TY - GEN
T1 - Immediate and general common ground
AU - Berio, Leda
AU - Latrouite, Anja
AU - Van Valin, Robert
AU - Vosgerau, Gottfried
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Springer International Publishing AG 2017.
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - The traditional literalism account of meaning has been challenged by several theories that stress the importance of context and of contextual information in communication, especially for mechanisms of meaning determination and reference fixing. However, the role of lexical meaning in such contextualist accounts often remains only vaguely defined. In this paper, we defend an account of communication that keeps the advantages of contextualist theories, while a new element is introduced that we claim could help to solve some of the remaining issues. By differentiating Immediate and General Common Ground in communication, we draw a distinction between mechanisms related to the situation at hand and those concerned with world and language knowledge. We further argue that such a distinction can help to understand cases of loose use and metaphors of which we provide some examples. Finally, we claim that this distinction has grammatical reality, as it is shown by the examples from Lakhota (North America), Umpithamu (Australia), Kuuk Thaayorre (Australia) and Mongsen Ao (India) discussed in the paper.
AB - The traditional literalism account of meaning has been challenged by several theories that stress the importance of context and of contextual information in communication, especially for mechanisms of meaning determination and reference fixing. However, the role of lexical meaning in such contextualist accounts often remains only vaguely defined. In this paper, we defend an account of communication that keeps the advantages of contextualist theories, while a new element is introduced that we claim could help to solve some of the remaining issues. By differentiating Immediate and General Common Ground in communication, we draw a distinction between mechanisms related to the situation at hand and those concerned with world and language knowledge. We further argue that such a distinction can help to understand cases of loose use and metaphors of which we provide some examples. Finally, we claim that this distinction has grammatical reality, as it is shown by the examples from Lakhota (North America), Umpithamu (Australia), Kuuk Thaayorre (Australia) and Mongsen Ao (India) discussed in the paper.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85020882255
U2 - 10.1007/978-3-319-57837-8_51
DO - 10.1007/978-3-319-57837-8_51
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85020882255
SN - 9783319578361
T3 - Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)
SP - 633
EP - 646
BT - Modeling and Using Context - 10th International and Interdisciplinary Conference, CONTEXT 2017, Proceedings
A2 - Penco, Carlo
A2 - Brezillon, Patrick
A2 - Turner, Roy
PB - Springer Verlag
T2 - 10th International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context, CONTEXT 2017
Y2 - 20 June 2017 through 23 June 2017
ER -