0apuntes_pragmatica (1)

8/17/2019 0apuntes_pragmatica (1)

1/36


2/36

* notice saying Out o$ Order laying on the $loor near a co$$ee ,achine and achair "ith a pile o$ !oo#s on it could ,ean3

1 – ,achine is not "or#ing.+ – !oo#s are not yet arranged in any particular order.

There are nu,erous cases o$ structural a,!iguity3

:.g. The ?ishop "al#ed a,ong the pilgri,s eating their picnic lunches3

1 – The pilgri,s "ere eating.+ – The !ishop ate lunches.

5o,eti,es "e can understand conte tual ,eaning !ut not $orce3

:.g. 4is that your car@6

1 – &esAno Buestion.+ – *d,iration.

– 5corn. – ReBuest $or a li$t.

7 – * co,plaint that the vehicle is o!structing access to so,e place.

?oth levels conte tual ,eaning and $orce are closely related !ut they are notinsepara!le and "e should not con$use the,.

Ta#e this sentence as o!Eect o$ analysis345arah it’s Diana. Dere#’s concert is to,orro" at eight6 %an ans"erFphone,essage a$ter not !eing at ho,e $or a $e" days)3

5entence ,eaning 1 – the per$or,ance o$ Dere# is to,orro" at eight. + – the concert that Dere# "ants to go is to,orro" at

eight. Conte tual ,eaning 1 – an e pected hearing o$ the voice ,essage $ro,

5arah. 9orce 1 – a re,inding $or 5arah.

+ – response to a Buestion.

– e cuse $or not ,eeting 5arah.

. De$ining Discourse *nalysis.

4It is the study o$ real language in use6.

4The study o$ discourse is the study o$ any aspect o$ language use6 %9asold1''/).

?ro"n and &ule 1'0 .

2


3/36

4Discourse re$ers to language in use as aa process "hich is socially situated6%Candlin 1'' ).

Da e,!races !oth $or,al and $unctional approaches3 4the ter, discourseanalysis is very a,!iguous. Roughly spea#ing it re$ers to atte,pts to study the

organiGation o$ language a!ove the sentence or a!ove the clause and there$oreto study larger linguistic units such as conversational e changes or "rittente ts. D* is also concerned "ith language in use in social conte ts6%5le,!rouc# +//7).

Discourse studies are essentially ,ultidisciplinary %van DiE# +//+). They crossthe 8inguistic !order into di$$erent and varied do,ains.

D* is studied not only !y linguists !ut also !y co,,unication scientists literarycritics philosophers sociologists anthropologists social psychologists politicalscientists etc.

. Origin and !rie$ history o$ Discourse *nalysis.

The Cho,s#ian Henerative 5chool %5yntactic 5tructures 1'7 ).

+/ th century e,ergence o$ other schools supporting the !elie$ that a goodlinguist description should go !eyond the sentence3

F 9unctionalis,.F Cognitive 8inguistics.F 5ociolinguistics.F Te t linguistics.F Discourse *nalysis.

It is di$$icult to distinguish one $or the another especially Te t 8inguistics andDiscourse *nalysis.

T8 is a ,ore $or,al approach= te t internal $actors %coherence and cohesion).D* is a ,ore $unctional approach= te t e ternal $actors %accepta!ilityin$or,ativity situationality and interte tuality – De ?eaugrande and Dressler

1'01).These are the co,,on tenets o$ interrelated disciplines3

F 8anguage use is necessarily social.F The description o$ language ,ust account $or the real $acts o$ language.F 8inguistic structures should !e closely lin#ed to the conditions o$ languageuse.F 8anguage is natural and necessary vague and inaccurate.

7. *pproaches to D*.

3


4/36

Current research $lo"s $ro, di$$erent acade,ic $ields. Discourse and D* areused to ,ean di$$erent things !y di$$erent researchers.

8eech %1'0 ' and 5chi$rin %1'' ) distinguish !et"een t"o ,ain approaches3

F The $or,al approach discourse is de$ined as units o$ language !eyondthe sentence.

F The $unctional approach discourse is de$ined as language in use.

arris %1'71) "as the $irst linguist "ho used the ter, ‘discourse analysis’ andhe "as a $or,alist.

5chi$$rin %1'' ) integrates !oth the $or,al and $unctional approaches3Discourse as ‘utterances’ i.e ‘units o$ linguistic production’ %"hether spo#en or"ritten) "hich are inherently conte tualiGed.

Discourse is ,ulti,odal !ecause it includes not only the purely linguisticcontent !ut also other se,iotic syste,s %i.e. !ody language).

UNIT +3 T : CONT:JT

+.1. Conte t or coFte t.

F The -earsons are on Co#e. Three possi!le interpretations They are drin#ing co#e

They use cocaineThey have solid – $uel heating

F It’s cold. Three possi!le interpretations * "eather $orecast

2o, to little son %re$erring to "eather)Custo,er to "aiter %re$erring to co$$ee)

Intention Hive in$or,ationTa#e your coat;Co,plaint A reBuest

+.1.1. Origins o$ the ter, ‘conte t’.

In 1'+ 2alino"s#y coined the ter, 4conte t o$ situation6.

4: actly as the reality o$ spo#en or "ritten languages a "ord "ithout linguisticconte t is a ,ere $ig,ent and stands $or nothing !y itsel$ so in the reality o$ aspo#en living tongue the utterance has no ,eaning e cept in the conte t o$situation6.

9irth ela!orated the concept o$ ‘conte t’ in his 1'7/ paper -ersonality K8anguage in 5ociety.

4


5/36

F The relevant $eatures o$ participants persons personalitieso The ver!al action o$ the participants.o The nonFver!al action o$ participants.

F The relevant o!EectsF The e$$ect o$ the ver!al action

The ter, ‘conte t’ is very co,,on !ut 4elusive o$ de$inition6 %Liddoson+// 3 +).

In 1'07 alliday K assan esta!lished "hat they call the ‘conte t o$ situation’"hich can !e descri!ed on ter,s o$ a si,ple conceptual $ra,e"or# o$ threeheadings %1'0')3

F The $ield o$ discourse re$ers to "hat is happening to the native o$ thesocial action that is ta#ing place.F The tenor o$ discourse re$ers to "ho is ta#ing part the native o$ theparticipants their status and role.F The ,ode o$ discourse re$ers to "hat part the language is playing theorganiGation o$ the te t the channel %"ritten spo#en or co,!ination).

2ey %1'' ) de$ined ‘conte t’ as 4surroundings in the "idest sense6.

5per!er K Lilson %1''7) de$ined ‘conte t’ as a 4psychological construct asu!set o$ the hearer’s assu,ptions a!out the "orld.6

+.1.+. Types o$ conte t.

Conte t involves three di$$erent di,ensions3

a) 5ituational conte t re$ers to the ti,e the place "here language is used.That is the i,,ediate physical environ,ent surrounding !oth spea#er andhearer.:.g. It’s a long ti,e since "e visited your ,other.

-ossi!le conte ts Conte t * – ,arried couple in their livingConte t ? – ,arried couple in the Goo in $ront o$ the hippos

eAshe co,es in all her vastness.

-ossi!le conte ts Conte t * – a TM reporter tal#ing a!out a ship !utthe ca,era sho"s the ueen 2other

F ?ac#ground #no"ledge that help us to 4construct ,eanings6 that spea#ers

!elonging to other cultural co,,unities ,ight not share.

5


6/36

:.g3 * – o" is your ne" tennis partner@? – e has ,uch in co,,on "ith ohn 2c:nroe.

* – Hood server@? – ?ad te,per.

F Interpersonal or ,utual #no"ledge is the #no"ledge spea#er and hearershare. ?ecause they share this #no"ledge they can ta#e things $or granted thatanother interlocutor is unli#ely to understand.

:.g3 I$ he hadn’t $allen out o$ !ed I’d never have $ound out a!out it;

Other i,portant aspect o$ the conte t is the setting. 5etting re$ers to the ti,eand place o$ a speech act and in general to the physical circu,stance

5cene "hich is di$$erent $ro, setting designates the 4psychological setting6 orthe cultural de$inition o$ an occasion as a certain type o$ scene6 % y,es1' 377).Le do not e perience language in isolation – i$ "e did "e "ould not recogniGe itas a language !ut al"ays in relation to an scenario so,e !ac#ground o$persons and actions and events $ro, "hich the things "hich are said derivetheir ,eaning.

+.1. . To"ards a co,prehensive de$inition o$ conte t.

F CoFte t re$ers to the linguistic conte t in "hich a particular utteranceoccurs. 9or e a,ple in adEacency pairs such as the $ollo"ing3Q *3 *re you co,ing to the cine,a@ %&esAno Buestion)Q ?3 I’ve got an e a, to,orro".

F The identi$ication o$ the coFte t has to do "ith the disa,!iguation o$re$erences3Q *3 I "ent "ith 9rancesca and David.Q ?3 Uhuh@Q *3 9rancesca’s roo,F,ate. *nd *lice – a $riend o$ *lice’s $ro, 8ondon. There"ere si o$ us. &eah "e did a lot o$ hill "al#ing.

CoFte t is dyna,ic3 conte ts are constructed continuously during the course o$a conversation.Q * 3 *re "e having classes to,orro"@Q ?3 It’s el -ilar.

I$ ? is a 5panish student he "ill understand the ans"er. Other"ise he "illnot.

Conte t relationship "ith language is !ilateral. In other "ords "e canunderstand the te t than#s to conte t !ut "e can also guess the conte t $ro,the te t.

alliday K assan %1'0'3 ) provides the $ollo"ing e a,ples "here as

spea#ers o$ :nglish "e can ,a#e in$erences a!out the conte t o$ situation3

6


7/36

F Once upon a ti,eP %$airy tale)F This to certi$y thatP %legal docu,ent)F 9our hearts %card ga,es)F On your ,ar#s %sportive co,petition)F / please %order in a shop)

F ust a tri, is it@ %at a hairdresser ’s)F Rail stri#e %rail "or#ers having a stri#e= headline)F 0F1'+' %Id code= serial nu,!er)F 5ea slight on a lo" s"ell %"eather prediction)F ands up %as# $or volunteers)F ands up all those "ho’ve $inished %classroo,)F *dd the eggs one at a ti,e %recipe)F 9ro, here a short "al# ta#es you to the $ountain %tourist guide)F Re,ove !attery holding do"n !olts %instructions)

+.+. Dei is.

Dei is co,es $ro, Hree#. It re$ers to a particular "ay in "hich certain linguistice pressions are dependent on the conte t in "hich they are produced orinterpreted.

Deictic e pressions derive part o$ their ,eaning $ro, their conte t o$ utterance.

:.g. I a, here no".

F The pheno,enon o$ dei is has !een o$ considera!le interest tophilosophers linguists and psychologists natural languages %$aceFtoF$aceinteraction).F *s people ta#e turns the re$erents ‘I you here there this P’syste,atically s"itch too – di$$iculty $or children in language acBuisition.F In si,ple ter,s dei is is organiGed around a ‘deicitic centre’ %thespea#er) and hisAher location in space and ti,e at the ti,e o$ spea#ing althoughthe location o$ the addressee is also ta#en into account $or,ing a t"oFcentredsyste,.F -ro i,al %this here no") Ms. distal %that there then) in ter,s o$spea#er’s location.

+.+.1. -ersonal dei is.

F -ronoun and ver! agree,ent.F 1st personal encodes the participation o$ the spea#er and te,poral andspatial dei is are organiGed pri,arily around the location o$ thespea#erAaddressee at the ti,e o$ spea#ing3Q 5pea#er inclusion %1st person).Q *ddressee inclusion %+nd person).F *s $ar as it is #no"n all languages have 1st and +nd person pronouns !ut

not all have rd person pronouns.

7


8/36

+.+.+. Ti,e dei is.

No" to,orro" ten years ago this "ee# this Nove,!er etc. ta#e as the deicticcentre the spea#er’s location in ti,e at the ti,e o$ the utterance.

The ,ost pervasive aspect o$ te,poral dei is is ‘tense’.

+.+. . 5patial dei is %place dei is).

Deictic adver!s li#e ‘here’ %including spea#er) and ‘there’ %re,ote $ro, spa#er)are the ,ost direct e a,ples o$ spatial dei is.

Other spatial deictics are ‘this’ and ‘that’ %so,e languages have a threeF"aydistinction e.g. 8atin or 5panish).

5patial dei is is also $reBuently encoded in ver!al roots or a$$i es "ith a typical!asic distinction !et"een 4,otion to"ards spea#er6 %e.g. co,e) and 4,otiona"ay $ro, the spea#er %e.g. go).

+.+. . Discourse dei is.

In a spo#en or "ritten discourse it is $reBuent to re$er to earlier or $orthco,ingseg,ents o$ the discourse %e.g. in the previousAne t paragraph).

5ince a discourse un$olds in ti,e it is natural to use te,poral deictic ter,s%ne t) although spatial ter,s are also $reBuent %in this chapter).

+.+.7. 5ocial dei is.

F This includes 4honori$ics63 2ada,e &our grace.F onori$ics include the spea#er’s social relationship to another person%usually the addressee !ut not al"ays) on a di,ension o$ ran#.

F There are t"o ,ain #inds o$ honori$ics3a) Re$erent honori$ics3 "here the honour party is re$erred to. :.g. UstedvocS etc.!) Nonre$erent honori$ics3 "e can signal respect "ithout re$erring to the

drese !y choosing !et"een di$$erent le ical and gra,atical options. :.g.apanese orean or avanese.

+. . Re$erence.

This is the act o$ using language to re$er in entities in the conte t is #no"n as

re$erence3 an act in "hich the spea#er uses linguistic $or,s to ena!le the hearer to identi$y so,ething.

8


9/36


10/36

+. .1. Types o$ re$erence.

Re$erring to the conte t outside3 e ophora.

Lhen there is no previous ,ention o$ the re$erent in the te t "e call ite ophoric re$erence.

Lhen a re$erring ite,s re$ers to entities in the !ac#ground #no"ledge %"hethercultural or interpersonal) that have !een ,entioned in previous conversationsor te ts it is #no"n as interte tuality %de ?eaugrande and Dressler 1'01).

Lhen "e re$er to the coFte t "e can spea# o$ cohesion.

F Lhen the re$erring e pressions re$er to ite,s "ithin the sa,e te t "ecall it endophoric re$erence.

Q *3 I "ent "ith 9rancesca and David %e ophoric re$erence).Q ?3 Uhuh@Q *3 9rancesca’s roo, ,ate. *nd *lice’s %e ophoric re$.) – a $riend o$ *lice’s$ro, 8ondon. There "ere si o$ us. &eah "e did a lot o$ hill "al#ing %endophoricre$.)

F Lhen a re$erring e pression lin#s "ith another re$erring e pression"ithin the coFte t "e say it is cohesive "ith the previous ,ention o$ the re$erentin the te t. This is part o$ "hat is #no"n as gra,,atical cohesion.

:ndophora also avoids unnecessary repetition.

Q : a,ple 1a vs 1!.

There are t"o types o$ endophora3

F *naphora %repetition) the pronouns lin# !ac# to so,ething that "ent!e$ore in the preceding te t. :.g. the, and this %,ore $reBuent).F Cataphora %anticipation) The pronouns lin# $or"ard to a re$erent in thete t that $ollo"s. It can !e a stylistic choice to #eep the reader in suspense asto "ho or "hat is !eing tal#ed a!out.

+. . Hra,,atical and le ical cohesion.

10


11/36

a) Hra,,atical cohesion F :ndophoric re$erence is only one $or, o$gra,,atical cohesion.

F There are not other $or,s that are not part o$ re$erence3Q 5u!stitution.Q :llipsis.

+.7. -ressupositions and entail,ent.

5pea#ers assu,e certain in$or,ation is already #no"n !y their listeners. 5uchin$or,ation "ill generally not !e stated co,,unicative econo,y and clarity.4*ll ohn’s children are "ise6 presupposes that3F 4 ohn has children6F 4 ohn has ,ore than one child6

-resupposition and entail,ent descri!e t"o di$$erent aspects o$ this #ind o$in$or,ation.

* presupposition is so,ething the spea#er assu,es to !e the case prior to,a#ing an utterance !ac#ground assu,ptions.

5pea#er not sentence have presuppositions.

:.g. a) ave you given up 8inguistics@!) &ou have studied 8inguistics !e$ore.

c) Did you enEoy your dinner@d) &ou have had dinner.

e) I don’t regret leaving 8ondon.$) I le$t 8ondon.

*n entail,ent is so,ething that logically $ollo"s $ro, "hat is asserted in an

utterance. 5entences not spea#ers have entail,ents.:.g. 2ary’s !rother has !ought three horses.

-ressupositions F * person called 2ary e ists.F 5he has a !rother.

:ntail,ents F 2ary’s !rother !ought so,ething.F e !ought three ani,als.

F e !ought t"o horses.F e !ought one horse.

11


12/36

F *nd other si,ilar logical conseBuences.

8et us loo# !ac# at historical !ac#ground and se,antic presupposition3

Q -resupposition originated "ith de!ates in philosophy related to thenature o$ re$erence re$erring e pressions logical theory and truth conditions%9rege 10'+= Russel 1'/7= 5tra"son 1'7+).

Q 9rege %10'+) "as the $irst philosopher in recent ti,es to pose theBuestion o$ presuppositions3

:.g. 4 epler died in ,isery6 presupposes 4 epler designates so,ething i.e. the"ord ‘ epler’ has a re$erent6.

Q Russell %1'/7) disagreed "ith 9rege’s theory !ecause he argued there"ere sentences that lac#ed proper re$erents !ut they could still !e ,eaning$ulli#e3 4The ing o$ 9rance is "ise6.

Q In general ter,s "e $ind a su!stantial agree,ent a!out the de$inition o$ presupposition in the philosophical tradition and later on in se,antics "herethey also deal "ith truth or $alsity3

:.g. 4-resupposition is "hat re,ains valid even i$ the sentence is negated6%*sher +1).

These are so,e e a,ples $ro, the de$inition3

*) ohn ,anaged to stop in ti,e.

ohn stopped in ti,e %entail,ent) ohn tried to stop in ti,e %presupposition)

?) ohn didn’t ,anage to stop in ti,e. ohn tried to stop in ti,e %presupposition). V ohn stopped in ti,e %entail,ent).

Constancy under negation ,a#es a !asic distinction !et"een presuppositionand entail,ent.

-resuppositions see, to !e tied to particular "ords – or aspects o$ sur$acestructure. These linguistic ite,s that generate presuppositions are calledpresupposition – triggers %8evinson 1'0 3 1 ').

12


13/36

artunnen has collected 1 #inds o$ such presupposition – triggers. 8evinson%1'0 3101F07) lists a selection $ro, these as indicators o$ di$$erent types o$presuppositions3

*) -roper na,es or de$inite descriptions3 e istential presuppositions3

F ohn’s !rother has Eust got !ac# $ro, Te as ohn has a !rother

?) 9active ver!s3 they are $actual presuppositions3F 5he didn’t realiGe he "as ill e "as ill.F Le regret telling hi, Le told hi,.

Other $active predicates "ould !e #no" !e sorry that !e proud that !eindi$$erent than !e glad that !e sad that !e a"are that !e odd that.Q In nonFrestrictive relative clauses the in$or,ation that is in co,,as do nota$$ect the rest o$ the sentence. :.g. illary "ho cli,!ed the :verest in 1'7"as the greater e plorer o$ our day.

Q I,plicative ver!s3 ,anage.

Q Change o$ state ver!s3 stop start continue3F ohn stoppedAdidn’t stop s,o#ing ohn had !een s,o#ing.

Q Iteratives3 again3F The $yling saucer ca,eAdidn’t co,e again The $lying saucer had

co,e !e$ore.

Q Te,poral clause3F ?e$ore 5tra"sson "as !orn ever= 9rege noticed presuppositions

5tra"sson "as !orn.

*ll o$ the, represent le ical presupposition.

Q 5trucutural presuppositions3F Cle$t sentences pseudoFcle$ts

It "asA"asn’t enry "ho #issed Rosie 5o,eone #issed Rossie.Lhat ohn lost "as his "allet ohn lost so,ething.

FLhF Buestions Lhen did she die@ 5he died.Q Counter$actual presuppositions3 counter$actual conditionals3

F I$ I "eren’t ill I’, ill.

Q NonF$active presuppositions3F e pretended to !e happy e "asn’t happy.F Other nonF$active predicates3 drea, i,agine.

o"ever a strictly truthFconditional de$inition $ails on several counts %2ey+//+ 10 F07)3

1) 9irst there is ,ore to sentences than the a!stract truth value they carry.

13


14/36

+) 5econd sentences "hen spo#en cannot !e considered in isolation $ro,the spea#er %s) and listener %s) "ho are relevant $actors in any situation o$language use.

*ccording to 8evinsson %1'0 ) se,antic presuppositions also pose t"o

i,portant pro!le,s3

F De$easi!ility in certain conte ts %!oth the coFte t and the !ac#ground#no"ledge conte t) presuppositions are lia!le to evaporate. 9or e a,ple3

9active ver! ‘#no"’ F ohn doesn’t #no" that ?ill ca,e %?ill ca,e)F I don’t #no" that ?ill ca,e V ?ill ca,e.

?e$ore clauses %ti,e adver!ials) F 5ue cried !e$ore she $inished herthesis

F 5ue $inished her thesis.

F 5ue died !e$ore she $inished her thesis.F V 5ue $inished her thesis.

F The proEection pro!le, it is related to the !ehaviour o$ presuppositionsin co,ple sentences "here they also disappear.

Co,pare * and ?3

a) ohn didn’t cheat again ohn had cheated !e$ore.!) ohn didn’t cheat again i$ indeed he ever did V ohn had cheated !e$ore.

Co,pare C and D3

c) No!ody realiGed that she "as ill she "as ill .d) I,agine that elly "as ill and no!ody realiGed that she "as ill V 5he "asnot ill.

To su, up se,antic theories o$ presupposition are not via!le !ecause

se,antics is concerned "ith invariant sta!le ,eanings and presuppositions arenot invariant or sta!le %8evinson 1'0 3 +/ ).

Q The notion o$ prag,atic presupposition "as introduced !y the philosopher5talna#er in an in$luential article %1' ) and $urther developed !y the sa,e5tal#aner and others % artunnen 1' = Hau#er 1''0 etc.)

Q -rag,atic presuppositions have !een de$ined as assu,ptions shared !y theinterlocutors "hich $ro, the !ac#ground o$ their ongoing discourse %5talna#er1' 1' ) ,utual #no"ledge or co,,on ground.

Q This set o$ assu,ptions shi$ts as ne" sentences are uttered.

14


15/36

Q 5o,e i$ not all o$ these shared !ac#ground assu,ptions have linguistic,ar#ers3 thus 5talna#er %1' ) %$ollo"ed a,ong others !y 5oa,es 1'0') hasspo#en o$ presupposition reBuire,ents or presupposition triggers %8evinson1'0 = Man de 5andt 1'00).

:.g. a. 2y "i$e is a dentist.!. I have a "i$e.

Q The ,utual #no"ledge condition is $ar too strong.

:.g. a) I’, sorry I’, late I’, a$raid ,y car !ro#e do"n!) The spea#er has a car

Q -resuppositions ,ay have in$or,ation uses % arttunen 1' 5talna#er 1' ).The reBuired presupposition still ,ay not !e included a,ong the !elie$s shared!y the interlocutors. It ,ay !e ne" in$or,ation $or the listener "ho "ill‘acco,,odate’ the presupposition !y adding it to the shared !ac#ground !elie$s%8e"is 1' ').

:.g. a) *re you going to lunch@!) No I’ve got to pic# up ,y sister.

Q 5tal#aner %1' ) artunnen %1' ) and Hau#er %1''0) thus tal# a!outin$or,ative presuppositions and presupposition acco,,odation.

:.g. I’, sorry. I’, late. 2y car !ro#e do"n

F The spea#er presupposes he has a car.F The interlocutor%s) ,ight have #no"n so in advance %it "as part o$ their,utual #no"ledge) and they ta#e it $or granted.F The interlocutor%s) ,ight not #no" the spea#er has a car !utacco,,odate this ne" piece o$ in$or,ation into their !ac#ground #no"ledgegenerally accepting it as true %although not necessarily).

:.g. 4Le regret that children cannot acco,pany their parents to theco,,ence,ent e ercises6 %Hau#er 1''0).

F The point is that Children cannot !e acco,panied !y their parents.F -arents have to acco,,odate this ne" piece o$ in$or,ation into their!ac#ground #no"ledge.F ?y putting it that "ay the spea#er ac#no"ledges that this ne"s ,ight !edisappointing to so,e interlocutors.

Q 5uch in$or,ative uses o$ presuppositions are also $reBuent "ith persuasive

purposes %e.g. in the press in advertise,ents political speeches etc.

15


16/36

Q It is ,ore di$$icult to Buestion so,ething that is co,,unicated only i,plicitly%via presuppositions) than openly.

:.g. -olitical discourse and the press3

F 4 The ,oral and civil unity o$ the nation is also rooted in and held $ast !yreligious li$e and !elonging to the Catholic Church %Ro,ano -rodi 'F'F' ).F 4Ro,ano -rodi !asically said in 8oretto that "e are united !ecause "eare Catholics6 %8a 5ta,pa 'F'F' ).

:.g. *dvertising3

F 4Carls!erg possi!ly the !est !eer in the "orld.6This is a generaliGation %open state,ent= invitation)

-eople’s co,,on #no"ledge or !elie$ that the purpose o$ every advert is toe,phasiGe the ,erits o$ speci$ic products or services.

F 48’Oreal !ecause you "orth it.6 The !est product $or the !est one. It is connected to the idea o$ sel$F

estee, %strong state,ent).There is a co,,on !ac#ground assu,ption o$ sel$Festee,.

To su, up presuppositions are the result o$ co,ple interactions !et"eense,antics and prag,atics.6 %8evinson 1'0 3 ++7) hy!rid account.

4Le conclude that presupposition re,ains ninety years a$ter 9rege’s re,ar#son the su!Eect still only partially understood6 %i!id).

a) ohn regrets that he $ailed the e a, %$act – se,antic presupp.)!) ohn doesn’t regret that he $ailed the e a, %prag,atic presupp.)c) ohn doesn’t regret having $ailed !ecause in $act he passed

Q The cat is on the ,at There is a cat There is a ,at

F Utterer3 o"ner. F Intention3 Larning description etc.

c) 9ound3 Hray Cat There is a cat d) -hone3 '1F / / The cat is gray

F Utterer3 O"ner. F Intention3 Het the cat !ac#.F -lace3 a la,ppost $or e a,ple.

16


17/36


18/36

-ractice %e ercise ()3

Lhat !ac#ground #no"ledge does it assu,e $or its readers@

There is a Buite speci$ic voca!ulary. It is assu,ing shared cultural #no"ledge

and su!$ield #no"ledge.

The te t ,a#es no concession to those "ho do not understand the re$erence o$the specialiGed voca!ulary. Lhy do you thin# this happens@

?ecause this article is targeted to people "ho li#e sports and #no" a!out theissues and topics related to.

-ractice %e ercise )3

It has $ailed the shared #no"ledge !et"een the "riter and the reporter.

-ractice %e ercise 0)3

1) &ou have ta#en at least a cup o$ co$$ee.+) That he has Eust hit you !e$ore.

) That he has as#ed so,ething to you %5e,antic).) &ou have read that article once !e$ore.

7) Trigger &ou have ta#en ti,e to ,a#e the dra"ing.() &ou put the paper so,e"here.

UNIT

./. Introduction.

5peech *ct theory3 initially developed !y *ustin % o" to do things "ith "ords1'(+). Di$$erent lectures put together and pu!lished in O $ord University and

arvard and a$ter his death this volu,e "as pu!lished.

F *ustin3 the 4$ather o$ prag,atics6.F 9irst to challenge the descriptive $allacy3 the only $unction o$ language "as thato$ ,a#ing true or $alse state,ents %truth conditional se,antics). 8in#ed to the

$ield o$ logic.F is contention3 language is not ,erely $or saying !ut also $or doing.

F ?e$ore *ustin’s challenge to truthFconditional se,antics logical positivists%?ertrand Russell) held the vie" that the only ,eaning$ul state,ents "ere those"hich could !e e,pirically tested.

:.g. The #ing o$ 9rance is !ald. %In a ti,e there "asn’t a #ing o$ 9rance it "ould!e ,eaningless. In *ustin’s vie" it has ,eaning).I$ "e ta#e the $ollo"ing e a,ples $ro, the point o$ vie" o$ the logical positivis,approach they could !e si,ply ,eaningless do "e consider the,

,eaningless@ In ter,s o$ logic they are ,eaningless !ecause invisi!le cars donot e ist so it is $alse and the sa,e happens "ith ca,e out o$ no"here – i$ you

18


19/36

ta#e it literally. The second e a,ple !elo" you cannot sleep all the ti,e andthis person is spea#ing not sleeping so it is $alse. In ter,s o$ logical positivis,they "ould !e $alse and ,eaningless.

:.g. *n invisi!le car ca,e o$ no"here hit ,y car and vanished.

I sleep all the ti,e doctorRussel *ustin:veryday language "as an i,precise and de$icient tool o$ co,,unication $ullo$ a,!iguities and contradictions and needed to !e re$ined. -eople,anage to co,,unicate very "ell "ith language Eust the "ay it is and "ithoutserious di$$iculty.

5peech *ct Theory %later developed !y 5earle %disciple o$ *ustin)

.1. The per$or,ative hypothesis.

In *ustin’s vie" there "as so,e declarative sentences that could !e not eithertrue or $alse this truth and $alsity conditions "ere si,ply irrelevant. ?ecausethese sentences "ere not descri!ing they "ere ai,ed to per$or, to do things.: a,ples3

F I !et you si it "ill rain to,orro".F I here!y christen this ship !y ueen :liGa!eth II.F I declare "ar onPF I apologiGe.F I o!Eect.F I !eBueath you ,y -icasso.

Q They are not used to say things !ut to do things.Q *ustin ter,ed these special sentences and the utterances realiGed !y the,per$or,ative %utterances "hich are 5peech acts).

5yntactically per$or,atives see, to share three co,,on $eatures3

F They are declarative sentences in present si,ple.

F The su!Eect is al"ays the $irst person pronoun – re$erring to thespea#er%s).F -er$or,ative ver!s "ill ta#e the adver! 4here!y6.

:.g. I here!y declare you 2ayor o$ Canter!ury.

‘ ere!y’ can !e used in order to test $or per$or,ative utterances !y inserting it3F I here!y Eog ten ,iles on 5undays.

o"ever these distinctive $eatures are not so clearP

:.g. I !etted you $ive pounds.

19


20/36

Q -er$or,ative ver!s can !e used nonFper$or,atively.

:.g. &ou are here!y "arned.Q The su!Eect is not necessarily the 1st person pronoun.

:.g. Huilty;Q 5o,eti,es there are cases that do not contain a ver! at all.

It is possi!le to distinguish t"o #inds o$ per$or,atives %8evinson 1'0 = Tho,as1''73 )3

a) : plicit per$or,atives that spea#ers use "hen they "ant to !euna,!iguous.!) I,plicit per$or,atives they carry out an action !ut using other devicessuch as ,ood adver!s intonation etc.

F 5hut the door %I order you to shut the door).F I’ll !e there "ithout $ail %I pro,ise I’ll !e there).F There$ore P %I conclude thatP).

There is a second pro!le, has to do "ith this distinction !et"een constativesand per$or,atives. Constatives could !e also e panded into e plicitper$or,atives i$ pre$i ed "ith a $or,ula li#e 4I here!y state that63

F I’, alone responsi!le.F I state that I a, alone responsi!le.

The per$or,ativeAconstative dichoto,y "as untena!le. No real inco,pati!ility!et"een utterances !eing truthF!earers %constatives) and si,ultaneouslyper$or,ing actions %per$or,atives).

*ustin clai,ed that there is a "hole $a,ily o$ speech acts o$ "hich constativesand the various per$or,atives %,etalinguistic ritual colla!orative – Tho,as 1''7) are Eustparticular ,e,!ers.

.+. 9elicity conditions.

F -er$or,atives cannot !e true or $alse ho"ever they can go "rong i$ thenecessary conditions $or the, to !e success$ul do not ta#e place.FThese conditions are ter,ed $elicity conditions %i$ constatives have trueconditions per$or,atives have $elicity conditions). %9elicity ,ust !e understoodin ter,s o$ appropriateness)

*ustin distinguished three categories o$ $elicity conditions3

a) 9irst category has t"o parts3a. 1. There ,ust !e a conventional procedure having a conventional e$$ect.a. +. The circu,stances and persons ,ust !e appropriate.

20


21/36

%:.g. a procedure could !e a "edding I declare you hus!and and "i$e the ritualthat in order to !e success$ul "e need these conditions. In ter,s o$ a "edding"e need a priest= "e need a couple that are not prevented $ro, ,arriage.

!) 5econd category3 The procedure ,ust e e ecuted %i) correctly and %ii)

co,pletely.%:.g i$ the priest as#s the other person i$ you "ant to ,arry you have to ans"er‘I do’ and i$ you say ‘o#’ you have to $ollo" a ‘$or,ula’.

c) Third category3c.1. The persons ,ust have the reBuisite thoughts $eelings and intentions.c.+. I$ conseBuent conduct is speci$ied then the relevant parties ,ust do it.%:.g. In a "edding the person is supposed to !e "ishing to get ,arried ashotgun "edding "ould !e legally !inding= and then the second partconsu,,ating ,arriage $or instance).WW I$ these conditions are not $ul$illed the act "ill !e in$elicitous.

:.g. I here!y divorce you. %not an act o$ divorce here in 5pain so the conditionthat is not the conventional procedure you are not capa!le o$ divorceso,e!ody. In 2uslins society you are the hus!and and you say this to your"i$e it is $ul$illed !ut not in other cultures. ust uttering this ,essage does notper$or, the act o$ divorcing.

Curate3 4Lill thou have this "o,an to thy "edded "i$eP so long as !oth shalllive@6?ridegroo,3 4O# "hy not@6 It is an in$elicitous act not $ul$illed ‘!’ category!ecause the procedure is not uttered properly she doesn’t say ‘I do’.5pea#er3 4I !et you ten pounds she "ill $ail again6. %‘?et’ is other e a,ple o$per$or,ative it is colla!orative. I$ there is no ans"er on the part o$ the hearerdo "e have a !et@ I$ there is not an upta#e that the other accept the !et ‘o# I’,on’. It is not co,pletely !.+. category is not $ul$illed in this colla!orative processyou need t"o parts involved in a !et. )

F The precise $elicity conditions o$ an act depend o$ the act !eingper$or,ed on its nature.F 2is$ires %*ustin)3 those cases "hen there is a ,is,atch !et"een the actand the circu,stances and the act is not $ul$illed.

9elicity conditions are preconditions on speech acts3a) Heneral conditions on the participants3 that they can understand thelanguage !eing used that they are not playFacting or !eingFnonsensical.

!) Content conditions3 $or e a,ple $or !oth a pro,ise and a "arning thecontent o$ the utterance ,ust !e a!out a $uture event. 9urther condition $or apro,ise3 $uture act o$ the spea#er.

c) -reparatory conditions $or a pro,ise are signi$icantly di$$erent $ro, those $ora "arning.

21


22/36

F 9or a pro,ise the event "ill not happen !y itsel$ and the event "ill have a!ene$icial e$$ect.

F 9or a "arning it is not clear that the hearer #no"s that the event "ill occur thespea#er does thin# the event "ill occur and the event "ill not have a !ene$icial

e$$ect.

d) 5incerity conditions3

F -ro,ise the spea#er genuinely intends to carry out the $uture action.F Larning the spea#er genuinely !elieves that the $uture event "ill not have a!ene$icial e$$ect.

e) :ssential condition3 the utterance changes the spea#er state $ro, nonFo!ligation %pro,ise) or $ro, nonFin$or,ing to in$or,ing %"arning).

. . Utterances as acts3 locutionary illocutionary perlocutionary.

Lhen "e utter a sentence "e are also per$or,ing actions.

*ustin isolates three #inds o$ acts that are si,ultaneously per$or,ed3F 8ocutionary act the utterance o$ a sentence %the actual "ords uttered).F Ilocuitionary act %illocutionary $orce) the $orce or intention !ehind the"ords %pro,ising o$$ering "arning etc.)F -erlocutionary act %perlocutionary e$$ect) the conseBuence or e$$ect onthe hearer%s).

:.g. shoot hi,;

F 8ocutionary act3 4shoot hi,6F Ilocutionary act3 an order or advice urging the addressee to shoot hi,.F -erlocutionary e$$ect3 the addressee ,ight shoot that person.

:.g. Is that your car@

F 8ocutionary act3 4Is that your car6F Ilocutionary $orce3 a co,plain a "arning in order to chec# i$ he’s the

o"ner o$ the car.F -erlocutionary e$$ect3 the addressee is e pected to give an ans"er or i$he is a police agent he ,ight i,pose a $ine $or the spea#er.

The sa,e "ords can !e used to per$or, di$$erent speech acts %4Is that yourcar6)

The di$$erent "ords can !e used to per$or, the sa,e speech acts.

:.g. the speech act o$ reBuesting so,eone to close the door3

F 5hut the door;F Could you shut the door@

22


23/36

F Did you $orget the door@F -ut the "ood in the hole.F Lere you !orn in a !arn@F Lhat do !ig !oys do "hen they co,e into a roo, ohnny@

. . 5peech acts classi$ication.

5earle %1' 7) developed ta ono,y o$ illocutionary acts "here he distinguished$ive ,ain ,acroFclasses3

a) Representatives or assertives the spea#er states "hat heAshe !elievesto !e the case %descri!ing clai,ing insisting predicting concluding etc.) :.g.It "as a "ar, sunny day.!) Directives the spea#er ai,s at ,a#ing the hearer do so,ething%co,,anding ordering reBuesting inviting $or!idding suggesting etc.) :.g.Don’t touch that;= Could you lend ,e a pen please@c) Co,,isives the spea#er co,,its hi,Ahersel$ to $uture action %pro,iseo$$ering threatening re$using vo"ing volunteering etc). :.g. I’’ll help you i$ youhave any pro!le,s.d) : pressives the spea#er states "hat heAshe $eels. They e presspsychological states and can !e state,ents o$ pleasure pain li#es disli#es Eoyor sorro" %apologiGing praising congratulating deploring regretting etc.). :.g.I $eel I should have apologised $or ,y !ehaviour.e) Declaratives or declarations the spea#er changes the "orld !y the veryutterance o$ the "ords. :.g. I here!y declare you hus!and and "i$e.

. . Direct and indirect speech acts.

Direct speech acts are those "here a spea#er "ants to co,,unicate the literal,eaning that the "ords conventionally e press. There is a direct relationship!et"een the $or, and the $unction.

F Het ,e one order.F I a, hungry state,ent.F Do you li#e tuna@ Buestion.

Indirect speech acts are those "here a spea#er "ants to co,,unicate adi$$erent ,eaning $ro, the apparent sur$ace ,eaning. The $or, and $unctionand not directly related3

F Lould you get ,e a sand"ich@ reBuest.F It’s hot in here reBuest %open the "indo").F Co,e $or a "al# "ith ,e invitation.

The classi$ication o$ utterances in categories is di$$icult as long as ,uch o$ "hat"e say operate on !oth levels and o$ten have ,ore than one o$ the ,acroF

$unctions.

23


24/36

:.g. 4I’ve !een seen Rivers. Lhich re,inds ,e he "ants to see you !ut Ii,agine it’ll !e all right i$ you du,p your !ag $irst.6

e "ants to see you %declarative reBuest= indirect speech act) 5tate,ent descri!ing River’s "ishes Order or a suggestion to the hearer

.7. 5peech acts and society.

*) 5ocial di,ension3

*pparently %!ecause o$ politeness) ,ost speech acts "e produce every day"ould !e indirect according to 5earle’s distinction.

In :nglish directives are ,ore o$ten e pressed as interrogatives thani,peratives. :.g. 4Than# you not $or not s,o#ing.6

There are $actors that can ,a#e spea#ers use indirect directives3

F 8ac# o$ $a,iliarity.F Reasona!leness o$ the tas#.F 9or,ality o$ the conte t.F 5ocial distance %di$$erences o$ status roles age gender educationclass occupation and ethnicity).

-o"er and authority those o$ the less do,inant role tend to use indirectness.

5peech acts and their linguistic realiGations are also culturally !ound and itvaries $ro, country to country.:.g. o" $at you are; %praising criticiGing).

India3 "eight is an indicator o$ prosperity ?ritain3 sli, !eauti$ul

Di$$erences in speech conventions %directAindirect) can also cause di$$icultiescrossFculturally.

:.g. %$ro, Cu!a)

* X ?ristish "o,an ?X Cu!an "o,an *3 Is 2r. -YreG there@?3 &es he is.

*3 :,P Can I spea# to hi, please@?3 &es "ait a ,inute.

:.g. Lhere are you going@F Chinese3 $riendly greetingF ?ritish person3 intrusive %disrespect$ul) Buestion

Chinese greeting ?ritish greeting4 ello have you had your lunch@6 4 i a !it colder today6

24


25/36

45peci$ic di$$erences !et"een languages in the area o$ soFcalled ‘indirect’speech acts are ,otivated to a considera!le degree !y di$$erences in culturalnor,s and cultural assu,ptions and the general ,echanis,s the,selves arecultureFspeci$ic6 %LierG!ic#a 1''13 (+).

Intercultural or crossFcultural prag,atics3

a) Interlanguage prag,atics3 a !ranch o$ prag,atics "hich speci$icallydiscusses ho" nonFnative spea#ers co,prehend and produce a speech act in atarget language and ho" their prag,atic co,petence develops over ti,e% asper K ?lu,F ul#a 1'' = asper 1''7).!) CategoriGation o$ speech acts3 one utterance can $all into ,ore than one,acroFclass %overlap).c) *nother pro!le, is the apparent ‘,essiness’ %chaos) o$ everyday spo#enlanguage.Q 9illers3 4so there you go6 4you #no"6 4so6 %!ueno pues aBui esta,os). Theysay very little and they are very di$$icult to classi$y in ter,s o$ the speech actsta ono,y. Interactional socially cohesive $unction.Q ?ac#channels and $eed!ac#3 %really@ Uh uh) they sho" "e are listening to ourinterlocutor and encouraging the, to continue tal#ing.Q Inco,plete sentences3 as in 4!ut she didn’t do the – er –no.6

Lhen "e tal# "e do not produce isolated utterances !ut there are ,oreutterances produced !y the interlocutors involved3

F 5peech event an activity in "hich participants interact via language inso,e conventional "ay to arrive at so,e outco,e. It ,ay include an o!viouscentral act %e.g. 4I don’t li#e this6 as a speech event o$ co,plaining) !ut it "illalso include other utterances leading up to and su!seBuently reacting to thatcentral action %speech event o$ reBuesting – directive).

8i#e"ise the sa,e spea#er can produce a larger piece o$ discourse than asingle utterance "hich can include ,any speech acts !ut "hich ta#en as"hole $or, o$ a ,acroFspeech act.

:.g. political speeches3

2acroFspeech act3 persuading people to vote $or herAhis political party.

In$or,ing stating

9inally over and a!ove speech acts there are t"o ,ain ,acroF$unctions o$ tal#%?ro"n and &ule 1'0 )3

25


26/36

F The transactional $unction is the one "e use to trans,it $actualin$or,ation.F The interactional $unction is the one involved in e pressing socialrelations and personal attitudes sho"ing solidarity and ,aintaining socialcohesion.

In $act ,ost tal# has a ,i ture o$ !oth $unctions3 a cline $ro, the purelytransactional to the purely interactional3

F *t the e tre,e end o$ the transactional.F *t the e tre,e end o$ the interactional3 phatic co,,union "e uselanguage not to co,,unicate !ut to !e $riendly and sho" a readiness to tal#.

.0. 5peech acts and po"er3 CD*.

The idea o$ speech acts ‘uttering as acting’ is central to "hat 9airclough callsC85 %Critical 8anguage 5tudy). C85 analyses social interactions in a "ay in"hich $ocuses upon their linguistic ele,ents and ho" language a$$ects and isa$$ected !y the syste, o$ social relationships %1'0'3').

The "or# o$ 9airclough presents a co,prehensive atte,pt to develop a theoryo$ CD* "hich lin#s discourse po"er and social structure.

Discourse is a threeFdi,ensional concept "hich involves te ts discoursepractices %production distri!ution and consu,ption o$ te ts) and socialpractices %po"er relations ideologies hege,onic struggles).

Individuals are not usually $ree to ,anipulate language to achieve their goals!ut they are constrained !y social conventions.-eople do not have eBual control in interactions !ecause there are ineBualitieso$ po"er.

ReBuests and po"er Q Indirect reBuests leave the po"er relationsi,plicitly.

Q The gra,,ar o$ a reBuest can e press varying degrees o$ indirectness.

UNIT 3 CONM:R5*TION *N*8&5I5

1. Introduction.

Q Le are going to study t"o approaches at the structure o$ discourse.

a) : change structure studies the conventional overall patterns that occur"hen people are tal#ing.!) Conversation analysis studies the "ay "hat spea#ers say dictates thetype o$ ans"er e pected and that spea#ers ta#e turns "hen they interact.

26


27/36

There is a di$$erent approach3 e change structure starts "ith a ,odel and seesho" real data $its it "hereas conversation analysis starts !y o!serving real dataand descri!es "hat patterns e,erge and a$ter that they develop a theory.

+. : change structure.

5inclair and Coulthard %1' 7) and the ?ir,ingha, 5chool o$ discourse analysis.They studied pri,ary school lessons and $ound a regular structure.

They studied pri,ary school lessons and $ound a regular structure.

*ccording to the ?ir,ingha, 5chool there are $ive ran#s or levels3F The act is the lo"est ran#. *cts are de$ined !y their interactive $unction.They cover the ,essiness o$ spo#en discourse.F Their categories include $or e a,ple3‘2ar#er’ as in ‘"ell’ ‘O ’ and ‘Right’.‘*c#no"ledge’ %!ac#channels).‘Cue’ as in ‘hands up’ and ‘Don’t call out’.‘:valuate’ as in ‘good’ and ‘interesting’.

ence acts tend to !e carried out in a $i ed order o$ ,oves3

F ?asic ,oves3 initiation %teacher) response %student) and $ollo"Fup%teacher’s co,,ent).F The co,!ination o$ ,oves in the IR9 structure is #no"n as e change.: changes can co,!ine to ,a#e the transaction.F :ach e change consists on t"o ,oves3 initiation and response.

I$ "e ta#e as e a,ple o$ conversation a lesson "e could study di$$erenttransactions.

2oreover there are certain li,itations o$ IR9 %initiationFresponseFP)3

F It does not acco,,odate easily to the real li$e and unruliness o$ theclassroo,.

F It re$lects the traditional teacherFcentred classroo,.F Contrarily to the previous case there are learnerFcentred classes in"hich there is ,uch interactions !et"een students and the teacher and thereare learners’ initiations.

The IR9 approach as descri!ed here is rarely used today.

The structure o$ classroo, transactions is not typical o$ everyday tal# !ut ,oreo$ ritualistic nature %intervie"s trials doctorFpatient e changes).

.+. Conversation analysis.

27


28/36

C* ta#es a ‘!otto,Fup’ approach3 starting "ith the conversation itsel$ and it letsthe data dictate its o"n structure.

C* can !e seen as a process 8inear ongoing event that i,plies negotiationand cooperation !et"een spea#ers.

C* originated "ithin 5ociology "ith the "or# o$ Har$in#el %1'( ) and hisapproach #no"n as ‘:thno,ethodology’ and then it "as applied !y 5ac#s and5cheglo$$.

:thno,ethodological research suggests that #no"ledge is neither autono,ousnor deconte tualiGed= it avoids idealiGations and argues that that "hat spea#ersproduce are categories that are continuously adEusted according to "hether theanticipation o$ an actor is con$ir,edly another action or not. These categoriesare called typi$ications. 8anguage o$ one typi$ication is social conduct.

Conversation is a "ay o$ using language socially o$ doing things "ith "ordstogether "ith other persons %2ey +//1).

One o$ the ,ain assu,ptions o$ C* is that interaction is structurally organiGed3

Q The core o$ C* is the e plorational seBuential structures o$ socialaction that is the patterns that e,erge as interaction un$olds.

The !asic unit o$ the conversation is the turn3

*) In nor,al "esternFtype conversations people do not spea# at the sa,eti,e3 they Eust "ait $or their turn.?) &ielding the right to spea# or the 4$loor6 to the ne t spea#er constitutes aturn.C) o" do people allocate turns to each other@ ?y turnFta#ing,echanis,s.

Turns nor,ally occur at certain "ellFde$ined Eunctures in conversations= suchpoints are called ‘transition relevant places’ %TR-s)3F Natural !rea#s %pauses endings etc).

There are di$$erent ,echanis,s that are part o$ turnF,anage,ent syste, %orlocal ,anage,ent syste,)3 un"ritten conventions a!out tal#ing turns that are#no"n !y ,e,!ers o$ a social group.

F Lhen the hearer predict that the turn is a!out to !e co,pleted and theyco,e !e$ore it is this is an overlap.F 5o,eti,es overlap e ists "hen there is a!sence o$ $a,iliarity and theinteraction does not $lo" s,oothly.F Other #ind o$ overlap e presses solidarity or closeness as "ell asopinions or values.F Overlap ,ay also co,,unicate co,petition "hen people are having a

discussion.

28


29/36

F In a co,petitive environ,ent these holding the 4$loor6 "ill avoidproviding TR-s3 avoid pauses and $illers.F *nother type o$ 4$loor6 holding device is to indicate that it is a largerstructure.F -assives3 un"ritten cultural agree,ent a!out the accepta!le length o$

passives i$ one spea#er turns over the $loor to another and the other does notspea# then that silence is attri!uta!le to the second spea#er and !eco,essigni$icant.F ?ac#channels3 vocal indications that provide $eed!ac# that the ,essageis !eing received.

*dEacency pairs are t"o su!seBuent utterances constituting a conversationale change %5ac#s K 5cheglo$$)3

F Hiven the 1st part the +nd is e pecta!le.F :ach part has a pre$erred and a dispre$erred response. This is apre$erence structure.

Conversation is ,ore than Eust co,!ining pairs in seBuences. The coherenceprinciple is stronger than the notion o$ paired adEacency.

Dispre$erred responses are linguistically ,ar#ed %pre$erred responses areun,ar#ed).

Dispre$erred seconds %re$usals or disagree,ents) e hi!it one or ,ore o$ the$ollo"ing $eatures %8evinson 1'0 3 )3

F Delay o$ delivery pause use o$ a pre$ace sel$Finterruptions sel$Frepairs %e.g. ‘Lhat I really "ant to say isP’).F -re$aces ,ar#ers o$ dispre$erreds li#e Uh and Lell er apologieshesitation in various $or,s %‘I don’t #no"’ ‘!ut’).F *ccounts care$ully $or,ulated e planations $or "hy the dispre$erred actis !eing done.F Declination co,ponent characteristically indirect or ,itigated%hedges).F -re$erred reponse3 si,pleFstructured second part.There are also other seBuences dealing "ith C*3

*) -reFseBuences certain utterances are $elt to !e ‘precursors’ toso,ething else. -reFseBuences include attention getters %‘hey ‘e cuse ,e’)preFannounce,ents %‘guess "hat’) preFinvitations %e.g. ‘are you doing anythingtonight@) preFthreats %‘"atch it’) preFreBuest %‘I "onder i$P’ ‘do you have anychanceP’ ‘are you !usyP’@).?) Insertion seBuences "e ,ay spea# o$ ‘nested adEacency pairs. Thepairs occur e,!edded "ithin other adEacency pairs "hich act as ,acroFseBuences.C) Repairs it is a device $or a correction o$ ,isunderstandings,ishearings or nonFhearings. Le ,ay distinguish sel$Finitiated repair and otherF

initiated repair. *ccording to 8evinson %1'0 3 1) the pre$erence ran#ing onthe repair syste, is as $ollo"s %see e a,ple 1 )

29


30/36

i. 5el$Finitiated sel$Frepair in o"n turn.ii. 5el$Finitiated sel$Frepair in transition space.iii. OtherFinitiatied otherFrepair in ne t turn.iv. OtherFinitiation o$ sel$Frepair in ne t turn.

D) Opening and closing seBuences conventional openings tend to containthe greeting an enBuiry a$ter health and a past re$erence %as in ‘ho" did it golast night@). Closings tend to have a preFclosing seBuence %long and dra"n outon occasion) rather than Eust ending "ith a $are"ell. 5pecial $eatures in theopening and closing sections o$ di$$erent classes o$ ver!al interchanges3 overallorganiGation patternsa. Telephone conversations3 Openings %su,,onsFans"er adEacency pairs)$irst topic slot %announce,ente !y the caller o$ the reason $or the call) andprototypical closings %,a#ing o$ arrange,ents giving o$ regards to $a,ily,e,!ers use o$ ,ar#ers %O so all right) organiGed in passing turns and $inale change o$ ter,inal ele,ents %!ye cheers ta#e care).

There are certain li,itations $or C*3

F 8ac# o$ siste,acity not e haustive list o$ all adEacency pairs or aprecise description o$ ho" adEacency pairs or TR-s ,ight !e recogniGed%:ggins K 5lade 1'' ).F C* does not ta#e into account sociolinguistic aspects o$ interaction. 9orC* analysts te t %coFte t) is conte t. The dra"!ac# is as 9airclough %1'0'3 1+)says 4conversation does not e ist "ithin in social vacuu,. Conversationstructures are connected to structures o$ social institutions and society3interactional sociolinguistics.

. . Interactional 5ociolinguistics.

The interactional sociolinguistic approach to D* is ,ultidisciplinary3 it concernsthe study o$ the relationship !et"een language culture and society and has itsroots in *nthropology 5ociology and 8inguistics.

Interactional sociolinguistics !rings to the $ront the situational conte t and the

conte t o$ shared #no"ledge a!out spea#ers their histories and their purposein spea#ing.

* crucial concept is that o$ 4conte tualiGation cues6 %see handout).: a,ples o$ conte tualiGation cues include intonation or any prosodic choicesconversational codeFs"itching le ical or syntactic choices style s"itching and$acial and gestural signs. These cues ,ay !e di$$erent across cultures or acrosssocial groups ,isunderstandings i$ conte tualiGation conventions are di$$erent%see e a,ple).

Ho$$,an’s contri!ution to Interactional 5ociolinguistics3

F 9ocus on physical coFpresence rather than on social groups.

30


31/36

F The sel$ is a social construction %$ace sho"s the positive social value aperson clai,s $or hi,sel$).

Other i,portant concept is that o$ $ra,e3 social actors organiGe their e periencein ter,s o$ recogniGa!le activities %a !usiness ,eeting a lecture a ga,e o$

chess etc) "hich are the $ra,es through "hich people structure e perience.-eople $ro, di$$erent groups have di$$erent "ays o$ sho"ing that they are Eo#ingor serious $lirting sho"ing concern acting apologetic etc.

Interactional sociolinguistics and conversation analysis have !eco,e togetherno" %Ochs 5cheglo$$ and Tho,pson 1''() "ith analysts loo#ing at therelationship !et"een gra,,ar and social interaction "ithin the larger sche,eso$ hu,an conduct and the organiGation o$ social li$e.

Unit 73 The Cooperative -rincipleIt is concerned "ith ho" "e get $ro, "hat the spea#er says to"ards "hat thespea#er ,eans. Hrice3 ho" the hearer gets $ro, "hat spea#ers say %e pressed,eaning) to "hat it is ,eant %i,plied ,eaning). %Xillocutionary act in *ustin’ster,s)‘?ridging’ assu,ptions= social contract or $or, o$ cooperation social nor,s o$ !ehaviour. Le su!consciously a!ide !y these conventions they are not ‘rules’as such.Cooperative -rinciple and ,a i,sF The ,a i,s are the shared conventions !y spea#ers.F The general principle3 4,a#e your contri!ution such as is reBuired at thestage at "hich it occurs !y the accepted purpose or direction o$ the tal#e change in "hich you are engaged. %Hrice Buoted in 8evinson 1'0 3 ).F It can !e divided into $our ,a i,s31) The ,a i, o$ uantity3F Try to ,a#e your contri!ution as in$or,ative as is reBuired $or the currentpurposes o$ the e change.F Do not ,a#e your contri!ution ,ore in$or,ative than is reBuired.:.g. Lell to cut a long story short she didn’t get ho,e till t"o. %spea#er isa!iding !y the ,a i, o$ Buantity)+) The ,a i, o$ uality3F Do not say "hat you !elieve to !e $alse !e sincere.F Do not say that $or "hich you lac# adeBuate evidence.

:.g. *3 I’ll ring you to,orro" a$ternoon then.?3 :r, shall !e there as $ar as I #no" and in the ,eanti,e have a "ord "ith2u, and dad i$ they’re $ree. Right. ?yeF?ye then s"eetheart.

*3 ?yeF!ye !ye.) The ,a i, o$ Relevance %"hich "ill later give rise to the Theory o$

Relevance) is ,a#e your contri!ution relevant. *#a ,a i, o$ Relation. *3 I ,ean Eust going !ac# to your point I ,ean to ,e an order $or, is acontract. I$ "e are going to put so,ething in then let’s #eep it as general aspossi!le.?3 yes

) The ,a i, o$ ,anner is !e ‘perspicuous’ %X!e clear in ,eaning) andspeci$ically3

31


32/36

F *void o!scurity avoid a,!iguity !e !rie$ !e orderly.:.g. Than# you Chair,an Eust to clari$y one point. There is a ,eeting o$ the-olice Co,,ittee on 2onday and there is an ite, on their !udget $or theprovision o$ their ca,era.

O!serving and $louting the ,a i,s1 F O!serving the ,a i,s

us!and3 Lhere are the car #eys@Li$e3 They’re on the ta!le in the hall.

uantity3 right a,ount o$ in$or,ation enough.uality3 it is clearly e pressed.

RelevanceArelation3 directly addressing the ans"er2anner3 there is clarity.There is not level o$ additional ,eaning "hat is said is "hat is ,eant.+ – NonFo!serving the ,a i,s3 "ays o$ $ailing to o!serve a ,a i,3+. 1. 9louting a ,a i,.+. +. Miolating a ,a i,.+. . In$ringing a ,a i,.+. . Opting out o$ a ,a i,.+.7. 5uspending a ,a i,.+.1. 9louting a ,a i,

* $lout occurs "hen a spea#er !latantly %openly conspicuously) $ails to o!servea ,a i, not "ith any intention o$ deceiving or ,isleading !ut "ith thedeli!erate intention o$ generating an additional ,eaning3 ‘conversationali,plicature’.a) 9louting Buantity.: a,ple 1

*3 Lell ho" do I loo#@?3 &our shoes are nicePIn the e a,ple Buantity ,a i, is $louted ans"ering the Buestion "ith i,pliedadditional ,eaning= you i,ply that your clothes hair etc. isn’t nice.: a,ple +

*3 ho" are "e getting there@?3 "ell "e’re getting there in Dave’s car.? is not including * in the ans"er. It is not enough in$or,ation !ut "hat is

i,plied is that you are not co,ing "ith us.!) 9louting the ,a i, o$ Buality. %Xdon’t tell lies or things you lac# evidence)!.1. ?y saying so,ething that o!viously does not represent "hat they thin#.: a,ple 1 %to a shop assistant)4I’ll go a"ay and thin# a!out it and ,ay!e co,e !ac# later.6I,ply ,eaning is that you don’t li#e the product clothes etc.: a,ple +Lhen 5ir 2aurice ?o"ra "as Larden o$ Ladha, College O $ord he "asP.5pea#er is not saying "hat he thin#s the spea#er #no"s that the spea#er isgoing to !e a!le to add that ,eaning "e don’t "ant to ta#e you you are not theright candidate.

: a,ple 3 *3 Lould you li#e to go out "ith ,e tonight@

32


33/36

?3 5orry I’, tired.&ou are not deceiving !ecause the intentions are very clear. 9louting is "henthe hearer can get to the i,plied ,eaning you are a!le to interpret or decodethe ,essage than#s to i,plicatures.!.+ ?y e aggerating as in hyper!oles.

: a,ples3 *3 I could eat a horse.or

*3 I’, starving.!. . ?y using a ,etaphor3 4,y house is a re$rigerator in anuary6!. . Conventional euphe,is,s34I’, going to "ash ,y hands6 I’, going to urinate.!.7. Irony and !anter.

*ccording to 8eech ‘irony is an apparently $riendly "ay o$ !eing o$$ensive%,oc#Fpoliteness) "hile !anter is an o$$ensive "ay o$ !eing $riendly %,oc#Fi,politeness). 5arcas, is li#e irony !ut intended to hurt.: a,ple3Irony3 This is a lovely undercoo#ed egg you’ve given ,e. &u,,y;?anter3 you’re nasty ,ean and stingy. o" can you give ,e only one #iss@?ant can !e used as a tease or $iltration.c) 9louting the ,a i, o$ relation.: a,ple3

*3 5o "hat do you thin# o$ 2ar#@?3 is $lat,ate’s a "onder$ul coo#.: a,ple3

*3 ave you ,ade your !ed today@?3 Today is Buite lovely and sunny isn’t it@: a,ple3

*3 there’s so,e!ody at the door.?3 I’, in the !ath.d) 9louting ,anner.e.g. appearing to !e o!scure to e clude a third party.: a,ple32other3 "here are you o$$ to@9ather3 I "as thin#ing o$ going out to get so,e o$ that $unny "hite stu$$ $orso,e!ody.2other3 O# !ut don’t !e long –dinner’s nearly ready.

Lhite stu$$ and so,e!ody3 are vague re$erences= and "hite stu$$ re$ers to icecrea, he is trying to surprise the child and he doesn’t guess "hat they aretal#ing a!out.,ontsecustodioZg,ail.co,

c) Miolating a ,a i, Q uiet or unostentatious nonFo!servance o$ a,a i,. I$ a spea#er violates a ,a i, sAhe 4"ill !e lia!le to ,islead6 %Hrice1' 73 ').Q The spea#er #no"s that the hearer "ill not #no" the truth and "ill onlyunderstand the sur$ace ,eaning o$ the "ords. They intentionally generate a,isleading i,plicature.

Not all violations are !la,e"orthy3

33


34/36

F To a child o$ $ive 42u,,y’s gone on a little holiday !ecause sheneeds a rest6 rather than 42u,,y’s got a"ay to decide "hether she is going todivorce or not6


35/36

F I,plicature changes o"ever conversational i,plicature ,ay !eco,ethe ,eaning o$ a le ical ite, %e.g. 4co,pany restructuration6 ,eaning 4,assivedis,issals6 4creative accounting6 ,eaning 4cheating6).F Calcula!ility the i,plicature conveyed in one particular conte t is notrando,. -ossi!le to spell out the steps the hearer goes through in order to

calculate the intended i,plicature.F De$easi!ility an i,plicature can !e cancelled.

7.7. 8i,itations o$ Hrice’s theory.

5o,eti,es an utterance has a range o$ possi!le interpretations. o" do "e#no" "hen a spea#er is deli!erately $ailing to o!serve a ,a i, and hence thatan i,plicature is intended@

o" can "e distinguish !et"een di$$erent types o$ nonFo!servance@

2a i,s overlap or di$$icult to distinguish.The ,a i,s are not eBually i,portant and relevance see,s to !e inevita!le.9or 5per!er K Lilson %1''7) Hrice’s ,a i,s can !e reduced to one overridingprinciple3 relevance.

The ,echanis,s $or calculating an i,plicature3 co,parison= e act opposite oran i,plicature "hich is no "ay related.

There are certain crossFcultural di$$erences !et"een di$$erent languages.

I,plicature changes i,plicatures are the property o$ utterances not o$sentences. The sa,e "ords can carry di$$erent i,plicatures on di$$erentoccasions %i.e. depending on the conte t "here they are uttered).

UNIT (3 -O8IT:N:55 T :ORI:5.

(./. Introduction.

It does not re$er to social !ehaviour !ut to choices ,ade in language use %i.e.the linguistic e pressions used to give people space and sho" a $riendlyattitude to the,).

There are t"o ,ain theories3

F ?ro"n K 8evinson %1' 0 1'0 ) -oliteness3 so,e universals in languageusage. Ca,!ridge3 CU-.F 8eech %1'0 )3 -rinciples o$ -rag,atics. arlo"3 8ong,an.o -oliteness -rinciples and its ,a i,s.

35


36/36

(.1. ?ro"n and 8evinson’s theory o$ politeness3 the concept o$ $ace.

In order to enter into social relationships "e have to ac#no"ledge and sho" ana"areness o$ $ace %derived $ro, Ho$$,an 1'( – $ro, :nglish 4losing $ace6 –i.e. !e e,!arrassed).

9ace re$ers to pu!lic sel$Fi,age.

The content o$ $ace can di$$er in di$$erent cultures !ut the notion itsel$ see,s to!e universal.

*spects o$ $ace Negative the "ant o$ every ‘co,petent adult ,e,!er’ thathis actions !e uni,peded !y others %nonFi,position personal space). :.g.orders vs reBuests.

-ositive the "ant o$ every ,e,!er that his "ants to !e desira!le to !e atleast so,e others %"hat is i,portant $or us is i,portant $or others to !e li#edneed to $eel accepted and appreciated !y others). :.g. co,pli,ents.

In general people cooperate in ,aintaining $ace in interaction. Cooperation is!ased on the ,utual vulnera!ility o$ $ace.

9ace can !e ignored in cases o$ social !rea#do"n %e.g. Buarrel) !ut also incases o$ urgent cooperation %e.g. an accident) or in the interests o$ e$$iciency%e.g. during a surgical operation).

(.+. 9aceFthreatening acts %9T*s).

These are certain illocutionary acts are lia!le to da,age or threaten anotherperson’s $ace3 ‘$aceFthreatening acts’ %9T*s).

0apuntes_pragmatica (1)

Documents