1. Chapter Seven Pragmatics

2. What is pragmatics?
Pragmatics can be defined as the analysis of meaning in context.
Pragmatic analysis of meaning is first and foremost concerned with the study of what is communicated by a speaker/writer and interpreted by a listener/reader.
Analysis of intentional meaning necessarily involves the interpretation of what people do through language in a particular context.
Intended meaning may or may not be explicitly expressed. Pragmatic analysis also explores how listeners/readers make inferences about what is communicated.

3. What are the differences between the two linguistic studies of meaning – semantics and pragmatics?
Semantics studies literal, structural or lexical meaning, while pragmatics studies non-literal, implicit, intended meaning, or speaker meaning.
Semantics is context independent, decontextualized, while pragmatics is context dependent, contextualized.
Semantics deals with what is said, while pragmatics deals with what is implicated or inferred.

4. Deixis and reference (1)
Deixis is a word originally from Greek. It means pointing via language. An expression used by a speaker/writer to identify something is called deictic expression.
Out of context, we cannot understand sentences containing deictic expressions, because we do not know what these expressions refer to respectively.

5. Deixis and reference (2)
According to referential content, deixis can be put into person deixis, place deixis, time deixis and discourse deixis.
Person deixis: I, we, you, me, he, etc.
Place deixis: here, there, above, over, this, that…

6. Deixis and reference (3)
Proximal and distal terms
Proximal terms are used when something is close to the speaker, while distal terms when something is away from the speaker.
Time deixis: next…, by…, before…, etc.
Tenses: coding time

7. Deixis and reference (4)
Discourse deixis
Anaphoric: backward reference
Cataphoric: forward reference
The deictic centre – ego-centric centre

8. Speech acts (1)
In linguistic communication, people do not merely exchange information. They actually do something through talking or writing in various circumstances. Actions performed via speaking are called speech acts.
Performative sentences
Implicit performatives – It’s cold here.
Explicit performatives – Please close the door.

9. Speech acts (2) Types of speech acts
Locutionary speech act – the action of making the sentence
Illocutionary speech act – the intentions
Perlocutionary speech act – the effects
Of these dimensions, the most important is the illocutionary act.

10. Speech acts (3)
In linguistic communication people respond to an illocutionary act of an utterance, because it is the meaning intended by the speaker.
If a teacher says, “I have run out of chalk” in the process of lecturing, the act of saying is locutionary, the act of demanding for chalk is illocutionary, and the effect the utterance brings about – one of the students will go and get some chalk – is perlocutionary.
In English, illocutionary acts are also given specific labels, such as request, warning, promise, invitation, compliment, complaint, apology, offer, refusal, etc. these specific labels name various speech functions.

11. Speech acts (4)
As functions may not correspond to forms, speech acts can be direct and indirect.
Searle: two ways of communication (performing acts)
Direct speech act: Close the door.
Indirect speech act: It’s cold in here.

12. Speech acts (5)
Why do people often speak indirectly in social communication?
Different social variables: age, sex, social condition
Politeness: communicative strategy
Indirect speech acts are related to appropriateness.
Indirect speech acts are made for politeness, not vice versa. To make appropriate choices does not necessarily mean indirect speech acts.

13. Lexical sense relations (6)
Polysemy
A polyseme is a word which has several related senses.
Polysemy is based on the intuition of native speakers as well as the etymology or history of words.

14. Cooperation and implicature (1)
Conversational Implicature
In our daily life, speakers and listeners involved in conversation are generally cooperating with each other. In other words, when people are talking with each other, they must try to converse smoothly and successfully. In accepting speakers’ presuppositions, listeners have to assume that a speaker is not trying to mislead them. This sense of cooperation is simply one in which people having a conversation are not normally assumed to be trying to confuse, trick, or withhold relevant information from one another.

15. Cooperation and implicature (2)
However, in real communication, the intention of the speaker is often not the literal meaning of what he or she says. The real intention implied in the words is called conversational implicature. For example:
[1] A: Can you tell me the time?
B: Well, the milkman has come.

16. Cooperation and implicature (3)
In this little conversation, A is asking B about the time, but B is not answering directly. That indicates that B may also not no the accurate time, but through saying “the milkman has come”, he is in fact giving a rough time. The answer B gives is related to the literal meaning of the words, but is not merely that. That is often the case in communication. The theory of conversational implicature is for the purpose of explaining how listeners infer the speakers’ intention through the words.
The study of conversational implicature starts from Grice (1967), the American philosopher. He thinks, in daily communication, people are observing a set of basic rules of cooperating with each other so as to communicate effectively through conversation. He calls this set of rules the cooperative principle (CP) elaborated in four sub-principles (maxims), that is the cooperative principle.

17. Cooperation and implicature (4)
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. The maxims are:
Quantity
Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes of the exchange).
Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.
Quality – Try to make your contribution one that is true.
Do not say what you believe to be false.
Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.

18. Cooperation and implicature (5)
Relation – Be relevant.
Manner – Be perspicuous.
Avoid obscurity of expression.
Avoid ambiguity.
Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).
Be orderly.

19. The politeness principle (PP) (1)
Leech points out that CP in itself cannot explain why people are often so indirect in conveying what they mean. Grice’s theory of CP is, fundamentally, logic-oriented.
Conversational interaction is also social behaviour. Choice of linguistic codes is central in language use. There are social and psychological factors that determine the choice.

20. The politeness principle (PP) (2)
Besides being cooperative, participants of conversations normally try to be polite. The speakers consider the matter of face for themselves and others. Based on this observation, Leech proposes the politeness principle (PP), which contains six maxims.
Tact
Minimize cost to other.
Maximize benefit to other.
Generosity
Minimize benefit to self.
Maximize cost to self. 
Approbation
Minimize dispraise of other.
Maximize praise of other.
Modesty
Minimize praise of self.
Maximize dispraise of self.
Agreement
Minimize disagreement between self and other.
Maximize agreement between self and other.
Sympathy
Minimize antipathy between self and other.
Maximize sympathy between self and other.

21. The politeness principle (PP) (3)
The maxims expressed in terms of maximize entail the concept of gradience in politeness. The tact maxim expressed in terms of cost and benefit can be exemplified by the following:
Clean the rooms Cost to H Less polite
Get some chalks for me. ↑ ↑
Look at the map.
Take a seat.
Enjoy your trip ↓ ↓
Have another cup of coffee. Benefit to H More polite
Cost to hearer:
Peel the potatoes More direct Less polite
Can you peel the potatoes? ↑ ↑
Will you peel the potatoes? ↓ ↓
Would you possibly peel …? Less direct More

22. The politeness principle (PP) (4)
Benefit to hearer:
Would you have another sandwich? Less direct Less polite
Will you have another sandwich? ↑ ↑
Have another sandwich ↓ ↓
You must have another sandwich. More direct More polite
Politeness and appropriateness
Distance, power, situational context
Relation between CP and PP
 The PP is the superordinate principle standing above the CP. The PP overrides the CP.
People sometimes violate the CP in order to follow the PP.

23. the principle of relevance (RP)
From the four maxims of CP to the RP
The code model
Communication is a process of coding and decoding.
The inferential model
 Communication is a process of producing and interpreting, or coding and inferring.
Theoretical assumptions
 General law: to use the minimal effort for the maximal effect for human behaviour.
To communicate is to claim others’ attention.
Contractual effect/processing effort = relevance

24. Conversational implicature
What is a conversation?
A conversation is changing ideas, or conversing.
Conversation is the basic form of speech in human communication.
Conversation is the dialogic form in spoken and written discourse.

25. Analysis of conversation (1)
The global analysis – to analyze the whole structure, the whole process of a conversation.
The local analysis – to understand the internal structure of a conversation.
Turn-taking
Turn-taking refers to having the right to speak by turns.
Conversations normally follow the pattern of “I speak – you speak – I speak – you speak”, if there are two participants.
Any possible change-of-turn point is called a transition relevance place (TRP).

26. Analysis of conversation (2)
Adjacency pair
Adjacency pairs are a fundamental unit of conversational structure.
Greeting/greeting, question/answer, invitation/acceptance, offer/decline, complaint/denial are common cases of adjacency pairs.
Insertion sequence
Not all first parts are immediately followed by second parts. It often occurs that the answer is delayed by another pair of question and answer. Look at the following example:
- May I have a bottle of Mich? (Q1)
- Are you over 21? (Q2)
- No. (A2)
- No. (A1)
The second part of adjacency pair is violated here.

27. Analysis of conversation (3)
A conversation sometimes is organized in a preferential way.
Pre-sequence
Pre-invitation
Pre-request
Pre-announcement
Post-sequence
Explanation