Three demonstrations and a funeral
Mind and Language 21 (2):166–186 (2006)
| Abstract | Gricean pragmatics seems to pose a dilemma. If semantics is limited to the conventional meanings of types of expressions, then the semantics of an utterance does not determine what is said. If all that figures in the determination of what is said counts as semantics, then pragmatic reasoning about the specific intentions of a speaker intrudes on semantics. The dilemma is false. Key points: Semantics need not determine what is said, and the description, with which the hearer begins, need not provide the hearer with knowledge of what was said, or the ability to express what was said, from the hearer's context. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,679 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesKen Turner (ed.) (1999). The Semantics/Pragmatics Interface From Different Points of View. Elsevier.
Noel Burton-Roberts (ed.) (2007). Pragmatics. Palgrave Macmillan.
Kepa Korta & John Perry (2008). The Pragmatic Circle. Synthese 165 (3):347 - 357.
Kent Bach (1992). Intentions and Demonstrations. Analysis 52 (3):140--146.
Robyn Carston (2008). Linguistic Communication and the Semantics/Pragmatics Distinction. Synthese 165 (3):321 - 345.
Patrick Hawley (2002). What is Said. Journal of Pragmatics 34 (8):969-991.
Keith Allan (1986). Linguistic Meaning. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads42 ( #27,042 of 549,084 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,333 of 549,084 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
