A formal characterization of explicature and its consequences to explicating in Chinese
Issue: Vol 8 No. 2 (2012)
Journal: Linguistics and the Human Sciences
Subject Areas: Writing and Composition Linguistics
DOI: 10.1558/lhs.v8i2.243
Abstract:
This paper studies the notion of explicature and the process of explicating in relevance-theoretic pragmatics against the background of the minimalism versus contextualism controversy. It attempts to give a formal definition of explicature, which has not yet been spelt out in the literature. It then applies the formal characterization to the study of a range of related cases in Chinese grammar. The findings are used to re-examine the minimalism/contextualism debate. We argue that explicature theory does not by nature favour either of the two sides.
Author: JIANG Yan
References :
Bach, K. (2000) Quantification, qualification and context: A reply to Stanley and Szabó. Mind and Language 15 (2 and 3): 262–283.
Bezuidenhout, A. (2002) Truth-conditional pragmatics. In J. Tomberlin (ed.) Philosophical Perspectives, Volume 16: Language and Mind, 105–134. Oxford: Blackwell.
Borg, E. (2004) Minimal Semantics. Oxford: Clarendon. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0199270252.001.0001
Cappelen, H. and Lepore, E. (2005) Insensitive Semantics: A Defense of Semantic Minimalism and Speech Act Pluralism. Oxford: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470755792
Carston, R. (1988) Implicature, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics. In R. Kempson (ed.) Mental Representations: The Interface between Language and Reality, 155–181. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carston, R. (1995) Postscript to Carston (1988). In A. Kasher (ed.) (1998) Pragmatics: Critical Concepts. Vol. IV, 464–479. London and New York: Routledge.
Carston, R. (2002) Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470754603
Carston, R. (2004) Explicature and semantics. In S. Davis and B. Gillon (eds) Semantics: A Reader, 817–845. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carston, Robyn. (2010) Explicit communication and ‘free’ pragmatic enrichment. In B. Soria and E. Romero (eds) Explicit Communication: Robyn Carston’s Pragmatics, 217–285. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Grice, P. (1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds) Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press. Also in Grice, P. (1989) Studies in the Way of Words, 22–40. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hurford, J., Heasley, B. and Smith, M. B. (2007) Semantics: A Coursebook. Cambridge University Press. Second edition. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511841668
Jiang, Y. (2005a) Formal pragmatics and explicature theory: With special relevance to the relationship between explicating and Chinese valency studies. In D. Liu (ed.) Frontiers in Linguistics and Analyses of Chinese Language, 143–170. Shanghai Educational Publishing. [Written in Chinese]
Jiang, Y. (2005b) Formal pragmatics and explicature theory. In X. Xiong and J. Cai (eds) Language Interfaces, 140–178 Shanghai: Fudan University Press. [Written in Chinese]
Jiang, Y. (2007) Implication, explicature and explicating. In J. Shao and X. Zhang (eds) New Developments in Chinese Grammatical Studies 3, 74–90. Changchun: Northeast China Normal University Press. [Written in Chinese]
Jiang, Y. and Yuan, Y. (2010) Ad hoc concepts and metaphor comprehension. Contemporary Rhetoric, 157 (3): 1–6. [Written in Chinese]
Kompa, N. (2010). Contextualism in the philosophy of language. In K. Petrus (ed), Meaning and Analysis: New Essays on Grice, 288–309. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Landman, F. (2000) Events and Plurality: The Jerusalem Lectures. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4359-2
Martí, L. (2003) Contextual Variables. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut.
Martí, L. (2006). Unarticulated constituents revisited. Linguistics and Philosophy, 29 (2): 135–166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10988-005-4740-4
Parsons, T. (1990) Events in the Semantics of English: A Study in Subatomic Semantics. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Recanati, F. (2004) Literal Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Recanati, F. (2010a). Pragmatics and logical form. In B. Soria and E. Romero (eds) Explicit Communication: Robyn Carston’s Pragmatics, 25-41. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Recanati, F. (2010b). Truth-conditional Pragmatics. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226993.001.0001
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. (1986/1995) Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. Second Edition.
Stainton, R. (2009) Words and Thoughts: Subsentences, Ellipsis, and the Philosophy of Language. New York: Oxford University Press.
Stanley, J. (2000) Context and logical form. Linguistics and Philosophy 23: 391–434. Reprinted in Stanley (2007), 30-68.
Stanley, J. (2007) Language in Context: Selected Essays. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Stanley, J. and Szabó, Z. (2000) On quantifier domain restriction. Mind and Language 15 (2 and 3): 219–261. Reprinted in Stanley (2007), 69–110.
Travis, C. (2001) Unshadowed Thought: Representation in Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.