Cover not available
Part of
Implicitness: From lexis to discourse
Edited by Piotr Cap and Marta Dynel
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 276] 2017
► pp. 147–176

Chapter 7
Lexical pragmatics and implicit communication

| University College London
| New York College Athens
In this paper, we consider what is implicitly communicated when the linguistically-specified (encoded) meaning of a word or phrase is modified in use. Well-studied examples of such modification include lexical narrowing, approximation and metaphorical extension. A striking feature of much research in this area is that narrowing, approximation and metaphorical extension tend to be seen as distinct processes which lack a common explanation; indeed, the philosopher Donald Davidson famously argued that since metaphor does not always determine “a cognitive content that its author wishes to convey and that the interpreter must grasp if he is to get the message”, it does not fall within the scope of a theory of communication at all. Using corpus data to shed light on some of the issues raised by this research, we will make two main points. First, there is a continuum of cases between literal use, approximation, hyperbole and metaphor, which favours the search for a unitary account that applies across the whole continuum. Second, what is implicitly communicated is not always a specific “cognitive content that the speaker wishes to convey”: rather, there is a continuum of cases with varying degrees of specificity, and an adequate theory of communication should explain the whole range.
Keywords: lexical narrowing, broadening, approximation, metaphor, communication, speaker’s meaning
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Lexical narrowing
  • 3.The continuum of literal, loose and metaphorical uses
  • 4.When narrowing and broadening combine
  • 5.The scope of a theory of communication
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 30 June 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.276.07wil
References (47)
References
Blutner, Reinhard. 1998. “Lexical Pragmatics.” Journal of Semantics 15: 115–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. “Pragmatics and the Lexicon.” In The Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Laurence Horn and Gregory Ward, 488–514. Oxford: BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Carston, Robyn. 1997. “Enrichment and Loosening: Complementary Processes in Deriving the Proposition Expressed?” Linguistische Berichte 8: 103–127.Google Scholar
. 2002. Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carston, Robyn, and Catherine Wearing. 2011. “Metaphor, Hyperbole and Simile: A Pragmatic Approach.” Language and Cognition 3: 283–312. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1978. “What Metaphors Mean.” Critical Inquiry 5: 31–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner. 2002: The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Geurts, Bart. 2009. “Scalar Implicature and Local Pragmatics.” Mind and Language 24: 51–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glucksberg, Sam. 2001. Understanding Figurative Language: From Metaphors to Idioms. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. “The Psycholinguistics of Metaphor.” Trends in Cognitive Science 7: 92–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1957. “Meaning.” Philosophical Review 66: 377–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1967. “Logic and Conversation” (William James Lectures), Harvard University.Google Scholar
. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence. 2004. “Implicature.” In The Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Laurence Horn and Gregory Ward, 3–28. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2012. “Histoire d’*O: Lexical Pragmatics and the Geometry of Opposition.” In New Perspectives on the Square of Opposition, ed. by J.-Y. Béziau and G. Payette, 393–426. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Jaszczolt, Kasia. 2014. “Defaults in Semantics and Pragmatics.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition). [URL]Google Scholar
Kolaiti, Patricia, and Deirdre Wilson. 2014. “Corpus Analysis and Lexical Pragmatics: An Overview.” International Review of Pragmatics 6: 211–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lepore, Ernie, and Matthew Stone. 2010. “Against Metaphorical Meaning.” Topoi 29: 165–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Imagination and Convention: Distinguishing Grammar and Inference in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lascarides, Alex, and Ann Copestake. 1998. “Pragmatics and Word Meaning.” Journal of Linguistics 34: 55–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lasersohn, Peter. 1999. “Pragmatic Halos.” Language 75: 522–551. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lewis, David. 1979. “Scorekeeping in a Language Game.” Journal of Philosophical Logic 8: 339–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Noveck, Ira, and Dan Sperber. 2007. “The Why and How of Experimental Pragmatics.” In Pragmatics, ed. by Noel Burton-Roberts, 184–212. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Recanati, François. 2004. Literal Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2010. Truth-Conditional Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1985. “Loose Talk.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 86: 153–171.
. 1986/1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1998. “The Mapping between the Mental and the Public Lexicon.” In Language and Thought, ed. by P. Carruthers and J. Boucher, 184–200. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 2002. “Pragmatics, Modularity and Mindreading.” Mind and Language 17: 3–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. “A Deflationary Account of Metaphors.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor in Language and Thought, ed. by Raymond Gibbs, 84–105. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Beyond speaker’s meaning.” Croatian Journal of Philosophy vol. XV, no. 44: 117–149.Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard, Aletta Dorst, Berenike Herrman, Anna J. Kaal, Tina Krennmayr, and Trijntje Pasma. 2010. A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vega Moreno, Rosa. 2007. Creativity and Convention: The Pragmatics of Everyday Figurative Speech. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wharton, Tim. 2003. “Natural Pragmatics and Natural Codes.” Mind and Language 18: 447–477. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Pragmatics and Non-Verbal Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre. 2011a. “Parallels and Differences in the Treatment of Metaphor in Relevance Theory and Cognitive Linguistics.” Intercultural Pragmatics 8: 177–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011b. “The Conceptual-Procedural Distinction: Past, Present and Future.” In Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives, ed. by Victoria Escandell-Vidal, Manuel Leonetti and A. Ahern, 66–84. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
. 2016. “Reassessing the Conceptual–Procedural Distinction.” Lingua175–176: 5–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. “Relevance Theory.” In Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Yan Huang, 79-100.Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Robyn Carston. 2006. “Metaphor, Relevance and the ‘Emergent Property’ Issue.” Mind and Language 21: 404–433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. “A Unitary Approach to Lexical Pragmatics: Relevance, Inference and ad hoc Concepts.” In Pragmatics, ed. by Noel Burton-Roberts, 230–259. London: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. “Metaphor and the ‘Emergent Property’ Problem: A Relevance-theoretic Treatment.” The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 3: 1–40.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber. 2002. “Truthfulness and Relevance.” Mind 111: 583–632. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Meaning and Relevance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Scott, Kate
2021. Memes as multimodal metaphors. Pragmatics & Cognition 28:2 ► pp. 277 ff. DOI logo
Diez-Arroyo, Marisa
2020. The pragmatics of luxury. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 83 ► pp. 25 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 july 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.