Abstract The semantic-pragmatic interface debate is about how much actual situational context the linguistic signs need in order for them to be meaningful in the communicative process. There is evidence that interlocutors in intercultural interactions rely more Some of the ideas in the paper are based on chapter six in Kecskes (2019). on the compositional meaning of linguistic signs (semantics) than contextually supported meaning (pragmatics) because actual situational context cannot help pragmatic implication and interpretation the way it does in L1 communication. At the same time in pragmatic theory there seems to be an agreement between the neo-Gricean account and the post-Gricean account on the fact that the process of implicature retrieval is context-dependent. But will this L1-based contextualism work in intercultural interactions? Is pragmatics impoverished if interlocutors can only partly rely on pragmatic enrichment coming from context and the target language? The paper argues that in fact pragmatics is invigorated rather than impoverished in intercultural communication. A new type of synchronic events-based pragmatics is co-constructed by interlocutors. Instead of relying on the existing conventions, norms and frames of the target language interlocutors create their own temporary frames, formulas and norms. There is pragmaticization of semantics which is a synchronic, (usually) one-off phenomenon in which coded meaning, sometimes without any specific pragmatic enrichment coming from the target language, obtains temporary pragmatic status. This pragmatic enrichment happens as a result of interlocutors’ blending their dictionary knowledge of the linguistic code (semantics) with their basic interpersonal communicative skills and sometimes unusual, not necessarily target language-based pragmatic strategies that suit them very well in their attempt to achieve their communicative goals.

中文翻译：

---

实用主义贫困吗？跨文化视角下的语义语用界面

摘要语义-语用界面的争论是关于语言符号需要多少实际的情境，以使其在交流过程中有意义。有证据表明，跨文化互动中的对话者更多地依赖论文中的某些观点，这些观点基于Kecskes（2019）的第六章。在语言符号（语义学）的构成意义上要比在上下文支持的意义（语用学）上重要，因为实际的情境并不能帮助语用暗示和解释它在第一级交流中的表现方式。同时，在实用主义理论中，新隐喻解释和后广义解释之间在隐含检索过程依赖于上下文这一事实上似乎达成了共识。但是这种基于L1的情境主义是否可以在跨文化互动中起作用？如果对话者只能部分依靠语境和目标语言的语用充实，那么语用学是否会贫困？该论文认为，实际上，在跨文化交流中，实用主义是充满活力的，而不是贫穷的。对话者共同构造了一种新型的基于同步事件的语用学。目标语言对话者的标准和框架不是依赖现有的约定，而是创建自己的临时框架，公式和规范。语义的语用化是一种共时（通常）的一次性现象，在这种现象中，编码的含义（有时没有来自目标语言的任何具体语用充实）获得暂时的语用状态。