An enticing view about explanation consists of two theses. First, there is the Relevance Thesis, the thesis that the truth of explanation sentences depends on a contextually selected relevance relation. The idea is that whether an utterance is true depends on what factors the context counts as relevant. Second, there is the Contrastivity Thesis, the thesis that the truth of explanation sentences depends on a contextually determined contrastive focus. This metalinguistic view is enticing, and elements of it have been defended by van Fraassen (1980), Woodward (1984), Schaffer (2005a; 2013), and others. Nevertheless, the enticing view is flawed; both the Contrastivity Thesis and the Relevance Thesis are mistaken.

中文翻译：

---

什么是解释的语用学？

关于解释的诱人观点包括两个论点。首先，存在关联命题，即解释语句的真伪取决于上下文选择的关联关系的命题。这个想法是，话语是否真实取决于上下文将哪些因素视为相关。其次，有对比论题，即解释句子的真实性取决于语境确定的对比焦点的论题。这种元语言观点很有吸引力，van Fraassen (1980)、Woodward (1984)、Schaffer (2005a; 2013) 和其他人都为其中的元素辩护。然而，诱人的观点是有缺陷的。对比论和关联论都是错误的。