Chapter 6: Pragmatics

Part One: Some Basic Notions

1. Definition:

pragmatics: The study of how speakers uses sentences to effect successful communication.

2. Pragmatics VS. Semantics

The difference between pragmatics and semantics lie in the fact whether the context is taken into account.

3. Context

context: The general knowledge shared by the speakers and the hearers.

Context determines the speaker’s use of language and also the hearer’s interpretation of what is said to him.

4. Sentence meaning VS. utterance meaning

sentence meaning: The meaning of a self-contained unit with abstract and de-contextualized features.

utterance meaning: The meaning that a speaker conveys by using a particular utterance in a particular context.

E.g. My bag is heavy.------sentence meaning (BAG (BE HEAVY)), utterance meaning (would you give me a hand?)

Part Two: Speech Act Theory

1. Austin’s model of speech acts

Speech Act Theory: The theory proposed by John Austin and deepened by Searle, which believes that we are performing actions when we are speaking.

constatives: Constatives are statements that either state or describe, and are thus verifiable.

performatives: Performatives are sentences that don’t state a fact or describe a state, and are not verifiable.

Speech act theory:

locutionary act: The act of conveying literal meaning by virtue of syntax, lexicon and phonology.

illocutionary act: The act of expressing the speaker’s intention and performed in saying something.

perlocutionary act: The act resulting from saying something and the consequence or the change brought about by the utterance.

2. Searle’s Classification of Speech Acts

1 representatives: Stating or describing, saying what the speaker believes to be true.

2 directives: Trying to get the hearer to do something.

3 commisives: Committing the speaker himself to some future course of action.

4 expressives: Expressing feelings or attitude towards an existing state.

5 declaration: Bring about immediate changes by saying something.

Conclusion: All the acts that belong to the same category share the same purpose but differ in their strength or force.

Part Three: Principle of Conversation

cooperative Principle (CP): Proposed by Paul Grice, the principle that the participants must first of all be willing to cooperate in making conversation, otherwise, it would be impossible to carry on the talk.

Four maxims:

1 The maxim of quantity:

1 Make your contribution as informative as required (for the current purpose of exchange.)

2 Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.

E.g. A: When is Susan’s farewell party?

    B: Sometime next month.

2The maxim of quality:

1 Do not say what you believe to be false.

2 Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.

E.g. A: Would you like to join us for the picnic on Sunday?

    B: I’m afraid I have got a class on Sunday.

3 The maxim of relation:

Be relevant.

E.g. A: How did the math exam go today, Jonnie?

 B: We had a basketball match with the other class and we beat them.

4 The maxim of manner:

1 Avoid obscurity of expression.

2 Avoid ambiguity.

    3 Be belief.

    4 Be orderly.

    E.g. A: Shall we got something for the kids?

        B: Yes. But U vetoI-C-E-C-R-E-A-M.

conversational implicature:The use of conversational maxims to imply meaning during conversation.