On indirect reports and language games: Evidence from Persian

Abstract

Approaching (indirect) reports from Wittgenstein’s perspective on language games, and evaluating them with an eye on Sperber and Wilson’s Relevance Theory (RT), this paper draws on evidence from Persian to support Capone’s Paraphrasis/Form Principle (PFP). It begins with a brief but informative review of relevant works on reported speec — including Davidson’s Paratactic view of indirect reports, Wittgenstein’s notion of language games, Sperber and Wilson’s relevance theory, Weizman and Dascal’s theory of clues and cues, and Lepore and Anderson’s views about slurs. It then goes on to show how Capone’s Paraphrasis/Form Principle (PFP) functions as a more explanatorily adequate account of reported speech. In doing so, it describes how (indirect) reports are performed in Persian. The paper cites relevant examples from Persian to show that a semantico-pragmatic explanation of reported speech—like Capone’s PFP—is more robust in adequately explaining the notion of ‘samesaying’ which lies at the heart of (indirect) reporting. Of utmost importance is the paper’s attempt at showing how ‘insincere’ reporting through linguistic manipulations—like topicalization—can transform social realities.