Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||For the past two decades, speech-act theory has been one of the basic tools for studying pragmatics from both a theoretical and an experimental perspective. In this paper, I want to discuss certain aspects of the theory with respect to data from early communication in children. My aim will be to show that some of the central assumptions of the speech-act model of utterance comprehension need to be rethought. In the second part of the paper, I will outline a different pragmatic approach to verbal understanding and present a preliminary application of this approach to the developmental data.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Melinda Vadas (1992). The Pornography / Civil Rights Ordinance V. The BOG: And the Winner Is...? Hypatia 7 (3):94 - 109.
Savas L. Tsohatzidis (ed.) (1994). Foundations of Speech Act Theory: Philosophical and Linguistic Perspectives. Routledge.
Erling Skjei (1985). I. A Comment on Performative, Subject, and Proposition in Habermas's Theory of Communication. Inquiry 28 (1-4):87 – 105.
Stefanov Gheorghe (2010). Negative Acts. Analele Universitatii Bucuresti - Filosofie (LIX):3-9.
Mary Kate McGowan (2009). Oppressive Speech. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (3):389 – 407.
Jan Marta (1996). A Linguistic Model of Informed Consent. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21 (1):41-60.
Lawrence B. Solum (1989). Freedom of Communicative Action. Northwestern University Law Review 83 (1):54-135.
Marina Sbisà (2006). Speech Acts Without Propositions? Grazer Philosophische Studien 72 (1):155-178.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads16 ( #81,785 of 739,318 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,243 of 739,318 )
How can I increase my downloads?