Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton March 23, 2021

Functional logical semiotics of natural language

  • Joanna Odrowąż-Sypniewska EMAIL logo
From the journal Semiotica

Abstract

In the first part of my paper I briefly present Jerzy Pelc’s functional approach to logical semiotics of natural language. This approach focuses on the use of natural language expressions and on its dependence on context and conversational situation. One of the important goals of this analysis is to appreciate the role of sentences in natural language and stress that it is by means of sentences that language fulfills its main roles. However, for Pelc almost any expression can be used as a sentence, despite not being a grammatical sentence. In the second part I try to place Pelc’s standpoint within the framework of contemporary semantic minimalism – contextualism debate. I pay special attention to his treatment of subsentential expressions used to express propositions and argue that his view belongs to pragmatics-oriented approaches to subsentential speech acts.


Corresponding author: Joanna Odrowąż-Sypniewska, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland, E-mail:

Funding source: National Science Centre, Poland

Award Identifier / Grant number: UMO-2014/15/B/HS1/00171 (OPUS 8)

References

Corazza, Eros. 2011. Unenriched substentential illocutions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 83. 560–580. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2011.00528.x.Search in Google Scholar

Devitt, Michael. 2018. Sub-sententials: Semantics or pragmatics? In Alessandro Capone, Marco Carapezza & Franco Lo Piparo (eds.), Further advances in pragmatics and philosophy, 45–64. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-72173-6_3Search in Google Scholar

Elugardo, Reinaldo & Robert J. Stainton. 2004. Shorthand, syntactic ellipsis, and the pragmatic determinants of what is said. Mind and Language 19(4). 442–471. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0268-1064.2004.00268.x.Search in Google Scholar

Kaplan, David. 1989. Demonstratives. In Joseph Almog, John Perry & Howard Wettstein (eds.), Themes from Kaplan, 481–563. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

King, Jeffrey C. & Jason Stanley. 2005. Semantics, pragmatics, and the role of semantic content. In Jason Stanley (ed.), Language in context, 133–181. Oxford: Clarendon Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199251520.003.0005Search in Google Scholar

Merchant, Jason. 2004. Fragments and ellipsis. Linguistics and Philosophy 27. 661–738.10.1007/s10988-005-7378-3Search in Google Scholar

Merchant, Jason. 2010. Three kinds of ellipsis: Syntactic, semantic, pragmatic? In François Recanati, Isidora Stojanovic & Neftalà Villanueva (eds.), Context-dependence, perspective, and relativity, 141–192. Berlin: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Odrowąż-Sypniewska, Joanna. 2012. Kontekstualizm i wyrażenia nieostre. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Semper.Search in Google Scholar

Odrowąż-Sypniewska, Joanna. 2017. Are there any subsentential speech acts? Studia Semiotyczne – English Supplement 29. 248–271.Search in Google Scholar

Pelc, Jerzy. 1967. Funkcjonalne podejście do semiotyki logicznej języka naturalnego. Studia Filozoficzne 2(49). 109–134.Search in Google Scholar

Pelc, Jerzy. 1971a. Studies in functional logical semiotics of natural language. Berlin: Mouton.10.1515/9783110828375Search in Google Scholar

Pelc, Jerzy. 1971b. O użyciu wyrażeń. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy Imienia Ossolińskich.Search in Google Scholar

Perry, Jerzy. 1986. Thought without representation. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes 60. 137–151. https://doi.org/10.1093/aristoteliansupp/60.1.137.Search in Google Scholar

Quine, Willard Van Orman. 2013. Word & object. Cambridge: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9636.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Recanati, François. 2004. Literal meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511615382Search in Google Scholar

Soames, Scott. 1986. Incomplete definite descriptions. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 27. 349–375. https://doi.org/10.1305/ndjfl/1093636680.Search in Google Scholar

Stainton, Robert J. 2006a. Words and thoughts: Subsentences, ellipsis, and the philosophy of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199250387.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Stainton, Robert J. 2006b. Neither fragments nor ellipsis. In Ljiljana Progovac, Kate Paesani, Eugenia Casielles-Suarez & Ellen Barton (eds.), The Syntax of nonsententials: Multidisciplinary perspectives, 93–116. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.93.06staSearch in Google Scholar

Stanley, Jason. 2000. Context and logical form. Linguistics and Philosophy 23. 391–434. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1005599312747.10.1023/A:1005599312747Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2020-01-23
Accepted: 2021-01-20
Published Online: 2021-03-23
Published in Print: 2021-05-26

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 29.3.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/sem-2020-0006/html
Scroll to top button