The pragmatics of metarepresentation ascription and RT

From: J L Speranza (jls@netverk.com.ar)
Date: Mon Feb 19 2001 - 13:44:22 GMT

  • Next message: robyn carston: "Non-member submission from [D.Blakemore@salford.ac.uk]"

    From a review of

      "The Pragmatics of Propositional Attitude Reports"
      ed. KM Jaszczolt. Current Research in the
      Semantics/Pragmatics Interface IV. Oxford: Elsevier, 2000.
      Rev. by E Garrett. LINGUIST 12.283,

          "In ch. VII

    title of essay?

           A Bezuidenhout

    affiliated to the Netherlands, I take?

          endorses a relevance-theoretic approach, and
          suggests that 'that'-clauses encode "procedural
          information", i.e. instructions as to how the
          expression

    specifically the "that-clause", I understand. But should "believe" be
    treated as dyadic, or tryadic?

           is to be processed. She discusses the importance of
           pragmatic concepts such as loosening,

    is this related to OPACITY and non-substitutivity salva veritate (where
    "veritas" should read "truth-conditions")?

            enrichment,

    semantic enrichment, I take, as introduced by Wilson/Sperber 1977 Pragmatics
    Microfiche ("I believe she plays well" EXPL+> (explicates) "I believe she
    believes the flute well).

           and transfer,

    of what into what?

           and raises several interesting cases for discussion.

    Please re-raise them here! It's one of my all time favourite topics, and I'm
    not at all convinced my own Gricean approach to the matter (in his "Method
    in Philosophical Psychology").

    Best

    JL
    (Mr)
    Bs.As.Argentina.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 19 2001 - 13:44:59 GMT