Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Psychology 6 (2):181-205 (1993)
|Abstract||Abstract What role do speakers'/authors? communicative intentions play in language interpretation? Cognitive scientists generally assume that listeners'/readers? recognitions of speakers'/authors? intentions is a crucial aspect of utterance interpretation. Various philosophers, literary theorists and anthropologists criticize this intentional view and assert that speakers'/authors? intentions do not provide either the starting point for linguistic interpretation or constrain how texts should be understood. Until now, cognitive scientists have not seriously responded to the current challenges regarding intentions in communication. My purpose in this article is to provide just such a response. I briefly describe some of the empirical evidence in cognitive science on the importance of intentions in communication. I then discuss some of the criticisms of the intentional view that have arisen in the humanities and social sciences. Following this, I offer a partial resolution to the intentionalist controversy that recognizes the differing views on the idea of linguistic interpretation. I specifically suggest a way of thinking about linguistic interpretation in terms of the time?course of understanding that provides a metric for evaluating the role of intentions in communication. This time?course perspective on linguistic understanding provides for the plurality of ideas that now exist both in cognitive science and in postmodern philosophical thought|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Raymond W. Gibbs Jr (1993). The Intentionalist Controversy and Cognitive Science. Philosophical Psychology 6 (2):181 – 205.
Marco Mazzone & Emanuela Campisi (2010). Are There Communicative Intentions? In L. A. Perez Miranda & A. I. Madariaga (eds.), Advances in Cognitive Science: Learning, Evolution, and Social Action. IWCogSc-10 Proceedings of the ILCLI International Workshop on Cognitive Science.
Norris F. Krueger Jr & Jill Kickul, So You Thought the Intentions Model Was Simple? Cognitive Style and the Specification of Entrepreneurial Intentions Models.
Maciej Witek (2009). Scepticism About Reflexive Intentions Refuted. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 5 (1):69-83.
James S. Boster (2012). Cognitive Anthropology Is a Cognitive Science. Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (3):372-378.
Mark Risjord (1996). Meaning, Belief, and Language Acquisition. Philosophical Psychology 9 (4):465-475.
Kent Bach (1992). Intentions and Demonstrations. Analysis 52 (3):140--146.
Mark Collier (2005). Hume and Cognitive Science: The Current Status of the Controversy Over Abstract Ideas. [REVIEW] Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 4 (2):197-207.
Annelie Rothe (2012). Cognitive Anthropologists: Who Needs Them? Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (3):387-395.
Rex Welshon (2002). Intentions, Goals, and the Archaeological Record. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (3):425-426.
Rocco Marchitelli (2010). Francisco Varela's View on Phenomenology in His Cognitive Interpretation. Dialogues in Philosophy, Mental and Neuro Sciences 3 (2):42-44.
Added to index2010-09-14
Total downloads4 ( #189,165 of 739,350 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,538 of 739,350 )
How can I increase my downloads?