Article published in:New Perspectives on Utterance Interpretation and Implicit Contents
Edited by Daniela Rossi and Nicolas Ruytenbeek
[Belgian Journal of Linguistics 28] 2014
► pp. 45–70
The importance of being indirect
A new nomenclature for indirect speech
Standard accounts of indirect speech share two assumptions: that indirect speech always has a direct alternative, and that it is strategic. I survey a number of cases that challenge one or both of these assumptions and propose a new nomenclature for indirect speech that crucially includes, in addition to cases where indirect speech is strategic, cases where it is ‘enabling.’ The enabling potential of indirect speech lies in allowing us to give voice to thoughts or experiences that may be possible to express propositionally only in part. In such cases, the speaker does not start off with a direct alternative in mind but rather uses speech to invite the hearer to help her develop an inchoate thought. Including these cases under the same scheme allows us to consider ways other than recognition of the speaker’s intention in which indirect meanings may arise, such as through shared experience and the interlocutors’ habitus. The proposed nomenclature thus yields a multi-faceted view of indirect speech that goes beyond its current, formally driven, understanding.
Published online: 28 November 2014
Bach, Kent and Robert M. Harnish
Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson
Culpeper, Jonathan and Jane Demmen
Grice, Herbert Paul
Hawkins, Sarah and Smith, Rachel
Horn, Laurence R.
Huls, Erica and Wijk, Carel van
Kiesling, Scott & Gosh Johnson, Erica
1973 “‘The Logic of Politeness or Minding your p’s and q’s.’” Papers from the 9th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society , 292–305.
Lee, James, and Pinker, Steven
Levinson, Stephen C.
Lumsden, Joanne, Miles, Lynden, Richardson, Michael, Smith, Carlene & Macrae, Neil
McElree, Brian and Johanna Nordlie
Miles, Lynden, Nind, Louise, Henderson, Zoe & Macrae, Neil
2007 The Development of Semantic Co-ordination in Dialogue: The Role of Direct Interaction. PhD diss., Department of Computer Science, Queen Mary University of London.
2011 “The Emergence of Procedural Conventions in Dialogue.” In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society . Boston, USA. http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/gmills/Mills_2011_Procedural.pdf
Pinker, Stephen, Nowak, Martin and Lee, James
Shapiro, Amy and Gregory Murphy
Soltys, Jessica, Marina Terkourafi and Napoleon Katsos
1986 The dynamics of discourse: A pragmatic analysis of confrontational interaction. PhD Diss. University of Lancaster.
Cited by 10 other publications
Ameka, Felix K. & Marina Terkourafi
Chen, Xi & Jiayi Wang
Culpeper, Jonathan & Marina Terkourafi
Morady Moghaddam, Mostafa
Morady Moghaddam, Mostafa
Sifianou, Maria & Garcés-Conejos Blitvich
Yuan, Wen, Francis Y. Lin & Richard P. Cooper
Zhou, Ling & Shaojie Zhang
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 31 december 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.