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
1. Introduction
2. Grice’s theory
3. Use-theories of meaning
4. Truth-condition theories
5. Conclusion
Objectives & Key Themes
This paper examines Paul Grice's philosophical framework regarding sentence-meaning and speaker-meaning, contrasting it with use-theories of language and evaluating its compatibility with truth-conditional semantics.
- Analysis of Grice's reductive project regarding linguistic meaning and psychological states.
- Comparative study of Wittgenstein’s and Sellars’ use-theories of language.
- Evaluation of the relationship between linguistic expression, intention, and truth conditions.
- Investigation into the potential synthesis of Gricean theory with truth-conditional semantics.
Excerpt from the Book
Grice’s theory
As mentioned, I will first refer to the second stage of Grice’s theory. Even if it seems confusing at first glance, I will explain later why I do so. The plausible approach of speaker-meaning has its being in intentions, intended future beliefs and states ofrecognition.6 Not by being an expression, which “expresses” a proposition, but more actually and verbatim by the expression of a concrete intention or idea of the person who uses it, a linguistic expression has meaning according to Grice. The idea of speaker-meaning or “utterer’s meaning” as introduced by Grice consists of what the speaker intends to convey to a listener, of his communicative intention, when pronouncing a particular sentence on a particular occasion. By the fact that speakers do not always mean what their sentences linguistically mean by default, Grice makes a distinction between the sentence’s standard meaning and the outlined speaker meaning. That is the reason why I start the dissection with speaker meaning, respectively the second stage theory. What Grice here offers is a detailed analysis concerning the speakers’ beliefs,
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Outlines the basic understanding of sentences as signs and introduces the three primary philosophical approaches: Gricean, use-theories, and truth-conditional semantics.
Grice’s theory: Details Grice's psychological reduction of sentence-meaning to speaker-meaning and the role of communicative intentions in conveying information.
Use-theories of meaning: Explores the Wittgensteinian and Sellarsian views that emphasize language as a social practice governed by rules rather than abstract objects.
Truth-condition theories: Discusses the Davidsonian approach to meaning based on truth conditions and assesses the possibility of integrating it with Gricean theory.
Conclusion: Summarizes the systematic nature of Grice’s work and reflects on the potential for linking disparate theories of language.
Keywords
Grice, Speaker-meaning, Sentence-meaning, Use-theory, Wittgenstein, Sellars, Truth-conditional semantics, Davidson, Intentions, Psychology, Philosophy of language, Linguistic expression, Proposition, Social practices, Inference.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary subject of this academic paper?
The paper explores the philosophy of language, specifically focusing on how meaning is generated and interpreted through different theoretical lenses, including Grice’s theory, use-theories, and truth-conditional semantics.
What are the central thematic areas covered?
The themes include the psychological roots of meaning, the distinction between literal sentence-meaning and speaker-meaning, language as a social behavior, and the logical conditions for truth.
What is the main objective or research question?
The objective is to explain Grice’s notion of sentence-meaning, contrast it with use-theories, and determine if these theories can be reconciled with truth-conditional semantics.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The work utilizes a comparative analytical method, dissecting primary philosophical concepts and evaluating their theoretical compatibility through logical argument and example-based analysis.
What is discussed in the main body of the paper?
The main body examines Grice’s two-stage reduction of meaning, the contrasting social-behavioral views of Wittgenstein and Sellars, and the possibility of fusing Davidson’s truth-conditional program with Gricean principles.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include Grice, speaker-meaning, sentence-meaning, use-theories, Wittgenstein, Sellars, and truth-conditional semantics.
How does Grice define the difference between speaker-meaning and sentence-meaning?
Grice distinguishes between the standard linguistic definition of a sentence and the speaker’s communicative intention, which is the specific belief they intend to convey to an audience.
What is the "soldier example" used to illustrate in the text?
The soldier example illustrates that, for Grice, successful communication does not necessarily require the listener to be familiar with established "rules of the game" or formal syntax, but rather to recognize the speaker's intention.
- Citation du texte
- Inken Bräger (Auteur), 2020, About Grice’s notion of sentence-meaning and how it contrasts with speaker-meaning, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/535377
