Words: Syntactic structures and pragmatic meanings

Carston, Robyn

doi:10.1007/s11229-022-03861-1

Cited by 4 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In response to a number of issues connected to the traditional view of AHCC, Carston (2013Carston ( , 2016aCarston ( , 2019Carston ( , 2022) advances an alternative and empirically more plausible view, according to which, in line with the thesis of semantic underdeterminacy, it is not only sentence meaning that is underspecified. More specifically, word meaning, too, consists not in a fully fledged concept but, rather, in an underspecified type of meaning that pragmatically develops into an ad hoc concept.…”

Section: A Unitary Approach To Lexical Pragmaticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To conclude, it becomes evident that the study of AHCC needs to consistently observe two distinct stages: a) the pragmatic task employed for the delivery of an interpretation and b) the resulting interpretation itself. On this view, we would like to suggest that AHCC a) consists in a single type of pragmatic task that b) may lead to two types of interpretation: literal and non-literal 12 . In light of this discovery, it seems that a genuinely unitary treatment of AHCC requires abandoning not only the traditional dual view of concept construction, i.e.…”

Section: Factors Contributing To the Dual View Of Ad Hoc Concept Cons...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The earlier period is basically represented most notably by Carston's (1996Carston's ( , 2002Carston's ( , 2004Carston's ( , 2009Carston's ( , 2010a), Wilson's (2003), as well as Wilson & Carston's (2007) project on the nature of conceptual content and its impact on a) propositional meaning and b) the distinction between literal and non-literal interpretation. However, Carston's closer attention to matters of semantic underspecificity marks a later period of study; a period of reconceptualization of the AHCC issue (Carston, 2013(Carston, , 2016a(Carston, , 2019(Carston, , 2022.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The aim of this paper is fairly modest: to argue against the standard dual view of AHCC 1 , offering a potential contribution to the currently developing alternative/later view of the notion at issue (Carston, 2013(Carston, , 2016a(Carston, , 2019(Carston, , 2022. More specifically, we will argue that the standard relevance-theoretic argument underlying the dual view requires further descriptive rigor and that, as it stands, it does not encourage a very clear view or thorough assessment or, ultimately, a justification of it.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Within her later conception of AHCC, Carston (2013Carston ( , 2016aCarston ( , 2019Carston ( , 2022 argues for an alternative, empirically plausible view, which is on a par with the relevance-oriented semantic underdeterminacy thesis. On this view, word meaning, like sentence meaning, is underspecified: it consists in an underspecified type of meaning (rather than a full-fledged concept), which pragmatically develops into a full-fledged ad hoc concept.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Narrowed and Broadened Concepts: A Contribution to Current Issues and Future Directions

Bardzokas

2023

jpda

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As standardly conceived in truth-conditional pragmatic theory, particularly from a relevance-theoretic perspective, lexical adjustment can be effected by a pragmatic process of ad hoc concept construction. Studies of ad hoc concept construction fall into two types: early (or traditional) and current (or later) studies. According to the early studies, ad hoc concept construction is claimed to be accommodated univocally. While this is so, it is, in fact, viewed as falling into two varieties: narrowing and broadening. On the other hand, although current studies developed out of a concern with certain issues connected to the traditional conception of ad hoc concept construction, they seem to retain these two varieties. The current paper takes issue with the two-directional approach to ad hoc concept construction. It is argued that the specific approach is based on a line of argument detracting from descriptive rigor and parsimony. It is also argued that it has unfavorable implications for theoretical assumptions that are well-established in pragmatic theory. In this light, it is proposed that the dual view of narrowing/broadening needs to be dispensed with, along with the labels sustaining it, in the interest of a genuinely coherent view. Ultimately, the discussion offered in the present paper is intended as a potential contribution to the currently developing or later approach to ad hoc concept construction.

show abstract

Section: A Unitary Approach To Lexical Pragmaticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Factors Contributing To the Dual View Of Ad Hoc Concept Cons...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Narrowed and Broadened Concepts: A Contribution to Current Issues and Future Directions

Bardzokas

2023

jpda

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Words and Roots – Polysemy and Allosemy – Communication and Language

Carston

2024

Rev.Phil.Psych.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most substantive (content-bearing) words are polysemous, but polysemy is cross-categorial; for instance, the lexical forms ‘stone’ and ‘front’ are associated with families of interrelated senses and these senses are spread across their manifestations as three words, noun, verb and adjective. So, the ultimate unit underpinning polysemy is not a word but the categoryless root of the related words, which must, in some sense, track the interrelated families of senses. The main topic of this paper is the vexed question of the meaning of roots and the backdrop is a view of words as delineated syntactic domains which allow assignment of atomic content (non-compositional meaning), and whose actual meanings are, in the first instance, pragmatically inferred in the throes of communication, some of them subsequently becoming established, so stored in a lexicon and directly retrieved in comprehension. Three different positions on the meanings of roots are outlined, and their merits and shortcomings are discussed: (a) inherent underspecified meanings; (b) meanings conditioned by grammatical context (allosemy); (c) meaninglessness. I argue that, overall, the current state of the evidence favours the third position: roots are categoryless, meaningless (perhaps phonological) indices.

show abstract

Semantic minimalism and the continuous nature of polysemy

2024

Mind & Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polysemy has recently emerged as a popular topic in philosophy of language. While much existing research focuses on the relatedness among senses, this article introduces a novel perspective that emphasizes the continuity of sense individuation, sense regularity, and sense productivity. This new perspective has only recently gained traction, largely due to advancements in computational linguistics. It also poses a serious challenge to semantic minimalism, so I present three arguments against minimalism from the continuous perspective that touch on the minimal concept, the distinction from homonymy, and the quasi‐rule‐like nature of polysemy. Last, I provide an account of polysemy that incorporates this continuous perspective.

show abstract

Words: Syntactic structures and pragmatic meanings

Cited by 4 publications

References 41 publications

Narrowed and Broadened Concepts: A Contribution to Current Issues and Future Directions

Narrowed and Broadened Concepts: A Contribution to Current Issues and Future Directions

Words and Roots – Polysemy and Allosemy – Communication and Language

Semantic minimalism and the continuous nature of polysemy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About