Pragmatics (语用学)
---- the study of language in use or language communication; the study of the use of context to make inference about meaning.
---- the study of how speakers of a language use sentences to effect successful communication.
Some basic notions in Pragmatics
Context
Context---- a basic concept in the study of pragmatics. It is generally considered as constituted knowledge shared by the speaker and the hearer, such as cultural background, situation(time, place, manner, etc.), the relationship between the speaker and the hearer, etc.….
Pragmatics vs. semantics
Semantics---- is the study of the literal meaning of a sentence (without taking context into consideration).
Pragmatics---- 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 and the intention of the speaker, say, making a suggestion or giving an invitation…
Sentence meaning vs. utterance meaning
---- Sentence meaning:
Abstract and context-independent meaning;
literal meaning of a sentence;
having a dyadic relation as in: What does X mean?
----utterance meaning:
concrete and context-dependent meaning;
intended meaning of a speaker;
having a triadic relation as in: What did you mean by X?
For example, “The bag is heavy” can mean
a bag being heavy (sentence meaning);
an indirect, polite request, asking the hearer to help him carry the bag;
the speaker is declining someone’s request for help.
Note: The meaning of an utterance is based on the sentence meaning; it is the realization of the abstract meaning of a sentence in a real situation of communication, or simply in a context; utterance meaning is richer than sentence meaning; it is identical with the purpose for which the speaker utters the sentence.
Correctness vs. appropriateness
*“John play golf”---- grammatically incorrect;
?“Golf played John” ---- logically incorrect; but it might be appropriate pragmatically in certain context.
Speech act theory言语行为理论
Speech acts is a term derived from the work of the philosopher J. L. Austin (1962) and now used to refer to a theory which analyzes the role of utterances in relation to the behavior of the speaker and the hearer in interpersonal communication. It aims to answer the question “What do we do when using language?”
Two types of utterances
Constatives (叙述句) ---- statements that either state or describe, and are thus verifiable;
Performatives (施为句) ---- sentences that do not state a fact or describe a state, and are not verifiable.
Note: Sometimes they are easy to get confused, e.g.“It is raining outside” can be a constative, and also a performative, for by uttering such a sentence, we may not only state a fact, but involve in the act of informing someone about the rain.
Some Examples of Performatives
“I do”
“I name this ship Elizabeth.”
“I give and bequeath my watch to my brother.”
“I bet you sixpence it will rain tomorrow.”
“I declare the meeting open.”
A Theory of The Illocutionary Act
行事行为理论
----According to Austin’s new model, a speaker might be performing three acts simultaneously when speaking: locutionary act, illocutionary act and perlocutionary act.
The locutionary act言内行为----an act of saying something, i.e. an act of making a meaningful utterance (literal meaning of an utterance);
The illocutionary act言外行为----an act performed in saying something: in saying X, I was doing Y (the intention of the speaker while speaking).
The perlocutionary act言后行为----an act performed as a result of saying something: by saying X and doing Y, I did Z.
Searle’s classification of speech acts (1969)
Assertives/representatives(陈述)
Directives(指令)
Commissives(承诺)
Expressives(表达)
Declarations(宣布)
Principle of conversation (Paul Grice)
Cooperative principle (CP)---- According to Grice, in making conversation, there is a general principle which all participants are expected to observe. It goes as follows:
Make your conversational contribution such as required at the stage at which it occurs by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged.
Four maxims of CP
The maxim of quality 质量原则
----Do not say what you believe to be false.
----Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.
The maxim of quantity 数量原则
----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 关联原则
----Be relevant ( make your contribution relevant).
The maxim of manner 方式原则
----Avoid obscurity of expression.
----Avoid ambiguity.
----Be brief.
----Be orderly.
Conversational implicature
In real communication, however, speakers do not always observe these maxims strictly. These maxims can be violated for various reasons. When any of the maxims is blantantly violated, i.e. both the speaker and the hearer are aware of the violation, our language becomes indirect, then conversational implicature arises.
Violation of Maxim of quality
----A: Would you like to go movie with me tonight?
----B: The final exam is approaching. I’m afraid I have to prepare for it.
----A: would you like to come to our party tonight?
----B: I’m afraid I’m not feeling so well tonight.
----A: Who was that lady I saw you with last night?
----B: That was no lady, that was my wife.
Violation of maxim of quantity
At a party a young man introduces himself by saying “I’m Robert Sampson from Leeds, 28, unmarried…”
----A:When is Susan’s farewell party?
----B:Sometime next month.
Violation of maxim of relation
----A: How did the math exam go today, Jonnie?
----B: We had a basketball match with class 2 and we beat them.
----A: The hostess is an awful bore.
----B: The roses in the garden are beautiful, aren’t they?
----A: What time is it?
----B: The postman has just arrived.
Violation of maxim of manner
----A: Shall we get something for the kids?
----B: Yes. But I veto I-C-E-C-R-E-A-M.
参考资料：戴炜栋，何兆熊，(2002)，《新编简明英语语言学教程》
本回答被提问者采纳