Trognon, A. (2013). Pragmatics re-established on its feet. Weigand's Mixed Game Model 2010. Langage and Dialogue, Vol 3/3, 457-475.
The «Mixed Game Model» as a linguistic theory conceptualizes the natural ability of human beings: «competence-in-performance». The theory rests on a holistic view of language and dialogue that takes into account the physically and socially complex and more or less chaotic universe we live in. Competence-in- performance is thereby rooted in human biology. This ability enables people to communicate in an extremely context-sensitive manner. It rests on the subtle integration of three fundamental registers of human mental functioning in dia- logic communication: perception (including emotional perception), cognition, and natural language. This explains why the theory is called the Mixed Game. The Mixed Game defines language as dialogue, conceptualizing the components of natural language along action and reaction. The book gives us a new foundation to the pragmatics of the human communication system, a rigorous systematic methodology to study all kinds of dialogues, from the simplest to the more sophisticated, from the most informal to the most institutional or professional. This book also suggests various theoretical and practical developments. It is useful not only for linguists, but also for all researchers in psychology, sociology, and more generally in all the human sciences.
Keywords Natural language, Dialogue, Pragmatics, Mixed Game Model
Main conclusion of the review
Throughout its multidisciplinary orientation (cf. Ladams 2012), Weigand's work ultimately forms a very important contribution to the unification of human sciences including areas and disciplines like the biology of the central nervous system, psychology, notably social psychology and even more precisely the social psychology of cognitive development (see Sorsana and Trognon 2011; Trognon and Batt 2012; Trognon, Batt and Marchetti 2011; Trognon and Sorsana 2011) and finally the logical dynamics of information and interaction, e.g., van Benthem's logic (van Benthem 2012).
In any case, many works on interlocutory logic (Batt and Trognon 2012; Larrue and Trognon 1993; Trognon 1993; Trognon, Batt and Laux 2011) should seek their pragmatic foundation in the MGM. It is clearly the case that the speakers, by mixing their abilities, mean more than they say, and that the hearers understand more than is said. More generally, the MGM explains to the social psychologist such as me why the natural use of language is a source of cognitive progress and why its constrained use disables thought and disturbs relationships (as in Blanchet, Bromberg and Trognon 2009, Trognon, Batt and Marchetti 2011, Trognon and Bromberg 2007).