Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Publisher Login

New from Cambridge University Press!

ad

Voice Quality

By John H. Esling, Scott R. Moisik, Allison Benner, Lise Crevier-Buchman

Voice Quality "The first description of voice quality production in forty years, this book provides a new framework for its study: The Laryngeal Articulator Model. Informed by instrumental examinations of the laryngeal articulatory mechanism, it revises our understanding of articulatory postures to explain the actions, vibrations and resonances generated in the epilarynx and pharynx."


New from Oxford University Press!

ad

Let's Talk

By David Crystal

Let's Talk "Explores the factors that motivate so many different kinds of talk and reveals the rules we use unconsciously, even in the most routine exchanges of everyday conversation."



E-mail this page

We Have a New Site!

With the help of your donations we have been making good progress on designing and launching our new website! Check it out at https://linguistlist.org/!
***We are still in our beta stages for the new site--if you have any feedback, be sure to let us know at webdevlinguistlist.org***

Dissertation Information


Title: Contraintes de pertinence et compétence énonciative. L'image du possible dans l'interlocution. Add Dissertation
Author: Francois Nemo Update Dissertation
Email: click here to access email
Homepage: http://www.univ-orleans.fr/lettres/departements/SDL/?page=14
Institution: École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, EHESS, PhD in Linguistics
Completed in: 1992
Linguistic Subfield(s): Pragmatics;
Director(s): François Recanati
Oswald Ducrot
Alain Berrendonner
Pierre Encrevé

Abstract: The idea that saying would be ruled by general pragmatic principles is not giving any clue when the diversity of utterance-types is to be accounted for. But in order to study this diversity, and for instance that we can say things which are not informative at all (but are argumentative or directive) but are still relevant, we need to ask the same question, i.e. the question of their relevance to all types of utterances, and compare the answers. It is shown here that beyond this diversity, what makes an utterance different from a proposition is that it associates a proposition with a modal frame. In other words, that utterances are saying something simultanesously about what is the case and what is not the case. It is shown then that the different types of utterances are building different modal frames, i.e images of what is possible, and specific descriptions are made to describe the conditions of relevance of argumentative utterances, performative (directive) utterances, informative utterances, etc.