arXiv:2508.06167cs.CLcs.HC2025-08

重新定义语言使用中的语用学,为大模型时代沟通提供新框架。

Pragmatics beyond humans: meaning, communication, and LLMs

  • 提出人机通信框架,替代传统语义三元论
  • 指出人类中心语用理论不适用于预测型大模型
  • 揭示评估偏差,强调用户需共同构建对话语境

本文将语用学重新定位为语言作为社会嵌入性工具行动的动态接口,而非意义的附属维度。随着大语言模型(LLMs)在交际场景中的出现,这一理解亟需方法论重构。第一部分挑战传统符号学三分法,认为连接主义架构动摇了既有意义层级,提出更适合的‘人机通信’(HMC)框架。第二部分探讨以人类为中心的语用理论与机器本质之间的张力;尽管格赖斯式理论仍主导,但其依赖人类特有假设,不适用于如LLMs等预测系统。概率语用学,尤其是理性言语行为框架,通过聚焦优化而非真值判断,提供更适配的因果逻辑。第三部分揭示三种形式的替代主义——泛化、语言和交际层面——暴露了评价中的人类中心偏见,掩盖了人类交流主体的角色。最后,论文引入‘语境挫败’概念,描述输入上下文增多却理解能力坍塌的悖论,强调用户被迫同时为模型和自身共构语用条件。这些论述表明,语用理论可能需调整或扩展,以更好地解释生成式AI参与的沟通。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

The paper reconceptualizes pragmatics not as a subordinate, third dimension of meaning, but as a dynamic interface through which language operates as a socially embedded tool for action. With the emergence of large language models (LLMs) in communicative contexts, this understanding needs to be further refined and methodologically reconsidered. The first section challenges the traditional semiotic trichotomy, arguing that connectionist LLM architectures destabilize established hierarchies of meaning, and proposes the Human-Machine Communication (HMC) framework as a more suitable alternative. The second section examines the tension between human-centred pragmatic theories and the machine-centred nature of LLMs. While traditional, Gricean-inspired pragmatics continue to dominate, it relies on human-specific assumptions ill-suited to predictive systems like LLMs. Probabilistic pragmatics, particularly the Rational Speech Act framework, offers a more compatible teleology by focusing on optimization rather than truth-evaluation. The third section addresses the issue of substitutionalism in three forms - generalizing, linguistic, and communicative - highlighting the anthropomorphic biases that distort LLM evaluation and obscure the role of human communicative subjects. Finally, the paper introduces the concept of context frustration to describe the paradox of increased contextual input paired with a collapse in contextual understanding, emphasizing how users are compelled to co-construct pragmatic conditions both for the model and themselves. These arguments suggest that pragmatic theory may need to be adjusted or expanded to better account for communication involving generative AI.

语用学大模型人机交互认知偏见

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。