BibliographyAbras, C. 2002. The principle of relevance and metamessages in online discourse: electronic exchanges in a graduate course. Language, Literacy and Culture Review 1.2: 39–53.
Ackerman, B. 1983. Form and function in children's understanding of ironic utterances. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 35: 487–508.
Adger, D. 2003. Core Syntax. Oxford University Press.
Aguilar, M. 2008. Metadiscourse in Academic Speech: A Relevance-theoretic Approach. Peter Lang, Berlin.
Allbritton, D.W. and Gerrig, R.J. 1991. Participatory responses in prose understanding. Journal of Memory and Language 30: 603–26.
Allott, N. and Uchida, H. 2009. Natural language indicative conditionals are classical. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 21: 1–17.
Andersen, G. 1999. Pragmatic Markers and Sociolinguistic Variation: A Corpus-based Study. PhD thesis, University of Bergen.
Asher, N. and Lascarides, A. 2003. Logics of Conversation. Cambridge University Press.
Astington, J., Harris, P. and Olson, D. (eds.) 1988. Developing Theories of Mind. Cambridge University Press.
Atlas, J.D. 1989. Philosophy Without Ambiguity: A Logico-linguistic Essay. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Atlas, J.D. 2005. Logic, Meaning and Conversation: Semantical Underdeterminacy, Implicature and their Interface. Oxford University Press.
Atlas, J.D. and Levinson, S.C.. 1981. It-clefts, informativeness and logical form. In Cole, P. (ed.) Radical Pragmatics, pp. 1–62. Academic Press, New York.
Bach, K. 1994a. Conversational impliciture. Mind and Language 9: 124–62.
Bach, K. 1994b. Semantic slack: what is said and more. In Tsohatzidis, S. (ed.) Foundations of Speech Act Theory: Philosophical and linguistic perspectives, pp. 267–91. Routledge, London.
Bach, K. 1997. The semantics–pragmatics distinction: what it is and why it matters. Linguistische Berichte 8 (Special Issue on Pragmatics): 33–50. Reprinted in K. Turner (ed.) 1999. The Semantics–Pragmatics Interface from Different Points of View. Elsevier Science, Oxford.
Bach, K. 1999. The myth of conventional implicature. Linguistics and Philosophy 22: 327–66.
Bach, K. 2001. You don't say. Synthése 128: 15–44.
Bach, K. 2004. Pragmatics and the philosophy of language. In Horn and Ward (eds.), pp. 461–87.
Bach, K. 2010. Impliciture vs. explicature: what's the difference? In B. Soria and E. Romero (eds.), pp. 126–37.
Bach, K. and Harnish, R.M. 1982. Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Baron-Cohen, S. 1995. Mindblindness: An Essay on Autism and Theory of Mind. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Barrett, H.C. and Kurzban, R. 2006. Modularity in cognition: framing the debate. Psychological Review 113.3: 628–47.
Barsalou, L. 1987. The instability of graded structure: implications for the nature of concepts. In Neisser, U. (ed.) Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization: 101–40. Cambridge University Press.
Barsalou, L. 1989. Intra-concept similarity and its implications for inter-concept similarity. In Vosniadou, S. and Ortony, A. (eds.) Similarity and Analogical Reasoning, pp. 76–121. Cambridge University Press.
Barsalou, L. 1992. Frames, concepts, and conceptual fields. In Kittay, E. and Lehrer, A. (eds.) Frames, Fields, and Contrasts: New Essays in Semantic and Lexical Organization, pp. 21–74. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale NJ.
Barsalou, L. 1993. Flexibility, structure, and linguistic vagary in concepts: manifestations of a compositional system of perceptual symbols. In Collins, A., Gathercole, S., Conway, A. and Morris, P. (eds.) Theories of Memory, pp. 29–101. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove.
Bekalu, M.A. 2006. Presupposition in news discourse. Discourse & Society 17.2: 147–72.
Berlin, I. 1953. The Hedgehog and the Fox: An Essay on Tolstoy's View of History. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, New York.
Berg, J. 2002. Is semantics still possible?Journal of Pragmatics 34.4: 349–59.
Bezuidenhout, A. 1997. Pragmatics, semantic underdetermination and the referential–attributive distinction. Mind 106: 375–409.
Bezuidenhout, A. 2002. Truth-conditional pragmatics. Philosophical Perspectives 16: 105–34.
Bezuidenhout, A. 2004. Procedural meaning and the semantics/pragmatics interface. In Bianchi, C. (ed.) The Semantics/Pragmatics Distinction, pp. 101–31. CSLI Publications, Stanford CA.
Bezuidenhout, A. and Sroda, M.S. 1998. Children's use of contextual cues to resolve referential ambiguity: an application of relevance theory. Pragmatics and Cognition 6: 265–99.
Bialystok, E. 1987. Influences of bilingualism on metalinguistic development. Second Language Research 3.2: 154–66.
Bialystok, E. 1991. Language Processing in Bilingual Children. Cambridge University Press.
Bialystok, E. 2001. Bilingualism in Development: Language, Literacy and Cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Birdsong, D. 1989. Metalinguistic Performance and Interlinguistic Competence. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Blakemore, D. 1987. Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Blackwell, Oxford.
Blakemore, D. 1991. Performatives and parentheticals. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 91: 197–214.
Blakemore, D. 1992. Understanding Utterances. Blackwell, Oxford.
Blakemore, D. 1995. Relevance theory. In Verschueren, J., Ostman, J.-O. and Blommaert, J. (eds.) Handbook of Pragmatics, pp. 443–52. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Blakemore, D. 1996. Are apposition markers discourse markers?Journal of Linguistics 32: 325–47.
Blakemore, D. 1997. On non-truth conditional meaning. Linguistische Berichte 8 (Special Issue on Pragmatics): 92–102.
Blakemore, D. 2002. Relevance and Linguistic Meaning: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse Markers. Cambridge University Press.
Blakemore, D. 2007a. Constraints, concepts and procedural encoding. In N.C. Burton-Roberts (ed.), pp. 45–66.
Blakemore, D. 2007b. ‘Or’-parentheticals, ‘that is’-parentheticals and the pragmatics of reformulation. Journal of Linguistics 43: 311–33.
Blakemore, D. 2009. Parentheticals and point of view in free indirect style. Language and Literature 18.2: 129–53.
Blakemore, D. 2010. Communication and the representation of thought: the use of audience-directed expressions in free indirect thought representations. Journal of Linguistics 46: 575–99.
Blutner, R. 1998. Lexical pragmatics. Journal of Semantics 15: 115–62.
Blutner, R. and Zeevat, H. 2004. Optimality Theory and Pragmatics. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Boase-Beier, J. 2004a. Knowing and not knowing: style, intention and the translation of a Holocaust poem. Language and Literature 13.1: 25–35.
Boase-Beier, J. 2004b. Saying what someone else meant: style, relevance and translation. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 14.2: 276–87.
Boase-Beier, J. 2009. Translation and timelessness. Journal of Literary Semantics 38: 101–14.
Bolinger, D. 1986. Intonation and its Parts: Melody in Spoken English. Edward Arnold, London.
Bolinger, D. 1989. Intonation and its Uses: Melody in Grammar and Discourse. Edward Arnold, London.
De Boni, M. 2004. Relevance in Open Domain Question Answering: Theoretical Framework and Application. PhD thesis, University of York.
Borg, E. 2004. Minimal Semantics. Oxford University Press.
Bolinger, D. 2007. Minimalism versus contextualism in semantics. In Preyer, G. and Peter, G. (eds.) Context-Sensitivity and Semantic Minimalism, pp. 339–59. Oxford University Press.
Bou-Franch, P. 2002. Misunderstandings and unofficial knowledge in institutional discourse. In Walton, D. and Scheu, D. (eds.) Culture and Power, pp. 323–45. Peter Lang, Berlin.
Bouton, L.F. 1988. A cross-cultural study of ability to interpret implicatures in English. World Englishness 7: 183–96.
Bouton, L.F. 1990. The effective use of implicature in English: why and how it should be taught in the ESL classroom. Pragmatics and Language Learning Monograph Series, vol.1, pp. 43–51.
Bouton, L.F. 1992a. The interpretation of implicature in English by NNS: does it come automatically without being explicitly taught?Pragmatics and Language Learning 3: 53–65.
Bouton, L.F. 1992b. Culture, Pragmatics and Implicature: Acquisition of Language – Acquisition of Culture. AFinLA Yearbook (Publications de l'Association Finlandaise de Linguistique Appliquée) 50, pp. 35–61.
Bouton, L.F. 1994a. Conversational implicature in a second language: learned slowly when not deliberately taught. Journal of Pragmatics 22: 157–67.
Bouton, L.F. 1994b. Can NNS skill in interpreting implicature in American English be improved through explicit instruction? A pilot study. Pragmatics and Language Learning Monograph Series, vol. 5, pp. 88–109.
Bouton, L.F. 1999. Developing nonnative speaker skills in interpreting conversational implicatures in English: explicit teaching can ease the process. In Hinkel, E. (ed.) Culture in Second Language Teaching and Learning, pp. 47–70. Cambridge University Press.
Brown, C. 2010. The Lost Diaries. Fourth Estate, London.
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. 1978. Universals in language usage: politeness phenomena. In Goody, E. (ed.) Questions and Politeness, pp. 56–310. Cambridge University Press.
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge University Press.
Bryant, G. and Fox Tree, J. 2002. Recognising verbal irony in spontaneous speech. Metaphor and symbol 17: 99–117.
Buckland, W. 1992. Filmic Meaning: The Semantics–Pragmatics Interface. PhD thesis, University of East Anglia.
Buckland, W. 1995. Relevance and cognition: towards a pragmatics of unreliable filmic narration. In Müller, J.E. (ed.) Towards a Pragmatics of the Audiovisual, vol. 2, pp. 55–66. Nodus Publikationen, Münster.
Bursey, J. and Furlong, A. 2006. Cognitive gothic: relevance theory, iteration and style. In Tabbi, J. and Shavers, R. (eds.) Paper Empire: William Gaddis and the World System, pp. 118–33. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.
Burton-Roberts, N.C. 2000. Where and what is phonology? A representational perspective. In Burton-Roberts, N.C., Carr, P. and Docherty, G. (eds.) Phonological Knowledge: Conceptual and empirical issues, pp. 39–66. Oxford University Press.
Burton-Roberts, N.C. (ed.) 2007. Pragmatics. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Burton-Roberts, N.C. 2010. Cancellation and intention. In B. Soria and E. Romero (eds.), pp. 138–55.
Burton-Roberts, N.C. 2011. On the grounding of syntax and the role of phonology in human cognition. Lingua 121.14: 2089–102.
Burton-Roberts, N. and Poole, G. 2006. ‘Virtual conceptual necessity’, feature-dissociation and the Saussurian legacy in generative grammar. Journal of Linguistics 42.3: 575–628.
Camp, E. 2008. Showing, telling, and seeing: metaphor and ‘poetic’ language. Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication, vol. 3, pp. 1–24.
Cann, R., Kempson, R. and Marten, L. 2005. The Dynamics of Language. Elsevier, Oxford.
Cann, R., Kempson, R. and Wedgwood, D. 2012. Representationalism and linguistic knowledge. In Kempson, R., Fernando, T. and Asher, N. (eds.) Philosophy of Linguistics, pp. 357–401. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Cappelen, H. and Lepore, E. 2007. Relevance theory and shared content. In N.C. Burton-Roberts (ed.), pp. 115–35.
Carruthers, P. 2006. The Architecture of the Mind: Massive Modularity and the Flexibility of Thought. Oxford University Press.
Carruthers, P. and Smith, P. (eds.) 1996. Theories of Theories of Mind. Cambridge University Press.
Carston, R. 1988. Implicature, explicature and truth-theoretic semantics. In Kempson, R. (ed.) Mental Representation: The Interface between language and reality, pp. 155–81. Cambridge University Press.
Carston, R. 1997. Enrichment and loosening: complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed?Linguistische Berichte 8 (Special Issue on Pragmatics): 103–27.
Carston, R. 1998. Pragmatics and the Explicit–Implicit Distinction. PhD thesis, University College London.
Carston, R. 2002a. Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
Carston, R. 2002b. Metaphor, ad hoc concepts and word meaning: more questions than answers. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 14: 83–105.
Carston, R. 2004a. Relevance theory and the saying–implicating distinction. In L. Horn and G. Ward (eds.), pp. 633–56.
Carston, R. 2004b. Explicature and semantics. In Davis, S. and Gillon, B. (eds.) Semantics: A Reader, pp. 1–44. Oxford University Press.
Carston, R. 2007. How many pragmatic systems are there? In Frapolli, M.J. (ed.) Saying, Meaning, Referring: Essays on the Philosophy of F. Recanati, pp. 18–48. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Carston, R. 2008. Linguistic communication and the semantics–pragmatics distinction. Synthèse 165.3: 321–45.
Carston, R. 2009a. The explicit/implicit distinction in pragmatics and the limits of explicit communication. International Review of Pragmatics 1.1: 35–62.
Carston, R. 2009b. Relevance theory: contextualism or pragmaticism?UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 21: 19–26.
Carston, R. 2010. Explicit communication and ‘free’ pragmatic enrichment. In B. Soria and E. Romero (eds.), pp. 217–85.
Carston, R. and Powell, G. 2006. Relevance theory: new directions and developments. In Lepore, E. and Smith, B. (eds.) Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Language, pp. 341–60. Oxford University Press.
Carston, R. and Uchida, S. (eds). 1998. Relevance Theory: Applications and Implications. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Chalmers, A.F. 1999. What Is This Thing Called Science? 3rd edn. Open University Press, Buckingham.
Chapman, S. 2005. Paul Grice: Philosopher and Linguist. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Christie, C. 2007. Relevance theory and politeness. Journal of Politeness Research 3: 269–94.
Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Chomsky, N. 1986. Knowledge of Language. Praeger, New York.
Clark, B. 1991. Relevance Theory and the Semantics of Non-Declaratives'. PhD thesis, University College London.
Clark, B. 1993a. Let and let's: procedural encoding and explicature. Lingua 90: 173–200.
Clark, B. 1993b. Relevance and pseudo-imperatives. Linguistics and Philosophy 16.1: 79–121.
Clark, B. 1996. Stylistic analysis and relevance theory. Language and Literature 5.3: 163–78.
Clark, B. 2007. ‘Blazing a trail’: moving from natural to linguistic meaning in accounting for the tones of English. In Nilsen, R.A., Appiah Amfo, N.A. and Borthen, K. (eds.) Interpreting Utterances: Pragmatics and its interfaces. Essays in honour of Thorstein Fretheim, pp. 69–81. Novus, Oslo.
Clark, B. 2009. Salient inferences: pragmatics and The Inheritors. Language and Literature 18.2: 173–212.
Clark, B. 2011. Recent developments in relevance theory. In Grundy, P. and Archer, D. (eds.) The Pragmatics Reader, pp. 129–37. Routledge, London.
Clark, B. 2012. The relevance of tones: prosodic meanings in utterance interpretation and in relevance theory. The Linguistic Review, 29.4: 643–61.
Clark, B. and Lindsey, G. 1990. Intonation, grammar and utterance interpretation: evidence from English exclamatory-inversions. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 2: 32–51.
Clark, B. and Owtram, N. 2012. Imagined inference: teaching writers to think like readers. In Burke, M., Czabo, S., Week, L. and Berkowitz, J. (eds.) Current Trends in Pedagogical Stylistics, pp. 126–41. Continuum, London.
Clark, H. and Gerrig, R.J. 1984. On the pretense theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113: 121–6.
Clark, H. and Gerrig, R.J. 1990. Quotations as demonstrations. Language 66: 764–805.
Cook, V.J. and Newson, M. 2007. Chomsky's Universal Grammar: An Introduction, 3rd edn. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
Coupland, J., Coupland, N. and Robinson, J.D. 1992. ‘How are you?’ Negotiating phatic communion. Language in Society 21: 207–30.
Crook, J. 2004. On covert communication in advertising. Journal of Pragmatics 36: 715–38.
Currie, G. 2006. Why irony is pretence. In Nichols, S. (ed.) The Architecture of the Imagination, pp. 111–33. Oxford University Press.
Davies, M. and Stone, T. (eds.) 1995a. Mental Simulation: Philosophical and Psychological Essays. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
Davies, M. and Stone, T. (eds.) 1995b. Folk Psychology. Blackwell, Oxford.
Dennett, D. 1969. Content and Consciousness. Routledge, London.
Desilla, L. 2012. Implicatures in film: construal and functions in Bridget Jones romantic comedies. Journal of Pragmatics 44: 30–53.
Dogan, G. 1992. The Pragmatics of Indirectness of Meaning: A Relevance-Theoretic Approach to Epigrams and Graffiti in Turkish. PhD thesis, University of Manchester.
Dowty, D.R., Wall, R.E. and Peters, S.. 1980. Introduction to Montague Semantics. Reidel, Dordrecht.
Durán-Martínez, R. 2005. Covert communication in the promotion of alcohol and tobacco in Spanish press advertisements. Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada 5: 82–102.
Durant, A. 1984. Conditions of Music. Macmillan, London.
Durant, A. 2010. Meaning in the Media: Discourse, Controversy and Debate. Cambridge University Press.
Dynell, M. 2008. Wittiness in the visual rhetoric of advertising and the quest for relevance. In Walaszewska, E., Kisielewska-Krysiuk, M., Korzeniowska, A. and Grzegorzewska, M. (eds.) Relevant Worlds: Current Perspectives on Language, Translation and Relevance Theory, pp. 48–66. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle.
Elugardo, R. and Stainton, R.J. 2004. Shorthand, syntactic ellipsis, and the pragmatic determinants of what is said. Mind & Language 19.4: 442–71.
Escandell-Vidal, V. 1998a. Intonation and procedural encoding: the case of Spanish interrogatives. In V. Rouchota and A. Jucker (eds.), pp. 169–204.
Escandell-Vidal, V. 1998b. Politeness: a relevant issue for relevance theory. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 11: 45–57.
Escandell-Vidal, V. 2002. Echo-syntax and metarepresentations. Lingua 112: 871–900.
Escandell-Vidal, V., Leonetti, M. and Ahern, A. (eds.) 2011. Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives. Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley.
Evans, V. and Green, M. 2006. Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh University Press.
Fabb, N. 1995. The density of response: a problem for literary criticism and cognitive science. In Payne, J. (ed.) Linguistic Approaches to Literature: Papers in Literary Stylistics, pp. 143–57. English Language Research, University of Birmingham.
Fabb, N. 1997. Linguistics and Literature. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
Fabb, N. 2002. Language and Literary Structure. Cambridge University Press.
Fauconnier, G. and Turner, M. 2002. The Way We Think. Basic Books, New York.
Fiddick, L., Cosmides, L. and Tooby, J. 2000. No interpretation without representation: the role of domain-specific representations in the Wason selection task. Cognition 77: 1–79.
Fodor, J.A. 1975. The Language of Thought. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.
Fodor, J.A. 1983. The Modularity of Mind. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Fodor, J.A. 1987. Psychosemantics: The Problem of Meaning in the Philosophy of Mind. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Fodor, J.A. 1990. A Theory of Content and Other Essays. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Fodor, J.A. 1994. The Elm and the Expert. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Fodor, J.A. 2008. LOT 2: The Language of Thought Revisited. Oxford University Press.
Forceville, C. 1996. Pictorial Metaphor in Advertising. Routledge, London.
Forceville, C. 2000. Compasses, beauty queens and other PCs: pictorial metaphors in computer advertisements. Hermes 24: 31–55.
Forceville, C. 2002. The identification of target and source in pictorial metaphors. Journal of Pragmatics 34: 1–14.
Forceville, C. 2010. Why and how study metaphor, metonymy and other tropes in multimodal discourse? In Caballero, R. and Pinar Sanz, M.J. (eds.) Ways and Modes of Human Communication, pp. 57–76. Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Servicio de Publicaciones y AESLA, Ciudad Real.
Foster-Cohen, S.H. 2000. Review article on Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Second Language Research 16.1: 77–92.
Foster-Cohen, S.H. 2004a. Relevance theory and second language learning/ behaviour. Second Language Research 20.3: 189–92.
Foster-Cohen, S.H. 2004b. Relevance theory, action theory and second language communication strategies. Second Language Research 20.3: 289–302.
Fraser, B. 2006. On the conceptual–procedural distinction. Style 40.1–2. Available at:
Fretheim, T. 1998. Intonation and the procedural encoding of attributed thoughts: the case of Norwegian negative interrogatives. In V. Rouchota and A. Jucker (eds.), pp. 205–36.
Furlong, A. 1996. Relevance Theory and Literary Interpretation. PhD. thesis, University College London.
Furlong, A. 2001. Is it a classic if no one reads it? In Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Atlantic Provinces Linguistics Association (APLA), pp. 54–60. Université de Moncton, Moncton NB.
Furlong, A. 2011. The soul of wit: a relevance-theoretic discussion. Language and Literature 20.2: 136–50.
Gerrig, R.J. 1993. Experiencing Narrative Worlds: On the Psychological Activities of Reading. Yale University Press, New Haven CT.
Gerrig, R.J. and Allbritton, D.W. 1990. The construction of literary character: a view from cognitive psychology. Style 24: 380–91.
Gibbs, R. 1994. The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language and Understanding. Cambridge University Press.
Gibbs, R. 2001. Evaluating contemporary models of figurative language understanding. Metaphor and Symbol 16: 317–33.
Gibbs, R. and Moise, J. 1997. Pragmatics in understanding what is said. Cognition 62: 51–74.
Gibbs, R. and Tendahl, M. 2006. Cognitive effort and effects in metaphor comprehension: relevance theory and psycholinguistics. Mind and Language 21.3: 379–403.
Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. and the ABC Research Group 1999. Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart. Oxford University Press.
Gilman, R. 2003. Introduction. In Gilman, R. (ed.) Anton Chekhov: Plays, pp. vii-xxxii. Penguin, London.
Girotto, V., Kemmelmeier, M., Sperber, D. and van der Henst, J.-B., 2001. Inept reasoners or pragmatic virtuosos? Relevance and the deontic selection task. Cognition, 81: 69–76.
Glucksberg, S. 2001. Understanding Figurative Language. Oxford University Press.
Glucksberg, S. 2004. On the automaticity of pragmatic processes: a modular proposal. In I. Noveck and D. Sperber (eds.), pp. 72–93.
Glucksberg, S., Manfredi, D. and McGlone, M.S. 1997. Metaphor comprehension: How metaphors create new categories. In T. Ward, S. Smith and J. Vaid (eds.), pp. 327–50.
Goffman, E. 1959. The Presentation of Self In Everyday Life. Anchor Doubleday, Garden City NY.
Goffman, E. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Anchor Doubleday, Garden City NY.
van Gompel, R.P.G. 2006. Sentence processing. In Brown, K. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edn, vol. 11, pp. 251–5. Elsevier, Oxford.
Gow, D.W. and Gordon, P.C. 1995. Lexical and prelexical influences on word segmentation: evidence from priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 21: 344–59.
Grice, H.P. 1957. Meaning. The Philosophical Review 66: 377–88. Reprinted in H. P. Grice (1989), pp. 213–23.
Grice, H.P. 1967. Logic and Conversation. The William James Lectures. Harvard University. Published as Grice (1975) and reprinted in Grice (1989).
Grice, H.P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. and Morgan, J. (eds.) Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, pp. 41–58. Academic Press, New York. Reprinted in Grice (1989), pp. 86–116.
Grice, H.P. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.
Groefsema, Marjolein. 2007. Concepts and word meaning in relevance theory. In N.C. Burton-Roberts (ed.), pp. 136–57.
Groenendijk, J. and Stokhof, M. 1991. Dynamic predicate logic. Linguistics and Philosophy 14: 39–100.
Gutt, E.-A. 1991. Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context. Blackwell, Oxford. (2nd edn 2000. St Jerome Publishing, Manchester.)
Gutt, E.-A. 1998. Pragmatic aspects of translation: some relevance-theoretic observations. In Hickey, L. (ed.) The Pragmatics of Translation, pp. 41–53. Multilingual Matters, Clevedon.
Gutt, E.-A. 2004. Translation, metarepresentation and claims of interpretive resemblance. In Arduini, S. and Hodgson, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Conference on Similarity and Translation, pp. 93–101. Guaraldi, Rimini.
Haegeman, L. 2006. Register variation: Core grammar and periphery. In Brown, K. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edn, pp. 468–74. Elsevier, Oxford.
Haegeman, L. and Ihsane, T.. 1999. Subject ellipsis in embedded sentences in English. English Language and Linguistics 3: 117–45.
Haegeman, L. and Ihsane, T.. 2001. Adult null subjects in the non-pro drop languages: two diary dialects. Language Acquisition 9.4: 329–46.
Haicun, L. 2005. Explaining phatic utterance within the theory of relevance. In Korzeniowska, A. and Grzegorzewska, M. (eds.) Relevance Studies in Poland, vol. 2, pp. 81–7. The Institute of English Studies, University of Warsaw.
Hall, A. 2009. ‘Free’ enrichment and the nature of pragmatic constraints. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 21: 93–123.
Halliday, M.A.K. and Matthiessen, C.M.I.M.. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 3rd edn. Hodder Arnold, London.
Hampton, J. 1997. Emergent attributes in combined concepts. In T. Ward, S. Smith and J. Vaid (eds.), pp. 83–110.
Hann, M. 2007. Meh – the word that's sweeping the internet. The Guardian, 5th March 2007. Available at:
Happé, F. 1993. Communicative competence and theory of mind in autism: a test of relevance theory. Cognition 48: 101–19.
Hawkins, J.A. 1991. On (in)definite articles: implicatures and (un)grammaticality prediction. Journal of Linguistics 27: 405–42.
Heim, I. 1983. File change semantics and the familiarity theory of definiteness. In Bäuerle, R., Schwarze, C. and von Stechow, A. (eds.) Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language, pp. 164–89. De Gruyter, Berlin.
Horn, L.R. 1972. On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English. PhD thesis, UCLA.
Horn, L.R. 1984. Towards a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q- and R-based implicature. In Schiffrin, D. (ed.) Meaning, Form, and Use in Context, pp. 11–42. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics. Georgetown University Press, Washington DC.
Horn, L.R. 1988. Pragmatic theory. In Newmeyer, F. (ed.) Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey, vol. 1: Linguistic Theory: Foundations, pp. 113–45. Cambridge University Press.
Horn, L.R. 1989. A Natural History of Negation. University of Chicago Press.
Horn, L.R. 1992. The said and the unsaid. Ohio State Working Papers in Linguistics (Proceedings of SALT II: The Second Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory) 40: 163–202.
Horn, L.R. 1996. Presupposition and implicature. In Lappin, S. (ed.) The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, pp. 299–320. Blackwell, Oxford.
Horn, L.R. 2004. Implicature. In Horn, L.R. and Ward, G. (eds.), pp. 3–28.
Horn, L.R. and Ward, G. (eds.) 2004. The Handbook of Pragmatics. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
House, J. 1990. Intonation structures and pragmatic interpretation. In Ramsaran, S. (ed.) Studies in the Pronunciation of English, pp. 38–57. Routledge, London.
House, J. 2006. Constructing a context with intonation. Journal of Pragmatics 38.10: 1542–58.
Huang, Y. 1991. A neo-Gricean pragmatic theory of anaphora. Journal of Linguistics 27: 301–35.
Huang, Y. 2007. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora: A Study with Special Reference to Chinese. Cambridge University Press.
Huang, Y. 2010. Neo-Gricean pragmatic theory of conversational implicature. In Heine, B. and Narrog, H. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, pp. 607–31. Oxford University Press.
Hunston, S. 2006. Corpus linguistics. In Brown, K. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edn, pp. 234–48. Elsevier, Oxford.
Ifantidou, E. 2001. Evidentials and Relevance. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Ifantidou, E. 2005a. Evidential particles and mind-reading. Pragmatics & Cognition 13.2: 253–95.
Ifantidou, E. 2005b. Hearsay devices and metarepresentation. In Marmaridou, S., Antonopoulou, E. and Nikiforidou, V. (eds.) Reviewing Linguistic Thought: Converging trends in the 21st Century, pp. 401–20. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.
Ifantidou, E. 2005c. The semantics and pragmatics of metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics 37: 1325–53.
Ifantidou, E. 2009. Newspaper headlines and relevance: ad hoc concepts in ad hoc contexts. Journal of Pragmatics 41.4: 699–720.
Ifantidou, E. and Tzanne, A. 2006. Multimodality and relevance in the Athens 2004 Olympic Games televised promotion. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 19: 191–210.
Imai, K. 1998. Intonation and relevance. In Carston, R. and Uchida, S. (eds.) Relevance Theory: Applications and implications, pp. 69–86. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Iten, C. 2005. Linguistic Meaning, Truth Conditions and Relevance. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Jackendoff, R. 2002. Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution. Oxford University Press.
Jary, M. 2008. The relevance of complement choice: a corpus study of ‘believe’. Lingua 118: 1–18.
Jary, M. 2009. Relevance, assertion and possible worlds: a cognitive approach to the Spanish subjunctive. In de Brabanter, P. and Kissine, M. (eds.) Utterance Interpretation and Cognitive Models, pp. 235–77. Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley.
Jary, M. 2010. Assertion. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Jary, M. 2011. Assertion, relevance and the declarative mood. In V. Escandell-Vidal, M. Leonetti and A. Ahern (eds), pp. 267–89.
Jaszczolt, K.M. 2005. Default Semantics: Foundations of a Compositional Theory of Acts of Communication. Oxford University Press.
Jaszczolt, K.M. 2006. Default semantics. In Brown, K. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, vol. 3, 2nd edn, pp. 388–92. Elsevier, Oxford.
Jaszczolt, K.M. 2009. Representing Time: An Essay on Temporality as Modality. Oxford University Press.
Jaszczolt, K.M. 2010. Default semantics. In Heine, B. and Narrog, H. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, pp. 193–221. Oxford University Press.
Jaszczolt, K.M. 2011. Default meanings, salient meanings and automatic processing. In , K.M.Jaszczolt, and Allan, K. (eds.) Salience and Defaults in Ulterance Processing, pp. 11–33. Mouton de Gruytes, Berlin.
Jodlowiec, M. 2009. Relevance and misunderstanding. In Tarasti, E., Forsell, P. and Littlefield, R. (eds.) Communication: Understanding/Misunderstanding. Proceedings of the 9th Congress of the IASS-AIS, Helsinki-Imatra. Vol. 1: Acta Semiotica Fennica XXXIV, pp. 651–61. International Semiotics Institute/Helsinki: Semiotic Society of Finland, Imatra.
Jodlowiec, M. 2010. The role of relevance theory in SLA studies. In Pütz, M. and Sicola, L. (eds.) Cognitive Processing in Second Language Acquisition, pp. 49–66. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Johnson-Laird, P.N. 1983. Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference and Consciousness. Cambridge University Press.
Johnson-Laird, P.N. 2004. The history of mental models. In Manktelow, K. and Chung, M.C. (eds.) Psychology of Reasoning: Theoretical and Historical Perspectives, pp. 179–212. Psychology Press, New York.
Johnson-Laird, P.N. 2006. How We Reason. Oxford University Press.
Johnson-Laird, P.N. and Byrne, R.M.J. 1991. Deduction. Psychology Press, New York.
Jorgensen, J., Miller, G. and Sperber, D. 1984. Test of the mention theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113: 112–20.
Kamp, H. 1981. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In Groenendijk, J.A.G., Janssen, T.M.V. and Stokhof, M.J.B. (eds.) Truth, Interpretation and Information, pp. 1–41. Foris, Dordrecht.
Kamp, H. and Reyle, U. 1993. From Discourse to Logic. Reidel, Dordrecht.
Katz, J.J. and Fodor, J.A. 1963. The structure of a semantic theory. Language 39.2: 170–210.
Katz, J.J. and Postal, P.M. 1964. An Integrated Theory of Linguistic Descriptions. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Keenan, E.I. 1976. The universality of conversational postulates. Language in Society 5: 67–80.
Kempson, R., Meyer-Viol, W. and Gabbay, D. 2001. Dynamic Syntax. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
King, J. and Stanley, J. 2005. Semantics, pragmatics, and the role of semantic content. In Szabo, Z.G. (ed.) Semantics vs. Pragmatics, pp. 111–64. Oxford University Press.
Kisielewska-Krysiuk, M. 2010. Banter – a case of phatic communication? In Walaszewska, E., Kisielewska-Krysiuk, M. and Piskorska, A. (eds.) In the Mind and across Minds: A relevance-theoretic perspective on communication and translation, pp. 188–207. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle.
de Klerk, V. 2005. Procedural meanings of ‘well’ in a corpus of Xhosa English. Journal of Pragmatics 37: 1183–1205.
Kripke, S. 1977. Speaker's reference and semantic reference. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 2: 255–76.
Kumon-Nakamura, S., Glucksberg, S. and Brown, M. 1995. How about another piece of pie: the allusional pretense theory of discourse irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 124: 3–21.
Ladd, R. 1996. Intonational Phonology. Cambridge University Press.
Lagerwerf, L. 2007. Irony and sarcasm in advertisements: effects of relevant inappropriateness. Journal of Pragmatics 39: 1702–21.
Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things. University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1999. Philosophy In The Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. Basic Books, New York.
Lakoff, G. and Turner, M. 1989. More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. University of Chicago Press.
Landragin, F. 2003. Clues for the identification of implicit information in multimodal referring actions. In Stephanidis, C. and Jacko, J. (eds.) Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 2, pp. 711–15. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah NJ.
Landragin, F., De Aangeli, A., Wolff, F., Lopez, P. and Romary, L. 2002. Relevance and perceptual constraints in multimodal referring actions. In Van Deemter, K. and Kibble, R. (eds.) Information Sharing: Reference and Presupposition in Language Generation and Interpretation, pp. 391–410. CSLI Publications, Chicago.
Lascarides, A. and Asher, N. 2007. Segmented discourse representation theory: dynamic semantics with discourse structure. In Bunt, H. and Muskens, R. (eds.) Computing Meaning, vol. 3, pp. 87–124. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Lascarides, A. and Copestake, A. 1998. Pragmatics and word meaning. Journal of Linguistics 34: 387–414.
Laver, J. 1974. Semiotic Aspects of Spoken Communication. Edward Arnold, London.
Leech, G. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. Longman, London.
Leslie, A. 1987. Pretense and representation: the origins of ‘theory of mind’. Psychological Review 94: 412–26.
Leslie, A. and Happé, F.. 1989. Autism and ostensive communication: the relevance of metarepresentation. Development and Psychopathology 1: 205–12.
Levinson, S.C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.
Levinson, S.C. 1987a. Minimization and conversational inference. In Verschueren, J. and Bertuccelli-Papi, M. (eds.) The Pragmatic Perspective, pp. 61–129. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Levinson, S.C. 1987b. Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora: a partial pragmatic reduction of binding and control phenomena. Journal of Linguistics 23: 379–434.
Levinson, S.C. 1987c. Implicature explicated?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10.4: 722–3.
Levinson, S.C. 1989. A review of ‘Relevance’. Journal of Linguistics 25: 455–72.
Levinson, S.C. 1995. Three levels of meaning. In Palmer, F. (ed.) Grammar and Meaning: Essays in honour of Sir John Lyons, pp. 90–119. Cambridge University Press.
Levinson, S.C. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Lewis, D. 1970. General semantics. Synthèse 22: 18–67.
MacMahon, B. 1996. Indirectness, rhetoric and interpretive use: communicative strategies in Browning's ‘My Last Duchess’. Language and Literature 5: 209–23.
MacMahon, B. 2001a. The effects of word substitution in slips of the tongue, Finnegans Wake and The Third Policeman. English Studies 3: 231–46.
MacMahon, B. 2001b. Relevance theory and the use of voice in poetry. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 15: 11–34.
MacMahon, B. 2007. The effects of sound patterning in poetry: a cognitive pragmatic approach. Journal of Literary Semantics 36.2: 103–20.
MacMahon, B. 2009a. Metarepresentation and decoupling in Northanger Abbey: Part I. English Studies 90.5: 518–44.
MacMahon, B. 2009b. Metarepresentation and decoupling in Northanger Abbey: Part II. English Studies 90.6: 673–94.
Malinowski, B. 1923. The problem of meaning in primitive languages. In Ogden, C.K. and Richards, I.A. (eds.) The Meaning of Meaning, pp. 146–52. Routledge, London.
Margolis, E. and Laurence, S. (eds.) 1999. Concepts: Core Readings. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Marten, L. and Kempson, R. 2006. Dynamic syntax. In Brown, K. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, vol. 4, 2nd edn, pp. 33–37. Elsevier, Oxford.
Martí, L. 2006. Unarticulated constituents revisited. Linguistics and Philosophy 29: 135–66.
Mascaro, O. and Sperber, D. 2009. The moral, epistemic, and mindreading components of children's vigilance towards deception. Cognition 112: 367–80.
Matsui, T., Yamamoto, T. and McCagg, P.. 2006. On the role of language in children's early understanding of others as epistemic beings. Cognitive Development 21: 158–73.
Matsui, T., Rakoczy, H., Miura, Y. and Tomasello, M. 2009. Understanding of speaker certainty and false-belief reasoning: a comparison of Japanese and German preschoolers. Developmental Science 12.4: 602–13.
McEnery, A.M. and Hardie, A. 2011. Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press.
McEnery, A.M. and Wilson, A. 2001. Corpus Linguistics, 2nd edn. Edinburgh University Press.
Mercier, H. and Sperber, D. 2009. Intuitive and reflective inferences. In Evans, J. and Frankish, K. (eds.) In Two Minds: Dual processes and beyond, pp. 149–70. Oxford University Press.
Mirecki, P. 2005. Misunderstanding: a starting point for successful communication. A view from the relevance-theoretic perspective. In Korzeniowska, A. and Grzegorzewska, M. (eds.) Relevance Studies in Poland, vol. 2, pp. 45–51. The Institute of English Studies, University of Warsaw.
Montague, R. 1974. Formal Philosophy: Selected Papers of Richard Montague (ed. Thomason, R.H.). Yale University Press, New Haven CT.
Morgan, J. and Green, G. 1987. On the search for relevance. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10: 726–7.
Müller-Lyer, F.C. 1889. Optische Urteilstauschungen. Archiv fur Anatomie und Physiologie. Physiologische Abteilung, 2: 263–70.
Navarro, M.P. 2006. Enrichment and loosening: an on-going process in the practice of translation. A study based on some translations of Gulliver's Travels. In Hornero, A.M., Luzón, M.J. and Murillo, S. (eds.) Corpus Linguistics: Applications for the Study of English, pp. 269–86. Peter Lang, Berlin.
Neale, S. 2000. On being explicit. Mind and Language 15: 284–94.
Neale, S. 2005. Pragmatism and binding. In Szabó, Z. (ed.) Semantics vs. Pragmatics, pp. 165–285. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Nicolle, S. and Clark, B. 1998. Phatic interpretations: standardisation and conventionalisation. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 11: 183–91.
Nicolle, S. and Clark, B. 1999. Experimental pragmatics and what is said: a response to Gibbs and Moise. Cognition 66: 337–54.
Noveck, I. 2001. When children are more logical than adults: investigations of scalar implicature. Cognition 78.2: 165–88.
Noveck, I., Bianco, M. and Castry, A. 2001. The costs and benefits of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol 16: 109–21.
Noveck, I. and Sperber, D. 2004. Experimental Pragmatics. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Noveck, I. and Sperber, D. 2007. The why and how of experimental pragmatics: the case of ‘scalar inferences’. In N.C. Burton-Roberts (ed.), pp. 184–212.
Nowik, E.K. 2005. Politeness of the impolite: relevance theory, politeness and banter. In Korzeniowska, A. and Grzegorzewska, M. (eds.) Relevance Studies in Poland, vol. 2, pp. 157–66. The Institute of English Studies, University of Warsaw.
Ogden, C.K. and Richards, I.A. 1923. The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner, London. Also available in a version edited by Gordon, W.T. (1994). Continuum, London.
Owtram, N. 2010. The Pragmatics of Academic Writing. Peter Lang, Berlin.
Padilla Cruz, M. 2007. Metarepresentations and phatic utterances: a pragmatic proposal about the generation of solidarity between interlocutors. In Cap, P. and Nikakowska, J. (eds.) Current Trends in Pragmatics, pp. 110–28. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle.
Padilla Cruz, M. 2008. Three different pragmatic approaches to the teaching of the (im)politeness of phatic utterances in English. In Estébanez, C. and Pérez Ruiz Valladolid, L. (eds.) Language Awareness in English and Spanish, pp. 131–52. University of Valladolid.
Padilla Cruz, M. 2009. Understanding and overcoming pragmatic failure when interpreting phatic utterances. In Gómez Morón, R., Padilla Cruz, M., Fernández Amaya, L. and Hernández López, M.O. (eds.) Pragmatics Applied to Language Teaching and Learning, pp. 87–108. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle.
Pajares Tosca, S. 2000. A pragmatics of links. In Proceedings of Hypertext 2000, San Antonio, TX, pp. 77–84. Also in Journal of Digital Information 1.6. Available at:
Peeters, S. 2010. Metaphors in media discourse: from a conceptual metaphor approach to the relevance-theoretic ‘continuity view’ (and back again). In Witczak-Plisiecka, I. (ed.) Pragmatic Perspectives on Language and Linguistics. Vol. I: Speech Actions in Theory and Applied Studies, pp. 327–59. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle.
Pilkington, A. 1991. Poetic effects: a relevance theory perspective. In Sell, R. (ed.) Literary Pragmatics, pp. 44–61. Routledge, London.
Pilkington, A. 1992. Poetic effects. Lingua 87: 29–51.
Pilkington, A. 1996. Introduction: relevance theory and literary style. Language and Literature 5.3: 157–62.
Pilkington, A. 2000. Poetic Effects. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Pilkington, A. 2001. Non-lexicalised concepts and degrees of effability: poetic thoughts and the attraction of what is not in the dictionary. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 15: 1–10.
Pinker, S. 1997. How The Mind Works. Penguin, London.
Powell, G. 2001. The referential–attributive distinction. Pragmatics and Cognition 9.1: 69–98.
Powell, G. 2002. Underdetermination and the principles of semantic theory. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 102.3: 271–78.
Powell, G. 2010. Language, Thought and Reference. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Premack, D. and Woodruff, G.. 1978. Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4: 515–26.
Prentice, D.A., Gerrig, R.J. and Bailis, D.S. 1997. What readers bring to the processing of fictional texts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 4: 416–20.
Prince, A. and Smollensky, P. 2004. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
Prinz, J.J. 2009. Is the mind really modular? In Stainton, R. (ed.) Contemporary Debates in Cognitive Science, pp. 22–36. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
Rapp, D.N. and Gerrig, R.J.. In press. Predilections for narrative outcomes: the impact of story contexts and reader preferences. To appear in Journal of Memory and Language.
Recanati, F. 1989. The pragmatics of what is said. Mind & Language 4: 295–329.
Recanati, F. 1993. Direct Reference: From Language to Thought. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
Recanati, F. 1995. The alleged priority of literal interpretation. Cognitive Science 19: 207–32.
Recanati, F. 2000. Oratio Obliqua, Oratio Recta: The Semantics of Metarepresentations. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Recanati, F. 2001. What is said. Synthèse 128: 75–91.
Recanati, F. 2002a. Unarticulated constituents. Linguistics and Philosophy 25: 299–345.
Recanati, F. 2002b. Does linguistic communication rest on inference?Mind & Language 17: 105–26. (Special Issue on Pragmatics and Cognitive Science.)
Recanati, F. 2004. Literal Meaning. Cambridge University Press.
Recanati, F. 2007. Indexicality, context and pretence. In N.C. Burton-Roberts (ed.), pp. 213–29.
Recanati, F. 2010. Pragmatics and logical form. In B. Soria and E. Romero (eds.), pp. 25–41.
Rockwell, P. 2000. Lower, slower, louder: vocal cues of sarcasm. Journal of Psycholinguistics Research 29: 483–95.
Romero, E. and Soria, B. 2007. A view of novel metaphor in the light of Recanati's proposals. In Frápolli, M.J. (ed.) Saying, Meaning and Referring: Essays on François Recanati's Philosophy of Language, pp. 145–59. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Rosales Sequeiros, X. 2005. Effects of Pragmatic Interpretation on Translation: Communicative Gaps and Textual Discrepancies. Lincom Studies in Pragmatics 13. Lincom, München.
Rouchota, V. 1988. Procedural meaning and parenthetical discourse markers. In Jucker, A. and Ziv, Y. (eds.) Discourse Markers: Descriptions and Theory, pp. 96–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Rouchota, V. and Jucker, A. (eds) 1998. Current Issues in Relevance Theory. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Rubio Fernandez, P. 2001. The inhibition of core features in metaphor interpretation. Cambridge Working Papers in English and Applied Linguistics 8: 73–100.
Rubio Fernandez, P. 2005. Pragmatic Processes and Cognitive Mechanisms in Lexical Interpretation: The On-line Construction of Concepts. PhD thesis, Cambridge University.
Rubio Fernandez, P. 2007. Suppression in metaphor interpretation: differences between meaning selection and meaning construction. Journal of Semantics 24: 345–71.
Rubio Fernandez, P. 2008. Concept narrowing: the role of context-independent information. Journal of Semantics 25.4: 381–409.
Ruhi, S. and Dogan, G. 2001. Relevance theory and compliments as phatic communication: the case of Turkish. In Bayraktaroglu, A. and Sifianou, M. (eds.) Linguistic Politeness Across Boundaries, pp. 341–90. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Saad, J. 2010. Explicating the Implicit: An Exploration into the Pragmatic Competence of Arabic-speaking Trainee Translators. PhD thesis, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh.
Schegloff, E.A. and Sacks, H. 1973. Opening up closings. Semiotica 7.4: 289–327.
Schneider, K.P. 1988. Small Talk: Analysing Phatic Discourse. Hitzeroth, Marburg.
Scholl, B. and Leslie, A. 1999. Modularity, development and ‘theory of mind’. Mind and Language 14: 131–53.
Schütze, C.T. 1996. The Empirical Base of Linguistics: Grammaticality Judgments and Linguistic Methodology. University of Chicago Press.
Scott, K. 2006. When less is more: implicit arguments and relevance theory. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 18: 139–70.
Scott, K. 2008. Reference, procedures and implicitly communicated meaning. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 20: 275–301.
Scott, K. 2010. The Relevance of Referring Expressions: The Case of Diary Drop in English. PhD thesis, University College London.
Scott, K. 2011. Beyond reference: concepts, procedures and referring expressions. In V. Escandell-Vidal, M. Leonetti and A. Ahern (eds.), pp. 183–203.
Searle, J. 1979. Literal meaning. In Searle, J., Expression and Meaning, pp. 117–36. Cambridge University Press.
Setton, R. 1999. Simultaneous Interpretation: A Cognitive-Pragmatic Analysis. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Setton, R. 2005a. Pointing to contexts: a relevance-theoretic approach to assessing quality and difficulty in interpreting. In Dam, H.V., Engberg, J. and Gerzymisch-Arbogast, H. (eds.) Knowledge Systems and Translation, pp. 275–312. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin and New York.
Setton, R. 2005b. So what is so interesting about simultaneous interpreting?Skase Journal of Translation and Interpretation 1.1: 70–84.
Setton, R. 2006. Context in simultaneous interpretation. Journal of Pragmatics 38.3: 374–89.
Shively, R.L., Menke, R.M. and Manzón-Omundson, S.M. 2008. Perception of irony by L2 learners of Spanish. Issues in Applied Linguistics 16.2: 101–32
Smith, N.V. 2004. Chomsky: Ideas and Ideals, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press.
Soames, S. Forthcoming. The gap between meaning and assertion: why what we literally say often differs from what our words literally mean. In Hackl, M. and Thornton, R. (eds.) Asserting, Meaning, and Implying. Oxford University Press.
Sodian, B. 2004. Theory of mind: the case for conceptual development. In Schneider, W., Schumann-Hengsteler, R. and Sodian, B. (eds.) Young Children's Cognitive Development, pp. 95–131. Routledge, London.
Soria, B. and Romero, E. (eds.) 2010. Explicit Communication: Robyn Carston's Pragmatics. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Sperber, D. 1984. Verbal irony: pretense or echoic mention?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113: 130–6.
Sperber, D. 1994a. The modularity of thought and the epidemiology of representations. In Hirschfeld, L.A. and Gelman, S.A. (eds.) Mapping The Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture, pp. 39–67. Cambridge University Press.
Sperber, D. 1994b. Understanding verbal understanding. In Khalfa, J. (ed.) What is Intelligence?, pp. 179–98. Cambridge University Press.
Sperber, D. 1995. How do we communicate? In Brockman, J. and Matson, K. (eds.) How Things Are: A Science Toolkit for the Mind, pp. 191–9. Morrow, New York.
Sperber, D. 2000. Metarepresentations in an evolutionary perspective. In Sperber, D. (ed.) Metarepresentations: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, pp. 117–37. Oxford University Press.
Sperber, D. 2001. In defense of massive modularity. In Dupoux, E. (ed.) Language, Brain and Cognitive Development: Essays in Honor of Jacques Mehler, pp. 47–57. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Sperber, D. 2005. Modularity and relevance: How can a massively modular mind be flexible and context-sensitive? In Carruthers, P., Laurence, S. and Stich, S. (eds.) The Innate Mind: Structure and contents, pp. 53–68. Oxford University Press.
Sperber, D., Cara, F. and Girotto, V.. 1995. Relevance theory explains the selection task. Cognition 57: 31–95.
Sperber, D. and Girotto, V. 2002. Use or misuse of the selection task? Rejoinder to Fiddick, Cosmides and Tooby. Cognition 85: 277–90.
Sperber, D. and Girotto, V. 2003. Does the selection task detect cheater detection? In Sterleny, K. and Fitness, J. (eds.) From Mating to Mentality: Evaluating Evolutionary Psychology, pp. 197–226. Macquarie Monographs in Cognitive Science. Psychology Press, New York and Hove.
Sperber, D. and Noveck, I.. 2004. Introduction. In I. Noveck and D. Sperber (eds.), pp. 1–22.
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D.. 1982. Mutual knowledge and relevance in theories of comprehension. In Smith, N.V. (ed.) Mutual Knowledge, pp. 61–85. Academic Press, London.
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 1985. Loose talk. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society LXXXVI: 153–71.
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 1986. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford and Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA (2nd edn 1995).
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 1987a. Précis of relevance. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10.4: 697–710.
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 1987b. Presumptions of relevance. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10.4: 736–53.
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 1990a. Spontaneous deduction and mutual knowledge. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13.1: 179–84.
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 1990. Rhetoric and relevance. In Bender, J. and Wellbery, D. (eds.) The Ends of Rhetoric: History, Theory, Practice, pp. 140–56. Stanford University Press.
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 1995. Postface to the second edition of Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 1998. The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon. In. Carruthers, P. and Boucher, J. (eds.) Language and Thought: Interdisciplinary Themes, pp. 184–200. Cambridge University Press.
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 2002. Pragmatics, modularity and mindreading. Mind & Language 17: 3–23.
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 2005. Pragmatics. In Jackson, F. and Smith, M. (eds.) Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy, pp. 468–501. Oxford University Press.
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 2008. A deflationary account of metaphor. In Gibbs, R. (ed.) Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, pp. 84–108. Cambridge University Press.
Sroda, M.S. 2000. Relevance Theory and the Markedness Model in SLA: Cognitive Approaches to Pragmatics and Second Language Acquisition. PhD thesis, University of South Carolina.
Stainton, R. 1994. Using non-sentences: an application of relevance theory. Pragmatics and Cognition 2: 269–84.
Stainton, R. 2006. Words and Thoughts: Subsentences, Ellipsis, and the Philosophy of Language. Oxford University Press.
Stanley, J. 2000. Context and logical form. Linguistics and Philosophy 23: 391–434.
Stanley, J. 2002. Making it articulated. Mind & Language 17 1&2: 149–68.
Stanley, J. and Szabó, Z.G. 2000. On quantifier domain restriction. Mind & Language 15: 219–61.
Stöver, H. 2011a. Awareness in metaphor understanding: the lingering of the literal. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 9.1: 65–82.
Stöver, H. 2011b. Metaphor and Relevance Theory: A New Hybrid Model. PhD thesis, University of Bedfordshire.
Strawson, P.F. 1964[1971]. Intention and convention in speech acts. Philosophical Review 73: 439–60. Reprinted in P. F. Strawson (1971) Logico-Linguistic Papers, pp. 170–89. Methuen, London.
Surian, L. and Leslie, A. 1999. Competence and performance in false belief understanding: a comparison of autistic and normal 3-year-old children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 17: 141–55.
Swinney, D. 1979. Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18: 645–59.
Tabossi, P. 1993. Connections, competitions and cohorts. In Altmann, G.T.M. and Shillcock, R.C. (eds.) Cognitive Models of Speech Processing: The second Sperlonga Meeting, pp. 277–94. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove.
Tabossi, P., Burani, C. and Scott, D.. 1995. Word identification in fluent speech. Journal of Memory and Language 34: 440–67.
Tanaka, K. 1992. The pun in advertising: a pragmatic approach. Lingua 87: 91–102.
Tanaka, K. 1994. Advertising Language: A Pragmatic Approach to Advertisements in Britain and Japan. Routledge, London.
Tendahl, M. and Gibbs, R. 2008. Complementary perspectives on metaphor: cognitive linguistics and relevance theory. Journal of Pragmatics 40.11: 1823–64.
Teubert, W. and Cermakova, A. 2007. Corpus Linguistics: A Short Introduction. Continuum, London.
Thomas, J. 1995. Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. Longman, London.
Thompson, G. 2004. Introducing Functional Grammar, 2nd edn. Hodder Arnold, London.
Tomasello, M. 2005. Constructing a Language: A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.
Tomlinson, C. (ed.) 2000. William Carlos Williams: Selected poems. Penguin, London.
Travis, C. 1981. The True and the False: The Domain of the Pragmatic. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Travis, C. 1985. On what is strictly speaking true. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 15: 187–229.
Travis, C. 1991. Annals of analysis: Studies in the Way of Words by H. P. Grice. Mind 100: 237–64.
Van der Henst, J.-B., Carles, L. and Sperber, D. 2002. Truthfulness and relevance in telling the time. Mind & Language 17.5: 457–66.
Van der Henst, J.-B. and Sperber, D. 2004. Testing the cognitive and the communicative principles of relevance. In I. Noveck and D. Sperber (eds.), 141–69.
Van der Henst, J.-B., Sperber, D. and Politzer, G. 2002. When is a conclusion worth deriving? A relevance-based analysis of indeterminate relational problems. Thinking & Reasoning 8: 1–20.
Vandepitte, S. 1989. A pragmatic function of intonation. Lingua 79: 265–97.
Vega Moreno, R. 2004. Metaphor interpretation and emergence. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 16: 297–322.
Vega Moreno, R. 2005. Creativity and Convention: The Pragmatics of Everyday Figurative Speech. PhD thesis, University College London.
Vega Moreno, R. 2007. Creativity and Convention: The Pragmatics of Everyday Figurative Speech. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Walton, K. 1990. Mimesis as Make-believe: On the Foundations of the Representational Arts. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Ward, T., Smith, S. and Vaid, J. (eds.) 1997. Creative Thought: An Investigation of Conceptual Structures and Processes. American Psychological Association, Washington DC.
Wason, P. 1966. Reasoning. In Foss, B.M. (ed.) New Horizons in Psychology. Penguin, Harmondsworth.
Watts, R.J. 2004. Politeness. Cambridge University Press.
Wellman, H.M., Cross, D. and Watson, J. 2001. Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: the truth about false belief. Child Development 72: 655–84.
Wharton, T. 2003a. Natural pragmatics and natural codes. Mind and Language 18.5: 447–77.
Wharton, T. 2003b. Interjections, language and the ‘showing-waying’ continuum. Pragmatics and Cognition 11.1: 39–91.
Wharton, T. 2006. Evolution of pragmatics. In Brown, K. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edn, pp. 338–45. Elsevier, Oxford.
Wharton, T. 2009. Pragmatics and Non-Verbal Communication. Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, D. 1995. Is there a maxim of truthfulness?UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 7: 197–212.
Wilson, D. 2000. Metarepresentation in linguistic communication. In Sperber, D. (ed.) Metarepresentations: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, pp. 411–48. Oxford University Press.
Wilson, D. 2005. New directions for research on pragmatics and modularity. Lingua 115: 1129–46.
Wilson, D. 2006. The pragmatics of verbal irony: echo or pretence?Lingua 116: 1722–43.
Wilson, D. 2009. Irony and metarepresentation. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 21: 183–226.
Wilson, D. 2011a. Parallels and differences in the treatment of metaphor in relevance theory and cognitive linguistics. Intercultural Pragmatics 8.2: 177–96.
Wilson, D. 2011b. Conceptual-procedural distinction: past, present and future. In V. Escandell-Vidal, M. Leonetti and A. Ahern (eds.), pp. 3–31.
Wilson, D. and Carston, R. 2006. Metaphor, relevance and the emergent property issue. Mind and Language 21.3: 404–33.
Wilson, D. and Carston, R. 2007. A unitary approach to lexical pragmatics: relevance, inference and ad hoc concepts. In N.C. Burton-Roberts (ed.), pp. 230–59.
Wilson, D. and Carston, R. 2008. Metaphor, relevance and the ‘emergent property’ problem. The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 3: 1–40.
Wilson, D and Sperber, D. 1981. On Grice's theory of conversation. In Werth, P. (ed.) Conversation and Discourse, pp. 155–78. Croom Helm, London.
Wilson, D and Sperber, D. 1986. Pragmatics and modularity. Chicago Linguistic Society 22, Parasession on Pragmatics and Grammatical Theory, pp. 68–74.
Wilson, D and Sperber, D. 1988. Mood and the analysis of non-declarative sentences. In Dancy, J., Moravcsik, J. and Taylor, C. (eds.) Human Agency: Language, Duty and Value, pp. 77–101. Stanford University Press. Reprinted in A. Kasher (ed.) 1998, vol. II, pp. 262–89.
Wilson, D and Sperber, D. 1993. Linguistic form and relevance. Lingua 90: 1–25.
Wilson, D and Sperber, D. 1998. Pragmatics and time. In R. Carston and S. Uchida (eds.), pp. 1–22.
Wilson, D and Sperber, D. 2002. Truthfulness and relevance. Mind 111: 583–632.
Wilson, D and Sperber, D. 2004. Relevance theory. In L.R. Horn and G. Ward (eds.), pp. 607–32.
Wilson, D and Sperber, D. 2012. Meaning and Relevance. Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, D. and Wharton, T. 2006. Relevance and prosody. Journal of Pragmatics 38.10: 1559–79.
Wimmer, H. and Perner, J. 1983. Beliefs about beliefs: representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children's understanding of deception. Cognition 13.1: 103–28.
Yamanaka, E.J. 2003. Effect of proficiency and length of residence on the pragmatic comprehension of Japanese ESL. Second Language Studies 22.1: 107–75.
Yus, F. 1998a. Relevance theory and media discourse: a verbal-visual model of communication. Poetics 25: 293–309.
Yus, F. 1998b. The ‘what-do-you-mean syndrome’: a taxonomy of misunderstandings in Harold Pinter's plays. Estudios Ingleses de la Universidad Complutense 6: 81–100.
Yus, F. 1999a. Towards a pragmatic taxonomy of misunderstandings. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 38: 218–39.
Yus, F. 1999b. Misunderstandings and explicit/implicit communication. Pragmatics 9.4: 487–517.
Yus, F. 2006. Relevance theory. In Brown, K. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, vol. 10, 2nd edn, pp. 512–19. Elsevier, Oxford.
Yus, F. 2008. Alterations of relevance in cyber-media. Universitas Psychologica 7.3: 623–36.
Yus, F. 2009. Visual metaphor versus verbal metaphor: a unified account. In Forceville, C. and Uriós-Aparisi, E. (eds.) Multimodal Metaphor, pp. 145–72. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.
Yus, F. 2010. Relevance theory. In Heine, B. and Narrog, H. (eds.) Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, pp. 679–701. Oxford University Press.
Yus, F. 2011. Cyberpragmatics: Internet-Mediated Communication in Context. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Zajac, M. 2004. Polish quantified sentences. From logical form to explicature: an analysis of selected examples from a corpus of young Poles' everyday conversation. In Mioduszewska, E. (ed.) Relevance Studies in Poland, pp. 143–53. The Institute of English Studies, University of Warsaw.
Zaki, M. 2011. The Semantics and Pragmatics of Demonstratives in English and Arabic. PhD thesis, Middlesex University.
Zegarac, V. 1998. What is ‘phatic communication’? In V. Rouchota and A. Jucker (eds.), pp. 327–62.
Zegarac, V. and Clark, B. 1999. Phatic interpretations and phatic communication. Journal of Linguistics 35.2: 321–46.
