Graduate studies at Western
Pragmatics and Cognition 13 (2):363-382 (2005)
|Abstract||P.F. Strawson proposed in the early seventies a threefold distinction regarding how context bears on the meaning of ¿what is said¿ when a sentence is uttered. The proposal was somewhat tentative and, being aware of this aspect, Strawson himself raised various questions to make it more adequate. In this paper, we review Strawson¿s scheme, note his concerns, and add some of our own. We also defend its essence and recommend it as an insightful entry point re the interplay of intended meaning and context|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Peter Brian Barry (2011). Saving Strawson: Evil and Strawsonian Accounts of Moral Responsibility. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (1):5-21.
Yakir Levin (2004). Cartesians, Strawsonians and the Univocal Meaning of Mental Predicates. Acta Analytica 19 (32):91-106.
Jacek Malinowski (2006). On the Formalization of Strawson's Presupposition. Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 91 (1):111-118.
Michael S. McKenna (1998). The Limits of Evil and the Role of Moral Address: A Defense of Strawsonian Compatibilism. [REVIEW] Journal of Ethics 2 (2):123-142.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads19 ( #71,344 of 739,443 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 739,443 )
How can I increase my downloads?