Abstract
Classical Gricean pragmatics is usually conceived as dealing with far-side pragmatics, aimed at computing implicatures. It involves reasoning about why what was said, was said. Near-side pragmatics, on the other hand, is pragmatics in the service of determining, together with the semantical properties of the words used, what was said. But this raises the specter of ‘the pragmatic circle.’ If Gricean pragmatics seeks explanations for why someone said what they did, how can there be Gricean pragmatics on the near-side? Gricean reasoning seems to require what is said to get started. But then if Gricean reasoning is needed to get to what is said, we have a circle.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cappelen H., Lepore E. (2005). Insensitive semantics. A defense of semantic minimalism and speech act pluralism. Blackwell, Oxford
Kaplan, D. (1977). Demonstratives. In J. Almog, J. Perry, & H. Wettstein (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan (pp. 481–563). New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.
Korta, K., & Perry, J. (forthcoming). How to say things with words. In S. L. Tsohatzidis (Ed.), John Searle’s philosophy of language: Force, meaning, and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Perry J. (2001). Reference and reflexivity. CSLI Publications, Stanford
Recanati F. (2004). Literal meaning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Recanati F. (2006). Predelli and Garcia-Carpintero on Literal meaning. Crítica 38(112): 69–79
Searle J. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Stojanovic, I. (2007). What is said as lexical meaning. Cuadernos de filosofía 19 (in press).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Korta, K., Perry, J. The pragmatic circle. Synthese 165, 347–357 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-007-9188-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-007-9188-3