Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Evidence and Interpretation in Great Ape Gestural Communication.Richard Moore - 2013 - Humana Mente 6 (24):27-51.
    Tomasello and colleagues have offered various arguments to explain why apes find the comprehension of pointing difficult. They have argued that: (i) apes fail to understand communicative intentions; (ii) they fail to understand informative, cooperative communication, and (iii) they fail to track the common ground that pointing comprehension requires. In the course of a review of the literature on apes' production and comprehension of pointing, I reject (i) and (ii), and offer a qualified defence of (iii). Drawing on work on (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Relevance Theory.Deirdre Wilson & Dan Sperber - 2002 - In L. Horn & G. Ward (eds.), The Handbook of Pragmatics. Blackwell. pp. 607-632.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   136 citations  
  • Speech Acts, the Handicap Principle and the Expression of Psychological States.Mitchell S. Green - 2009 - Mind and Language 24 (2):139-163.
    Abstract: One oft-cited feature of speech acts is their expressive character: Assertion expresses belief, apology regret, promise intention. Yet expression, or at least sincere expression, is as I argue a form of showing: A sincere expression shows whatever is the state that is the sincerity condition of the expressive act. How, then, can a speech act show a speaker's state of thought or feeling? To answer this question I consider three varieties of showing, and argue that only one of them (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   29 citations  
  • Voice and Expressivity in Free Indirect Thought Representations: Imitation and Representation.Diane Blakemore - 2013 - Mind and Language 28 (5):579-605.
    This article addresses issues in the philosophy of fiction from the perspective of a relevance theoretic approach to communication: first, how should we understand the notion of ‘voice’ as it is used in the analysis of free indirect style narratives; and, second, in what sense can the person responsible for free indirect representations of fictional characters' thoughts be regarded as a communicator? The background to these questions is the debate about the roles of pretence and attribution in free indirect style. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Pragmatics, Modularity and Mind‐Reading.Dan Sperber & Deirdre Wilson - 2002 - Mind and Language 17 (1-2):3–23.
    The central problem for pragmatics is that sentence meaning vastly underdetermines speaker’s meaning. The goal of pragmatics is to explain how the gap between sentence meaning and speaker’s meaning is bridged. This paper defends the broadly Gricean view that pragmatic interpretation is ultimately an exercise in mind-reading, involving the inferential attribution of intentions. We argue, however, that the interpretation process does not simply consist in applying general mind-reading abilities to a particular (communicative) domain. Rather, it involves a dedicated comprehension module, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   130 citations  
  • Beyond Ostension: Introducing the Expressive Principle of Relevance.Constant Bonard - 2022 - Journal of Pragmatics 187:13-23.
    In this paper, I am going to cast doubt on an idea that is shared, explicitly or implicitly, by most contemporary pragmatic theories: that the inferential interpretation procedure described by Grice, neo-Griceans, or post-Griceans applies only to the interpretation of ostensive stimuli. For this special issue, I will concentrate on the relevance theory (RT) version of this idea. I will proceed by putting forward a dilemma for RT and argue that the best way out of it is to accept that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Exploring the Cognitive Infrastructure of Communication.Jan Peter de Ruiter, Matthijs L. Noordzij, Sarah Newman-Norlund, Roger Newman-Norlund, Peter Hagoort, Stephen C. Levinson & Ivan Toni - 2010 - Interaction Studies 11 (1):51-77.
    Human communication is often thought about in terms of transmitted messages in a conventional code like a language. But communication requires a specialized interactive intelligence. Senders have to be able to perform recipient design, while receivers need to be able to do intention recognition, knowing that recipient design has taken place. To study this interactive intelligence in the lab, we developed a new task that taps directly into the underlying abilities to communicate in the absence of a conventional code. We (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Linguistic Communication and the Semantics/Pragmatics Distinction.Robyn Carston - 2008 - Synthese 165 (3):321-345.
    Most people working on linguistic meaning or communication assume that semantics and pragmatics are distinct domains, yet there is still little consensus on how the distinction is to be drawn. The position defended in this paper is that the semantics/pragmatics distinction holds between encoded linguistic meaning and speaker meaning. Two other ‘minimalist’ positions on semantics are explored and found wanting: Kent Bach’s view that there is a narrow semantic notion of context which is responsible for providing semantic values for a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   39 citations  
  • Echo and Pretence in Communicative Irony.Maciej Witek Janina Mękarska - 2020 - Studia Semiotyczne—English Supplement 31:149-177.
    In the article we present a model of communicative irony formulated within the framework of speech act theory. We claim that acts of verbal irony are special cases of phenomena that John L. Austin referred to as “etiolations of language”. After discussing the concept of communicative irony understood in the spirit of Mitchell S. Green’s expressive communication model, we propose to develop the Austinian idea of etiolation and show how cases of etiolative use of language parasitize the mechanisms of its (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Might Interjections Encode Concepts? More Questions Than Answers.Manuel Cruz - 2009 - Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 5 (2):241-270.
    Might Interjections Encode Concepts? More Questions than Answers This paper reflects on the conceptual nature of interjections. Although there are convincing reasons to claim that interjections do not encode concepts, arguments can be adduced to question such claim. In fact, some pragmatists have contended that they may be conceptual elements. After reviewing both the non-conceptualist and conceptualist approaches to interjections, this paper discusses some reasons that can be given to reconsider the conceptuality of interjections. Nevertheless, it adopts an intermediate standpoint (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations