Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Peter Kirk" <Peter_Kirk AT sil.org>]

Thank you, Rolf. Well, if semantic meaning is defined as that which is
uncancellable, at least I can accept the first part of Grice's principle,
that "semantic meanings may not be canceled without contradiction..." I have
to; it is no longer either an assertion or a definition, it is a tautology.
I will leave Randall to answer for himself as to what he makes of this.

Peter Kirk

----- Original Message -----
From: Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>
To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 7:15 AM
Subject: Re: vayyiqtol, assumption-rolf


<snip>
>
> I am not sure about the difference between "assertion" and "definition" in
> relation to pragmatics versus semantics, so I would just call Grice's
> dictum a principle. It simply outlines a method to find the difference
> between "semantic meaning" and "conversational pragmatic implicature".
> Regarding definition, I would give the following one: "Semantic meaning"
is
> uncancelable but "conversational pragmatic implicature" is cancelable.
>
<snip>