CONTEXT DYNAMICS 1: IS RELEVANCE SUBSCRIPTED ?

Yıl 2005, Sayı: 009, 203 - 208, 15.12.2005

C. Aksoy

Öz

It is generally assumed that a pragmatic proposition is formed by an utterance as relevant to some context. However, such assumptions may not yet be treated as scientific because operational definitions of the main concept "relevance" hardly exist, thus prone to circular definitions as "relevance of an utterance to a context exists whenever the utterance is relevant to the context", or "relevance exists whenever a relevance-theoretician says it exists" (to arrive at such inferences, please see [1], the book that marks the birth of the literary hypothesis of relevance). This theoretical vulnerability is probably due to the treatment of a context as invariant, and/or the belief that short-term memory can hold an infinite amount of propositions (some of which become inferences as a result of undefined procedures while some others remain as presuppositions), and/or the conception of an utterance as unitary and static following its onset in the hearer's mind, which is scientifically tolerable, because after listening to or reading out an utterance thoroughly and thinking about it for a period which an ordinary hearer/reader would unfortunately lack, the utterance could have a consolidated unitary episodic structure and the number of pertaining propositions could be easier to count, without the well-known limitations of short-term memory. Leaving such speculative and non-empirical deductions out of the discussion here, the utterance itself maybe considered as a token for context analysis by the hearer(s), as previously proposed [2, 3]; please also see [4]...

Anahtar Kelimeler

CONTEXT DYNAMICS

CONTEXT DYNAMICS 1: IS RELEVANCE SUBSCRIPTED ?

Öz

It is generally assumed that a pragmatic proposition is formed by an utterance as relevant to some context. However, such assumptions may not yet be treated as scientific because operational definitions of the main concept "relevance" hardly exist, thus prone to circular definitions as "relevance of an utterance to a context exists whenever the utterance is relevant to the context", or "relevance exists whenever a relevance-theoretician says it exists" (to arrive at such inferences, please see [1], the book that marks the birth of the literary hypothesis of relevance). This theoretical vulnerability is probably due to the treatment of a context as invariant, and/or the belief that short-term memory can hold an infinite amount of propositions (some of which become inferences as a result of undefined procedures while some others remain as presuppositions), and/or the conception of an utterance as unitary and static following its onset in the hearer's mind, which is scientifically tolerable, because after listening to or reading out an utterance thoroughly and thinking about it for a period which an ordinary hearer/reader would unfortunately lack, the utterance could have a consolidated unitary episodic structure and the number of pertaining propositions could be easier to count, without the well-known limitations of short-term memory. Leaving such speculative and non-empirical deductions out of the discussion here, the utterance itself maybe considered as a token for context analysis by the hearer(s), as previously proposed [2, 3]; please also see [4]...

Anahtar Kelimeler

CONTEXT DYNAMICS

Kaynakça

• [1] Sperber, D., D. Wilson, 1986.. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
• [2] Aksoy, C. 1995. "Dynamic context processing." Dilbilim Arastirmalari, 131-137.
• [3] Aksoy, C. 1996. "Baglam ogelerinin gecisim ozellikleri." Presentation at X. Turkish Symposium in Linguistics (in press), Izmir: Ege University.
• [4] Tucker, A. 2004. "Holistic Explanations of Events." Philosophy., 79:573-589.
• [5] Grossberg, S., 1980. "How does a brain build a cognitive code?" Psychological Review, 87:1-51.
• [6] Bennett, J., 2004. "Time in Human Experience." Philosophy. 2004, 79:165-183
• [7] Harrison, J., 2004. "The Logical Function of ‘That’, or Truth, Propositions and Sentences." Philosophy., 79:67-96
• [8] Talasli, U., 1984. "Proactive inhibition as a result of activation" Psychological Reports, 55: 363- 370.
• [9a] Aksoy, C., 1994. Inhibitory processes in verbal communication. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Ankara: Hacettepe University.
• [9b] Aksoy, C. , 1994. "The effect of partially relevant information on inferential localisation in decision dichotomies." Dilbilim Arastirmalari, 206-218.
• [10] Grossberg, S., Stone, R., 1986. "Neural dynamics of attention switching and temporal order information in working memory" Memory and Cognition, 14(6): 451-468.
• [11] McCarthy, J., 1987. "Circumscription: A form of non-monotonic reasoning." In Ginsberg, M.L. (ed.) Readings in non-monotonic reasoning. California, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 145-152.
• [12] Chomsky, N., 2005. "Simple Truths, Hard Problems: Some thoughts on terror, justice, and self-defence." Philosophy., 80:1:5-28
• [13] Lockie, R., 2004. "Knowledge, Provenance and Psychological Explanation." Philosophy., 79:421-433.