We here assess Geurts’ proposal to understand the bulk of human communication in terms of commitments undertaken in the service of action coordination. Our main points are as follows: (i) Geurts’ criticism of intention-based accounts rests on an unduly narrow notion of intentional action and its interpretation, and thus attacks a straw version thereof; (ii) properly understood, Geurts’ view of communication as being primarily a matter of action coordination does not rule out the simple sharing of information as a case of action coordination. It is accordingly not clear what position his view is meant to challenge; (iii) there is an internal tension in his view of the status of psychological states: although Geurts claims to de-psychologize the explanation of implicature, that explanation cannot in fact eschew such states; (iv) the notion of consistency invoked in the elucidation of commitment is apparently too weak to do the explanatory work required of it; (v) Geurts’ characterization of commitment elides the distinctions among various types of commitment. Different members of what I have elsewhere called the assertive family, for instance, correspond to different kinds of commitment, but it is difficult to see how Geurts can accommodate those distinctions within his framework; (vi) his view likewise expands the notion of conversational implicature beyond recognition, entailing that one who asserts p conversationally implicates that p, and conversationally implicates that she believes that p.

中文翻译：

---

铺装言语天堂之前请三思

我们在此评估Geurts的建议，即根据为行动协调服务而做出的承诺来理解人类交流的主体。我们的主要观点如下：（i）Geurts对基于意图的陈述的批评基于对意图行为及其解释的过分狭义的理解，因此攻击了它的草率版本；（ii）正确理解，盖尔特斯的交流观点主要是行动协调问题，并不排除在行动协调情况下简单地共享信息。因此，不清楚他的观点打算挑战什么立场。（iii）他对心理状态的状态有一种内在的张力：尽管格尔茨声称对暗示的解释去了心理上的解释，但这种解释实际上不能避开这种状态；（iv）阐明承诺时援引的一致性概念显然太弱，无法进行要求的解释性工作；（v）Geurts的承诺特征消除了各种承诺类型之间的区别。例如，我在别处所谓的自信家庭的不同成员对应于不同类型的承诺，但是很难看到Geurts如何在他的框架内适应这些区别。（vi）他的观点同样扩大了对话含意的概念，使之超出了人们的认识范围，这意味着一个主张p的人在对话中暗示了p，而在对话中又暗示了她认为p。（v）Geurts的承诺特征消除了各种承诺类型之间的区别。例如，我在别处所谓的自信家庭的不同成员对应于不同类型的承诺，但是很难看到Geurts如何在他的框架内适应这些区别。（vi）他的观点同样扩大了对话含意的概念，使之超出了人们的认识范围，这意味着一个主张p的人在对话中暗示了p，而在对话中又暗示了她认为p。（v）Geurts的承诺特征消除了各种承诺类型之间的区别。例如，我在别处所谓的自信家庭的不同成员对应于不同类型的承诺，但是很难看到Geurts如何在他的框架内适应这些区别。（vi）他的观点同样扩大了对话含意的概念，使之超出了人们的认识范围，这意味着一个主张p的人在对话中暗示了p，而在对话中又暗示了她认为p。