GRADO EN ESTUDIOS INGLESES: LENGUA, LITERATURA Y CULTURA UNIT 1: DEFINING PRAGMATICS Professor: Dr. Laura Alba Juez [email protected] it is important to point out that pragmatics is defined with respect to a speaker or user of the language.What is pragmatics? Why do we need pragmatic knowledge in communication? Many authors have defined Pragmatics in different ways. Leech explains that both Semantics and Pragmatics are concerned with meaning. speech acts. and in these definitions. meaning beyond literal meaning. . Thus. elements such as context. deixis. but the difference between them lies in two different uses of the verb to mean (1983: 6): [1] What does X mean? [2] What did you mean by X? Semantics would deal with [1]. and Pragmatics with [2]. understatement or implicature are presented as important components of this discipline. In any case.Georgia Green’s (1989) definition of Pragmatics is. and as Peter Grundy (2008) suggests with the following quote from Sam Johnson (1776). The more we study conversation or any kind of discourse. as how they reveal the intentions and strategies of the speakers themselves. cultural anthropology. cognitive psychology. a much broader one: “Linguistic pragmatics as defined here is at the intersection of a number of fields within and outside of cognitive science: not only linguistics. are Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis the same? Schiffrin notes that the scope of Pragmatics is wide and “faces definitional dilemmas similar to those faced by discourse analysis” (1994: 190). the more we realize that it is not so much what the sentences literally mean that matters. “We all know what light is. but also sociology (interpersonal dynamics and social convention) and rhetoric contribute to its domain”. But. action theory). semantics. . (1989: 2) One of Levinson’s (1983) definitions of Pragmatics as “the study of utterance meaning” equates it to Schiffrin’s definition of Discourse Analysis. and Philosophy (logic. but it is not easy to tell what it is”. by contrast. FEATURES OF EVERYDAY LANGUAGE USE THAT ARE IMPORTANT IN PRAGMATICS (Grundy.2008) Appropriateness Non-literal or indirect meaning Inference Indeterminacy Context Relevance Accomodation Reflexivity Misfires . APPROPRIATENESS One of the important features of language has to do with appropriate ways of using language to get business done. Appropriateness is thought in relation to those who use the language and those to whom it is directed Read and look at this comic strip about Alice in Wonderland.1. what is it and why is it strange? . Do you find it appropriate? Is there anything strange about it? If so. indirect meanings.2) NON-LITERAL OR INDIRECT MEANING: Human discourse is full of nonliteral. as for instance in: A: What do you think of Paula? Is she pretty? B: Well. Consider the mother’s question in the strip on the right. she’s certainly a very good student. . Why is it indirect? What does she mean with her question? Many appropriate utterances are indirect. Sometimes appropriateness requires indirectness. In Grundy’s example (2008: 7): Radion removes dirt AND odours We infer that other washing powders leave our clothes smelling bad. So what the patient in this cartoon does is verbalize the inference she made from what the doctor said. indirect meaning? We obviously have to draw inferences or come to conclusions as to what the speaker is intending to convey. .3) INFERENCE But how do we get from literal to nonliteral. So communication is not only about a speaker encoding a message and a hearer decoding it. The receiver must also draw an inference as to what is conveyed beyond what is stated. even though we are not told such a thing. i. . the following utterance is under-determined in that it would mean different things depending on whether it’s uttered by most people or by a university lecturer: I’ve just finished a book Pragmatics is partly about trying to account in systematic ways for our ability to determine what speakers intend even when their utterances are under-determined.. Depending on how you look at it. underdetermined.4) INDETERMINACY: The fact that some meanings are matters of inference implies that the utterances we encounter are somehow unclear or ambiguous. Can you see them both? Thus.e. This means that an utterance might have several possible meanings and that the inferences we draw determine which of these possible meanings is the one the addressee thinks the speaker is intending. The picture on the right is an example of image undeterminacy or ambiguity. it may be the picture of an old lady or of a young one. Think of the utterance: I love people with good manners Said by a person in a conversation about good manners. a) Do a) and b) mean exactly the same? . And we refer here not only to linguistic context. b) Said by a person after someone else has been rude to her. but to the physical.5) CONTEXT: Context is a crucial aspect for determining the meaning of an utterance. The same utterance in different contexts may mean completely different things. social and cultural contexts as well. V commercial (http://www. what else? What is the most relevant assertion intended by the question? .6) RELEVANCE: Relevance has been seen by Sperber and Wilson (1986. Since we take every utterance as relevant. in Grundy’s (2008: 14) example of the sign pinned to a chair that read: Sit down with care. 1995) as the most important principle in accounting for the way we understand language. So.com/watch?v=DfyeXrdZZ1o ) where George Cloney says: “Nespresso.youtube. Legs can come off It is obviously more relevant to assume that it refers to the legs of the chair rather than to those of the person sitting down. we understand utterances in whatever way will make them as relevant as possible. Think of the nowadays famous T. for instance. we usually need to accept or accommodate a good deal of information which we feel is known to both the speaker and ourselves” (Grundy. George. .7) ACCOMMODATION “As we try to determine what people mean by what they say.youtube.com/watch?v=EzgGe ZS2BrE&feature=related ) “We’ve run out of capsules up there” “Heaven can wait. taken from another of the Nespresso commercials (http://www. This background knowledge or accommodation is essential to making sense of exchanges like the following. 2008: 14). but not for its capsules” Think of all the information we have to accommodate in order to understand the real meaning of this exchange between George and John. 8) REFLEXIVITY: We usually provide some sort of comment on how our utterance fits into the discourse as a whole. ‘in fact’ and the emphatic ‘did’ are examples of reflexive uses of language which tell us about Clinton’s commitment to the truth of what he is saying . Here ‘indeed’. In fact. it was wrong”. or on how we want to be understood. That is why reflexive uses of language as the following are so common: Bill Clinton (on his relationship with Monica Lewinsky): “Indeed. When we do this. we make it easier for our interlocutor(s) to understand what we mean. I did have a relationship with Ms Lewinsky that was not appropriate. that there are expected norms for talk. misfires are rare. . they are important because they tell us -by showing us the effect of not achieving the norm. Can you think of other examples of misfires? However. In spite of the negative effect they may have. The following utterance was considered to be a misfire when a reader understood that the suit was a piece of clothing (when in fact it referred to a legal action).9) MISFIRES: Pragmatic misfires occur when a given utterance does not have the expected pragmatic effect. and normally speakers are able to convey the meanings they intend with remarkable consistency. The tailor pressed one suit in the municipal court And the following headline was a misfire when the reader interpreted that the gun had been found beside the victim (and not that the victim had found it (which was the intended meaning): Stolen gun found by the victim This kind of misfires reminds us of the great care speakers need to exercise in order to convey the intended meaning successfully. the fact is that all or most of them normally appear together in a bundle. etc. Thus we see the element of reflexivity in the pragmatic marker I mean. as can be seen in the following utterance (made by a dancing teacher in her class to one of her new students): Is she your partner? I mean. the teacher realizes she has to reformulate her question in order to make sure the student does not misinterpret the question as one about his private life.TO CONCLUDE… Although all the above features have been treated separately for the sake of clarity. indeterminacy. are you going to dance together? We can see here how the features of every day language studied in this unit (appropriateness. but considering the student is new. . inference.) work together in order to make the utterance a pragmatic whole: 1) the question the teacher makes is an appropriate way to ask about dancing partners in a dancing class. .e. In this way. This knowledge will make him work out the right inference as to what the teacher means by “partner” (i. not ‘girl-friend’). therefore making the former interpretation the most relevant. ‘dancing partner’. the student will learn to accommodate this background information in order to make the correct interpretation of the teacher’s utterance.Therefore. the question Is she your partner? is underdetermined and can become a misfire if the addressee does not have a common background and knowledge of the terminology used in a dancing class and of the context in general.