23.4501, Review: Discourse Analysis; Linguistic Theories; Semantics: Sequeiros (2012)

[linguist at linguistlist.org]

LINGUIST List: Vol-23-4501. Mon Oct 29 2012. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 23.4501, Review: Discourse Analysis; Linguistic Theories; Semantics: Sequeiros (2012)

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Eastern Michigan U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>

Reviews: Veronika Drake, U of Wisconsin Madison
Monica Macaulay, U of Wisconsin Madison
Rajiv Rao, U of Wisconsin Madison
Joseph Salmons, U of Wisconsin Madison
Anja Wanner, U of Wisconsin Madison
       <reviews at linguistlist.org>

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Do you want to donate to LINGUIST without spending an extra penny? Bookmark
the Amazon link for your country below; then use it whenever you buy from
Amazon!

USA: http://www.amazon.com/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-20
Britain: http://www.amazon.co.uk/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-21
Germany: http://www.amazon.de/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistd-21
Japan: http://www.amazon.co.jp/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlist-22
Canada: http://www.amazon.ca/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistc-20
France: http://www.amazon.fr/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=linguistlistf-21

For more information on the LINGUIST Amazon store please visit our
FAQ at http://linguistlist.org/amazon-faq.cfm.

Editor for this issue: Rajiv Rao <rajiv at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  


Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:30:02
From: Zhenqiang Fan [fanzhenqiangzju at gmail.com]
Subject: Linguistic Meaning and Non-Truth-Conditionality

E-mail this message to a friend:
http://linguistlist.org/issues/emailmessage/verification.cfm?iss=23-4501.html&submissionid=4556810&topicid=9&msgnumber=1
 
Discuss this message: 
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=4556810


Announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/23/23-1484.html 

AUTHOR: Xosé Rosales Sequeiros
TITLE: Linguistic Meaning and Non-Truth-Conditionality
SERIES TITLE: Contemporary Studies in Descriptive Linguistics Vol. 32
PUBLISHER: Peter Lang 
YEAR: 2012
 
Zhen-qiang Fan, Zhejiang Gongshang University, P. R. China
 	
SUMMARY

"Linguistic Meaning and Non-Truth-Conditionality" contributes to linguistic 
semantics by focusing on non-truth-conditional meaning within the framework of 
cognitive pragmatics and Relevance Theory (RT), in particular. It offers an in-depth 
analysis of a wide range of non-truth-conditional semantic phenomena, critically 
evaluates the main traditional approaches to these phenomena (e.g. Speech Act 
Theory and Gricean Pragmatics), points out the problems of earlier explanations, 
and provides a new interpretation on the basis of RT.
 
The book consists of 12 chapters grouped into three parts: Part I, Traditional 
approaches to non-truth-conditional meaning; Part II, New developments in 
linguistic semantics; and Part III, Applications of semantic theory to non-truth-
conditional meaning.
 
As the heading suggests, the first part explicates the distinction between truth-
conditional and non-truth-conditional meaning, introduces a variety of non-truth-
conditional phenomena and illustrates how main traditional approaches explain 
these phenomena, as well as problems encountered. The second part introduces 
the key concepts of RT, a cognition-based approach used to propose a new 
semantic and pragmatic account of non-truth-conditional meaning. Finally, the last 
part applies this new approach to various non-truth-conditional linguistic 
expressions and offers solutions to the problems faced by traditional accounts.
 
Chapter 1 is an introduction, which serves as a microcosm of the whole book. It 
previews the truth-conditional and non-truth-conditional distinction, surveys 
traditional approaches to non-truth-conditional meaning and the challenges it faces, 
and briefly introduces the core notions of RT, before finally showing the 
implications of the notions for the full range of non-truth-conditional linguistic 
expressions or constructions.
 
The second chapter firstly explicates a distinction between truth-conditional and 
non-truth-conditional aspects of meaning and justifies the significance of non-truth-
conditional meaning, i.e., the existence of non-truth-conditional linguistic 
expressions "are important because they seem to provide counterexamples to the 
claim that linguistic semantics can be accounted for in purely truth-conditional 
semantics" (p. 26), which is a theory of linguistic meaning that had been widely 
believed until the 1950s. Next, the author, in this chapter, examines a range of 
data that falls on the non-truth-conditional side of semantics. These data will be 
covered in subsequent chapters of the book, but include mood indicators, 
connectives, sentence adverbials, sentence/discourse particles, parentheticals, 
and injections. Notably, in presenting these linguistic data, the author also 
sketches two traditional accounts of these phenomena, i.e., Speech Act Theory 
and Gricean Pragmatics, which are dealt with specifically in the following two 
chapters. 

Chapter 3 deals with Speech Act Theory and its explanation of non-truth-
conditional meaning. Speech Act Theory claims that language can be used not 
only to describe states of affairs in the world but also to perform speech acts. 
There are two main versions within this framework: the pragmatic version believes 
that utterance interpretation lies in the hearer recognizing the speech act being 
performed; the semantic version holds that speech act information is encoded 
linguistically. The chapter concentrates on the second approach, which proposes 
that besides describing states of affairs or expressing truth-conditional meaning, 
an expression can indicate various aspects of non-truth-conditional meaning or 
propositional attitudes. This chapter utilizes this distinction to analyze mood 
indicators, sentence adverbials and parentheticals. Essentially, it argues that 
these expressions indicate or encode speech act information: mood indicators 
show what speech act is being performed; sentence adverbials indicate the 
speaker's attitude to the proposition expressed by an utterance; parentheticals are 
signals guiding the hearer to properly appreciate a statement in its social, logical, 
or evidential context. Moreover, the inadequacies of Speech Act Theory are also 
pointed out, e.g., the author questions the universality of the theory and lists 
numerous counterexamples (pp. 50-54) that go beyond the power of the theory.
 
The following chapter focuses on the Gricean framework and its key notion of the 
conventional implicature. The author argues that there is a parallelism between 
saying and conventionally implicating, a distinction made by Grice, and describing 
and indicating, a distinction made in Speech Act Theory. The difference is that the 
former concentrates on connectives while the latter centers around illocutionary 
aspects of meaning. Similar to the account offered by Speech Act Theory, Grice, 
in explaining connectives, argues that "connectives are non-truth-conditional 
speech act indicators….and that their function is to indicate to the hearer the type 
of speech act being performed by the speaker in a given situation" (p. 74). By 
challenging Grice's view that all connectives are non-truth-conditional and using 
truth-conditional tests, this chapter points out that some connectives, like 
"therefore", contribute to the truth conditions of the utterance in which they appear. 
This raises doubts about applying Grice's theory to the analysis of connectives as 
a whole.
 
In view of the above-mentioned inadequacies of Speech Act Theory and the 
Gricean model and their neglect of the cognitive processes involved in describing 
and indicating, the second part of the book (Chapters 5 & 6) introduces two key 
theoretical distinctions made in RT. Chapter 5 discusses the first distinction, i.e., 
two basic types of meaning that can be encoded linguistically: conceptual and 
procedural meaning. Cognitively speaking, conceptual meaning is related to 
representational content, whereas procedural meaning involves computational 
information. It is argued that the former "involves concept and contributes to truth-
conditional content" (p. 104), while the latter involves procedures and "can provide 
an alternative way of accounting for non-truth-conditional meaning" (p. 104). 
Specifically, based on concrete examples, the author shows that the role of 
procedure-encoding linguistic expressions, such as pragmatic connectives (e.g. 
"and", "but"), is to "constrain and help the search for the intended interpretation by 
guiding the hearer towards the relevant contextual assumptions and resulting 
cognitive effects" (p. 91). In other words, these expressions serve as constraints 
on the relevance of the utterance in which they are contained by signaling the 
direction toward which the hearer should search for implicatures in the utterance 
interpretation process. At the end of the chapter, the author doubts whether a 
conceptual/procedural distinction can account for all non-truth-conditional 
expressions in the same way, given the diversity of these expressions. To help 
solve this problem, the second distinction of explicitness and implicitness in 
communication is elaborated in Chapter 6.
 
On the basis of various types of non-truth-conditional expressions, in Chapter 6, 
Sequeiros challenges the view that equates explicitness with linguistic encoding 
and implicatures with inference. This view is endorsed by Speech Act theorists but 
is not compatible with Grice's view. According strictly to Grice's notion of "what is 
said", some amount of pragmatic inference is allowed in explicit communication. 
With examples such as ellipsis and ambiguous utterances, Sequeiros points out 
that the Speech Act approach is problematic because, according to Grice's 
analysis, elliptical or ambiguous utterances also involve pragmatic inference. 
Moreover, with mood indicators and propositional-attitude involving utterances as 
counterexamples, Sequeiros indicates that the Gricean model is not sufficient to 
account for all non-truth-conditional phenomena. Then, Sequeiros introduces an 
alternative approach in RT, which redefines the notion of implicitness by loosening 
and expanding it to include inference. The expanded notion of explicature 
"subsumes the range of pragmatic enrichment processes that are necessary in 
order to enable the hearer to go from the logic form, which is encoded linguistically 
by the sentence, to the propositions expressed" (p. 118), and also "subsumes the 
process of embedding the proposition expressed within a speech act or 
propositional-attitude description" (p. 118). Simply put, "explicature" involves 
encoding and inference, whereas "implicature" only involves inference. Finally, the 
author argues that explicitness is a matter of degree, i.e., the more decoding 
involved, the more explicit communication is, and conversely, the more inference 
engaged, the less explicit communication is. 
 
The new approach elaborated in Part II (i.e. the combination of the two distinctions: 
conceptual/procedural and explicature/implicature) is put to the test in the third part 
of the book through application to various data. Chapter 7 focuses on adverbials 
and parentheticals. It is argued that adverbials and parentheticals contribute to 
higher level explicatures, which are part of the explicit side of communication. 
Furthermore, truth-conditionality, scope, and compositionality tests tell us that 
adverbials and parentheticals encode concepts instead of procedural information. 
Notably, in terms of conditionality, it is discovered that some adverbials (e.g. 
illocutionary) are non-truth-conditional, while others (e.g. evidential) are truth-
conditional. This chapter also addresses issues related to the format and functions 
of adverbials and parentheticals. 
 
Chapter 8 deals with discourse and pragmatic connectives, presenting two main 
approaches to these phenomena. Firstly, the Gricean and Discourse Coherence 
approach conceive of connectives as conventional implicatures involving the 
performance of two speech acts: a ground floor and a higher order speech act. 
According to this conception, connectives are part of higher level explicatures, 
encoding conceptual content and contributing to an explicature. In contrast, the RT 
approach views connectives as encoding procedural meaning and contributing to 
implicature. Next, the inadequacy of the Gricean approach is analyzed and the 
advantage of the RT approach is demonstrated. Then, some outstanding problems 
are discussed, i.e., the issue of the embedding of connectives, the existence of 
some truth-conditional connectives and the definition of connectives in procedural 
terms. Finally, some tentative solutions to these problems are provided.
 
Chapter 9 targets the issue of why, within the same category of expressions (such 
as connectives), some items contribute to truth-conditions while others to 
implicatures. The author offers an account based on procedural meaning. Starting 
with pronouns, this chapter proposes (being truth-conditional and contributing to 
propositions) that they encode procedural meaning rather than concepts and that 
they function as constraints on the direction for the hearer to find the referent 
intended. Other categories of expressions, such as demonstratives and indexicals, 
can be analyzed along similar lines. It is also mentioned that particles and 
interjections make the same contributions to explicatures. More specifically, these 
expressions encode procedural information that constrains the inferential process 
used in the construction of explicatures; either the proposition expressed or higher 
level explicatures. 
 
Chapters 10 & 11 examine mood: Chapter 10 presents more general aspects of 
mood and a detailed account of the imperative mood; Chapter 11 specifically 
scrutinizes the interrogative mood. In order to explain mood indicators in terms of 
the RT notions of propositional attitudes, procedural meaning and explicit 
communication (i.e. mood indicators encode propositional attitudes instead of 
speech acts), another key distinction between descriptive and interpretative 
attitudes is introduced, which mirrors the distinction between descriptive and 
interpretative uses of language in RT. The former is about states of affairs in the 
world (descriptions), and the latter is about thoughts or utterances 
(representations). Hence, in declaratives and imperatives, mood indicators "are 
seen as encoding information about descriptive attitudes" (p. 203), whereas in 
interrogative and exclamative sentences, mood indicators "are seen as encoding 
information about interpretative attitudes" (p. 203). Focusing on descriptive 
attitudes and interpretative attitudes, respectively, the two chapters offer a detailed 
account of the various specific types of attitude involved.
 
Finally, the last chapter summarizes the conclusions drawn from each of the three 
parts of the book.
 
EVALUATION

The wide range of potential non-truth-conditional expressions has "been discussed 
widely in the literature, but often in a piecemeal fashion" (p. 26). This book brings 
them together and provides a unified model capable of accounting for the full range 
of non-truth-conditional phenomena while aiming for explanatory and descriptive 
adequacy. Its significance is twofold: on the one hand, it opens a coherent and 
unified new perspective to the diversity of non-truth-conditional linguistic 
expressions and constructions; on the other hand, and more importantly, it also 
demonstrates the explanatory power of the account offered by the RT framework 
by illustrating how RT solves the problems encountered by other approaches (e.g. 
Speech Act Theory, the Gricean model, and Discourse Coherence Theory) 
concerning non-truth-conditional meaning. This theory-oriented contribution can 
partially be revealed by the organization of the book, especially the third part. Part 
III is organized according to the theoretical distinctions made by RT, and some 
representative types of non-truth-conditional examples are employed to 
demonstrate how RT's explanation inherits insights from other approaches while 
also solving their problems. 
 
The book is well-structured and reader-friendly, following an introduction-
phenomena-theory-application-conclusion pattern. Besides the introductory chapter 
(Chapter 1), each chapter of the whole book also begins with a chapter 
introduction. In addition to the conclusions appearing at the end of each chapter, 
the book dedicates a whole chapter to present general conclusions (Chapter 12). 
That said, since the introduction in Chapter 1 functions as the general introduction 
to the whole book, I wonder why the author put this chapter within Part I instead of 
prior to it?
 
Another strength of the book is that, apart from using data from English, the author 
also draws upon many examples from Spanish that lend support to his views and 
reveal some new insights (e.g. the discussion on connectives on p. 100 and the 
analysis of interjections on p. 188).
 
The book brings up many challenging issues for further research with regard to the 
RT-based new framework developed, and some of the issues are tentatively 
addressed (e.g. Chapter 8, see the above summary). Moreover, there are many 
questions left unanswered. For instance, Chapter 5 mentions groups of 
connectives whose function is to simply constrain the possibilities of 
interpretation. The group of "therefore", "so", "as a consequence", "consequently", 
"hence", "thus", and "thereupon" all indicate sequence; similarly, expressions like 
"however", "nonetheless", "but", "and", "also", and "besides" seem to perform very 
similar functions despite their different forms (p. 98). The author explains their 
differences in terms of the fact that their roles intersect rather than totally overlap. 
However, the author still does not justify in detail why they play similar roles (when 
their roles intersect), i.e., there are different expressions displaying similar roles 
(e.g. both "also" and "too" may trigger parallel processing of different parts of the 
representation in which they occur (p. 99)). Also, we may wonder whether the 
conceptual/procedural distinction is mutually exclusive. To put it another way, is it 
possible for the same linguistic expression to encode both conceptual and 
procedural meaning? Researchers interested in the answer to this question can 
refer to Miri Hussein (2008).

Although the book covers numerous non-truth-conditional types, we might still ask: 
Are there more types of non-truth-conditional expressions available? Can they be 
explained adequately by the new model developed in the book? Will there be new 
issues? The answer to these questions seems to be affirmative, and for more 
information, please refer to Miri Hussein (2008; 2009).
 
There are also some very minor bugs related to typos. For example, on p. 110, 
"rather implicitly" appears in lieu of "rather than implicitly"; on p. 102, the definite 
"the" is missing in "in third part of the book", and a similar mistake can be found in 
"in second part of the book" on p. 235; moreover, on p.85, "such those mentioned 
above" appears in lieu of  "such as mentioned above". However, these minor bugs 
do not detract from the book's coherence and readability.
 
Overall, this book is a valuable resource and highly recommended to researchers 
and novices in the fields of cognitive linguistics, cognitive science, philosophy of 
language, philosophy of the mind, pragmatics, and discourse analysis.

REFERENCES

Hussein, M. 2008. The truth-conditional/non-truth-conditional and 
conceptual/procedural distinctions revisited. Newcastle Working Papers in 
Linguistics 14. 61-80. 

Hussein, M. 2009. Relevance Theory and Procedural Meaning: The Semantics and 
Pragmatics of Discourse Markers in English and Arabic. PhD Thesis. Newcastle 
University (England).

ABOUT THE REVIEWER 

Fan Zhen-qiang is a lecturer in linguistics at Zhejiang Gongshang 
University in Hangzhou, China. He obtained his doctoral degree at the 
Center for the Study of Language and Cognition, Zhejiang University, 
China. In 2008, he was a visitor at the Utrecht Institute of Linguistics (Uil-
Ots), Utrecht University, the Netherlands. His research interests lie in the 
areas of cognitive linguistics, pragmatics and discourse analysis. 






----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-23-4501	
----------------------------------------------------------