Lenguaje figurado y teoría de la mente

Abstract

Figurative language has received a wide number of explanations in the pragmatic literature. Different pragmatic approaches have different consequences with regard to the psycholinguistic processing of non literal language. The aim of this paper is to compare two current views on the pragmatics of irony; and to assess them with regard to their predictions about the cognitive capacities required for handling verbal irony. I conclude that relevance theory is the most adequate framework to approach non-literal language. First; relevance theory allows precise predictions as to the development of the ability to engage in figurative language in childhood and the relation of this with the development of other more general cognitive abilities; such as the capacity to attribute to others mental states which are different from one's own (usually referred to as the possession of a ("theory of mind"). Second; relevance theory explains why the ability to engage in figurative language and verbal humour is impaired in autistic subjects. An account of irony in terms of indirect negation; on the other hand; leads to wrong predictions about its workings.