{"title":"狗狗语用学的一些问题","authors":"P. Santos","doi":"10.21747/16466195/ling2022v2a14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dogwhistles are communicative mechanisms for expressing subliminal meanings. In this paper, I take up the distinction, usual in the literature on the topic, between two types of dogwhistle: overt and covert, whereby in the latter, as opposed to the former, the preservation of the subliminal character of the message seems to be a necessary condition for the dogwhistle’s communicative success. I discuss various aspects of this distinction, arguing that both types of dogwhistle can be analysed as conversational implicatures bearing in mind, in particular, the canonical properties of cancelability and calculability.","PeriodicalId":53272,"journal":{"name":"Linguistica Revista de Estudos Linguisticos da Universidade do Porto","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A pragmática dos dogwhistles algumas questões\",\"authors\":\"P. Santos\",\"doi\":\"10.21747/16466195/ling2022v2a14\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Dogwhistles are communicative mechanisms for expressing subliminal meanings. In this paper, I take up the distinction, usual in the literature on the topic, between two types of dogwhistle: overt and covert, whereby in the latter, as opposed to the former, the preservation of the subliminal character of the message seems to be a necessary condition for the dogwhistle’s communicative success. I discuss various aspects of this distinction, arguing that both types of dogwhistle can be analysed as conversational implicatures bearing in mind, in particular, the canonical properties of cancelability and calculability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53272,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistica Revista de Estudos Linguisticos da Universidade do Porto\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistica Revista de Estudos Linguisticos da Universidade do Porto\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21747/16466195/ling2022v2a14\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistica Revista de Estudos Linguisticos da Universidade do Porto","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21747/16466195/ling2022v2a14","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Dogwhistles are communicative mechanisms for expressing subliminal meanings. In this paper, I take up the distinction, usual in the literature on the topic, between two types of dogwhistle: overt and covert, whereby in the latter, as opposed to the former, the preservation of the subliminal character of the message seems to be a necessary condition for the dogwhistle’s communicative success. I discuss various aspects of this distinction, arguing that both types of dogwhistle can be analysed as conversational implicatures bearing in mind, in particular, the canonical properties of cancelability and calculability.