Lingua inglese 2, discourse analysis | Appunti di Lingua Inglese

COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE: Hyme’s notion of communicative competence is an

important part of the theoretical background To the ethnography of communication. It is also

an important notion for the discussion of spoken and written discourse. Communicative

competence involves not only knowing what is grammatically correct and what is not, but

also when and where To use language appropriately.

Communicative competence is often described of four underlying components:

1. Grammatical competence

2. Sociolinguistic competence

3. Discourse competence

4. Strategic competence

Discursive competence draws together the Notion of textual competence (that refers To the

ability to produce and interpret contextually appropriate texts. For example when use

Messenger learns sets of abbreviations > bb that means bye bye), generic competence (that

describes how we are able to respond to both recurring and new communicative situations

by constructing, interpreting, using and exploiting conventions associated with the use of

particular kinds of texts) and social competence (that describes how we use language to

take part in social and institutional interactions in a way to express our social identity.

Differences between spoken and written:

- The first commonly held views is that writing is more structurally complex and

elaborate than speech.

- Written discourse, however, according to Halliday tends to be more lexically dense

than spoken discourse (that refers to the ratio of content words to grammatical, or

function words, within a clause → content words include nouns and verbs, while

grammatical words include items such as prepositions, pronouns and articles.

- in written texts are also a high level of nominalization (where actions and events are

presented as nouns rather than as verbs). Halliday calls this phenomenon

grammatical metaphor (where a language items is transferred from a more expected

grammatical class to another).

- speaking use much more repetition, hesitation and redundancy than written

discourse, because it’s produced in real time.

- spoken discourse is organized differently from written, becuse spoken discourse

contain more reformulated phrases than written discourse, just because spoken is

produced spontaneously.

PRAGMATICS: is the study of meaning in relation to the context in which a person is

speaking or writing. Two influential works in the area of pragmatics are Austin’s How to do

things with words, and Searle’s Speech Acts.

PERFORMATIVE SPEECH ACT: The name is derived of course from “perform” the oral verb with

the noun “action”: it indicated that the issuing of the utterance is the performing of an action. It

indicated when the utterance performing of an action.

-Performative speech act: does not work unless, it is complete, sincere and compliance with socially

accepted procedures.

-Performative speech act theory: is a subfield of pragmatics, concerning with the ways word can be

used not merely to present information but also to carry out actions.

Anteprima parziale del testo

Scarica Lingua inglese 2, discourse analysis e più Appunti in PDF di Lingua Inglese solo su Docsity!

COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE: Hyme’s notion of communicative competence is an important part of the theoretical background To the ethnography of communication. It is also an important notion for the discussion of spoken and written discourse. Communicative competence involves not only knowing what is grammatically correct and what is not, but also when and where To use language appropriately. Communicative competence is often described of four underlying components:

Grammatical competence
Sociolinguistic competence
Discourse competence
Strategic competence Discursive competence draws together the Notion of textual competence (that refers To the ability to produce and interpret contextually appropriate texts. For example when use Messenger learns sets of abbreviations > bb that means bye bye), generic competence (that describes how we are able to respond to both recurring and new communicative situations by constructing, interpreting, using and exploiting conventions associated with the use of particular kinds of texts) and social competence (that describes how we use language to take part in social and institutional interactions in a way to express our social identity. Differences between spoken and written:

The first commonly held views is that writing is more structurally complex and elaborate than speech.
Written discourse, however, according to Halliday tends to be more lexically dense than spoken discourse (that refers to the ratio of content words to grammatical, or function words, within a clause → content words include nouns and verbs, while grammatical words include items such as prepositions, pronouns and articles.
in written texts are also a high level of nominalization (where actions and events are presented as nouns rather than as verbs). Halliday calls this phenomenon grammatical metaphor (where a language items is transferred from a more expected grammatical class to another).
speaking use much more repetition, hesitation and redundancy than written discourse, because it’s produced in real time.
spoken discourse is organized differently from written, becuse spoken discourse contain more reformulated phrases than written discourse, just because spoken is produced spontaneously. PRAGMATICS: is the study of meaning in relation to the context in which a person is speaking or writing. Two influential works in the area of pragmatics are Austin’s How to do things with words, and Searle’s Speech Acts. PERFORMATIVE SPEECH ACT: The name is derived of course from “perform” the oral verb with the noun “action”: it indicated that the issuing of the utterance is the performing of an action. It indicated when the utterance performing of an action. -Performative speech act: does not work unless, it is complete, sincere and compliance with socially accepted procedures. -Performative speech act theory: is a subfield of pragmatics, concerning with the ways word can be used not merely to present information but also to carry out actions.

DIRECT AND INDIRECT SPEECH ACTS:

Sometimes when we speak we do mean exactly what we say. Often we do, however, say things indirectly. That is, we often intend something that is quite different from the literal meaning of what we say. FELICITY CONDITIONS: This is an important notion in speech act theory and according to Austin there are a number of conditions that must be met: the first is that there must be a generally accepted procedure for successfully carrying out the speech act. Also the circumstances must be appropriate for the use of the speech act. The person who uses the speech act must be the appropriate person to use it in the particular context. Austin argued that this procedure must be carried out correctly and completely. And the person performing the speech act must have required thoughts, feelings and intentions for the speech act to be “felicitous”. That is, the communication must be carried out by the right person, in the right place, at the right time and with a certain intention or it will not “work”. If the two of these conditions are not satisfied, the act will not be achieved and will misfire. Searle took Austin’s work further by arguing that the felicity conditions of an utterance are “constitutive rules”. He attempts to classify speech acts into groups according to shared sets of conditions. He found this impossibile to do, however, and proposed instead a set of criteria that might be used for classifying speech acts. POLITENESS AND FACE There are other further key notions in the area of pragmatics and discourse. The notion of “face” comes from Goffman’s word on face and from the English “folk” notion of face, which ties up with notions of being embarrassed, humiliated or “losing face”. Politeness and face are important for understanding why people choose to say things in a particular way in spoken and written discourse. Lakoff proposes three maxims of politeness:

don’t impose (ex.:I’m sorry to bother you but..)
give options (ex: Do you think you could possibly..)
make your hearer feel good (ex: You’re better at this than me) CATAPHORIC REFERENCE: describes an item which refers forward to another word or phrase which is used later in the text. EXOPHORIC REFERENCE: looks outside the text to the situation in which the text occurs for the identity of the item being referred to. HOMOPHORIC REFERENCE: is where the identity of the item can be retrieved by reference to cultural knowledge, rather than the specific context of the text. COMPARATIVE REFERENCE: the identity of the presumed item is retrieved not because it has already been mentioned in the text, but because an item with which it is being compared has been mentioned. BRIDGING REFERENCE: is where an item refers to something that has to be inferentially derived from the text or situation, that is something that has to be presumed indirectly.

Most interactions are governed by politeness, that is to say by what is considerd a “polite social behaviour” within a certain culture. THE POLITENESS PRINCIPLE is a series of maxmis, which Geoffrey Leech has proposed as a way of explaining how politeness operates in conversational exchanges.

Lingua inglese 2, discourse analysis, Appunti di Lingua Inglese

Documenti correlati

Anteprima parziale del testo

Scarica Lingua inglese 2, discourse analysis e più Appunti in PDF di Lingua Inglese solo su Docsity!

DIRECT AND INDIRECT SPEECH ACTS: