Docsity
Docsity

Prepara tus exámenes
Prepara tus exámenes

Prepara tus exámenes y mejora tus resultados gracias a la gran cantidad de recursos disponibles en Docsity


Consigue puntos base para descargar
Consigue puntos base para descargar

Gana puntos ayudando a otros estudiantes o consíguelos activando un Plan Premium


Orientación Universidad
Orientación Universidad


UNIT 1 PRAGMATICS AND DISCOURSE, Resúmenes de Filología

UNIT 1 PRAGMATICS AND DISCOURSE CARMEN MAIZ AREVALO + PRÁCTICAS

Tipo: Resúmenes

2021/2022

Subido el 09/05/2022

anon444d
anon444d 🇪🇸

4

(4)

8 documentos

1 / 7

Toggle sidebar

Esta página no es visible en la vista previa

¡No te pierdas las partes importantes!

bg1
PRAGMATICS !
Unit 1. Introduction !
1.1. Defining pragmatics !
1.2. Defining discourse analysis !
1.3. Meaning, context and co- text !
1.1 Defining pragmatics
People do not always or even usually say what they mean.#
E.g. “It’s hot in here” !
Two important questions arise:#
– How do we work out what this means on one specific !
occasion?#
– Why don’t people say what they mean? !
These issues, among many others, are studied by Pragmatics. !
Historical Background
Within Linguistics, there are dierent areas that focus on dierent aspects of language: !
-Phonetics and phonology !
-Morphology!
-Syntax!
-Semantics !
“Young” and “Waste-paper”
The “anti-syntactic” tendency: !
-“reaction” against the formalist view of linguistics (Noam Chomsky in the late 60s):
“Ideal language use”!
The “philosophical” tradition: Britain !
-UK but unknown outside until the late 1960s. Represented by John Austin, Searle or
Grice, who followed philosophers such as Bertrand Russell or Wittgenstein. !
-Focus on “ordinary language use”!
The “ethnomethodological tradition”: !
-late tendency. !
pf3
pf4
pf5

Vista previa parcial del texto

¡Descarga UNIT 1 PRAGMATICS AND DISCOURSE y más Resúmenes en PDF de Filología solo en Docsity!

PRAGMATICS

Unit 1. Introduction 1.1. Defining pragmatics 1.2. Defining discourse analysis 1.3. Meaning, context and co- text 1.1 Defining pragmatics

  • People do not always or even usually say what they mean. E.g. “It’s hot in here”
  • Two important questions arise:
  • How do we work out what this means on one specific occasion?
  • Why don’t people say what they mean?
  • These issues, among many others, are studied by Pragmatics. Historical Background

• Within Linguistics, there are different areas that focus on different aspects of language:

- Phonetics and phonology

- Morphology

- Syntax

- Semantics

“Young” and “Waste-paper”

• The “anti-syntactic” tendency:

- “reaction” against the formalist view of linguistics (Noam Chomsky in the late 60s):

“Ideal language use”

• The “philosophical” tradition: Britain

- UK but unknown outside until the late 1960s. Represented by John Austin, Searle or

Grice, who followed philosophers such as Bertrand Russell or Wittgenstein.

- Focus on “ordinary language use”

• The “ethnomethodological tradition”:

- late tendency.

- Emphasis is on communication rather than grammar (conversation analysis).

- Harvey Sacks, Schegloff and Gail Jefferson.

  • Since the early 1970s, there has been a growing and unstoppable interest in Pragmatics.
  • “Interest for what really goes on in language, for what people actually `do with words’” (Asher)
  • (In the 80s) P. defined as “meaning in use” or “meaning in context”:
    • performance vs. competence
    • However, this definition is too general.
  • To define Pragmatics is a hard task, since it implies setting boundaries and limits and separating Pragmatics from other disciplines such as Semantics or DA. Meaning
  • –^ “ speakermeaning ”:focusesonthe“producer”ofthemessageand^ takes^ a^ more social view of the discipline.
  • –^ “ utterance interpretation ” (i.e. what the hearer understands). This approach focuses on the “receiver” of the message and takes a more cognitive view of the discipline.
  • Only^ one^ of^ these^ sides^ also^ has^ important^ limitations.^ A^ more^ reasonable definition of pragmatics is considering it as meaning in interaction.
  • “Meaning is not something which is inherent in the words alone, nor is it produced by the speaker alone, nor by the hearer alone. Making meaning is a dynamic process” (J. Thomas, 1995: 22) Context
  • We can trace the concept of “context” back to Malinowski in the 1920s and Firth in the 1950s.
  • The importance of context in figuring out ambiguities in written or spoken language is undeniable. “It’s a long time since we visited your mother” Context A: married couple talking in their living room.
  • John saw her duck = Both lexical and syntactic Types of “ambiguity”
  • Lexical(“polysemy”):
  • The coach left the stadium after the match – John and Bill passed the port in the evening
  • Syntactic or structural: – They are cooking apples
  • Visiting relatives can be boring
  • For those who have children and don’t know yet, there will be a picnic next weekend
  • In the case of structural ambiguity, we are already doing Discourse Analysis (see 1.2) 1.2. Defining Discourse Analysis
  • In the^ Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language,^ Crystal (1992) defines DA as:
  • the study of how sentences in spoken and written language form larger meaningful units such as paragraphs, conversations, interviews, etc.
  • It is beyond the “sentence level”= discourse
  • DA and pragmatics are hence very closed related (in fact, some authors even use the two terms to refer to the same discipline)
  • For^ us,^ however,^ some^ differences^ can^ be^ found^ related^ to^ the^ focus^ of investigation Pragmatics:

User’s point of view

• Uttering / interpreting

• Much focused on context

• For some authors, pragmatics is wider than DA since it includes more than language

(discourse) and provides the basis for DA Discourse analysis:

  • Analysis of language (spoken and/or written) as used in actual communication
  • Much focused on language form and function and the relationships between words in a text
  • What makes a text a text
  • The “context of situation”
  • Halliday and Hassan (1989) i. Field → what / social action ii. Tenor → who / relations, statuses, roles iii. Mode → language / written, oral, mixed
  • Context is dynamic and its relationship with language is bilateral.
  • In other words, we can understand the text thanks to context but we can also guess the context from the text. IN CLASS: 2/2/ PRAGMATICS Introduction Examples: -We can be friends -Would you like to have a cup of tea? 1. How do we work out what this means on one specific occasion? The context (which is everything in pragmatics), cultural knowledge (background knowledge), body language 2. Why don’t people say what they mean? Not to sound mean (we are conventionally expected to be polite) Activity In an interview: Thank you, we’ll call you. In Spain we know they won’t even call you In England they call you and tell you they don’t want you for the job. -We need to talk -In a family reunion when you don’t really like the food and say: No, I’m full -“Ya vamos viendo” -“We should catch up someday” -“Just one more beer and we go” -“It’s getting late”