The assumption that pragmatic processes are inferential is standardly held by Gricean and post-Gricean pragmatic theories. Recently, however, it has been challenged by accessibility-based approaches to pragmatics. Recanati (2002, 2004) proposes that primary pragmatic processes (i.e. processes that contribute to the recovery of the explicit content of the utterance) are underpinned by a simple dynamics of activations-and-associations, with no need for any further (specifically inferential) step or ‘confirmatory stage’ to warrant the selected interpretation. Mazzone (2009, 2011) extends this account to secondary pragmatic processes (i.e. processes of implicature derivation): the recovery of the explicit and implicit content of the utterance is the result of a unified associative comprehension process. This paper argues that, on close analysis, the role played by information about the speaker’s mental states (i.e. her beliefs and intentions) indicates that inference is indispensable in an adequate account of pragmatic processing.
Brown-Schmidt, Sarah, and Joy E. Hanna. 2011. “Talking in another person’s shoes: Incremental perspective-taking in language processing”. Dialogue and Discourse 21: 11–33.
Carston, Robyn. 2007. “How many pragmatic systems are there?” In Saying, Meaning, Referring. Essays on the Philosophy of François Recanati, ed. by Maria J. Frapolli, 18–48. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Chemla, Emmanuel, and Benjamin Spector. 2011. “Experimental evidence for embedded implicatures”. Journal of Semantics 28 (3): 359–400.
García-Carpintero, Manuel. 2006. “Recanati on the semantics/pragmatics distinction”. Crítica 38 (112): 35–68.
Grandy, Richard E. 1989. “On Grice on language”. Journal of Philosophy 861: 514–525.
Grice, Henry P. 1957. “Meaning”. Philosophical Review 661: 377–388. Reprinted in Grice, Henry P. 1989, 213–223.
Grice Henry P. 1975. “Logic and Conversation”. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Reprinted in Grice, Henry P. 1989, 22–40.
Grice, Henry P. 1989. Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Jary, Mark. 2013. “Two types of implicature: material and behavioural”. Mind & Language 28 (5): 638–660.
Mazzarella, Diana. 2011. “Accessibility and relevance: a fork in the road”. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 231: 11–20.
Mazzarella, Diana. 2013. “ ‘Optimal relevance’ as a pragmatic criterion: the role of epistemic vigilance”. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 251: 20–45.
Mazzone, Marco. 2009. “Pragmatics and cognition: intentions and pattern recognition in context”, International Review of Pragmatics 1 (2): 321–347.
Mazzone, Marco. 2010. “Pragmatica lessicale: processi associativi o inferenziali?” In Linguaggio e cervello. Atti del XLII Covegno della società di linguistica italiana, 2, ed. by Pier Marco Bertinetto, Valentina Bambini, and Irene Ricci. Roma: Bulzoni.
Mazzone, Marco. 2011. “Schemata and associative processes in pragmatics”. Journal of Pragmatics 431: 2148–2159.
Mazzone, Marco. 2013. “Attention to the speaker. The conscious assessment of utterance interpretation in working memory”, Language & Communication 331: 106–114.
Recanati, François. 1995. The alleged priority of literal interpretation, Cognitive Science 191: 207–232.
Recanati, François. 2002. Does linguistic communication rest on inference?Mind & Language 17 (1&2): 105–126.
Recanati, François. 2004. Literal Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Recanati, François. 2007. “Reply to Carston”. In Saying, Meaning, Referring. Essays on the Philosophy of François Recanati, ed. by Maria J. Frapolli, 49–54. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1986/1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1998. “The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon”. In Thought and language, ed. by Peter Carruthers, and Jill Boucher, 184–200. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 2002. “Pragmatics, modularity and mind-reading”. Mind & Language 17 (1&2): 3–23.
Sperber, Dan, Fabrice Clément, Christophe Heintz, Olivier Mascaro, Hugo Mercier, Gloria Origgi, and Deirdre Wilson. 2010. “Epistemic vigilance”. Mind & Language 24 (4): 359–393.
Tomasello, Michael. 1999. The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Wilson, Deirdre, and Robyn Carston. 2007. “A unitary approach to lexical pragmatics: Relevance, inference ad Hoc concepts”. In Pragmatics (Palgrave Advances in Linguistics), ed. by Noel Burton-Roberts, 230–260. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wilson, Deirdre, and Tomoko Matsui. 1998. “Recent approaches to bridging: Truth, coherence, relevance”. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 101: 1–28.
Yeh, Wenchi, and Lawrence W. Barsalou. 2006. “The situated nature of concepts”. American Journal of Psychology 119 (3): 349–384.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Elder, Chi-Hé & Michael Haugh
2024. The role of inference and inferencing in pragmatic models of communication. Journal of Pragmatics 229 ► pp. 71 ff.
Allott, Nicholas
2023. Encapsulation, inference and utterance interpretation. Inquiry► pp. 1 ff.
Ryzhova, Margarita & Vera Demberg
2023. Processing cost effects of atypicality inferences in a dual-task setup. Journal of Pragmatics 211 ► pp. 47 ff.
Mazzarella, Diana & Filippo Domaneschi
2018. Presuppositional effects and ostensive-inferential communication. Journal of Pragmatics 138 ► pp. 17 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 january 2025. 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.