Bibliography – The Semantics-Pragmatics Controversy


Allot, N. and Textor, M.: 2012, Lexical Pragmatic Adjustment and the Nature of Ad-hoc Conpcets., International Review of Pragmatics 4, 185–208. URL:

Ariel, M.: 2002, The demise of a unique concept of literal meaning., Journal of Pragmatics 34, 361–402.

Asher, N. and Lascarides, A.: 2003, Logics of Conversation., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Assimakopoulos, S.: 2008, Intention, common ground and the availability of semantic content: a relevance-theoretic perspective., in I. Kecskes and J. Mey (eds), Intention, common ground and the egocentric speaker-hearer., Mouton de Gruyter.

Bach, K.: 1994a, Conversational Impliciture., Mind and Language 9, 124–162.

Bach, K.: 1994b, Semantic slack: what is said and more., in S. L. Tsohatzidis (ed.), Foundations of Speech Act Theory. Philosophical and linguistic perspectives., Routledge, pp. 267–291.

Bach, K.: 1997, The Semantics-Pragmatics Distinction: What It Is and Why It Matters., Linguistische Berichte, Special Issue on Pragmatics 8, 33–50.

Bach, K.: 2000, Quantification, Qualification and Context. A Reply to Stanley and Szabó., Mind and Language 15, 262–283.

Bach, K.: 2001a, Speaking Loosely: Sentence Nonliterality., Midwest Studies in Philosophy 25, 249–263. Figurative Language.

Bach, K.: 2001b, You don’t say?, Synthese 128, 15–44.

Bach, K.: 2004, Minding the gap., in C. Bianchi (ed.), The Semantics/Pragmatics Distinction., Stanford: CSLI.

Bach, K.: 2005, Context ex Machina., in G. S. Zoltán (ed.), Semantics vs. Pragmatics., Oxford: Clarendon, pp. 15–44.

Bach, K.: 2006a, Impliciture vs. Explicature: What’s the difference? Paper given at the ‘Workshop on Explicit Communication’, University of Granada, Spain. URL:

Bach, K.: 2006b, The Excluded Middle: Semantic Minimalism without Minimal Propositions., Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73, 435–442.

Bach, K.: 2012, Context dependence (such as it is), in M. Kölbel and M. Garcia-Carpintero (eds), The Continuum Companion to the Philosophy of Language., Continuum, pp. 153–184.

Bach, K.: n.d.a, From the strange to the bizarre: Another Reply to Cappelen and Lepore. URL:

Bach, K.: n.d.b, Minimalism for Dummies: A Reply to Cappelen and Lepore. URL:

Baker, C., Fillmore, C. and Cronin, B.: 2003, The structure of the FrameNet database., International Journal of Lexicography 16, 281–296.

Baker, C., Fillmore, C. and Lowe, J.: 1998, The Berkeley FrameNet project., Proceedings of the 36th ACL and 17th COLING, San Francisco, pp. 86–90.

Barner, D., Brooks, N. and Bale, A.: 2011, Accessing the unsaid: The role of scalar alternatives in children’s pragmatic inference, Cognition 118, 84–93.

Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M. and Frith, U.: 1985, Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”?, Cognition 21, 37–46.

Beretta, A., Fiorentino, R. and Poeppel, D.: 2005, The effects of homonymy and polysemy on lexical access: an MEG study., Cognitive Brain Research 24, 57–65.

Bezuidenhout, A. L.: 2006, The coherence of contextualism., Mind and Language 21, 1–10.

Bezuidenhout, A. L. and Cutting, J. C.: 2002, Literal meaning, minimal propositions, and pragmatic processing., Journal of Pragmatics 34, 433–456.

Bezuidenhout, A. L. and Morris, R. K.: 2004, Implicature, Relevance, and Default Pragmatic Inference., in D. Sperber and I. Noveck (eds), Experimental Pragmatics., Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 257–282.

Bianchi, C. (ed.): 2004, The Semantics/Pragmatics Distinction., CSLI Publications.

Bierwisch, M.: 1979, Wörtliche Bedeutung - eine pragmatische Gretchenfrage., in G. Grewendorf (ed.), Sprechakttheorie und Semantik., Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp Verlag, pp. 119–148.

Bierwisch, M.: 1980, Semantic Structure and Illocutionary Force., Speech act theory and pragmatics. , D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

Bierwisch, M.: 1983, Semantische und konzeptuelle Repräsentation lexikalischer Einheiten., in R. Růžička and W. Motsch (eds), Untersuchungen zur Semantik., Akademie Verlag, Berlin, pp. 61–99.

Bierwisch, M.: 1997, Lexical Information from a Minimalist Point of View., in C. Wilder, H. M. Gerlach and M. Bierwisch (eds), The Role of Economy Principles in Linguistic Theory., Akademie Verlag, Berlin.

Bierwisch, M. and Lang, E. (eds): 1987, Grammatische und konzeptuelle Aspekte von Dimension-sadjektiven. , Akademie-Verlag, Berlin.

Bierwisch, M. and Schreuder, R.: 1992, From concepts to lexical items., Cognition 42, 23–60.

Blasko, D. G. and Connine, C. M.: 1993, Effects of familiarity and aptness in metaphor processing., Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 19, 295–308.

Bohrn, I. G., Altmann, U. and Jacobs, A. M.: 2012, Looking at the brains behind figurative language – a quantitative meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies on metaphor, idiom, and irony processing., Neuropsychologia 50, 2669–2683.

Borer, H.: 2004, Structuring Sense., Vol. 1 and 2, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Borg, E.: 2001, An Expedition Abroad: Metaphor, Thought and Reporting., in P. French and H. Wettstein (eds), Midwest Studies in Philosophy XXV, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 227–248.

Borg, E.: 2004a, Formal semantics and intentional states., Analysis 64, 215–23.

Borg, E.: 2004b, Minimal Semantics., Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Borg, E.: 2006, Review of Literal Meaning., Mind 115, 461–5.

Borg, E.: 2007, Minimalism vs. Contextualism in Semantics., in G. Preyer and G. Peter (eds), Context Sensitivity and Semantic Minimalism: Essays on Semantics and Pragmatics., Oxford University Press, pp. 546–571.

Borg, E.: 2009, On three theories of implicature: Default Theory, Relevance Theory and Minimalism., International Review of Pragmatics 1, 63–83.

Borg, E.: 2012, Semantics without pragmatics?, in K. Allen and K. Jaszczolt (eds), The Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 513–528.

Braun, D.: 2010, Indexicals., in E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy., summer 2010 edn, Stanford University.

Breheny, R., Katsos, N. and Williams, J.: 2006, Are generalised scalar implicatures generated by default? an on-line investigation into the role of context in generating pragmatic inferences., Cognition 100, 434–463.

Brennan, J. and Pylkkänen, L.: 2008, Processing events: Behavioral and neuromagnetic correlates of Aspectual Coercion, Brain and Language 106, 132–143.

Bryant, G.: 2012, Is Verbal Irony Special?, Language and Linguistics Compass 6, 673–685.

Burton-Roberts, N.: 1994, Ambiguity, sentence and utterance., Transactions of the Philological Society 92, 179–213.

Burton-Roberts, N.: 2000, Where and what is phonology? A representational perspective., in N. Burton-Roberts, P. Carr and G. Docherty (eds), Phonological knowledge., Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 39–66.

Burton-Roberts, N.: 2005, Robyn Carston on semantics, pragmatics and ‘encoding’., Journal of Linguistics 41, 389–407.

Burton-Roberts, N.: 2006, Cancellation and Intention. Paper given at the ‘Workshop on Explicit Communication’, University of Granada, Spain.

Burton-Roberts, N.: 2007a, Varieties of semantics and encoding: negation, narrowing /loosening and numerals., in N. Burton-Roberts (ed.), Pragmatics., Palgrave, Basingstoke.

Burton-Roberts, N.: 2013, On Grice and cancellation., Journal of Pragmatics 48, 17–28.

Burton-Roberts, N. (ed.): 2007b, Pragmatics., Palgrave, Basingstoke.

Burton-Roberts, N. and Poole, G.: 2006, ‘Virtual conceptual necessity’, feature-dissociation and the Saussurian legacy in generative grammar., Journal of Linguistics 42, 575–628.

Busse, D.: 1991, Diachrone Semantik und Pragmatik. Untersuchungen zur Erklärung und Beschreibung des Sprachwandels., Tübingen: Niemeyer.

Cacciari, C. and Tabossi, P.: 1988, The Comprehension of Idioms., Journal of Memory and Language 27, 668–683.

Capone, A.: 2005, Speech acts: literal and non-literal., in K. Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Elsevier Science, pp. 4143–4144.

Capone, A.: 2006, On Grice’s Circle (a theory-internal problem in linguistic theories of the Gricean type.), Journal of Pragmatics 38, 645–669.

Capone, A.: 2009, Are explicatures cancellable? Toward a theory of the speaker’s intentionality., Intercultural Pragmatics 6(1), 55–83.

Cappelen, H. and Lepore, E.: 2005, Insensitive Semantics: a defense of semantic minimalism and speech act pluralism., Blackwell.

Cappelen, H. and Lepore, E.: n.d.a, Kent Bach on Minimalism for Dummies. URL:

Cappelen, H. and Lepore, E.: n.d.b, Reply to Bach. URL:

Carston, R.: 1997, Enrichment and loosening: complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed?, Linguistische Berichte, Special Issue on Pragmatics 8, 103–27.

Carston, R.: 1999, The semantics/pragmatics distinction: A view from Relevance Theory., in K. Turner (ed.), The Semantics/Pragmatics Interface from Different Points of View., Current research in the semantics - pragmatics interface 1, Elsevier Science, Oxford.

Carston, R.: 2002a, Linguistic meaning, communicated meaning and cognitive pragmatics., Mind and Language 17(1/2), 127–48. Special Issue on Pragmatics and Cognitive Science.

Carston, R.: 2002b, Metaphor, ad hoc concepts and word meaning - more questions than answers., UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 14, University College London.

Carston, R.: 2002c, Thoughts and Utterances. The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication., Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.

Carston, R.: 2004a, Explicature and semantics., in S. Davis and B. S. Gillon (eds), Semantics: A Reader., Oxford University Press, pp. 817–845.

Carston, R.: 2004b, Relevance Theory and the saying/implicating distinction., in L. Horn and G. Ward (eds), Handbook of Pragmatics., Oxford: Blackwell.

Carston, R.: 2004c, Truth-conditional content and conversational implicature., in C. Bianchi (ed.), The Semantics/Pragmatics Distinction., CSLI Publications.

Carston, R.: 2007, How many pragmatic systems are there?, in M.-J. Frapolli (ed.), Saying, Meaning, Referring: Essays on the Philosophy of François Recanati., Palgrave, pp. 18–48.

Carston, R.: 2009, The explicit/implicit distinction in pragmatics and the limits of explicit communication., International Review of Pragmatics 1, 35–62.

Carston, R.: 2010, Explicit Communication and ‘Free’ Pragmatic Enrichment., in B. Soria and E. Romero (eds), Explicit communication: Robyn Carston’s pragmatics, Palgrave, pp. 217–287.

Carston, R.: 2012, Word meaning and concept expressed., The Linguistic Review 29, 607–623.

Carston, R. and Hall, A. M.: 2012, Implicature and explicature., in H. J. Schmid (ed.), Handbook of Cognitive Pragmatics., Mouton de Gruyter.

Chierchia, G.: 2004, Scalar Implicatures, Polarity Phenomena, and the Syntax/Pragmatics Interace., in A. Belletti (ed.), Structures and Beyond., Oxford University Press, pp. 39–103.

Chierchia, G., Fox, D. and Spector, B.: 2010, The Grammatical View of Scalar Implicatures and the Relationship between Semantics and Pragmatics.

Chierchia, G. and McConnell-Ginet, S.: 2000, Meaning and grammar: an introduction to semantics, 2. edn, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT.

Chng, S. W.: 1999, Language, thought and literal meaning., Phd thesis, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.

Clark, H. H.: 1973, Space, time, semantics and the child., in T. E. Moore (ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language., New York: Academic Press, pp. 27–63.

Cohen, A.: 2006, Anaphora resolution and minimal models., in J. Bos and A. Koller (eds), ICoS-5, Buxton, England, pp. 7–16.

Cole, P. (ed.): 1981, Radical pragmatics, Academic, New York.

Colston, H. L.: 2000, On necessary conditions for verbal irony comprehension., Pragmatics and Cognition 8, 277–324.

Colston, H. L.: 2002, Contrast and assimilation in verbal irony., Journal of Pragmatics 34, 111–142.

Colston, H. L. and Gibbs, R. W.: 2002, Are Irony and Metaphor Understood Differently?, Metaphor and Symbol 17, 57–80.

Curcó, C.: 2000, Irony: Negation, echo and metarepresentation., Lingua 110, 257–280.

Dascal, M.: 1987, Defending literal meaning., Cognitive Science 11, 259–281.

Dascal, M.: 1989, On the roles of context and literal meaning in understanding., Cognitive Science 13, 253–257.

de Villiers, J., Myers, B. and Stainton, R.: 2010, Differential Pragmatic Abilities and Autism Spectrum Disorders: The Case of Pragmatic Determinants of Literal Content., in M. Macaulay and P. Garces-Blitvich (eds), Pragmatics and Context., Toronto: Antares.

de Villiers, J., Stainton, R. and Szatmari, P.: 2007, Pragmatic abilities in autism spectrum disorder: a case study in philosophy and the empirical., Midwest Studies in Philosophy 31, 292–317.

Dennett, D. C.: 1969, Content and Consciousness., Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

Dews, S. and Winner, E.: 1999, Obligatory processing of literal and nonliteral meanings in verbal irony., Journal of Pragmatics 31, 1579–1599.

Dölling, J.: 1997, Semantic Form and Abductive Fixation of Parameters., in J. Dölling (ed.), Systematische Bedeutungsvariationen: Semantische Form und kontextuelle Interpretation, University of Leipzig.

Dölling, J.: 2000, Formale Analyse von Metonymie und Metapher., in R. Eckhardt and K. von Heusinger (eds), Meaning Change – Meaning Variation., University of Konstanz, pp. 31–53.

Dölling, J.: 2001, Systematische Bedeutungsvariationen: Semantische Form und kontextuelle Interpretation., Linguistische Arbeitsberichte 78, University of Leipzig, Germany.

Dölling, J.: 2003a, Aspectual (Re-)Interpretation: Structural Representation and Processing., Mediating between Concepts and Grammar., Berlin-New York: Mouton - de Gruyter, pp. 303–322.

Dölling, J.: 2003b, Flexibility in Adverbal Modification: Reinterpretation as Contextual Enrichment., Modifying Adjuncts., Berlin-New York: Mouton - de Gruyter, pp. 511–552.

Dölling, J.: 2005, Semantische Form und pragmatische Anreicherung: Situationsausdrücke in der Äußerungsinterpretation., Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 24, 159–225.

Dölling, J.: 2013, Aspectual Coercion and Eventuality Structure., Aspects, Phases, and Arguments: Topics in the Semantics of Verbs., Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Dölling, J. and Zybatow, T.: 2007, Verb Meaning: How much Semantics is in the Lexicon?, in A. Späth (ed.), Interfaces and Interface Conditions., Mouton – de Gruyter, pp. 33–75.

Dynel, M.: 2013, Irony from a neo-Gricean perspective., Intercultural Pragmatics 10, 403–431.

Egg, M.: 1994, Zur Repräsentation extrem polysemer Lexeme., in M. Schwarz (ed.), Kognitive Semantik., Narr, Tübingen.

Egg, M.: 2002, Semantic construction for reinterpretation phenomena, Linguistics 40, 579–609.

Egg, M.: 2003, Beginning Novels and Finishing Hamburgers: Remarks on the Semantics of to begin, Journal of Semantics 20, 163–191.

Egg, M.: 2005, Flexible Semantics for Reinterpretation Phenomena., CSLI, Stanford.

Eviatar, Z. and Just, M. A.: 2006, Brain correlates of discourse processing: An fMRI investigation of irony and conventional metaphor comprehension., Neuropsychologia 44, 2348–2359.

Fillmore, C., Johnson, C. and Petruck, M.: 2003, Background to FrameNet., International Journal of Lexicography 16, 235–250.

Fodor, J. A.: 1983, Modularity of Mind: An Essay on Faculty Psychology., Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Fodor, J. A.: 1998, Concepts. Where cognitive science went wrong., Oxford: Clarendon.

Fodor, J. A. and Lepore, E.: 1998, The Emptiness of the Lexicon: Reflections on James Pustejovsky’s The Generative Lexicon., Linguistic Inquiry 29, 269–288.

Foraker, S. and Murphy, G. L.: 2012, Polysemy in sentence comprehension: Effects of meaning dominance., Journal of Memory and Language 67, 407–425.

Frisson, S.: 2009, Semantic Underspecification in Language Processing., Language and Linguistics Compass 3(1), 111–27.

Frisson, S. and Pickering, M. J.: 1999, The Processing of Metonymy: Evidence from Eye Movements., Journal of Experimental Psychology 25(6), 1366–1383.

Frisson, S. and Pickering, M. J.: 2007, The processing of familiar and novel senses of a word: why reading Dickens is easy but reading Needham can be hard., Language and Cognitive Processes 22, 595–613.

Garcia-Carpintero, M.: 2006, Recanati on the Semantics/Pragmatics distinction., Critica 38(112), 35–68.

Garrett, M. and Harnish, R. M.: 2007, Experimental Pragmatics: Testing for impliciture., Pragmatics and Cognition 16(1), 65–90.

Garrett, M. and Harnish, R. M.: 2008, Skating along the syntactic verge., in W. D. Lewis, S. Karimi, H. Harley and S. O. Farrar (eds), Time and Again. Theoretical Perspectives on Formal Linguistics., Benjamins, Amsterdam.

Garrett, M. and Harnish, R. M.: 2009, Q-Phenomena, I-Phenomena and Impliciture: Some Experimental Pragmatics., International Review of Pragmatics 1, 84–117.

Gazdar, G.: 1979, Pragmatics: implicature, presupposition and logical form., Academic Press.

Gernsbacher, M. A., Keysar, B., Robertson, R. R. W. and Werner, N. K.: 2001, The Role of Suppression and Enhancement in Understanding Metaphors., Journal of Memory and Language 45, 433–450.

Gernsbacher, M. A. and Robertson, R. R. W.: 1999, The role of suppression in figurative language comprehension., Journal of Pragmatics 31, 1619–1630.

Gibbs, R. W.: 1994, The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Gibbs, R. W.: 2002, A new look at literal meaning in understanding what is said and implicated., Journal of Pragmatics 34, 457 – 486.

Gibbs, R. W. and Moise, J. F.: 1997, Pragmatics in understanding what is said., Cognition 62, 51–74.

Giora, R.: 1995, On irony and negation., Discourse Processes 19, 239–264.

Giora, R.: 1997, Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis., Cognitive Linguistics 8, 183–206.

Giora, R.: 1999, On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of literal and figurative language., Journal of Pragmatics 31, 919–929.

Giora, R.: 2002, Literal vs. figurative language: Different or equal?, Journal of Pragmatics 34, 487–506.

Giora, R.: 2012a, Happy new war: The role of salient meanings and salience-based interpretations in processing utterances., in H.-J. Schmid (ed.), Cognitive Pragmatics, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 233–260.

Giora, R.: 2012b, Literal vs. nonliteral language - novelty matters., in T. Holtgraves (ed.), Handbook of Language and Social Psychology, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 233–260.

Giora, R. and Fein, O.: 1999, On understanding familiar and less-familiar figurative language., Journal of Pragmatics 31, 1601–1618.

Giora, R., Fein, O., Kaufman, R., Eisenberg, D. and Erez, S.: 2009, Does an “ironic situation” favour an ironic interpretation?, in G. Brone and J. Vandaele (eds), Cognitive poetics. Goals, gains and gaps., Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 383–399.

Giora, R., Fein, O., Laadan, D., Wolfson, J., Zeituny, M., Kidron, R., Kaufman, R. and Shaham, R.: 2007, Expecting Irony: Context Versus Salience-Based Effects., Metaphor and Symbol 22, 119–146.

Giora, R., Fein, O. and Schwartz, T.: 1997, On the time course of understanding metaphor: The graded salience hypothesis., In preparation.

Giora, R., Raphaely, M., Fein, O. and Livnat, E.: forthcoming, Resonating with contextually inappropriate interpretations: The case of irony. URL:

Glucksberg, S. and McGlone, M. S.: 1999, When love is not a journey: What metaphors mean., Journal of Pragmatics 31, 1541–1558.

Glucksberg, S., P., G. and Bookin, H.: 1982, On understanding non-literal speech: Can people ignore metaphors?, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1, 85–96.

Gold, R., Faust, M. and Goldstein, A.: 2010, Semantic integration during metaphor comprehension in asperger syndrome., Brain and Language . doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2010.03.002.

Grice, H. P.: 1969, Utterer’s Meaning and Intentions., Philosophical Review pp. 147–177. Reprinted in Grice 1989, pp. 86–116.

Grice, H. P.: 1975, Logic and Conversation., in P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (eds), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, Academic Press, New York. Reprinted in Grice 1989, pp. 22–40.

Grice, H. P.: 1989, Studies in the ways of words., Harvard University Press, Cambridge and London.

Groefsema, M.: 2007, Concepts and word meaning in relevance theory., in N. Burton-Roberts (ed.), Pragmatics., Palgrave, Basingstoke, pp. 136–157.

Gross, S.: 2006, Can One Sincerely Say What One Doesn’t Believe?, Mind and Language 21, 11–20.

Happé, F. G. E.: 1993, Communicative compentence and theory of mind in autism: A test of relevance theory., Cognition 48, 101–119.

Hintzman, D. L.: 1986, “Schema Abstraction” in a Multiple-Trace Memory Model., Psychological Review 93, 411–428.

Hirst, W., LeDoux, J. and Stein, S.: 1984, Constraints on the Processing of Indirect Speech Acts: Evidence from Aphasiology., Brain and Language 23, 26–33.

Hobbs, J. R., Stickel, M., Appelt, D. and Martin, P.: 1993, Interpretation as Abduction., Artificial Intelligence 63, 69–142.

Horn, L. R.: 1984, Toward a new taxonomy of pragmatic inference: Q- and R-based implicature., in D. Shiffrin (ed.), Meaning, form, and use in context., Georgetown University Press, pp. 11 – 42.

Horn, L. R.: 2006, The border wars., Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics., Elsevier, pp. 21–48.

Huang, Y.: 2007, Pragmatics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Huang, Y. T. and Snedeker, J.: 2009, Online interpretation of scalar quantifiers: Insight into the semantic-pragmatic interface., Cognitive Psychology 58, 376–415.

Huang, Y. T. and Snedeker, J.: 2011, Logic and Conversation revisited: Evidence for a division between semantic and pragmatic content in real time language comprehension., Language and Cognitive Processes 26, 1161–1172.

Irmer, M.: 2009, Bridging Inferences in Discourse Interpretation. Ms., doctoral thesis.

Irmer, M.: 2011, Bridging Inferences: Constraining and Resolving Underspecification in Discourse Interpretation., de Gruyter.

Israel, M.: 2002, Literally Speaking., Journal of Pragmatics 34.

Kadmon, N.: 2001, Formal Semantics. Semantics, pragmatics, presupposition, and focus., Blackwell.

Kaplan, D.: 1989a, Afterthoughts., in J. Almog, J. Perry and H. Wettstein (eds), Themes from Kaplan, Oxford.

Kaplan, D.: 1989b, Demonstratives., in J. Almog, J. Perry and H. Wettstein (eds), Themes from Kaplan, Oxford.

Katz, J.: 1977, Propositional Structure and Illocutionary Force., New York: Crowell.

Keysar, B.: 1989, On the Functional Equivalence of Literal and Metaphorical Interpretations in Discourse., Journal of Memory and Language 28, 375–385.

Klepousniotou, E.: 2002, The Processing of Lexical Ambiguity: Homonymy and Polysemy in the Mental Lexicon., Brain and Language 81, 205–223.

Klepousniotou, E., Pike, G. B., Steinhauer, K. and Gracco, V.: 2012, Not all ambiguous words are created equal: An EEG investigation of homonymy and polysemy., Brain and Language 123, 11–21.

König, E. u. E. C. T.: 1988, Pragmatic Strengthening and Semantic Change: The Conventionalizing of Conversational Implicature., in Hüllen and Schulze (eds), Understanding the Lexicon., Tübingen: Niemeyer, pp. 110–124.

Korta, K.: 1997, Implicitures: Cancelability and Non-detachability., Technical Report ILCLI-97-LIC-6 , Donostia: ILCLI.

Korta, K. and Perry, J.: 2008, Pragmatics., in E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy., fall 2008 edn, Stanford University.

Kratzer, A.: 1996, Severing the external argument from its verb., in J. Rooryck and L. Zaring (eds), Phrase Structure and the Lexicon., Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 109–137.

Lakoff, G. (ed.): 1987, Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind., University of Chicago Press.

Lang, E.: 1991, A two-level approach to projective prepositions., in G. Rauh (ed.), Approaches to prepositions., Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, pp. 127–167.

Lang, E.: 1993, The meaning of German projective prepositions: a two-level approach., in C. Zelinsky-Wibbelt (ed.), The Semantics of Prepositions. From Mental Processing to Natural Processing., Berlin-New York: de Gruyter, pp. 249–291.

Lang, E.: 1994, Semantische vs. Konzeptuelle Struktur: Unterscheidung und Überschneidung., in M. Schwarz (ed.), Kognitive Semantik., Narr, Tübingen.

Lascarides, A. and Asher, N.: 2007, SDRT: Dynamic semantics with discourse structure., in H. Bunt and R. Muskens (eds), Computing Meaning: Volume 3, Tilburg: Kluwer.

Laurent, J.-P., Denhiéres, G., Passerieux, C., Iakimova, G. and Hardy-Baylé, M.-C.: 2006, On understanding idiomatic language: The salience hypothesis assessed by ERPs., Brain Research 1068, 151–160.

Leslie, A. M.: 1987, Pretense and representation: The origins of theory of mind., Psychological Review 94, 412–426.

Levinson, S. C.: 1983, Pragmatics., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Levinson, S. C.: 2000, Presumptive Meanings. The Theory of Generalised Conversational Implicature. , MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Lewis, D. S.: 1969, Convention., Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Lyons, J.: 1987, Semantics., in J. Lyons (ed.), New Horizons in linguistics., Vol. 2, London: Penguin, pp. 152 – 178.

MacKay, G. and Shaw, A.: 2004, A comparative study of figurative language in children with autistic spectrum disorders., Child Language Teaching and Therapy 20, 13–32.

Maienborn, C.: 2000, Zustände – Stadien – stative Ausdrücke: Zur Semantik und Pragmatik von Kopula-Prädikativ- Konstruktionen., Linguistische Berichte 183, 273–309.

Maienborn, C.: 2001, On the Position and Interpretation of Locative Modifiers., Natural Language Semantics 9, 191 – 240.

Maienborn, C.: 2003, Event-internal modifiers: Semantic underspecification and conceptual interpretation., in E. Lang, C. Maienborn and C. Fabricius-Hansen (eds), Modifying Adjuncts, Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 475–509.

Marantz, A.: 1997, No escape from syntax. don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon., in A. Dimitriadis (ed.), Proceedings of the 21th Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium., Penn Linguistics Club, pp. 201–225.

Mashal, N., Faust, M., Hendler, T. and Jung-Beeman, M.: 2008, Hemispheric differences in processing the literal interpretation of idioms., Cortex 44, 848–860.

McElree, B. and Frisson, Steven Pickering, M. J.: 2006, Deferred interpretations: Why starting dickens is taxing but reading dickens isn’t., Cognitive Science 30, 181–192.

McElree, B., Traxler, M. J., Pickering, M. J., Seely, R. E. and Jackendoff, R.: 2001, Reading time evidence for enriched semantic composition., Cognition 78, B17–B25.

McGlone, M.: 1996, Conceptual Metaphor and Figurative Language Interpretation: Food for Thought?, Journal of Memory and Language 35, 544–565.

Melogno, S., D’Ardia, C., Pinto, M. A. and Levi, G.: 2012, Metaphor comprehension in autistic spectrum disorders: Case studies of two high-functioning children., Child Language Teaching and Therapy 28, 177–188.

Morgan, J. L.: 1978, Two Types of Convention in Indirect Speech Acts., in P. Cole (ed.), Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 9., New York/ San Francisco/ London, pp. 261–280.

Nicolle, S. and Clark, B.: 1999, Experimental pragmatics and what is said: a response to Gibbs and Moise., Cognition 69, 337–354.

Nissim, M., Sansó, A. and Soria, C.: 1999, Towards a compositional frame semantics., Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Science . Siena, Italy.

Nogales, P. D.: 2012, Metaphorical content as what is said., Journal of Pragmatics 44, 997 – 1008.

Noveck, I. A.: 2001, When children are more logical than adults: Experimental investigations of scalar implicature., Cognition 78, 165–188.

Noveck, I. and Posada, A.: 2003, Characterising the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study., Brain and Language 85, 203–210.

Nunberg, G.: 1978, The Pragmatics of Reference., Indiana University Linguistics Club 1978, Bloomington, IN.

Nunberg, G.: 1979, The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions: polysemy., Linguistics and Philosophy 3, 143–184.

Nunberg, G.: 1995, Transfers of Meaning., Journal of Semantics 12, 109–132.

Nunberg, G.: 2002, The Pragmatics of Deferred Interpretation., in L. Horn and G. Ward (eds), Blackwell Encyclopedia of Pragmatics., Blackwell.

Nunberg, G., Sag, I. A. and Wasow, T.: 1994, Idioms., Language 70(3), 491–538.

Ortony, A., Schallert, D. L., Reynolds, R. E. and Antos, S. J.: 1978, Interpreting Metaphors and Idioms: Some Effects of Context on Comprehension., Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 17, 465–477.

Pagin, P.: 2005, Compositionality and context., in G. Preyer (ed.), Contextualism in Philosophy., Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 303–48.

Pagin, P. and Pelletier, J.: 2007, Content, context and composition., in G. Peter and G. Preyer (eds), Content and Context. Essays on Semantics and Pragmatics., Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 25–62.

Perry, J.: 1998, Indexicals, Context and Unarticulated Constituents., Proceedings of the 1995 CSLI-Amsterdam Logic, Language and Computation Conference., Stanford: CSLI Publications.

Pexman, P. M. and Glenwright, M.: 2007, How do typically developing children grasp the meaning of verbal irony?, Journal of Neurolinguistics 20, 178–196.

Pickering, M. J., McElree, B., Frisson, S., Chen, L. and Traxler, M. J.: 2006, Underspecification and aspectual coercion., Discourse Processes 42, 131–155.

Pickering, M. J., McElree, B. and Traxler, M. J.: 2005, The difficulty of coercion: A response to de almeida., Brain and Language 93, 1–9.

Piñango, M. M., Winnick, A., Ullah, R. and Zurif, E.: 2006, Time-course of semantic composition: The case of aspectual coercion., Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 35, 233–244.

Piñango, M. M., Zurif, E. B. and Jackendoff, R.: 1999, Real-time processing implications of enriched composition and the syntax-semantics interface., Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 28, 395–414.

Pustejovsky, J.: 1991, The generative lexicon., Computational Linguistics 17(4).

Pustejovsky, J.: 1995, The Generative Lexicon., MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Putnam, H.: 1975, The Meaning of “Meaning”., in K. Gunderson (ed.), Language, mind, and knowledge., University of Minneapolis Press, Minneapolis, pp. 131–193.

Pylkkänen, L., Llinás, R. and McElree, B.: 2004, Distinct effects of semantic plausibility and semantic composition in meg, in E. Halgren, S. Ahlfors, M. Hämäläinen and D. Cohen (eds), Biomag 2004: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Biomagnetism, Biomag: Boston, USA.
URL:änen, L., Llinás, R. and Murphy, G. L.: 2006, The Representation of Polysemy: MEG Evidence., Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 18, 1–13.

Pylkkänen, L., Martin, A. E., McElree, B. and Smart, A.: 2009, The Anterior Midline Field: Coercion or decision making?, Brain and Language 108, 184 – 90.

Pylkkänen, L. and McElree, B.: 2006, The syntax-semantic interface: On-line composition of sentence meaning., in M. Traxler and M. A. Gernsbacher (eds), Handbook of Psycholoin-guistics. , Elsevier, pp. 537–77.

Pylkkänen, L., Oliveri, B. and Smart, A. J.: 2009, Semantic vs. world knowledge in prefrontal cortex., Language and cognitive processes 24, 1313–1334.

Rabagliati, H., Maruc, G. F. and Pylkkänen, L.: 2011, Rules, Radical Pragmatics and Restrictions on Regular Polysemy, Journal of Semantics 28, 485–512.

Reboul, A.: 2004, Conversational Implicatures: Nonce or Generalised?, in I. Noveck and D. Sperber (eds), Experimental Pragmatics., Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 322–333.

Recanati, F.: 1989, The pragmatics of what is said., Mind and Behaviour 4, 295–329.

Recanati, F.: 1995, The Alleged Priority of Literal Interpretation., Cognitive Science 19, 207–232.

Recanati, F.: 2001, Literal/Nonliteral., Midwest Studies in Philosophy 15, 264–274.

Recanati, F.: 2002, Unarticulated constituents., Linguistics and Philosophy 25, 299–345.

Recanati, F.: 2004, Literal Meaning., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Recanati, F.: 2010, Truth-conditional pragmatics., Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Recanati, F.: n.d., Crazy minimalism. internet resource.

Rodd, J., Gaskell, G. and Marslen-Wilson, W.: 2002, Making sense of semantic ambiguity: semantic competition in lexical access., Journal of Memory and Language 46, 245–66.

Rolf, E.: 1995, Zur Grammatikalisierung konversationeller Implikaturen., in F. Liedtke (ed.), Implikaturen. Grammatische und pragmatische Analysen., Tübingen: Niemeyer, pp. 87–102.

Rubio Fernández, P.: 2007, Suppression in Metaphor Interpretation: Differences between Meaning Selection and Meaning Construction., Journal of Semantics 24, 345–71.

Rubio Fernández, P., Breheny, R. and Lee, M. W.: 2003, Context-independent information in concepts: An investigation of the notion of “core features”., in F. Schmalhofer, R. M. Young and G. Katz (eds), Proceedings of EuroCogSci 03: The European Cognitive Science Conference 2003., London: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ruhl, C.: 1989, On Monosemy. A Study in Linguistic Semantics., State University of New York Press, Albany.

Rundblad, G. and Annaz, D.: 2010a, The atypical development of metaphor and metonymy comprehension in children with autism., Autism 14, 29–46.

Rundblad, G. and Annaz, D.: 2010b, Metaphor and Metonymy Comprehension: Receptive Vocabulary and Conceptual Knowledge., British Journal of Developmental Psychology 28, 547–563.

Ruppenhofer, J., Ellsworth, M., Petruck, M. R. L., Johnson, C. R. and Scheffczyk, J.: 2010, FrameNet II: Extended Theory and Practice.

Sag, I.: 1981, Formal Semantics and Extralinguistic Context., in P. Cole (ed.), Radical Pragmatics., Academic Press, New York, pp. 273–294.

Saussure, F. d.: 1931, Grundfragen der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft, de Gruyter, Berlin. edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye.

Schmidt, G. L. and Seger, C. A.: 2009, Neural correlates of metaphor processing: The roles of figurativeness, familiarity and difficulty., Brain and Cognition 71, 375–386.

Schulz von Thun, F.: 1982, Miteinander reden. Störungen und Klärungen: Psychologie der zwischenmenschlichen Kommunikation., Vol. 1, Rororo.

Schwoebel, J., Dews, S., Winner, E. and Srinivas, K.: 2000, Obligatory Processing of the Literal Meaning of Ironic Utterances: Further Evidence., Metaphor and Symbol 15, 47–61.

Searle, J. R.: 1975, Indirect Speech Acts., in P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (eds), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts., Academic Press, London.

Searle, J. R.: 1978, Literal Meaning., Erkenntnis 13, 207–224.

Searle, J. R.: 1979, Metaphor., in A. Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Searle, J. R.: 1980, The background of meaning., in J. R. Searle, F. Kiefer and M. Bierwisch (eds), Speech act theory and pragmatics., Dordrecht.

Shapiro, A. M. and Murphy, G. L.: 1993, Can You Answer a Question for Me? Processing Indirect Speech Acts., Journal of Memory and Language 32, 211–229.

Sperber, D. and Wilson, D.: 1995, Relevance: Communication and Cognition., Blackwell, Oxford. second edition.

Sperber, D. and Wilson, D.: 2002, Pragmatics, Modularity and Mind-reading., Mind and Language 17, 3–23.

Sperber, D. and Wilson, D.: 2008, A Deflationary Account of Metaphor., in R. Gibbs (ed.), Handbook of Metaphor and Thought., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Sportono, N., Koun, E., Prado, J., Henst, J.-B. V. D. and Noveck, I. A.: 2012, Neural evidence that utterance-processing entails mentalizing: The case of irony., NeuroImage 63, 25–39.

Stainton, R.: 2005, In Defense of Non-Sentential Assertion., in Z. G. Szabo (ed.), Semantics vs. Pragmatics., Oxford: OUP, pp. 383–457.

Stanley, J.: 2000, Context and Logical Form., Linguistics and Philosophy 23, 391–434.

Stanley, J. and Szabo, Z. G.: 2000, On Quantifier Domain Restriction., Mind and Language 15, 219–261.

Stern, J.: 2000, Metaphor in Context., MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Stern, J.: 2006, Metaphor, Literal, Literalism., Mind and Language 21, 243–279.

Stern, J.: 2009, Metaphor and Minimalism., Philosophical Studies. doi:10.1007/s11098-009-9486-3.

Storto, G. and Tanenhaus, M.: 2005, Are scalar implicatures computed online?, in E. M. et al. (ed.), Proceedings of Sinn and Bedeutung 9, Nijmegen: Nijmegen Center of Semantics.

Strawson, P. F.: 1950, On referring., Mind 59, 320–44.

Stringaris, A. K., Medford, N. C., Giampietro, V., Brammer, M. J. and David, A. S.: 2007, Deriving meaning: Distinct neural mechanisms for metaphoric, literal, and non-meaningful sentences., Brain and Language 100, 150–162.

Taylor, J. R.: 1994, The Two-Level Approach to Meaning., Linguistische Berichte 149, 3–26.

Taylor, J. R.: 1995, Approaches to Word Meaning: The Network Model (Langacker) and the Two-Level-Model (Bierwisch) in comparison., in R. Dirven and J. Vanparys (eds), Current Approaches to the Lexicon., Peter Lang Verlag, Frankfurt.

Todorova, M., Straub, K., Badecker, W. and Frank, R.: 2000, Aspectual coercion and the online computation of sentential aspect., Journal of Memory and Language 53, 1–25.

Traxler, M. J., Pickering, M. J. and McElree, B.: 2002, Coercion in sentence processing: Evidence from eye-movements and self-paced reading., Journal of Memory and Language 47, 530 –547.

Turner, K. (ed.): 1999, The Semantics/Pragmatics Interface from Different Points of View., number 1 in Current research in the semantics - pragmatics interface, Elsevier Science, Oxford.

Wearing, C.: 2010, Autism, Metaphor and Relevance Theory., Mind and Language 25, 196–216.

Wharton, T.: 2002, Paul Grice, saying and meaning., UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 14.

Wiese, H.: 1999, Die Verknüpfung sprachlichen und konzeptuellen Wissens: Eine Diskussion mentaler Module., in I. Wachsmuth and B. Jung (eds), KogWis99. Proceedings der 4. Fachtagung der Gesellschaft für Kognitionswissenschaft Bielefeld, St.Augustin: Infix-Verlag., pp. 92–97.

Wiese, H.: 2004, Semantics as a gateway to language., in H. Härtl and H. Tappe (eds), Mediating between Concepts and Language., Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 197–222.

Wilson, D.: 2012, Irony comprehension: A developmental perspective., Journal of Pragmatics . URL:

Wilson, D. and Sperber, D.: 1992, On verbal irony., Lingua 87, 53–76.

Wilson, D. and Sperber, D.: 2000, Truthfulness and Relevance., UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 12, 215 – 254.

Wilson, D. and Sperber, D.: 2012, Explaining irony., Meaning and Relevance, Cambridge: CUP, pp. 123–145.

Wunderlich, D.: 1977, On Problems of Speech Act Theory., in R. E. Butts and J. Hintikka (eds), Basic Problems in Methodology and Linguistics., Dordrecht, Holland, pp. 243–258.