Article published In: Pragmatics
Vol. 10:2 (2000) ► pp.233–245
Communicated and non-communicated acts in relevance theory
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 1 June 2000
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.10.2.04nic
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.10.2.04nic
According to relevance theory (Sperber and Wilson 1986; Blakemore 1991) some cases of communication depend on the hearer recognising that a particular speech act, for example admitting, betting or promising, is being performed. These are ‘communicated’ acts. Other cases of communication do not depend on the hearer recognising that a particular speech act, for example predicting, warning or permitting, is being performed. These are ‘non-communicated’ acts. In the case of non-communicated acts communication is successful so long as the hearer recovers adequate contextual effects without having to recognise the speaker’s intentions. Against this view, I will argue that each of the speech acts considered to be non-communicated in the relevance theory literature fall into one of two categories. The speech acts in one category contribute to the strength of associated assumptions, and those in the other convey socially relevant information. I will argue that according to relevance theory both types of speech act must be recognised and that they are in fact communicated. If relevance theory is to be internally consistent, therefore, the distinction between communicated and non-communicated speech acts must be abandoned.
Keywords: Performative, Speech act, Non-communication, Communication, Relevance theory
References (24)
Andersen, G., and T. Fretheim (in press) (eds.) Pragmatic markers and propositional attitude. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Arundale, R.B. (1999) An alternative model and ideology of communication for an alternative to politeness theory. Pragmatics 91: 119–153. BoP
Blakemore, D. (1991) Performatives and parentheticals. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 911: 197–213.
Carston, R., and S. Uchida (1998) (eds.) Relevance theory: Applications and implications. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. BoP
Cosmides, L., and J. Tooby (1992) Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides and J. Tooby (eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dominicy, M., and N. Franken (forthcoming) Speech acts and relevance theory. To appear in D. Vanderveken and S. Kubo (eds.), Essays in speech act theory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Escandell-Vidal, V. (1996) Towards a cognitive approach to politeness. In K. Jaszczolt and K. Turner (eds.), Contrastive semantics and pragmatics. Oxford: Pergamon Press, pp. 629–650.
Franken, N. (1997) Les performatifs dans la théorie de la pertinence. Paper presented at the 3ème Rencontre des Jeunes Linguistes, Université du Littoral, Dunkerque, 16–17 May 1997.
Jary, M. (1998a) Relevance theory and the communication of politeness. Journal of Pragmatics 301: 1–19. BoP
Humphrey, N. (1976) The social function of the intellect. In P.P.G. Bateson and R.A. Hinde (eds.), Growing points in ethology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Myers-Scotton, C. (1993) Common and uncommon ground: Social and structural factors in codeswitching. Language in Society 221: 475–503. BoP
(1995) What do speakers want? Codeswitching as evidence of intentionality in linguistic choices. In P. Silberman and J. Loftin (eds.), SALSA 2 (Papers from the Symposium about Language and Society at Austin). Austin: University of Texas, Department of Linguistics.
Nicolle, S. (1999) On the translation of implicit information: Experimental evidence and further considerations. Notes on Translation 13.3: 1–12.
(in press) Markers of general interpretive use in Amharic and Swahili. In G. Andersen and T. Fretheim (eds.), Pragmatic markers and propositional attitude. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 174–188.
Okamoto, S. (1999) Situated politeness: Manipulating honorific and non-honorific expressions in Japanese conversations. Pragmatics 91: 51–74. BoP
Rouchota, V., and A. Jucker (1998) (eds.) Current issues in relevance theory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. BoP
Sperber, D. (1994) The modularity of thought and the epidemiology of representations. In L.A. Hirschfeld and S.A. Gelman (eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 39–67.
Sperber, D., and D. Wilson (1986) Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. BoP
Terkourafi, M. (1999) Frames for politeness: A case study. Pragmatics 91: 97–117. BoP
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Linde-Usiekniewicz, Jadwiga
2020. Towards a relevance-theoretic account of hate speech. In Relevance Theory, Figuration and Continuity in Pragmatics [Figurative Thought and Language, 8], ► pp. 229 ff.
Piskorska, Agnieszka
2016. Perlocutionary effects and relevance theory. In Relevance Theory [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 268], ► pp. 287 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 november 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.