Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Publisher Login
amazon logo
More Info


New from Cambridge University Press!

ad

From Utterances to Speech Acts

By Mikhail Kissine

"Kissine offers a new theory of speech acts which is philosophically sophisticated and builds on work in cognitive science, formal semantics, and linguistic typology. This highly readable, brilliant essay is a major contribution to the field."

--François Recanati, Institut Jean-Nicod



Query Details


Query Subject:   Semantic/Pragmatic Analyses of ''Understand''
Author:   Eddy Gaytan
Submitter Email:  click here to access email

Linguistic LingField(s):  Discourse Analysis
Pragmatics
Semantics
Syntax

Query:   Dear Linguists,
I am researching the cognitive verb UNDERSTAND in English and
other languages such as French.

I am particularly interested in sentences in which understand takes the
WH-word why, plus a clausal object complement like the following:

1. I understand why John V/Ved…
2. I do not understand why John V/Ved…

I am interested in semantic/pragmatic/discourse-analysis analyses
which explain the information not expressed and pointed to by why,
which seems to be crucial for sentences like 1 and 2 to make sense.
Or, rather, the cogitator in 1 and 2 is only being truthful if his use of
why points to a set of reasons which allow him to understand a
proposition.

As I said before, I would appreciate any information regarding the verb
understand of the WH-word why.
LL Issue: 23.1110
Date posted: 05-Mar-2012



Back

Sums main page