Does Linguistic Communication Rest on Inference

By François Récanati. 2002

137 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Language and Linguistics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d79426687a0a13674a78a96d17a173df08e1772f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Daniel Sperber
2. Dorit Bar‐On
3. Deirdre Wilson
4. Robyn Carston
5. Elly Ifantidou
6. Dan Sperber
7. T. Wharton
8. Gerard Steen

In Language and Linguistics

1. Daniel Sperber
2. Dorit Bar‐On
3. Deirdre Wilson
4. Robyn Carston
5. Elly Ifantidou
6. Dan Sperber
7. T. Wharton
8. Gerard Steen

Citations in the corpus

• Origins of Meaning: Must We 'Go Gricean'? (2013, background): “…animals’ capacity to make inferences, but rather their capacity to make 10 For the relevant distinctions and a persuasive argument that, even in the case of linguistic communication, not all pragmatic, context-dependent recovery of content should be construed as inferential, see Recanati, 2002.”
• Relevance theory: A tutorial (2002, background): “For discussion, see Recanati (1995), Carston (1997, this volume, forthcoming), Sperber & Wilson (1998a), Wilson & Sperber (2002).”