(formal pragmatics)

(computational pragmatics)

(inferential pragmatics)(DRT)
(optimality theory)(game theory)
(relevance logic)(decision theory)(abductive inference)
(embodied conversational agent)

(relevance theory)
(explicature) (explicating)

1.
(post-Gricean)(Grices theory of conversation)
(direct meaning)(implicated meaning)
(Grice 1975, 1978)(implicature)
(the Cooperative Principle) (maxims of conversation)
(utterance)

(particularized conversational implicature) (the

Quantity Maxim)
(generalized conversational implicature)

(non-truth-conditional meaning)
(conventional implicature)
(what is implicated) (what is said)

(reference assignment)(disambiguation)
(truth-conditional meaning)

(non-truth-conditional

meaning) (the Underdeterminacy

Thesis)

(development)

(the Neo-Griceans)

(Carston 1988,

1995, 2000, 2002)

(explicature)
(explicit)
U
U (Sperber & Wilson 1986/1995: )
(Blakemore 1992: )
(Carston 2002: 1)

(ostension)

I. (disambiguation)[(linguistic expression identification)]

(1) a. He was writing advertisements on the train.

b. Standing on the platform, he was writing advertisements onto the train.

c. On the train, he was writing advertisements (e.g. with his notebook pc).

II. (saturation process)

(free variable)
(anaphora)(indexicals)

(2) a. She put it there.

[]
b. Mary put the book on the table.

(3) a. Jasmine tea is better. [than what?]

[]

b. Jasmine tea is better than lemon tea.

(4) a. Its the same. [as what?]

[]

b. Coke is the same as Pepsi.

(5) a. He is too young. [for what?]

[]

b. He is too young for the post.

(6) a. Its hot enough. [for what?]

[]

b. Its hot enough for a bath.

(7) a. The winners each get 100. [winners of what?]

[]

b. The winners of the crossword puzzle competition each get 100.

(8) a. I like Sallys wedding gown. [wedding gown in what relation to Sally?]

 []

b. I like the wedding gown that Sally designed.

III.(free enrichment)

A.

(9) a. Itll take time for your knee to heal.

[]
b. Itll take quite a long time for your knee to heal.

(10) a. Ralph drinks.

[]

b. Ralph drinks alcohol (habitually).

(11) a. Emily has a temperature.

[]

b. Emily has a high temperature.

(12) a. Hes a person with a brain.

[]

b. Hes a person with a good brain.

(13) a. Something has happened.

[]
b. Something of an untoward sort has happened.

B.

(14) a. Jack and Jill went up the hill.

b. Jack and Jill went up the hill together.

[]
(15) a. He ran to the edge of the cliff and jumped.

b. John ran to the edge of the cliff and jumped over the cliff.
[]
(16) a. Sue got a Ph.D. and became a lecturer.

b. Sue got a Ph.D. and then became a lecturer.

[ ]
(17) a. Mary left Paul and he became clinically depressed.

b. Mary left Paul and as a consequence he became clinically depressed.
[]
(18) a. She took out her gun, went into the garden and killed her boss.

b. She took out her gun, went into the garden and killed her boss with the gun in the garden.

[]
(19) a. Ill give you 10 if you mow the lawn.

b. Ill give you 10 if and only if you mow the lawn.

[]
(20) a. John has four children.

b. John has exactly four children.

[]
(21) a. There were 50 people in the queue.
50

b. There were approximately 50 people in the queue.

50 [
]
C. (subsentential utterances)

(unarticulated constituent)

(22) a. Water.
[]

b. Give me water./I want some water./Get me some water./I want to buy some water./
////
(23) a. A torch. A torch.
[
]

b. Get a torch/Use a torch/You need a torch

//
[]
(24) a. Michaels dad.
[]

b. This is Michaels dad/The man entering the gate is Michaels dad/The man we are looking
at is Michaels dad.
//
IV. (ad hoc concept construction)

(concept adjustment)
(25)A tired tapas is worse than anything.
[tapas


]
(26) Ugh, this custard is raw.
[custard

]
(27)
[
]
(28)
[
]
V. (higher-level explicatures)

 (base-level explicatures)
(speech act)(propositional attitude)
(embedding)

(29)a. Buy some milk.

b. The speaker requests the hearer to buy some milk.

(30) a. Frankly, Im unimpressed.

b. I tell you frankly that Im unimpressed.

(31) a. Regrettably, Marys son failed the exam.

b. It is regrettable that Marys son failed the exam.

2.
(Carston 1988, 1995, 2002)
(literal meaning)

(functional independence)

4.2

cancellability(calculability)

(Kempson 1996)
(central cognitive processes)

(Carston 2000) (32)

(33)(32)(33)
(34)(32)(33)(35)(36)

(32)
(33)
(34)
(35) 7 19
(36) 7 19
(Recanati 1993) [
]

3.

(fine-grained) (entail)
(coarse-grained)

4.2

(Fodor 1975)
(the language of thought)

(1984)

3.1

(37)
E <p1, p2, p3, pn> E pn+1 pnpn
pn-1
(38)
ln E ln

E pn (semantically entail)ln
(i) pn ln
(ii) pn (formally contain)ln
(39)
A B

B A

(37)-(39) (38i) (38ii)

(40)(38i)
(40)
A B

(i)
B A
(ii)
B A
(40)(41)
(41)
A B

B A
(38)(42)
(42)
ln E ln

E pn (semantically entail)ln
pn (formally contain)ln
(37)(42)(41)

(42)

(synonymy)(paraphrasing)
+S S
++S S

(43)
(44)
(45)
(46)

(44)(45)(46)(43)

(47)(48)(49) (47)
(43)(43)
(47)
(48)
(49)
3.2

(50b)(50a)
(50) a.
b.

(Carston 1988, 2000, 2002)and
and
IIIB and
and

(type theory)(type-raising)
and (19)if
(inter-utterance
relationship) (inter-utterance explicature)

(rhetorical structure theory) (Mann & Thompson 1988

19941995) Kehler (2002) (2001)

(discourse explicature)

[]

4.2

(David Lewis)
4.

4.1

(valency grammar)(dependency grammar)

(case grammar) (theory of thematic roles) (theory of argument
structures)

( 1994b, 1995b) ( 1994a, 1995a)

( 1987, 1993b, 1995)

(1998a, b)

(1994b, 1995b)

(canonical)

(adjunct)
[]

(51)


(52)a.
[]

b.
[a ]
c.
[]
d.
[]
4.2

(contextual effects)

(processing effort)

(optimal relevance)
(Sperber & Wilson 1986/1995: )
(53)

(54)
a. (make manifest) I

b. I

(common ground)

10

4.3
IIIA
IIIB(20) (21)
(1993b)
[]

(elaboration)
IIIA

IIIB
(Carston 1988)
n n n n n
n
(21)

n
(meta-variable)

4.4

-

- - -

--
(event semantics)

[
]

- A
A
/(thematic roles/relations)(semantic case)
(thematic hierarchy)
B C
A
BC

11

(activate)

(non-demonstrative)

5.

(Russell)
(Frege)
(literalism)(Austin)

(contextualism)

(linguistic direction)

(indexicalism)
(Stanley 2000, 2002, Stanley & Szab 2000)

(Stanley 2000)

(Carston 2000, 2002)

12

IIIA
(understatement)(loose talk) 4.3
*

(2002) Stone (1998) Parikh (2001) Asher & Lascarides

(2003) Gabbay & Woods (2003, forthcoming) Potts (2003) van Rooy (2003) Blutner & Zeevat
(2004)Hobbs (2004)
Bunt (1995)Thomason (1997) (2002) (2003) Hobbs (2004)

(intentional ostensive communication)

(explicature) (explicating) (implicature)

(implicating)
(Sperber & Wilson 1986/1995) (Carston
1988)

(23)(25) (1) Blakemore
(1992: )

IIIC

(1979)(minor sentence)
(1998a)
(1998b)[]

(Lewis 1969)
(1995) (1998) (2000)
(1998b)
(2002) (2004) (1990) (1993b)
(2000) (2002)
(1993b) (1998b)
(1993a)
(1998)
(1998)
(2001)

13


(1996)
Sperber & Wilson (1986/1995)Carston (2002)
(2002)

(2002)
(1998) (2000) (2000)
(2000)
(1998d)

Parsons (1990)Landman (2000) Rothstein (2004)

(2004)
Sperber & Wilson (1986/1995)
Carston (2000, 2002)Bezuidenhout (2002) Recanati (2003, 2004)
Bach (2000)Travis (2000) Recanati (2002)
*

2002
2000 200077-100
2002 3
_______ 1998a[]
_______ 1998b 1998
323 329 http://www.cbs.polyu.edu.hk/ctyjiang/file/jnptypesimp.doc
2000 2000101-115
1984 4 1992
16-29
1987 3
2004
2001
1998 1998
2002 3
2003 4
1998 1998283-294
1998 1998295-307 2000
144-159
2000 4
2000
_______ 1995
1994 4
_______1995 2
2000 200053-76
2004
1990
_______2000 2000116-140
1994a 4 1998c103-125
_______1994b 3 1998c151-165
_______1995a 199529-58 1998c74-102
_______1995b
4 1998c166-193
_______1996 4 1998c279-307
_______1998a 199818-68
_______1998b
_______1998c
_______1998d 1998b
_______2002

14

_______ 1998
1993a 2
_______1993b
_______1995 199559-89
1979
Asher, Nicholas. and Alex Lascarides (2003). Logics of Conversation. Cambridge University Press.
Bach, Kent. (2000). Quantification, qualification and context: a reply to Stanley and Szab. Mind and Language 15,
Nos. 2 and 3: 262 283.
Bezuidenhout, Anne. (2002). Truth-conditional pragmatics. In James Tomberlin (ed.) Philosophical Perspectives,
Volume 16: Language and Mind. Oxford: Blackwell. 105 134.
Blakemore, Diane. (1992). Understanding Utterances. Oxford: Blackwell.
Blutner, Reinhard. and Henk Zeevat (2004). Optimality Theory and Pragmatics. Houndmills, Hampshire & New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Bunt, Harry. (1995). Formal pragmatics. In Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola stman and Jan Blommaert (eds.) Handbook of
Pragmatics (Manual). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 282 286.
Carston, Robyn. (1988). Implicature, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics. In Ruth Kempson (ed.) Mental
Representations: the Interface between Language and Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 155
181.
_______ (1995). Postcript to Carston (1988). In Asa Kasher (ed.) (1998) Pragmatics: Critical Concepts. Vol. IV.
London and New York: Routledge. 464 479.
_______ (2000). Explicature and semantics. In Corinne Iten and Ad Neeleman (eds.) UCL Working Papers in
Linguistics, Volume 12. Department of Linguistics and Phonetics, University College, London. 1 44. Also in S.
Davis & B. Gillon (eds.) (forthcoming) Semantics: A Reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
_______ (2002). Thoughts and Utterances: the Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell.
Fodor, Jerry. (1975). The Language of Thought. New York: Crowell.
Gabbay, Dov. and John Woods (2003). A Practical Logic of Cognitive Systems. Volume 1. Agenda Relevance: a Study
in Formal Pragmatics. Amsterdam et al.: North-Holland(Elsevier Science).
_______ (forthcoming). A Practical Logic of Cognitive Systems. Volume 2. The Reach of Abduction: Insight and Trial .
Amsterdam et al.: North-Holland(Elsevier Science).
Grice, Paul. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan (eds.) Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech
Acts. New York: Academic Press. 41 58. Also in Grice (1989), 22 40.
_______ (1978). Further notes on logic and conversation. In Peter Cole (ed.) Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics. New
York: Academic Press. 113 127. Also in Grice (1989), 41 57.
_______ (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hobbs, Jerry. (2004). Abduction in natural language understanding. In Laurence Horn and Gregory Ward (eds.) The
Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell, 724 741.
Kehler, Andrew. (2002). Coherence, Reference, and the Theory of Grammar. Stanford, California: CSLI Publications.
Kempson, Ruth. (1996). Semantics, pragmatics, and natural language interpretation. In Shalom Lappin (ed) The
Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 561 598.
Landman, Fred. (2000). Events and Plurality: the Jerusalem Lectures. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Lewis, David. (1969). Convention: a Philosophical Study. Oxford: Blackwell.
Mann, William. and Sandra Thompson. (1988). Rhetorical structure theory: toward a functional theory of text
organization. Text 8(3), 243 281.
Parikh, Prashant. (2001). The Use of Language. Stanford, California: CSLI Publications.
Parsons, Terence. (1990). Events in the Semantics of English: a Study in Subatomic Semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Potts, Christopher. (2003). The Logic of Conventional Implicatures. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California at Santa
Cruz.
Recanati, Franois. (1993).Direct Reference: from Language to Thought. Oxford: Blackwell.
_______ (2002). Unarticulated constituents. Linguistics and Philosophy 25: 299 345.
_______ (2003). Literalism and contextualism: some varieties. In Gerhard Preyer (ed.) Contextualism. Oxford
University Press.
_______ (2004). Literal Meaning. Cambridge University Press.
van Rooy, Robert. (2003). Questioning to resolve decision problems. Linguistics and Philosophy, 26: 727 763.
Rothstein, Susan. (2004). Structuring Events. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sperber, Dan. and Deirdre Wilson (1986/1995). Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. Second
Edition.

Stanley, Jason. (2000). Context and logical form. Linguistics and Philosophy 23: 391 434.

15

_______ (2002). Making it articulated. Mind and Language 17, Nos. 1 and 2: 149 168.
_______ and Zoltn Szab (2000). On quantifier domain restriction. Mind and Language 15, Nos. 2 and 3: 219 261.
Stone, Matthew. (1998). Modality in Dialogue: Planning, Pragmatics and Computation. Ph.D. Dissertation, University
of Pennsylvania.
Thomason, Richmond. (1997). Nonmonotonicity in linguistics. In Johan van Benthem and Alice ter Meulen (eds.)
Handbook of Logic and Language. Elsevier Science and the MIT Press. 777 831.
Travis, Charles. (2000). Unshadowed Thought: Representation in Thought and Language. Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Harvard University Press.

16