The role of cognitive mechanism in making inferences

  1. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco José 1
  1. 1 Universidad de La Rioja
    info

    Universidad de La Rioja

    Logroño, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0553yr311

Revista:
Journal of English Studies

ISSN: 1576-6357

Año de publicación: 1999

Número: 1

Páginas: 237-256

Tipo: Artículo

beta Ver similares en nube de resultados
DOI: 10.18172/JES.50 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: Journal of English Studies

Repositorio institucional: lock_openAcceso abierto Editor

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

Discovering the nature and role of inferential mechanisms in language understanding is a distinctly common concern in work carried out both within Cognitive Linguistics and Relevance Theory. Cognitive linguists increasingly tend to see language-related inferences as a matter of the activation of relevant conceptual structures. This is generally accepted by relevance theorists; however, they tend to play down the importance of such structures in favour of pragmatic principles. This is evident in their treatment of phenomena like metaphor and metonymy, which are explained by them as a question of deriving strong and weak implicatures. In this paper we revise this treatment and argue in favour of dealing with metaphor and metonymy as cognitive mechanisms which provide us with explicit meaning or, as relevance theorists would put it, with sets of "explicatures". This allows us to reformulate the implicature/explicature distinction and to reconsider the way it works in relation to other phenomena which are also of concern to relevance theorists, like disambiguation in conjoined utterances.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Bach, K. 1994. “Conversational impliciture”. Mind & Language 9(2): 124-162.
  • Blakemore, D. 1987. Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  • Blakemore, D. 1988. “ ‘So’ as a constraint on relevance”. Mental Representations: The Interface between Language and Reality. Ed. R. Kempson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 183-195.
  • Blakemore, D. 1992. Understanding Utterances. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  • Carston, R. 1988. “Implicature, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics”. Mental Representations: The Interface Between Language and Reality. Ed. R.M. Kempson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 155-181. Reprinted in S. Davis ed. 1991. Pragmatics. A Reader. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 33-51.
  • Carston, R. 1993. “Conjunction, explanation and relevance”. Lingua 90: 27-48. NorthHolland.
  • Grice, H. P. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Lakoff, G. & M. Turner. 1989. More than Cool Reason. A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Lakoff, G, 1993. “The contemporary theory of metaphor”. Metaphor and Thought. 2nd. ed. Ed. A. Ortony. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 202-251.
  • Recanati, F. 1989. “The pragmatics of what is said”. Mind & Language 4: 294-328. Reprinted in S. Davis, ed. 1991. Pragmatics. A Reader. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 97-120.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. 1997. “Cognitive and pragmatic aspects of metonymy”. Cuadernos de Filología Inglesa 6/2: 161-178. Universidad de Murcia.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. 1998a. “Developing explicatures”. Pragmalinguistic Aspects of (Trans-)Communication. Eds. M. P. Navarro Errasti, R. Lorés Sanz, C. Buesa Gómez & S. Murillo Ornat. Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. 1998b. “The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy”. Metonymy and Metaphor at the Crossroads. Volume in the Topics in English Linguistics Series. Ed. A. Barcelona. Mouton de Gruyter; volume in preparation.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. 1999. “From semantic underdetermination via metaphor and metonymy to conceptual interaction”. LAUD Series A: General & Theoretical Papers. University of Essen.
  • Sperber, D. & D. Wilson. 1986 (1995). Relevance. Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  • Taylor, J. R. 1989 (1995). Linguistic Categorization. Prototypes in Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Clarendon.
  • Ungerer, F. & H. Schmid. 1996. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. London & New York: Longman.
  • Wilson, D. & D. Sperber, 1993. “Linguistic form and relevance”. Lingua 90: 1-25. North-Holland.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet