1

4. PRAGMATICS - HANDOUT

4.1 What is pragmatics?

Consider the following situation:

Alan walked across, smiled, greeted his acquaintance and, with a momentary look at the men’s glasses, asked: What are you drinking’?

They were all pleasantly surprised.

Why? What happened?

The people at the pub thought that he was offering to buy a round of drinks, but Alan was not aware of this.

Can you imagine other contexts where such a question could be used and what pragmatic meanings it would have?

There is more to being a competent user of the language than working out the literal meaning of sentences.

Children provide illuminating examples of this:

(1) [A little boy comes in the front door.] Mother: Wipe your feet, please.

We often don’t say what we mean or we may mean something quite different from what we say:

(2) It’s hot in here.(3) Nice of you to do the shopping yesterday.

Several questions arise from these observations:

o Why don’t we just say what we mean?o How is it that we manage to understand one another?

2

4.2 What pragmatics is about

Pragmatics is about examining language as it is used. Language is a form of social action, i.e. it is used to do things.

What types of things do you think can be done with language?

Language is viewed as always situated, i.e. contextual.

The same piece in a different context can mean a different thing.

(4) Her handwriting is excellent.

Pragmatics studies ho meaning is jointly negotiated by speakers in interaction and how it is dynamically constructed.

Pragmatics understands language as a set of resources

4.3 How is pragmatics defined

There are several definitions of pragmatics:

o The study of language use

o The study of the relationship between form and function and between language and context

o The study of the science of language in relation to its users

o The study of meaning in use or meaning in context

o The study of how meaning is created

o The study of speaker meaning

o The study of utterance interpretation

3

4.4 Utterance

An utterance is a stretch of speech, defined by use:

o It is situated.

o It is a unit of spoken behaviour.

o It is not a priori right or wrong;

o Usually preceded and followed by silence.

o It may not be a complete/grammatical sentence.

4.5 Where does meaning come from?

Where do you think meaning comes from?

4.6 Force

Force is the speaker’s intention: praise, criticise, request, offer, give advice, scold, etc.

Usually, both utterance meaning and force are understood: (5)

A: Let’s go for a drink. A: Let’s go for a drink.

B: I can’t. My doctor won’t let me. B: I can’t. My mother-in-law won’t let me.

A: What’s wrong with you?

Sometimes, utterance meaning is understood, but not force: Sheldon, from The Big Bang Theory does not understand sarcasm (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DF7MroTLDfU&feature=related)

Sometimes (rarely), force is understood, but not utterance meaning:

(6) Break a leg!

4

Even more rarely, none of the two is understood:

(7) A: Pedro me ha propuesto que invierta en su empresa. B: Pedro es un chanta.

This is an example from Argentinian Spanish. Chanta means “embaucador”. If I don’t know what the word means, I won’t know whether I’m being told that it’s a good idea or a bad idea.

4.7 Context

The context includes all those features in and around the utterance that are relevant for communication.

YES:

o Speaker and addressee:

o Place:

o Time: What a nice day today!

o Historical time: She’s a single mother.

o Culture: You’re a very kind old lady.

o Previous utterance(s): What’s wrong with you?

o Linguistic channel:

o

NO:

The context is not static. It changes alongside with the conversation. Besides, it’s not only context that influences the interpretation of the utterances. A given utterance can also produce a change in the context.

(8) Teacher: What’s up?

5

4.8 Speech acts

4.8.1 J.L Austin – How to do Things with Words 1962. Oxford: Oxford University Press

He was a philosopher, an ‘ordinary language philosopher’. He developed his theory in a series of lectures given at Oxford University between 1952 and 1954 (later also delivered at Harvard in 1955). He died unexpectedly in 1960, and his famous book was based on Austin’s own notes and recordings of his lectures.

A number of earlier philosophers (e.g. Bertrand Russell) had the view that everyday language is defective, full of ambiguities, imprecision and contradictions. Austin (and his group) wanted to understand how people managed to communicate extremely efficiently and with very little problems with language just the way it is.

Austin claimed that we do not use language just to say things. Actually, we do things with language.

4.8.2 Locution, illocution, perlocution

As we have seen, utterances have sense (‘what is said’) and force (‘what is meant’). Austin made a three-fold distinction:

Locution the actual words uttered

Illocution the force or intention behind the words

Perlocution the effect of the illocution on the hearer

(9) (Looking at somebody with a piece of chocolate cake)

We have seen that often both the locution and the illocution are understood, but there may also be misunderstandings.

(10) (A man and a woman enter an art gallery. The man is carrying a plastic carrier bag. The woman goes to buy the admission tickets, while her husband has gone ahead into the gallery).Official: Would the gentleman like to leave his bag here?Man: Oh no, thank you. It’s not heavy.Official: Only ... we have had ... we had a theft here yesterday, you see.

The same locution can have different illocutionary force in different contexts.

(11) How old are you?

Different utterances can perform the same speech act (another expression for illocutionary act, illocutionary force, force).

(12) Speech act: requesting something to turn off the lights:Turn off the lights!Can you please turn off the lights?

6

Did you forget about the lights?Are you a Basicpower shareholder?What do big boys do when they leave a room, Peter?

When the typical form for a speech act is not used, we talk about indirect speech acts.

Form Function

Which one of the utterances in (12) would be an example of an indirect speech act?

4.8.3 J. R. Searle

He studied under Austin at Oxford. His most important book is Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. 1969. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. In it he distinguishes between ‘propositional content’ (locution; what is said) and ‘illocutionary force’ (illocution; what is meant). He also established a classification of speech acts (‘A classification of illocutionary acts’. 1975. Language in Society, 5, 1-23), formulated a theory of indirect speech acts (‘Indirect speech acts’ in P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.). 1975. Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 59-82) and attempted to establish a set of rules for speech acts (1969).

4.8.4 Searle’s classification of speech acts

Representatives = speech acts that commit a speaker to the truth of the expressed proposition: assertions, affirmations, claims.

Directives = speech acts that make the hearer carry out a specific action: requests, commands, advice

Commissives = speech acts that commit the speaker to some future action: promises, threats, oaths

Expressives = speech acts that express the speaker's attitudes and emotions towards the proposition: congratulations, excuses, apologies thanks

Declarations = speech acts that change the reality with the proposition of the declaration: baptisms, pronouncing someone guilty, pronouncing someone husband and wife.

7

4.8.5 Searle’s rules for speech acts

Propositional act Speaker (S) predicates a future act (A) of Speaker (S)

Preparatory condition

S believes that doing act A is in H’s best interest and S can do A.

Sincerity condition S intends to do act A.

Essential condition S undertakes an obligation to do act A.

Analysis of John promising Sally to come to her party: I’ll come to your party tomorrow.

Propositional act

Preparatory condition

Sincerity condition

Essential condition

What can go wrong? What can make this speech act non-felicitous?

1) Preparatory condition:

2) Sincerity condition:

3) Essential condition:

4.9 H.P. Grice

H.P. Grice worked with Austin at Oxford. His seminal paper is ‘Logic and conversation’, 1975, in P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 41-58. Although he never fully developed his theory and his work is somehow problematic, his attempt to explain how a hearer goes from what is said to what is meant is extremely important.

4.9.1 Conversational implicature

A conversational implicature is the additional or different meanings that a given utterance has, in a given context:

(13) Are you a Basicpower shareholder?

(14) Great, that’s just great!

8

4.9.2 The Cooperative Principle

The CP: Make your contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged.

When we are faced with someone NOT being cooperative, instead of assuming that they are being non-cooperative, we try to find a meaning for their utterance:

(15) (A has accidentally locked herself out of her house. It is winter, the middle of the night and she is stark naked)A: Do you want a coat?B: No, I really want to stand out here in the freezing cold with no clothes on.

4.9.3 The four conversational maxims

Quantity: Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purpose of the exchange).Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.

Quality: Do not say what you believe to be false.Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.

Relation: Be relevant.Manner: Avoid obscurity of expression.

Avoid ambiguity.Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).Be orderly.

When the maxims are observed, there is nothing very interesting:

(16) A: When’s Mary’s plane arriving?B: Tomorrow at five o’clock.

4.9.4 Flouting a maxim

Blatantly not observing a maxim.

Exploiting the maxim of Quality

(14) Great! That’s just great!

1)

2)

3)

9

4)

5)

6)

7)

8)

Another example would be:

(17) A: What’s your name? B: I’m the Queen of Sheba.

Exploiting the maxim of Quantity

(18) A: I heard Henry is a great pianist. I wanted to hire him for my party. B: Yes, he plays the piano.

Exploiting the maxim of relation

(19) (At a dinner, a conversation is going on about politics, and it is becoming a little awkward, because two of the speakers hold widely different views. Then the host speaks)A: Has anyone seen the new Harry Potter film?

Exploiting the maxim of Manner

(20) (This interaction occurred during a radio interview with an unnamed official from the United States Embassy in Port-au-Prince, Haiti)Interviewer: Did the United States Government play any part in Duvalier’s departure? Did they, for example, actively encourage him to leave?Official: I would not try to steer you away from that conclusion.