7 Pragmatics Definition of pragmatics Pragmatics vs. semantics Context Sentence meaning vs. utterance meaning Speech act theory Principle of conversation

Pragmatics is the study of how speakers of a language use sentences to effect successful communication. It studies such topics as deixis, speech acts, indirect language, conversation, politeness, cross-cultural communication, and presupposition.

Pragmatics vs. semantics: Semantics is the study of meaning in language. It is concerned with what language means. This is not the same as what people mean by the language they use, how They actualize its meaning potential as a communicative resource, which is the concern of pragmatics. Pragmatics is concerned in part with how language engages the schematic knowledge people have of what is normal and customary in their particular communities. In this respect, pragmatics is the study of how people conform to social conventions. It is concerned with what people make of their language.

Context: It is considered as constituted by the knowledge shared by the speaker and the hearer including knowledge of the language they use, knowledge of what has been said before, knowledge about the world in general, knowledge about the specific situation in which linguistic communication is taking place, and knowledge about each other.

Sentence meaning vs. utterance meaning: A sentence is a grammatical concept, and the meaning of a sentence is often studied as the abstract, intrinsic property of the sentence itself in terms of predication. While the meaning of a sentence is abstract, and de-contextualized that of an utterance is concrete, and context-dependent. The meaning of an utterance is the realization of the abstract meaning of a sentence in a real situation of communication, or simply in a context.

Illocutionary act Austin’s model of speech acts Perlocutionary act Locutionary act

Austin’s new model of speech acts ----According to Austin’s new model, a speaker might be performing three acts simultaneously when speaking: locutionary act, illocutionary act and perlocutionary act. The locutionary act----an act of saying something, i.e. an act of making a meaningful utterance (literal meaning of an utterance); The illocutionary act----an act performed in saying something: in saying X, I was doing Y (the intention of the speaker while speaking). The perlocutionary act----an act performed as a result of saying something: by saying X and doing Y, I did Z.

For example,“It is cold in here.” Its locutionary act is the saying of it with its literal meaning the weather is clod in here; Its illocutionary act can be a request of the hear to shut the window; Its perlocutionary act can be the hearer’s shutting the window or his refusal to comply with the request. ----Analyze one more example: “You have left the door wide open.” Note: Of the three acts, what speech act theory is most concerned with is the illocutionary act. It attempts to account for the ways by which speakers can mean more than what they say.

Analyze the illocutionary acts of the following conversation between a couple: ----(the telephone rings) ----H: That’ the phone. (1) ----W: I’m in the bathroom. (2) ----H: Okay. (3) This seemingly incoherent conversation goes on successfully because the speakers understand each other’s illocutionary acts: (1)   Making a request of his wife to go and answer the phone. (2)   A refusal to comply with the request; issuing a request of her husband to answer the phone instead. (3) Accepting the wife’s refusal and accepting her request, meaning “all right, I’ll answer it.”

Searle’s classification commissives expressives Searle’s classification of speech acts directives representatives declarations

Searle's classification of speech acts Searle's的言语行为分类 1. representatives（阐述类）: stating or describing, saying what the speaker believes to be true 2. directives（指令类）: trying to get the hearer to do something 3. commissives（承诺类）: committing the speaker himself to some future course of action 4. expressives（表述类）: expressing feelings or attitude towards an existing state 5. declarations（声明类）: bringing about immediate changes by saying something

Assertives/representatives ---- Stating or describing, saying what the speaker believes to be true, e.g. I think the film is moving. I’m certain I have never seen the man before. I solemnly swear that he had got it. …

Directives ---- Trying to get the hearer to do something, e.g. I order you to leave right now. Open the window, please. Your money or your life! …

Commissives ---- Committing the speaker himself to some future course of action, e.g. I promise to come. I will bring you the book tomorrow without fail. …

Expressives ----Expressing the speaker’s psychological state about something, e.g. I’m sorry for being late. I apologize for the sufferings that the war has caused to your people. …

Declarations ----Bringing about an immediate change in the existing state or affairs, e.g. I now appoint you chairman of the committee. You are fired. I now declare the meeting open. …

Principle of conversation (CP): The maxim of quantity The maxim of quality The maxim of relation The maxim of manner

The maxim of quantity（数量准则） 1. Make your contribution as informative as required (for the current purpose of the exchange) 2. Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.

The maxim of quality（质量准则） 1. Do not say what you believe to be false. 2. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.

The maxim of manner（方式准则） 1. Avoid obscurity of expression. 2. Avoid ambiguity. 3. Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity). 4. Be orderly.

Conversational implicature In real communication, however, speakers do not always observe these maxims strictly. These maxims can be violated for various reasons. When any of the maxims is blantantly violated, i.e. both the speaker and the hearer are aware of the violation, our language becomes indirect, then conversational implicature arises.

The maxim of relation（关联准则） Be relevant

Conversational implicature: Only when those maxims are flouted does “conversational implicature” occur.

Violation of Maxim of quality ----A: Would you like to go movie with me tonight? ----B: The final exam is approaching. I’m afraid I have to prepare for it. ----A: would you like to come to our party tonight? ----B: I’m afraid I’m not feeling so well tonight. ----A: Who was that lady I saw you with last night? ----B: That was no lady, that was my wife.

Violation of maxim of quantity At a party a young man introduces himself by saying “I’m Robert Sampson from Leeds, 28, unmarried…” “War is war.” “Girls are girls.” ----A:When is Susan’s farewell party? ----B:Sometime next month.

Violation of maxim of relation ----A: How did the math exam go today, Jonnie? ----B: We had a basketball match with class 2 and we beat them. ----A: The hostess is an awful bore. ----B: The roses in the garden are beautiful, aren’t they? ----A: What time is it? ----B: The postman has just arrived.

Violation of maxim of manner ----A: Shall we get something for the kids? ----B: Yes. But I veto I-C-E-C-R-E-A-M.