The application of Causal Implication Theory: Study of conversational implicature taken as an example

Expand

Online published: 2021-09-30

Abstract

One of the important means of humanities innovation is the transformation of theory through interdisciplinary research. In this paper, Causal Implication Theory is used instead of implication theory, which carries paradoxes of implication, is the transformation of the research horizon, the transformation of theory, thus forming a new starting point of theoretical thinking. While paradoxes of implication gives rise to uncertainty of the inference mechanism of Grice’s and Neo-Grice’s, Causal Implication Theory stresses the specific causal relationship in one specific event, which is constrained by certain context and the speaker’s orientation, thus bringing about specific result out of the specific reason. In other words, one result corresponds exactly to one reason, thus Causal Implication Theory bringing certainty to the inference mechanism to such an extent that implication. In so doing, the old topic, the study of conversational implicature, is given new vitality.

Cite this article

XU Shenghuan, LIU Qian . The application of Causal Implication Theory: Study of conversational implicature taken as an example[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2021 , 21(3) : 5 -20 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2021.03.001

References

[1] Burks A. 1977. Chance Cause Reason[M]. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
[2] Grice P. 1957. Meaning[J]. The Philosophical Review 66(3):377-388.
[3] Grice P. 1961. The causal theory of perception[A]. In T.Bever,J.Katz & D.Langemdoen (eds.) Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume 35[C]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 121-168.
[4] Grice P. 1975. Logic and conversation[A]. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (eds.). Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts [C]. New York: Academic Press. 41-58.
[5] Kant I. 1929. Critique of Pure Reason (trans.by N. K. Smith ) [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[6] Levinson C. S. 1991. Pragmatic reduction of the binding conditions revisited[J]. Journal of Linguistics 27(1):107-161.
[7] Levinson S. C. 1983. Pragmatics [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[8] Wilson, D., & D. Sperber. 2004. Relevance theory[A]. In G. Ward & L. Horn (eds.). Handbook of Pragmatics[C]. Oxford: Blackwell. 607-623.
[9] 戴维森. 1998. 真理与意义[A].马蒂尼奇.语言哲学(牟博、杨音莱、韩林合等译)[C]. 北京: 商务印书馆. 127-151.
[10] 刘邦凡, 王磊. 2013. 科学、哲学与认知融合视域下的因果陈述逻辑[J]. 哲学研究 (12):114-118.
[11] 塞拉斯. 2017. 经验主义与心灵哲学(王玮译)[M]. 上海: 复旦大学出版社.
[12] 习近平. 2016. 在哲学社会科学工作座谈会上的讲话(2016-5-17)[N]. 人民日报 (5-19):002.
[13] 习近平. 2018. 在中国科学院第十九次院士大会、中国工程院第十四次院士大会上的讲话(2018-5-28)[N]. 人民日报 (5-29):002.
[14] 徐盛桓. 2015. 因果蕴涵与婉曲话语的生成[J]. 外语教学与研究 (3):323-332.
[15] 徐盛桓. 2018. 精巧的语言,有意味的形式——汉语谜语语言研究[J]. 外语教学与研究 (4):483-494.
[16] 徐盛桓. 2021. 交叉学科研究视域下理论概念的移用与发展——语言学科理论创新探究之一[J]. 天津外国语大学学报 (1):1-13.
[17] 徐盛桓, 华鸿燕. 2020. 直陈式含义和回会话式含义[J]. 浙江外国语学院学报 (4):1-8.
[18] 徐盛桓, 王艳滨. 2021. 语言运用中的不连续现象——量子思维与语言研究之二[J]. 外语教学 (3):8-13.
Outlines

/