When we ask ourselves what sentences are, we conclude that they are types of signs and sounds. So-to-say individual signs and sounds that are executed by people in different situations for a specific purpose, usually for communication.
According to Grice, we express our opinion, a wish or intention with the goal of the desired reaction. Therefore, he believes that the meaning of the sentence is rooted in the mental and suggests that it needs to be explained in terms of the psychological states of the individual human being. This might be no less than the reduction of linguistic meaning to psychology. For that in terms of describing Grice’s reductive project, the focus is on the explication of sentence meaning in psychological terms. According to him, it proceeds in two importantly different stages: In the first stage, Grice attempts to reduce sentence meaning to speaker-meaning. The second stage contains, his try to reduce speaker-meaning to a complex of psychological states, concentrating on a type of intention.
In contrast to Grice, there are two kinds of well-known “use” theories: The Wittgensteinian view and Wilfrid Sellars’ Inferentialism. According to these languages and linguistic expressions are neither bloodless abstract objects nor do they have lives on their own. Wittgenstein argued that “words and sentences are more like game pieces or tokens, used to make moves in rule-governed conventional social practices” and Sellars view centralizes the complexity of patterns of inference.
Already with this short overview, it has become clear in which manifold theories try to explain theoretically how the meaning of languages comes about. Therefore, the following elaboration is divided into various sub-areas. First Grice’s second stage theory, the speaker-meaning, will be explained in detail, before sentence-meaning, as the first stage theory, will be associated. Contrasts will be evinced, before use theories come into play, also by their distinction to Grice’s theory. The last investigation will be if either Grice’s theory or a use theory of meaning can be squared with truth-conditional semantics. After I have explained why I see a stronger connection between Grice’s theory and the truth-conditional semantics, I will conclude the elaboration with a summary.
Table of Contents
- Introduction
- Grice's theory
- Speaker-meaning
- Sentence-meaning
- Use-theories of meaning
- Truth-condition theories
- Conclusion
Objectives and Key Themes
This text examines the notion of sentence-meaning and its relation to speaker-meaning, as defined by philosopher Paul Grice. The work contrasts Grice's theory with use-theories of meaning, and explores whether either can be reconciled with truth-conditional semantics.
- Grice's theory of sentence-meaning and speaker-meaning
- Comparison of Grice's theory with use-theories of meaning
- Examination of the compatibility of Grice's theory and use-theories with truth-conditional semantics
- Analysis of the psychological and social aspects of language use
- Exploration of the philosophical foundations of meaning and communication
Chapter Summaries
The introduction sets the stage by discussing the nature of sentences as signs and sounds used for communication. It introduces Grice's perspective on sentence meaning as rooted in mental states and his two-stage approach to reducing sentence meaning to speaker-meaning and then to psychological states.
The section on Grice's theory delves into the second stage, speaker-meaning, explaining how it is based on intentions, beliefs, and recognition. It highlights the distinction between sentence meaning and speaker meaning, emphasizing that speakers may not always mean what their sentences literally express. The analysis focuses on the components of speaker-meaning, including the speaker's intention to form a belief in the listener, the intention that the listener recognizes this intention, and the intention that the belief is formed partly due to the recognition of the original intention. The chapter also addresses objections to Grice's theory, particularly the case of soliloquy, and provides Grice's response regarding a hypothetical audience.
Moving on to the first stage of Grice's theory, the text discusses sentence-meaning and its relation to speaker-meaning. It examines Grice's argument that sentence-meaning is a function of individual speaker-meaning and that the meaning of utterances can be analyzed in terms of speakers' intentions. It explores how the analysis can overcome obstacles posed by the stubborn refusal of sentences to cooperate with speaker-meaning.
The section on use-theories of meaning introduces the Wittgensteinian view and Wilfrid Sellars' Inferentialism, both of which contrast with Grice's theory. These theories emphasize the social and conventional aspects of language, viewing words and sentences as tools used in rule-governed practices.
Keywords
The main keywords and focus topics of this text include: sentence-meaning, speaker-meaning, Paul Grice, use-theories of meaning, Wittgensteinian view, Wilfrid Sellars' Inferentialism, truth-conditional semantics, communication, intention, psychological states, linguistic meaning.
- Quote paper
- Inken Bräger (Author), 2020, About Grice’s notion of sentence-meaning and how it contrasts with speaker-meaning, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/535377
