This volume suggests a novel treatment of context in the analysis of everyday interaction. On a theoretical level, it advocates a switch of focus from 'context' as a preestablished, monolithic category which constringes co-participants' verbal and nonverbal behaviour, to an active notion of 'contextualization': in order to make oneself understood, participants have to establish and maintain those shared contextual frames which in turn are relevant to the local interpretation of their verbal and nonverbal activities. On an empirical level, the volume (...) contains exemplary analyses that show how participants employ 'contextualization cues' of prosodic (rhythm, intonation, tempo, etc.) or nonverbal (gaze, gesture, etc.) nature in order to 'achieve context'.The volume is also an appraisal of the theory of contextualization developed by John Gumperz. In their contributions, researchers from various schools of research, such as conversation analysis, micro-ethnography, phonetics/phonology and metapragmatics, relate their work to this theory. (shrink)

The history of Fuzziness in Italy is varied and scattered among a num- ber of research groups. As a matter of fact, “fuzziness” spread in Italy through a sort of spontaneous diffusion, and, also subsequently, no one felt the need to cre- ate some “national” common structure like an Association or similar things. Since a cohesive retelling would be next to impossible, a few members of the Italian fuzzy community have been asked to recount their experience and express their hopes (...) for the future. (shrink)

La ricerca qui proposta si rivolge al programma di radicale naturalizzazione della mente e, in particolare, alla posizione del monismo materialistico che esso produce. L’articolo si propone di individuare gli assunti fondamentali sui quali tale programma poggia. Un primo assunto identificato e discusso criticamente all’interno del lavoro concerne una concezione corrispondentista della verità. Un secondo assunto fa riferimento ad una concezione secondo la quale lo studio della mente si riduce all’individuazione di relazioni causali e leggi che regolano processi meccanici, mentre (...) si possono considerare scientifiche solo quelle forme di indagine fondate sul principio di chiusura del mondo fisico. L’analisi si conclude sottolineando come il presupposto più significativo si riveli essere la negazione della soggettività e della coscienza, la quale viene ridotta/ricondotta a operazioni inconsce e inintelligenti. In problema rincontrato a questo rispetto è identificato nel fatto di non fare valere la fondamentale distinzione teoretica tra condizione empirica e condizione di intelligibilità. (shrink)

In modern studies it has been largely denied that the so-called “secret doctrine” (which would be more correct to call “private teaching”) of the Theaetetus can be traced back to Protagoras. However, reasons why this doctrine can not be his own, have never been explained. At the same time, an appropriate justification of the hypothesis that it would be considered a pure Platonic creation has never been offered, nor was explained why it would be attributed to followers of Protagoras, but (...) not to Protagoras himself. This article examines the Platonic text in an analytical way, shows how Plato repeatedly attributes to the sophist of Abdera the content of this doctrine, and, based on fragments of Protagoras and other doctrines related to him by ancient sources, it is evident that nothing in Protagorean concepts comes into conflict with Theaetetus so-called “secret doctrine”, and how actually is completely coherent with it. (shrink)