Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1) Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatics
2) Source:
http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsPrag
matics.htm
Pragmatics is the study of the aspects of meaning and language use that are
dependent on the speaker, the addressee and other features of the context
of utterance, such as the following:
• The effect that the following have on the speaker’s choice of expression
and the addressee’s interpretation of an utterance:
o Context of utterance
B. deixis
D. implicature, and
E. the relations of meaning or function between portions of
discourse (see interpropositional relation) or turns of conversation
(see conversation analysis).
• common knowledge
• who is speaking
•I
• You
• Now
• There
• That
• The following
• Tenses
o asserts
o suggests
o demands
o promises, or
o vows.
3) Source: http://www.ling.gu.se/~biljana/st1-97/pragmalect1.html
One main interest of pragmatics is defining the principles for the determination
of intended meaning. This meaning may be transmited verbally or non-verbally.
• deixis • irony
Pragmatic defect:
I hereby play.
Come there!
Metaphoric defect:
Max Svensson is a pig. (and Max is, e.g., really fat, and/or eats too much)
Ironic defect:
Max Svensson is a pig. ( and Max is, e.g., really small and eats almost nothing)
Grammatical defect:
Semantic defect:
The metaphor and the irony cases are one the main concerns of early
pragmatics, cf. Grice nad Searle. From the above cases one may say that the
grammatical defects may not be defects in other languages than English but the
pragmatical defects may be defects in all languages. The semantic defect is also
dependent on the semantic definition of a dress and of the verb of breaking in
the concrete language we are studying. So, here we can see that the purpose of
syntactic analysis is to define what is a well-formed sentence and are there
syntactic forms which are defective in all languages. If we can find that there are
such sentences we may study why are they universally defective, that is, is there
an underlying cognitive reason for these defects. What regards the pragmatic
and semantic defects it is not so clear if they could be explained only
by semantics (if you follow this link, make a search on "meaning theories") or
pragmatics. Thus one needs to settle the definitions of these two aspects of
linguistic structure. Today, with the growth of interest in cognitive linguistics it is
getting more and more typical to consider pragmtics and semantics as
inseparable. The cognitive implication of the chosen definition will be that either
there is a separate cognitive module for analysis of semantic aspects of linguistic
expressions or that this module and the module of pragmatic analysis are one.
Clearly, most theorists agree that syntax and sematics are two separate
cognitive entities.
One may say that there is a continuum of defintions relating sematics and
pragmatics the two extremes of which are:
In the first case, semantics is rigidly defined as the study of meaning in linguistic
expressions, apart from consideration of the effect that pragmatic factors such
as features of the context, conventions of language use, and the goals of the
speaker have on the meaning of language in use (cf. Crystal, 1985:274; Leech,
1983:5-6; Lyons, 1981:136,163-4; Levinson, 1983:5-34). Phenomena such as
implicatures, deixis, speech acts, intentions may be left to pragmatics. In the
second case, there is no rigid distinction between the goals and the tasks of the
two disciplines. Jackendoff's article, which will be discussed in the second part of
the course defends this second view on pragmatics and semantics.
4) Source: http://www.gxnu.edu.cn/Personal/szliu/definition.html
Definition
5) Source: http://grammar.about.com/od/pq/g/pragmaticsterm.htm
A branch of linguistics concerned with the use of language in social contexts and
the ways in which people produce and comprehend meanings through
language.