Acknowledgements |
|
xi | |
Introduction |
|
1 | (8) |
|
1 Varieties of What Is Said |
|
|
9 | (25) |
|
1.1 Competing conceptions of what is said |
|
|
10 | (6) |
|
1.2 Why posit what is said as a level of representation? |
|
|
16 | (15) |
|
1.2.1 Intuitions concerning what is said |
|
|
16 | (3) |
|
1.2.2 Theoretical justification for what is said |
|
|
19 | (1) |
|
1.2.2.1 Relevance Theory: the role of explicature |
|
|
20 | (6) |
|
1.2.2.2 Against explicature |
|
|
26 | (2) |
|
1.2.3 Psychologising Grice's theory of conversation |
|
|
28 | (3) |
|
1.3 What is said: a reflective concept |
|
|
31 | (2) |
|
|
33 | (1) |
|
2 Linguistic vs. Behavioural Communication |
|
|
34 | (15) |
|
2.1 Behavioural communication |
|
|
35 | (2) |
|
2.2 Linguistic communication proper |
|
|
37 | (5) |
|
2.3 Why is the distinction important? |
|
|
42 | (1) |
|
2.4 Relationship with standard pragmatic theories |
|
|
42 | (5) |
|
2.4.1 Grice's theory of conversation |
|
|
43 | (2) |
|
2.4.2 Grice's meaning-nn and Relevance Theory's ostensive-inferential communication |
|
|
45 | (2) |
|
|
47 | (2) |
|
3 Linguistic Communication Proper |
|
|
49 | (37) |
|
3.1 Characterising linguistic communication proper |
|
|
50 | (13) |
|
3.1.1 Situations, joint attention, and communication |
|
|
51 | (6) |
|
3.1.2 Situations, commitments, and implicatures |
|
|
57 | (6) |
|
3.1.3 Situation types as interpretations |
|
|
63 | (1) |
|
3.2 The semantics and pragmatics of linguistic communication proper |
|
|
63 | (21) |
|
3.2.1 The road not taken, and why |
|
|
64 | (3) |
|
3.2.2 What sentences encode |
|
|
67 | (8) |
|
3.2.3 Interpreting utterances |
|
|
75 | (6) |
|
3.2.4 What about literal meaning? |
|
|
81 | (3) |
|
|
84 | (2) |
|
4 What Is Said and Behavioural Communication |
|
|
86 | (26) |
|
4.1 Reflecting on what is said: empirical findings |
|
|
87 | (5) |
|
4.2 Reflection and what is said |
|
|
92 | (6) |
|
4.2.1 Reflection without what is said |
|
|
92 | (3) |
|
4.2.2 Reflecting on what is said |
|
|
95 | (3) |
|
4.3 Behavioural communication |
|
|
98 | (4) |
|
|
102 | (1) |
|
4.5 Developmental data on implicature recognition |
|
|
103 | (7) |
|
4.5.1 Material implicatures |
|
|
104 | (4) |
|
4.5.2 Behavioural implicatures |
|
|
108 | (2) |
|
|
110 | (2) |
|
5 Pragmatics When Nothing Is Said |
|
|
112 | (33) |
|
|
113 | (8) |
|
5.1.1 Against lexical adjustment |
|
|
117 | (4) |
|
|
121 | (7) |
|
|
128 | (10) |
|
|
128 | (3) |
|
|
131 | (2) |
|
5.3.1.2 The scope-test reconsidered |
|
|
133 | (4) |
|
|
137 | (1) |
|
5.4 Manner implicatures: `and' and orderliness |
|
|
138 | (6) |
|
5.4.1 Relevance Theory on `and' - conjunction |
|
|
140 | (4) |
|
|
144 | (1) |
|
6 Assertion When Nothing Is Said |
|
|
145 | (21) |
|
|
146 | (7) |
|
6.1.1 Assertion is fundamentally linguistic |
|
|
146 | (2) |
|
6.1.2 Assertions express propositions |
|
|
148 | (1) |
|
6.1.3 Assertion involves commitment to truth |
|
|
149 | (1) |
|
6.1.4 Assertion requires the explicit expression of a proposition |
|
|
149 | (4) |
|
6.2 Assertion, deniability, and responsibility |
|
|
153 | (6) |
|
6.3 Lying vs. otherwise misleading |
|
|
159 | (3) |
|
6.4 Assertion and information structure |
|
|
162 | (3) |
|
|
165 | (1) |
|
7 The Brandomian Substrate |
|
|
166 | (29) |
|
|
166 | (3) |
|
7.2 Commitments and content |
|
|
169 | (3) |
|
7.3 Word meaning and public languages |
|
|
172 | (13) |
|
7.3.1 Decompositional lexical semantics |
|
|
172 | (5) |
|
|
177 | (7) |
|
7.3.3 Summary of section 7.3 |
|
|
184 | (1) |
|
7.4 Language and representational theory of mind |
|
|
185 | (9) |
|
7.4.1 Grasping representation as attributing commitments |
|
|
186 | (3) |
|
7.4.2 The developmental data |
|
|
189 | (2) |
|
7.4.3 Commitment attribution on the current model |
|
|
191 | (3) |
|
|
194 | (1) |
Conclusion |
|
195 | (4) |
References |
|
199 | (9) |
Index |
|
208 | |