J Fantin, of Sheffield, England, writes:
"I am interested in the role of Grice's work within RT and the position of
RT within the larger field of pragmatics. As with my previous posts, please
feel free to correct me if I demonstrate an obvious lack of understanding
of RT. I came to the field of pragmatics (and Grice's work) through RT and
my understand of the relationship of the two is as follows. Are my
observations here correct?
1. RT builds upon and goes beyond Grice's "Cooperative Principle" and
maxims by further re-fining and postulating _relevance_ as the only
essential maxim."
Wrong. RT does _not_ postulate _relevance_ as a maxim. Thus Wilson &
Sperber say:
Sub-Section,
"What are the differences between RT and Grice's approach"
(first edition, section, The principle of relevance, ch. relevance, pp. 161
ff)
It would then be first a _principle_ not a maxim, but I'll let _that_ pass.
But the important thing is:
"Communicators do not _follow_ the principle of relevance, and they could
not violate it even if they wanted to".
So, this contrasts, blatantly, with Grice's _maxim_ of relevance, which,
you may recall from reading 'Logic & Conversation' can be violated in
1. A: Mrs Smithers-Jones is an old bag.
B: The weather's been quite delightful this summer.
Of course, a full-fledged interpretation of the non-monotonic process
behind (1) may lead you to say that some notion of _relevance_ is NOT being
_flouted_ there, but Grice explicitly (and in the repr. in STUDIES IN THE
WAY OF WORDS, too) classifies that example as one "in which an implicature
is achieved by REAL, as opposed to APPARENT, VIOLATION OF THE MAXIM, BE
RELEVANT", which, he says are "rare, perhaps"... (Grice, Studies, p.35).
"Through this maxim, a working theory of pragmatics can be suggested.
2. Thus, though RT has roots in Grice, it really departs from traditional
Grican pragmatics.
3. Within the general field of pragmatics which is dominated by traditional
Grican practitioners, RT is not widely accepted and generally rejected
(e.g., Levinson, Review of _Relevance, 1989; Mey, _Pragmatics_, 1993). I
do not share this belief; this is merely my observation."
What belief? that RT is rejected, or the belief that you believe that RT is
generally rejected? :) I take it that you mean the former, but I don't call
"rejection" a belief, but an attitude.
I guess you are right, that, all in all, there are more Griceans than
RT-ists, but then, RT is the only one which has a mailing list, so--- look
on the bright side!
Also, one thing about RT, which is unlike non-RT, is like it is like a
club, so you have people! Consider the list of RT-mailing list members,
which is available publicly for all to see. The list includes:
I won't provide their emails but their names, when I know they have
contributed with papers, which, plus the inferential assumption that they
subscribe in here, make them RT-ists:
-----Original Message-----
From: Majordomo@linguistics.UCL.ac.uk
[mailto:Majordomo@linguistics.UCL.ac.uk]
Subject: Majordomo results
-- >>>> who relevance Members of list 'relevance': Country distribution of relevance members.SPAIN GERMANY yahoo.com ITALY SWITZERLAND Pennsylvania Univ, USA CAMBRIDGE UNIV, ENGLAND CHINA GERMANY JFantin@aol.com. SHEFFIELD, YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND. Originally USA! :) * RM KEMPSON, LONDON, ENGLAND. hotmail.com FRANCE SPAIN JAPAN JAPAN jlonline.com CUNY, NY, USA LUTON UNIV, BEDFORDSHIRE, ENGLAND. SWITZERLAND JAPAN NEW ZEALAND CANADA CAMBRIGDE UNIV, Cambridge, England. sil.org CHINA ISRAEL lse.ac.uk --> FAIL TO SEE WHAT PART OF ENGLAND (OR UK) THIS IS. SPAIN SIL.ORG JAPAN JAPAN hotmail.com basil@at -- POSSIBLY AUSTRIA??? hinet.net CANADA CARDIFF, WALES, United Kingdom. hud.ac.uk -- FAIL TO SEE WHERE IN UK THIS IS. SPAIN sil.org GREECE, I suppose ("gr"). "hk" --> HUNGARY?? wfu.edu --> ?? The ARGENTINe -- that's not me! I mean, it's not I! but I know them! The ARGENTINe. -- that's not me, but I don't know THEM! (I think) University of Michigan University of Michigan, USA, DENMARK DENMARK NORWAY SPAIN SPAIN SC.EDU Rob Seton, FRANCE (but English, originally, I suppose). ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME jls@netverk.com.ar (my, one of the eldest here!) D.Blakemore@mod-lang.salford.ac.uk (rings a bell! English!) bill_mann@bigfoot.com I don't know, but with an address like big foot sounds like American) sattardo@cc.ysu.edu This is my friend Attardo, originally SWISS but now American, nice chap! aol.com PLYMOUTH UNIV, DEVON, ENGLAND. "hk", oh I see it's HONG KONG, and not HUNGARY. (I see there's no "k" in Hungary, but then there's neither a c nor a h in Switzerland! corporation helvetia!) my --> can't be mexico, because that's MX. edu.cn ISRAEL BRAZIL, South America. gdufs.edu.cn george@linguistics.ucl.ac.uk (THIS IS VERY MYSTERIOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I don't know any George there! I know Dick Hudson. WHO ___IS____ GEORGE????) Italy Hong Kong BELGIUM MEXICO SWEDEN SWITZERLAND MEXICO JAPAN JAPAN Louis.deSaussure@lettres.unige.ch SWITZERLAND. Lovely Surname!!!!!! SWITZERLAND. uy --> ??? ISRAEL FRANCE JAPAN JAPAN gxnu.edu.cn JAPAN GERMANY Princeton.EDU -- that's posh! JAPAN TAIWAN * deirdre@linguistics.ucl.ac.uk ((RINGS A BELL! :)) gary@linguistics.ucl.ac.uk (RINGS A BELL -- Gary Cooper, but fail to know his surname) dick@linguistics.ucl.ac.uk (that's HUDSON, R. A.) NORWAY NORWAY (he is the Norwegian included in A. Kasher's 19 studies of conversational implicature, recently reviewed by yours truly here). HERTFORDSHIRE UNIV, ENGLAND. FRANCE SWITZERLAND Teddington, middlesex.ac.uk, ENGLAND umn.edu NORWAY. mdx.ac.uk, TEDDINGTON, MIDDLESEX, England. jill@phonetics.ucl.ac.uk (rings a bell!) FINLAND ISRAEL ITALY lse.ac.uk -> ???? uoregon.edu, USA poly.polytechnique.fr, FRANCE. recanati@poly.polytechnique.fr RINGS A BELL! (WHOLE POINT OF THIS LIST. Joe. If Recanati is listed here, and since he has published a lot, unlike I who's TALKED a lot, it means we can safely assume that he's a RT-ist, unless he ain't...). umich.edu, USA umich.edu, USA SWITZERLAND. ITALY. This is very important. PAPI. GERMANY JF@SOAS.AC.UK This is very important, but no idea who she is it's not a former you, Joe Fantin. SOAS is School of Oriental and African Studies... London. PRINCETON.EDU -- that's very Posh. Spain ucsc.edu --> I know this one, because he's the nice prof of psychology at the famous seaside resort in Calif, called Santa Cruz, and his name is RW Gibbs. cam.ac.uk, CAMBRIDGE, UNIV, ENGLAND (I note "univ", because as I'm a snob, one thing is to be "cambridge", and another to be "cambridge, university"... Pity there's nobody from OXFORD so far... GRICE WAS!!!) Ernst-August_Gutt@sil.org Oh, I corresponded with him. This suggests that SIL is GERMANY. NEW ZEALAND palma FRANCE, I know him. Nice person. w.downes@uea.ac.uk RINGS A BELL. FAIL TO SEE WHAT UEA... Oh, that's U. of East Anglia, Norwich. ENGLAND. I think he published a book with FONTANA. plymouth.ac.uk, DEVON, ENGLAND hu -- this HAS to be HUNGARY carleton.ca, CANADA @aen1.english.nottingham.ac.uk NOTTINGHAM, ENGLAND. ISRAEL SPAIN rochester.edu, USA FRANCE FRANCE @shu.ac.uk fail to see what SHU is... JAPAN JAPAN ZAIRE @mdx.ac.uk, Teddington, England Japan jasper.holmes@ucl.ac.uk rings a bell... luton.ac.uk, Bedfordshire, England. ucl.ac.uk rings a bell. cdu.ucl.ac.uk rings a bell * N.Burton-Roberts@newcastle.ac.uk VERY IMPORTANT NAME Newcastle, England. CANADA BRAZIL @hertford.ox.ac.uk GOOD. We have an Oxonian. Same college as Evelyn Waugh... Grice was St John's, and Nuffield was DSM Wilson's alma mater Who else has an Oxonian edukeishn? specify alma mater. We may get a St Johnian. FRANCE. JAPAN soas.ac.uk, LONDON FRANCE @hermes.cam.ac.uk, CAMBRIDGE UNIV, ENGLAND **** regina.blass@SIL.ORG Oh this confuses me, I thought that SIL was GERMANY but Regina is in London, right???? ling.ed.ac.uk -> Edinburgh, Scotland, I guess. harlequin.co.uk, somewhere in UK. UEA, Norwich, England. KENYA SWITZERLAND GERMANY Steve-Alison_Nicolle@sil.org He rings a bell! m.jary@roehampton.ac.uk This is England. I corresponded with him. tcody.freeserve.co.uk, ENGLAND, ================================
============================== (the great founder of this network. Although I was told this was first set up by D Brockway Blakemore?
wheaton.edu, USA SPAIN JAPAN SPAIN SPAIN SPAIN BRAZIL @navegalia.com ???? BRAZIL NETHERLANDS. Ooops the first so far! I would have tho't RT was more influential there... @cus.cam.ac.uk. That must be CAIUS, CAMBRIDGE, UNIV, ENGLAND. Robin.Setton@eti.unige.ch Eh, this is not fair, I think I saw him before!!! Now he's SWISS.? airtel.net GERMANY @fredonia.edu ?? SPAIN @mdx.ac.uk @hotmail.com @yahoo.com FRANCE
======================================
====================================== the great keeper of the RECORDS.
user.he.cninfo.net @greenwich.ac.uk, ENGLAND F.YUS@mail.ono.es this is not fair, He's is above! SPAIN JAPAN FRANCE aol.com SWEDEN FRANCE umich.edu, USA BRAZIL ITALY att.net gd.cn
=====================================
======================================= Rings a relevant number of bells!
@ling.canterbury.ac.nz NEW ZEALAND FRANCE SPAIN INDIA @lsu.edu SWITZERLAND The Argentina. And I don't know him. We're 4 so far! r.horsey@ucl.ac.uk ----oh he is very good, the other day, I came across his online paper called PSYCHOSEMANTIC ANALYTICITY which I'm discussing in the yahoogroup "ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY". Very very good. Even if I disagree with everything he says... btinternet.com tc.umn.edu NETHERLANDS, Two of them now. hotmail.com yahoo.com adrianpilkington@hotmail.com I recall I corresponded with him. @jesus.oxford.ac.uk Good. Another Oxonian. So we have one HERFTORD and one JESUS. @mailandnews.com PORTUGAL SPAIN b.clark@mdx.ac.uk I KNOW HIM!!!!, ENGLAND. hungary @hotmail.com SPAIN ix.netcom.com @ono.com AUSTRALIA CANADA GERMANY SPAIN sc.edu D.Blakemore@salford.ac.uk -- I think I saw her name before... @cam.ac.uk. CAMBRIDGE???? @linguistics.ucl.ac.uk CANADA ioe.ac.uk --> ??? @post.harvard.edu why -- this is is posh. Grice delivered the Logic & Convesation Lectures at 'Arvard an' all. @virgin.net @nottingham.ac.uk, England @aland.net MEXICO @attglobal.net
==========================
================== I think I know him, because he's the only or one of the only (other than myself) who comments (not so disfavourably) on my posts... That's TEL AVIV, ISRAEL.
SPAIN JAPAN BRAZIL @ling-phil.ox.ac.uk mmm. that looks like oup, but I may be wrong!! Nice email address. I wish I had it...! mail.ustc.edu.cn JAPAN hotmail.com JAPAN mj.0038.net NETHERLANDS. There's 3 with "nl" address. waitrose.com @pgr.salford.ac.uk, LANCASHIRE, ENGLAND. -- same as D Brockway Blakemore. Japan @amadeus.net aol.com thefreeinternet.co.uk
=========================
========================== the very same Teun Van Dijk??? Oh, no, this is R. van Dijk. Sorry. Anyway, this makes 4 from Netherlands. Nice surname.
@mac.com @chinaren.com @hotmail.com francisxu@163.net ==== I think I've seen this man 3 times already.
==== END OF CHITTY CHATTY INTERLUDE... Continuation with Joe Fantin's post...
"The reason I ask about my observations is because of a statement made by Jeffrey T. Reed, in an article called 'Modern Linguistics & the New Testament: A Basic Guide to Theory, Terminology, and Literature' in _Approaches to New Testament Study_, ed. S. E. Porter and D. Tombs (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press).
You and your local bibliography! :)
">Within a section on Pragmatics (234-42) in a subsection called "presupposition and implicature" (238-42),"
i.e. a mere 4 pages!!!! Even Grice spends more time explaining implicature, he goes from page 24 to 40.
"Reed describes Grice's "co-operative principle" and the four maxims."
which he took in irony from KANT, Since in the Intro to Kr der Rein. Vern there are 4 categories.
QUANTITY QUALITY RELATION MANNER.
Incidentally, the new book with Grice, Aspect of Reason, was formerly given not only as the Locke Lectures at Oxford, but as the Immanuel Kant Memorial Lectures at Kant... RELEVANT EXPLICATURE: Grice is Kantian...
"Near the end of the section, Reed states:
"Indeed all of the above communicative principles may be summed up"
doesn't he mean "subsumed". One thing is to be subsumed, and another to be summed up. I.e. I prefer subsumed, which implicates that I must know what is being subsumed. But if you tell me, you can do with "be relevant", which sums up everything Grice says, I won't be satisfied, because I may like to know what Grice was saying in the first place. Also, as Wilson and Sperber proved in their more specific article,
On Grice's Theory of Conversation 1977 PRAGMATICS MICROFICHE ed S C Levinson
--- I don't see why you see Levinson as anti RT when the man did so much for RT --
it is quite something to prove that something gets subsumed by something else... And not everybody may be happy with the subsumption. Grice wasn't... He wrote in STUDIES, Retrospective Epilogue, now repr by KASHER among the 19 essays dedicated to Conversational Implicature:
he is considering that maxims have to have a "degree of mutual independence" .
"The force of this consideration seems to be BLUNTED by writers like WILSON and SPERBER"
--- who Grice describe nevertheless as good friends in PGRICE, Philosophical Grounds of Rationality: Intention, Categories, Ends, ed. R. Grandy & R. Warner, Oxford, Clarendon, p.45)
"...who seem to be disposed to SEVER the notion of RELEVANCE"
note that he says "notion of relevance" and NOT, notably, MAXIM of relevance.
"...from the specification of some PARTICULAR direction of relevance"
where direction is, roughly, maxim. Or at least something that directs your behaviour, something that you rationally or reasonably follow, which is something that W & S are denying...
"under Sperber and Wilson's single "axiom""
Now that's a nice one! Axiom! I only know one axion, and I've forgotten it now...
"of relevance: Principle: The speaker tries to make the utterance as relevant as possible to the hearer".
"I do agree with this statement;"
Do you, but do you know the philosophical history of the word AXIOM??? Can you distinguish between an AXIOM and a THEOREM, and a tautology and an analytic claim".
I mean, intepretations of what Grice meant by "be relevant" are as many as what Jesus said when he said, "This bread will be my body, this wine will be my blood". B F Loar, a literary executor of Grice says in MIND & MEANING that the cheapest (in the sense of less demanding) assumption is that "be relevant" be interpreted as a CONTINGENT GENERALISATION OVER FUNCTIONAL STATES... p.132, n.7 -- subsection: "The epistemology of belief-desire ascription" within the chapter, Objectively Determinate beliefs and our knowleddge of them". From that to the idea of a brain wired cognitive axiom there is what I say, a gappy."
JF goes on:
"however, it seems to me to be suggesting that this position is the normal position within the field of pragmatics (remember, this is a work meant to introduce pragmatics to biblical scholars and thus should represent the broader field and if not it should at least note important controversy). I assume this would represent the RT's position; however, is Reed's representation accurate here of pragmatics in general?"
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO Let me have that email address of Reed. Let him JOIN IN HERE FOR A WHILE!!! =====
"Any comments to help me clarify the role of RT within the larger field of pragmatics would be appreciated."
Well, there are good online resources that will give you a more fine-grained picture of the place of RT within pragmatics. Also, in my previous post, I was being _tricky_ or whatever, in thinking that RT is a pragmatic theory or belongs in pragmatics. RT claims to be a cognitive theory. A psycho-semantic theory, a la Horsey, if you want...
The claims that RT makes about the truth-conditional semantic vs implicature content of an utterance are just one component of its predicament. But of course I too would love to hear from other (I mean from) RT theorists... Best,
JL Grice Circle J L Speranza, Esq Country Town St Michael's Hall Suite 5/8 Calle 58, No 611 Calle Arenales 2021 La Plata CP 1900 Recoleta CP 1124 Tel 541148241050 Tel 542214257817 BUENOS AIRES, Argentina http://www.netverk.com.ar/~jls.htm jls@netverk.com.ar
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 24 2001 - 05:40:28 GMT