東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Pragmatic minimalism: A defense of f...

Agler, David W.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Pragmatic minimalism: A defense of formal approaches to semantics.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Pragmatic minimalism: A defense of formal approaches to semantics./
作者:	Agler, David W.
面頁冊數:	266 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-07(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International76-07A(E).
標題:	Philosophy. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3690523
ISBN:	9781321594188

Pragmatic minimalism: A defense of formal approaches to semantics.
Agler, David W.

Pragmatic minimalism: A defense of formal approaches to semantics. - 266 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-07(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Pennsylvania State University, 2012.

Context plays a fundamental role in interpreting language. It aids in determining what was said, what was meant, and how we choose to respond. Knowing what a particular utterance means is thus not simply a matter of knowing what the words in the sentence mean along with a grammar. Knowing a language also requires the non-linguistic (pragmatic) capacity to know how context influences the interpretation of sentences.

ISBN: 9781321594188Subjects--Topical Terms:

516511
Philosophy.

Pragmatic minimalism: A defense of formal approaches to semantics.
LDR:03114nmm a2200313 4500 001 2066368
005 20151231074247.5
008 170521s2012 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781321594188
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3690523
035 $a AAI3690523
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Agler, David W. $3 3181154
245 1 0 $a Pragmatic minimalism: A defense of formal approaches to semantics.
300 $a 266 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-07(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Vincent M. Colapietro.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Pennsylvania State University, 2012.
520 $a Context plays a fundamental role in interpreting language. It aids in determining what was said, what was meant, and how we choose to respond. Knowing what a particular utterance means is thus not simply a matter of knowing what the words in the sentence mean along with a grammar. Knowing a language also requires the non-linguistic (pragmatic) capacity to know how context influences the interpretation of sentences.
520 $a Minimalism is the theory that the role context plays in determining the literal meaning of an utterance is guided entirely by the syntactic and lexical features in the sentence. That is, if the meaning of a sentence depends upon the context in which the sentence is used, then there will be some feature in the sentence itself that conventionally directs the language user to the context. In short, language drives a turn to context. Contextualism, by contrast, is the theory that the interpretation of utterances involves a process of free enrichment, i.e. conversational or pragmatic rules will draw upon features from context to shape the content in certain ways.
520 $a My argument for minimalism occurs in two parts. First, I articulate and respond to two major objections to minimalism. Incompleteness objections state that the minimalist theory does not deliver propositional content and so falls short as a semantic theory. The inappropriateness objections state that the minimalist theory may deliver propositional content but this content plays no functional role in a larger story involving human communication and cognition. I argue that by appealing to a more expansive notion of language (involving its syntactic and semiotic underpinnings) both of these objections are unwarranted. Second, I offer a number of reasons for choosing minimalism over contextualism. I argue that minimalism offers a psychologically realistic (modular) picture of how we process language, that it provides the best explanation for the existence of cross-contextual communication, and that it best explains the distinction between what we are committed to in virtue of the words we use and what we are committed to in virtue of conversational principles governing communication.
590 $a School code: 0176.
650 4 $a Philosophy. $3 516511
650 4 $a Linguistics. $3 524476
650 4 $a Logic. $3 529544
690 $a 0422
690 $a 0290
690 $a 0395
710 2 $a The Pennsylvania State University. $b Philosophy. $3 3181155
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 76-07A(E).
790 $a 0176
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2012
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3690523