期刊文献+

《假定意义:一般会话含意理论》评介 被引量:3

A Review of Presumptive Meanings:The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature
下载PDF
导出
摘要 本文首先简要介绍Stephen Levinson新著《假定意义:一般会话含意理》 (Presumptive Meanings:The Theory of Generalized ConversationalImplicature. Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2000, pp. xxiii + 480)的主要内容,然后着重评述其中的几个重要观点。笔者认为,Levinson与Grice在研究路向上的分野源于对“合作”的不同诠释。在Grice 看来,合作是遵循逻辑,而Levinson认为合作是遵循常规。常规比逻辑更具心理现实性,是产生一般会话含意的根源。一般会话含意决定语句的命题内容,属于先语义语用学范畴。先语义语用学不仅是对Grice会话含意学说的发展与补充,而且为语用学研究开拓了新的领域。一般会话含意的推理机制是默认推理,默认推理与演绎推理共存于言语交际之中,二者呈互补关系,体现了科学理论的一般要求。 The present paper first briefly introduces the main contents of Stephen Levinsons Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature, published by MIT Press, 2000. It then puts forward the following comments on the main points of the book. The difference in Grices and Levinsons directions of research originates from their different interpretations of the notion of cooperation. For Grice cooperation means logicality, but for Levinson it means stereotypicality. Grices Cooperative Principle was motivated by his wish to make a compromise between logicians (represented by Russell) and ordinary language philosophers, i.e., to explain the logicality of illogical ordinary language. His notion of cooperation, however, is viewed by Levinson as too underspecified to serve as the starting point of a pragmatic principle. There is a need to reinterpret it. According to Levinson, it is conforming to stereotypes, rather than to logic, that constitutes cooperation. Logic must exhaust all possibilities while stereotypes are filtered of all the theoretically possible, but empirically nonexistent, states of affairs. Taking into account the instantaneity of verbal communication, it is obvious that stereotypes are more psychologically plausible than logic. Stereotypes are the sources from which generalized conversational implicatures (GCIs) originate. GCIs play an essential role in the determination of the prepositional content of the sentences in which they occur, and they dont involve the flouting of any maxim, for which reason they fall into the category of what is called presemantic pragmatics, rather than postsemantic Gricean pragmatics. GCIs cannot be regarded as part of semantics, either, for the reason that their defeasible nature is inconsistent with the monotonicity of semantic relations. Presemantic pragmatics interleave with semantics and postsemantic pragmatics in the sense that alternately act on the generation of communicated meaning. Given the dependence of particularized conversational implicatures on determinate propositions, presemantic pragmatics constitutes a new development of, and a complement to, classical Gricean pragmatics. It opens up a new horizon for pragmatic study as a whole. The derivation of GCIs involves default inference, which goes through in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Default inference and deductive inference coexist in human verbal communication, one serving the purpose of hypothesis formation and the other that of hypothesis confirmation. Hypothesis formation is characterized by its maximization of limited information available, while hypothesis confirmation emphasizes the validity of an inference from the premises to the conclusion. Default inference and deductive inference are complementary to each other, and, jointly, they reflect the fact that a scientific proposition needs to strike a balance between correctness and value.
作者 李海辉
出处 《现代外语》 CSSCI 北大核心 2003年第1期104-110,共7页 Modern Foreign Languages
关键词 常规 先语义语用学 默认推理 stereotype, presemantic pragmatics, default inference
  • 相关文献

参考文献14

  • 1Blakemore. D. 1987. Semantic constraints on relevance [M]. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  • 2Chapman. S. 2000. Philosophy for Linguists [M]. London: Routledge.
  • 3Farmer. A. & M. Hamish. 1987. Communicative reference with pronouns [A]. In J. Verschneren & M. Bertuccelli-Papi (ed.) The Pragmatic Perspective [C]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • 4Grice, H.P. 1975. Logic and Conversation [A]. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (ed.) Syntax and Semantics(Vol.3): Speech Acts [C]. New York: Academic Press.
  • 5Grice. H. P. 1989. Studies in the way ofwords [M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press
  • 6Horn L. R. 1984. Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inferences: Q-and R-based implicature [A]. In D. Shiffrin (ed.) Meaning, Form and Use in Context [C]. Washington: Georgetown University Press.
  • 7Levinson, S. C. 1983. Pragmatics [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • 8Levinson, S. C. 1987. Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora [J]. Journal of Linguistics 23: 379-434.
  • 9Lev ins on, S.C. 1991. Pragmatic reduction of the binding conditions revisited [J]. Journal of Linguistics 27:107-161.
  • 10Popper, K. 1959. The logic ofscientific discovery [M]. London: Hutchison.

共引文献45

同被引文献25

  • 1Grice, P. 1975. Logic and conversation [A]. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (eds.). Syntax and Semantics (vol. 3) [C]. New York: Academic Press, 41-58.
  • 2Heine, B., U. Claudi & F. Hunnemeyer. 1991. Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • 3Levinson, S. C. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature [M]. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • 4Traugott, E. C. 1999. The rhetoric of counterexpectation in semantic change: A study in subjectification [A]. In A. Black & P. Koch (eds.). Historical Semantics and Cognition [C]. Berlin/New York: Nouton de Gruyter, 177-196.
  • 5渡边義夫.1960,カラ格の名詞と動詞とのくみゎゎせ時間的結びつき[A].言語研究会(編),日本語文法·連語論(資料編)[C].东京:むぎ書房,382—394.
  • 6工藤真由美.1995,スアベクト·テンス体系テとクスト[M].东京:ひつじ書房.
  • 7荒正子.1975,から格の名詞と動詞とのくみゎゎせ[A].言語学研究会(編),日本語文法·連語論(资料編)[C].东京:むぎ書房,397—425.
  • 8Capone, A. Book Review of Presumptive Meanings [J].Language, 2001, (77) :578 - 580.
  • 9Kamp, H. A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation[A]. In Groenendijk, J. T. Janssen, & M. Stokhof ( eds. ). Formal Methods in the Study of language, Vol. 1[C]. Amsterdam: Mathematiseh C, entrum, 1981. 277 - 321.
  • 10Carnap, R. Meaning and Necessity[ M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1947.

引证文献3

二级引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部