Phatic interpretations: standarisation and conventionalisation

This paper builds on work by Zegarac and Clark (Zegarac and Clark, forthcoming; Zegarac, in press) on phatic communication. Zegarac and Clark define phatic interpretations as interpretations which depend on the recognition of a communicative intention (as defined by Sperber and Wilson 198...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nicolle, Steve, Clark, Billy
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Universidad de Alicante 1998-11-01
Series:Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses
Online Access:https://raei.ua.es/article/view/1998-n11-phatic-interpretations-standarisation-and-conventionalisation
id doaj-0f93d7c642904d30b4059a2ad18311f5
record_format Article
spelling doaj-0f93d7c642904d30b4059a2ad18311f52020-11-25T03:54:40ZengUniversidad de AlicanteRevista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses0214-48082171-861X1998-11-011118310.14198/raei.1998.11.144536Phatic interpretations: standarisation and conventionalisationNicolle, SteveClark, Billy This paper builds on work by Zegarac and Clark (Zegarac and Clark, forthcoming; Zegarac, in press) on phatic communication. Zegarac and Clark define phatic interpretations as interpretations which depend on the recognition of a communicative intention (as defined by Sperber and Wilson 1986 and exploited in their definition of ostensive communication). This definition does not link phatic interpretations directly to social functions but does reflect the fact that phatic interpretations have social effects. The social effects follow from the fact that any act of ostensive communication is, by definition, social. Zegarac discusses how phatic interpretations become standardised and conventionalised. Here we explore the processes of standardisation and conventionalisation in more detail. A first glance at the phenomena suggests an interesting paradox. When a particular linguistic form becomes so frequently linked with phatic interpretations that this usage becomes conventionalised, Zegarac and Clark's definition seems to predict that utterances containing that form will no longer give rise to phatic interpretations (because the interpretation will depend on the linguistically-encoded meaning rather than on the recognition of a communicative intention). We consider an alternative approach to that proposed by Zegarac, which exploits the relevance-theoretic notion of procedural encoding. We show how such an approach might lead to the modification of a prediction of Zegarac and Clark, i.e. the claim that purely phatic interpretations arise only when non-phatic interpretations are not consistent with the principle of relevance.https://raei.ua.es/article/view/1998-n11-phatic-interpretations-standarisation-and-conventionalisation
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Nicolle, Steve
Clark, Billy
spellingShingle Nicolle, Steve
Clark, Billy
Phatic interpretations: standarisation and conventionalisation
Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses
author_facet Nicolle, Steve
Clark, Billy
author_sort Nicolle, Steve
title Phatic interpretations: standarisation and conventionalisation
title_short Phatic interpretations: standarisation and conventionalisation
title_full Phatic interpretations: standarisation and conventionalisation
title_fullStr Phatic interpretations: standarisation and conventionalisation
title_full_unstemmed Phatic interpretations: standarisation and conventionalisation
title_sort phatic interpretations: standarisation and conventionalisation
publisher Universidad de Alicante
series Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses
issn 0214-4808
2171-861X
publishDate 1998-11-01
description This paper builds on work by Zegarac and Clark (Zegarac and Clark, forthcoming; Zegarac, in press) on phatic communication. Zegarac and Clark define phatic interpretations as interpretations which depend on the recognition of a communicative intention (as defined by Sperber and Wilson 1986 and exploited in their definition of ostensive communication). This definition does not link phatic interpretations directly to social functions but does reflect the fact that phatic interpretations have social effects. The social effects follow from the fact that any act of ostensive communication is, by definition, social. Zegarac discusses how phatic interpretations become standardised and conventionalised. Here we explore the processes of standardisation and conventionalisation in more detail. A first glance at the phenomena suggests an interesting paradox. When a particular linguistic form becomes so frequently linked with phatic interpretations that this usage becomes conventionalised, Zegarac and Clark's definition seems to predict that utterances containing that form will no longer give rise to phatic interpretations (because the interpretation will depend on the linguistically-encoded meaning rather than on the recognition of a communicative intention). We consider an alternative approach to that proposed by Zegarac, which exploits the relevance-theoretic notion of procedural encoding. We show how such an approach might lead to the modification of a prediction of Zegarac and Clark, i.e. the claim that purely phatic interpretations arise only when non-phatic interpretations are not consistent with the principle of relevance.
url https://raei.ua.es/article/view/1998-n11-phatic-interpretations-standarisation-and-conventionalisation
work_keys_str_mv AT nicollesteve phaticinterpretationsstandarisationandconventionalisation
AT clarkbilly phaticinterpretationsstandarisationandconventionalisation
_version_ 1724472314403225600