On weak communication
- Autores
- Gil, Jose Maria
- Año de publicación
- 2015
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson suggest that much of linguistic communication is weak because the hearer usually must take a great responsibility in the interpretation of the speaker’s utterance. Sometimes, the (very) “weak implicatures” supplied by the hearer are very different from (and even incompatible with) the speaker’s intention. Relevance Theory helps us to understand crucial aspects of weak communication. However, I aim at showing that pragmatic theory should reconsider the importance of intention in order to explain that, often, the hearer interprets certain meanings that are independent from (or even incompatible with) the speaker’s intention. Some types of inferences proposed by Mira Ariel, as well as unintended puns studied by Sydney Lamb and other stratificational linguists, help us to begin to show that it may be necessary to go beyond the concept of intention if we want to understand why and how human communication is weak.
Fil: Gil, Jose Maria. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Humanidades. Departamento de Filosofía; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina - Materia
-
Cognition
Communication
Relational Networks
Truth Compatible Inferences
Weak Implicatures - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
- OAI Identificador
- oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/62430
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
CONICETDig_a475d4ce114c84af5e8657c52e84e300 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/62430 |
network_acronym_str |
CONICETDig |
repository_id_str |
3498 |
network_name_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
spelling |
On weak communicationGil, Jose MariaCognitionCommunicationRelational NetworksTruth Compatible InferencesWeak Implicatureshttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson suggest that much of linguistic communication is weak because the hearer usually must take a great responsibility in the interpretation of the speaker’s utterance. Sometimes, the (very) “weak implicatures” supplied by the hearer are very different from (and even incompatible with) the speaker’s intention. Relevance Theory helps us to understand crucial aspects of weak communication. However, I aim at showing that pragmatic theory should reconsider the importance of intention in order to explain that, often, the hearer interprets certain meanings that are independent from (or even incompatible with) the speaker’s intention. Some types of inferences proposed by Mira Ariel, as well as unintended puns studied by Sydney Lamb and other stratificational linguists, help us to begin to show that it may be necessary to go beyond the concept of intention if we want to understand why and how human communication is weak.Fil: Gil, Jose Maria. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Humanidades. Departamento de Filosofía; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaDe Gruyter2015-09info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/62430Gil, Jose Maria; On weak communication; De Gruyter; Intercultural Pragmatics; 12; 3; 9-2015; 387-4041612-295X1613-365XCONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1515/ip-2015-0019info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/iprg.2015.12.issue-3/ip-2015-0019/ip-2015-0019.xmlinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T09:59:04Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/62430instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 09:59:04.971CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
On weak communication |
title |
On weak communication |
spellingShingle |
On weak communication Gil, Jose Maria Cognition Communication Relational Networks Truth Compatible Inferences Weak Implicatures |
title_short |
On weak communication |
title_full |
On weak communication |
title_fullStr |
On weak communication |
title_full_unstemmed |
On weak communication |
title_sort |
On weak communication |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Gil, Jose Maria |
author |
Gil, Jose Maria |
author_facet |
Gil, Jose Maria |
author_role |
author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
Cognition Communication Relational Networks Truth Compatible Inferences Weak Implicatures |
topic |
Cognition Communication Relational Networks Truth Compatible Inferences Weak Implicatures |
purl_subject.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6 |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson suggest that much of linguistic communication is weak because the hearer usually must take a great responsibility in the interpretation of the speaker’s utterance. Sometimes, the (very) “weak implicatures” supplied by the hearer are very different from (and even incompatible with) the speaker’s intention. Relevance Theory helps us to understand crucial aspects of weak communication. However, I aim at showing that pragmatic theory should reconsider the importance of intention in order to explain that, often, the hearer interprets certain meanings that are independent from (or even incompatible with) the speaker’s intention. Some types of inferences proposed by Mira Ariel, as well as unintended puns studied by Sydney Lamb and other stratificational linguists, help us to begin to show that it may be necessary to go beyond the concept of intention if we want to understand why and how human communication is weak. Fil: Gil, Jose Maria. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Humanidades. Departamento de Filosofía; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina |
description |
Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson suggest that much of linguistic communication is weak because the hearer usually must take a great responsibility in the interpretation of the speaker’s utterance. Sometimes, the (very) “weak implicatures” supplied by the hearer are very different from (and even incompatible with) the speaker’s intention. Relevance Theory helps us to understand crucial aspects of weak communication. However, I aim at showing that pragmatic theory should reconsider the importance of intention in order to explain that, often, the hearer interprets certain meanings that are independent from (or even incompatible with) the speaker’s intention. Some types of inferences proposed by Mira Ariel, as well as unintended puns studied by Sydney Lamb and other stratificational linguists, help us to begin to show that it may be necessary to go beyond the concept of intention if we want to understand why and how human communication is weak. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-09 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/62430 Gil, Jose Maria; On weak communication; De Gruyter; Intercultural Pragmatics; 12; 3; 9-2015; 387-404 1612-295X 1613-365X CONICET Digital CONICET |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/62430 |
identifier_str_mv |
Gil, Jose Maria; On weak communication; De Gruyter; Intercultural Pragmatics; 12; 3; 9-2015; 387-404 1612-295X 1613-365X CONICET Digital CONICET |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1515/ip-2015-0019 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/iprg.2015.12.issue-3/ip-2015-0019/ip-2015-0019.xml |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
De Gruyter |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
De Gruyter |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET) instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
reponame_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
collection |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
instname_str |
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar |
_version_ |
1844613755530379264 |
score |
13.070432 |