Scarica Pragmatics & Discourse: Context, Speech Acts, and Conversation Analysis e più Prove d'esame in PDF di Lingua Inglese solo su Docsity!
Introduction
Pragmatics gives importance to the social principles of discourse, like the politeness principle and the cooperative principle, focusing on a socio-cultural perspective. Discourse analysis emphasizes the text's structure, studying its organization. They both study context, text and function. Their studies may be carried out using corpus linguistic, very large databases of spoken/written texts which are analyzed.
Chap. 1: Context and co-text
Context
Context stands for the meaning of words in physical and social world, considering assumptions of knowledge that the speaker and hearer share.
- Situational context : It's the immediate physical co-presence, which cannot be understood by an overhearer of the conversation. (ex: "this", demonstrative pronoun, used for pointing to something that speaker and hearer can see)
- Background knowledge context
- Cultural : Interlocutors establish that they are part of the same group sharing mutual knowledge of everything normally known by group members. Communities of practice have broadly agreed goals, special vocabulary, mechanisms for communication.
- Interpersonal : Interlocutors share privileged personal knowledge thanks to previous verbal interactions.
- Co-textual context : It's the context of the text itself. The interlocutors assume that everyone in the conversation has enough knowledge of what they have been saying, so they infer some references. (ex: "we", "us")
Language and context
Reference : The act of using linguistic forms to enable the hearer to identify something; the entity being referred to is called referent. Deixis are the words that actually point to the referent. Deixis may be:
- Person deixis: Expressions that point to a person. (ex: personal pronouns)
- Place deixis: Words used to point to a location. (ex: there, here, this, that) Exophoric reference : When there is no previous mention of the reference in the preceding text. We call it intertextuality if the referring item refers to entities in the background knowledge (cultural or interpersonal), so these entities have obviously been mentioned in a previous conversation.
Language of the text inside
A referring expression is cohesive with the previous mention of the referent if it's linked with another referring expression within the co- text.
Grammatical cohesion :
• Endophora is a reference that avoids unnecessary repetitions. Endophora may be:
- Anaphora : An endophora that links back to something that went before in the text.
- Cataphora : An endophora that links forward to a referent that follows in the text.
- Associative endophora is half way between endophora and exophora, it's when the nouns are not linked explicitly to each other, but they presuppose some knowledge of what goes before and after within the same text.
- Substitution : Consists in the substitution of a word with another word to avoid repetitions and hold the text together. It's usually endophoric (the noun being substituted is in the text).
- Ellipsis : Consists in omitting a piece of text, because it's not necessary. It avoids repetitions and occurs more often in conversation than in written text.
Lexical cohesion
- Repetition : Repeating words or phrases, it exploits repetition for stylistic effect.
- Synonyms : Using another word with the same meaning to avoid repetition.
- Superordinates : An umbrella word that can be used in substitution of a given noun to avoid repetition.
- General world : It's a higher level superordinate that can cover almost everything (ex: thing, stuff, place, person). They don't carry much information and depend on the co-text for their meaning.
Chap. 2: Speech acts
Speech acts are the actions performed in saying something. The speech act theory says that the action performed in saying something can be analyzed in three levels :
- Locution : What is said.
- Illocutionary force : What the speakers are doing with their words, the function of the words.
- Perlocutionary effect : The result of the words, the effect on the hearer.
Searle classifies direct speech acts in macro-classes:
- Declarations : Expressions that change the world by their very utterance. (ex: I bet, I declare, I resign)
- Representatives : Expressions that state what the speaker believes to be the case (ex: describing, hypothesizing, predicting)
- Commissives : Expressions that commit the speaker to future action (ex: promising, offering)
- Directives : Expressions that are aimed at making the hearer do something (ex: commanding, inviting)
- Expressives : Expressions that state what the speaker feels (ex: apologizing, congratulating)
Felicity conditions
Felicity conditions are necessary for the speech acts to be successfully performed. For Austin , they are:
- The context and role of participants must be recognized by everyone
- The action must be carried out completely
- The person must have the right intentions For Searle , the general condition is that the hearer must hear and understand and the speaker mustn't be pretending.
Indirect speech acts
Searle says that a speaker using a direct speech act wants to communicate the literal meaning of the words (direct relationship between form and function). On the other hand, in indirect speech acts the speaker wants to communicate a different meaning : one speech act is performed through another speech act.
Speech acts and society
Social dimension : Indirect speech acts are used as a form of politeness, especially in case of lack of familiarity and social distance (different status, age, role). Cultural dimension : The way of expressing speech acts change from culture to culture. In India they say "how fat you are!" as a speech act of congratulating, but in Britain it would sound like a criticizing speech act because of the main idea of "slim is beautiful".
Limitations of speech act theory
First, one utterance can fall into more than one macro-class. Besides, expressions like "you know" ( fillers, to avoid silence) and "oh really?" ( feedbacks , used to encourage a speaker to continue talking) or incomplete sentences don't fit into the speech act model, there's a lack of semantic content.
Macro-functions
Transactional function : Involved in the expression of content and transmission of information. Interactional function : Involved in expressing social relations, personal attitudes, solidarity. Most talk shows both functions. A purely transactional language is that of a policeman giving directions to a traveller, a purely interactional language is known as phatic communion (with no information content).
Chap. 4: Cooperative principle
The cooperative principle studied by Grice consists in the knowledge of four maxims so that the hearer can draw inferences about the speaker's intentions and implied meaning:
- Maxim of quantity : Speakers should be as informative as required. (too little information isn't enough for the hearer to identify what the speaker's talking about; too much will probably bore the hearer)
- Maxim of quality : Speakers are supposed to be sincere and say only what they believe to be true.
- Maxim of relation : Speakers are supposed to say something that is relevant to what has been said before.
- Maxim of manner : Speakers should avoid ambiguity and obscurity.
Flouting maxims
Sometimes speakers are flouting the maxims: they expect the hearer to appreciate the meaning implied without following the maxims.
- Flouting quantity : When the speaker gives too little or too much information.
- Flouting quality : When the speaker says something that he clearly doesn't believe in; exaggerates with hyperboles (ex: "I'm starving"); uses metaphors (ex: "My house is a refrigerator in January"); uses irony , where the speaker expresses a positive feeling and implies a negative one ("I love being woken up by a fire alarm"), or sarcasm (which is not so friendly); uses banter , where the speaker expresses a negative sentiment implying a positive one (ex. when someone pretends to be angry, in reality expressing friendship or intimacy).
- Flouting relation : When the speaker expects the hearer to imagine what he didn't say and make the connection between one utterance and the next. (ex: "there's someone at the door" "I'm in the bath")
- Flouting manner : The speaker appears to be obscure , often to exclude a third party (ex: dad that says "buy some ice-cream for somebody" referring to his daughter).
Violating the maxims
Speakers violate the maxims when they know that the hearer won't understand the truth but just the surface meaning of the words.
- Violating quantity : The speaker doesn't give full information so that the hearer doesn't know the full picture.
- Violating quality : When the speaker isn't sincere giving the wrong information. Sometimes speakers tell a so called white lie , when it's a lie that protects, with good intentions. (ex: when a child's father passes away, people explain that "daddy's gone on a holiday")
- Violating relation : When the speaker doesn't answer to a question , changing topic for example.
- Violating manner : When the speaker is obscure , being vague and using general nouns.
Other forms of non-observance
Infringe maxims : The speaker fails to observe a maxim because of an imperfect linguistic performance. (ex: a child, a foreign learner) Opt out maxims : When the speaker can't or doesn't want to cooperate , sometimes for legal or ethical reasons. (a police officer can't release the name of an accident victim)
Limitations of the cooperative principle
Every culture has a different way of observing and expressing maxims, for example quantity maxims. (ex: "How are you?" in the USA expects the answer "fine", nothing else) There is often an overlap between the four maxims, it's difficult to say which one is operating. Sperber and Wilson say that all the maxims can be reduced to the maxim of relation , since the other ones are natural features of all interactions.
Relevance theory
Sperber and Wilson propose the relevance theory , saying that hearers just select the relevant features of context and recognize what's relevant in the speaker's utterance. In fact, the purpose of communication is to enlarge mutual cognitive environments. The degree of relevance is governed by:
- Contextual effects : Adding new information, strengthening/weakening old information. A lot of contextual effects give more relevance to a fact.
- Processing effort : The relevance of a fact depends on the effort required to recover it. (the facts must be relatively accessible for the reader) They call explicature the filling in missing words, which is helped by the propositions that are explicitly communicated by the speaker: context helps the hearer to fill in any incomplete parts and understand connections. Explicature comes before implicature.
Limitations of relevance theory : Being relation maxim the only maxim, it loses its explanatory force. It doesn't include cultural/social dimensions, and every culture has it own way to express maxims.
Chap. 5: Politeness
Politeness refers to linguistic expressions that give people space and show a friendly attitude.
Politeness and face
Brown and Levinson say that in order to enter in social relationships we have to acknowledge and show an awareness of the public self-image , avoiding face threatening acts ( FTA ) and taking account of other people's feelings. Speakers can redress FTAs with negative politeness that respects the hearer's negative face (being independent) or with positive politeness , respecting the positive face (the need to be accepted by others). A speaker can do FTA in many ways:
- Off record : Indirectly, for example asking for help using an indirect speech act. ("I wish I could remember the address": flouting of maxim of quantity, declarative, request for help) Indirectness allows hearers to respond or ignore.
- On record - baldly : Directly, making suggestions, requests, offers, invitations with direct speech acts. ("Mary, tell me the website"). The hearer will do what he's asked to, or he'll seem uncooperative. Directness implies a firmer attitude, which is polite.
- On record - with negative politeness : Paying attention to negative face, avoiding intruding on each other's territory, avoiding impositions, using apology and hesitation, ("Could you possibly tell me the address, please?")
- On record - with positive politeness : Appealing to friendship, closeness, making other people feel good, usually attending to other people's interests and needs. ("Mary sweetie, I'd really appreciate if you'd give me the address, please?") Politeness strategies may conflict with the cooperative principle, violating maxims. ("How do I look?" "Good!" and it's not true, violates the maxim of quality)
Politeness maxims
Leech lists six maxims that compose the Politeness Principle :
- Tact and Generosity : Tact focuses on the hearer, saying " minimize cost to other " (negative politeness strategy, minimizing imposition) and " maximize benefit to other " (positive politeness strategy, attending to the hearer's interests) ("I interrupt you for one second - what was the address?"). Generosity focuses on the speaker, saying " minimize benefit to self " and " maximize cost to self " ("Could I copy that address down?")
- Approbation and Modesty : Approbation says " minimize dispraise of other " (avoiding disagreement) and " maximize praise of other " (positive politeness strategy, making other people feel good) ("Mary, you're so efficient, you must have a copy of that address"). Modesty says " minimize praise of self " and " maximize dispraise of self " ("I'm so stupid, I don't remember that address, do you?"): modesty often violates the maxim of quality
- Agreement : " Minimize disagreement between self and other ", " maximize agreement between self and other ".
- Sympathy : " Minimize antipathy between self and other ", " maximize sympathy between self and other ", such as congratulating, commiserating. It's close to Cruse's maxim of consideration (minimize discomfort for other, maximize comfort for other, making other people feel good).
Overlaps and gaps
Brown and Levinson start from data , while Leech starts from principles. There's overlap within Brown and Levinson's model (an utterance mixes two types of politeness ) and Leech's categories (an utterance obeys two maxims ). Besides, in Leech's model a new maxim can be added for every new situation (ex: patience).
Politeness and context
● Form and function : Politeness doesn't lie in the form and the words themselves but in their function and social meaning. ● Situational context : Politeness is a pragmatic phenomenon that is influenced by two elements:
- The size of the imposition : The greater the imposition, the more indirect the language is.
- The formality of the context : The greater the formality, the more indirect the language is. ● Social context : Politeness depends on social distance and power relation between speakers (the greater the distance, the more indirect the language is) , but also on status, roles, age, gender, etc. Participants of a particular group can judge whether a language item is polite for them or not. ● Cultural context : The use of politeness can hardly be understood without the cross-cultural perspective, it changes from culture to culture. For example, a couple of friends in Cuba doesn't have to say "thank you" because it appears to put up barriers; some cultures appreciate modesty maxims, some reject it, etc, but politeness underlies all languages in some way or another.
Chap. 7: Culture and language learning
From English pragmatics to global pragmatics
Studies comparing cultures can have pragmalinguistic focus or sociopragmatic focus (sociological, related to values, ex: accepting an offer). ● Cross-cultural pragmatics : Provides synchronic studies of first language use , comparing manifestations of particular pragmatic principles in two or more social groups.
- Speech acts : Studies on offers and invitations (Polish and Japanese doesn't have a "Would you like...?" form, it's not good manners), requests and commands (Cubans use intonation, some societies use imperatives, some don't), apologies (Anglo-Americans apology contains an acknowledgement of fault, Japanese apology contains an offer to do something to remedy).
- Politeness and cooperation : Studies on maxim of quality (Anglo-Americans prefer a white lie, Germans disapprove dishonesty), of modesty (a British prefers not to display knowledge, unlike Americans), of agreement (Japaneses look for harmony, they avoid direct confrontation as "you're wrong", while Spanish people usually declare disagreement). ● Intercultural pragmatics : Provides synchronic studies of second language use by non-native speakers with other speakers (native or non-native). Pragmatic failure may be pragmalinguistic (a request is intended as a command because of inappropriate language) and sociopragmatic (misunderstanding of the native speaker's social status, the speaker acts impolitely).
- Politeness and cooperation : Forms of address, deference, hierarchy are different from culture to culture: miscommunication may occur if the speaker doesn't know the face values of the other social group.
- Structure : The discourse structure may be different, for example Est Asian style is inductive (start with the background and then move to the main point), Western is deductive (give the main point, then explain the reasons). ● Interlanguage pragmatics : Provides synchronic (one level of language learning) or diachronic (compares two levels, follows the development of one level) studies of second language learning.
- Synchronic studies : For example, trying to teach French learners of English that the Australian greeting on monday "Did you have a good weekend?" expects a formulaic answer, while in French context it is only asked to friends and expects a detailed answer.
- Diachronic studies : Some studies show that learners tend to speak more directly as they gain confidence with the language; other studies show the opposite (becoming indirect).
- Learners beliefs and attitudes : The learner's attitude towards native speakers and culture affect their acquisition of pragmatic features: low psychological distance leads to integration and acquisition. There are two important factors: identity (some learners don't want to adopt the foreign language's rules, some do) and native speaker attitude to learners ( some native speakers have negative views of learners, avoiding some politeness norms towards them, not being humble, etc).
Teaching intercultural pragmatics
Using classroom interaction data, linguistics investigate whether pragmatics should be taught. ● Whether to teach it : Some theorists believe that there is no need to teach intercultural pragmatics (coursebooks only include cultural content to teach skills). Other theorists think that imposing the culture of English-speaking countries is a form of " linguistic imperialism ". Some others think that intercultural pragmatics must be taught , because it's essential to understand the language structure and meanings. ● How to teach it : Explicit instructions seem to be better than simply exposing learners to the language. Small group discussions give better risults in the learning of pragmatic features. Teachers-centred classes don't work well, they don't bring learners into contact with a variety of social situations.
