@article{oai:glim-re.repo.nii.ac.jp:00001106,
 author = {岡田, 聡宏 and Okada, Toshihiro},
 issue = {6},
 journal = {言語 文化 社会, Language, Culture and Society},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {application/pdf, Tropes such as metaphor, hyperbole, and metonymy make up distinct categories in the traditional rhetoric. Also in Gricean pragmatics, these utterances are treated differently from literal ones. Grice suggests, for example, metaphorical utterances overtly violate the maxim of truthfulness, and this violation triggers the recovery of implicature. As Sperber & Wilson（2006: 172), on the other hand,“see metaphors as simply a range of cases at one end of a continuum that includes literal, loose and hyperbolic interpretations” , there is no mechanism specific to these utterances and they are all interpreted in exactly the same process. Nor is metonymy an important notion in the study of verbal communication, and there is no mechanism specific to it either, because there is a continuum of cases between loose uses and metonymical utterances, and metonymical utterances are interpreted in exactly the same way as other utterances. The main aims of this paper are firstly, to reanalyze rhetorical utterances including metonymy as well as other tropes on the latest theory of Relevance, especially Sperber & Wilson（2006）; and secondly, to show that exactly the same inferential procedure applies to metaphoric, hyperbolic, loose, and metonymical utterances as well as literal ones, irrespective of their rhetorical definitions.},
 pages = {63--84},
 title = {レトリック再考},
 year = {2008},
 yomi = {オカダ, トシヒロ}
}