Précis for Context and Coherence

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Croatian Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI:10.52685/cjp.23.69.1
Una Stojnić
{"title":"Précis for Context and Coherence","authors":"Una Stojnić","doi":"10.52685/cjp.23.69.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This précis outlines some of the key themes in Context and Coherence. At the core of Context and Coherence is the meta-semantic question: what determines the meaning of context-sensitive language and how do we interpret it as effortlessly as we do? What we can express with language is obviously constrained by grammar, but it also seems to depend on various non-linguistic features of an utterance situation, for example, pointing gestures. Accordingly, it is nearly universally assumed that grammar underspecifi es content: the interpretation of context-sensitive language depends in part on extra-linguistic features of the utterance situation. Contra this dominant tradition, the book develops and defends a thoroughly linguistic account: context-sensitivity resolution is entirely a matter of grammar, which is much more subtle and pervasive than has typically been noticed. In interpreting context-sensitive language as effortlessly as we do, we draw on our knowledge of these subtle, but pervasive, linguistic cues—what I call discourse conventions. If this is right, the dominant, extra-linguistic account must be rejected. It not only mischaracterizes the linguistic conventions affecting context-sensitivity resolution, but its widespread, and often implicit, endorsement leads to philosophically radical conclusions. The recent arguments for non-truth-conditional and non-classical semantics for modal discourse provide just one illustration of this point. But appeals to context are quite common within a wide range of debates across different subfi elds of philosophy, and they typically assume the extra-linguistic model of context-sensitivity resolution. If the account of context-sensitivity developed in Context and Coherence is on the right track, such arguments have to be reconsidered.","PeriodicalId":43218,"journal":{"name":"Croatian Journal of Philosophy","volume":"53 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Croatian Journal of Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52685/cjp.23.69.1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This précis outlines some of the key themes in Context and Coherence. At the core of Context and Coherence is the meta-semantic question: what determines the meaning of context-sensitive language and how do we interpret it as effortlessly as we do? What we can express with language is obviously constrained by grammar, but it also seems to depend on various non-linguistic features of an utterance situation, for example, pointing gestures. Accordingly, it is nearly universally assumed that grammar underspecifi es content: the interpretation of context-sensitive language depends in part on extra-linguistic features of the utterance situation. Contra this dominant tradition, the book develops and defends a thoroughly linguistic account: context-sensitivity resolution is entirely a matter of grammar, which is much more subtle and pervasive than has typically been noticed. In interpreting context-sensitive language as effortlessly as we do, we draw on our knowledge of these subtle, but pervasive, linguistic cues—what I call discourse conventions. If this is right, the dominant, extra-linguistic account must be rejected. It not only mischaracterizes the linguistic conventions affecting context-sensitivity resolution, but its widespread, and often implicit, endorsement leads to philosophically radical conclusions. The recent arguments for non-truth-conditional and non-classical semantics for modal discourse provide just one illustration of this point. But appeals to context are quite common within a wide range of debates across different subfi elds of philosophy, and they typically assume the extra-linguistic model of context-sensitivity resolution. If the account of context-sensitivity developed in Context and Coherence is on the right track, such arguments have to be reconsidered.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
背景和连贯性简述
本摘要概述了《语境与连贯性》中的一些关键主题。语境与连贯》的核心是元语义问题:是什么决定了对语境敏感的语言的意义,我们又是如何毫不费力地解释它的?我们能用语言表达的内容显然受到语法的限制,但似乎也取决于语篇情景中的各种非语言特征,例如指向手势。因此,人们几乎普遍认为语法对内容的规定性不足:对语境敏感语言的解释部分取决于语篇情景的非语言特征。与这一主流传统相反,本书发展并捍卫了一种彻底的语言学解释:语境敏感性的解决完全是语法的问题,而语法比人们通常注意到的要微妙和普遍得多。我们在毫不费力地解释语境敏感语言时,利用了我们对这些微妙但无处不在的语言线索的了解--我称之为话语惯例。如果这种观点是正确的,那么主流的、语言之外的解释就必须被摒弃。它不仅错误地描述了影响语境敏感性解析的语言惯例,而且其广泛的、往往是隐含的认可导致了哲学上激进的结论。最近关于模态话语的非真理条件和非经典语义学的争论就说明了这一点。但是,在哲学不同分支领域的广泛争论中,对语境的诉求是相当普遍的,而且它们通常都假定语境敏感性的解决是语言之外的模型。如果《语境与一致性》一书中关于语境敏感性的论述是正确的,那么就必须重新考虑这些论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
Linguistic Conventions or Open-Ended Reasoning Incoherent Meanings What is a Tense, Anyway? Précis for Context and Coherence The Syntax of Prominence
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1