| Popis: |
This study investigates the pragmatic status and psychological reality of four levels of interpretation: linguistic meaning, explicature, strong implicature, and weak implicature. We test their potential to constitute the Privileged Interactional Interpretation, which is the primary interpretation of an utterance as intended by the speaker and understood by the addressee ( Ariel, 2002 , Ariel, 2008 , Jaszczolt, 2010 ). Maximalists, such as Recanati, 2001 , Recanati, 2004 , Recanati, 2010 and Carston, 2001 , Carston, 2002 , Carston, 2004a , Carston, 2004b , Carston, 2005 , Carston, 2012 see no discourse role for the bare linguistic meaning. However, Maximalist Ariel (2002 and onwards) alongside Minimalists, such as Bach (1994) and Borg (2009) do. So, our first goal is to demonstrate that linguistic meanings, explicatures, and implicatures can all be taken as Privileged Interactional Interpretations. But our hypothesis takes the concept of the Privileged Interactional Interpretation a step further. We propose a scale of interpretation strength: Bare linguistic meaning > explicature > implicature[strong] > implicature[weak]. We here claim that the stronger (i.e., left) the representation on the scale, the more likely it is to count as the Privileged Interactional Interpretation. |
Full Text from ScienceDirect