Questions Under Discussion and the Semantics/Pragmatics Divide
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10691146 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jumbly Grindrod (0000-0001-8684-974X, University of Reading), Emma Borg (0000-0003-2725-9568, University of Reading) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 69 |
| Issue | 275 |
| Pages | 418-426 |
| Publication date | 2019-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Philosophical Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0031-8094 • E-ISSN: 1467-9213 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/pq/pqy058 |
| OpenAlex | W2905988837 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 10 |
| References cited | 8 |
The ‘question under discussion’ (or ‘QUD’) framework is a pragmatic framework that draws on work in the semantics of questions to provide an appealing account of a range of pragmatic phenomena, including the use of prosodic focus in English and restrictions on acceptable discourse moves. More recently, however, a number of proposals have attempted to use the framework to help to settle issues at the semantics/pragmatics boundary, fixing the truth-conditions of what is said by a speaker (which many theorists take to be a semantic matter). In this discussion piece, we suggest that this kind of putative extension of the work to be done by the QUD framework is illegitimate, as the framework ultimately seems to depend on a prior grip on semantic content. To see this, we first outline the QUD framework and then raise our concern.
Epistemology · Extension (predicate logic) · Focus (optics) · Linguistics · Pragmatics · Programming language · Semantics (computer science) · Computer Science · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies · Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation · Philosophy
Metaphor and contextual coherence
Meaning and responsibility
Are utterance truth-conditions systematically determined
A defense of QUD reasons contextualism
Common ground and the presuppositions of questions
Pragmatic Particularism
The “All Lives Matter” response
On what is said and asked
Knowing more (about questions)
Inquisitive injustice
| Unique citing works | 10 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 2 |
| Citation span | 2021 - 2026 (6) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 10 |