IMAGINATIVE RESISTANCE AND CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURE
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Conversational Implicature and Lexical Pragmatics
Lexical Pragmatics is a research field that tries to give a systematic and explanatory account of a number of pragmatic phenomena that are connected with the semantic underspecification of lexical items. The approach combines a constraint-based semantics with a Gricean mechanism of pragmatics. The basic pragmatic mechanism rests on conditions of updating the common ground and allows to give a p...
متن کاملRationality, Cooperation and Conversational Implicature
beliefs explaining the role the first set of beliefs play in the speaker's plan. Pollack's idea of ascribing a set of additional beliefs based on the intentions contained in the recognised plan is similar to our idea of ascribing additional conversational goals to explain why a plan is apparently inefficient. However, her motivation is to show how mistaken beliefs in dialogue can be recognised ...
متن کاملSituated Inference versus Conversational Implicature
As Grice defined it, a speaker conversationally implicates that p only if the speaker expects the hearer to recognize that the speaker thinks that p. This paper argues that in the sorts of cases that Grice took as paradigmatic examples of conversational implicature there is in fact no need for the hearer to consider what the speaker might thus have in mind. Instead, the hearer might simply make...
متن کاملConversational implicature: interacting with grammar
I seek to mediate this debate. I describe a general framework for interactional models of implicature and then assess the major arguments for grammar-driven approaches. My central findings are that many of these arguments are conceptually or theoretically problematic, and that the valid ones do not compromise the Gricean picture. Stepping back, I find that the two sides in this debate are not r...
متن کاملTruth-conditional content and conversational implicature
According to some pragmatists, certain conversational implicatures of an uttered sentence may be composed into the truth-conditional content of more complex constructions (e.g. conditionals or comparatives) in which that sentence is embedded. I present two arguments against this view, the one based on the intuitive (in)validity of arguments couched in natural language, the other on the (in)cohe...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: The Philosophical Quarterly
سال: 2009
ISSN: 0031-8094,1467-9213
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9213.2009.625.x