Validate this page
Present and criticize a Gricean account of metaphor, that is, an account on which what speakers communicate with metaphorical utterances is a content that gets communicated by the Gricean mechanisms of conversational implicature. You may choose to provide an exegesis and criticism of Martinich's Gricean account in his article "A Theory for Metaphor." Or you may choose to devise and criticize an account that's more or less loosely based on Martinich's. So the structure here should be: (i) Here's what a Gricean account of metaphor does/should/would look like; (ii) Here are some problems with the account.
Present and criticize a Gricean account of Donnellan's referential uses of definite descriptions, that is, an account on which (for example) the proposition that Jones is insane may be conversationally implicated, though not literally expressed, by an utterance of the sentence ‘Smith's murderer is insane’. Again, the structure here should be: (i) Here's what a Gricean account of referential uses should/would look like; (ii) Here are some problems with the account.
Please be as concise and clear as possible. Always provide specific page references and bibliographic information for work you discuss. (When you attribute a view to an author, you must cite the work and page number of the passage on which your attribution is based. All quotes must be provided with page references.)
This page created by Delia Graff
URL: http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/research/graff/phi345/paper1.html
Last modified: Tue 3/6/2001