@article{oai:glim-re.repo.nii.ac.jp:00001119,
 author = {岡田, 聡宏 and Okada, Toshihiro},
 issue = {9},
 journal = {言語 文化 社会, Language, Culture and Society},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {application/pdf, The linguistically encoded concept of a word is not the same as the one communicated by the speaker, but only a clue to the communicated concept. The encoded concept needs to go through the process of developing including saturation and ad hoc concept construction. The ad hoc concept expressed by use of the italicised word below, for instance, is more specific than the encoded one, and therefore has a narrower denotation: I have a temperature. The speaker of this sentence might be understood as asserting not that she has a normal temperature or any temperature at all, but that she has a temperature above normal. The word temperature is used in a more specific sense than the encoded one, and this is an example of lexical narrowing. The ad hoc concept communicated by the speaker, on the other hand, may be more general than the encoded concept, as in the examples below: The glass is empty. (referring to the nearly empty glass) [approximation] Sally is a block of ice. [metaphor] These are examples of lexical broadening, where a word is used to convey a more general sense than the encoded one, resulting in wider denotation. Lexical narrowing and lexical broadening are two similar processes based on the same pragmatic principle, and they may cooccur, as Wilson & Carston (2006: 411) claim that ʻnarrowing and broadening often combine to yield an adjusted concept that is narrower than the encoded concept in some respects, and broader in others.ʼ Approximation, hyperbole, and metaphor may all be seen as varieties of lexical broadening (or both lexical broadening and narrowing), and they are all interpreted in the same way through the relevance-guided mutual adjustment process.},
 pages = {25--45},
 title = {アドホック概念について},
 year = {2011},
 yomi = {オカダ, トシヒロ}
}