As if the syntactic, lexical, and morphological peculiarities with which other peoples languages are unfortunately replete were not enough to confoundCet article propose une approche du sens pragmatique qui repose sur la distinction entre le sens véri-conditionnel et le sens non véri-conditionnel. When studying exotic languages, the speaker of English often runs into odd facts. Context of an utterance, as well as to other implicit assumptions made by the par-ticipants in a discourse.
Context In English Language Plus Que LeThe context can help learners remember the language and recall it at a. Contextualising language tries to give real communicative value to the language that learners meet. Modern English , thou continues to be used in formal religious contexts, in wedding ceremonies, in literature that seeks to reproduce archaic language.Contextualisation is putting language items into a meaningful and real context rather than being treated as isolated items of language for language manipulation practice only. Dans la boîte à outils terminologiques présentée ici, « pragmatique » est utilisé pour désigner un sens contextuel bien restreint : le concept est réservé pour la couche non véri-conditionnelle du sens contextuel, qui englobe bien plus que le sens implicité (« implicatures »), alors que les facettes véri-conditionnelles du sens contextuel relèvent de la sémantique. Cette distinction n’est pas toujours explicitée dans les analyses et, par conséquent, la « pragmatique » renvoie à des phénomènes très divers. Une distinction claire doit être posée entre une dénotation du terme « pragmatique », globalement formelle, qui renvoie au contexte linguistique et non-linguistique (« sens en contexte »), et une dénotation plus fonctionnelle du même terme, qui saisit un type de sens (« sens contextuel »).Context In English Language Free Pragmatic EnrichmentIn the terminological reflection that is presented here, pragmatics is restricted even further: it is reserved for non-truth conditional facets of contextual meaning, which are shown to encompass more than implicated meaning, while the truth-conditional facets of contextual meaning are situated in the realm of (context-dependent) semantics. This basic ‘form-function’ distinction is not always made explicit, and as a result, pragmatics becomes a very generic concept that refers to very diverse phenomena. First, a clear distinction needs to be made between a use of the term pragmatics which is more ‘formal’ in nature and which refers to the linguistic and non-linguistic context (‘meaning in context’) and one which is more ‘functional’ and which captures a specific type of meaning (‘contextual meaning’). While acknowledging that pragmatic processes (like saturation and ‘free pragmatic enrichment’) contribute as much to the recovery of the explicature or ‘what is said’ as pragmatic reasoning does to the recovery of implicated meaning, it is argued that a more elegant model is arrived at if it is truth-conditional content rather than pragmatic inference that is taken as a defining criterion of ‘pragmatics’ and related conceptual distinctions. Simply, context means circumstances forming a.This paper argues for an approach to pragmatic meaning that hinges on the distinction between truth-conditional meaning and non-truth conditional meaning. ![]() At least they seem to, for as we will see, much of what passes for context dependence is really something else. It turns out that there is more than one kind of context and that different sorts of things depend on each. Answers to these questions are not straightforward. So we will need to ask what context is, what depends on it, and what this dependence involves. Special attention will be paid to the semantics and pragmatics of modal verbs.3 In a paper in which he argues for a distinction between narrow and broad context, Bach starts by observing that the notion of context dependence is far too often taken for granted:Philosophers and linguists often say that certain words (and sentences containing them) are context sensitive, that what they express is context dependent, as if it is perfectly obvious what context dependence is. What he calls ‘narrow contextual information’ is restricted in scope: it concerns the identity of the speaker and hearer, the time and place of the utterance. (Bach 2012: 155)4 Bach differentiates two types of contextual information. It is that their (standing) meanings determine their contents as a function of contexts of their use. The claim is not that their meanings vary with the context. ![]() Contextual meaning is a specific type of meaning. 1 It is often pointed out that the bare-bones, skeletal meaning communicated by words or by an u (.)5 Contextual meaning is a more functional notion that captures that status of the information that is communicated in context : it captures a range of meaning effects that share, as a common denominator, the fact that they are determined in context (be it the linguistic or the non-linguistic context). In order to make clear terminological distinctions, it seems safer not to use the term pragmatic as a synonym of (formal) context: if pragmatic is used whenever we are referring to meaning in context, then it becomes a commonplace that is generic at the risk of becoming relatively void of meaning. Overall, when Bach writes that the ‘ context does not literally determine what is said or what is meant’ (speakers do) (2005: 36), ‘context’ is to be understood as a formal notion. My view is that it is not a good idea to use pragmatics to refer to meaning in context (be it broad or wide in Bach’s (1997, 2012) terms), which relates to the formal or the physical environment: the linguistic context (the clause or sentence in which words are embedded) and the extra-linguistic context in which utterances are made (the setting, including a speaker and potentially her interlocutors, the context of speech, the knowledge that discourse participants have about themselves, each other and the world). Universe sandbox 2In the approach argued for here, pragmatic is a functional notion that captures a specific type of meaning (non-truth-conditional aspects of meaning determined in context) while in the literature pragmatic is either used as a synonym of ‘enrichment in context’ (which is described here as the ‘formal’ use of pragmatic ) or it captures meaning resulting from an inference process. In-context-determined aspects of non-truth-conditional meaning: (context-dependent) pragmatics- Other types of contextual meaning that do not impact on the truth-conditional content6 Table 1 gives an overview of the basic conceptual distinctions put forward, which reflect a specific stance on the semantics-pragmatics interface:* In order to avoid conceptual confusion, the concept ‘free enrichment’ is used in the table rather than ‘free pragmatic enrichment’. In-context-determined facets of truth-conditional meaning: (context-dependent) semantics3. Context-independent semantics (truth-conditional meaning) 12.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorShawn ArchivesCategories |