Compositionality and Sandbag Semantics

Synthese 191 (14):3329-3350 (2014)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
It is a common view that radical contextualism about linguistic meaning is incompatible with a compositional explanation of linguistic comprehension. Recently, some philosophers of language have proposed theories of 'pragmatic' compositionality challenging this assumption. This paper takes a close look at a prominent proposal of this kind due to Franc╠žois Recanati. The objective is to give a plausible formulation of the view. The major results are threefold. First, a basic distinction that contextualists make between mandatory and optional pragmatic processes needs to be revised. Second, the pragmatic theory can withstand a Davidsonian objection only by rejecting the importance of a distinction between primitive and non-primitive semantic items. Thirdly, however, the theory is now open to a worry about how it should be understood: either the theory consists in a very broad functionalist generalization about communication, which makes it explanatorily inert, or it boils down to a highly particularist view about linguistic meaning. Finally, I argue that Recanati's notion of 'occasion meaning' is problematic and suggest replacing it with the notion of speaker meaning, which is explanatorily more basic.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
UNNCAS
Revision history
First archival date: 2015-11-21
Latest version: 9 (2016-02-11)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Literal Meaning.Recanati, Fran├žois

View all 44 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2014-04-23

Total downloads
223 ( #11,678 of 37,180 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
19 ( #17,760 of 37,180 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.