Home A relational account of communication on the basis of slips of the tongue
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

A relational account of communication on the basis of slips of the tongue

  • José María Gil

    José María Gil received his PhD from the University of La Plata, and developed a postdoctoral research on neurolinguistics at Rice University in cooperation with Sydney Lamb. He is full professor of Logic at the National University of Mar del Plata, and an independent researcher to the National Council of Scientific and Technological Research (CONICET), in Argentina. Thanks to various international fellowships, he has worked in Mexico, England, Italy, the USA, and China.

    EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: May 1, 2019
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

They are a good deal more than amusing (or embarrassing) errors of speech. The collection and analysis of such errors provides important clues to how speech is organized in the nervous system.

Victoria A. Fromkin (1973: 110)

Also, most current linguistics fails to consider various kinds of anomalous data which actually reveal very important information about the structure of the mental system which underlies our linguistic abilities, including slips of the tongue and unintentional puns.

Sydney M. Lamb (1999: 9)

Abstract

The socio-cognitive approach to pragmatics [SCA] is based on two fundamental hypotheses: (1) speaker and hearer are equal participants in the communicative process, (2) communication is the result of the interplay of intention and attention, as this interplay is motivated by the individuals’ private socio-cultural backgrounds. In this paper, I aim at showing that relational network theory (which has been mainly developed by the American neurolinguist Sydney M. Lamb) allow us to account not only for aspects corresponding to intention or attention, but also for “smooth communication” and “bumpy communication” (being the latter the dimension which includes unintended meanings). Four actual slips of the tongue will be relevant examples thanks to which it can be recognized how cooperation and intention are in a highly complex interaction together with the substantial elements of the individual traits: attention, private experience, egocentrism, and salience. Within this context, the relational account is epistemologically crucial. Firstly, it allows us to represent the neurocognitive structures that enable a person to produce or understand utterances. Secondly, it helps us to suggest that canonical pragmatics (like Speech Acts Theory, Gricean Pragmatics, Relevance Theory) cannot even consider actual and relevant phenomena like slips of the tongue, because they focus on cooperative intention and they neglect (or discard) egocentric attention.

About the author

José María Gil

José María Gil received his PhD from the University of La Plata, and developed a postdoctoral research on neurolinguistics at Rice University in cooperation with Sydney Lamb. He is full professor of Logic at the National University of Mar del Plata, and an independent researcher to the National Council of Scientific and Technological Research (CONICET), in Argentina. Thanks to various international fellowships, he has worked in Mexico, England, Italy, the USA, and China.

References

Arundale, Robert B. 2008. Against (Gricean) intentions at the heart of human interaction. Intercultural Pragmatics 5(2). 229–258.10.1515/IP.2008.012Search in Google Scholar

Atlas, Jay David. 2005. Logic, meaning, and conversation: semantical underdeterminacy, implicature, and their interface. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195133004.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Austin, John Langshaw. 1962. How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Boomer, Donald S. & John D. M. Laver. 1968. Slips of the tongue. British Journal of Disorders of Communication 3. 2–12.10.3109/13682826809011435Search in Google Scholar

Brown, Penelope & Stephen Levinson. 1978. Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Esther N. Goody (ed.), Questions and politeness, 56–311. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Brown, Penelope & Stephen Levinson. 1987. Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813085Search in Google Scholar

Danziger, Eve. 2006. The thought that counts: Interactional consequences of variation in cultural theories of meaning. In Nick Enfield & Stephen Levinson (eds.), Roots of human sociality: culture, cognition and interaction, 259–278. Oxford: Berg.10.4324/9781003135517-13Search in Google Scholar

Davis, Wayne A. 2007. How normative is implicature? Journal of Pragmatics 39. 1655–1672.10.1016/j.pragma.2007.05.006Search in Google Scholar

Davis, Wayne A. 2008. Replies to green, szabo, jeshion, and siebel. Philosophical Studies 137. 427–445.10.1007/s11098-007-9128-6Search in Google Scholar

Dell, Gary. 1979. Slips of the mind. LACUS Forum 4. 69–74.Search in Google Scholar

Dell, Gary & Peter Reich. 1977. A model of slips of the tongue. LACUS Forum 4. 448–455.Search in Google Scholar

Dell, Gary & Peter Reich. 1980a. Slips of the tongue: The facts and the stratificational order. In James Copeland & Phillip Davis (eds.), Papers in cognitive-stratificational linguistics (Rice University Studies, vol. 66:2), 19–34. Houston: Rice University.Search in Google Scholar

Dell, Gary & Peter Reich. 1980b. Toward a unified model of slips of the tongue. In Victoria A. Fromkin (ed.), Errors in linguistic performance: Slips of the tongue, ear, pen, and hand, 273–286. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

Duranti, Alessandro. 2006. The social ontology of intentions. Discourse Studies 8. 31–40.10.1177/1461445606059548Search in Google Scholar

Freud, Sigmund. 1924. Zur Psychopathologie des Alltagslebens. Leipzig: Internationaler Psychoanalytischer Verlag.Search in Google Scholar

Fromkin, Victoria A. 1971. Speech errors as linguistic evidence. Language 47(1). 27–52.10.1515/9783110888423Search in Google Scholar

Fromkin, Victoria A. 1973. Slips of the tongue. Scientific American 229(6). 110–117.10.1038/scientificamerican1273-110Search in Google Scholar

Fromkin, Victoria A. (ed.). 1980. Errors in linguistic performance: Slips of the tongue, ear, pen, and hand. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

Gil, José María. 2011. Relevance Theory and unintended transmission of information. Intercultural Pragmatics 8(1). 1–40.10.1515/IPRG.2011.001Search in Google Scholar

Gil, José María. 2014. Cómo se representa la información fonológica en el cerebro: Una explicación en términos de las redes relacionales. Revista Chilena De Fonoaudiología 13. 17–39.10.5354/0719-4692.2014.33911Search in Google Scholar

Gil, José María. 2016. A relational account of the Spanish Noun Phrase. Australian Journal of Linguistics 36(1). 22–51.10.1080/07268602.2016.1109429Search in Google Scholar

Green, Mitchell S. 2007. Self-Expression. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199283781.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Green, Mitchell S. 2008. Expression, indication, and showing what’s within. Philosophical Studies 137. 389–398.10.1007/s11098-007-9127-7Search in Google Scholar

Grice, Herbert Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics, vol. 3. 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

Grice, Herbert Paul. 1981. Presupposition and conversational implicature. In Peter Cole (ed.), Radical pragmatics, 183–198. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

Grice, Herbert Paul. 1989. Studies in the way of words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Haugh, Michael. 2008. Intention in pragmatics. Intercultural Pragmatics 5(2). 99–110.10.1515/IP.2008.006Search in Google Scholar

Haugh, Michael. 2015. Im/Politeness implicatures. Berlin: Mouton-De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110240078Search in Google Scholar

Hjelmslev, Louis. 1961[1943]. Prolegomena to a theory of language. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Search in Google Scholar

Horn, Laurence R. 2000. From IF to IFF: Conditional perfection as pragmatic strengthening. Journal of Pragmatics 32. 289–326.10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00053-3Search in Google Scholar

Horn, Laurence R. 2004. Implicature. In Laurence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds.), The handbook of pragmatics, 3–28. Blackwell: Oxford.10.1111/b.9780631225485.2005.00003.xSearch in Google Scholar

Horn, Laurence R. 2005. The Border wars: A neo-Gricean perspective. In Ken Turner & Klaus von Heusinger (eds.), Where semantics meets pragmatics. Elsevier: Amsterdam.Search in Google Scholar

Hubel, David & Torsten Wiesel. 1962. Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex. Journal of Physiology 160. 106–154.10.1113/jphysiol.1962.sp006837Search in Google Scholar

Hubel, David & Torsten Wiesel. 1968. Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex. Journal of Physiology 195. 215–243.10.1113/jphysiol.1968.sp008455Search in Google Scholar

Hubel, David & Torsten Wiesel. 1977. Ferrier lecture: Functional architecture of macaque monkey visual cortex. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 198. 1–59.10.1098/rspb.1977.0085Search in Google Scholar

Jaszczolt, Katarzyna M. 2005. Default semantics. foundations of a compositional theory of acts of communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199261987.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Jaszczolt, Katarzyna M. 2006. Meaning merger: Pragmatic inference, defaults, and compositionality. Intercultural Pragmatics 3(2). 195–212.10.1515/IP.2006.012Search in Google Scholar

Jespersen, Otto. 1922. Language: Its nature, development, and origin. London: Allen-Unwin.Search in Google Scholar

Kaas, John H., Randall J. Nelson, Mriganka Sur, Chia-Sheng Lin & Michael M. Merzenich. 1981. Organization of and motor cortex: Autoradiographic evidence for cortico-cortical somatosensory cortex in primates. In Francis Schmitt, Frederick Worden, George Adelman & Steven Dennis (eds.), The organization of the cerebral cortex, 237–26. Cambridge: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kecskés, István. 2006. On my mind: Thoughts about salience, context, and figurative language from a second language perspective. Second Language Research 22(2). 219–237.10.1191/0267658306sr266raSearch in Google Scholar

Kecskés, István. 2008. Dueling Context: A dynamic model of meaning. Journal of Pragmatics 40(3). 385–406.10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.004Search in Google Scholar

Kecskés, István. 2010. The paradox of communication: Socio-cognitive approach to pragmatics. Pragmatics and Society 1(1). 50–73.10.1075/ps.1.1.04kecSearch in Google Scholar

Kecskés, István & F. Fenghui Zhang. 2009. Activating, seeking and creating common ground. Pragmatics & Cognition 17(2). 331–335.10.1075/pc.17.2.06kecSearch in Google Scholar

Kecskés, István & Jacob Mey. (eds.). 2008. Intention, common ground and the egocentric speaker-hearer. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110211474Search in Google Scholar

Keysar, Boaz. 2007. Communication and miscommunication: The role of egocentric processes. Intercultural Pragmatics 4(1). 71–84.10.1515/IP.2007.004Search in Google Scholar

Lamb, Sydney Macdonald. 1999. Pathways of the brain: The neurocognitive basis of language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.170Search in Google Scholar

Lamb, Sydney Macdonald. 2004. Language and reality. London & New York: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Lamb, Sydney Macdonald. 2005. Language and brain: When experiments are unfeasible, you have to think harder. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 1. 151–178.10.1558/lhs.v1i2.151Search in Google Scholar

Lamb, Sydney Macdonald. 2006. Being realistic, being scientific. LACUS Forum 32. 201–209.Search in Google Scholar

Lamb, Sydney Macdonald. 2013. Systemic networks, relational networks, and choice. In Lise Fontaine, Tom Bartlett & G. Gerard O’Grady (eds.), Systemic functional linguistics. exploring choice, 137–160. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139583077.010Search in Google Scholar

Lamb, Sydney Macdonald. 2016. Linguistic structure: A plausible theory. Language Under Discussion 4(1). 1–37.10.31885/lud.4.1.229Search in Google Scholar

Lashley, Karl S. 1951. The problem of serial order in behavior. In Lloyd A. Jeffress (ed.), Cerebral mechanisms of behavior, 112–136. New York: Wiley.Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813313Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen. 1987. Minimization and conversational inference. In Jef Verschueren & Marcella Bertuccelli-Papi (eds.), The Pragmatic perspective, 61–129. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbcs.5.10levSearch in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen. 2000. Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen. 2006a. Cognition at the heart of human interaction. Discourse Studies 8. 85–93.10.1177/1461445606059557Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen. 2006b. On the human ‘interaction engine’. In Nick Enfield & Stephen Levinson (eds.), Roots of Human Sociality. Culture, Cognition and Interaction, 39–69. Oxford: Berg.10.4324/9781003135517-3Search in Google Scholar

Mac Kay, Donald G. 1970. Spoonerisms: The structure of errors in the serial order of speech. Neuropsychologia 8. 323–350.10.1016/0028-3932(70)90078-3Search in Google Scholar

Martin, Kevan. 2015. Vernon B. Mountcastle (1918-2015) Discoverer of the repeating organization of neurons in the mammalian cortex. Nature 518(7539). 304.10.1038/518304aSearch in Google Scholar

Mountcastle, Vernon B. 1957. Modality and topographic properties of single neurons of cat’s somatic sensory cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 20(4). 408–434.10.1152/jn.1957.20.4.408Search in Google Scholar

Mountcastle, Vernon B. 1997. The columnar organization of the neocortex. Brain 120. 701–722.10.1093/brain/120.4.701Search in Google Scholar

Mountcastle, Vernon B. 1998. Perceptual neuroscience: The cerebral cortex. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Mountcastle, Vernon B. 2005. The sensory hand: Neural mechanisms of somatic sensation. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.10.2307/j.ctv23dxd9kSearch in Google Scholar

Mountcastle, Vernon B., James C. Lynch, Apostolos Georgopoulos, Hideaki Sakata & Acuña. Carlos. 1975. Posterior parietal association cortex of the monkey: Command functions for operations within extrapersonal space. Journal of Neurophysiology 38(4). 871–908.10.1152/jn.1975.38.4.871Search in Google Scholar

Németh, T. Eniko. 2008. Verbal information transmission without communicative intention. Intercultural Pragmatics 5(2). 53–176.10.1515/IP.2008.009Search in Google Scholar

Rapaport, William J. 2003. What did you mean by that? Misunderstanding, negotiation, and syntactic semantics. Minds and Machines 13(3). 397–427.10.1023/A:1024145126190Search in Google Scholar

Reich, Peter. 1985. Unintended puns. LACUS Forum 11. 314–322.10.1038/314322b0Search in Google Scholar

Richland, Justin. 2006. The multiple calculi of meaning. Discourse and Society 17. 65–97.10.1177/0957926505056672Search in Google Scholar

Sampson, Geoffrey. 1980. Schools of linguistics: Competition and evolution. London: Hutchinson.10.1515/9781503621282Search in Google Scholar

Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1949 [1916]. Course in general linguistics. New York: Philosophical Library.Search in Google Scholar

Searle, John R. 1969. Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.10.1017/CBO9781139173438Search in Google Scholar

Searle, John R. 1975. Indirect speech acts. In Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics volume 3: Speech acts, 59–82. New York: Academic Press.10.1163/9789004368811_004Search in Google Scholar

Searle, John R. 1979. The classification of speech acts. In John R. Searle (ed.), Expression and meaning, 1–29. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511609213Search in Google Scholar

Searle, John R. 1983. Intentionality: An essay in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139173452Search in Google Scholar

Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford & Cambridge: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson. 2005. Pragmatics. In Frank Jackson & Michael Smith (eds.), The oxford handbook of contemporary philosophy, 468–495. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Stemberger, Joseph P. 1989. Speech errors in early child language production. Journal of Memory and Language 28(2). 164–188.10.1016/0749-596X(89)90042-9Search in Google Scholar

Sturtevant, Edgar H. 1917. Linguistic change. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Verschueren, Jeff. 1999. Understanding Pragmatics. London: Hodder Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Wilson, Deirdre & Dan Sperber. 2002. Truthfulness and relevance. Mind 111. 583–632.10.1093/mind/111.443.583Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2019-05-01
Published in Print: 2019-05-07

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 14.10.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/ip-2019-0008/html?lang=en
Scroll to top button