Who ?
F: Out .
E: Huh ?
F: There was one on on " out " or " out of " ?
E: There was a
E: Well , it may be just " out " .
F: OK .
E: Yeah .
E: I think there was " over "
E: but there was also a paper on " out " .
F: Yeah , Lind - Susan Lindner ,
F: right ?
E: Or something .
A: Oh , yeah , you 're right . Yeah .
F: The the " the syrup spread out " ?
F: That kind of thing ?
E: Yeah , and all that sort of stuff .
A: Yeah .
A: And undoubtably there 's been reams of work about it in cognitive linguistics ,
E: OK . But anyway . We 're not gonna do that between now and next week .
A: but .
A: Yeah .
C: Yeah .
E: OK .
E: So , um A: It 's not one of the y it 's more straightforward ones forward ones to defend ,
A: so you probably don't want to use it for the purposes C: Mm - hmm .
E: Right .
E: OK .
A: th these are you 're addressing like , computational linguists ,
A: right .
A: Or are you ?
C: There 's gonna be four computational linguists ,
A: OK . But more emphasis on the computational ? Or emphasis on the linguist ?
C: computer
C: it 's C: More there 's going to be the just four computational linguists , by coincidence ,
C: but the rest is , whatever , biocomputing people and physicists .
E: No no no , but not for your talk .
A: Oh , OK .
E: I 'm - we 're worrying about the th the thes
C: Oh , the thesis !
E: it 's just for one guy .
A: Oh , I meant this ,
C: That 's that 's computa should be very computational ,
A: you know , like A: OK .
E: Yeah .
C: and , uh , someth
A: So I would try to I would stay away from one that involves weird construal stuff .
F: Yeah .
E: Right .
A: You know , it 's an obvious one F: Totally weird stuff .
C: I mean the the old bakery example might be nice ,
A: but , uh C: " Is there a bakery around here " .
F: Yeah .
C: So if you c we really just construe it as a A: Around ?
C: No , it 's the bakery itself C: is it a building ? uh , that you want to go to ? or is it something to eat that you want to buy ?
A: Oh .
A: Oh , oh yeah . Yeah ,
A: we 've thought about that .
A: Right . Right .
C: And then A: Nnn .
A: No .
A: What ?
A: " Bakery " can't be something you 're gonna eat .
E: No , no . The question is d do you wanna do you wanna construe do you wanna constr - strue
F: Sh
D: It 's a speech - act .
E: r
E: Exactly . It 's because do you wanna c do you want to view the bakery as a p a place that that i for example , if y
A: Yeah .
A: Where you can get baked goods .
E: Well th well , that 's one .
E: You want to buy something .
E: But the other is ,
E: uh , yo you might have smelled a smell and are just curious about whether there 'd be a bakery in the neighborhood ,
E: or ,
F: Mm - hmm .
E: um , pfff
E: you know , you wonder how people here make their living ,
E: and there 're all sorts of reasons why you might be asking about the existence of a bakery
F: Yeah .
E: that doesn't mean , " I want to buy some baked goods . "
A: OK .
E: But um ,
E: those are interesting examples
E: but it 's not clear that they 're mainly construal examples .
F: Yeah .
A: So it 's a lot of pragmatics , there , that
C: Mmm .
E: There 's all sorts of stuff going on .
E: So
A: might be beyond what you want to do .
E: let 's so let 's think about this from the point of view of construal .
E: So let 's first do a E: So the metonymy thing is probably the easiest
E: and a and actually the E: Though , the one you have isn't quite A: You mean the s
A: You mean " the steak wants to pay " ?
E: N no not that one ,
E: that 's that 's a the sort of background .
E: This is the t uh , page five .
D: About Plato and the book ?
E: No .
A: Oh .
C: No .
A: Um .
F: Onward .
E: Just beyond that .
A: How much does it cost ?
C: Where is the castle ?
E: Yeah .
F: A castle .
C: How old is it ?
C: How much does it cost ?
D: Oh .
F: Mm - hmm .
A: To go in ,
A: that 's like F: Two hundred million dollars .
E: Right .
E: It 's not for sale .
E: Uh . So
F: Yeah , I think that 's a good example , actually .
C: S
A: Yeah , that 's good .
A: u
C: But as Nancy just su suggested it 's probably ellipticus .
A: Ellipsis .
C: Huh .
A: Like , " it " doesn't refer to " thing , "
A: it refers to acti you know , j
A: thing standing for activ most relevant activity for a tourist A: you could think of it that way ,
A: but .
E: Yeah .
F: Well , shoot ,
F: isn't that I mean , that 's what C: Well , I mean , my argument here is it 's it 's it 's the same thing as " Plato 's on the top shelf , "
F: figuring that out is what this is about .
A: Yeah , yeah , no , I I agree .
C: I 'm con
C: you know , th that you can refer to a book of Plato by using " Plato , "
A: Yeah .
C: and you can refer back to it ,
A: No no , I I 'm agreeing that this is a good , um C: and so you can Castles have as tourist sites , have admission fees ,
C: so you can say " Where is the castle ,
C: how much does it cost ? "
C: Um .
C: " How far is it from here ? "
F: Mm - hmm .
C: So ,
C: You 're also not referring to the width of the object , or so ,
A: Hmm .
C: www .
A: Mm - hmm .
F: Mmm .
E: OK . Can we think of a nice metaphorical use of " where " in the tourist 's domain ?
E: Um .
F: Hmm .
E: So you know it 's E: you you can sometimes use " where " f for " when "
F: O
E: in the sense of , you know ,
E: um ,
E: where wh where where was , um ,
E: " where was Heidelberg , um , in the Thirty Years ' War ? "
E: Or something .
F: Uh , yeah .
C: Mm - hmm .
E: You know , or some such thing .
E: Um .
F: Like what side were they on ,
F: or ?
A: What ?
E: Yeah . Essentially , yeah .
A: OK . I was like , " Huh ?
A: It was here . "
A: Like <comment> Um .
E: But anyway th so there are there are cases like that .
E: Um ,
A: Ah !
A: Or like its developmental state or something like that ,
A: you could I guess you could get that .
E: Yeah .
E: Um .
A: Um .
F: I mean , there 's also things like I mean , s
F: um ,
F: I guess I could ask something like " Where can I find out about blah - blah - blah "
F: in a sort of F: doesn't nece I don't necessarily have to care about the spatial location ,
F: just give me a phone number
F: and I 'll call them or something like that ?
E: Yeah . There certainly is that , yeah .
E: You know , " Where could I learn its opening hours , " or something .
F: Yeah .
E: But that 's not metaphorical .
A: Hmm .
E: It 's another F: Yeah .
E: So we 're thinking about , um ,
E: or we could also think about ,
E: uh C: Well , I I I E: How about " I 'm in a hurry " ?
A: State .
E: It i But it 's a state and the the issue is , is that it may be just a usage ,
F: Hmm ?
E: you know , that it 's not particularly metaphorical ,
E: I don't know .
F: Mmm .
A: Right .
A: So you want a more exotic one version of that .
F: Oh .
E: Yeah . Yeah , right .
E: Ah !
E: How about
A: I 'm really into E: I I I you know , " I 'm in I 'm in a state of exhaustion " ?
E: or something like that ,
A: Do you really say that ?
E: which a tourist w
E: Huh ?
A: Would you really say that ?
E: A st uh , well , you can certainly say , um , you know , " I 'm in overload . "
F: Yeah .
E: Tu - stur tourists will often say that .
D: I I 'm really into art .
A: Yeah , I was gonna say , like D: Uh E: Oh , you can do that ?
E: Really ?
E: Of course that 's that that 's definitely a , uh F: Fixed .
A: A fixed expression , yeah .
E: that 's a , uh E: Right . But . A: There 're too there 're all sorts of fixed expressions
A: I don't like uh
A: " I 'm out of sorts now ! "
E: Right .
A: Like <comment> " I 'm in trouble ! "
C: Well I when , uh just f u
C: the data that I 've looked at so far that rec
E: Yeah .
C: I mean , there 's tons of cases for polysemy .
E: Right .
C: So , you know , mak re making reference to buildings as institutions , as containers , as build
A: Uh - huh .
E: Right .
C: you know , whatever .
C: Um , so ib in mus for example , in museums , you know , as a building or as something where pictures hang versus , you know , ev something that puts on exhibits ,
E: Right . As an institution ,
C: so forth .
C: But E: yeah .
C: Um .
A: Why don't you want to use any of those ?
C: Hmm ?
A: So y you don't wanna use one that 's C: Yeah , well C: No , but this C: that 's what I have , you know , started doing .
E: The castle the that old castle one is sort of C: Metonymy , polysemy .
D: I love Van Gogh .
E: Yeah .
E: Ah !
A: " I wanna go see the Van Gogh . "
F: Oh geez .
A: Anyway , I 'm sorry .
C: But I think the argument should be uh , can be made that , you know , despite the fact that this is not the most met metaphorical domain ,
C: because people interacting with HTI systems try to be straightforward and less lyrical ,
E: Yeah .
C: construal still is , uh , you know , completely , um , key in terms of finding out any of these things ,
C: so , um .
E: Right .
E: So that 's that 's that 's a that 's a reasonable point ,
E: that it in this domain you 're gonna get less metaphor and more metonymy .
C: We , uh I with a I looked with a student I looked at the entire database that we have on Heidelberg for cases of metonymy .
E: And polysemy , and stuff like that .
E: Yeah .
C: Hardly anything .
C: So not even in descriptions w did we find anything , um , relevant .
F: I have to go .
E: Alright . Yeah .
C: But OK this is just something we 'll we 'll see ,
C: um ,
E: Right .
E: s See you .
C: and deal with .
E: OK , well . I guess if anybody has additional suggestions ,
C: I mean maybe the " where is something " question as a whole , you know , can be construed as , u i locational versus instructional request .
E: w
E: Yeah .
C: So , if we 're not talk about the lexic
A: Location versus what ?
C: instruction .
A: Instruction . Oh , directions ? Yeah .
E: Sure .
C: Yeah .
A: Oh , I thought that was definitely treated as an example of construal .
A: Right ?
C: Yeah but then you 're not on the lexical level ,
C: that 's sort of one level higher .
A: Oh , you want a lexical example .
C: But I don't need it .
E: Well , you might want both .
C: Mm - hmm .
A: Yeah .
C: Also it would be nice to get ultimately to get a nice mental space example ,
E: We C: so , even temporal references are C: just in the spatial domain are rare .
E: But it 's it 's easy to make up plausible ones .
E: You know .
C: When when you 're getting information on objects .
E: Right ,
C: So , I mean E: you know you know , where r
E: Yeah .
E: What color was this in in in the nain nineteenth century .
C: Yeah .
E: What was this p
E: instead of wh what you know how was this painted ,
E: what color was this painted ,
E: um ,
E: was this alleyway open .
C: Yeah , maybe we can include that also in our second , uh , data run .
E: Uh .
C: We c we can show people pictures of objects
C: and then have then ask the system about the objects
C: and engage in conversation on the history and the art and the architecture and so forth .
E: Mm - hmm .
E: OK . So why don't we plan to give you feedback electronically .
E: Wish you a good trip .
E: All success .
D: For some reason when you said " feedback electronically " I thought of that D: you ever see the Simpsons where they 're like the family 's got the buzzers
D: and they buzz each other when they don't like what the other one is saying ?
A: Yeah . That 's the first one , I think .
D: It was a very early one .
A: The very very first one .
D: I don't know if it 's the first one .
A: Mmm .
A: Mmm .