Commentary: Achieving adequacy and commitment in pragmatics

Michael Silverstein

Abstract

If the thread that connects these papers one to another is the theme of violence and social struggle, they are at the same time quite diverse in approaches and subject matters. So diverse, in fact, that in order to see how they present material on violence and social struggle, we must begin by situating the variety of sociocultural material they bring to our attention in the story-lines, as it were, of their respective approaches. This grouping, or re-grouping, of the papers will, I think, lead us to seeing what is involved in giving what we might term an adequate pragmatic account of the phenomena they treat, though it is not my intention here to give an actual re-analysis of the various materials. My purpose is rather to be able to relate such criteria of adequacy to the particular commitments we have as social scientists to elucidating and thereby engaging with conditions that people more generally face in the inherent politics of sociocultural experience.

Quick links
A browser-friendly version of this article is not yet available. View PDF
Bateson, Gregory
(1936) Naven. Cambridge: [Cambridge] University Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre
(1991) Language and symbolic power. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving
(1979) Footing. Semiotica 25: 1-29. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Latour, Bruno
(1984) Science in action. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mehan, Hugh
(1996) The construction of an LD student: A case study in the politics of representation. In M. Silverstein & G. Urban (eds.), Natural histories of discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 253-76.Google Scholar
Putnam, Hilary
(1975) The meaning of ‘meaning’. In Philosophical papers, vol. 2: Mind, language, and reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 215-71. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael
(1992) The indeterminacy of contextualization: When is enough enough? In P. Auer & A. di Luzio (eds.), The contextualization of language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 55-76. CrossrefGoogle Scholar