Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 18, Issue 6, pp 677–686 | Cite as

Standardization vs. conventionalization

  • Kent Bach
Remark And Reply

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bach, K.: 1975, ‘Performatives are Statements Too’,Philosophical Studies 28, 229–236.Google Scholar
  2. Bach, K.: 1984, ‘Default Reasoning: Jumping to Conclusions and Knowing When to Think Twice’,Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 65, 35–58.Google Scholar
  3. Bach, K.: 1987,Thought and Reference, Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bach, K.: 1994, ‘Conversational Impliciture’,Mind & Language 9, 124–162.Google Scholar
  5. Bach, K.: to appear, ‘Standardization Revisited’, in A. Kasher (ed.),Pragmatics: Critical Assessment, London, Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Bach, K. and R. M. Harnish: 1979,Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts, Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bach, K. and R. M. Harnish: 1992, ‘How Performatives Really Work: A Reply to Searle’,Linguistics and Philosophy 15, 93–110.Google Scholar
  8. Grice, H. P.: 1989,Studies in the Way of Words, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Morgan, J. 1978, ‘Two Types of Convention in Speech Acts’, in P. Cole (ed.),Syntax and Semantics 9, Pragmatics, New York, Academic Press.Google Scholar
  10. Ludwig, K.: 1992, ‘Impossible Doings’,Philosophical Studies 65, 257–281.Google Scholar
  11. Recanati, F.: 1989, ‘The Pragmatics of What is Said’,Mind & Language 4, 295–329.Google Scholar
  12. Reimer, M.: 1995, ‘Performative Utterances: A Reply to Bach and Harnish’,Linguistics and Philosophy 18, 655–675.Google Scholar
  13. Searle, J. R.: 1989, ‘How Performatives Work’,Linguistics and Philosophy 12, 535–558.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kent Bach
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophySan Francisco State UniversitySan FranciscoU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations