The paper has three goals: 1) Explain the role of context and word in meaning construction and comprehension. 2) Present a model that can explain meaning generated by both monolingual and multilingual meaning construc...The paper has three goals: 1) Explain the role of context and word in meaning construction and comprehension. 2) Present a model that can explain meaning generated by both monolingual and multilingual meaning construction systems. 3) Discuss how the model can be applied to explain major issues in pragmatics. Pragmatics is understood here in a narrow sense as defined by Sperber & Noveck: “...pragmatics is the study of how linguistic properties and contextual factors interact in the interpretation of utterances” (Sperber & Noveck 2004∶1). It is argued that world knowledge is available to interlocutors in two forms: as encapsulated in lexical items based on prior encounters and experience (conventionalized cognitive context), and as provided by the actual situational context framed by the situation in which the interaction takes place. Meaning formally expressed in the linguistic interactional context is created on-the-spot, and is the result of the interaction of the two sides of world knowledge and the actual situational context. The paper makes three claims∶ First, supremacy of context is not unconditional in language processing. Second, salient meaning rather than literal meaning of lexical units plays a central role in comprehension. Third, intercultural communication differs from intracultural communication in the conceptual content of conventionalized cognitive contexts rather than in communicative means.展开更多
文摘The paper has three goals: 1) Explain the role of context and word in meaning construction and comprehension. 2) Present a model that can explain meaning generated by both monolingual and multilingual meaning construction systems. 3) Discuss how the model can be applied to explain major issues in pragmatics. Pragmatics is understood here in a narrow sense as defined by Sperber & Noveck: “...pragmatics is the study of how linguistic properties and contextual factors interact in the interpretation of utterances” (Sperber & Noveck 2004∶1). It is argued that world knowledge is available to interlocutors in two forms: as encapsulated in lexical items based on prior encounters and experience (conventionalized cognitive context), and as provided by the actual situational context framed by the situation in which the interaction takes place. Meaning formally expressed in the linguistic interactional context is created on-the-spot, and is the result of the interaction of the two sides of world knowledge and the actual situational context. The paper makes three claims∶ First, supremacy of context is not unconditional in language processing. Second, salient meaning rather than literal meaning of lexical units plays a central role in comprehension. Third, intercultural communication differs from intracultural communication in the conceptual content of conventionalized cognitive contexts rather than in communicative means.
