Pragmatics( 2 hours )Teaching aims: enable the students to have a better understanding of pragmatics and its two important theories.Focal points: Speech act theory, the theory of conversational implicatureTeaching difficulties: Speech act theory, the cooperative principle and its four maximsTeaching procedures1.An introduction to pragmaticsPragmatics is a comparatively new branch of study in the area of linguistics. It developed in the 1960s and 1970s.Morris first proposed the word “pragmatics” in his “Foundations of the Theory of Signs”. He said that the study of semiotics includes three parts: syntax (sign---sign); semantics (sign---word); pragmatics (sign---its user).1977 Journal of Pragmatics published in Holland signified the start of pragmatics. Some basic notions in Pragmatics1.1Pragmatics vs. SemanticsSemantics: which refers to the study of the literal meaning of a sentence ( without taking context into consideration ).Pragmatics: which refers to the study of the intended meaning of a speaker ( taking context into consideration ), e.g. “Today is Sunday”, semantically, it means that today is the first day of the week; pragmatically, you can mean a lot by saying this, all depending on the context on the context and the intention of the speaker, say, makinga suggestion or giving an invitation…1.2Sentence meaning vs. utterance meaningSentence meaning:Abstract and context-independent meaning;Literal meaning of a sentence;Utterance meaning:Concrete and context-dependent meaning;Intended meaning of a speaker;For example, “The bag is heavy” can mean:⑴a bag being heavy (sentence meaning);⑵an direct, polite request, asking the hearer to help him carry the bag.2. Speech act theoryA theory about language used to do things.The theory origin ated with British philosopher John Austin in the 50’s of the 20th century and developed by J. R. Searle. According to this theory, we are performing various kinds of acts when we are speaking, thus linguistic communication is composed of a succession of acts.2.1. Two types of utterancesPerformatives (施为句): In speech act theory proposed by John Austin, it’s an utterance which performs an acts, such asI name this ship Titanic.I declare the meeting open.I warn you to leave away (suggestion)Constatives（叙述句）：statements that either state or describe, and are thus verifiable, for example, “The cat is in the room”.Later, Austin realized that such distinction is not scientific, because all sentences can be used to do things, “saying is performing”.In some senses, constatives are also performatives. e.g.The cat is on the mat. ( implicit performatives)I tell you that the cat is on the mat. (explicit performatives)I’ll be there at two o’clock. (implicit performatives)I promise to be t here at two o’clock. (explicit performatives)2.2. Austin’s new mode l of speech actsA ccording to Austin’s new model, a speaker might be performing three acts simultaneously when speaking: locutionary act, illocutionary act and perlocutionary act.Locutionary act: the act of saying something, which is meaningful and can be understood (literal meaning of an utterance);Illocutionary act: an act performed in something: in saying X, I was doing Y (the intention of the speaker while speaking);Perlocutionary act: an act performed as a result of saying something: by saying X and doing Y, I did Z.For example, “It is cold in here.”Its locutionary act is the saying of it with its literal meaning the weather is cold in here;Its illocutionary act can be a request of the hearer to close the window;Its perlocutionary act can be the hearer’s closing the window or his refusal to comply with the request.Note: Of the three acts, what speech act theory is most concerned with is the illocutionary act. It attempts to account for the ways by which speakers can mean more than what they say.Analyze the illocutionary acts of the following conversation between a couple:---- (the telephone rings)---- Husband: That’s the phone. (1)---- Wife: I’m in the bathroom. (2)---- Husband: Okay. (3)This seemingly incoherent conversation goes on successful because the speakers understand each other’s illocutionary acts:(1)Making a request of his wife’s to go and answer the phone.(2)A refusal to comply with the request; issuing a request of her husband toanswer the phone instead.(3)Accepting the wife’s refusal and accepting her request, meaning “all right, I’llanswer it.”2.3. Searle’s classification of speech actsSpeech acts theory aroused great interest among scholars in the 1960’s and 1970’s. One of those who made notable contribution to it is the American philosopher linguistJohn Searle. He made classification of illocutionary acts. According to Searle, speech acts fall into five general categories.(1)Representatives(陈述): stating or describing, saying what the speaker believes tobe trueThe film is moving.I have never seen the man before.(2) Directives（指令）: trying to get the hearer to do something,You’d better go to the clinic.Open the window!（3）Commisives （承诺）: committing the speaker himself to some future course of action.I promise to come here at 7:00（4）Expressives（表达）: expressing feelings or attitude towards an existing state. It’s very kind of you to help me.I’m sorry for the mess I have made（5）Declarations（宣布）: bring about immediate changes by saying something.I appoint you monitor of the class.I now declare the meeting openNote: All the acts that belong to the same category share the same purpose but differ in their force or strength. e.g.Close the doorWill you close the doorDo you mind closing the door?I would be very grateful if you couldClose the door!The door is open!The door please!Whatever act we perform with language can be categorized into one of these 5 kinds.3. The theory of conversational implicatureAs the objective of pragmatic study is to explain how language is used to effectsuccessful communication, conversation, as the most common and natural form of communication, has drawn the attention of many scholars.The theory was proposed by another Oxford philosopher H. P. Grice. in his lectures under the title of “Logic and conversation”.3.1. The cooperative principle (CP )Grice noticed that in daily conversation people do not usually say things directly but turn tend to imply th em. He coined the term “implicature” to refer to such implied meaning. And he explored the question how people manage to convey implicature, which is not explicitly expressed.According to Grice, in making conversation, the participant must first of all be willing to cooperate; otherwise, it would not be possible for them to carry on the task. These general principle is called the cooperative Principle, abbreviated as cp.Four maxims of CPThe maxim of quality---- Do not say what you believe to be false.---- Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.The maxim of quantity---- Make your contribution as informative as required for the current purpose of the exchange.---- Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.The maxim of relation---- Be relevant.The maxim of manner---- Avoid obscurity of expression.----Avoid ambiguity.---- Be brief.---- Be orderly.3.2. Conversational implicature“Conversational implicature”, according to Paul Grice, refers to the extra meaning n ot contained in the utterance, understandable to the listener only when he shares thespeaker’s knowledge or knows why and how he violates intentionally one of the four maxims of the CP.3.3. Violation of the maximsa. Violation of maxim of qualitye.g. Paul is made of iron. ( metaphor )[Paul has some properties similar to those of iron.]--Would you like to come to our party tonight?--I’m afraid I’m not feeling so well tonight.b. Violation of maxim of quantity--when is Susan’s farewell party?--sometime next month--we’ll all miss Bill and Agatha, won’t we?--well, we’ll all miss BILL.c. Violation of maxim of relation--How do you like my painting?--I don’t have an eye for beauty, I’m afraid-- The hostess is an awful bore.-- The roses in the garden are beautiful, aren’t they?d. Violation of maxim of manner--Shall we get something for the kids?-- Yes. But I veto I-C-E-C-R-E-A-M.4. Relevance theoryAn assumption is relevant in a context if it has some contextual effect in that context The three types of contextual effecta. Contextual implication(1) A: Could you have a quick look at my printer––it’s not working right.B: I have got an appointment at eleven o’clock.(2) a. There are only five minutes until eleven o’clock.b. The printer problem is not an obvious one, but will require opening it up.c. Opening the printer will take more than five minutes.(3) A is not able to have a look at the printer now.b. Strengthening/confirmation of contextual assumption(4) A: I have a hunch that Gill is looking for a new job.B: Yeah, she is studying job ads whenever she’s got a spare minute.(5) Someone reading job ads is probably looking for a new job.c. Elimination of a previously held assumption(6) A: We have to call another meeting. I don’t think that Christine is going to come, so we’ll be one person short of a quorum.B: No need for cancellation, I see Christine just coming up the drive.Questions and Exercises 2, 3, 5, 6AssignmentQuestions and Exercises 2, 3, 5, 6Self-study guideFurther readingLeech, G. N. (1983) Principles of Pragmatics. London: LongmanDai Wei-dong (2002) A New Concise Course on Linguistics for Students of English。