|
Implicatures
In pragmatics, a subdiscipline of linguistics, an implicature is something the speaker suggests or implies with an utterance, even though it is not literally expressed. Implicatures can aid in communicating more efficiently than by explicitly saying everything we want to communicate. The philosopher H. P. Grice coined the term in 1975. Grice distinguished ''conversational'' implicatures, which arise because speakers are expected to respect general rules of conversation, and ''conventional'' ones, which are tied to certain words such as "but" or "therefore". Take for example the following exchange: : A (to passer by): I am out of gas. : B: There is a gas station 'round the corner. Here, B does not say, but ''conversationally implicates'', that the gas station is open, because otherwise his utterance would not be relevant in the context. Conversational implicatures are classically seen as contrasting with entailments: They are not necessary or logical consequences of what is said, ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Paul Grice
Herbert Paul Grice (13 March 1913 – 28 August 1988), usually publishing under the name H. P. Grice, H. Paul Grice, or Paul Grice, was a British philosopher of language. He is best known for his theory of implicature and the cooperative principle (with its namesake Gricean maxims), which became foundational concepts in the linguistic field of pragmatics. His work on meaning has also influenced the philosophical study of semantics. Life Born and raised in Harborne (now a suburb of Birmingham), in the United Kingdom, he was educated at Clifton College and then at Corpus Christi College, Oxford.publish.uwo.ca/~rstainto/papers/Grice.pdf After a brief period teaching at Rossall School, he went back to Oxford, firstly as a graduate student at Merton College from 1936 to 1938, and then as a Lecturer, Fellow and Tutor from 1938 at St John's College. During the Second World War Grice served in the Royal Navy; after the war he returned to his Fellowship at St John's, which he held u ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Scalar Implicature
In pragmatics, scalar implicature, or quantity implicature, is an implicature that attributes an ''implicit'' meaning beyond the explicit or ''literal'' meaning of an utterance, and which suggests that the utterer had a reason for not using a more informative or ''stronger'' term on the same scale. The choice of the weaker characterization suggests that, as far as the speaker knows, none of the stronger characterizations in the scale holds. This is commonly seen in the use of 'some' to suggest the meaning 'not all', even though 'some' is logically consistent with 'all'. If Bill says 'I have some of my money in cash', this utterance suggests to a hearer (though the sentence uttered does not logically imply it) that Bill does not have all his money in cash. Origin Scalar implicatures typically arise where the speaker qualifies or scales their statement with language that conveys to the listener an inference or implicature that indicates that the speaker had reasons not to use a ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Explicature
Explicature is a technical term in pragmatics, the branch of linguistics that concerns the meaning given to an utterance by its context. The explicatures of a sentence are what is explicitly said, often supplemented with contextual information. They contrast with implicatures, the information that the speaker conveys without actually stating it. The truth value of a sentence is determined using its explicature. For example: Imagine Jim and Raoul are driving across America from New York City to Seattle, Washington. Raoul is driving, and Jim falls asleep. When Jim wakes up, he asks Raoul, "Where are we?" Raoul replies, "We aren't there yet, but we've passed Chicago." If Jim and Raoul's car is in fact five minutes outside Seattle and Raoul knows this, he may be accused of lying, since "We aren't there yet, but we've passed Chicago" in that context has the implicature "We are not too far past Chicago and still not near Seattle." Technically, however, Raoul's statement was true, because ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Maxims Of Conversation
In social science generally and linguistics specifically, the cooperative principle describes how people achieve effective conversational communication in common social situations—that is, how listeners and speakers act cooperatively and mutually accept one another to be understood in a particular way. The philosopher of language Paul Grice introduced the concept in his pragmatic theory, argued such: Accordingly, the cooperative principle is divided into Grice's four maxims of conversation, called the Gricean maxims—quantity, quality, relation, and manner. These four maxims describe specific rational principles observed by people who follow the cooperative principle in pursuit of effective communication. Applying the Gricean maxims is a way to explain the link between utterances and what is understood from them. Though phrased as a prescriptive command, the principle is intended as a Linguistic description, description of how people normally behave in conversation. Lesley Jef ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Entailment (linguistics)
Linguistic entailments are entailments which arise in natural language. If a sentence ''A'' entails a sentence ''B'', sentence ''A'' cannot be true without ''B'' being true as well. For instance, the English sentence "Pat is a fluffy cat" entails the sentence "Pat is a cat" since one cannot be a fluffy cat without being a cat. On the other hand, this sentence does not entail "Pat chases mice" since it is possible (if unlikely) for a cat to not chase mice. Entailments arise from the semantics of linguistic expressions. Entailment contrasts with the pragmatic notion of implicature. While implicatures are fallible inferences, entailments are enforced by lexical meanings plus the laws of logic. Entailments also differ from presuppositions, whose truth is taken for granted. The classic example of a presupposition is the existence presupposition which arises from definite descriptions. For instance, the sentence "The king of France is bald" presupposes that there is a king of France. Unl ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Defeasibility (linguistics)
In the linguistic field of pragmatics, an inference is said to be defeasible or cancellable if it can be made to disappear by the addition of another statement, or an appropriate context. For example, sentence would normally implicate iby scalar implicature: :i: Alice has three children. :ii: Alice has exactly three children. But the implicature can be cancelled by the modification in b :ib: Alice has three children, and possibly more. Whereas conversational implicatures and presuppositions may be cancelled, an entailment may not be. For example, entails the proposition "Alice has at least three children", and this cannot be cancelled with a modification like: :ic: Alice has three children, and possibly less. Explicit and contextual cancellation Grice The grice was a breed of swine found in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland and in Ireland. Culley, George(1807), ''Observations on Livestock'', pub Wilkie, Robinson et al, p 176/ref> It became extinct, surviving lo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Lexicalization
In linguistics, lexicalization is the process of adding words, set phrases, or word patterns to a language's lexicon. Whether ''word formation'' and ''lexicalization'' refer to the same process is controversial within the field of linguistics. Most linguists agree that there is a distinction, but there are many ideas of what the distinction is. Lexicalization may be simple, for example borrowing a word from another language, or more involved, as in calque or loan translation, wherein a foreign phrase is translated literally, as in ''marché aux puces'', or in English, flea market. Other mechanisms include compounding, abbreviation, and blending. Particularly interesting from the perspective of historical linguistics is the process by which ''ad hoc'' phrases become set in the language, and eventually become new words (see lexicon). Lexicalization contrasts with grammaticalization, and the relationship between the two processes is subject to some debate. In psycholinguistic ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Damning With Faint Praise
Damning with faint praise is an English idiom, expressing oxymoronically that half-hearted or insincere praise may act as oblique criticism or condemnation.Ammer, Christine. (2001) ''The American Heritage Dictionary of Idioms,'' p. 153./ref> In simpler terms, praise is given, but only given as high as mediocrity, which may be interpreted as passive-aggressive. History of the term The concept can be found in the work of the Hellenistic sophist and philosopher Favorinus (c. 110 AD) who observed that faint and half-hearted praise was more harmful than loud and persistent abuse. The explicit phrasing of the modern English idiomatic expression was first published by Alexander Pope in his 1734 poem, " Epistle to Dr Arbuthnot" in ''Prologue to the Satires.'' ::Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, ::And without sneering, teach the rest to sneer; ::Willing to wound, and yet afraid to strike, ::Just hint a fault, and hesitate dislike. ::::— "Epistle to Dr Arbuthnot" by Alex ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Cross-examination
In law, cross-examination is the interrogation of a witness called by one's opponent. It is preceded by direct examination (in Ireland, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, South Africa, India and Pakistan known as examination-in-chief) and may be followed by a redirect (re-examination in Ireland, England, Scotland, Australia, Canada, South Africa, India, Hong Kong, and Pakistan). Redirect examination, performed by the attorney or pro se individual who performed the direct examination, clarifies the witness' testimony provided during cross-examination including any subject matter raised during cross-examination but not discussed during direct examination. Recross examination addresses the witness' testimony discussed in redirect by the opponent. Depending on the judge's discretion, opponents are allowed multiple opportunities to redirect and recross examine witnesses (may vary by jurisdiction). Variations by jurisdiction In the United States federal Courts, a cross-examining ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Q-principle
In the Neo-Gricean approach to semantics and pragmatics championed by Yale linguist Laurence Horn, the Q-principle ("Q" for "Quantity") is a reformulation of Paul Grice's maxim of quantity (''see'' Gricean maxims) combined with the first two sub-maxims of manner. The Q-principle states: "Say as much as you can (given R)." As such it interacts with the R-principle, which states: "Say no more than you must (given Q).""Implicature" in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy ."The Gricean Model" in the Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science. The Q-principle leads to the implicature (or narrowing) that if the speaker did not make a stronger statement (or say more), then its de ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R-principle
In the Neo-Gricean approach to semantics and pragmatics advanced by Yale linguist Laurence Horn, the R-principle ("R" for "Relation") is a reformulation of Paul Grice's maxim of relation (''see'' Gricean maxims) combining with the second sub-maxim of quantity and the third and fourth sub-maxims of manner. The R-principle states: "Say no more than you must (given Q)." As such it interacts with the Q-principle, which states: "Say as much as you can (given R).""Implicature" in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy."The Gricean Model" in the Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science. According to the R-principle, there is no reason to make a stronger statement (say more) if the ex ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Pragmatics
In linguistics and related fields, pragmatics is the study of how context contributes to meaning. The field of study evaluates how human language is utilized in social interactions, as well as the relationship between the interpreter and the interpreted. Linguists who specialize in pragmatics are called pragmaticians. Pragmatics encompasses phenomena including implicature, speech acts, relevance and conversation,Mey, Jacob L. (1993) ''Pragmatics: An Introduction''. Oxford: Blackwell (2nd ed. 2001). as well as nonverbal communication. Theories of pragmatics go hand-in-hand with theories of semantics, which studies aspects of meaning, and syntax which examines sentence structures, principles, and relationships. The ability to understand another speaker's intended meaning is called ''pragmatic competence''. Pragmatics emerged as its own subfield in the 1950s after the pioneering work of J.L. Austin and Paul Grice. Origin of the field Pragmatics was a reaction to structuralist l ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.jpg "Click for more on -> Cross-examination")
