By Gregory L. Ward, Betty J. Birner
The most energetic and contentious concerns in modern linguistic conception issues the elusive boundary among semantics and pragmatics, and Professor Laurence R. Horn of Yale collage has been on the middle of that discuss ever in view that his groundbreaking 1972 UCLA dissertation. This quantity in honor of Horn brings jointly the simplest of present paintings on the semantics/pragmatics boundary from a neo-Gricean point of view. that includes the contributions of twenty-two prime researchers, it comprises papers on implicature (Kent Bach), inference (Betty Birner), presupposition (Barbara Abbott), lexical semantics (Georgia eco-friendly, Sally McConnell-Ginet, Steve Kleinedler & Randall Eggert), negation (Pauline Jacobson, Frederick Newmeyer, Scott Schwenter), polarity (Donka Farkas, Anastasia Giannakidou, Michael Israel), implicit variables (Greg Carlson & Gianluca Storto), definiteness (Barbara Partee), reference (Ellen Prince, Andrew Kehler & Gregory Ward), and common sense (Jerrold Sadock, Francis Jeffry Pelletier & Andrew Hartline). those unique papers symbolize not just a becoming homage to Larry Horn, but additionally an enormous contribution to semantic and pragmatic conception.
Read or Download Drawing the Boundaries of Meaning: Neo-Gricean studies in pragmatics and semantics in honor of Laurence R. Horn (Studies in Language Companion Series) PDF
Similar semantics books
C. S. Peirce used to be the founding father of pragmatism and a pioneer within the box of semiotics. His paintings investigated the matter of which means, that's the center point of semiosis in addition to an important factor in lots of educational fields. Floyd Merrell demonstrates all through Peirce, indicators, and which means that Peirce's perspectives stay dynamically proper to the research of next paintings within the philosophy of language.
This e-book deals a brand new method of the research of the a number of meanings of English modals, conjunctions, conditionals, and notion verbs. even though such ambiguities can't simply be accounted for via feature-analyses of note that means, Eve Sweetser's argument indicates that they are often analyzed either comfortably and systematically.
This easy-to-use advisor illuminates key strategies and phrases in semantics and pragmatics and the examine of which means because it is conveyed via language.
CDS is a multifarious box continually constructing assorted methodological frameworks for analysing dynamically evolving features of language in a huge variety of socio-political and institutional contexts. This quantity is a leading edge, interdisciplinary account of those theoretical and empirical advancements.
- Semantic Analysis of Verbal Collocations with Lexical Functions
- The Greek Imperative Mood in the New Testament: A Cognitive and Communicative Approach
- Translating Popular Film
- Nondescriptive Meaning and Reference: An Ideational Semantics
Additional info for Drawing the Boundaries of Meaning: Neo-Gricean studies in pragmatics and semantics in honor of Laurence R. Horn (Studies in Language Companion Series)
I propose that the answer lies in a reformulation of the notion of discourse-old information to encompass more than only information that has been explicitly evoked in the prior discourse. In Birner and Ward 1998, it is argued that both evoked and inferrable information provides a link to the prior discourse. , that the unifying factor is not in fact previous evocation within the discourse, but instead the existence of an inferential link to the information evoked in the prior discourse. In the case of explicitly evoked information, this inferential relation is one of identity, whereas in the case of what previous accounts have called ‘inferrable’ information, the inference is based on some relation other than identity; however, in all cases an inferential relationship is present.
As we noted at the outset, the examples in (2), repeated here in (43), couldn’t be used appropriately in contexts where the speaker was not assuming that the complement clause was true. (43) a. If any of the students regrets behaving badly, they’ll let us know. b. It doesn’t matter that the chimpanzees escaped. c. Was Bill surprised that spinach was included? Perhaps some relevant difference between these factives and the cognitive factives can be found to explain their different behavior. Maybe the cognitive factives don’t express as much more about the complement clause as the other factives do.
He intended it as a rational reconstruction. When he illustrated the ingredients involved in recognizing an implicature, he was enumerating the sorts of information that a hearer needs to take into account, at least intuitively, and exhibiting how this information is logically organized. He was not foolishly engaged in psychological speculation about the nature of or even the temporal sequence of the cognitive processes that implement that logic. There are cases in which it is pretty clear to the hearer well before the speaker finishes saying something that he does not mean what he will have said.