...aspect of what Davidson means by a passing theory by comparing it to Mikhail Bakhtin's statement that "every concrete act of understanding is active: it...merged with the response, with a motivated agreement or disagreement."26 Bakhtin continues: It is precisely such an understanding that the speaker counts on....

...immanent in the speaker's own discourse and do not go beyond his semantic or expressive self-sufficiency. In the actual life of speech, every concrete act of...word to be understood into its own conceptual system tilled with specific objects and emotional expressions, and is indissolubly merged with the response,...

...textuality" (142). Bakhtin also sounds optimistic, as in this passage from The Dialogic Imagination: "In the actual life of speech, every concrete act...response, with a motivated agreement or disagreement. To some extent, primacy belongs to the response, as the activating principle; it creates the ground...

...assimilated within the conceptual system of the person who wants to understand this word. The utterance is "indissolubly merged with the response, with a motivated agreement or disagreement" (Bakhtin 1981, 283). This dialogue between an utterance and a response results in two forms of dialogue....

...message. This 'primacy of understanding' prepares the ground for active and engaged understanding. 'In the actual life of speech, every concrete act...specific objects and emotional expressions, and is indissoluble merged with the response, with a motivated agreement or disagreement' (Bakhtin, 1980,...

...Linguistics and the philosophy of language acknowledge only a passive understanding of discourse. ... In the actual life of speech, every concrete act of...with specific objects and emotional expressions, and it is indissolubly merged with the response, with a motivated agreement or disagreement. . . . [The...

...Furthermore, like Merleau-Ponty, Bakhtin sees speaking as directed to and for another, who will respond: In the actual life of speech, every concrete act of...is active: it assimilates the word to be understood . . . with the response, with a motivated agreement or disagreement. To some extent, primacy belongs...

...then, in both the form and the content of their talk, Bakh tin's ( 1981 ) conception of dialogism: "In the actual life of speech, every concrete act of understanding is active Understanding comes to fruition only in response. Understanding and response are dialectically merged...

...immanent in the speaker's own discourse and do not go beyond his semantic or expressive self-sufficiency. In the actual life of speech, every concrete act of...response, with a motivated agreement or disagreement. To some extent, primacy belongs to the response, as the activating principle: it creates the ground...

...takes B akhtin a step further to consider response as the prime component of the speaking situation: In the actual life of speech, every concrete act of understanding is active . . . To some extent, primacy belongs to the response, as the activating principle: it creates the...