The problem of intentionality in the pragmatics of communicative language use

Dissertation, Doctoral School of Linguistics, University of Debrecen, Hungary (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The thesis is a metatheoretical analysis of the concept of ‘speaker’s intention’ as it is used in traditional linguistic-philosophical and in cognitive pragmatics. The analysis centers around works of Austin, Searle, Grice, and Relevance Theory. The main aim is to argue for the following thesis: (T1) if pragmatics is targeting on how speaker’s intentions contribute to linguistic choices in communicative language use, then focusing solely on causally efficient mental states and analyzing them at the utterance level necessarily leads to unsatisfactory consequences in theorizing. The secondary aim of the dissertation is to argue that: (T2) the traditional account of intentionality is tenable only if we take utterances as data. Surely, there are causally efficient intentions which lead the speaker to formulate her utterances as part of conversational turns. But speakers also have intentions which shape the conversation itself (motives, goals, plans). However: (T3) if we take discourses or conversations as divergent sources of data (besides of utterances), we run into an explanatory gap that cannot be filled mechanically: the structured-proposionalist theory is simply insufficient to grasp discourse-level intentions. To argue for (T3), I analyse speaker’s intentions in a fictive conversation (The smuggler sketch from Monty Python’s Flying Circus) through the “prisms” of Austin’s speech act theory, Searle’s (at least) two theories of intentions, Grice’s M-intention, and the ostensive-inferential view on communication.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Searle vs. Searle on language, speech, and thought.Sanford Goldberg & Guiming Yang - 2014 - Pragmatics and Cognition 22 (3):352-372.
Meaning, intentionality and communication.Pierre Jacob - 2011 - In Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger & Paul Portner (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning. De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 11--25.
Meaning, belief, and language acquisition.Mark Risjord - 1996 - Philosophical Psychology 9 (4):465-475.
Scepticism About Reflexive Intentions Refuted.Maciej Witek - 2009 - Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 5 (1):69-83.
The intentional and the socio-cultural in language use.Jan Nuyts - 1994 - Pragmatics and Cognition 2 (2):237-268.
On Juren Habermas’s Misinterpretation of J.L. Austin.Aydan Turanl - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 39:237-243.
Speaker Reference and Cognitive Architecture.Daniel W. Harris - 2017 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 17 (3):319-349.
Pragmatics, Modularity and Mind‐reading.Dan Sperber & Deirdre Wilson - 2002 - Mind and Language 17 (1-2):3–23.
Speech Acts, Criteria and Intentions.Jesús Navarro-Reyes - 2010 - Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 6 (1):145-170.
On Communicative Intention And Saying/implicating Distinction.Ivana Stojanovic-Prelevic - 2011 - Facta Universitatis, Series: Linguistics and Literature 9 (2):107-114.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-08-23

Downloads
119 (#139,676)

6 months
32 (#91,318)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Studies in the way of words.Herbert Paul Grice - 1989 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
The meaning of a word.John L. Austin - 1961 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 35 (4):23--43.

Add more references