“然而”的关联理论分析

L. Schourup
{"title":"“然而”的关联理论分析","authors":"L. Schourup","doi":"10.11435/GENGO1939.2005.127_83","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For those who view linguistic meaning as synonymous with truthconditions, to say that however is non-truth conditional amounts to saying that it is semantically empty. On the allied assumption that it is the distinction between truth-conditional and non-truth conditional meaning that defines the boundary between semantics and pragmatics,1) the fact that however does not contribute to truth conditions would be taken to imply that its contribution to utterance interpretation is entirely pragmatic. There is, however, a self-evident problem with consigning however exclusively to the realm of pragmatics as thus delimited: the core","PeriodicalId":389547,"journal":{"name":"Gengo Kenkyu: Journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A relevance-theoretic analysis of 'however'\",\"authors\":\"L. Schourup\",\"doi\":\"10.11435/GENGO1939.2005.127_83\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"For those who view linguistic meaning as synonymous with truthconditions, to say that however is non-truth conditional amounts to saying that it is semantically empty. On the allied assumption that it is the distinction between truth-conditional and non-truth conditional meaning that defines the boundary between semantics and pragmatics,1) the fact that however does not contribute to truth conditions would be taken to imply that its contribution to utterance interpretation is entirely pragmatic. There is, however, a self-evident problem with consigning however exclusively to the realm of pragmatics as thus delimited: the core\",\"PeriodicalId\":389547,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gengo Kenkyu: Journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gengo Kenkyu: Journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11435/GENGO1939.2005.127_83\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gengo Kenkyu: Journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11435/GENGO1939.2005.127_83","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

对于那些认为语言意义等同于真理条件的人来说,说however是非真理条件的就等于说它在语义上是空的。根据相关的假设,即定义语义和语用学之间界限的是真条件意义和非真条件意义之间的区别,1)然而,它对真条件没有贡献这一事实将被认为意味着它对话语解释的贡献完全是语用的。然而,有一个不证自明的问题,然而,寄存于语用学领域如此划定:核心
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A relevance-theoretic analysis of 'however'
For those who view linguistic meaning as synonymous with truthconditions, to say that however is non-truth conditional amounts to saying that it is semantically empty. On the allied assumption that it is the distinction between truth-conditional and non-truth conditional meaning that defines the boundary between semantics and pragmatics,1) the fact that however does not contribute to truth conditions would be taken to imply that its contribution to utterance interpretation is entirely pragmatic. There is, however, a self-evident problem with consigning however exclusively to the realm of pragmatics as thus delimited: the core
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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