The Field Model of Language and Free Enrichment

  • Dorota Zielińska
Part of the Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology book series (PEPRPHPS, volume 20)


More and more linguists claim that postulating encoding and inferencing alone is not enough to account for the interpretation of all utterances. Although copious evidence for that claim has been collected and classified, among these the phenomenon of free enrichment has been described, there are doubts as to the quality of the explanations offered. In this paper, I propose to account for some types of that data in a more rigorous way by postulating a cognitive mechanism of selective use of language, in addition to encoding and inferencing, and by testing quantitative implications of that model.


  1. Atlas, Jay, Levinson, Stephen C. 1981. It-clefts, informativeness and logivasl form. In Cole, Peter, ed. Radical pragmatics. (1–51). New York, Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bolinger, Dwight. (1967). Adjectives in English: Attribution and predication. Lingua 18, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Capone, Alessandro. 2009. Are explictures cancellable? Intercultural Pragmatics, 6(1) 55–83.Google Scholar
  4. Capone, Alessandro. 2012. Indirect reports as language games. Pragmatics & Cognition 20 (3).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Capone, Alessandro. 2010. On the social practice of indirect reports. Journal of Pragmatics. 42(2):377–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Capone, Alessandro. 2013. Explicatures are not cancellable. Perspectives on Linguistic Pragmatics, Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Jaszczolt, Katarzyna. 2005. Default semantics. OUP.Google Scholar
  8. Kecskes, Istvan. 2013. Intercultural Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge, CUP.Google Scholar
  10. Mey, Jacob. 2001. Pragmatics. An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bunge, Mario. 2003. Emergentism and Convergence. Ontario: Ontario University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Neale, 2007. HEAVY HANDS, MAGIC, AND SCENE-READING TRAPS STEPHEN NEALE. EUJAP VOL. 3 No. 2 2007 Original scientific paper UDk: 1:81 165. file:///C:/Users/Dorota/Downloads/EUJAP_6_neale.pdf.Google Scholar
  13. François Recanati, IsidoraStojanovic, Neftali Villanueva. 2010. Context-Dependence, Perspective and Relativity, Goettingen: Walter de GruyterGoogle Scholar
  14. Kaplan, David 1979. On the logic of Demonstratives. Journal of Philosophical Logic 8, 81–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Walczak, George. (to appear in Ratio) Entailments are cancellable.Google Scholar
  16. Wulf, Stephanie. 2003. A multifactorial corpus analysis of adjective order in English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 8:2 (2003), 245–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Zielinska, Dorota. 2016a. Linguistic research in the empirical paradigm as outlined by Mario. Bunge, SpringerPlusGoogle Scholar
  18. Zielinska, Dorota. 2016b. A model of categorization and compositionality (sense determination) in the light of a procedural model of language (based on selection and the communicative field) in ed. Capone, A: Pragmemes and theories of language use.Google Scholar
  19. Zielinska, Dorota. 2016c. Philosophy and teaching reading to home-schoolers: phonics vs. whole words.Asian Academic Research Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities. ISSN: 2278-859X, vol.3, issue 6, pp. 204–224.Google Scholar
  20. Zielinska, Dorota. 2014. Procedurální model jazykaLingvistika z pohledu teorie modelů. empirickýchvěd.Google Scholar
  21. Zielinska, Dorota. 2013. Utterance and sentence meanings from the perspective of the theory of empirical models. Foundations of philosophical Pragmatics. Red. Alessandro Capone, Franco Lo Piparo, Marco Carapezza, Springer, pp. 469–521.Google Scholar
  22. Zielinska, Dorota. 2010. Prepositions and the explicature from the perspective of the selective mode of language use. Perspectives on language, use and pragmatics pod redakcją A. Capone. (Lincom Europa, Monachium), 181–210Google Scholar
  23. Zielinska, Dorota. 2007a. The selective mode of language use and the quantized communicative field. Journal of Pragmatics. 39, 813–830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Zielinska, Dorota. 2007b. Polish-English contrastive study of the order of noun phrase premodifiers. Tom pokonferencyjny: 4 Corpus Linguistics Conference, Birmingham 2007. (on-line http :// 2007/zielinska.htm)

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dorota Zielińska
    • 1
  1. 1.The Jesuit University IgnatianumKrakowPoland

Personalised recommendations