لخّصلي

Analyzing Volosinov's perspective on understanding utterances and comparing it with Sperber and Wilson's relevance theory offers valuable insights into the philosophy of language and communication.

INTRODUCTION

Understanding language and communication is a fundamental aspect of human interaction. Volosinov and Sperber/Wilson approached this topic from different angles, but both provide intriguing insights into the intricacies of comprehending utterances.

VOLOSINOV'S PERSPECTIVE

Volosinov emphasizes the importance of orienting oneself to understand another person's utterance. He suggests that comprehension involves finding the proper place for the utterance within the corresponding context. For each word in the utterance, we generate our own set of answering words, which contribute to a deeper and more substantial understanding.

Volosinov's view can be characterized by the following key points:

• Contextual Placement
He underscores the significance of context in understanding utterances. Words gain meaning in relation to the context in which they are used.

• Interpretive Dialogue
Volosinov's idea of generating answering words implies an ongoing interpretive dialogue within the mind of the listener. This dialogue aids in comprehending the speaker's intention.

• Depth of Understanding
The richness of understanding depends on the number and weight of answering words. In other words, a more comprehensive understanding emerges when multiple aspects of context and interpretation are considered.

SPERBER AND WILSON'S RELEVANCE THEORY

Sperber and Wilson propose a relevance-based theory of communication. They argue that understanding utterances is closely tied to the principle of relevance. Their theory can be summarized as follows:

• Explicature
Utterances are often underdetermined or underspecified, leaving room for interpretation. The process of explicature involves enriching these utterances with contextually relevant information.

• Relevance
The degree of relevance of an utterance is determined by cognitive effects and processing effort. The more an utterance contributes to the listener's cognitive environment with less processing effort, the more relevant it is considered.

• Cost-Benefit Analysis
Relevance is viewed on a cost-benefit scale. An utterance's relevance depends on the cognitive effects it creates and the ease with which it integrates into the listener's existing knowledge.

COMPARING VOLOSINOV AND RELEVANCE THEORY

Now, let's explore the similarities and differences between Volosinov's perspective and Sperber/Wilson's relevance theory:

SIMILARITIES

• Contextual Emphasis
Both Volosinov and relevance theory highlight the importance of context in understanding language. Volosinov speaks of finding the proper place in the context, while relevance theory relies on contextual enrichment (explicature).

• Interpretation
Both views acknowledge that understanding involves interpretation. Volosinov's idea of generating answering words aligns with the process of explicature in relevance theory, where listeners actively interpret to extract meaning.

DIFFERENCES:

• Explanation of Understanding
Volosinov's focus is on the generation of answering words, emphasizing the dialogic nature of comprehension. Relevance theory, on the other hand, centers on the idea that comprehension is driven by the principle of relevance. It explains understanding in terms of cognitive effects and processing effort.

• Degree of Relevance
While both perspectives consider relevance, they differ in their approach to assessing it. Sperber and Wilson introduce a degree of relevance, which is based on cognitive effects and processing effort. Volosinov's framework does not explicitly quantify relevance in this manner.

• Underdeterminacy
Relevance theory addresses the issue of underdeterminacy directly by proposing explicature as a means to resolve it. Volosinov's view doesn't provide a systematic approach to handling underdetermined utterances.

CONCLUSION

In summary, both Volosinov's perspective on understanding utterances and Sperber/Wilson's relevance theory offer valuable insights into the complexities of language comprehension. They share a common emphasis on the role of context and interpretation. However, they diverge in their explanations of understanding, with Volosinov emphasizing dialogic interpretation and Sperber/Wilson proposing a relevance-based framework. Additionally, relevance theory introduces the concept of a degree of relevance, which quantifies the relevance of utterances based on cognitive effects and processing effort, while Volosinov's approach does not provide such quantification. These insights shed light on the philosophical and cognitive aspects of language and communication, enriching our understanding of how humans make sense of utterances in various contexts.