Analytic languages and their function. (7)

[David Tuggy]

It could perhaps be defined as "what the speaker and listeners think the 
utterance would mean to other people, apart from the particular 
context". At least I judge that's what most people mean when they say 
"that word(/phrase/etc.) means X". I.e. it is the conventional meaning.

--David Tuggy

Salinas17 at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 5/29/06 9:19:41 PM, lise.menn at colorado.edu writes:
> << very often it is necessary to be carefully agnostic on the issue of what a 
> child's utterance means in itself, as opposed to what the child means by 
> saying it.  >>
>
> Let's start with two categories of "meaning":
> -- what an utterance means to the speaker
> -- what an utterance means to the listener(s)
>
> Somehow, we've got a third kind of meaning described here -- 
> "what a child's utterance means in itself, as opposed to what a child means 
> by saying it"
>
> What makes us think there is such a thing as "what an utterance means in 
> itself"?
>
> Regards
> Steve Long
>
>
>