Cover not available

In:Figurative Language – Intersubjectivity and Usage
Edited by Augusto Soares da Silva
[Figurative Thought and Language 11] 2021
► pp. 19–40

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Second-order empathy, pragmatic ambiguity, and irony

 | University of Leuven
Published online: 19 May 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.11.01gee
Abstract
If first-order empathy is the ability of Self to take into account Other’s point of view, second-order empathy may be defined as the ability of Self to take into account Other’s point of view as including a view of Self. The paper argues that the possibility for the hearer to choose between a first-order empathic and a second-order empathic interpretation of speaker utterances introduces a principled and pervasive indeterminacy in speaker-hearer interactions, illustrated with examples of referential ambiguity, speech-act-related ambiguity, and sociocommunicative ambiguity. With representative speech acts, the interaction of degree of empathy and convergence/divergence of beliefs yields six interpretative configurations: assertion, mistake, agreement, disagreement, irony, deception. Thus, irony finds a systematic position within a broader calculus of intersubjective interaction.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Demarcations
  • 3.Ambiguities
    • 3.1Referential ambiguity
    • 3.2Speech-act-related ambiguity
    • 3.3Sociocommunicative ambiguity
    • 3.4Non-verbal empathic ambiguity
  • 4.Representatives
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgement
  • References
References (52)
References
Arslan, B., Taatgen, N. A., & Verbrugge, R. (2017). Five-year-olds’ systematic errors in second-order false belief tasks are due to first-order theory of mind strategy selection: A computational modeling study. Frontiers in Psychology 8, 275. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barnden, J. (2017). Irony, pretence and fictively-elaborating hyperbole. In A. Athanasiadou, & H. L. Colston (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 145–178). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a ‘theory of mind’? Cognition, 21, 37–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bohn, M., & Köymen, B. (2018). Common ground and development. Child Development Perspectives, 12, 104–108. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brems, L., Ghesquière, L., & Van de Velde, F. (2012). Intersections of intersubjectivity. English Text Construction, 5, 1–6. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corballis, M. (2014). The recursive mind: The origins of human language, thought, and civilization. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dancygier, B., Lu, W., & Verhagen, A. (Eds.). (2016). Viewpoint and the fabric of meaning: Form and use of viewpoint tools across languages and modalities. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Jaegher, H., & Di Paolo, E. (2007). Participatory sense-making: An enactive approach to social cognition. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 6, 485–507. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeLancey, S. (1981). An interpretation of split ergativity and related patterns. Language, 57, 626–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Di Meola, C. (1994). Kommen und gehen: Eine kognitiv-linguistische Untersuchung der Polysemie deiktischer Bewegungsverben. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dunbar, R. (2000). On the origin of the human mind. In P. Carruthers (Ed.), Evolution and the human mind: Modularity, language and meta-cognition (pp. 238–253). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1966). Les mots et les choses. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fusaroli, R., Demuru, P., & Borghi, A. M. (Eds.) (2012). The intersubjectivity of embodiment. Thematic issue of Journal of Cognitive Semiotics, 4, 1–250.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gallagher, S. (2012). Phenomenology. Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D. (1985). Paradigm and paradox: Explorations into a paradigmatic theory of meaning and its epistemological background. Leuven: Universitaire Pers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1993). Vagueness’s puzzles, polysemy’s vagaries. Cognitive Linguistics, 4, 223–272. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D., & Grondelaers, S. (1995). Looking back at anger. Cultural traditions and metaphorical patterns. In J. Taylor, & R. E. MacLaury (Eds.), Language and the construal of the world (pp. 153–180). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geeraerts, D. (2016). The sociosemiotic commitment. Cognitive Linguistics, 27, 527–542. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grueneisen, S., Wyman, E., & Tomasello, M. (2015). “I know you don’t know I know…” Children use second-order false-belief reasoning for peer coordination. Child Development, 86, 287–293. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harder, P. (2010). Meaning in mind and society: A functional contribution to the social turn in Cognitive Linguistics. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaiser, E., Runner, J. T., Sussman, R. S., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2009). Structural and semantic constraints on the resolution of pronouns and reflexives. Cognition, 112, 55–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kempson, R. (1977). Semantic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kinderman, P., Dunbar, R., & Bentall, R. P. (1998). Theory-of‐mind deficits and causal attributions. British Journal of Psychology, 89, 191–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krebs, J. R., & Dawkins, R. (1984). Animal signals: Mind reading and manipulation. In J. R. Krebs, & N. B. Davies (Eds.), Behavioural ecology: An evolutionary approach (pp. 380–402). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kristiansen, G., & Dirven, R. (Eds.). (2006). Cognitive sociolinguistics: Language variation, cultural models, social systems. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinas, E. (1961). Totalité et infini : Essai sur l’extériorité. Paris: Le Livre de Poche.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S. (2003). Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meijering, B., van Rijn, H., Taatgen, N. A., & Verbrugge, R. (2011). I do know what you think I think: Second-order theory of mind in strategic games is not that difficult. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 2486–2491.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, S. A. (2012). Theory of mind: Beyond the preschool years. New York: Psychology Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morton, J. (1986). Developmental contingency modelling. A framework for discussing the processes of chang and the consequence of deficiency. Advances in Psychology, 36, 141–165. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Grady, C., Kliesch, C., Smith, K., & Scott-Phillips, T. C. (2015). The ease and extent of recursive mindreading, across implicit and explicit tasks. Evolution and Human Behavior, 36, 313–322. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Premack, D., & Woodruff, G. (1978). Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4, 515–526. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Preston, S. D., & De Waal, F. B. M. (2002). Empathy: Its ultimate and proximate bases. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 1–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1978). When is attribution of beliefs justified? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4, 592–593. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruthrof, H. (2015). Implicit deixis. Language Sciences, 47, 107–116. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saunders, G. (2013). Tenth of December. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Searle, J. R. (1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 5, 1–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. (1976). Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Robert M. W. Dixon (Ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages (pp. 112–171). Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, D. (2000). Metarepresentations in an evolutionary perspective. In D. Sperber (Ed.), Metarepresentations: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 117–137). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tobin, V., & Israel, M. (2012). Irony as a viewpoint phenomenon. In B. Dancygier, & E. Sweetser (Eds.), Viewpoint in language: A multimodal perspective (pp. 25–46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2008). Origins of human communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). A natural history of human thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Valle, A., Massaro, D., Castelli, I., & Marchettia, A. (2015). Theory of mind development in adolescence and early adulthood: The growing complexity of recursive thinking ability. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 11, 112–124. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verhagen, A. (2005). Constructions of intersubjectivity: Discourse, syntax, and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). Construal and perspectivization. In D. Geeraerts, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 48–81). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Grammar and cooperative communication. In E. Dąbrowska, & D. Divjak (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 232–252). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wellman, H. M., Cross, D., & Watson, J. (2001). Meta-analysis of theory of mind development: The truth about false belief. Child Development, 72, 655–684. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wimmer, H., & Perner, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition, 13, 103–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ziemke, T., Zlatev, J., & Frank, R. (Eds.). (2007). Body, language and mind 1: Embodiment. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zlatev, J. (2008). The co-evolution of intersubjectivity and bodily mimesis. In J. Zlatev, T. Racine, C. Sinha, & E. Itkonen (Eds.), The shared mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity (pp. 215–244). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zlatev, J., Racine, T., Sinha, C., & Itkonen, E. (Eds.). (2008). The shared mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Tabacaru, Sabina
2025. “That was really a productive segment, wasn’t it?” Nonverbal markers of humor in the American presidential debates of 2016 and 2020. Frontiers in Psychology 15 DOI logo
Expósito Ropero, Noé & Augusto Soares da Silva
2024. Phenomenology and cognitive linguistics in dialogue: A review of Ortega y Gasset's theory of emotive gesture as metaphor. The Southern Journal of Philosophy 62:3 ► pp. 374 ff. DOI logo
Winter-Froemel, Esme
2024.  Go home (6 Jan 2021). Lingvisticae Investigationes 47:2 ► pp. 315 ff. DOI logo
Brdar, Mario & Rita Brdar-Szabó
2022. Figurative thought and language research in the 21st century. In Figurative Thought and Language in Action [Figurative Thought and Language, 16], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Geeraerts, Dirk
2022. What does it mean to wear a mask?. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 20:1 ► pp. 70 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2023. Fictive questions in the Zhuangzi [Figurative Thought and Language, 18], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue