{"title":"信息的可撤回性和可抵赖性之间的预设和暗示的证据意义","authors":"Viviana Masia","doi":"10.1515/flin-2023-2048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The relation evidentiality bears on the coding of some information as presupposition or as implicature is still an underexplored research field. In this paper, such an interplay is addressed by looking into how presupposed and implied contents (differently) respond to contexts of challenge and deniability. As taken for granted information (Stalnaker, Robert. 1973. Presuppositions. <jats:italic>Journal of Philosophical Logic</jats:italic> 2(4). 447–457), presupposition is more resistant to both challenging and retracting conversational moves, since it conveys content the speaker does not commit to. By contrast, implicature – characterized as intentional meaning (Grice, Herbert P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry Morgan (eds.), <jats:italic>Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts</jats:italic>, 41–58. New York: Academic Press) – allows both challenging and retracting conversational moves, because it is information the speaker commits to the most, similarly to what happens with plain declarative sentences. Building on this account, it is suggested that the higher challenging and deniability status cued by implicature is related to its function of encoding a direct type of evidentiality (Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. <jats:italic>Evidentiality</jats:italic>. Oxford: Oxford University Press), namely a condition in which the speaker presents herself as the first-hand source of some information. Conversely, the weaker challengeability and deniability associated to presupposition hinges on its property of encoding a mutual type of evidentiality (Hintz, Daniel J. & Hintz Diane M. 2017. The evidential category of mutual knowledge in Quechua. <jats:italic>Lingua</jats:italic> 186. 88–109), that is, a state in which information is construed and conveyed as already shared by all participants at the moment of utterance.","PeriodicalId":45269,"journal":{"name":"Folia Linguistica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The evidential meaning of presupposition and implicature between retractability and deniability of information\",\"authors\":\"Viviana Masia\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/flin-2023-2048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The relation evidentiality bears on the coding of some information as presupposition or as implicature is still an underexplored research field. In this paper, such an interplay is addressed by looking into how presupposed and implied contents (differently) respond to contexts of challenge and deniability. As taken for granted information (Stalnaker, Robert. 1973. Presuppositions. <jats:italic>Journal of Philosophical Logic</jats:italic> 2(4). 447–457), presupposition is more resistant to both challenging and retracting conversational moves, since it conveys content the speaker does not commit to. By contrast, implicature – characterized as intentional meaning (Grice, Herbert P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry Morgan (eds.), <jats:italic>Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts</jats:italic>, 41–58. New York: Academic Press) – allows both challenging and retracting conversational moves, because it is information the speaker commits to the most, similarly to what happens with plain declarative sentences. Building on this account, it is suggested that the higher challenging and deniability status cued by implicature is related to its function of encoding a direct type of evidentiality (Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. <jats:italic>Evidentiality</jats:italic>. Oxford: Oxford University Press), namely a condition in which the speaker presents herself as the first-hand source of some information. Conversely, the weaker challengeability and deniability associated to presupposition hinges on its property of encoding a mutual type of evidentiality (Hintz, Daniel J. & Hintz Diane M. 2017. The evidential category of mutual knowledge in Quechua. <jats:italic>Lingua</jats:italic> 186. 88–109), that is, a state in which information is construed and conveyed as already shared by all participants at the moment of utterance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45269,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Folia Linguistica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Folia Linguistica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2023-2048\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Folia Linguistica","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2023-2048","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
证据性对某些信息作为预设或隐含的编码关系的研究仍然是一个未被充分探索的研究领域。在本文中,通过研究预设和隐含的内容如何(不同地)对挑战和否认的背景作出反应来解决这种相互作用。被认为是理所当然的信息(罗伯特·斯托纳克,1973)。的前提。哲学逻辑学报2(4)。447-457),预设更能抵抗挑战性和退缩性的对话动作,因为它传达了说话者没有承诺的内容。相比之下,含意-表征为有意的意义(格赖斯,赫伯特P. 1975)。逻辑和对话。在彼得·科尔&;杰里摩根(编),语法和语义3:言语行为,41-58。纽约:学术出版社)-允许具有挑战性和退缩性的对话动作,因为这是说话者最关注的信息,类似于简单的陈述句。在此基础上,有人认为,含意导致的更高的挑战性和可否认性地位与其编码直接证据的功能有关(Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004)。Evidentiality。牛津:牛津大学出版社),即讲话者将自己呈现为某些信息的第一手来源。相反,与预设相关的较弱的可质疑性和可否认性取决于其编码相互类型的证据性的特性(Hintz, Daniel J. &Hintz Diane M. 2017。克丘亚语相互认知的证据范畴。186年通用。88-109),也就是说,在这种状态下,信息被理解和传达,就像所有参与者在话语的那一刻已经共享了一样。
The evidential meaning of presupposition and implicature between retractability and deniability of information
The relation evidentiality bears on the coding of some information as presupposition or as implicature is still an underexplored research field. In this paper, such an interplay is addressed by looking into how presupposed and implied contents (differently) respond to contexts of challenge and deniability. As taken for granted information (Stalnaker, Robert. 1973. Presuppositions. Journal of Philosophical Logic 2(4). 447–457), presupposition is more resistant to both challenging and retracting conversational moves, since it conveys content the speaker does not commit to. By contrast, implicature – characterized as intentional meaning (Grice, Herbert P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press) – allows both challenging and retracting conversational moves, because it is information the speaker commits to the most, similarly to what happens with plain declarative sentences. Building on this account, it is suggested that the higher challenging and deniability status cued by implicature is related to its function of encoding a direct type of evidentiality (Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press), namely a condition in which the speaker presents herself as the first-hand source of some information. Conversely, the weaker challengeability and deniability associated to presupposition hinges on its property of encoding a mutual type of evidentiality (Hintz, Daniel J. & Hintz Diane M. 2017. The evidential category of mutual knowledge in Quechua. Lingua 186. 88–109), that is, a state in which information is construed and conveyed as already shared by all participants at the moment of utterance.
期刊介绍:
Folia Linguistica covers all non-historical areas in the traditional disciplines of general linguistics (phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics), and also sociological, discoursal, computational and psychological aspects of language and linguistic theory. Other areas of central concern are grammaticalization and language typology. The journal consists of scientific articles presenting results of original research, review articles, overviews of research in specific areas, book reviews, and a miscellanea section carrying reports and discussion notes. In addition, proposals from prospective guest editors for occasional special issues on selected current topics are welcomed.