Assertion: concept's evaluation | /r/HasProperty | conveyed by t-utterances
Facets:
value: normally
type: DEGREE
value: as speaker meanings
type: MANNER
value: as presuppositions
type: MANNER
Source sentences:
text: The view that the evaluations normally conveyed by T-utterances are conveyed by the same mechanism as semantic or truth-conditional content in general is, however, controversial.
text: A stronger challenge to the Semantic View is based on two more complex sets of linguistic data about thick terms: the evaluations normally conveyed by T-utterances seem to survive embedding in various complex sentences that usually block truth-conditional content, and those evaluations seem to be defeasible in ways that truth-conditional content isn’t.
text: Among writers on thick concepts, Allan Gibbard and Gopal Sreenivasan speak of the evaluations conveyed by T-utterances as presuppositions, but without developing the view in detail (Gibbard 1992; Sreenivasan 2001: 26).
text: If the evaluations normally conveyed by T-utterances were conventional implicatures (or semantic presuppositions, for that matter), then thick terms would be inherently evaluative in meaning, but not as a matter of truth-conditions.
text: The evaluations normally conveyed by T-utterances are also not as directly deniable as conversational implicatures: “I have to work, but I don’t mean to imply that I won’t be coming to the party” sounds perfectly fine, unlike the similarly direct denials in (1) and (2) above.
text: However, we have also seen worries about thinking that the evaluations normally conveyed by T-utterances are either presuppositions or conventional implicatures.
text: The pragmatic view developed by Pekka Väyrynen identifies a type of pragmatic content that projects and is defeasible but needn’t readily become mutually taken for granted by conversational participants to explain the evaluations normally conveyed by T-utterances.
text: The evaluations normally conveyed by T-utterances will be separable from thick terms in whatever way pragmatic not-at-issue implications are in general separable from the utterances that generate them.
text: The Pragmatic View is well suited to treating the evaluations normally conveyed by T-utterances as speaker meanings, especially if they are best explained by conversational mechanisms.