Article published in:
New Developments in Relevance Theory
Edited by Manuel Padilla Cruz and Agnieszka Piskorska
[Pragmatics & Cognition 28:2] 2021
► pp. 321–346

Relevance

Communication and cognition and…?

| University of Brighton
Deirdre Wilson (2018) provides a reflective overview of a volume devoted to the historic application of relevance-theoretic ideas to literary studies. She maintains a view argued elsewhere that the putative non-propositional nature of (among other things) literary effects are an illusion, a view which dates to Sperber and Wilson (1986/1995: 224): “If you look at [non-propositional] affective effects through the microscope of relevance theory, you see a wide array of minute cognitive [i.e., propositional] effects.” This paper suggests an alternative, that modern-day humans have two apparently different modes of expressing and interpreting information: one of these is a system in which propositional, cognitive effects dominate; the other involves direct, non-propositional effects. The paper concludes by describing two ways such affects might be assimilated into relevance theory. The first, to accept that humans are much more than merely cognitive organisms; the second, to rethink quite radically what we mean by cognition.
Keywords: affect, emotion, non-propositional effects, non-verbal communication, propositions, relevance theory, natural codes
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Towards a ‘something else’
    • 2.1Ineffability
    • 2.2Mental imagery
  • 3.Creature construction
  • 4.Affective effects
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 27 June 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.21013.wha
References
Anderson, Michael
2010 Neural reuse: A fundamental organizational principle of the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 331: 245–266. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bambini, Valentina, Chiara Bertini, Walter Schaeken, Alessandra Stella and Francesco di Russo
2016 Disentangling metaphor from context: an ERP study. Frontiers in Psychology: Language Sciences. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baron-Cohen, Simon
1995 Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barsalou, Lawrence
1999 Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences (22): 577–660. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 Grounded cognition: past, present and future. Behavioral and Brain Sciences (22): 577–660.Google Scholar
Bergquist, Patricia
1974 Phylum porifera. In Textbook of zoology invertebrates, 7th ed., ed. by Marshall, Andrew J. and Vale William Williams, 76–103. London and Basingstoke: Macmillan Press Ltd.Google Scholar
Bezuidenhout, Anne
2001 Metaphor and what is said: a defense of a direct expression view of metaphor, Midwest Studies in Philosophy 25 1: 156–186. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Black, Max
1955 Metaphor. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. 55 (19): 273–294. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blakemore, Diane
1987 Semantic constraints on relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2011 On the descriptive ineffability of expressive meaning. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(14): 3537–3550. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Block, Ned
1983 Mental pictures and cognitive science. The Philosophical Review 93, Vol. 4 1: 499–541. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bradbury, Jack & Sandra Vehrencamp
1998 Principles of animal communication. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Byrne, Richard & Andrew Whiten
eds. 1988 Machiavellian intelligence: Social expertise and the evolution of intellect in monkeys, apes and humans. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Camp, Elizabeth
2006 Metaphor and that certain ‘je ne sais quoi’. Philosophical Studies, 129 1: 1–25. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carston, Robyn
2002 Thoughts and utterances: The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 Linguistic communication and the semantics/pragmatics distinction. Synthese 165 (3):321-345. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 Metaphor: ad hoc concepts, literal meaning and mental images. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. 1101: 295–321. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018 Figurative language, mental imagery and pragmatics. Metaphor and Symbol: 198–217. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cave, Terence & Deirdre Wilson
2018 Reading beyond the code: literature and relevance theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cheney, Dorothy & Robert Seyfarth
1990 How monkeys see the world: inside the mind of another species. Chicago: Chicago University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Andy
1999 An embodied cognitive science? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 3 (9): 345–351. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Collingwood, Robin George
1938 The principles of art. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cornell, Louis & Tim Wharton
2021 Before meaning: creature construction, sea-sponges, lizards and Humean projection. In Elly Ifantidou, Louis de Saussure & Tim Wharton (eds.) Beyond meaning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 177–198. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Damasio, Antonio
1994 Descartes Error. Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald
1978 What metaphors mean. Critical Inquiry 5 (1): 31–47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dennett, Daniel
1978 Beliefs about beliefs. Behavior and Brain Sciences 4 1: 568–570. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1981 Brainstorms: philosophical aims on mind and psychology. MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Deplanque, Sylvie & David Sander
2021 A fascinating but risky case of reverse inference: From measures to emotions! Food Quality and Preferences. Volume 921. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ellsworth, Phoebe
2013 Appraisal theory: old and new questions. Emotion Review: 125–131. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fabb, Nigel
2021 Experiences of ineffable significance. In Elly Ifantidou, Louis de Saussure & Wharton (eds.) Beyond meaning, 135–150. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner
2002 The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Fridland, E. R.
2015 Skill, non-propositional thought, and the cognitive penetrability of perception. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 461: 105–120. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Genovesi, Chris
2020 Metaphor and what is meant: Metaphorical content, what is said, and contextualism. Journal of Pragmatics 1571: 17–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, Ray
1994 The poetics of mind: figurative thought, language and understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2002 A new look at literal meaning in understanding what is said and implicated. Journal of Pragmatics. 341: 457–486. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Glucksberg, Sam
2008 How metaphors create categories – quickly. Gibbs, Raymond (ed.) The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought, 67–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Golding, Alexandra
2016 Metaphor in the embodied mind: beyond the propositionality of figurative language. PhD thesis. University of Brighton.
Goleman, Daniel
1995 Emotional intelligence, New York, Bantam Books Inc.Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul
1957 Meaning. Philosophical Review 661: 377–388. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1975a Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. and J. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press: 41–58.Google Scholar
1975b Method in philosophical psychology (from the Banal to the Bizarre). Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 481: 23–53. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1982 Meaning revisited. In Smith, Neil (ed.) Mutual knowledge. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1989 Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gutt, Ernest-August
2013 How does the affective relate to ostensive-inferential communication? Unpublished ms.Google Scholar
Hatfield, Elaine, John Cacioppo & Richard Rapson
1994 Emotional contagion. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hauser, Marc
1996 The evolution of communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Humphrey, Nicholas
1984 Consciousness regained. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Huron, David
2006 Sweet anticipation: Music and the psychology of expectation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, David
1999 What is meaning? Explorations in the theory of meaning as use. Ms.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson
2003 Metaphors we live by. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leslie, Alan
1994 ToMM, ToBY and Agency: core architecture and domain-specificity. In Hirschfeld, Lawrence & Susan Gelman. eds. Mapping the mind: domain specificity in cognition and culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 119–148. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lieberman, Mark
2000 Intuition: A social-cognitive neuroscience approach. Psychological Bulletin 1261: 109–137. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lepore, Ernie & Matthew Stone
2010 Against Metaphorical Meaning. Topoi 29 (2): 165–80. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kolaiti, Patricia
2019 The limits of expression: language, literature, mind. Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
in press a. From a poetics of language to a poetics of action: literature and art as a cognitive object. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
in press b. Perceptual relevance and art: some tentative suggestions. Journal of Literary Semantics 49: 2. Crossref
Longhitano, Sabina
2014 Communicating the ineffable: A pragmatic account of literariness. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences. Vol. 1581: 187–193. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Martinich, Aloysius
1984 A theory for metaphor. Journal of Literary Semantics 13(1): 35–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McGinn, Colin
2004 Mindsight. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Michaels, Anne
1991 Miner’s Pond: poems. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.Google Scholar
1992 Unseen formations. Open Letter 8.41: 96–99.Google Scholar
Moeschler, Jacques
2009 Pragmatics, propositional and non-propositional effects: Can a theory of utterance interpretation account for emotions in verbal communication? Social Science Information 48(3): 447–464. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moors, Agnes, Phoebe Ellsworth, Klaus Scherer & Nico Frijda
2013 Appraisal theories of emotion: state of the art and future development. Emotion Review, 51: 119–124. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Neale, Stephen
1992 Paul Grice and the philosophy of language. Linguistics and Philosophy 15.51: 509–559. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ortony, Andrew
1975 Why metaphors are necessary and not just nice. Educational Theory 251: 45–53. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2009a Towards an alternative relevance-theoretic approach to interjections. International Review of Pragmatics 1 (1): 182–206. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009b Might interjections encode concepts? More questions than answers. Łodź Papers in Pragmatics 5 (2): 241–270.Google Scholar
Pignocchi, Alessandro
2012 History and intentions in the experience of artworks. Topoi 331: 477–486. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pilkington, Adrian
2000 Poetic effects: a relevance theory perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Piskorska, Agnieszka
2012 Cognition and emotions–a joint effort at obtaining positive cognitive effects? In Relevance studies in Poland, Vol. 4. Essays on language and communication. Warsaw: Warsaw University Press: 102–111.Google Scholar
2016 Perlocutionary effects and relevance theory. In Padilla Cruz, Manuel (ed.), Relevance Theory: Recent Developments, Current Challenges and Future Directions, 287–305. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamin. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Potts, Christopher
2005 The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
2007a The expressive dimension. Theoretical Linguistics 33 ( 2 ): 165–197. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007b The centrality of expressive indices. Theoretical Linguistics 33 (2): 255–268. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Proust, Marcel
1922–1931 À la recherche du temps erdu. In search of lost time, translated by Scott-Moncrieff, Charles Kenneth, Terence Kilmartin & Andreas Mayor (Vol. 71). Revised by D. J. Enright. London: Chatto and Windus, New York: The Modern Library 1992 Based on the French La Pléiade edition (1987–89).Google Scholar
Pylyshyn, Zenon
1973 What the mind’s eye tells the mind’s brain: A critique of mental imagery. Psychological Bulletin, 80 ( 1 ): 1–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ramachandran, Vilayanur, & William Hirstein
1999 The science of art: A neurological theory of aesthetic experience. Journal of Consciousness Studies 61: 15–51.Google Scholar
Recanati, François
1993 Direct reference: From language to thought. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Rey, Georges
1981 Introduction: What are mental images? In Block, Ned (ed.), Readings in the Philosophy of Psychology: 117–127. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
1980 Functionalism and the emotions. In Rorty, Amélie (ed.) Explaining emotions, 163–198. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Sander, David, Jordan Grafman & Tiziana Zalla
2003 The human amygdala: an evolved system for relevance detection. Reviews in the Neurosciences, 14 (4): 303–16. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Saussure, Louis & Peter Schulz
2009 Subjectivity out of irony. Semiotica (173): 397–416. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Saussure, Louis & Wharton
2020 Relevance, effect and affect. International Review of Pragmatics, John Benjamin: CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schooler, Jonathan & Joseph Melcher, J.
1994 The ineffability of insight. In Smith, Steven, Thomas Ward, & Ronald Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press: 97–133.Google Scholar
Searle, John
1979 Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan
1996 Explaining culture: a naturalistic approach. Blackwell: Oxford.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, Fabrice Clément, Christophe Heintz, Oliver Mascaro, Hugo Mercier, Gloria Origgi & Deirdre Wilson
2010 Epistemic vigilance. Mind and Language 251: 359–393. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson
1986/1995 Relevance: Communication and Cognition (1st and 2nd eds.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2015 Beyond speaker’s meaning. Croatian Journal of Philosophy XV (44): 117–149.Google Scholar
1998 The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon. In Carruthers, Peter & Jill Boucher. (eds.), Language and Thought: Interdisciplinary Themes, 184–200. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 A deflationary account of metaphors. In Gibbs, Ray. (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, p. 84–105. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stanley, Jason
2011 Know how. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tendahl, Markus & Raymond Gibbs
2008 Complementary perspectives on metaphor: cognitive linguistics and relevance theory. Journal of Pragmatics 401: 1823–1864. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011 Coupling of metaphoric cognition and communication: a reply to Deirdre Wilson. Intercultural Pragmatics 8–41. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tolstoy, Leo
1897 What is art? (translated by Pevear, Richard & Larissa Volokhonsky 1995) Hanworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael, Melinda Carpenter, Josep Call, Tanya Behne & Henrike Moll
2005 Understanding and sharing intentions: the origins of cultural cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 281: 675 – 691. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tooby, John & Leda Cosmides
2008 The evolutionary psychology of the emotions and their relationship to internal regulatory variables. In Handbook of Emotions, 3rd ed., ed. by Michael Lewis, Jeannette M. Haviland-Jones, and Lisa Feldman Barrett: 114–137. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Tye, Michael
2004 On the non-conceptual content of experience. In Reicher, Marie & Johan Marek (eds.), Experience and Analysis: Papers of the 27th International Wittgenstein Symposium, 221–239. Vienna: Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society.Google Scholar
Wharton, Tim
2003a Interjections, language and the ‘showing’/‘saying’ continuum. Pragmatics & Cognition. Vol. 11–11. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003b Natural pragmatics and natural codes. Mind and Language Volume 18, No. 5: 447–477. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 Pragmatics and non-verbal communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015 That bloody so-and-so has retired: Expressives revisited. Lingua. 175–176: 20–35.Google Scholar
Wharton, Tim & Claudia Strey
2019 Slave to the passions: making emotions relevant. In Relevance, pragmatics and interpretation, ed. by Robyn Carston, Billy Clark, and Kate Scott, 253–267. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wharton, Tim, Constant Bonard, Daniel Dukes, David Sander & Steve Oswald
2021 Relevance and emotion. Journal of Pragmatics, 1811: 259–269. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre
2011 Parallels and differences in the treatment of metaphor in relevance theory and cognitive linguistics. Intercultural Studies. 8–21: 177–196.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre & Robyn Carston
2019 Pragmatics and the challenge of non-propositional effects. Journal of Pragmatics 1451: 31–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre
2018 Relevance theory and literary interpretation. In Cave, T. & Wilson, D. (eds.) Reading Beyond the Code: Literature and Relevance Theory, 185–204. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yus, Francisco (Paco)
2016 Propositional attitude, affective attitude and irony comprehension. Pragmatics & Cognition 23(1): 92–116. CrossrefGoogle Scholar