Abstract
Critics of relevance theory have charged that relevance theory provides no testable predictions, hence is unfalsifiable. This paper is an attempt to identify some testable relevance-theoretic predictions about anaphoric bridging inferences, and to show possible ways of testing these predictions. A relevance-based model of utterance interpretation is compared with Levinson’s GCI model, and their contrasting views on how to divide explicitly communicated content and implicitly communicated content of utterance are discussed. Moreover, predictions following each theory about derivation of bridging inferences are compared before possible ways to test these predictions are suggested.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bach, K. Conversational impliciture. Mind and Language 9, 124–162. 1994.
Carston, R. Implicature, explicature and truth-theoretic semantics. R. Kempson (ed.), Mental Representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1988.
Carston, R. Pragmatics and the Explicit-Implicit Distinction. PhD thesis, University College London. 1998.
Carston, R. Cognitive pragmatics and explicit communication. Paper given at Mind & Language Pragmatics and Cognitive Science Workshop, Oxford. 2000a.
Carston, R. Explicature and semantics. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 12, 1–44 2000b.
Clark, H. Bridging. P. Wason & P. Johnson-Laird (eds), Thinking: Readings in Cognitive Science, 411–420. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1977.
Gibbs, R. The Poetics of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1994.
Gibbs, R. & Moise, J. Pragmatics in understanding what is said. Cognition 62, 51–74. 1997.
Grice, H. P. Logic and conversation. P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press. 1975.
Levinson, S. Presumptive Meaning. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press. 2000.
Matsui, T. Pragmatic criteria for reference assignment: A relevance-theoretic account of the acceptability of bridging. Pragmatics and Cognition 6(1/2): 47–97. 1998.
Matsui, T. Bridging and Relevance. Amesterdam: John Benjamins. 2000.
Recanati, F. The pragmatics of what is said. Mind and Language 4, 295–329. 1989.
Recanati, F. Direct Reference: From Language to Thought. Oxford: Blackwell. 1993.
Revlin, R. & Hegarty, M. Resolving signals to cohesion: two models of bridging inference. Discourse Processes 27/1, 77–102. 1999.
Sanford, A. & Garrod, S. Understanding Written Language. Chichester: John Wiley. 1981.
Sanford, A. & Garrod, S. The role of scenario mapping in text comprehension. Discourse Processes 26(2&3), 159–190. 1998.
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. 1986/95.
Wilson, D. & Matsui, T. Recent approaches to bridging: truth, coherence, and relevance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 10: 173–200. 1998.
Wilson, D. & Sperber, D. Mood and the analysis of non-declarative sentences. J. Darcy, J. Moravcsik & C. Taylor (eds), Human Agency: Language, Duty and Value, 77–101. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 1988.
Wilson, D. & Sperber, D. Truthfulness and relevance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 12, 215–254. 2000.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Matsui, T. (2001). Experimental Pragmatics: Towards Testing Relevance-Based Predictions about Anaphoric Bridging Inferences. In: Akman, V., Bouquet, P., Thomason, R., Young, R. (eds) Modeling and Using Context. CONTEXT 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2116. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44607-9_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44607-9_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42379-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44607-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive