第十届全国语用学研讨会
会议议程
|
日期 |
时间 |
|
|
|
7月 20日 |
|
||
|
晚8:00-9:30 |
预备会(常务理事会) (宾馆5楼会议室) |
||
|
21日 |
|||
10th China Pragmatic Conference
Program
(Nanjing University, 20-23, July)
|
July 20 |
Registration [Huanengyuan Hotel, Zhongshan Road] |
||
|
July 21 |
A.M. Noon |
8:00-8:20 |
Photograph & Tea Break [Front gate, Nanjing University] |
|
8:40-9:20 |
Opening Ceremony [Conference Hall, 1st floor, K |
||
Pragmatics in second language learning: Current developments
Gabriele Kasper
University of Hawai'i at Manoa
Pragmatics made its entrance to second language research thirty years ago, mainly under the influence of curricular interests in teaching and testing language for communication and sociolinguistic concerns with intercultural discourse. A few notable precursors in the 1980s aside, studies of how L2 pragmatics is learned first started to slowly gain momentum in the 1990s (Bardovi-Harlig, 1999; Kasper & Rose, 2002; Kasper & Schmidt, 1996). In the same period, metatheoretical debates from across the social sciences made their way into SLA, where they introduced new ontological and epistemological perspectives to the discipline (Zuengler & Miller, 2006). Several of these perspectives have influenced research on L2 pragmatic development as well.
METAPHORS:
Dan Sperber
Metaphors are simply a range of cases at one end of a continuum that includes literal, loose and hyperbolic interpretations. Metaphorical interpretations are arrived at in exactly the same way as these other interpretations. There is no mechanism specific to metaphor, no interesting generalization that applies only to them. In other terms, linguistic metaphors are not a natural kind, and “metaphor” is not a theoretically important notion in the study of verbal communication. I argue for this deflationary thesis by outlining the general mechanism that governs the interpretation of all utterances.
|
210093 南京 |