Cover not available
Part of
Relevance Theory: Recent developments, current challenges and future directions
Edited by Manuel Padilla Cruz
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 268] 2016
► pp. 307–320

Some directions for future research in relevance-theoretic pragmatics

| University of Seville
Published online: 20 October 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.268.12cru
References
Arundale, Robert B
2006 “Face as Relational and Interactional: A Communication Framework for Research on Face, Facework and Politeness.” Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 2 (2): 193–216.Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane
1987 Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1992 Understanding Utterances. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2002 Relevance and Linguistic Meaning. The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “On the descriptive ineffability of expressive meaning.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (14): 3537–3550. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bousfield, Derek, and Miriam Locher
(eds) 2008 Impoliteness in Language. Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice. The Hague: Walter de GruyterGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Scott W., and Yong J. Park
2008 “Social Implications of Mobile Telephony: The Rise of Personal Communication Society.” Sociology Compass 2 (2): 371–387. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carston, Robyn
2012 “Word Meaning and Concept Expressed.” The Linguistic Review 29 (4): 607–623. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carston, Robyn, and Catherine Wearing
2012 “Metaphor, Hyperbole and Simile: A Pragmatic Approach.” Language and Cognition 3 (2): 283–312. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Billy
2013 Relevance Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 “Relevance Theory and Language Change.” Lingua 175–176: 139–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, Derek Bousfield, and Anne Wichmann
2003 “Impoliteness Revisited: With Special Reference to Dynamic and Prosodic Aspects.” Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1575–1579. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Escandell Vidal, M. Victoria
1996 “Towards a Cognitive Approach to Politeness.” Language Sciences 18: 629–650. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004 “Norms and Principles. Putting Social and Cognitive Pragmatics Together.” In Current Trends in the Pragmatics of Spanish, ed. by Rosina Márquez-Reiter and María Elena Placencia, 347–371. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fricker, Miranda
2006 “Powerlessness and Social Interpretation.” Episteme, A Journal of Social Epistemology 3 (1–2): 96–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Epistemic Injustice. Power & the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Georgakopoulou, Alexandra
2011 “Computer-mediated Communication.” In Handbook of Pragmatics Highlights. Volume 9: Pragmatics in Practice, ed. by Jan-Ola Östman and Jef Verschueren, 93–117. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldman, Alvin, and Dennis Whitcomb
(eds) 2011 Social Epistemology. Essential Readings. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haddock, Adrian, Alan Millar, and Duncan Pritchard
(eds) 2010 Social Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haugh, Michael
2007 “The Discursive Challenge to Politeness Research: An Interactional Alternative.” Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 3 (2): 295–317.Google Scholar
Herring, Susan C
(ed.) 1996 Computer-Mediated Communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ifantidou, Elly
2009 “Newspaper Headlines and Relevance: Ad hoc Concepts in Ad hoc Contexts.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (4): 699–720. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Pragmatic Competence and Relevance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jary, Mark
1998 “Relevance Theory and the Communication of Politeness.” Journal of Pragmatics 30: 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 “Two Types of Implicature: Material and Behavioural.” Mind & Language 28 (5): 638–660. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kienpointner, Manfred
1997 “Impoliteness and Emotional Arguments.” Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 4 (2): 243–265.Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam A
2006 “Polite Behaviour within Relational Work: The Discursive Approach to Politeness.” Multilingua, Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication 25 (3): 249–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maruenda Bataller, Sergio
2002 Reformulations and Relevance Theory Pragmatics: The Case of TV Interviews. Valencia: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Valencia.Google Scholar
Mascaro, Olivier, and Dan Sperber
2009 “The Moral, Epistemic, and Mindreading Components of Children’s Vigilance towards Deception.” Cognition 112 (3): 367–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mazzarella, Diana
2015 “Politeness, Relevance and Scalar Inferences.” Journal of Pragmatics 79: 93–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michaelian, Kourken
2013 “The Evolution of Testimony: Receiver Vigilance, Speaker Honesty and the Reliability of Communication.” Episteme 10 (1): 37–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nickerson, Raymond S
1998 “Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises.” Review of General Psychology 2 (2): 175–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Origgi, Gloria
2013 “Epistemic Injustice and Epistemic Trust.” Social Epistemology: A Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Policy 26 (2): 221–235. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2003 “A Relevance-theoretic Approach to the Introduction of Scandinavian Pronouns in English.” In Interaction and Cognition in Linguistics, ed. by Carlos 
Inchaurralde and Celia Florén, 123–134. Hamburg: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2005 “Relevance Theory and Historical Linguistics: Towards a Pragmatic Approach to the Morphological Changes in the Preterite from Old English to Middle English.” Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 51: 181–204.Google Scholar
2012 “Epistemic Vigilance, Cautious Optimism and Sophisticated Understanding.” Research in Language 10 (4): 365–386. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013a “Understanding and Overcoming Pragmatic Failure in Intercultural Communication: From Focus on Speakers to Focus on Hearers.” IRAL, International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 51 (1): 23–54.Google Scholar
2013b “Meta-psychological Awareness of Comprehension and Epistemic Vigilance of L2 Communication in Interlanguage Pragmatic Development.” Journal of Pragmatics 59 (A): 117–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 “Pragmatic Failure, Epistemic Injustice and Epistemic Vigilance.” Language & Communication 39: 34–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 “On the Role of Vigilance in the Interpretation of Puns.” Humor 28 (3): 469–490.Google Scholar
2016 “Vigilance Mechanisms in Interpretation: Hermeneutical Vigilance.” Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis 133 (1): 21–29.Google Scholar
Solska, Agnieszka
2012a “Relevance-theoretic Comprehension Procedure and Processing Multiple Meanings in Paradigmatic Puns.” In Relevance Theory. More than Understanding, ed. by Ewa Wałaszewska and Agnieszka Piskorska, 167–182. New Castle upon Tyne: 
Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
2012b “The Relevance-based Model of Context in Processing Puns.” Research in Language 10 (4): 387–404. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan
1994 “Understanding Verbal Understanding.” In What is Intelligence? ed. by Jean Khalifa, 179–198. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2013 “Speakers Are Honest because Hearers are Vigilant. Reply to Kourken Michaelian.” Episteme 10 (1): 61–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
1986 Relevance. Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1995 Relevance. Communication and Cognition, 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, Fabrice Clément, Christophe Heintz, Olivier Mascaro, Hugo Mercier, Gloria Origgi, and Deirdre Wilson
2010 “Epistemic Vigilance.” Mind & Language 25 (4): 359–393. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taillard, Mary-Odile
2000 “Persuasive Communication: The Case of Marketing.” UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 12: 145–172Google Scholar
Thurlow, Crispin, Laura Lengel, and Alice Tomic
2004 Computer-Mediated Communication. Social Interaction and The Internet. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Wałaszewska, Ewa
2011 “Broadening and Narrowing in Lexical Development: How Relevance Theory Can Account for Children’s Overextensions and Underextensions.” Journal of Pragmatics 43: 314–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wharton, Tim
2003 “Interjections, Language, and the ‘Showing/Saying’ Continuum.” Pragmatics & Cognition 11 (1): 39–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 Pragmatics and Non-Verbal Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 “That Bloody So-and-So Has Retired: Expressives Revisited.” Lingua 174–175: 20–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, Jonathan R
2014 “Standardisation of Reduced Forms in English in an Academic Community of Practice.” Pragmatics and Society 5 (1): 105–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre
2005 “New Directions for Research on Pragmatics and Modularity.” Lingua 115 (8): 1129–1146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 “Modality and the Conceptual-Procedural Distinction.” In Relevance Theory. More than Understanding, ed. by Ewa Wałaszewska and Agnieszka Piskorska, 23–43. New Castle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
2013 “Irony Comprehension: A Developmental Perspective.” Journal of Pragmatics 59 (A): 40–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Robyn Carston
2006 “Metaphor, Relevance and the ‘Emergent Property’ Issue.” Mind & Language 21 (3): 404–433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 “A Unitary Approach to Lexical Pragmatics: Relevance, Inference and Ad Hoc Concepts.” In Pragmatics, ed. by Noel Burton-Roberts, 230–259. Basingstoke: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber
1993 “Linguistic Form and Relevance.” Lingua 90 (1): 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Tim Wharton
2006 “Relevance and Prosody.” Journal of Pragmatics 38 (10): 1559–1579. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yus Ramos, Francisco
1998 “A Decade of Relevance Theory.” Journal of Pragmatics 30: 305–345. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999a “Towards a Pragmatic Taxonomy of Misunderstandings.” Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 38: 218–239.Google Scholar
1999b “Misunderstandings and Explicit/Implicit Communication.” Pragmatics 9 (4): 487–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 Ciberpragmática. El uso del lenguaje en Internet. Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar
Yus, Francisco
2003 “Humor and the Search for Relevance.” Journal of Pragmatics 35 (9): 1295–1331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 “A Relevance-theoretic Classification of Jokes.” Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4 (1): 131–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Cyberpragmatics. Internet-Mediated Communication in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yus Ramos, Francisco
2014 “Not All Emoticons Are Created Equal.” Linguagem em (Dis)curso 14 (3): 511–529. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Humour and Relevance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar