1. BM3 Introduction to English Linguistics Part II
Session 5: Pragmatics

2. Portfolio drop-off options: Due July 9 @ 6pm (can be handed in before)
Hand in during/ after lecture of 9 July
Drop-off in my mail box (across from A )

3. Announcements:
Class evaluation: online for lecture (this week only) next week for this class
Registration for Modulprüfung
Information for AM options THU, 6pm

4. Informationsveranstaltung des Seminars für Anglistik und Amerikanistik
Informationsveranstaltung 2. Juli 2009, Uhr in A
Aufbaumodule Anglistik – Wie belegt und wie dokumentieren?
Beenden Sie gerade die BM? Wollen Sie im kommenden Semester AM belegen? Sind Sie nicht ganz sicher, wie Sie kombinieren können/sollen/wollen?
Belegen Sie gerade Aufbaumodule? Können Sie Ihre Kombinationsmodule dieses Semester abschließen, oder müssen Sie strecken? Sind Ihre gewählten Veranstaltungen überhaupt kombinierbar? Wer bekommt den Laufzettel und wie gelangen die Noten ins Prüfungsamt? In dieser Informationveranstaltung bekommen Sie Hinweise zur effizienten Belegung von Aufbaumodulen und zum Laufzettelprocedere.

5. Overview: Where are we?
Phonetics/ Phonology
Morphology
Syntax
Semantics
Pragmatics
Applied Linguistics (Historical Linguistics, Sociolinguistics, Textlinguistics, Psycholinguistics, Neurolinguistics, Computational Linguistics, …)

6. Literature
Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., Hyams, N. (2006). An Introduction to Language. 8th ed. Wadsworth.
Handke, J. & Intemann, F. (2000). The Interactive Introduction to Linguistics. CD ROM. Version München: Hueber.
See Handapparat for further introductory books

7. RECAP Lexical Semantics
semantic relations

8. Semantic Relations Antonymy Homonymy Polysemy Hyponymy
Synonymy (hungry ≈ starved; couch ≈ sofa)
Complementary
Gradable
Relational
Homophone
Homograph
Hypernym
Hyponym
Co-hyponym

9. Hyponymy
Hyperonym
Hyponym
Hyperonym
Hyponym

10. Are the following pairs complementary, gradable, or relational opposites?
good bad
expensive cheap
parent offspring
beautiful ugly
false true
lessor lessee
pass fail
hot cold
legal illegal
larger smaller
poor rich
fast slow
asleep awake
husband wife
rude polite

11. Explain the semantic ambiguity by paraphrasing the following sentences:
He waited by the bank.
Is he really that kind?
The proprietor of the fish store was the sole owner.
The long drill was boring.
When he got the clear title to the land, it was a good deed.
It takes a good ruler to make a straight line.
He saw that gasoline can explode.
You should see her shop.
Every man loves a woman.
bank
sole
drill
deed
ruler
that
can
shop
Every a

12. ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Questions ??? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

13. RECAP Pragmatics Speech Act Theory (Austin, Searle)
(Conversational) Implicatures
Cooperative Principle
Grice‘s Maxims

14. Speech Act Theory constative vs. performative utterances
‚simple‘ statement vs. ‚doing-with-words‘
examples:
I like chocolate.
I command you to be quiet!
constative
performative

15. Speech Acts Locutionary Act  The uttered words: what you say
Illocutionary Act
 The force behind them: what you mean to say
Perlocutionary Act
 The effect of the utterance: (How) does the hearer react (appropriately)?

16. Locution, Illocution, Perlocution
locutionary speech acts
Thanks!
Nice desk!
illocutionary speech act: compliment
She probably wants one, too...
perlocutionary speech act: jealousy

17. Indirect Speech Acts Indirect speech act: rejection
Would you like to go out for lunch?
I have to work.
Indirect speech act: rejection
Direct speech act/ illocution: request

18. Grice I The Cooperative Principle
„Make your conversational 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.“
i.e. say it appropriately according to the situation
Always assume that the speaker follows this principle. If not, this is done for a reason.

19. Grice II The 4 Maxims Maxim of Quality  Be truthful.
Maxim of Quantity
 Do not say any more or less than necessary.
Maxim of Relevance/ Relation
 Make your contribution relevant.
Maxim of Manner
 Be orderly.

20. Grice III Conversational Implicatures
The speaker deliberately flouts a maxim to convey an additional meaning not expressed literally (conversational implicature).

21. Flouting of Maxims „Could you pass that napkin there, please?“
„Yes, I am able-bodied.“
„Yes, I could.“ (without doing so)

22. Flouting of Maxims Flouting which maxim? Implicature? Illocution?
„Could you pass that napkin there, please?“
„Yes, I am able-bodied.“
„Yes, I could.“ (without doing so)
Flouting which maxim?
Implicature? Illocution?

23. ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Questions ??? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

24. Exercise 16
Determine which of the following sentences are performative sentences by inserting „hereby“ and seeing whether they sound right.
e.g.
I hereby apologize to you.
I hereby know you.
(From: Fromkin/ Rodman. ch.5, ex.16) P

25. Exercise 16 c. I testify that she met the agent.
d. I know that she met the agent.
e. I suppose the Yankees will win.
f. He bet her $2500 that Bush would win.
g. I dismiss the class.
h. I dismiss the class.
We promise to leave early.
I owe the IRS $ 1 million.
I bequeathe $ 1,000,000 to the IRS.
I swore I didn‘t do it.
I swear I didn‘t do it. (From: Fromkin/ Rodman. ch.5, ex.16)

26. Exercise 21 What are the implicatures in the following statements?
Statement: „You make a better door than a window!“ Situation: s.o. is blocking your view.
Statement: „It‘s getting late.“ Situation: You‘re at a party at 4am.
Statement: „Mr. Smith dresses neatly, is well- groomed, and is always on time to class.“ Situation: The summary statement in a letter of recommendation to graduate school.
h. Statement: „John or Mary made a mistake.“
Sit.: Looking over work done by John and Mary.
(From: Fromkin/ Rodman. ch.5, ex.21)

27. Exercise 22
What is the conversational implicature in each of the following dialogues?
a. Jack: Did you make a doctor‘s appointment?
Laura: Their line was busy.
d. Jack: How do you like the string quartet? Laura: I thought the violinist was swell.
e. Laura: Do you own a cat? Jack: I‘m allergic to everything.
g. Laura: Did you mow the grass and wash the car like I told you? Jack: I mowed the grass.
h. Laura: Do you want dessert? Jack: Is the Pope Catholic? (From: Fromkin. ch.5, ex.22)

28. Searle‘s program for analysis of indirect speech act performances
Step 1: Understand the facts of the conversation.
Step 2: Assume cooperation and relevance on behalf of the participants.
Step 3: Establish factual background information pertinent to the conversation.
Step 4: Make assumptions about the conversation based on steps 1-3.
Step 5: If steps 1-4 do not yield a consequential meaning, then infer that there are 2 illocutionary forces at work.

29. Searle‘s program for analysis of indirect speech act performances
Step 6: Assume the hearer has the ability to perform the act the speaker suggests. The act that the speaker is asking to be performed must be something that would make sense for one to ask.
Step 7: Make inferences from steps 1-6 regarding possible primary illocutions.
Step 8: Use background information to establish the primary illocution.

30. HOMEWORK
Think of at least 1 topic that we should revise or at least 1 – 2 unanswered questions you would like to discuss next week.
Be specific!
Send until noon.