On the Meaning of or: Inclusivity vs. Alternativity
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The meaning of or has been considered the same as the logical connective ∨ (inclusive disjunction), which means that at least one disjunct is true. Ariel and Mauri (2018, 2019), examining the Santa Barbara Corpus, argue that inclusivity is too strong because the speaker may commit to none of the alternatives and too weak because she can commit to all alternatives. Instead, they suggest that the core meaning of or is ‘alternativity’ on some level (the propositional level or a non-propositional level), which is procedural, non-truth-conditional and conventionally implicated. They classify or constructions according to the types of their ‘explicatures’: Raised options, Higher-Level Category, Conjunctive, Narrowed, Choice, and Exhaustive readings. In this paper, I argue for the standard account of or, that is, or means inclusivity. Although some alternatives are distinct on a non-propositional level, the difference may contribute to the truth-conditional content through pragmatic enrichment. I deal with metalinguistic disjunction to show the process of pragmatic enrichment. In addition, I point out that some of Ariel and Mauri’s ‘explicatures’ of or constructions are better analyzed as pragmatically derived implicatures.
Abstract
The meaning of or has been considered the same as the logical connective ∨ (inclusive disjunction), which means that at least one disjunct is true. Ariel and Mauri (2018, 2019), examining the Santa Barbara Corpus, argue that inclusivity is too strong because the speaker may commit to none of the alternatives and too weak because she can commit to all alternatives. Instead, they suggest that the core meaning of or is ‘alternativity’ on some level (the propositional level or a non-propositional level), which is procedural, non-truth-conditional and conventionally implicated. They classify or constructions according to the types of their ‘explicatures’: Raised options, Higher-Level Category, Conjunctive, Narrowed, Choice, and Exhaustive readings. In this paper, I argue for the standard account of or, that is, or means inclusivity. Although some alternatives are distinct on a non-propositional level, the difference may contribute to the truth-conditional content through pragmatic enrichment. I deal with metalinguistic disjunction to show the process of pragmatic enrichment. In addition, I point out that some of Ariel and Mauri’s ‘explicatures’ of or constructions are better analyzed as pragmatically derived implicatures.
참고문헌 (20)
- Ariel, Mira, "What’s a distinct or alternative?", Journal of Pragmatics, 103, pp.1~14 (2016)[DOI]
- Ariel, Mira, "Why use or?", Linguistics, 56, pp.939~994 (2018)[DOI]
- Ariel, Mira, "An alternative core for or", Journal of Pragmatics, 149, pp.40~59 (2019)[DOI]
- Blakemore, Diane, "Relevance and linguistic meaning" (2002), Cambridge University Press
- Carston, Robyn, "Mental representations: The interface between language and reality", pp.155~181 (1988), Cambridge University Press
- Carston, Robyn, "Thoughts and utterances: The pragmatics of explicit communication" (2002), Blackwell
- Geurts, Bart, "Quantity implicatures" (2010), Cambridge University Press
- "Speech acts. Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy" (2014)[URL]
- Grice, H. Paul, "Studies in the way of words" (1989), Harvard University Press
- Horn, Laurence R., "On the semantic properties of the logical operators in English", Ph.D., pp.1972
- Horn, Laurence R., "Metalinguistic negation and pragmatic ambiguity", Language, 61, pp.121~174 (1985)[DOI]
- Hurford, James R, "Exclusive or inclusive disjunction", Foundations of Language, 11, pp.409~411 (1974)[DOI]
- Plurals, possibilities, and conjunctive disjunction, "Klinedinst, Nathan W.", UCL, 261~284, pp.UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 19 (2007)
- Levinson, Stephen C., "Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature" (2000), MIT Press
- Lotan, Saul, "An unpublished transcription of a businessman’s conversation with a few income tax clerks (Hebrew)", ~ (1990)
- Noh, Eun-Ju, "Metarepresentation: A relevance theory approach" (2000), Benjamins
- 노은주, "Metalinguistic Disjunctions: Pragmatic Enrichment and Hurford’s Constraint", 언어, 42(2), pp.179~198 (2017), 한국언어학회[DOI]
- Saeed, John I, "Semantics" (2009), Wiley-Blackwell
- Simons, Mandy, "Disjunction and alternativeness", Linguistics and Philosophy, 24, pp.597~619 (2001)[DOI]
- Sperber, Dan, "Relevance: Communication and cognition" (1995), Blackwell