Marcelo dascal and the literal meaning debates
Raymond W. Gibbs
Abstract
Raymond W. Gibbs
Abstract
What role does literal meaning play in people’s understanding of indirect and figurative language? Scholars from many disciplines have debated this issue forseveral decades. This chapter describes these debates, especially focusing on the arguments between the author and Marcelo Dascal. I suggest that Dascal’s defense of “moderate literalism” may have some validity, contrary to some of my earlier arguments against this point of view. The chapter acknowledges the strong contribution that Marcelo Dascal has made to interdisciplinary discussions on language and thought.
OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
What role does literal meaning play in people’s understanding of indirect and figurative language? Scholars from many disciplines have debated this issue forseveral decades. This chapter describes these debates, especially focusing on the arguments between the author and Marcelo Dascal. I suggest that Dascal’s defense of “moderate literalism” may have some validity, contrary to some of my earlier arguments against this point of view. The chapter acknowledges the strong contribution that Marcelo Dascal has made to interdisciplinary discussions on language and thought.
Key concepts: Literal and figurative language, Meaning (existential), Literal (mathematical logic), Epistemology, Philosophy, Point (geometry), Linguistics, Mathematics