The semantics/pragmatics distinction: a view from Relevance Theory
The semantics/pragmatics distinction: a view from Relevance Theory
复制标题
语义/语用的区别：关联理论的观点
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1998
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
R. Carston
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Carston
唐纳兰的观察动摇了句子类型编码命题类型的假设，即具有明确描述主语的句子可以表达一般命题或单数命题。换句话说，单个句子类型在不同的使用场合可能有不同的真值条件。相关性理论持有这种“语义不确定性”命题的强有力版本，根据该命题，自然语言句子通常远远达不到编码命题或命题类型。相关性驱动的实用推理机制是我们“心智理论”能力的一部分，其功能独立于任何代码；由此可见，语言编码的话语意义只需是示意性的。
The assumption that sentence types encode proposition types was shaken by Donnellan’s observation that a sentence with a definite description subject could express either a general or a singular proposition. In other words, a single sentence type could have different truth conditions on different occasions of use. Relevance Theory holds a strong version of this “semantic underdeterminacy” thesis, according to which natural language sentences standardly fall far short of encoding propositions or proposition types. The relevance-driven pragmatic inferential mechanism is part of our “theory of mind” capacity and functions independently of any code; it follows that linguistically encoded utterance meaning need be only schematic.