Order:
  1. Natural Pragmatics and Natural Codes.Tim Wharton - 2003 - Mind and Language 18 (5):447–477.
    Grice (1957) drew a distinction between natural(N) and non–natural(NN) meaning, and showed how the latter might be characterised in terms of intentions and the recognition of intentions. Focussing on the role of natural signs and natural behaviours in communication, this paper makes two main points. First, verbal communication often involves a mixture of natural and non–natural meaning and there is a continuum of cases between showing and meaningNN. This suggests that pragmatics is best seen as a theory of intentional verbal (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  2.  11
    Natural Pragmatics and Natural Codes.Tim Wharton - 2003 - Mind and Language 18 (5):447-477.
    : Grice drew a distinction between natural and non–natural meaning, and showed how the latter might be characterised in terms of intentions and the recognition of intentions. Focussing on the role of natural signs and natural behaviours in communication, this paper makes two main points. First, verbal communication often involves a mixture of natural and non–natural meaning and there is a continuum of cases between showing and meaningNN. This suggests that pragmatics is best seen as a theory of intentional verbal (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  3.  43
    Interjections, Language, and the "Showing/Saying" Continuum.Tim Wharton - 2003 - Pragmatics and Cognition 11 (1):39-91.
    Historically, interjections have been treated in two different ways: as part of language, or as non-words signifying feelings or states of mind. In this paper, I assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of two contemporary approaches that reflect the historical dichotomy, and suggest a new analysis which preserves the insights of both. Interjections have a natural and a coded element, and are better analysed as falling at various points along a continuum between `showing' and `saying'. These two notions are characterised (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  4.  6
    Interjections, Language, and the ‘Showing/Saying’ Continuum.Tim Wharton - 2003 - Pragmatics and Cognition 11 (1):39-91.
    Historically, interjections have been treated in two different ways: as part of language, or as non-words signifying feelings or states of mind. In this paper, I assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of two contemporary approaches that reflect the historical dichotomy, and suggest a new analysis which preserves the insights of both. Interjections have a natural and a coded element, and are better analysed as falling at various points along a continuum between ‘showing’ and ‘saying’. These two notions are characterised (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  5. Review of Dessalles (): Why We Talk: The Evolutionary Origins of Language. [REVIEW]Tim Wharton - 2009 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 10 (1):101-105.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6.  10
    Why We Talk: The Evolutionary Origins of Language.Tim Wharton - 2009 - Interaction Studies 10 (1):101-105.
  7.  7
    Why We Talk: The Evolutionary Origins of Language, by Dessalles, Jean-Louis.Tim Wharton - 2009 - Interaction Studiesinteraction Studies Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systems 10 (1):101-105.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  2
    Mutual (Mis)Understanding: Reframing Autistic Pragmatic “Impairments” Using Relevance Theory.Gemma L. Williams, Tim Wharton & Caroline Jagoe - 2021 - Frontiers in Psychology 12.
    A central diagnostic and anecdotal feature of autism is difficulty with social communication. We take the position that communication is a two-way, intersubjective phenomenon—as described by the double empathy problem—and offer up relevance theory as a means of explaining such communication difficulties. Based on a set of proposed heuristics for successful and rapid interpretation of intended meaning, relevance theory positions communication as contingent on shared—and, importantly, mutually recognized—“relevance.” Given that autistic and non-autistic people may have sometimes markedly different embodied experiences (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark