Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Explicit/Implicit Distinction in Pragmatics and the Limits of Explicit Communication

The Explicit/Implicit Distinction in Pragmatics and the Limits of Explicit Communication <jats:sec><jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>This paper has two main parts. The first is a critical survey of ways in which the explicit/implicit distinction has been and is currently construed in linguistic pragmatics, which reaches the conclusion that the distinction is not to be equated with a semantics/pragmatics distinction but rather concerns a division within communicated contents (or speaker meaning). The second part homes in on one particular way of drawing such a pragmatically-based distinction, the explicature/implicature distinction in Relevance Theory. According to this account, processes of pragmatic enrichment play a major role in the recovery of explicit content and only some of these processes are linguistically triggered, others being entirely pragmatically motivated. I conclude with a brief consideration of the language-communication relation and the limits on explicitness.</jats:p> </jats:sec> http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Review of Pragmatics Brill

The Explicit/Implicit Distinction in Pragmatics and the Limits of Explicit Communication

International Review of Pragmatics , Volume 1 (1): 35 – Jan 1, 2009

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/the-explicit-implicit-distinction-in-pragmatics-and-the-limits-of-7wBTxVnLXM
Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2009 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1877-3095
eISSN
1877-3109
DOI
10.1163/187731009X455839
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>This paper has two main parts. The first is a critical survey of ways in which the explicit/implicit distinction has been and is currently construed in linguistic pragmatics, which reaches the conclusion that the distinction is not to be equated with a semantics/pragmatics distinction but rather concerns a division within communicated contents (or speaker meaning). The second part homes in on one particular way of drawing such a pragmatically-based distinction, the explicature/implicature distinction in Relevance Theory. According to this account, processes of pragmatic enrichment play a major role in the recovery of explicit content and only some of these processes are linguistically triggered, others being entirely pragmatically motivated. I conclude with a brief consideration of the language-communication relation and the limits on explicitness.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

Journal

International Review of PragmaticsBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2009

Keywords: WHAT IS SAID; FREE ENRICHMENT; IMPLICIT COMMUNICATION; EXPLICIT COMMUNICATION; RELEVANCE EORY; PRAGMATICS; SEMANTICS

There are no references for this article.