A formal characterization of explicature and its consequences to explicating in Chinese

Authors

  • Jiang Yan The Hong Kong Polytechnic University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/lhs.v8i2.243

Keywords:

explicature, minimalism, contextualism

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 Biography

  • Jiang Yan, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University

    Jiang Yan received his Ph.D. in linguistics from London University in 1995. He is associate professor at the Department of Chinese and Bilingual Studies, the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, where he teaches semantics, pragmatics and rhetoric.

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.

Published

2013-11-26

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Yan, J. (2013). A formal characterization of explicature and its consequences to explicating in Chinese. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 8(2), 243-255. https://doi.org/10.1558/lhs.v8i2.243

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>