The processing of underspecified coherence relations

Bibliographic Data

ID11274178
AuthorsWilbert Spooren (0000-0002-2982-3970, Tilburg University, corresponding author)
Year1997
Volume24
Issue1
Pages149-168
Publication date1997-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueDiscourse Processes (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0163-853X • E-ISSN: 1532-6950
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/01638539709545010
OpenAlexW2016998601
LanguageEN
Citations received31
References cited18

One reason discourse coheres is because coherence relations such as Cause‐Consequence can be inferred between the sentences that function as the building blocks of the discourse. This article discusses cases in which the coherence relation remains underspecified: A connective is used that does not “literally” express the intended coherence relation. Underspecification has been dealt with in pragmatics and psycho‐linguistics. The purpose of this artice is to give an analysis of the phenomenon in pragmatic terms, as well as different strategies of how language users deal with these issues, phrased in terms of Horn's (1984) Q‐ and R‐principle. Apart from that, data from the psycholinguistic literature on the interpretation of underspecified relations and data from language acquisition research are presented that suggest that both speakers and hearers tend to be cooperative in using underspecified relations

Coherence (philosophical gambling strategy · Epistemology · Interpretation (philosophy · Linguistics · Natural language processing · Phenomenon · Pragmatics · Relation (database · Underspecification · Computer Science · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies · Language, Metaphor, and Cognition · Mathematics · Philosophy · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub