Can pragmatics and especially conversational implicature contribute to the semantic(i.e. conventional, truth-conditional, and propositional) content of a sentence uttered? During the ‘Golden Age of Pure Pragmatics...Can pragmatics and especially conversational implicature contribute to the semantic(i.e. conventional, truth-conditional, and propositional) content of a sentence uttered? During the ‘Golden Age of Pure Pragmatics'(GAPP), the answer to this question was straightforwardly negative. In other words, pragmatic intrusion into the semantic content of what is said is not allowed. But time has moved on. It has now been generally accepted in both the philosophy of language and linguistics that contra this ‘received' view, pragmatics and in particular conversational implicature or a variant of it like explicature or impliciture can encroach upon the semantic content of a sentence uttered, and to a less extent that some conversational implicatures may not be cancelled. This article presents a critical discussion and a neo-Gricean analysis of pragmatic and especially conversational implicatural penetration into the semantic content of a sentence uttered, focusing on what Levinson has called intrusive constructions.展开更多
本文尝试分析汉语特有的“你说X”的生成机制。本文从新兴的词汇—构式语用学视角进行考察,发现“你说X”构式的宾语小句“X”一般由反问句、陈述句或感叹句构成。其次,“你说”和小句“X”的语用矛盾触发其双重语用压制:词汇“你说”...本文尝试分析汉语特有的“你说X”的生成机制。本文从新兴的词汇—构式语用学视角进行考察,发现“你说X”构式的宾语小句“X”一般由反问句、陈述句或感叹句构成。其次,“你说”和小句“X”的语用矛盾触发其双重语用压制:词汇“你说”压制构式“你说X”,“你说X”构式又压制词汇“你说”。结果表现为“你说”的祈使言说义虚化,或者说发生话语标记化,获得了社会认知功能或篇章构建功能,而整个构式获得了(社会公约化评价的)抒情阐述的构式义及(社会共知的)共场共鸣的构式效。上述双重双向语用压制的机制在于其语用转喻,制约着言者使用该构式生成上述构式义和构式效以及听者对其构式义效的推理。鉴于该构式的上述特征,该构式可英译为“wouldn’t you say/think X?”“you know X”“you tell me X”等。展开更多
文摘Can pragmatics and especially conversational implicature contribute to the semantic(i.e. conventional, truth-conditional, and propositional) content of a sentence uttered? During the ‘Golden Age of Pure Pragmatics'(GAPP), the answer to this question was straightforwardly negative. In other words, pragmatic intrusion into the semantic content of what is said is not allowed. But time has moved on. It has now been generally accepted in both the philosophy of language and linguistics that contra this ‘received' view, pragmatics and in particular conversational implicature or a variant of it like explicature or impliciture can encroach upon the semantic content of a sentence uttered, and to a less extent that some conversational implicatures may not be cancelled. This article presents a critical discussion and a neo-Gricean analysis of pragmatic and especially conversational implicatural penetration into the semantic content of a sentence uttered, focusing on what Levinson has called intrusive constructions.
文摘本文尝试分析汉语特有的“你说X”的生成机制。本文从新兴的词汇—构式语用学视角进行考察,发现“你说X”构式的宾语小句“X”一般由反问句、陈述句或感叹句构成。其次,“你说”和小句“X”的语用矛盾触发其双重语用压制:词汇“你说”压制构式“你说X”,“你说X”构式又压制词汇“你说”。结果表现为“你说”的祈使言说义虚化,或者说发生话语标记化,获得了社会认知功能或篇章构建功能,而整个构式获得了(社会公约化评价的)抒情阐述的构式义及(社会共知的)共场共鸣的构式效。上述双重双向语用压制的机制在于其语用转喻,制约着言者使用该构式生成上述构式义和构式效以及听者对其构式义效的推理。鉴于该构式的上述特征,该构式可英译为“wouldn’t you say/think X?”“you know X”“you tell me X”等。
