scholarly journals Optimality-theoretic pragmatics

2009 ◽  
Vol 51 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Reinhard Blutner ◽  
Henk Zeevat

The article aims to give an overview about the application of Optimality Theory (OT) to the domain of pragmatics. In the introductory part we discuss different ways to view the division of labor between semantics and pragmatics. Rejecting the doctrine of literal meaning we conform to (i) semantic underdetermination and (ii) contextualism (the idea that the mechanism of pragmatic interpretation is crucial both for determining what the speaker says and what he means). Taking the assumptions (i) and (ii) as essential requisites for a natural theory of pragmatic interpretation, section 2 introduces the three main views conforming to these assumptions: Relevance theory, Levinson’s theory of presumptive meanings, and the Neo-Gricean approach. In section 3 we explain the general paradigm of OT and the idea of bidirectional optimization. We show how the idea of optimal interpretation can be used to restructure the core ideas of these three different approaches. Further, we argue that bidirectional OT has the potential to account both for the synchronic and the diachronic perspective on pragmatic interpretation. Section 4 lists relevant examples of using the framework of bidirectional optimization in the domain of pragmatics. Section 5 provides some general conclusions. Modeling both for the synchronic and the diachronic perspective on pragmatics opens the way for a deeper understanding of the idea of naturalization and (cultural) embodiment in the context of natural language interpretation.  

Author(s):  
Reinhard K. Blutner

In this article, three theoretic frameworks are discussed: optimality-theoretic, game-theoretic, and decision-theoretic pragmatics, the last being based on Ducrot’s argumentation theory. The close similarities between optimality-theoretic and game-theoretic pragmatics are pointed out. Concerning decision-theoretic pragmatics, some arguments are provided demonstrating that an independent, argumentation-theoretic grounding is neither needed nor useful. Rather, it seems more appropriate to incorporate the argumentation-theoretic insights into a general Gricean-oriented theory of natural language interpretation, let it be optimality-theoretic pragmatics or a game-theoretic variant.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Ash Asudeh ◽  
Gianluca Giorgolo

This chapter introduces and motivates the book. It introduces monads as a way to model enriched meanings and motivates enriched meanings as a way to avoid generalizing to the worst case in natural language interpretation. It reviews the three goals of the book: 1. to provide background on the theory of enriched meanings and how to model meaning enrichment formally using category theory, in particular monads; 2. to show the usefulness of the theory by providing new compositional analyses of the three phenomena; and 3. to explore the compositional possibilities for combining the three monads used in these analyses. The chapter also discusses the place of this kind of research in cognitive science. It lists some related literature on monads for natural language interpretation. It also introduces the computational tools and exercises.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document