Three Demonstrations and a Funeral

Korta, Kepa; Perry, John

doi:10.1111/j.0268-1064.2006.00310.x

Cited by 25 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(Grice, 1989, p. 32) What do the rules associated with English sentence 'I am out of petrol' buy us? Korta & Perry (2006) tell us that this buys us a truth-condition on the utterance itself:…”

Section: Critical Pragmatics and Grice's Circlementioning

confidence: 99%

“…(Grice, 1989, p. 31) The majority of theorists surveyed thus far seem to agree that what p corresponds to is something like the enriched truth-conditional content (plug in your preferred mechanism for determining it). Following Korta and Perry (2006) However, there is a worry with Cappelen and Lepore's account. They claim that minimalism can account for "how the same content can be expressed, claimed, asserted, questioned, investigated, etc.…”

Section: Demonstrating the Input To Implicaturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since people say things and implicate things by them, one may naturally take this to mean that what is implicated is figured out only after determining what is said. However, it is a mistake to suppose that what is said must be determined first (Bach, 2005;Bach & Harnish, 1979;Korta & Perry, 2006. In fact, there are numerous examples where it seems pretty clear to an auditor that the speaker doesn't mean what they are saying without explicit awareness of what the speaker said.…”

Section: The Role Of the Literalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…I sketch a theory of metaphor that builds on pluri-propositionalism based on Perry's (2012a) "Reference and Reflexivity" and Korta and Perry's (Korta, 2013;Korta & Perry, 2006, 2007a, 2011b) "Critical Pragmatics", and extended by Garmedia for the purpose of ironic utterances (e.g., "He is a fine friend", said about someone who the speaker believes to be a terrible). This account is a renovation of the classical Gricean paradigm.…”

Section: Chapter 10: Metaphor and Critical Pragmaticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, they respond by saying, "You know, I think I have some food sitting out, some clothing to fold, and I really need to clean my kitchen". It is likely that before they finished saying all of this that you could determine they were implicating that they don't want to discuss what's on their mind Korta and Perry (2006). offer several other more convincing examples wherein a speaker uses a demonstrative, although he is not trying to convey a singular proposition.Yet, it seems obvious that he is able to trigger an implicature.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Food for Thought: Metaphor in Communication and Cognition

Genovesi¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Metaphors are undoubtedly contextual phenomena. We often creatively employ them to say one thing and mean another by exploiting the literal meaning of the words used. However, metaphors are not simply parasitic on literal meaning. Rather, they pull from ways interlocutors, readers, and audiences understand context, and they tap into our shared knowledge of the world and one another's mutual beliefs. In this thesis, I propose a pragmatic account of metaphor that treats metaphorical meaning as the result of recovering the speaker's intended meaning. I defend a broadly Gricean account of metaphorical content from more recent accounts that take metaphorical meaning to be directly, explicitly, and automatically interpreted by an audience. A related concern with my view is whether metaphors are distinctively unique from other forms of linguistic communication. According to recent philosophers of language, metaphors and their literal counterparts exploit the same basic cognitive processes. I disagree with this conclusion. I promote a position that treats metaphor on par with poetic imaginings that exploit characterizations (roughly, stereotypes) to novel ends. This makes my treatment of metaphor importantly different from contemporary treatments of it that reduce metaphor to 'literally loose' talk. I develop a framework of metaphoric communication that is based on Korta and Perry's (2011b) framework developed at length in "Critical Pragmatics". The theoretical utility offered by Korta and Perry's framework is made explicit throughout, but becomes especially important in Part II where I undertake to show how their framework allows me to subsume the nuances of communicating metaphorically within a broader theory of communication. iii Preface My love for the topic of metaphor grew from a rather peculiar place. During the middle of my undergraduate degree I was experimenting with 'continental philosophy'. In a seminar on personal identity and recognition, I was introduced to the writings of Paul Ricoeur. Intrigued by his work on narratology and narrative identity, I impulsively purchased The Rule of Metaphor because I was curious to know what prompted Ricoeur to devote eight long studies-and numerous other essays-to understanding what I thought was a rhetorical non-issue. Already a fan of Ricoeur, I was immediately captivated by the ferocity he poured into his scholarship. These powers are evidenced by his ability to read, assimilate, elucidate, and historicize central issues surrounding nearly any topic he touched. Reading Ricoeur's study on metaphor put into relief just what is at stake, philosophically speaking: It became increasingly clear to me that there was in fact a 'question of metaphor'. We use metaphors every day in meaningful ways. But an interpretation can be meaningful, and yet be incorrect-or deemed 'false'. On a beautiful summer day, someone may utter: "The sky is weeping". You would understand their statement, but would probably consider it false. Then again, a literal-minded person might consider the sente...

show abstract

Section: Critical Pragmatics and Grice's Circlementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Demonstrating the Input To Implicaturesmentioning

confidence: 99%