A Resume of

PRAGMATICS

By:

ANDI CHAERUL AKBAR

1152040089
CLASS C OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE FACULTY

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MAKASSAR

2014

A. Definition of Pragmatics
Definition of pragmatics by experts:
1. Jean Aitchison
We human beings are odd compared with our nearest animal relatives. Unlike
them, we can say what we want, when we want. All normal humans can produce
and understand any number of new words and sentences. Humans use the
multiple options of language often without thinking. But blindly, they sometimes
fall into its traps. They are like spiders who exploit their webs, but themselves
get caught in the sticky strands.
2. David Crystal
Pragmatics studies the factors that govern our choice of language in social
interaction and the effects of our choice on others.
3. George Keith
Pragmatics is all about the meanings between the lexis and the grammar and
the phonology...Meanings are implied and the rules being followed are
unspoken, unwritten ones.
Pragmatics is a way of investigating how sense can be made of certain texts
even when, from a semantic viewpoint, the text seems to be either incomplete or
to have a different meaning to what is really intended. Consider a sign seen in a
children's wear shop window: Baby Sale - lots of bargains. We know without
asking that there are no babies are for sale - that what is for sale are items used
for babies. Pragmatics allows us to investigate how this meaning beyond the
words can be understood without ambiguity. The extra meaning is there, not
because of the semantic aspects of the words themselves, but because we share
certain contextual knowledge with the writer or speaker of the text.
4. Steve Campsall
Pragmatics is an important area of study for your course. A simplified way of
thinking about pragmatics is to recognise, for example, that language needs to be
kept interesting - a speaker or writer does not want to bore a listener or reader,
for example, by being over-long or tedious. So, humans strive to find linguistic
means to make a text, perhaps, shorter, more interesting, more relevant, more
purposeful or more personal. Pragmatics allows this.

Pragmatics is a systematic way of explaining language use in context. It seeks to

explain aspects of meaning which cannot be found in the plain sense of words or
structures, as explained by semantics. As a field of language study, pragmatics is fairly
new. Its origins lie in philosophy of language and the American philosophical school of
pragmatism. As a discipline within language science, its roots lie in the work of (Herbert)
Paul Grice on conversational implicature and the cooperative principle, and on the work of
Stephen Levinson, Penelope Brown and Geoff Leech on politeness.

B. Scope of Pragmatics
The lack of a clear consensus appears in the way that no two published accounts list
the same categories of pragmatics in quite the same order. But among the things you
should know about are:
a. Speech act theory
b. Felicity conditions
c. Conversational implicature
d. The cooperative principle
e. Conversational maxims
f. Relevance
g. Politeness
h. Phatic tokens
i. Deixis
C. Criticsm of Pragmatics
Some of the criticisms directed at pragmatics include these:

a. It does not have a clear-cut focus

b. Its principles are vague and fuzzy
c. It is redundant - semantics already covers the territory adequately
In defending pragmatics we can say that:
a. The study of speech acts has illuminated social language interactions
b. It covers things that semantics (hitherto) has overlooked
c. It can help inform strategies for teaching language
d. It has given new insights into understanding literature
e. The theories of the cooperative principle and politeness principle have provided
insights into person-to-person interactions.
D. Turn-taking Mechanism in Conversation
Conversation is a type of discourse: it is spoken dialogic discourse. Thus,
conversation analysis may be seen as a subfield of discourse analysis. Conversation
analysis involves close examination of internal evidence within the (spoken) text. One
type of conversation analysis is conversational ethnomethodology: "Ethnomethodologists
are primarily concerned with the tacit rules which regulate the taking-up by speakers of the
running topic, and hence the change-over from speaker to speaker."
Turn-taking process (Rahman, 2006) involves several guiding principles, such as: (1)
only one person talks at a time, (2) signalling to each other is essential, and (3) giving no
response or being silent may be considered awkward.
Turn-taking systems can provide strong motivations for non-speakers to listen
closely to the current-speaker: only by keeping track of upcoming transition-places can an
aspiring next-speaker know when to speak; and there is always the possibility that one may
be called upon by the current-speaker.
E. Definition of Conversation

Orestrom (1983:21-23) suggest several ways of understanding what a conversation

is. First, conversation is defined as a speech even that involves a mutual exchange of
information, thoughts, ideas, and emotion that take place on a here and now level and
therefore both social and psychological, as well as a linguistic activity.
Second, to understand a conversation, it should be described in terms of a number of
factors and compared with other speech events, for example with debate or meeting which
is led by a chairman. The following factors are typical of conversations:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.

Private rather than public

Casual and spontaneous
Not institutionalized
Focus in the interaction
Freedom to introduce new topics
Frequent use of tag questions and intimacy signals
Frequent use of listener responses
The third approach to understanding conversation would be give examples of it in

which typical manifestations are talks between colleagues, friends, between husband and
wife or other members of the family. This way of defining conversations, seems to be more
fruitful and workable as it is defined that conversations is a set of speech exchange system.
F. Kinds of Conversation
According to Cheepen and Monaghan, conversation can be classified into two kinds,
transactional conversation and interactional conversation, depending the way in
approaching the goal it has whether it is external or internal to the encounter. They said
that a goal that is external to the encounter is one that is concerned with having an effect of
some kind on the outside world. The difference between the two is this: in transactional
conversation, you and the listener or listeners are trying to share information in as efficient
way as possible.
G. The Context of Conversation
Sternstrom (1994) explained that exactly what the speaker means by saying
something must be interpreted not only in relation to the immediate context referring to
what the previous speaker just uttered, but also in relation to the wider context which

includes the speech situation, the topics, the speakers and their relationship to each other,
and the knowledge they share about the world.
1. Speech Situation
The speech situation in which a conversation takes place can vary according to
various different ways such as it can be a formal and informal situation. It can
involve talking about every day matters or highly technical or ones, speakers who
are very intimate or those who have never met before, and it can be private or
public.
2. Topic
The topic that the speakers talk about can also vary in some different ways.
The speakers may talk about everyday topics which they do not require
sophisticated vocabulary and do not require deep knowledge as well. The topics
which are related to a profession, for example, require not only adequate
knowledge about that profession but also require certain jargons which, if the
speaker who does not belong to that profession, would make following the
conversation difficult.
3. Speaker Relation
The way we talk depends not only on what we are talking about but probably
even more on whom we are talking to. Therefore, the level of formality does not
have to change as a result of the choice of topic. Even a scientific topic can be
discussed in a relaxed way.
4. Shared Knowledge
Shared knowledge is the knowledge that speakers have in common. The type
of shared knowledge required in every day chatting is, of course, far less specific
than the type required in a conversation about a specialized subject.
H. Reference
Rahman, A.Qashas. 2006. Turn-taking mechanism and pragmatics in English
conversations. Makassar: Badan Penerbit UNM.