Article published In:
PragmaticsVol. 9:4 (1999) ► pp.487–517
Misunderstandings and explicit/implicit communication
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
References
Bach, K.
(1994a) Conversational impliciture. Mind and Language 91: 124–162. 
(1994b) Semantic slack. What is said and more. In S.L. Tsohatzidis (ed.), Foundations of speech act theory. Philosophical and linguistic perspectives. London: Routledge, pp. 267–291.
(1998) Standardization revisited. In A. Kasher (ed.), Pragmatics. Critical concepts, vol. 4. London: Routledge, pp. 712–720.
Bach, K. & R. Harnish
(1979) Linguistic communication and speech acts. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press (chapter 9: Indirect acts and illocutionary standardization, in A. Kasher (ed.),
Pragmatics. Critical concepts, vol. 4. London: Routledge, pp. 682–712). BoP
Barthes, R.
(1977) Image-music-text. London: Fontana.
Bazzanella, C. & R. Damiano
(1999a) Coherence and misunderstanding in everyday conversations. In Bublitz and Lenk (eds.), Coherence in discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Conpany, pp. 175–187.
(1999b) The interactional handling of misunderstanding in everyday conversations. Journal of Pragmatics 311: 817–836. BoP
BoPBertolet, R.
(1994) Are there indirect speech acts? In S.L. Tsohatzidis (ed.), Foundations of speech act theory. Philosophical and linguistic perspectives. London: Routledge, pp. 335–349.
Bertuccelli Papi, M.
(1999) Implicitness to whom? In J. Verschueren (ed.), Pragmatics in 1998. Selected papers from the 6th International Pragmatics Conference. Antwerp: IPrA.
Blakemore, D.
(1989) Linguistic form and pragmatic interpretation: The explicit and the implicit. In L. Hickey (ed.), The pragmatics of style. London: Routledge, pp. 29–51.
Blass, R.
Brooks, L.
(1999) Do you want to come back to my place? The Guardian 13 December 1999, Women.
Cameron, R. & J. Williams
(1997) Senténce to ten cents: A case study of relevance and communicative success in nonnative-native speaker interactions in a medical setting. Applied Linguistics 18.4: 415–445.
Carston, R.
(1988) Implicature, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics. In R.M. Kempson (ed.), Mental representations. The interface between language and reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 155–181.
(1996) Enrichment and loosening: Complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 81: 61–88.
(1998a) The semantics/pragmatics distinction: A view from relevance theory. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 101: 53–80.
(1998b) Postcript. In A. Kasher (ed.), Pragmatics. Critical Concepts, vol. 4. London: Routledge, pp. 464–477.
(1999) The semantics/pragmatics distinction: A view from relevance theory. In K. Turner (ed.), The semantics/pragmatics interface from different points of view. Oxford: Elsevier Science, pp. 85–125.
Clark, H.H.
(1979) Responding to indirect speech acts. Cognitive Psychology 111: 430–477.
(1996) Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dascal, M.
(1999) Introduction: Some questions about misunderstanding. Journal of Pragmatics 311: 753–762.
Dascal, M. & I. Berenstein
(1987) Two modes of understanding: comprehending and grasping. Language & Communication 71: 139–151. BoP
BoPDascal, M. & O. Gruengard
(1981) Unintentional action and non-action. Manuscrito IV-2: 103–113.
Díez Arroyo, M.L.
(1997) Figurative vs literal meaning in idioms. A comparative study English-Spanish. Atlantis XIX(2): 51–64.
Franken, N.
Gibbs, R.W.
(1979) Contextual effects in understanding indirect requests. Discourse Processes 21: 1–10.
(1984) Literal meaning and psychological theory. Cognitive Science 81: 275–304.
(1994) The poetics of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(1998) The varieties of intentions in interpersonal communication. In S.R. Fussell & R.J. Kreuz (eds.), Social and cognitive approaches to interpersonal communication. Mahwah (NJ): LEA, pp. 19–37.
(1999) Speaker=s intuitions and pragmatic theory. Cognition 691: 355–359.
Gibbs, R.W. & J.F. Moise
(1997) Pragmatics in understanding what is said. Cognition 621: 51–74.
Goodman, B.A.
(1986) Reference identification and reference identification failures. Computational Linguistics 12.4.1: 273–305.
Grimshaw, A.
(1980) Mishearings, misunderstandings and other nonsuccesses in talk: A plea for redress of speaker-oriented bias. Sociological Inquiry 401: 31–74.
Groefsema, M.
(1992) >Can you pass the salt?=: A short-circuited implicature? Lingua 871: 103–135.
Grossen, M.
(1996) Counselling and gatekeeping: Definitions of the problem and situation in a first therapeutic interview. Text 161: 161–198.
Grossen, M. & D. Apothéloz
(1996) Communicating about communication in a therapeutic interview. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 151: 101–132. BoP
BoPHerman, V.
(1997) Misunderstanding and power: Contests of understandings. In M. Maufort & J.-P. van Noppen (eds.), Voices of power. Brussels: Belgian Association of Anglicists in Higher Education, pp. 33-43.
Holtgraves, T.
(1998) Interpersonal foundations of conversational indirectness. In S.R. Fussell & R.J. Kreuz (eds.), Social and cognitive approaches to interpersonal communication. Mahwah, NJ.: LEA, pp. 71–89.
Humphreys-Jones, C.
(1986) Make, make do and mend: The role of the hearer in misunderstandings. In G. McGregor (ed.), Language for hearers. Oxford: Pergamon, pp. 105–126.
Jaszczolt, K.M.
(1998) Referring in discourse: referential intention and the >taking for granted= principle. Journal of Literary Semantics XXVII/21: 96–109.
(1999) Default semantics, pragmatics, and intentions. In K. Turner (ed.), The semantics/pragmatics interface from different points of view. Oxford: Elsevier Science, pp. 199–232.
Linell, P.
(1995) Troubles with mutualities: Towards a dialogical theory of misunderstanding and miscommunication. In I. Marková, C. Graumann & K. Foppa (eds.), Mutualities in dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 176–213.
Maynard, D.W.
(1991) On the interactional and institutional bases of asymmetry in clinical discourse. American Journal of Sociology 971: 448–495.
Nicolle, S & B. Clark
(1999) Experimental pragmatics and what is said: A response to Gibbs and Moise. Cognition 691: 337–354.
Récanati, F.
(1989) The pragmatics of what is said. Mind and Language 41: 295–329.
(1993) Direct reference. From language to thought. Oxford: Blackwell.
(1995) The alleged priority of literal interpretation. Cognitive Science 191: 207–232.
Salazar Orvig, A.
(1995) Misunderstandings and the construction of dialogue in a clinical interview. International Journal of Applied Psycholinguistics 111: 227–247.
Schegloff, E.A.
(1987) Some sources of misunderstanding in talk-in-interaction. Linguistics 251: 201–218.
(1992) Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology 971: 1295–1345.
Searle, J.R.
(1978) Literal meaning. Erkenntnis 131: 207–224.
Sperber, D. & D. Wilson
(1990) Spontaneous deduction and mutual knowledge. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 131: 179–184.
Sperber, D. and D. Wilson
(1986b) Loose talk. In S. Davis (ed.), Pragmatics: A reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 540–549.
Sperber, D. & D. Wilson
(1987) Précis of Relevance: Communication and Cognition
. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 101: 697–754.
(1997) The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 91: 107–125.
Toolan, M.
Vicente, B.
(1996) Non-literal speech and indirection. Paper presented at the Ipra Conference. Mexico City.
(1998) Against blurring the explicit/implicit distinction. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 111 (special volume devoted to relevance theory): 241–258.
Weigand, E.
Weizman, E. & S. Blum-Kulka
(1992) Ordinary misunderstanding. In M. Stamenow (ed.), Current advances in semantic theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 417–432.
Weizman, E.
(1999) Building true understanding via apparent miscommunication: A case study. Journal of Pragmatics 311: 837–846. BoP
BoPWest, C.
(1985) Routine complications: Troubles with talk between doctors and patients. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press. BoP
Wilson, D.
(1994) Relevance and understanding. In: G. Brown, K. Malmkjaer, A. Pollitt & J. Williams (eds.), Language and understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 35–58.
Yamaguchi, H.
(1988) How to pull strings with words. Deceptive violations in the garden-path joke. Journal of Pragmatics 121: 323–337. BoP
BoPYus, F.
(1997a) Cooperación y relevancia. Dos aproximaciones pragmáticas a la interpretación. Alicante: Servicio de Publicaciones.
(1997b) Indirectness in conversation: The theory of sub-continua. Paper presented at the XXI International AEDEAN Conference. Seville (Spain), December 1997.
(1997c) Pragmática del malentendido. Paper presented at the XV International AESLA Conference. Zaragoza (Spain), 14–16 April 1997.
(1997d) La teoría de la relevancia y la estrategia humorística de la incongruencia-resolución. Pragmalingüística 3–4: 497–508.
(1997e) La interpretación y la imagen de masas. Alicante: Instituto de Cultura AJuan Gil-Albert@.
(1998b) Relevance: A thematic bibliographical list. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 11 (special volume devoted to relevance theory): 261–285.
(1998c) The what-do-you-mean syndrome. A taxonomy of misunderstandings in Harold Pinter=s plays. Estudios Ingleses de la Universidad Complutense 61: 81–100.
(1998d) Relevance theory and media discourse: A verbal-visual model of communication. Poetics 251: 293–309.
(1998e) Irony: Context accessibility and processing effort. Pragmalingüística 5–6: 391–411.
(1999) Towards a pragmatic taxonomy of misunderstandings. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 381: 217–239.
Cited by
Cited by 39 other publications
Alizadeh Afrouzi, Omid
2021. Humanitarian behavior across high-/low-context cultures: a comparative analysis between Switzerland and Colombia. Journal of International Humanitarian Action 6:1 
Bączkowska, Anna
2023. Implicit offensiveness from linguistic and computational perspectives: A study of irony and sarcasm. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 19:2 ► pp. 353 ff.
Colley, Mark & Enrico Rukzio
2020. Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ► pp. 1 ff.
Cruz, Manuel Padilla
2015. Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ► pp. 1 ff.
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2012. Epistemic Vigilance, Cautious Optimism and Sophisticated Understanding. Research in Language 10:4 ► pp. 365 ff.
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2013. Metapsychological awareness of comprehension and epistemic vigilance of L2 communication in interlanguage pragmatic development. Journal of Pragmatics 59 ► pp. 117 ff.
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2014. Pragmatic failure, epistemic injustice and epistemic vigilance. Language & Communication 39 ► pp. 34 ff.
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2016. Three decades of relevance theory. In Relevance Theory [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 268], ► pp. 1 ff.
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2016. Some directions for future research in relevance-theoretic pragmatics. In Relevance Theory [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 268], ► pp. 307 ff.
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2017. Interlocutors-Related and Hearer-Specific Causes of Misunderstanding: Processing Strategy, Confirmation Bias and Weak Vigilance. Research in Language 15:1 ► pp. 11 ff.
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2018. Pragmatic Competence Injustice. Social Epistemology 32:3 ► pp. 143 ff.
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
2020. Chapter 3. Evidential participles and epistemic vigilance. In Relevance Theory, Figuration, and Continuity in Pragmatics [Figurative Thought and Language, 8], ► pp. 69 ff.
Duan, Changming, Clara E. Hill, Guangrong Jiang, Bo Hu, Yujia Lei, Jie Chen & Lixia Yu
2015. The counselor perspective on the use of directives in counseling in China: Are directives different in China as in the United States?. Counselling Psychology Quarterly 28:1 ► pp. 57 ff.
Duan, De Quan & Chuan Wang
2011. An Open Communication Architecture for Multi-Robots in Complex Environment. Applied Mechanics and Materials 130-134 ► pp. 162 ff.
Engbers, Marilieke, Svetlana N. Khapova & Erik van de Loo
2024. Unsaid known in the boardroom: theorizing unspoken assessments of behavioral board dynamics. Frontiers in Communication 9
Ernstsen, Musharraf & Nazir
2018. Bayesian Model of Operator Challenges in Maritime Pilotage. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 62:1 ► pp. 1813 ff.
Gil, José María
2011. Relevance theory and unintended transmission of information. Intercultural Pragmatics 8:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Haugh, Michael
2022. The intuitive basis of implicature. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 117 ff.
Havsteen-Franklin, Dominik
2014. Consensus for using an arts-based response in art therapy. International Journal of Art Therapy 19:3 ► pp. 107 ff.
Jung, Hee Soo, Charles Warner-Hillard, Ryan Thompson, Krista Haines, Brooke Moungey, Anne LeGare, David Williamson Shaffer, Carla Pugh, Suresh Agarwal & Sarah Sullivan
2018. Why saying what you mean matters: An analysis of trauma team communication. The American Journal of Surgery 215:2 ► pp. 250 ff.
Kapogianni, Eleni
2011. Chapter 4. Graded salience effects on irony production and interpretation. In Salience and Defaults in Utterance Processing, ► pp. 53 ff.
Kecskes, Istvan
2017. Chapter 9. Implicitness in the use of situation-bound utterances. In Implicitness [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 276], ► pp. 201 ff.
Macagno, Fabrizio
2017. Evidence and presumptions for analyzing and detecting misunderstandings. Pragmatics & Cognition 24:2 ► pp. 263 ff.
Marocchini, Eleonora, Simona Di Paola, Greta Mazzaggio & Filippo Domaneschi
2022. Understanding indirect requests for information in high-functioning autism. Cognitive Processing 23:1 ► pp. 129 ff.
Mustajoki, Arto & Alla Baikulova
Oswald, Steve, Sara Greco, Johanna Miecznikowski, Chiara Pollaroli & Andrea Rocci
Piskorska, Agnieszka
2014. A relevance-theoretic perspective on humorous irony and its failure. HUMOR 27:4
Rossi, Maria Grazia & Fabrizio Macagno
2020. Coding Problematic Understanding in Patient–provider Interactions. Health Communication 35:12 ► pp. 1487 ff.
Rossi, Maria Grazia, Elena Vegni & Julia Menichetti
2021. Misunderstandings in ART Triadic Interactions: A Qualitative Comparison of First and Follow-Up Visits. Frontiers in Psychology 12
Ruiz-Moneva, Maria Angeles
2020. Chapter 12. Humour and irony in George Mikes’ How to be a Brit. In Relevance Theory, Figuration, and Continuity in Pragmatics [Figurative Thought and Language, 8], ► pp. 327 ff.
Ruiz-Moneva, María Angeles
2019. Irony, humour and culture in George Mikes’ How to Be a Brit: relevance-theoretical perspectives. Diacronia :10
Ruiz-Moneva, María Angeles
2019. Ironie, umor și cultură în How to Be a Brit de George Mikes: perspective teoretice ale relevanței. Diacronia :10
Sayer, Inaad Mutlib
2013. Misunderstanding and Language Comprehension. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 70 ► pp. 738 ff.
Soares, Leonardo Antonio & Sumiko Nishitani Ikeda
2020. OS PROCESSOS METONÍMICOS EM PUBLICIDADE VERBO-VISUAL SOB ENFOQUE DA LINGUÍSTICA CRÍTICA E DA MULTIMODALIDADE. Trabalhos em Linguística Aplicada 59:1 ► pp. 777 ff.
Sukhov, Alexandre
2018. The role of perceived comprehension in idea evaluation. Creativity and Innovation Management 27:2 ► pp. 183 ff.
SUKHOV, ALEXANDRE, ANTTI SIHVONEN, LARS E. OLSSON & PETER R. MAGNUSSON
2018. THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME: OPENNESS TO CHANGE AND SENSEMAKING IN IDEA SCREENING. International Journal of Innovation Management 22:08 ► pp. 1840009 ff.
Yus, Francisco
2001. Review of Dascal (1999): Filosofía del Lenguaje II. Pragmática (Enciclopedia Iberoamericana de Filosofía. Pragmatics & Cognition 9:1 ► pp. 165 ff.
Zahid, Indirawati
2020. Ketidakpatuhan Maksim Perbualan dan Komunikasi Berkesan dalam “Soal Rakyat”. Issues in Language Studies 9:2 ► pp. 33 ff.
Zakowski, Samuely
2022.
You didn’t build that. a relevance-theoretic approach to President Obama’s campaign flub. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 819 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 april 2024. 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.