Epistemic Vigilance, Cautious Optimism and Sophisticated Understanding

Manuel Padilla Cruz

doi:10.2478/v10015-011-0040-y

Authors

Manuel Padilla Cruz University of Seville

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2478/v10015-011-0040-y

Abstract

Humans have developed a critical alertness to the believability and reliability of communication: epistemic vigilance (Sperber et al. 2010). It is responsible for trusting interlocutors and believing interpretations. But what is exactly its role in communication? This paper suggests that epistemic vigilance may trigger shifts from a default processing strategy driven by expectations of optimal relevance to more complex processing strategies. These would be enacted when hearers notice speakers’ linguistic mistakes, hearers realise that they have made interpretive mistakes or when hearers discover that speakers seek to mislead them to erroneous or unintended interpretations.

Author Biography

Manuel Padilla Cruz, University of Seville

Manuel Padilla Cruz received his Ph.D. in English Linguistics from the University of Seville, where he currently teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in pragmatics, ESL, and sociolinguistics. His research interests and publications focus on cognitive pragmatics (Relevance Theory) and social pragmatics (politeness theory). He is a member of the research group “Intercultural Studies (English-Spanish): Pragmatic and Discourse Issues”, has authored four manuals and co-edited three linguistics volumes.

References

Attardo, Salvatore. 1990. The violation of Grice’s maxims in jokes”. In K. Hall et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 16th Berkeley Linguistics Society Conference. Berkeley: University of California Press, 355-362.
Google Scholar

Attardo, Salvatore. 1993. Violation of conversational maxims and cooperation: the case of jokes. Journal of Pragmatics 19: 537-558.
Google Scholar

Attardo, Salvatore. 1994. Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Google Scholar

Attardo, Salvatore. 1997. The semantic foundations of cognitive theories of humor. Humor 10(4): 395-420.
Google Scholar

Carston, Robyn. 2002. Thoughts and Utterances. The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell.
Google Scholar

Carston, Robyn. 2010. Lexical pragmatics, ad hoc concepts and metaphor: from a relevance theory perspective. Italian Journal of Linguistics 22(1): 153-180.
Google Scholar

Curcó, Carmen. 1995. Some observations on the pragmatics of humorous interpretations. A relevance-theoretic approach. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 7: 27-47.
Google Scholar

Curcó, Carmen. 1996. The implicit expression of attitudes, mutual manifestness and verbal humour. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 8: 89-99.
Google Scholar

Dynel, Marta. 2008. There is method in the humorous speaker’s madness: humour and Grice’s model. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4(1): 159-185.
Google Scholar

Forabosco, Giovannantonio. 1992. Cognitive aspect of the humor process: the concept of incongruity. Humor 5(1-2): 45-68.
Google Scholar

Forabosco, Giovannantonio. 2008. Is the concept of incongruity still a useful construct for the advancement of humour research? Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4(1): 45-62.
Google Scholar

Mascaro, Olivier and Dan Sperber. 2009. The moral, epistemic, and mindreading components of children’s vigilance towards deception. Cognition 112(3): 367-380.
Google Scholar

McGhee, Paul. 1972. On the cognitive origins of incongruity humor: fantasy assimilation versus reality assimilation. In J. H. Goldstein and P. E. McGhee (eds.), The Psychology of Humor. London: Academic Press, 61-80.
Google Scholar

Norrick, Neal R. and Janine Klein. 2008. Class clowns: talking out of turn with an orientation toward humor. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4(1): 83-107.
Google Scholar

Oswald, Steve. 2011. From interpretation to consent: arguments, beliefs and meaning. Discourse Studies 13(6): 806-814.
Google Scholar

Padilla Cruz, Manuel. In press. Understanding and overcoming pragmatic failure in intercultural communication: from focus on speakers to focus on hearers. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching.
Google Scholar

Padilla Cruz, Manuel. Forthcoming. Epistemic vigilance and pragmatic failure in interlanguage interaction.
Google Scholar

Peleg, Orna, Rachel Giora and Ofer Fein. 2008. Resisting contextual information: You can’t put a salient meaning down. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4(1): 13-44.
Google Scholar

Raskin, Victor. 1985. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Google Scholar

Raskin, Victor and Salvatore Attardo. 1994. Non-literalness and non-bona-fide in language: an approach to formal and computational treatments of humor. Pragmatics and Cognition 2: 31-69.
Google Scholar

Reynolds, Mike. 1995. Where the trouble lies: cross-cultural pragmatics and miscommunication. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 30: 5-15.
Google Scholar

Schnurr, Stephanie and Charley Rowe. 2008. The ‘dark side’ of humour. An analysis of subversive humour in workplace emails. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4(1): 109-130.
Google Scholar

Sperber, Dan. 1994. Understanding verbal understanding. In J. Khalfa (ed.), What Is Intelligence? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 179-198.
Google Scholar

Sperber, Dan. 1996. Explaining Culture. A Naturalistic Approach. Oxford: Blackwell.
Google Scholar

Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance. Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Google Scholar

Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance. Communication and cognition. 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.
Google Scholar

Sperber, Dan et al. 2010. Epistemic vigilance. Mind and Language 25(4): 359-393.
Google Scholar

Suls, Jerry M. 1972. A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons”. In Jeffrey H. Goldstein and Paul E. McGhee (eds.), The Psychology of Humor: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Issues. New York: Academic Press, 81-100.
Google Scholar

Suls, Jerry M. 1983. Cognitive processes in humor appreciation. In Paul E. McGhee and Jeffrey H. Goldstein (eds.), Handbook of Humor Research (I). New York: Springer, 39-57.
Google Scholar

Tanaka, Keiko. 1992. The pun in advertising: a pragmatic approach. Lingua 87: 91-102.
Google Scholar

Tannen, Deborah. 1984. The pragmatics of cross-cultural communication. Applied Linguistics 5: 188-195.
Google Scholar

Thomas, Jenny. 1983. Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics 4: 91-112.
Google Scholar

Unger, Christoph. 2012. Epistemic vigilance and the function of procedural indicators in communication and comprehension. In E. Wałaszewska and A. Piskorska (eds.), Relevance Theory. More than Understanding. New Castle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 45-73.
Google Scholar

Wells, John. 1996. Accents of English 1: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Wharton, Tim. 2009. Pragmatics and Non-verbal Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Wilson, Deirdre. 1993. Relevance and understanding. Pragmalingüística 1: 335-366.
Google Scholar

Wilson, Deirdre. 1999. Metarepresentation in linguistic communication. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 11: 127-161.
Google Scholar

Wilson, Deirdre. 2011. Understanding and believing. Paper presented at Relevance Round Table (Meeting 3). Warsaw: Institute of English Studies, University of Warsaw.
Google Scholar

Wilson, Deirdre. 2012a. Relevance theory and the interpretation of literary works Paper presented at the 5th International Symposium on Intercultural, Cognitive and Social Pragmatics (EPICS V). Seville: Pablo de Olavide University.
Google Scholar

Wilson, Deirdre. 2012b. Modality and the conceptual-procedural distinction. In E. Wałaszewska and A. Piskorska (eds.), Relevance Theory. More than Understanding. New Castle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 24-43.
Google Scholar

Wilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber. 2002. Relevance theory. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 14: 249-287.
Google Scholar

Wilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber. 2004. Relevance Theory. In L. Horn and G. Ward (eds.), The Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Google Scholar

Yamaguchi, Haruhiko. 1988. How to pull strings with words. Deceptive violations in the garden-path joke. Journal of Pragmatics 12: 323-337.
Google Scholar

Yus Ramos, Francisco. 1999. Misunderstandings and explicit/implicit communication. Pragmatics 9(4): 487-517.
Google Scholar

Yus Ramos, Francisco. 2000. On reaching the intended ironic interpretation. International Journal of Communication 10(1-2): 27-78.
Google Scholar

Yus Ramos, Francisco. 2003. Humour and the search for relevance. Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1295-1331.
Google Scholar

Yus Ramos, Francisco. 2008. A relevance-theoretic classification of jokes. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4(1): 131-157.
Google Scholar

Yus Ramos, Francisco. 2012. Relevance Theory and contextual sources-centred analysis of irony. Current research and compatibility. Paper presented at the 5th International Symposium on Intercultural, Cognitive and Social Pragmatics (EPICS V). Seville: Pablo de Olavide University.
Google Scholar

Yus Ramos, Francisco. Forthcoming a. An inference-centred analysis of jokes: the Intersecting Circles Model of humorous communication.
Google Scholar

Yus Ramos, Francisco. Forthcoming b. Relevance Theory and contextual sourcescentred analysis of irony: current research and compatibility.
Google Scholar