Диссертация (1137652), страница 21
Текст из файла (страница 21)
266–278.135. Kasher A. Conversational Maxims and Rationality // Language infocus: Foundations, methods and systems / ed. A. Kasher. Dordrecht:Springer Netherlands, 1975. P. 197–216.136. Katsos N. The semantics/pragmatics interface from an experimentalperspective: the case of scalar implicature // Synthese. 2007. Vol. 165, №3. P. 385–401.137. Keenan E.O.
The universality of conversational postulates //Language in Society. 1976. Vol. 5, № 01. P. 67–80.138. Kleinke S. Speaker activity and Grice’s maxims of conversation atthe interface of Pragmatics and Cognitive Linguistics // Journal ofPragmatics. 2010. Vol. 42, № 12. P. 3345–3366.139. Komter M.L. Conflict and Cooperation in Job Interviews: A study oftalks, tasks and ideas (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series). Amsterdam;Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1991.145140. Kreuz R.J., Long D.L., Church M.B. On Being Ironic: Pragmatic andMnemonic Implications // Metaphor and Symbolic Activity. 1991.
Vol. 6,№ 3. P. 149–162.141. Ladegaard H.J. Pragmatic cooperation revisited: Resistance andnon-cooperation as a discursive strategy in asymmetrical discourses //Journal of Pragmatics. 2009. Vol. 41, № 4. P. 649–666.142. Lakoff R.T. The Logic of Politeness, or, Minding Your P's and Q's //Papers from the 9th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society.Chicago, 1973. P. 292-305.143. Language, Games, and Evolution: Trends in Current Research onLanguage and Game Theory / eds. A.
Benz, C. Ebert , G. Jäger , R. vanRooij. Dordrecht: Springer, 2011.144. Lee H.-K. Presupposition and implicature under negation // Journalof Pragmatics. 2005. Vol. 37, № 5. P. 595–609.145. Leech G.N. Principles of Pragmatics. L.: Longman, 1983.146. Levinson S.C. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of GeneralizedConversational Implicature. Cambridge MA; L.: A Bradford Book, 2000.147. Lewis D. Convention.
Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press,1969.148. Lindblom K. Cooperating with Grice: a cross-disciplinarymetaperspective on uses of Grice’s cooperative principle // Journal ofPragmatics. 2001. Vol. 33, № 10. P. 1601–1623.149. Mann A.L., Sandu G., Sevenster M. Independence-Friendly Logic: AGame-Theoretic Approach (London Mathematical Society Lecture NoteSeries).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.150. Mayol L., Castroviejo E.
How to cancel an implicature // Journal ofPragmatics. 2013. Vol. 50, № 1. P. 84–104.151. McBurney P., Parsons S. Retraction and Revocation in AgentDeliberation Dialogs // Argumentation. 2007. Vol. 21, № 3. P. 269–289.152. McLaughlin M.L. Conversation: How Talk Is Organized. L.: SAGEPublications, 1984.153. Meaning and Analysis: New Essays on Grice (Palgrave Studies inPragmatics, Language and Cognition) / ed. Petrus K.
Basingstoke: PalgraveMacmillan, 2010.154. Meibauer J. Lying and falsely implicating // Journal of Pragmatics.2005. Vol. 37, № 9. P. 1373–1399.155. Mooney A. Co-operation, violations and making sense // Journal ofPragmatics. 2004. Vol. 36, № 5. P.
899–920.156. Norrick N.R. Issues in conversational joking // Journal of Pragmatics.2003. Vol. 35, № 9. P. 1333–1359.157. Novaes Dutilh C. Formal Languages in Logic: A Philosophical andCognitive Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.146158. Noveck I.A., Reboul A. Experimental pragmatics: a Gricean turn inthe study of language. // Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2008. Vol. 12, №11. P. 425–431.159. Oberlander J. Do the Right Thing ... but Expect the Unexpected //Computational Linguistics.
1998. Vol. 24, № 3. P. 501–507.160. Optimality Theory and Pragmatics / eds. R. Blutner, H. Zeevat.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.161. Parikh P. A Game-Theoretic Account of Implicature // TARK.Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 1992. P. 85–94.162. Parikh P. Communication and strategic inference // Linguistics andPhilosophy. 1991. Vol. 14, № 5.
P. 473–514.163. Parikh P. Communication, meaning, and interpretation // Linguisticsand Philosophy. 2000. Vol. 23, № 2. P. 185–212.164. Parikh P. Language and Equilibrium. Cambridge MA; L.: The MITPress, 2010.165. Parikh P. Radical Semantics: A New Theory of Meaning // Journalof Philosophical Logic. 2005. Vol. 35, № 4. P. 349–391.166. Partee B.H. The semantics of belief-sentences // Approaches tonatural language. 1973. P.
309–336.167. Peregrin J. The Use-Theory of Meaning and the Rules of OurLanguage Games // Making Semantics Pragmatic / ed. K. Turner. Bingley:Emerald, 2011. P. 183–204.168. Pfister J. Is there a need for a maxim of politeness? // Journal ofPragmatics. 2010. Vol. 42, № 5. P. 1266–1282.169. Pietarinen A.-V. Games as formal tools versus games as explanationsin logic and science // Foundations of Science. Kluwer AcademicPublishers, 2003. Vol.
8, № 4. P. 317–364.170. Pietarinen A.-V.A. Semantic Games in Logic and Epistemology //Logic Epistemology and the Unity of Science / ed. Rahman S. et al.Springer Netherlands, 2004. Vol. 1. P. 1075–1076.171. Pitts A. Exploring a “Pragmatic Ambiguity” of Negation //Language. 2011. Vol. 87, № 2. P. 346–368.172. Potts C. The Logic of Conventional Implicatures. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 2005.173. Presupposition and Implicature in Compositional Semantics(Palgrave Studies in Pragmatics, Language and Cognition). Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.174.
Radical Pragmatics / ed. P. Cole. N. Y.: Academic Press, 1981.175. Romoli J. A scalar implicature-based approach to neg-raising //Linguistics and Philosophy. 2013. Vol. 36, № 4. P. 291–353.176. Ros I. Say What? A Game-Theoretic Approach to theSaid/Implicated Distinction // Making Semantics Pragmatic / ed.K. Turner.. Bingley: Emerald, 2011. P.
205–226.147177. Rubinstein A. Economics and Language: Five Essays. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2000.178. Rubinstein A. Why are certain properties of binary relationsrelatively more common in natural language? // Econometrica. 1996. Vol.64, № 2. P. 343–355.179. Sauerland U., Stateva P. Presupposition and Implicature inCompositional Semantics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.180. Saul J. What Is Said And Psychological Reality; Grice’s Project AndRelevance Theorists' Criticisms // Linguistics and Philosophy.
2002. Vol.25, № 3. P. 347–372.181. Saul J.M. What Is Said And Psychological Reality; Grice’s ProjectAnd Relevance Theorists' Criticisms // Linguistics and Philosophy. 2002.Vol. 25, № 3. P. 347–372.182. Sbisà M. After Grice: Neo- and Post-perspectives // Journal ofPragmatics. 2006. Vol. 38, № 12. P. 2223–2234.183. Schoolfield M.D. Rationality and Conversation: A Thesis on Grice’sTheory of Conversation. The University of Edinburgh, 2007.184. Sevenster M., Sandu G.
Equilibrium semantics of languages ofimperfect information // Annals of Pure and Applied Logic. 2010. Vol.161. P. 618–631.185. Shoham Y., Leyton-Brown K. Multiagent Systems: Algorithmic,Game-Theoretic, and Logical Foundations. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2008.186. Siegfried T.
A Beautiful Math: John Nash, Game Theory, and theModern Quest for a Code of Nature. Washington D.C.: Joseph HenryPress, 2006.187. Skyrms B. Signals: Evolution, Learning, and Information. Oxford;N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2010.188. Soames S. Drawing the Line Between Meaning and Implicature-andRelating Both to Assertion // Noûs. 2008. Vol.
42, № 3. P. 440–465.189. Spence M. Job Market Signaling // The Quarterly Journal ofEconomics. 1973. Vol. 87, № 3. P. 355–374.190. Spencer C. Do Conversational Implicatures Explain SubstitutivityFailures? // Pacific Philosophical Quarterly. 2006. Vol. 87, № 1. P. 126–139.191.
Sperber D., Wilson D. Irony and the use-mention distinction //Radical pragmatics / ed. Cole P. N. Y.: Academic Press, 1981. P. 295–318.192. Stalnaker R. Belief revision in games: forward and backwardinduction // Mathematical Social Sciences. 1998. Vol. 36, № 1.
P. 31–56.193. Stalnaker R. Context and Content: Essays on Intentionality in Speechand Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.194. Stalnaker R. Extensive and strategic forms: Games and models forgames // Research in Economics. 1999. Vol. 53, № 3. P. 293–319.148195. Stalnaker R. Knowledge, Belief and Counterfactual Reasoning inGames // Economics and Philosophy. 2008.
Vol. 12, № 02. P. 133-163.196. Stalnaker R. Pragmatics // Synthese. 1970. Vol. 22, № 1-2. P. 272–289.197. Stalnaker R. Semantics for belief // Philosophical Topics. 1987. Vol.15, № 1. P. 177–190.198. Talmage C.J.L. Literal meaning, conventional meaning and firstmeaning // Erkenntnis. 1994. Vol. 40, № 2. P. 213–225.199. The Oxford Handbook of Compositionality. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 2012.200. Tokarz M.
Non-axiomatizability of Grice’s implicature // StudiaLogica. 1994. Vol. 53, № 2. P. 343–349.201. van Rooij R., Jager T. Explaining Quantity Implicatures // Journal ofLogic, Language and Information. 2012. Vol. 21, № 4. P. 461–477.202. van Benthem J. Games in Dynamic-Epistemic Logic // Bulletin ofEconomic Research. 2001. Vol. 53, № 4. P. 219–248.203. van Benthem J. Logical dynamics of information and interaction.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.204.
van Benthem J., van Rooij R. Connecting the Different Faces ofInformation // Journal of Logic, Language and Information. 2003. Vol. 12,№ 4. P. 375–379.205. van Rooij R. Attitudes and Changing Contexts. Dordrecht: Springer,2006.206. van Rooij R. Comparing questions and answers: A bit of logic, a bitof language, and some bits of information // Formal Theories ofInformation. 2009.207. van Rooij R. Cooperative versus argumentative communication //Philosophia Scientia.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
