Killing Two Birds with One Deceit: Deception in Multi-Party Interactions

IF 0.3 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Marta Dynel
{"title":"Killing Two Birds with One Deceit: Deception in Multi-Party Interactions","authors":"Marta Dynel","doi":"10.1163/18773109-00802002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the workings of deception performed in multi-party interactions, a topic hitherto hardly ever examined by deception philosophers. Deception is here discussed in the light of a neo-Goffmanian classification of (un)ratified hearers and a neo-Gricean version of speaker meaning, anchored in non-reflexive intentionality and accountability, which is shown to operate beyond the speaker-hearer dyad. An utterance, it is argued, may carry different meanings, judged according to their (lack of) intentionality and (non)deceptiveness, towards the individuals performing different hearer roles. The complex mechanisms of deception with regard to different hearers are illustrated with examples culled from the American television series “House.” Deception in fictional interactions is illustrative of real-life manifestations of deception, yet it brings into focus also those rare ones, which are in the centre of philosophical attention.","PeriodicalId":43536,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Pragmatics","volume":"8 1","pages":"179-218"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18773109-00802002","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-00802002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

This paper explores the workings of deception performed in multi-party interactions, a topic hitherto hardly ever examined by deception philosophers. Deception is here discussed in the light of a neo-Goffmanian classification of (un)ratified hearers and a neo-Gricean version of speaker meaning, anchored in non-reflexive intentionality and accountability, which is shown to operate beyond the speaker-hearer dyad. An utterance, it is argued, may carry different meanings, judged according to their (lack of) intentionality and (non)deceptiveness, towards the individuals performing different hearer roles. The complex mechanisms of deception with regard to different hearers are illustrated with examples culled from the American television series “House.” Deception in fictional interactions is illustrative of real-life manifestations of deception, yet it brings into focus also those rare ones, which are in the centre of philosophical attention.
一欺二鸟:多人互动中的欺骗
本文探讨了在多方互动中进行的欺骗的工作原理,这是一个迄今为止几乎从未被欺骗哲学家研究过的话题。本文将根据新戈夫曼式的(未经)认可的听者分类和新格里希式的说话人意义分类来讨论欺骗,该分类以非自反性意向性和问责性为基础,其作用超出了说者和听者的二元关系。有人认为,一个话语可能对扮演不同听者角色的个体具有不同的意义,根据它们的(缺乏)意向性和(非)欺骗性来判断。从美国电视连续剧《豪斯医生》(House)中挑选的例子可以说明欺骗不同听众的复杂机制。虚构互动中的欺骗是现实生活中欺骗表现的例证,但它也使那些罕见的、处于哲学关注中心的欺骗成为焦点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Review of Pragmatics
International Review of Pragmatics LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信