Abstract
This paper is concerned with vagueness in language, its relation to logico-philosophical questions on the one hand, and to so-called syncategorematic terms and their linguistic use on the other hand. It attempts to show that it is not language itself which is vague but rather the way we use it.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ducrot, O.: 1981, ‘Langage, métalangage et performatifs’, Cahiers de Linguistique française 3, 5–34 (reprinted in O. Ducrot, Le dire et le dit, Paris, Minuit, 1984).
Dummett, M.: 1978, Truth and other enigmas, Duckworth, London.
Milner, J-C.: 1978, De la syntaxe á l'interprétation, Le Seuil, Paris.
Reboul, A.: 1987, ‘Les aspects pragmatiques de la notion de classifiance’, Sigma 11, 128–147.
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D.: 1986a, ‘Loose talk’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 1985–6, 153–171 (translated in French: ‘Façons de parler’, CLF, 1986, 9–26).
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D.: 1986b, Relevance: communication and cognition, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Reboul, A. Relevance and argumentation: How bald can you get. Argumentation 3, 285–302 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00128942
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00128942