Discourse dynamics, pragmatics, and indefinites
- Karen S. Lewis
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Everyone agrees that conversations take place in a context. This is not to merely point out that conversations occur at a time and a place, or that there are particular speakers and hearers, though this is all of course true. Conversations take place against a background of mutually recognized facts: facts about the beliefs and presumptions of the participants, facts about the information conveyed thus far, facts about what’s under discussion, and so on. Although there is some disagreement as to the exact nature of conversational contexts, it is generally agreed that they record these sorts of facts.
As Stalnaker (1978) and Lewis (1979) first pointed out, the context both affects and is affected by the utterances in a conversation. Consider a conversation in which I ask (1) and another one in which I ask (2):
Do you know of a nice, flat road for bike riding?
I need a large, flat surface for a physics experiment. Do you know of any?
- Asher, N., & Lascarides, A. (2003). Logics of conversation. Cambridge University Press.
- Bratman, M. (1990). What is intention? In intentions in communication. MIT Press.
- Crimmins, M. (1992). Talk about beliefs. MIT Press.
- Davis, W. A. (1998). Implicature: Intention, convention, and principle in the failure of gricean theory. Cambridge University Press.
- Dekker, P. (2004). Grounding dynamic semantics. In M. Reimer & A. Bezuiden- hout (Eds.), Descriptions and beyond. Oxford University Press.
- Evans, G. (1977). Pronouns, quantifiers, and relative clauses. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 7(3), 467–536.
- Farkas, D. (2002). Varieties of indefinites. In: Proceedings of SALT 12.
- Grice, P. (1989) Studies in the way of words. Harvard University Press.
- Groenendijk, J., & Stokhof, M. (1990) Two theories of dynamic semantics. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science.
- Groenendijk, J., & Stokhof, M. (1991). Dynamic predicate logic. Linguistics and Philosophy, 14, 39–100. CrossRef
- Groenendijk, J., & Stokhof, M. (1999) Meaning in motion. In: K. von Huesinger & U. Egli (Eds.), Reference and anaphoric relations (pp. 47–76). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
- Grosz, B., & Sidner, C. (1990). Plans for discourse. In: Intentions in communication (pp. 417–444). MIT Press.
- Harnish, R. (1976). Logical form and implicature. In J. J. Katz, T. G. Bever, & T. Langedoen (Eds.), An integrated theory of liguistic ability. Thomas Y. Crowell.
- Heim, I. (1982). The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. University of Massachusetts Dissertation.
- Kamp, H. (1981). A theory of truth and semantic representation. In Formal methods in the study of language, Mathematisch Centrum.
- Kamp, H. (1988) Comments on stalnaker, belief attribution and context. In Contents of thought. University of Arizona Press.
- Kamp, H., & Reyle, U. (1993). From discourse to logic. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
- King, J. (1994). Anaphora and operators. Philosophical Perspectives, 8, 221–250. CrossRef
- King, J. (2007). The nature and structure of content. Oxford University Press.
- Krifka, M. (2001). Non-novel indefinites in adverbial quantification. In C. Condoravdi, & G. R. der Lavalette (Eds.), Logical perspec- tives on language and information, stanford. CSLI Press.
- Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. Longmans.
- Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.
- Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of general- ized conversational implicature. MIT Press.
- Lewis, D. (1979). Scorekeeping in a language game. Journal of Philo- sophical Logic, 8(3), 339–359.
- Lewis, K. (2011). Understanding dynamic discourse. Rutgers University Dissertation.
- Litman, D. & Allen, J. (1990). Discourse processing and commonsense plans. In Intentions in communication. MIT Press.
- Muskens, R. (1996). Combining montague semantics and discourse representation. Linguistics and Philosophy, 19, 143–186. CrossRef
- Neale, S. (1990). Descriptions. MIT Press.
- Roberts, C. (2003). Uniqueness in definite noun phrases. Linguistics and Philosophy, 26, 287–350. CrossRef
- Roberts, C. (ms). Retrievability and incomplete descriptions.
- Rooth, M. (1995). Indefinites, adverbs of quantification and focus seman- tics. In G. N. Carlson & F. J. Pelletier (Eds.), The generic book. Chicago University Press.
- Stalnaker, R. (1978). Assertion. Syntax and Semantics, 9.
- Stalnaker, R. (1998). On the representation of context. Journal of Logic, Language, and Information, 7, 3–19. CrossRef
- Szabo, Z. (2000). Descriptions and uniqueness. Philosophical Studies, 101, 29–57. CrossRef
- Thomason, R. (1990). Accommodation, meaning, and implicature: Interdisciplinary foundations for pragmatics. In P. R. Cohen, J. Morgan & M. E. Pollack (Eds.), Intentions in communication. MIT Press.
- von Fintel, K. (1994). Restrictions on quantifier domains. University of Massachusetts at Amherst Dissertation.
- von Fintel, K., & Gillies, T. (2008). CIA leaks. Philosophical Review, 117, 77–98. CrossRef
- Discourse dynamics, pragmatics, and indefinites
Volume 158, Issue 2 , pp 313-342
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Karen S. Lewis (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Philosophy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA