2024年2月29日发(作者：诺基亚e71行货)

Brief Introduction to Relevance Theory

Formally proposed by Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson in their book Relevance:

Communication and Cognition in 1986, relevance theory, intended to improve

Gricean maxims by reducing redundant maxims to one single principle, has arisen

heated discussions for years since it was first proposed.

This presentation, accordingly, will give a brief introduction to relevance theory, its

origin, its core notions, its main principles, and its current assessment, the significant

contributions it has made to pragmatics and the limitations that needed to be

overcome in future study.

Relevance Theory: its communicative view

As for the definition of language, most linguists tend to regard language as a

grammar-governed representational system used for communication. Therefore,

language is to express and explain meaning, and the basic function of language is to

communicate.

However, Sperber and Wilson believe that although language can be used for

communicative purpose, its communicative function has not revealed the essential

features of language.

In their opinion, human activities involved language is in essence for cognition.

Cognition is to absorb information, to obtain the knowledge. So the basic function of

language is to retrieve and process information.

Thus relevance theory regard communicative activities, verbal or nonverbal, as

cognitive activities. The intention of speaker can be perceived by the audience

because of the shared cognitive environment. The success of communication will

depend on the manifestness and mutual manifestness of each other's cognitive

environment. Human cognition tends to be geared to the principle of relevance, and

the comprehension of utterances follow ostensive-inferential model.

Revision of Two models of Communication: Code model & Inferential model

Code model

From Aristotle through to modern semiotics initiated by Saussure, all theories of

communication was based on a single model, which we will call the code model.

According to the code model, communicative function is the main function of

language and that communication is achieved by encoding and decoding messages.

Several notions:

A code, is a system which pairs messages with signals, enabling two

information-processing devices (organisms or machines) to communicate.

A message is a representation internal to the communicating devices.

A signal is a modification of the external environment which can be produced by one

device and recognized by the other.

A widely quoted diagram of Shannon and Weaver (1949), slightly adapted in figure1,

shows how communication can be achieved by use of a code.

message源发信息 signal received signal received message接收信息

| | | |

destination信的

channel信道 decoder解码

encoder编码

source信源

noise

This diagram shows how a message originating in an information source can be

duplicated at a destination as the result of a communication process. As a matter of

fact, Shannon and Weaver's diagram is inspired by telecommunications techenology.

Thus, communication is achieved by encoding a message, which cannot travel, into a

signal, which can, and by decoding this signal at the receiving end. Noise along the

channel (electrical disturbances) can destroy or distort the signal. Otherwise, as long

as the devices are in order and the codes are identical at both ends, successful

communication is guaranteed.

Thus language is seen as a code which pairs phonetic and semantic representations of

sentences. This view of communication has been proven to be explanatory for some

forms of weak communication, such as Morse codes of traffic lights, however, its

main defect lies in its inadequacy in description of verbal communication, and it can

never touch the core of verbal communication, for verbal communication is far more

the simple encoding and decoding process.

Inferential model

The alternative of code model is the inferential model of communication. Still

assuming that the code model provides the framework for a general theory of

communication and verbal communication, the inferential model described

comprehension as an inferential process. Thus communication has been described as

a process of inferential recognition of the communicator's intentions.

The inferential and decoding processes are quite different.

According to the code model, communication is achieved by encoding and decoding

messages.

According to the inferential model, communication is achieved by the communicator

providing evidence of her intentions and the audience inferring her intentions from the

evidence, on the basis of the shared common knowledge (shared contextual elements).

语码模式认为交际是对信息的编码和解码的过程；推理模式认为，交际是说话人提供他要表达的意图的证据（前提）、听话人根据这些证据，结合“共有知识”（即共有的语境部分）而推断出说话人意图的过程。

An inferential process starts from a set of premises and results in a set of conclusions

which follow logically from, or are at least warranted by, the premises.

A decoding process starts from a signal and results in the recovery of a message

which is associated to the signal by an underlying code.

推理过程起始于前提，终结于结论，这些结论从前提按逻辑推断出来，其可信性至少由前提得到一定的保证。而解码过程起始于信号，终结于复原的信息，这一信息由于隐含的语码而与该信号相联系。

Then are these two models of the same thing? Or of quite different things? Can they

be amalgamated in some way? How are the two related?

In fact, most theorists see communication as a unitary phenomenon, to be described

by a single model. The code model is very well entrenched in the western scholarly

tradition, the inferential model also appeals to common sense . When an appealing

new approach is put forward, the temptation is to treat it not as an alternative to the

old approach but as an elaboration of it.

However, both of the two model have limitations.

The code model has the merit of explaining how communication could in principle be

achieved. However, it fails on the descriptive side: cannot explain more complicated

thought.

The inferential model, although provides a description of human communication

which rings true, has several technical problems.

Relevance Theory Model of Communication

On the basis of the two model, and by drawing the theoretical source of cognitive

theory from The Unit Structure of Human Brain by A. J. Ford, Sperber and Wilson put

forward the notion of Ostensive-Inferential Communication, regarding there are two

aspects of communication: ostensive&inference.

Thus ostensive-inferential communication can be defined as follows:

the communicator produces a stimulus which makes it mutually manifest to

communicator and audience that the communicator intends, by means of this stimulus,

to make manifest or more manifest to the audience a set of assumptions I.

说话人发出一种刺激信号，使之对交际双方互相显映（mutually manifest），通过这种刺激信号，说话人意欲向听话人显映或更加清晰地显映一系列的命题{I}.

We will explain it in detail in the next part.

The Two Principles of Relevance Theory

Relevance theory altogether develops two general claims or principles about the role

of relevance in cognition and in communication.

Cognitive Principle of Relevance: human cognition tends to be geared to the

maximisation of relevance.

Communicative principle of relevance: every act of communication conveys a

presumption of its own optimal relevance.

认知关联原则：人类认知倾向于追求关联最大化。

交际关联原则：任何明示性交际行为都意味着本交际行为所传递的假设，具有最佳关联性。

The first principle of relevance

when we claim that human cognition tends to be geared to the maximisation of the

relevance, we mean that cognitive resources tend to be allocated to the processing of

the most relevant inputs available, whether from internal (assumptions) or external

(stimuli) sources.

In other words, human cognition tends to be geared to the maximisation of the

cumulative relevance of the inputs it processes. It does this not by pursuing a

long-term policy based on computation of the cumulative relevance achieved over

time, but by local arbitraries, aimed at incremental gains, between simultaneously

available inputs competing for immediately available resources.

The reason of why human cognition tends to be geared to the maximisation of

relevance comes in two stages: one to do with the design of biological mechanisms in

general, the other with efficiency in cognitive mechanisms.

The second principle of relevance

We firstly have to clarify several notions

Ostensive communication: they agree with Grice that communication is not simply a

matter of encoding and decoding, it also involves inference. But they maintain that

inference has only to do with the hear. From the speaker's side, communication should

be seen as an act of making clear one's intention to express something. This act they

call ostensive communication.

In other words, a complete characterization of communication is that it is

ostensive-inferential, and ostensive communication, or inferential communication is a

shorthand.

To explain presumption of optimal relevance, we shall first have a look at the three

definitions of relevance, each providing both classificatory and comparative items.

1st definition: relating it to context

An assumption is relevant in a context if and only if it has some contextual effect in

that context.

当且仅当一个设想在一种语境中具有语境效应时，这个设想在这个语境中才具有关联性。

However, relevance is also a comparative concept. Some assumptions may be more

relevant than others. What's more, "the assessment of relevance, like the assessment

of productivity, is a matter of balancing output against input". It does not only depend

on the effect produced by it but also on the effort required to process it. So they have

improved on the previous definition by adopting an extent-condition format.

Extent condition1: an assumption is relevant in a context to the extent that its

contextual effects in this context are large.

Extent condition2: an assumption is relevant in a context to the extent that the effort

required to process it in this context is small.

程度条件1：如果一个设想在一个语境中的语境效应大，那么这个假设在这个语境中就具有关联性。

程度条件2：如果一个设想在一个语境中所需的处理努力小，那么这个设想在这个语境中就具有关联性。

As for context, it is not given, but chosen, and the size of it is determined by the

assumption to is given is relevance. People generally assume that the

assumption they are processing is relevant (otherwise they would not bother to

process it), then try to find a context in which its relevance will be maximized.

2nd definition: relating it to an individual

An assumption is relevant to an individual at a given time if and only if it is relevant

in one or more of the contexts available to that individual at that time.

当且仅当一个设想在某个时刻，在某人可及的一种或多种语境中具有关联性时，这个设想才在当时与那个个体想关联。

Extent condition1: an assumption is relevant to an individual to the extent that the

contextual effects achieved when it is optimally processed are large.

Extent condition2: an assumption is relevant to an individual to the extent that the

effort required to process it optimally is small.

Thus the notion of relevance to an individual is featured in terms of effect and effort.

When we talk of the relevance of an assumption to an individual, we will mean the

relevance achieved when it is optimally processed. Achieving maximal relevance

involves selecting the best possible context in which to process an assumption: that is,

the context enabling the best possible balance of effort against effect to be achieved.

3rd definition: relating it to a phenomenon

A phenomenon is relevant to an individual if and only if one or more of the

assumptions it makes manifest is relevant to him.

当且仅当某个现象显映的一个或多个设想与某个体相关时，这个现象才与该个体有关联。

And this last definition involves the characterization of relevance "not just as property

of assumptions in the mind, but also as a property of phenomena(stimuli, e.g.

utterance) in the environment which lead to the construction of assumptions."

A communicator cannot directly present an audience with an assumption. All a

speaker, or a writer, can do is to present a stimulus in the form of a sound, or a written

mark. The presentation of this stimulus changes the cognitive environment of the

audience, making certain facts manifest, or more manifest. As a result, the audience

can mentally represent these facts as strong or stronger assumptions, and even use

them to derive further assumptions.

Thus, by presumption of optimal relevance(slightly revised later) is meant:

(a) The set of assumption I which the communicator intends to make manifest to the

addressee is relevant enough to make it worth the addressee's while to process the

ostensive stimulus.

(b) The ostensive stimulus is the most relevant one the communicator could have used

to communicate I.

(a) 发话者意欲向听话者显映的设想集I，具有足够的关联性，使听话人值得花时间去处理该明示性刺激信号。

(b) 该明示性刺激信号，是发话者传递设想集I时所能运用的关联性最大的信号。

That is, every utterance comes with a presumption of the best balance of effort against

effect. On the one hand, the effects achievable will never be less than is needed to

make it worth processing. On the other hand, the effort required will never be more

than is needed to achieve these effects. In comparison to the effects achieved, the

effort needed is always the smallest. This amounts to saying "of all the interpretations

of the stimulus which confirm the presumption, it is the first interpretation to occur to

the addressee that is the one the communicator intended to convey."

Assessment of Relevance Theory

Relevance theory proposed by Sperber and Wilson, the revision and further

exploration of Grice's Cooperative Principle, has given a relatively systemic

interpretation of ostensive-inferential communication, by regarding that

communication is an ostensive and inferential process, in which, one is only geared to

the principle of relevance instead of having to comply with the Cooperative Principle.

Significant contributions made to pragmatics

(a) has given a more precise definition of communication, by combining decoding and

inferential process together, thus providing a general framework for the pragmatic

interpretation of communication

(b) has given a sound revision and complement to pragmatic theories by Grice

(a) has broaden the research scope of traditional pragmatics to a more open

communication interpretation one

Limitations needed to be overcome

(a) has no clear explanation of the necessity and probability of the outcome of

utterance understanding

(b) cognitive context and ostensiveness are too objective and hard to definite

(c) generalization of communication is too general to include any concrete pragmatic

rules

Implications:

To be continued.

References

何兆熊，新编语用学概要，上海：上海外语教育出版社，2002。

胡壮麟，语言学教程（修订版），北京：北京大学出版社，2001。

胡壮麟，语言学教程（修订版中译本），北京：北京大学出版社，2001。

刘绍忠，关联理论的交际观，《现代外语》第2期，第13-19页，1997。

Sperber. D & Wilson. D, Relevance: Communication and Cognition (second edition), Beijing:

Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2001.