Books on Amazon
Grice/Avramidis: should be understood as a conceptual analysis, not as reductionism. - Not as physicalism ->philosophy of the mind - reconciliation with Frege and Davidson.
Grice/Avramides: Thesis: the problem of sentence meaning (meaning the whole utterance) takes precedence over the meaning of partial statements - Statement/Grice: is understood broadly, also signals etc. - Important argument: thus, the analysis ranges in a situation before timeless! (of the standard meaning) - only so can he equate"x means something" with "S means something (in a situation) with x" - 1st Version; ... A response from the listener is induced ...
- 2nd Version: ... in addition: the listener must recognize the intention of the speaker.
3rd Version: ... in addition: the recognition of the speaker's intention must act as a reason for the belief of the listener - Vs: there are still many counterexamples.
GriceVsGrice: counter-E.g. it is a difference whether I spontaneously frown in a situation or in order to express my displeasure to a person - Important argument: exactly the same information is transmitted, no matter if the speaker has the intention to communicate or not. - Then no reason to distinguish between natural and non-natural meaning - the difference has to do with what the frowning person can expect the listener to believe - but without intention no meaning - non-natural meaning (without intention) never sufficient for response.
E.g. thumbscrews mean nothing.
Grice/Avramides: so far, the analysis is not sufficient for timeless (linguistic meaning - only for speaker-meaning - Meaning/Grice: to be found both outside language and within.
Timeless Meaning/Grice: disjunction of findings and about what people want to achieve with x - also effect etc. but not practice (is not sufficient (may have second meaning), not necessary: (may have alternatives) - but " procedure in repertoire".
Reductionist Gricean/Loar: risks thinking without language.
Meaning and Mind Boston 1989