Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • Part II - Pragmatics and Linguistic Issues

  • Edited by Kate Scott, Kingston University, London, Billy Clark, Northumbria University, Newcastle, Robyn Carston, University College London
  • Book:
    Relevance, Pragmatics and Interpretation
    Published online:
    08 July 2019
    Print publication:
    18 July 2019, pp 113-202

  • Summary

    Jary and Kissine examine the meaning of imperative sentences, taking the existing relevance-theoretic semantic analysis, in terms of the desirability and potentiality of the described state of affairs, as their point of departure. In their view, a complete account of the interpretation of imperatives has to explain how they can result in the addressee forming an intention to perform an action, and this requires the theory to make room for ‘action representations’ (in addition to factual representations, such as assumptions). They claim that the imperative form is uniquely specified to interface with such action representations.

  • 14 - Procedural Syntax

  • from Part II - Pragmatics and Linguistic Issues
  • Edited by Kate Scott, Kingston University, London, Billy Clark, Northumbria University, Newcastle, Robyn Carston, University College London
  • Book:
    Relevance, Pragmatics and Interpretation
    Published online:
    08 July 2019
    Print publication:
    18 July 2019, pp 187-202

  • Summary

    Eleni Gregoromichelaki and Ruth Kempson present a range of arguments and data, including cases of split utterances, in support of their position that even syntax should be construed in terms of the linguistic underspecification of utterance content and incremental context-relative processing. This approach to language (which they call ‘Dynamic Syntax’) is fundamentally different from orthodox generative grammar and conceptualises syntax as procedures for interaction.