Skip to main content
Log in

Relevance and argumentation: How bald can you get

  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

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).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dummett, M.: 1978, Truth and other enigmas, Duckworth, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milner, J-C.: 1978, De la syntaxe á l'interprétation, Le Seuil, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reboul, A.: 1987, ‘Les aspects pragmatiques de la notion de classifiance’, Sigma 11, 128–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sperber, D. and Wilson, D.: 1986b, Relevance: communication and cognition, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00128942

Key Words

Navigation