The origin of Pragmatics - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 79
About This Presentation
Title:

The origin of Pragmatics

Description:

They use the term in their study of semiotics. They divide the research of semiotics into three branches: syntactics, semantics, ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:882
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 80
Provided by: modling
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: The origin of Pragmatics


1
The origin of Pragmatics
2
In the research fields of philosophy, C. Morris
and R. Carnap was the first to use the term
Pragmatics. They use the term in their study of
semiotics. They divide the research of semiotics
into three branches syntactics, semantics, and
pragmatics.
3
Syntactics studies the formal relationship
between the signs. Semantics studies the
relationship between signs and the things they
represent. Pragmatics, which studies the
relationship between the signs and the
interpreters of the signs.
4
The Origin and Development of Pragmatics in the
Linguistic Field
5
The history of Pragmatics study is fairly recent.
It has become a research field for only about 20
or 30 years. However, its development is rather
fast. Its range of research has become
increasingly wider. Like other branches of
science, the study of modern linguistics has been
one of the constant experiments, investigation
and discoveries.
6
The Swiss linguist F. de Saussure (1857---1913),
who published at the end of the century A Course
in General Linguistics, has been thought of as
the founder of the modern linguistics. Saussure
advanced the distinction between langue and
parole. Langue refers to the linguistic system
itself while parole refers to the manifestation
of the actual use of the linguistic system.
7
According to Saussure, linguistics should aim at
the study of langue, which is a system governed
by set rules instead of aiming at the study of
parole, which can not be subject to scientific
analysis. Saussure set the tone for the research
orientation of linguistics for decades of years.
8
After the late 1950s, Chomsky made distinctions
between competence and performance, which is not
much different from Saussures division of langue
and parole.
9
For many years, influenced by Saussure, linguists
devoted themselves to the study of language
proper at the expense of language use.
10
The American structuralist Bloomfield
(1887---1949) and others attached importance to
the analysis of phonological system and
linguistic forms. They took phoneme and morpheme
as the units for linguistic analysis. In their
eyes, the syntactic structures of language are so
abstract that their nature can hardly be revealed.
11
In the late 1950s, Chomskys theory brought about
great changes in linguistic field. Chomsky
regarded the language as an abstract device. He
interpreted the language as a property of human
physiological heredity. Anyone with
well-developed brain can possess the competence.
12
The competence is independent of performance. The
core of Chomskys theory is the grammaticality of
language, that is how to create sentences that
are in conformity with grammatical rules. This
structure-as-core theory excludes meanings out of
the linguistic study.
13
Starting from the beginning of 1970s, some
linguists tried to hold the study of meaning to
be the basis for linguistic study or tried to
find a midway between the meaning-based approach
and the structure-based approach. With the
attention given to the study of meaning, more and
more linguists came to realise the importance of
contexts in the study of meanings.
14
They believe that for a language in use, meanings
are not abstract, they are closely related to
contexts. Meanings can not be determined without
taking into count such contextual factors as Who
says what to whom, when, where and how. When
contexts are taken into consideration in the
study of meanings, pragmatics hence comes into
existence.
15
What has been briefly mentioned above has been
the main developmental stages in American
linguistic research. Though Bloomfield and
Chomsky are influential across the world,
linguists in Europe have their own characteristic
ways of research.
16
In Europe, esp. in England, quite some noted
linguists published their original linguistic
theories. These theories have promoted the
development of pragmatics.
17
As early as 1930s, the British famous linguist
J.R. Firth (1890---1960) put forward the
contextual theory of meanings. Firth believes
that meaning is use. Meaning is to be studied
through a hierarchy of contexts. Words are
analyzed in the context of sentences which are
then analyzed in situational contexts or settings
which are in turn seen in cultural context.
18
A Context of Situation A the relevant
features of participants (1) the verbal action
of the participants (2) the non-verbal action
B the relevance of objects C the effect of
the verbal action
19
????????????????(verbal action),??????????????????
?,? Ahng gunna giwun fer Ber. (Im going to
get one for Bert.) ??????????????????????(??????),
????????????(???),Bert?????(?????????),???????????
??????
20
He was very much influenced by anthropologist B.
Malinowski in the study of meanings. Malinowski ,
after observing the language uses in some tribes,
thought it more appropriate to look at language
as way of action than as the tool for
communication.
21
The characteristic slogan for this school of
thought is Language is in action and Meaning
is in use. Without use and context, meaning is
an empty concept.
22
The contemporary British linguist M.A.K. Halliday
put forward a set of functional theories of
language. Halliday believe that language is a
social phenomenon. What is universal in human
languages is not the
result of the common hereditary factors of human
beings, rather, it is because languages possess
the common functions in social activities.
23
Halliday believes that a language usually
fullfils the following functions
1.Instrumental I want satisfying the
material needs.
24
2.Regulatory Do as I tell you
controlling othersbehaviour.
25
3.Interactional me and you
getting along with other people.
26
4.Personal Here I come identifying or
expressing the self. 5.Heuristic Tell me why
exploring the world around or inside
one. 6.Imaginative Lets pretend creating a
world of ones own 7.Informative I have got
something to tell you communicating new
information.
27
The functionalists think the present state and
the development of language is to be determined
by the social functions that languages must
fulfil. Therefore, the description and
explanation of linguistic structures should be
linked with the functions of languages. The
functional school of thought also paved the way
for the emerging of pragmatics.
28
Philosophers also contributed to the occurrence
of pragmatics. In the late 50s, the British
philosopher J. Austin created speech act theory.
This theory is of significance in the study of
pragmatics. It has become the core theory of the
study of pragmatics. It also greatly influenced
such linguistic fields as psycholinguistics,
sociolinguistics and applied linguistics.
29
Another American philosopher H.P. Grice, advanced
the theory of co-operative principle. It
contributes a lot to the explanation of
communicative activities by means of language.
30
Definitions of Pragmatics Levinson (19836---27)
listed about ten definitions about
pragmatics Definition 1 Pragmatics is the
study of those relations between language and
context that are grammaticalized, or encoded in
the structure of a language. ?????????????????????
??????????????????
31
Definition 2 Pragmatics is the study of all
those aspects of meaning not captured in a
semantic theory. ??????????????????????????
32
Definition 3 Pragmatics is the study of the
relations between language and context that are
basic to an account of language
understanding. ???????????????????????????????????
?
33
Definition 4 Pragmatics is the study of the
ability of language users to pair sentences with
the contexts in which they would be
appropriate. ????????????????????????????????????
34
Definition 5 Pragmatics is the study of deixis (
at least in part), implicature, presupposition,
speech acts, and aspects of discourse
structure. ???????( ?????????)????????????????????
?????
35
Definition 6 Pragmatics is the study of
linguistic acts and the contexts in which they
are performed. ( Stalnakeer, 1972383
) ??????????????????????????
36
definition 7 Pragmatics is a theory which seeks
to characterise how speakers use the sentences of
a language to effect successful communication.
( Kempson, 197584 ) ??????????????????
??????????????????
37
Definition 8 Pragmatics is the study of language
use and linguistic communication. (
Akmajian, 1979267 ) ?????????????????????
38
Definition 9 Pragmatics can be defined as the
study of how utterances have meanings in
situations. ( Leech, 1983x
) ?????????????????????????????
39
Meaning and Context---the two basic concepts in
the study of Pragmatics
40
Meaning
41
Semantics regards meaning as the innate property
of the language proper. The property is innate,
fixed, and stable, not subject to the influence
of external interferences.
42
For example, dog in English or ? in Chinese
refers to a particular kind of animal in whatever
situations.
43
Formal semanticists are concerned with the truth
value (???)of the semantic proposition (????)of a
declarative sentence or a statement and with the
conditions that have to be satisfied in the truth
value judgement.
44
For example, It is cold in here. For formal
semanticists, it simply expresses the semantic
proposition of the low temperature in a certain
place. They do not consider the following
factors as who speaks it to whom , when, where,
why etc. In other words , they do not include
context in the study of meanings.
45
Excluding the context, this sentence It is cold
in here. is fixed in their meaning at any time
in any place.
46
Pragmatics is different. It not only studies the
meanings of the word proper, but also links those
meanings with the users of the word. In other
words, besides studying the word meanings of a
speech, it will try to explain in what situation
a speech is used, and what purposes the speakers
want to achieve.
47
In other words, pragmatics is concerned with the
truth-value of a speech in a particular context.
For example, we know that a dog refers to a
dog, however, in particular context, it can be
meant for a warning or a threat.
48
Likewise, It is cold in here, besides stating
the temperature of a place, can be used by the
speaker to ask the listener to do something, such
as to close the window, turn on the heating or
lending him a coat.
49
These meanings are obviously not existent in the
literal meanings of the utterance It is cold in
here. They are inferred from the literal
meanings. These inferred meanings are what the
speaker aims to convey.
50
The task of pragmatics is to reveal the meanings
that can expose the speakers purposes or
intentions in speaking an utterance. Therefore,
the meanings which pragmatics is concerned about
are not those existent in the words , expressions
or sentences proper.
51
There are three basic principles Leech made about
the pragmatic meanings (1) It involves the
speakers intention to convey a certain meaning
which may, or may not, be evident from the
message itself.
52
(2) Consequently, interpretation by the hearer of
this meaning is likely to depend on context and
53
(3) meaning, in this sense, is something which is
performed, rather than something that exists in a
static way. it involves action ( the speaker
producing an effect on the hearer) and
interaction ( the meaning being negotiated
between speaker and hearer on the basis of their
mutual knowledge).
( See Leech, 1981320 )
54
Leech also put forward four criteria in
determining whether the discussion of meanings
has entered into the field of pragmatics
55
(1) whether the reference has been made to the
speaker and the listener. (2) whether the
reference has been made to the intention of the
speaker and the interpretation of the listener.
56
(3) whether the reference has been made to the
context. (4) whether the reference has been
made to the speech acts performed through the use
of language
57
If the answer to one of the above questions is
positive, then the study of meanings has involved
pragmatics.
58
In linguistic literature, the distinctions
between sentence-meaning and utterance-meaning is
very common. To distinguish between
sentence-meaning and utterance -meaning, it is
necessary to separate sentences from utterances.
59
A sentence is a grammatical concept. It is
grammatical unit of language. Its constitution
should be in agreement with the grammatical
rules. For example, a sentence is composed of a
subject and an object.
60
An utterance is a unit of communication. It is
the smallest unit which has certain communicative
functions.
61
This smallest unit of communication can be , in
length, exactly the same as a grammatically well
formed sentence and in fact during communication,
most utterances are in the forms of grammatically
well-formed sentences, for example There is a
dog at the gate. Wed better keep away. These
two grammatically complete sentences can have the
communicative value of a warning or
suggestion in certain context.
62
However, there are also many utterances that are
grammatically incomplete. For example, (Theres
) A dog ( at the gate)! (I order you to )
Fire!.
63
There are still some utterances that are not in
any sense sentences, but still have communicative
functions such as Hello!, Hi!, and Ouch!
Wow!, Good morning!.
64
As far as meaning is concerned, sentence meaning
is abstract, isolated from the context while
utterance meaning is specific and related to the
context under which a communication is carried
out.
65
In many situations, the utterance meaning is
based on the sentence meaning, however it
contains more than the sentence meaning, because
the utterance meaning is the result of the
combination of the sentence meaning and the
context.
66
For example, John is still single, as an
isolated sentence, at most , tells us the Johns
marital status. If we look at it as an utterance,
then in certain contexts, besides the sentence
meaning it conveys , it can also implies other
meanings, for example, to encourage the listener
to date John..
67
Another distinction between meanings is made by
Grice from the nature of linguistic
communication. Grice used the term natural
meaning and non-natural meaning or
meaning-nn), The latter is also called
speakers meaning.
68
His distinctions between meanings are in essence,
the same as the distinction between the sentence
meaning and the utterance meaning. Grice , in his
explanation of non-natural meaning, believed that
if the speaker wants to express the non-natural
meanings through utterances, the following
conditions should be satisfied
69
(1) Speakers (S) intended utterances (U) to cause
some effect (Z) in recipient H (??????????????????
) (2) S intended (I) to be achieved simply by H
recognizing that intention (I)
(??????????????????????) (Grice, 1957,???Levinson
198316)
70
From the definition it is easy to see that Grice
regards the linguistic communicative process as
the process of the expression of the intention of
the speaker and the recognition of the intention
on the part of the listener.
71
Grice believes that the sentence meaning is time
free. The sentence meaning is not always the same
as the intention of the speaker in the use of
this sentence in particular context. For example
He is a fine friend . The sentence meaning is
perpetual. However , if you say this when your
friend deserted you at the time when you are in
trouble , you will mean quite different things.
72
Context Context plays an important role in the
study of meanings in pragmatics. Then what is
context? Different linguists have different
interpretations as to what is included in the
scope of context.
73
The language system is objective. It provides a
series of linguistic forms for use. The language
users linguistic ability determines his mastery
of these linguistic forms and which forms to use
in different situations.
74
For example, in English, we can call a person
Peter Smith or Mr. Smith, Professor Smith,
Or Sir, or My Lord, or Peter or even Pete
or simply mate. The fact is not all the forms
are appropriate in all situations.
75
In a given context, usually only one or two is
appropriate. For another example, in English
there are many expressions for die, pass away
join the majority, go the way of all flesh, be no
more, pop off, kick the bucket. They may be the
same in referential meanings, but they carry
different stylistic meanings.
76
Lyons illustrates on the context when he comes
to the discussion of the communicative
appropriateness. He says a person who is able to
judge the appropriateness of an utterance must
possess certain knowledges. The knowledges
constitute the context. Lyons listed 6 types of
knowledge
77
(1) Each of the participants must know his
role and status. (2) The participants must know
where they are in space and time. (3) The
participants must be able to categorize the
situation in terms of its degree of
formality.
78
(4) The participants must know what medium is
appropriate to the situation. (5) The
participants must know how to make their
utterances appropriate to the subject-matter and
the importance of subject-matter as a determinant
in the selection of one dialect or one language
rather than another. (6) The participants must
know how to make their utterance appropriate to
the province or domain to which the situation
belongs.
79
?? ?????????? ??
??????????
????????(??) ?? ??
????????? ?? ?????????

???????? ??? ?? ????? ?
? ?? ???????
??????????
?? ??
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com