Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp 347–372 | Cite as

What Is Said And Psychological Reality; Grice's Project And Relevance Theorists' Criticisms

  • Jennifer M. Saul


Artificial Intelligence Computational Linguistic Relevance Theorist Psychological Reality 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bach, K.: 1994, 'Conversational Impliciture', Mind and Language 9, 124-162.Google Scholar
  2. Bach, K.: 2001a, 'You Don't Say?', Synthese 128, 15-44.Google Scholar
  3. Bach, K.: 2001b, 'Seemingly Semantic Intuitions', in J. K. Campbell, M. O'Rourke, and D. Shier (eds.), Meaning and Truth: Investigations in Philosophical Semantics, Seven Bridges Press, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Bach, K.: forthcoming, 'Pragmatics and the Philosophy of Language', in L. Horn and G. Ward (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  5. Bezuidenhout, A.: 1996, 'Pragmatics and Singular Reference', Mind and Language 11(2), 133-159.Google Scholar
  6. Blakemore, D.: 1987 Semantic Constraints on Relevance, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  7. Blakemore, D.: 1992, Understanding Utterances, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  8. Borg, E.: manuscript, Saying What YouMean: Unarticulated Constituents and Communication.Google Scholar
  9. Carston, R.: 1991, 'Implicature, Explicature, and Truth-Theoretic Semantics', in S. Davis (ed.), Pragmatics, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Cohen, L. J.: 1971, 'The Logical Particles of Natural Language', in Y. Bar-Hillel (ed.), Pragmatics of Natural Language, Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  11. Davis, W.: 1998, Implicature: Intention, Convention, and Principle in the Failure of Gricean Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  12. Garcia-Carpintero, M.: 2001, 'Gricean Rational Reconstructions and the Semantics/Pragmatics Distinction', Synthese 128, 93-131.Google Scholar
  13. Grice, P.: 1989, Studies in the Way of Words, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  14. Neale, S.: 1992, 'Paul Grice and the Philosophy of Language', Linguistics and Philosophy 15, 509-559.Google Scholar
  15. Recanati, F.: 1991, 'The Pragmatics of What is Said', in S. Davis (ed.), Pragmatics: A Reader, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Recanati, F.: 1993, Direct Reference: From Language to Thought, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  17. Recanati, F.: 2001, What is Said, Synthese 128, 75-91.Google Scholar
  18. Saul, J.: 2001, 'Critical Study of Wayne Davis', Implicature: Intention, Convention, and Principle in the Failure of Gricean Theory', Noû s 35(4), 630-641.Google Scholar
  19. Saul, J.: 2002, 'Speaker Meaning, What is Said, and What is Implicated', Noû s.Google Scholar
  20. Sperber, D. and D. Wilson: 1986, Relevance: Communication and Cognition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  21. Wilson, D. and D. Sperber: 1981, 'On Grice's Theory of Conversation', in P. Werth (ed.), Conversation and Discourse, Croom Helm, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jennifer M. Saul
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUnited Kingdo

Personalised recommendations