PRAGMATICS

Cognitve Science 260

Fall Quarter, 2002

M/W 3-4:30 (may change to 2:30-4pm)

Instructor: Seana Coulson
Office: CSB 161
Office Phone: 534-7486
email: coulson@cogsci.ucsd.edu
Office Hours: F 8-10am and by appointment
Home Page: http://cogsci.ucsd.edu/~coulson/

Course Description

Pragmatics is the study of language in context. Exactly what "the study of language in context" really means will be a core issue in this seminar. Of course, one way to define pragmatics is to examine what people who claim to be studying pragmatics actually do. In linguistics and philosophy, this has typically involved topics such as deixis and indexical reference, presupposition, implicature, and speech acts. In psychology and cognitive neuroscience, this has involved studying figurative language comprehension in healthy adults and in neurologically impaired patients. In anthropology and sociology, this has involved microanalysis of the interactional basis of communicative activity. In this seminar, we will survey a number of traditional topics in pragmatics (i.e., deixis, speech acts, implicature, metaphor) from the perspecitive of linguistics, philosophy, psychology, sociology, and cognitive neuroscience and attempt to formulate and integrated cognitive science approach to pragmatics. Students are expected to do all readings on the syllabus, and to participate in class discussions. It is hoped that discussions in the seminar will lead to original research projects in pragmatics. Cognitive Science grads can receive either "brain" or "behavior" credit for this course.

Course Requirements

Class Participation: Participate in class discussions! As you do your readings for class, jot down a question or a comment (or two) about each article. If you don't get a chance to ask your questions or raise your issues in class, give your notes to Coulson so we can try to work it in next time.
Powerpoint-Style Presentations: To give you practice presenting complex material in a limited amount of time, each student will be required to do two 10-15 minute presentations of articles. For the presentation part, pretend that you are the author of the article and present it as clearly, concisely, and coherently as possible. (This may require omitting some of the material covered in the paper.) After your presentation, you will be responsible for leading a critical discussion of the paper, where you can be more objective and point to flaws you see in the paper.
Final Paper: Write a 10-page paper for Monday December 9, 2002 about a topic covered in the readings. The paper can be a "squib" in which you discuss pragmatic aspects of linguistic data, an analysis of a brief excerpt of communicative activity, a proposal for a behavioral experiment to investigate some aspect of pragmatic language comprehension, or a proposal for a cognitive neuroscience experiment (using neurologically impaired patients, or employing neuroimaging, MEG, or ERPs) to investigate some aspect of pragmatic language comprehension.

Recommended Texts

Coulson, Seana. (2000). Semantic Leaps: Frame-shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Green, Georgia. (1996). Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Week 1

What Is Pragmatics?

Monday September 30, 2002

Green, Georgia M. (1996). "What is pragmatics, and why do I need to know, anyway?" In Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 1-15.

Reddy, Michael. (1979). The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wednesday October 2, 2002

Gibbs, R.W., Jr. (1999). Interpreting what speakers say and implicate. Brain & Language 68: 466-485. PDF Version

Green, Georgia M. (1996). "Indexicals and anaphora: Contextually identifiable indeterminacies of reference" in Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 17-36.

Week 2

Semantics, Pragmatics, and Communication

Monday October 7, 2002

Green, Georgia M. (1996). "Reference and indeterminacy of sense" in Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 17-36.

Kaplan, David. (1978). Dthat. In Peter Cole (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics, volume 9. New York: Academic Press, 1978, pp. 221-253.

Sag, Ivan A. (1981). Formal semantics and extralinguistic context. In (Ed.) Peter Cole, Radical Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press, pp.273-294.

Wednesday October 9, 2002

Clark, Herbert H. (1997). Dogmas of understanding. Discourse Processes 23(3): 567-598.

Glenberg, Arthur M. & Robertson, David A. (1999). Indexical understanding of instructions. Discourse Processes 28(1): 1-26.

Goodwin, Charles. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32: 1489-1522. PDF Version

Week 3

Speech Acts

Monday October 14, 2002

Green, Georgia M. (1996). "Non-truth conditional meaning: interpreting the packaging of propositional content" in Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 65-87.

Austin, J.L. (1961). Performative utterances. In J.O. Urmson and G.J. Warnock, (Eds.) Philosophical Papers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 233-252.

Searle, John R. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, (Eds.) Syntax and Semantics, volume 3.New York: Academic Press, pp. 41-58.

Wednesday October 16, 2002

Gibbs, Raymond W. (1983). Do people always process the literal meanings of indirect requests? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 9(3): 524-533.

Holtgraves, Thomas. (1994). Communication in context: Effects of speaker status on the comprehension of indirect requests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 20(5): 1205-1218.

Brownell, H. & Stringfellow, A. (1999). Making requests: Illustrations of how right-hemisphere brain damage can affect discourse production. Brain & Language 68: 442-465. PDF Version

Week 4

Implicature

Monday October 21, 2002

Green, Georgia M. (1996). "Implicature" in Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 89-130.

Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, (Eds.) Syntax and Semantics, volume 3.New York: Academic Press, pp. 41-58.

Wilson, Deirdre & Sperber, Dan. In Press. Relevance theory. (In Press). In G. Ward and L. Horn (Eds.) Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Available on-line from: http://www.dan.sperber.com/relevance_theory.htm

Wednesday October 23, 2002

Gibbs, Raymond W., Jr. & Moise, Jessica. (1997). Pragmatics in understanding what is said. Cognition 62: 51-74. PDF Version

Gibbs, Raymond W., Jr. (1999). Speakers' intuitions and pragmatic theory. Cognition 69: 355-359. PDF Version

Kasher, A., Batori, G., Soroker, N. & Graves, D., & Zaidel, E. (1999). Effects of right- and left- hemisphere damage on understanding conversational implicatures. Brain & Language 68: 566-590. PDF Version

Week 5

Conversation

Monday October 28, 2002

Searle, John. (1992). Conversation. In (On) Searle on conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 7-30.

Levinson, Steven. (1983). "Conversational structure" In Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 284-370.

Goffman, Erving. (1981). Replies and responses. In Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 5-77.

Wednesday October 30, 2002

Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. & Jefferson, G. (1979). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language 50(4): 696-735.

Schegloff, Emannuel A. (1992). To Searle on conversation: A note in return. In (On) Searle on conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 113-128.

Goodwin, Marjorie Harness & Goodwin, Charles. (2000). Emotion within situated activity. In (Eds.) A. Duranti & M.A. Malden. Linguistic Anthropology: A Reader. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, pp. 239-257. (PDF is available)

Week 6

Metaphor

Monday November 4, 2002

Searle, John R. (1979). Metaphor. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.) Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 92-123.

Davidson, Donald. (1978). What metaphors mean. In Sheldon Sacks (Ed.), On Metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 29-46.

Coulson, Seana. (2000). "Conceptual blending in metaphor and analogy" in Semantic Leaps. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 162-201.

Wednesday November 6, 2002

Gibbs, Raymond W., Jr. (2002). A new look at literal meaning in understanding what is said and implicated. Journal of Pragmatics 34: 457-486. PDF Version

Coulson, S. & Van Petten, C. (2002, in press). "Conceptual integration and metaphor: An ERP Study" Memory & Cognition. PDF Version (accepted ms)

Bottini, G., Corcoran, R., Sterzi, R. Paulesu, E. et al. (1994). The role of the right hemisphere in the interpretation of figurative aspects of language: A positron emission tomography activation study. (NOT available on-line)

Week 7

Jokes

Monday November 11, 2002? (Veterans Day)

Chiaro, Delia. (1992). The Language of Jokes. London & New York: Routledge, pp. 4-16, 48-76,
100-121.

Coulson, Seana. (2000). "Frame-Shifting" in Semantic Leaps. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 31-114.

Wednesday November 13, 2002

Bihrle, A.M., Brownell, H.H., Powelson, J.A., & Gardner, H. (1986). Comprehension of humorous and nonhumorous materials by left and right brain-damaged patients. Brain & Cognition 5(4): 399-411. (not available on-line)

Shammi, P. & Stuss, D. (1999). Humour appreciation: A role of the right frontal lobe. Brain 122(2): 657-666. PDF Version

Goel, Vinod, & Dolan, Raymond J. (2001). The functional anatomy of humor: segregating cognitive and affective components. Nature Neuroscience 4(3): 237-238. (available on-line from ucsd library)

Week 8

Sarcasm

Monday November 18, 2002

Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deirdre. (1981). Irony and the use-mention distinction. In (Ed.) Peter Cole, Radical Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press, pp. 295-318.

Clark, Herbert H. (1995). "Layering" In Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.

Clift, Rebecca. (1999). Irony in conversation. Language in Society 28(4): 523-553. PDF Version

Wednesday November 20, 2002

Gibbs, Raymond W. (1995). Inferring meanings that are not intended: Speakers' intentions and irony comprehension. Discourse Processes 20(2): 187-203.

Kumon-Nakamura, Sachi, Glucksberg, Sam, & Brown, Mary. (1995). How about another piece of pie: The allusional pretense theory of discourse irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 124(1): 3-21.

McDonald, Skye. (1999). Exploring the process of inference generation in sarcasm: A review of normal and clinical studies. Brain & Languague 68: 486-506. PDF Version

Week 9

Prosody

Monday November 25, 2002

Cutler, Anne, Dahan, Delphine, & van Donselaar, Wilma. (1997). Prosody in the comprehension of spoken language: A literature review. Language and Speech 40(2): 141-201.

Clark, Herbert H. (2002). Speaking in time. Speech Communication 36: 5-13. (available on-line from UCSD library)

Schegloff, E. (1998). Reflection on studying prosody in talk-in-interaction. Language & Speech 41: 235-263.

Wednesday November 27, 2002 ? (Day Before Thanksgiving)

Baum, Shari R. & Pell, Marc D. (1999). The neural bases of prosody: Insights from lesion studies and neuroimaging . Aphasiology 13(8): 581-608. PDF Version

Ross, Elliott D., Thompson, Robin D., Yenkosky, Joseph. (1997). Lateralization of Affective Prosody in Brain and the Callosal Integration of hemispheric language functions. Brain & Language 56: 27-54. PDF Version

Week 10

Gesture

Monday December 2, 2002

McNeill, David. (1998). Speech and gesture integration. In Susan Goldin-Meadow & Jana M. Iverson (Eds.), The Nature and Functions of Gesture in Children's Communication. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, pp. 11-29.

Goldin-Meadow, Susan. (1999). The role of gesture in communication and thinking. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 3(11): 419-429. PDF Version

Kelly, S.D., Barr, D.J., Church, R.B., & Lynch, K. (1999). Offering a hand to pragmatic understanding: The role of speech and gesture in comprehension and memory. Journal of Memory and Language 40: 577-592. PDF Version

Wednesday December 4, 2002

Rizzolatti, Giacomo & Arbib, Michael. (1998). Language within our grasp. Trends in Neuroscience 21: 188-194. PDF Version

Hermsdorfer, J., Goldenberg, G., Wachsmuth, C., Conrad, B., Ceballos-Baumann, A.O., Bartenstein, P., Schwaiger, M. & Boeker, H. (2001). Cortical correlates of gesture processing: Clues to the cerebral mechanisms underlying apraxia during the imitation of meaningless gestures. Neuroimage 14: 149-161. PDF Version

Puce, Aina, Smith, Angela, & Allison, Truett. (2000). ERPs evoked by viewing facial movements. Cognitive Neuropsychology 17: 221-239. PDF Version

Final Exam Period

Monday December 9, 2002, 3-6PM

We will meet during the allotted time for our final exam to turn in final papers. Each student will give a brief presentation (about 10 minutes) on his or her project or proposal.