Artykuł w czasopiśmie
Brak miniatury
Licencja
CC-BY-NC-NDCC-BY-NC-ND - Uznanie autorstwa - Użycie niekomercyjne - Bez utworów zależnych
 

Odwoływalność i mówienie nie wprost

Uproszczony widok
cris.lastimport.scopus2024-02-12T19:44:54Z
dc.abstract.enThe aim of this article is to defend the thesis that every conversational implication is cancellable. To this end, I propose a precising definition of cancellability and, based on an analysis of examples proposed by Bach (2006) and Carston (2002), introduce the category of indirectly saying that p. I stipulate that person X said indirectly that p iff (i) X did not say (directly) that p, (ii) from what X said and the analytical truths of the language, it follows that p, and (iii) X meant that p. I define cancellability as follows: if the use of sentence S in context C implies proposition P then P is a cancellable part of this act iff there is a sentence S* and a context C* such that (i) S is a proper part of S*, (ii) S follows from S*, and (iii) P is not implied by S* in C*, but assertion of S* is admissible in C*.
dc.affiliationUniwersytet Warszawski
dc.contributor.authorPuczyłowski, Tomasz
dc.date.accessioned2024-01-25T15:15:20Z
dc.date.available2024-01-25T15:15:20Z
dc.date.copyright2020-10-31
dc.date.issued2020
dc.description.accesstimeAT_PUBLICATION
dc.description.financePublikacja bezkosztowa
dc.description.number3
dc.description.versionFINAL_PUBLISHED
dc.description.volume28
dc.identifier.doi10.14394/FILNAU.2020.0016
dc.identifier.issn1230-6894
dc.identifier.urihttps://repozytorium.uw.edu.pl//handle/item/114404
dc.identifier.weblinkhttps://www.fn.uw.edu.pl/index.php/fn/article/view/1163
dc.languagepol
dc.pbn.affiliationphilosophy
dc.relation.ispartofFilozofia Nauki
dc.relation.pages73-98
dc.rightsCC-BY-NC-ND
dc.sciencecloudnosend
dc.subject.enconversational implicature
dc.subject.encancellability
dc.subject.ensaying something indirectly
dc.subject.ensaying
dc.titleOdwoływalność i mówienie nie wprost
dc.typeJournalArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication