Hearer’s Meaning 2.0
A reply to Li and Xie (2025)
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 19219945 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Marina Terkourafi (0000-0002-4400-9336, Leiden University, corresponding author), Maj-Britt Mosegaard Hansen (0000-0002-9522-591X, University of Manchester) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Volume | 261 |
| Pages | 4-18 |
| Publication date | 2026-05-08 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Pragmatics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0378-2166 • E-ISSN: 1879-1387 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.pragma.2026.04.007 |
| OpenAlex | W7160612465 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 28 |
In a recent Journal of Pragmatics paper, Li and Xie (2025) present a critique of Hansen and Terkourafi’s (2023) model of Hearer’s Meaning. The present paper replies to their critique. Unlike Li & Xie, who defend speaker intentions as ultimately determining meaning, we do not see such intentions as playing an independent role in utterance comprehension. Rather, considering intentions to be private mental states, we view hearer assumptions about the speaker’s intention as deriving from the six sources of meaning identified in our previous work, and therefore as theoretically redundant. We support our argument in three main ways. (1) Li & Xie do not present a viable alternative construal of the speaker’s intention that is not already covered in our model, and which could be accessed by the hearer directly so as to play an independent role in determining meaning. (2) Although the speaker’s utterance sets in motion processes of understanding, what proposition it ultimately expresses, and what action it ultimately performs, depend on the hearer’s interpretation and uptake. (3) Hearers routinely derive meaning from utterances produced without intention (by accident or by non-sentient entities). Acknowledging that closer attention to differences between hearer roles can usefully inform future elaboration of our model, we argue for the priority of Hearer’s Meaning in communication on the grounds that what determines meaning is not the speaker’s intention, but the inferences that a hearer draws from the speaker’s utterance. These, in a very real way, constitute the impact of the utterance on the world
Action (physics) · Argument (complex analysis) · Construal level theory · Interpretation (philosophy) · Meaning (existential) · Pragmatics · Proposition · Utterance · Multisensory perception and integration · Phonetics and Phonology Research · Sound Studies and Aurality
Understanding and sharing intentions
A tale of two intentions
The meanings of social meaning
On understandings of intention
Compliance‐gaining as a function of accent
Defending speaker intention in a model of the hearer's meaning
Listening in on monologues and dialogues
Dogmas of understanding
Billboards, bombs and shotgun weddings
Meaning
Utterer's Meaning and Intention
Intention and Convention in Speech Acts
Assembling human empathy towards care robots
The limits of meaning
Social meaning as Hearer's Meaning
Participation framework underlying YouTube interaction
Four forms of interactional indirection
Speaker meaning and accountability in interaction
"You talking to me?" The viewer as a ratified listener to film discourse
Abduction and identity in family interaction
We need to talk about Hearer's Meaning
Introduction
Speaking Only Your Own Mind
An Instance of Negotiation in a Call Closing
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |