Affiliation:
1. Johannes Gutenberg University , Mainz , Germany
Abstract
AbstractIn the current debate on the lying-misleading distinction, many theorists distinguish between lying as insincere assertion and misleading through conveying an untruthful implicature. There is growing empirical evidence that average speakers count untruthful implicatures as cases of lying. What matters for them is the (degree) of commitment to an untruthful implicature. Since untruthful conversational implicatures may arise with non-assertions, and untruthful presuppositions are also judged as lying, a realistic conception of lying should aim at a definition of lying that it is able to cover these possibilities. Such a conception, which supports traditional assumptions about the semantics-pragmatics distinction, leads to a commitment-based definition of lying, as recently proposed by a number of authors.
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Communication,Language and Linguistics
Reference77 articles.
1. Adler, Jonathan E. 1997. Lying, deceiving or falsely implicating. The Journal of Philosophy XCIV. 435–452. https://doi.org/10.2307/2564617.
2. Adler, Jonathan E. 2018. Lying and misleading: A moral difference. In Eliot Michaelson and Andreas Stokke (eds.), Lying. Language, knowledge, ethics, and politics, 301–318. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Alston, William P. 2000. Illocutionary acts and sentence meaning. Ithaca, London: Cornell University Press.
4. Antomo, Mailin, Susanne Müller, Katharina Paul, Markus Paluch & Maik Thalmann. 2018. When children aren’t more logical than adults: An empirical investigation of lying by falsely implicating. Journal of Pragmatics 138. 135–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.09.010.
5. Ariel, Mira. 2002. Privileged interactional interpretations. Journal of Pragmatics 34. 1003–1044. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(01)00061-3.
Cited by
10 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献