Scarica Cutting pragmatics and discourse e più Dispense in PDF di Linguistica solo su Docsity!
CHAPTHER 1
CONTEXT
There’re three sorts of context: SITUATIONAL CONTEXT, BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE CONTEXT AND CO-TEXTUAL CONTEXT.
Situational context is what the speakers know about what they can see around them. In a common situation, a signal of situational context is the use of this or that to identify an object, or again a use of pictures in a story that add a visible context.
Background Knowledge context is what the speakers know about each other and the world. This can be cultural (areas of their life, special lexis or vocabulary) or interpersonal (history of the speakers themselves, because of the joint activities or experiences)
Co-textual context is the context of the text itself. The language is used to refers to something and the word that point to entity that they refer to is DEIXIS. There’re three sorts of deixis: PERSONAL DEIXIS when pointing a person (personal pronoun), PLACE DEIXIS to point a location (demonstrative adverbs, there…) and TIME DEIXIS to point to a time (next day…).
GRAMMATICAL COHESION
There’re two types of REFERENCE: exophoric and endophoric reference
Exophoric reference is when the referring expression is the first mention of the referent, in a sense that there’s no previous mention and it’s dependent on the situational or background knowledge context. For example when a speaker named a person, this name refers to a background knowledge, name that is not mentioned before, or also when he use this or that, they’re referred to something that is situational context. Intertextuality is when a referring item refers to entities in the background knowledge.
Endophoric reference is when the referring expression links with another previous mentioned. This expression is cohesive with the previous mention, it’s called grammatical cohesion and it’s what meshes the text together. Endophora avoids unnecessary repetition. There are two types of endophora: anaphora, when for example a pronoun link back to something that went before in the preceding text, cataphora, the opposite, the pronoun link forward to a referent in the text that follows. Associative endophora is when the noun phrases are not linked explicitly, but one noun phrase is linked to entities simply associated with the other noun phrase. It’s half way between endophora and exophora because it depends on knowledge of what went before or after the same text and also on background knowledge of cultural or interpersonal context.
Endophoric reference is one form of grammatical cohesion but there are also two other form that are not part of reference, they are SUBSTITUTION and ELLIPSIS. Substitution tend to be endophoric, the noun phrase being substituted is usually in the text.
Ellipsis , just like substitution, avoids repetition and depends on the hearer or reader’s being able to retrieve the missing words from the context. They occurs more often in conversation that in written text because conversation tends to be less explicit.
Grammatical cohesion: reference, substitution and ellipsis
LEXICAL COHESION
The most common form is REPETITITION, which is simply repeated words or word-phrases, the word repeated is use for stylistic effect. Instead of repeating the exact word, the writer can use another word that means the same or almost the same, this is SYNONYM. Another way to avoid repetition and still referring to the referent with a noun is the SUPERORDINATE. This is an umbrella term, a word the meaning of which includes the meaning of another word. The last form of lexical cohesion is GENERAL WORD. This can be general noun, such as stuff (roba), thing, place, person or general verbs, as do, and happen. General word is the higher level superordinate, it’s an umbrella term that can cover almost everything.
In the text, that has to be lexical cohesive, is used repetition, synonym, superordinate and general words.
CHAPTER 2
SPEECH ACTS
Speech acts are the actions performed in saying something. Speech act theory said that the action performed when a utterance (enunciato) is produced can be analysed on three different levels. The first level of analysis is the words themselves, this is the locution, what is said, the act of saying something is known as the LOCUTIONARY ACT. ( what is said ) The second level is what the speakers are doing with their words, what is done in uttering the words, the function of the word, the specific purpose that the speakers have in mind is ILLOCUTIONARY FORCE ( what is intended ). The last level is the result of the words, what is done by uttering the words, it’s the effect on the hearer, the hearer’s reaction is the PERLOCUTIONARY EFFECT. ( what you obtain ).
Performative hypothesis that behind every utterance there’s a performative verb such as to order, to warn, to admit, to promise, that make the illocutionary force explicit.
Classify of speech acts: DECLARATIONS: there’re words and expressions that change the world such as bet, declare, resign. Not everybody can say this word. REPRESENTATIVES: there are acts in which the words state what the speaker believes, such as describing, promising, offering, threatening, refusing, vowing and volunteering. (you make a commitment: impegno) DIRECTIVES: the words are aimed at making the hearer do something, such as commanding, inviting, forbidding, suggesting (you want people to do something) EXPRESSIVES: the words state what the speaker feels, such as apologizing, praising, congratulating, deploring, regretting (describe your own feeling)
FELICITY CONDITIONS
In order for speech acts to be appropriately performed, certain felicity condition have to be met. There is the general condition that the hearer must hear and understand the language and that the speaker must not be pretending. The roles of participants are recognized, the place is appropriate, the persons have right intentions. For declarations and directives, the rules are that the speaker must believe that is possible to carry out the action, they are sincere. ( man and woman that have to marry, but they’ve not all necessary
This can be explained by an example. There’s a teacher and a student, the teacher is guiding the pupil in colouring a map on the computer. There’s an act, that is based on moves. There’re three basic MOVES: the INITIATION (from the teacher), RESPONSE (from the student) and the FOLLOW UP (teacher’s comment on pupil’s answer): IRF. The combination of moves in the IRF is known as exchange. Exchange combine to make transaction, and the transaction make the lesson. ACT→MOVE→EXCHANGE→TRANSACTION→LESSON LIMITATION It does not accommodate easily to the real-life pressure and unruliness of the classroom ( such as pupil not responding…). Another limitation is that reflects the traditional teacher-centred classroom (long question, short answer), it’s not typical of everyday talk. Another example could be a talk doctor-patience, or in tv-quiz show.
CONVERSATION ANALYSIS
Conversation analysis looks at conversation as linear, ongoing and differs in its methodology from discourse analysis. CA takes real data and then examines language and demonstrates that is structured. Conversation is a discourse constructed and negotiated between speakers, it’s usually informal and unplanned. Talk may be classed as conversation when:
- It’s not primarily necessitated by a practical task
- Any unequal power of participants is partially suspended
- The number of the participants is small
- Turn are quit short
- Talk is primarily for the participants and not for an outside audience TURN-TAKING Cooperation is managed by all participants through turn taking, in many cultures only one person speaks at a time, speakers take turns, first one talking and then another. A point in a conversation where a change of turn is possible is called a TRANSITION RELEVANCE PLACE. Next speakers cannot be sure that the current speaker’s turn is complete, but they’ll usually take the end of sentence to indicate that the turn is possibly complete. When speakers don’t want to wait until the TRP, this is called INTERRUPTION. A pause can be positive or negative (exam) and if the pause is intended to carry meaning, it’s an ATTRIBUTABLE SILENCE. ADJACENCY PAIRS There’s a relation between acts and that conversation contains occurring patterns, in pairs of utterances known as ADJENCY PAIRS, the utterance of one speaking makes certain response of the next speaker very likely. The acts are ordered with a first part and a second part and categorized as question-answer, blame- deny, with each first part creating an expectation of a particular second part. This is PREFERENCE STRUCTURE: each first part has preferred and a dispreferred response (tend to be refusal and disagreement). If there’s any answer, that means that the hearer has not heard, or was not paying attention or does not want to cooperate.
SEQUENCES These can be pre-sequence, insertion sequences and opening or closing sequences. PRE-SEQUENCES prepare the ground for a further sequence and signal the type of utterance to follow. There’re pre invitation, pre-requests and pre-announcements. INSERTION SEQUENCE, the pairs occur embedded (inserito) within other adjacency pairs which act as macro sequences. (domanda e risposta che sono necessarie, inserite in un contest di altre frasi che possono anche essere tralasciate e il discorso si capirebbe comunque) There are conventional OPENING STRUCTURES and CLOSING STRUCTURES. Openings tend to contain a greeting, an enquiry after health (how are you?) and a past reference. In closing for example is to say goodbye. LIMITATION
Lack of sistematicity, there’s not an exhaustive list of adjacency pairs, or a description of what adjacency pairs are. Another criticism is that it does not take into account pragmatic or sociolinguistic aspects of interaction, the background context of why and how people say what they say. INTERACTIONAL SOCIOLINGUISTIC This takes into account the aspect of interaction, as well adjacency pairs, insertion giving importance to the way of that language is situated in particular circumstances. Social groups have their own language, their language is related to the socio cultural context. CULTURAL APPROACHES Interactional is extended to the nations who share the same common language, conversation is different with the different cultures.
CHAPTER 4
COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE
OBSERVING THE MAXIMS
The first maxim of the cooperative principle is MAXIM OF QUANTITY, the speakers should be as informative as is required. The second maxim is MAXIM OF QUALITY, the speakers are expected to be sincere, to be saying something that corresponds to the reality. The MAXIM OF RELATION is that the speakers are assumed to be saying something that is relevant to what has been said before. The last is the MAXIM OF MANNER, the speaker should be brief and orderly, and avoid obscurity and ambiguity. The meaning conveyed (transmitted) by speakers and recovered as a result of the hearers’ deductions is CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURE.
FLOUTING THE MAXIMS When the speakers appear not to follow the maxims but expect hearers to appreciate the meaning implied, they are flouting the maxims. The speaker who flouts the maxim of quantity seems to give too little or too much information as needed. The speaker flouting the MAXIM OF QUALITY may do it in several way, they may flout the maxim by exaggerating as in the hyperbole , or by using a metaphor , or also using irony and banter. In case of irony the speaker expresses a positive sentiment and implies a negative one, banter expresses a negative sentiment and implies a positive one, sarcasm tend to hurt and is a form of irony. Flouting MAXIM OF RELATION, they expect that the hearer will be able to imagine what the utterance did not say and make the connection between their utterance and the preceding one (ex: A: c’è qualcuno alla porta. B: sono in bagno. E’ implicito che non può andare a vedere chi c’è alla porta) Who flouts the MAXIM OF MANNER appears to be obscure.
VIOLATING THE MAXIMS A speaker violate a maxims when they know that the hearer will not know the truth and will only understand the surface meaning of the words. A speaker violate the MAXIM OF QUANTITY if they don’t give the hearer enough information to know what’s being talked about, because they do not want the hearer to know the full picture. Violating a MAXIM OF QUALITY is not been sincere and giving the wrong information. Violating the MAXIM OF RELATION is distract the hearer in order to change the topic. Violating the MAXIM OF MANNER for dropping the matter.
OTHER FORM OF NON-OBSERVANCE OF MAXIMS
ON RECORD WITH NEGATIVE POLITENESS: Negative politeness strategies pay attention to negative face, by demonstrating the distance between interlocutors and avoiding on each other’s territory. Speakers use them to avoid imposing and to give the hearer options. Speakers can avoid imposing by emphasizing the importance of the other’s time and concerns, using apology and hesitation or giving the opportunity to say no. Speakers can minimize the imposition by making it seem smaller than it is, or adding devices such as hedges that mitigate the imposition, such as ‘if possible’, ‘in a way’ and ’I wonder’. They can also emphasize the distance between interlocutors by personalizing stating the imposition as a general rule. ON RECORD WITH POSITIVE POLITENESS: Positive politeness strategies aim to save positive face, by demonstrating closeness and solidarity, appealing to friendship, making the other people feel good and emphasizing that both speakers have common goal. A common positive politeness strategy is that avoiding disagreement.
The politeness strategies sometimes conflict with the Cooperative principle. Speakers can violate cooperative maxims if they want to show positive politeness. There’s a politeness principle with conversational maxims. They’re six: tact, generosity, approbation, modesty, agreement and sympathy. MAXIMS ACCORDING TO LEECH TACT maxim focuses on the hearer and says minimize cost to other, maximize benefit to other. GENEROSITY minimize benefit to self and maximize cost to self. APPROBATION says minimize dispraise of self, maximize praise of other. MODESTY minimize praise to self, maximize dispraise of self. AGREEMENT minimize disagreement between self and the other and maximize agreement between self and the other. SYMPATHY minimize antipathy between self and the other and maximize sympathy between self and the other. MAXIMS ACCORDING TO CRUSE CONSIDERATION minimize discomfort/displeasure of other and maximize comfort/pleasure of other. PATIENCE minimize the urgency for other and maximize the lack of urgency for other This new category can contain both positive and negative politeness and could be added for every new situation that occurs.
POLITENESS AND CONTEXT Politeness is a pragmatic phenomenon and lies in the words’ function and intended social meaning. Politeness is not the same as deference (respect) and does not usually include an element of choice. SITUATIONAL CONTEXT There’re two factor that influence the way to make a request: imposition (the greater the imposition, the more indirect the language is) and formality (the greater the formality, the more indirect the language is). SOCIAL CONTEXT The choice of the politeness formulation depends on the social distance and the power relation between speakers. When there’s social distance, politeness is encoded, the variables that determine social distance are degree of familiarity and difference of status, roles, age… CULTURAL CONTEXT The relationship between indirectness and social variables is not so simple: the language is exceedingly culture-bound.
