Causality and Connectives -- Editorial page -- Title page -- LCC data -- Table of contents -- Acknowledgements -- Causal expression -- 1.1. Introduction -- 1.2. Cohesion, coherence and relevance -- 1.2.1 The functional approach -- 1.2.2 Ethnography of communication -- 1.2.3 The domain-oriented approach -- 1.2.4 The psycholinguistic approach -- 1.2.5 From the pragmatic to the cognitive pragmatic approach -- 1.3. Causality and connectives -- Causality and implicature -- 2.1. Introduction -- 2.2. Notion of implicature vs. notion of 'what is said' -- 2.3 Conversational implicature and the tests of detachability/cancellability -- 2.4. Grice and causal connectives -- 2.5. Particularized implicature and causal meaning -- 2.6. Generalized implicature and causal meaning -- 2.7. Conventional implicature and causal meaning -- 2.8. Explanatory interpretation of because as a conventional implicature -- 2.9. Inferential interpretation of because as a conventional implicature -- 2.10. Cancelling causal meaning -- 2.11. Detaching causal meaning -- 2.12. A truth-conditional approach to causal conjunctions -- 2.13. More problems with the Gricean framework: The notion of 'saying' -- 2.13.1 Kent Bach's account -- 2.13.2 Shortcomings of Bach's account -- 2.14. More problems with the Gricean framework: The case of epeiδi and γiati -- Introduction to Modern Greek causal connectives -- 3.1. Introduction -- 3.2. Tracing the history of the connectives -- 3.3. A brief descriptive account -- 3.4. Background building -- 3.5. Corpus analysis -- The Sweetserean approach -- 4.1. The domain-oriented approach to causality -- 4.2. The framework -- 4.3. Causality -- 4.4. The case of epeiδi and γiati -- 4.4.1 Problems with the case of γiati -- 4.5. Conclusion -- Relevance theory -- 5.1. Introduction to relevance -- 5.1.1 Utterance interpretation.

5.2. Conceptual and procedural meaning -- 5.3. Saying and implicating distinction -- Causality and relevance -- 6.1. Introduction to causality and relevance -- 6.2. Towards a characterization of conceptual and procedural encoding -- 6.3. Procedural meaning and discourse connectives -- 6.4. A procedural view of causal markers -- 6.4.1 Enriching the definition of procedural meaning -- 6.4.2 Causal markers and base-order explicatures -- 6.4.3 Causal markers and higher-order explicatures -- 6.5 A conceptual view of causal markers -- 6.5.1 Meaning relations -- 6.5.2 More on the conceptual view of causal markers -- 6.5.3 Truth conditional meaning and discourse markers -- 6.5.3.1 A truth-conditional view of conceptual causal markers -- 6.6. Basic findings -- 6.7. Lexical pragmatics -- 6.8. Further remarks on the conceptual or procedural view of epeiδi and γiati -- 6.9. Other uses of epeiδi -- 6.9.1 Pre-posed epeiδi -- 6.9.1.1 Pre-posed epeiδi: The data -- 6.9.1.2 Epeiδi: Further considerations -- 6.10. Discourse markers and (non-)propositional meaning -- 6.11. Metacommunicative causality -- Conclusions -- References -- Index.

The book explores finely-grained distinctions in causal meaning, mostly from a relevance-theoretic perspective. To increase the challenge of this double task, i.e. a thorough as well as satisfactory account of cause and a detailed assessment of the theoretical model employed to this end, the current study involves an investigation carried out by way of contrasting the prototypical causal exponents of Modern Greek subordination, i.e. epeiδi and γiati. In addition, this objective is achieved in the methodological framework of contrasting a range of contextual applications of the two connectives against their translated versions in English, realizable by means of because. Despite first impressions, a closer observation of the wide range of applications of these markers in the discourse of coherence relations illustrates divergences in their distribution, which, in turn, are taken to highlight differing aspects of causal interpretation. The proposal for the relevance-theoretic model emanates from a reaction to an array of problems undermining traditional tenets of pragmatic theory originating with Grice's stance, but is also made in response to the common practice in pragmatic research (since its origin) to pay low regard for the contribution of typical causal markers to debates aiming at the determination of the distinction that has been instrumental to issues of cognition and pragmatic interpretation, i.e. propositional vs. non-propositional meaning.

Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.

Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, 2018. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries.