The Evolution of Interpretive Contexts in Stories

Author Beth Cardier

Thumbnail PDF


  • Filesize: 0.79 MB
  • 16 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Beth Cardier

Cite AsGet BibTex

Beth Cardier. The Evolution of Interpretive Contexts in Stories. In 6th Workshop on Computational Models of Narrative (CMN 2015). Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs), Volume 45, pp. 23-38, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2015)


Modeling the effect of context on interpretation, for the purposes of building intelligent systems, has been a long-standing problem: qualities of logic can restrict accurate contextual interpretation, even when there is only one context to consider. Stories offer a range of structures that could extend formal theories of context, indicating how arrays of inferred contexts are able to knit together, making an ontological reference that is specific to the particular set of circumstances embodied in the tale. This derived ontology shifts as the text unfolds, enabling constant revision and the emergence of unexpected meanings. The described approach employs dynamic knowledge representation techniques to model how these structures are built and changed. Two new operators have been designed for this purpose: governance and causal conceptual agents. As an example, a few lines from the story Red Riding Hood As a Dictator Would Tell It are used to demonstrate how a story interpretive framework can be continually re-made, in a way that produces unexpected interpretations of terms.
  • Story dynamism
  • contextual interpretation
  • ontological interoperability
  • retroactive revision
  • narrative progression in discourse processes
  • derived o


  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    PDF Downloads


  1. G. Acampora, V. Loia, S. Salerno, and A. Vitiello. A hybrid evolutionary approach for solving the ontology alignment problem. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 27:189-216, 2012. Google Scholar
  2. B. Britton and A. Graesser. Models of Understanding. Psychology Press, New York, NY, 2014. Google Scholar
  3. P. Brooks. Reading the Plot. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1984. Google Scholar
  4. J. Bruner. Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1986. Google Scholar
  5. J. Bruner. The narrative construction of reality. Critical Inquiry, pages 1-21, 1991. Google Scholar
  6. B. Cardier. Seismic semantic federation: The view from Machu Picchu. In S. Louchart, M. Mehta, and D. L. Roberts, editors, Intelligent Narrative Technologies II: Papers from the 2009 AAAI Spring Symposium, pages 12-19, Menlo Park, CA, 2009. Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. Google Scholar
  7. B. Cardier., 2013. [online: accessed April 2015].
  8. B. Cardier. Unputdownable. School of Culture and Communication and the Department of Computing and Information Systems. Melbourne, University of Melbourne, 2013. Google Scholar
  9. H. H. Clark and T. B. Carlson. Context for comprehension. In J. Long and A. Baddeley, editors, Attention and performance IX, pages 313-330. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1981. Google Scholar
  10. K. Devlin. Logic and Information, pages 1-328. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995. Google Scholar
  11. K. Devlin. Modeling real reasoning. In G. Sommaruga, editor, Formal Theories of Information: From Shannon to Semantic Information Theory and General Concepts of Information. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009. Google Scholar
  12. H. Einhorn and R. Hogarth. Judging probable cause. Psychological Bulletin, 99:3-19, 1986. Google Scholar
  13. G. Fauconnier and M. Turner. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. Basic Books, New York, NY, 2002. Google Scholar
  14. H. T. Goranson. Topoiesis document., 2012. [online: accessed April 2013].
  15. H. T. Goranson and B. Cardier. A two-sorted logic for structurally modeling systems. In Progress in Biophysics &Molecular Biology, pages 141-178. Elsevier, 2013. Google Scholar
  16. A. Graesser, B. Olde, and B. Klettke. How does the mind construct and represent stories? In M. Green, J. Strange, and T. Brock, editors, Narrative Impact: Social and Cognitive Foundations, pages 231-263. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 2002. Google Scholar
  17. A. Graesser, M. Singer, and T. Trabasso. Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101(3):371-395, 1994. Google Scholar
  18. A. J. Greimas. Structural Semantics: An Attempt at a Method. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE, 1983. Google Scholar
  19. T. Gruber. Towards principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, 1993. Google Scholar
  20. M. Gruninger, K. Atefi, and M. Fox. Ontologies to support process integration in enterprise engineering. Computational &Mathematical Organization Theory, 6:381-394, 2000. Google Scholar
  21. S. Gueraud. Updating situation models: The memory-based contribution. Discourse Processes, 39(2-3):243-263, 2005. Google Scholar
  22. J. Hendler. Agents and the semantic web. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16:30-37, 2001. Google Scholar
  23. D. Herman. Story Logic. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE, 2002. Google Scholar
  24. K. Holyoak and P. Thagard. Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995. Google Scholar
  25. I. Horrocks. Ontologies and the semantic web. Communications of the ACM, 51:58-67, 2008. Google Scholar
  26. P. Hühn, J. Christoph Meister, J. Pier, and W. Schmid (Eds.). Handbook of Narratology. Walter de Gruyter GmbH &Co, 2014. Google Scholar
  27. K. Ireland. The Sequential Dynamics of Narrative. Associated Uni. Presses, Plainsboro, NJ, 2001. Google Scholar
  28. W. Kintsch. Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1979. Google Scholar
  29. W. Kintsch. An overview of top-down and bottom-up effects in comprehension: The ci perspective. Discourse Processes, 39(2-3):125-128, 2005. Google Scholar
  30. T. S. Kuhn. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1973. Google Scholar
  31. M. Leyton. Symmetry, Causality, Mind. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1992. Google Scholar
  32. L. Li and Y. Yang. Agent-based ontology mapping and integration: Towards interoperability. Expert Systems, 28:197-220, 2008. Google Scholar
  33. D. McNamara and J. Magliano. Toward a comprehensive model of comprehension. In Brian Ross, editor, The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 51, pages 297-384. Academic Press, Burlington, MA, 2009. Google Scholar
  34. A. Pretorious. Introduction and overview, semantic technology and applications research laboratory., 2004. [Online: accessed August 2013].
  35. M.-L. Ryan. Possible Worlds, Artificial Intelligence and Narrative Theory. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN, 1991. Google Scholar
  36. R. Schank and R. Abelson. Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, 1977. Google Scholar
  37. B. Smith, W. Kusnierczyk, D. Schober, and W. Ceuters. Towards a reference terminology for ontology research and development in the biomedical domain. Biomedical Ontology in Action, 222:57-65, 2006. Google Scholar
  38. B. Smith and C. Welty. Ontology: Towards a new synthesis. In C. Welty and B. Smith, editors, Formal Ontology in Information Systems, pages iii-x. ACM Press, Ongunquit, ME, 2001. Google Scholar
  39. J. Son and R. Goldstone. Contextualization in perspective. Cognition and Instruction, 27:51-89, 2009. Google Scholar
  40. J. Sowa. Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical and Computational Foundations. Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove, CA, 2000. Google Scholar
  41. J. Sowa. The role of logic and ontology in language and reasoning. In R. Poli and J. Seibt, editors, Theory and Applications of Ontology: Philosophical Perspectives. Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2010. Google Scholar
  42. P. Thagard. Conceptual Revolutions. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1992. Google Scholar
  43. M. Toolan. Graded expectations: On the textual and structural shaping of readers' narrative experience. In J. Pier, editor, The Dynamics of Narrative Form, pages 215-238. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, 2004. Google Scholar
  44. M. Toolan. Narrative Progression in the Short Story. John Benjamins Publishing Company, Philadelphia, PA, 2009. Google Scholar
  45. T. Trabasso. Goal plans of action and inferences during comprehension of narratives. Discourse Processes, 39(2-3):129-164, 2005. Google Scholar
  46. T. Trabasso and L. Sperry. Causal relatedness and importance of story events. Journal of Memory and Language, 24:595-611, 1985. Google Scholar
  47. T. van Dijk and W. Kintsch. Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. Academic Press, New York, NY, 1983. Google Scholar
  48. P. Visser, D. Jones, T. Bench-Capo, and M. Shave. An analysis of ontology mismatches; heterogeneity versus interoperability. In AAAI 1997, Spring Symposium on Ontological Engineering, pages 164-172, Palo Alto, CA, 1997. Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, Stanford University. Google Scholar
  49. J. Zipes (Ed.). The Trials and Tribulations of Little Red Riding Hood. Routledge, New York, NY, 1993. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail