Journal of Pragmatics 34 (8):969-991 (2002)
|Abstract||A common misunderstanding of Grice's distinction between <br>saying and implicating is that the hearer in a conversation <br>needs to use what is said in a calculation to determine what <br>is implicated. This mistake lead some to misconstrue the relation <br>between pragmatics and semantics.|
|Keywords||conversational implicature Grice Recanati semantics/pragmatics distinction|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jennifer M. Saul (2002). Speaker Meaning, What is Said, and What is Implicated. Noûs 36 (2):228–248.
Christopher Gauker (2001). Situated Inference Versus Conversational Implicature. Noûs 35 (2):163–189.
Kent Bach (1999). The Myth of Conventional Implicature. Linguistics and Philosophy 22 (4):327-366.
Jeff Speaks (2008). Conversational Implicature, Thought, and Communication. Mind and Language 23 (1):107–122.
Added to index2010-04-28
Total downloads50 ( #25,056 of 722,870 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #26,028 of 722,870 )
How can I increase my downloads?