Search Results

sign of a future one; and it may ⟦be⟧ asked, how can a future event explain a present one? In answer to this, one must say that we certainly do say such things as “the rope creaked because it was about the break”, “His voice grew faint because he was about to die.” Such utterances may or may not

In: International Review of Pragmatics

exaggerated mocking tone of voice, among others. Third proposal : Recanati’s (2007) account goes some way towards explaining how the pretence of F puts us in the mind of G. For Recanati, the pretence in irony amounts to shifting the actual context c —in which the speaker U, in uttering S , performs

In: International Review of Pragmatics

—the opposite of what she has made as if to say. In later work (Grice, 1967b/89: 53–54), Grice noted that irony is connected with the expression of a negative attitude, and he also mentioned that there might be an ironic tone of voice. Grice’s account is essentially a reconstruction of the classical and pre

In: International Review of Pragmatics

published in 1969, with Chomskyan type generative grammar in the background constituting the mainstream of research in linguistics at the time, with generative semantics voicing critical thinking over strict and narrow syntactocentrism, how you view the now 50 year old development of research in speech act

In: International Review of Pragmatics

reference to the elements they index, as Wilkins ( 1992 , 1995) proposes. 4. Interjections seem to be halfway between the natural and the linguistic. Like other paralinguistic elements such as grimaces, gestures or tones of voice, they retain their naturalness and can be used to communicate pro- vided there

In: International Review of Pragmatics

ere is now a shift of genre: “Wait a minute. Haven’t we heard this before? Of course we have”. Th is is a simulated dialogue between reader and writer, and one marker of the associated shift in social relations, and so identities and style, is the inclusive “we” attributed to both “voices” in the

In: International Review of Pragmatics

quantitative account of the data should also be able to display the diff erences by observing how linguistic features work.) However, there were times when individual voices criticised the government for not reporting the seriousness of the situation. An NST news excerpt (33) below is one such case. (33) Keep

In: International Review of Pragmatics

.g., females) affirm a side of their self that is hardly possible to reveal in real public spaces. In these emerging virtual spaces, women have the opportunity to make their voices heard and through making linguistic choices freely, they can reveal who they really are and what they really think

In: International Review of Pragmatics

fields. For one, the interpretation of the evidence from other fields may be itself be uncertain. And even when solid comparative anchors are available, we must always be aware of the uniqueness of our own data set and allow it to have its own voice. And yet, there is much to be said for

In: The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Study of the Humanities

) answer VK values are voice key times for question answering. 108 M. Garrett and R.M. Harnish / International Review of Pragmatics 1 (2009) 84–117 was compared for the two contexts. Th ose times were similar and did not dif- fer statistically for enabling and cancelling contexts, suggesting comparable

In: International Review of Pragmatics