【正文】 so should think about the processing effort that the hearers have put into. That is, the relevance is the result of the interplays of the contextual effects and processing efforts. In other words, if the processing effort is minimal while the contextual effects are maximal, the utterance has the optimal relevance and vise visa. The relevance theory is based on the economical principle. During the process of the munication, people always hope that they can obtain as much contextual effect as possible with as little processing effort as possible.3. Discussion on context in the perspective of the relevance theory. Importance and definitions of contextSome simply use the word “context”。 in a narrow sense, context is the “small context” which refers to linguistic context, including words, sentences, paragraphs, discourses and grammars. Situation context means real situation that linguistic activities happen in, including municators, time, place, topic, medium, the formality of munication and so on. Subjective context refers to municators’ subjective factors, such as personality, interest, feeling and mood。 implicit context is the hidden meaning and encyclopedic knowledge that is related to but hidden from the real situation. Actual context is the real environment of munication, while invented context is the fabricated environment that always appears in fictions and poems. Verbal context is the context that expresses in language, and nonverbal context always refers to gestures and body languages.From the above classifications, one can easily find that different classifications have many similarities and overlaps. Both of these classifications are reasonable in some aspects, but imperfect in some other aspects, so we cannot say which one is better than another. But all of these interpretations of context are static and fixed, and all of the contextual ponents are regarded as static, fixed and isolated. As the deepening of the context study, as the bination of the context study and munication study, traditional and static context study cannot meet the needs of developing munication any more. People need to discuss context in a new perspective.. Discussion on context in the perspective of pragmatics and relevance . Static context and dynamic contextAs what is discussed above, the traditional views of context are static and fixed. But the static study on context cannot meet the need of dynamic munication process. According to Thomas, meaning is not fixed only decided by words, and the speaker alone also does not arouse it。 more importance to dynamic context, because munication is based on interactive meaning generation and interpretation on the one hand, and on dynamic negotiation and interpretation of context on the other, and all munication starts from a certain relevant given context, and following the ostensiveinference model, dynamically and effectively arrives at the invisible implicit premise and implicit conclusion.” [18] Actually, the process of understanding an utterance or a text is a process of context proposition and selection. The hearer should select some relevant contextual ponents to form a munication environment within limited time, so that one can understand the utterance or text more quickly and effectively.Under the framework of dynamic context, context is not statically seen as the pool of shared knowledge relating to an utterance, but seen as a continuously developing process, which reflects the dynamic relations between municators and environment. On one hand, the municators should be restricted by context, that is, an utterance is meaningful only if it can adjust to a certain context. On the other hand, the municators can intentionally manipulate the contextual ponents to form a context that is beneficial to their linguistic munication. In other words, the municators are not only controlled by context, they also control text.. Cognitive contextIn the perspective of relevance theory, context is a psychological concept: “A context is a psychological construct, a subset of the hearer’s assumptions about the world.” [19] So in relevance theory, context does not refer to some part of external environment of the municators, be it preceding or following an utterance, situational circumstances, cultural factors, natural and social environment, etc。 almost every New Zealander likes this game. Up until then, A probably knows the actual meaning of B: “Of course I like rugby.”(6) A: Would you like some coffee?B: Coffee would keep me awake.In this case, A wants to offer B a coffee, so A asks the question hoping to get a definite answer. However, B does not give A an obvious answer, but gives an irrelevant answer to A’s question. Of course, A would feel puzzled: “what is the meaning of B? Does he want coffee or not?” At this time, A should guess and reason the actual meaning of B according to some contextual ponents, such as time, place, situation, character and mood of B, the relations of A and B, etc. If B is very tired and wanting to sleep well at night, then the intended meaning of B is: “No, thanks!” If B has a lot of work to do and need to stay up all night, then the intended meaning of B is: “Yes, please!”As the above examples show, a same sentence has many different understandings and meanings. The crucial problem is: how to choose the right or suitable meaning of a sentence in the certain situation. And Sperber and Wilson hold the opinion that any utterances have different meaning in different situation。 it is a developing dynamic concept. In order to give a relevant interpretation to an utterance, people have to add some more relevant assumptions to context. The context is dynamic and cognitive。 the key motile factor that affects the understanding of an utterance is people’s cognitive petence towards the world. “The realizations of the dynamic properties of context enable us to take a new look at the notion of municative petence, which means more