The Epistemic Norms of Assertion

Author(s):  
Mikkel Gerken

Chapter 7 extends the discussion of epistemic norms to the linguistic realm. Again, it is argued that a Knowledge Norm of Assertion (KNAS) is inadequate and should be replaced with a Warrant-Assertive Speech Act norm (WASA). According to WASA, S must be adequately warranted in believing that p relative to her conversational context in order to meet the epistemic requirements for asserting that p. This epistemic norm is developed and extended to assertive speech acts that carry implicatures or illocutionary forces. Particular attention is given to the development of a species of WASA that accounts for assertive speech acts having a directive force, such as a recommendation. Thus, Chapter 7 contributes to the debates concerning epistemic norms of assertions.

Author(s):  
Mikkel Gerken

Chapter 6 concerns the normative relationship between action and knowledge ascriptions. Arguments are provided against a Knowledge Norm of Action (KNAC) and in favor of the Warrant-Action norm (WA). According to WA, S must be adequately warranted in believing that p relative to her deliberative context to meet the epistemic requirements for acting on p. WA is developed by specifying the deliberative context and by arguing that its explanatory power exceeds that of knowledge norms. A general conclusion is that the knowledge norm is an important example of a folk epistemological principle that does not pass muster as an epistemological principle. More generally, Chapter 6 introduces the debates about epistemic normativity and develops a specific epistemic norm of action.


Author(s):  
Mikkel Gerken

Chapter 12 deals with the practical factor effects by arguing that in the cases where practical factor effects are generated, the focus is on some pertinent action. In the cases where the knowledge ascription is merely mental, it is argued to serve as a heuristic proxy for a more complex judgment about epistemic actionability. Linguistic knowledge ascriptions are argued to serve a directive communicative function in the relevant cases. Therefore, the “shifty” judgments about the knowledge ascriptions reflect whether they meet or violate the epistemic norm governing directive speech acts—specifically the speech act of recommending. Thus, Chapter 12 combines psychological and linguistic considerations to account for the puzzling patterns of knowledge ascriptions constituting practical factor effects.


2020 ◽  
pp. 131-170
Author(s):  
Jody Azzouni

Assertion is a phenomenological category—that is, assertions are experienced as such by speaker-hearers. Speech-act phenomenology is distinguished from semantic perception. We not only experience speech acts, we experience the words and sentences we utter as distinct objects with properties different from those of the speech acts. Using this distinction, evidence against agential-state assertion norms, such as a sincere-belief norm, a knowledge norm, or a warrant norm, etc., is given. Anonymous assertions or shapes resembling inscriptions produced by accident are experienced as assertions and as possessing meaning even when they are recognized to be products of sheer accidents and in reality without utterers. Spokespersons for companies, actors in advertisements for products, cartoon characters (that don’t exist), and flakes who can’t be trusted are all experienced nevertheless as asserting, and what they assert as assertions. The common-ground expectation view is supported. Compatibly with this, Moorean remarks are often naturally utterable.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Turri

What is the relationship between saying ‘I know that Q’ and guaranteeing that Q? John Austin, Roderick Chisholm and Wilfrid Sellars all agreed that there is some important connection, but disagreed over what exactly it was. In this paper I discuss each of their accounts and present a new one of my own. Drawing on speech-act theory and recent research on the epistemic norms of speech acts, I suggest that the relationship is this: by saying ‘I know that Q’, you represent yourself as having the authority to guarantee that Q.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 77-81
Author(s):  
Sayyora Azimova ◽  

This article is devoted to the pragmatic interpretation of the illocutionary action of the speech act “expression of refusals”. The article discusses different ways of reflecting cases of denial. This article was written not only for English language professionals, but also for use in aggressive conflicts and their pragmatic resolution, which naturally occur in the process of communication in all other languages


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-231
Author(s):  
Sayyora Azimova ◽  

This article is devoted to the pragmatic interpretation of the illocutionary action of the speech act“expression of refusals”. The article discusses different ways of reflecting cases of denial. This article was written not only for English language professionals, but also for use in aggressive conflicts and their pragmatic resolution, which naturally occur in the process of communication in all other languages


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Evi Jovita Putri

<p>The research entitled Directive Speech Act Seen on Family 2.0 Drama Script Written by Walter Wykes purposes to describe and uncover the types of form and intended meaning of directive speech act on that drama script. This descriptive research uses pragmatic approach and theory. The collecting and analysing data are focused on the using of declarative, imperative, and interrogative sentences in the text of drama. The forms of those sentences will be analysed to find out the types of form of directive speech act, while the context of those sentences will be used to analyze the intended meaning of directive speech act uttered by speakers. The results of the research are found that, first, there are two types of the form of directive speech acts, direct directive speech acts and indirect directive speech acts. Direct directive speech acts are represented by imperative sentence without subject; imperative sentence with let; and negative imperative sentence. Meanwhile the indirect directive speech acts are represented by declarative sentence statement; declarative sentence if clause; negative declarative sentences; and interrogative sentences. Second, the intended meanings seen on drama script of Family 2.0 are command, prohibition, request, treat, and persuasion. It can be concluded that, the most frequent intended meaning appeared in directive speech acts on this script is command by the use of imperative forms. Then, the declarative and interrogative forms are used to request something by adults charaters; in contrast the kids characters use them to command and prohibit the hearer.<strong></strong></p><strong>Keywords: </strong> family 2.0, pragmatic, speech act, directive, form and intended meaning


SUHUF ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 321-342
Author(s):  
Fathur Rosyid

Abstrak Kata Kunci: Pragamtik, Tindak Tutur, Implikatur, Kisah Sayyidah Maryam   Kisah Sayyidah Maryam dalam al-Qur’a>n merupakan salah-satu kisah yang menarik dikaji dengan pendekatan pragmatik. Hal ini disebabkan, secara tekstual, beliau adalah publik figur yang fenomenal, bahkan mengalahkan status sosial perempuan lainnya, sehingga namanya terdokumentasikan dalam satu surat khusus yang populer dengan sebutan ”Surat Maryam”. Kecuali itu, kisah tersebut juga termasuk kisah yang kaya dengan nuansa konteks. Sementara posisi ilmu prgamatik sendiri  merupakan disiplin keilmuan yang mengkaji satuan bahasa dari sudut pandang relasi antara konteks linguistik yang bersifat diadik dan konteks non-linguistik yang bersifat triadik. Penelitian ini hendak mengungkap dua hal; Pertama, apa yang dimaksud pragmatika al-Qur’a>n?. Kedua, bagaimana bentuk aplikasi pragmatik tindak tutur dan implikatur terhadap fragmentasi kisah kelahiran Sayyidah Maryam dalam al-Qur’an?. Tujuan kedua pertanyaan tersebut untuk memahami konsep prgamtika al-Qur’an, juga untuk mengungkap bentuk tindak tutur dan implikatur fragmentasi kisah kelahiran Sayyidah Maryam. Penelitian ini menghasilkan kesimpulan; Pertama, pragmatika al-Qur’an adalah suatu disiplin ilmu yang mengkaji al-Qur’a>n dari sudut pandang relasi antara konteks kebahasaan dengan konteks non-kebahasaan. Kedua, tindak tutur fragmentasi kisah kelahiran Sayyidah Maryam yang terdapat dalam Qs. A<li ‘Imra>n (03): 36, lokusinya berupa kalimat informatif, sementara illokusinya merupakan bentuk kalimat asertif yang bermakna mengeluh. Adapun implikaturnya sebagai pelajaran, bahwa jika segala sesuatu telah dipasrahkan sama Allah swt. maka tidak pantas mencari kesalahan atas peraturan yang telah ditetapkan-Nya.               Abstract Keywords: Pragamtik, Speech Acts, implicatures, Story of Sayyidah Maryam   The story of Sayyidah Maryam in the al-Qur'a>n is one-on-one interesting stories studied with a pragmatic approach. This is due, textually, he is a public figure who is phenomenal, even beating out other women's social status, so the name is documented in a special letter that is popularly known as "Surah Maryam". Except that, the story also included a story rich with nuances of context. While the position pragamatic science itself is a scientific discipline that examines unit of language from the perspective of the relationship between linguistic context that is both dyadic and non-linguistic context that is triadic. This research seeks to reveal two things; First, what is meant pragmatic al-Qur'a>n?. Second, how the application form pragmatics of speech acts and implicatures to fragmentation birth story of Sayyidah Maryam in the al-Qur'a>n?. The second purpose of these questions to understand the concept pragamtic al-Qur'a>n, as well as to reveal the shape of speech acts and implicatures fragmentation of the birth story of Sayyidah Maryam. This research resulted in the conclusion; First, the pragmatics of the al-Qur’a>n is a discipline that examines al-Qur'a>n from the viewpoint of the relationship between linguistic context with non-linguistic context. Second, the speech act fragmentation birth story of Sayyidah Maryam contained in Qs. A<li 'Imra>n (03): 36, locutionary acts be informative sentence, while illocutionary acts an assertive form meaningful sentences complaining. The implicature as a lesson, that if everything was handled the same God, it is inappropriate to find fault with the regulations set his.


Author(s):  
David Owens

Two models of assertion are described and their epistemological implications considered. The assurance model draws a parallel between the ethical norms surrounding speech acts like promising and the epistemic norms that govern the transmission of testimonial knowledge. This model is rejected in favour of the view that assertion transmits knowledge by (intentionally) expressing belief. The expression of belief is distinguished from the communication of belief. The chapter goes on to compare the epistemology of testimony with the epistemology of memory, arguing that memory and testimony are mechanisms that can preserve the rationality of the belief they transmit without preserving the evidence on which the belief was originally based.


Author(s):  
Craige Roberts

This essay sketches an approach to speech acts in which mood does not semantically determine illocutionary force. The conventional content of mood determines the semantic type of the clause in which it occurs, and, given the nature of discourse, that type most naturally lends itself to a particular type of speech act, i.e. one of the three basic types of language game moves—making an assertion (declarative), posing a question (interrogative), or proposing to one’s addressee(s) the adoption of a goal (imperative). There is relative consensus about the semantics of two of these, the declarative and interrogative; and this consensus view is entirely compatible with the present proposal about the relationship between the semantics and pragmatics of grammatical mood. Hence, the proposal is illustrated with the more controversial imperative.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document