Pragmatics

An introductory view

“A Pragmática é aquela componente da teoria geral da gramática que faz fronteira com a Semântica, a Sociolinguística e a Psicolinguística, reclamando para seu terreno próprio a «investigação linguística que se refere obrigatoriamente ao contexto, termo que engloba as identidades dos participantes, os parâmetros espaciais e temporais dos eventos de fala, as crenças, conhecimentos e intenções dos participantes nesses eventos, e muito mais» Levinson 1991 (1983):5 – trad.. ( MARQUILHAS 2005)

“Em um sentido amplo, “pragmatismo” ou “filosofia pragmática” referemse a concepções de filosofia que defendem não só uma distinção entre teoria e prática, mas sobretudo o primado da razão prática em relação à razão teórica, incluindo desde Kant, cuja última obra de 1804 intitulou-se precisamente Antropologia de um ponto de vista pragmático, até algumas correntes da filosofia contemporânea.

( MARCONDES, 2000)

“Na

lingüística, a pragmática se caracteriza pelo estudo da linguagem em uso, ou, segundo a definição de Charles Morris (1938), o primeiro a usar esse termo contemporaneamente, o estudo da “relação dos signos com seus intérpretes”. Rudolf Carnap (1938), o lógico e filósofo da ciência de origem alemã com quem Morris trabalhou em Chicago, por sua vez definiu a pragmática como o estudo da linguagem em relação aos seus falantes, ou usuários. Tanto a definição de Morris, quanto a de Carnap, fazem parte da já consagrada distinção geral do campo de estudos da linguagem entre pragmática, que considera a linguagem em seu uso concreto, semântica, que examina os signos lingüísticos em sua relação com os objetos que designam ou a que se referem,e sintaxe, que analisa a relação dos signos entre si.” ( MARCONDES,

Existe um grande debate entre lingüistas “puros”e pragmaticistas a respeito dos limites e conexões entre seus respectivos campos de estudo. São duas as principais posturas teóricas verificadas. Uma primeira que entende a pragmática como parte integrante da lingüística, do mesmo modo que a semântica, sintaxe, morfologia, fonologia, entre outras. A segunda posição compreende a pragmática como um campo que engloba toda a lingüística, porém a ultrapassa. Neste caso, a pragmática utiliza-se de outras áreas de estudo como a sociologia, antropologia, psicologia, o que permite o aumento do campo de estudo. Conforme Reyes113, Verschueren (2002f) compartilha com esta segunda posição por compreender a pragmática como uma perspectiva e não como um componente a mais da lingüística. Contrariamente a esta posição, Levinson (2000a) defende que a pragmática deve ser outro nível a mais no estudo da linguagem, contida na ciência lingüística da mesma forma que a sintaxe, fonologia ou semântica.

GEORGE YULE Until 1995, George Yule was a professor in the Linguistics program at Louisiana State University. he now lives and writes in Hawaii.

The Study of Language by George Yule (Paperback - Nov 28, 2005) Explaining English Grammar (Oxford Handbooks for Language Teachers) by George Yule (Paperback - Jan 21, 1999) Discourse Analysis (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics) by Gillian Brown and George Yule (Paperback - Aug 31, 1983) Pragmatics (Oxford Introductions to Language Study) by George Yule and H. G. Widdowson (Paperback - Jun 6, 1996) Oxford Practice Grammar: Advanced: with Answer Key and CD-ROM Pack by George Yule (Paperback - Sep 14, 2006) Teaching the Spoken Language (Cambridge Language Teaching Library) by Gillian Brown and George Yule (Paperback - Jan 27, 1984) Referential Communication Tasks (Second Language Acquisition Research Series Theoretical and Methodical Issues) by George Yule (Paperback - April 1, 1997) Focus on the Language Learner (Oxford English) by Elaine Tarone and George Yule (Paperback - Aug 31, 1989)

DEFINITIONS Pragmatics is concerned with the study of meaning as communicated by a speaker( or writer) and interpreted by a listener( or reader)  Pragmatics is the study of speaker meaning. Pragmatics involves the interpretation of what people mean in a particular context and how the context influences what is said  Pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning. Pragmatics explores how listeners can make inferences about what is said in order to arrive at an interpretation of the speaker’s intended meaning  Pragmatics is the study of how more gets communicated than is said.

Pragmatics raises the question of what determines the choice between the and the unsaid, which is tied to the notion of distance  Pragmatics s the of the expression or relative distance.

Syntax is the study of the relationship between linguistic forms, how they are arranged in sequence, and which sequences are well formed. Semantics is the study of the relationship between linguistic forms and the entities in the world; that is, how words literally connect to things.

Pragmatics is the study of the relationship between linguistic forms and the us of those forms .

ADVANTAGES one can talk about people’s intended meanings, their assumptions, their purposes or goals, and the kinds of actions ( for example, requests) that they are performing when they speak. DISADVANTAGES  the concepts involved are extremely difficult to analyze in a consistent and objective way. [1]

Her: So – did you? Him: Hey – who wouldn’t?

People are members of a social group and follow general patterns of behavior expected within the group. Yule in Saudi Arabia : Arabians

How are you? Fine. Praise to God

[2]

I found an old bicycle lying on the ground. The chain was rusted and the tires were flat.

[3]

I found an old bicycle. A bicycle has a chain. The chain was rusted. A bicycle also has tires. The were flat.

tires

For a long period in the study of language, there has been a very strong interest in the formal systems of analysis, often derived from mathematics and logic  abstract, potentially universal features of language. The notes on ordinary language in use began to be knocked off and ended in the wastebasket . those were defined negatively, as the stuff that wasn’t easily handled within the formal systems of analysis. [4]

The duck ran up to Mary and licked her. The duck ran up to Mary. The duck licked Mary

( p & q)

( = p) ( = q)

[7] Interpret order of mention as a reflection of order of occurrence.

Deixis (from Greek) means pointing via language. Deictic expressions ( indexicals) : Person deixis ( me, you) Spatial deixis ( here, there) Temporal deixis ( now< then) [1]

I’ll put this here.

Of course ,you understood that Jim was telling Anne that he was about to put an extra house key in one of the kitchen drawers. PROXIMAL TERMS ( “NEAR SPEAKER”) THIS, HER AND NOW DISTAL TERMS ( “ AWAY FROM THE SPEAKER” )  THAT, THERE AND THEN

It operates on a three-part division: speaker(“I”)/ addressee(“you) / other (“he”, “she”, “it”) Honorifics : expressions that indicate higher status  social deixis T/V distinction – tu/vous; tú/usted  distal forms [2]

[3]

Would his highness like some coffee?

irony/humor

a. Somebody didn’t clean up after himself. b. Each person has to clean up after him or herself. c. We clean up after ourselves around here. ( exclusive “we”)

Contemporary English makes use of only two adverbs: here(proximal/ there(distal) yonder( more distant from the speaker), hither( to this place) , thence( from there)

“I’ll come later” ( movement to the addressee's location)  deictic projection

Temporal deixis now/then ( relative to past or future) c.November 22, 1963? I was in Scotland then. d.Dinner at 8:30 on Saturday? Okay, I’ll see you then. [8] [9]

Back in an hour! Free beer tomorrow.

Assumption: the use of words to refer to people and things is a relatively straightforward matter  fairly use to do/ difficult how to explain. REFERENCE: an act in which a speaker, or writer, uses linguistics forms to enable a listener, or reader, to identify something tied to the speaker’s goals and the speaker’s beliefs INFERENCE [1]

Mr. Aftershave is late today.

inventing names successful reference

Attributive use : used to describe entities that are assumed to exist, but are unknown, or, as far as we know, don’t exist: [2]

[3]

a. b. c.

There’s a man waiting for you. He wants to marry a woman with lots of money. We’d love to find a 9-foot-tall basketball player. There was no sign of the killer.

Convention: certain referring expressions will be used to identify certain entities on a regular basis  Shakespeare can only be used to identify one specific person. [4]

a. b.

Can I borrow your Shakespeare? Yeah, it’s over there on the table.

[5]

a. b.

Where’s the cheese sandwich sitting? He’s over there by the window.

[7]

a. b.

Picasso’s on the far wall. My Rolling Stones is missing.

Pragmatic connection --. more is being communicated than is said.

co-test linguistic material context  the physical environment range of references  a number of possible referents [9]

a. b.

The cheese sandwich is made with white bread. The cheese sandwich left without paying.

[10]

a. b. c.

The heart-attack mustn't be moved. Your ten-thirty just canceled. A couple of rooms complained about the heat.

Reference is a social act, in which the speaker assumes that the word or phrase chosen to identify an object or person will be interpreted as the speaker intended.

In the film, a man and a woman were trying to wash a cat. The man was holding the cat while the woman poured water on it. He said something to her and they started laughing. [11]

Technically, the second or subsequent expression is the anaphor and the initial expression is the antecedent. [12]

Peel and slice six potatoes. Put them in cold salted water.

[13]

I turned the corner and almost stepped on it. there was a large snake in the middle of the path.

[14]

a. b. c.

Peel an onion and slice it. Drop the slices into hot oil. Cook for three minutes.

zero anaphora, or ellipsis

A presupposition is something the speaker assumes to be the case prior to making an utterance. Speakers, not sentences, have presuppositions. An entailment is something that logically follows from what is asserted in the utterance. Sentences, not speakers, have entailments. A presuppositions is treated as a relationship between two propositions. [2]

[3]

a. b. c.

Mary's dog is cute. ( = p) Mary has a dog. ( = q) p >> q ( p presupposes q)

a. Mary's dog isn’t cute. ( = NOT p) b. Mary has a dog. ( = q) c. NOT p >> q ( NOTp presupposes q) ( CONSTANCY UNDER NEGATION)

TYPE

EXAMPLE

PRESUPPOSITION

EXISTENTIAL

The X

>> X exists

FACTIVE

I regret leaving

>> I left

NON-FACTIVE

He pretended to be happy. He managed to escape. When did she die? If I weren’t ill,

>> He wasn’t happy

LEXICAL STRUCTURAL COUNTERFACTUAL

>> He tried to escape >> She died. >> I am ill

Basic expectation : the presupposition of a simple sentence will continue to be true when that simple sentence becomes part of a more complex sentence. [13]

Shirley: It’s so sad. George regrets getting Mary pregnant. Jean: But he didn’t get her pregnant. We know that now.

Presupposition not always project, since they can be destroyed by entailments. The entailment( a necessary consequence of what is said) is simply more powerful than the presupposition ( an earlier assumption).

Generally speaking, entailments is not a pragmatic concept( i.e. having to do with the speaker meaning), but instead is considered a purely logical concept, symbolized by || - . [17]

Rover chased three squirrels.

( = p)

[18]

a. Something chased three squirrels. b. Rover did something to three squirrels. c. Rover chased three of something. d. Something happened.

( = q) ( = r) ( = s) ( = t)

p ||- q

In uttering the sentence in [17], the speaker is necessarily committed to the truth of a very large number of background entailments. Foreground entailment  usually communicated by STRESS. [19]

a. Rover chased THREE squirrels. b. ROVER chased three squirrels

It is assumed that speakers and listeners involved in a conversation are generally COOPERATING with each other. In the middle of their lunch hour, one woman asks another how she likes the hamburger she is eating, and receives the answer in [1]. [1]

A hamburger is a hamburger.

Tautologies :  the speaker intends to communicate more than is said. “ business is business” or “ boys will be boys” The idea that something must be more than just what the words mean – an additional conveyed meaning – is called an IMPLICATURE.

There is a woman sitting on a park bench and a large dog lying in front of the bench. A man comes along and sits down on the bench. [2]

Man:

Does your dog bite?

Woman:

No.

( The man reaches down to pet the dog. the dog bites his hand.) Man:

Ouch! Hey! You said your dog doesn't bite.

Woman:

He doesn’t. But that’s not my dog

The cooperative principle: Make your conversational contribution such as required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged.

THE MAXIMS Quantity 1.Make your contribution as informative as required ( for the current purposes of the exchange). 2. Do not make your contribution more informative than is required. Quality Try to make your contribution one that is true. 11.Do not say what you believe to be false. 12.2. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence. Relation Be relevant. Manner Be perspicuous. 17.Avoid obscurity of expression. 18.Avoid ambiguity. 19.Be brief ( avoid unnecessary prolixity) 20. be orderly

Expressions we use to indicate that what we are saying may not be totally accurate. QUALITY [3] a. As far as I know, they’re married. b. I may be mistaken, but I thought I saw a wedding ring on her finger. c. I’m not sure if this is right, but I heard it was a secret ceremony in Hawaii. d. He couldn’t live without her, I guess. QUANTITY [4] a. As you probably know, I'm terrified of bugs. b. So, to cut a long story short, we grabbed our stuff and ran. c. I won't bore you with all the details, but it was an exciting trip. RELATION( relevance) [5] a. I don't know if this is important, but some of the files are missing. b. This may sound like a dumb question, but whose handwriting is this? c. Not to change the subject, but is this related to the budget? MANNER [6] a. This may be a bit confused, but I remember being in a car. b. I’m not sure if this makes sense, but the car had no lights. c. I don’t know if this is clear at all, but I think the other car was reversing.

[7]

Charlene: Dexter:

I hope you brought the bread and the cheese. Ah, I brought the cheese.

b( = bread ) and c ( = cheese) [8]

Charlene : Dexter:

b &c? b

[9]

a. Doobie: b. Mary:

Did you invite Bella and Cathy? I invited Bella.

[10]

I was sitting in a garden one day. A child looked over the fence.

( +> NOT c) ( +> implicates) ( b & c?) ( b +> NOT c)

The relevance of the utterances depends on the context. [16]

[17]

Rick: Tom: Ann: Sam:

Hey, coming to the wild party tonight? My parents are visiting.

college students

Where are you going with the dog? To the V-E-T.

The dog is known to recognize the word vet Leila’s boss might be around

[18]

Leila: Mary:

Whoa! has your boss gone crazy? Let’s go get some coffee.

[19]

Bert: Ernie:

Do you like ice-cream? Is the Pope Catholic?

Humor

In attempting to express themselves, people do not only produce utterances containing grammatical structures and words, they perform ACTIONS via these utterances. [1]

You’re fired!

[2]

a. You’re delicious. b. You’re welcome. c. You’re crazy!

SPEECH ACTS : apology, complaint, compliment, invitation, promise, or request.

Both speaker and hearer are usually helped in this process by the circumstances surrounding the utterance SPEECH EVENT

[3] This tea is really cold !

complaint/compliment

LOCUTIONARY ACT  the basic act of utterance, producing a meaningful linguistic expression. ILLOCUTIONARY ACT  some kind of function the speaker has in mind. PERLOCUTIONARY ACT  the intention of having an effect, on the account that the hearer will recognize the effect.

[5]

a. I’ll see you later. ( = A) b. [ I predict that] A c. [ I promise that] A d. [ I warn you that ] A

LOCUTIONARY ACT ILLOCUTIONARY ACTS

[6] I (Vp) you that ... IFID  an expression where there is a slot for a verb that explicitly names the illocutionary act being performed.

[8]

a. You’re going! b. You’re going? c. Are you going?

[ I tell you Y-G] [ I request confirmation about Y-G] [ I ask you if Y-G]

DECLARATIONS are those kinds of speech acts that change the world via their utterance. [15]

a. Priest: I now pronounce you husband and wife. b. Referee: You’re out! c. Jury Foreman: We find the defendant guilty.

REPRESENTATIVES are those kinds of speech acts that state what the speaker believes to be the case or not( statements of facts, assertions, conclusions and descriptions). In using a representative, the speaker makes words fit the world. [16]

a. b. c.

The earth is flat. Chomsky didn’t write about peanuts. It was a warm sunny day.

EXPRESSIVES are those kinds of speech acts that states what the speaker feels. [17]

a. b.

I’m really sorry! Congratulations!

DIRECTIVES are those kinds of speech acts that speakers use to get someone to do something. [18]

a. b. c.

Gimme a cup of coffee. Make it black. Could you lend me a pen, please? Don’t touch that!

COMMISIVES are those kinds of speech acts that speakers use to commit themselves to some future action. [19]

a. b. c.

I’ll be back! I’m gonna get it right the next time. we will not do that.

A linguistic interaction is necessarily a social interaction. It is possible to treat politeness as a fixed concept, as in the idea of polite social behavior, or etiquette, within a culture being tactful, generous, modest, and sympathetic towards others. FACE  the public self-image of a person. Thus, politeness, in an interaction can be defined as the means employed to show awareness of another person’s face. [1]

a. b.

Excuse me, Mr. Buckingham, but can I talk to you for a minute? He, Bucky, got a minute?

face wants  the expectations concerning one’s persons public self-image.

Negative face is the need to be independent, to have freedom of action, and not to be imposed by others. Positive face is the need to be accepted, even liked, by others, to be treated as a member of the same group, and to know that his or her wants are shared by others.