Pragmatics

Question 1

What is pragmatics?

Answer 1

Semantics with context?

Wiki:
Pragmatics is a subfield of linguistics and semiotics that studies the ways in which context contributes to meaning. Pragmatics encompasses speech act theory, conversational implicature, talk in interaction and other approaches to language behavior in philosophy, sociology, linguistics and anthropology.
Unlike semantics, which examines meaning that is conventional or “coded” in a given language, pragmatics studies how the transmission of meaning depends not only on structural and linguistic knowledge (grammar, lexicon, etc.) of the speaker and listener but also on the context of the utterance, any pre-existing knowledge about those involved, the inferred intent of the speaker, and other factors. In that respect, pragmatics explains how language users are able to overcome apparent ambiguity since meaning relies on the manner, place, time, etc. of an utterance.

The ability to understand another speaker’s intended meaning is called pragmatic competence.

Question 2

Type-token-distinction

Answer 2

The type–token distinction is the difference between naming a class (type) of objects and naming the individual instances (tokens) of that class. Since each type may be represented by multiple tokens, there are generally more tokens than types of an object. For example, the sentence “A rose is a rose is a rose” contains three word types, “a”, “rose”, and “is”; and eight word tokens of those types, “a”, “rose”, “is”, “a”, “rose”, “is”, “a”, “rose”. The distinction is important in disciplines such as logic, linguistics, metalogic, typography, and computer programming.

Question 3

What are the differences between semantics and pragmatics?

Answer 3

Semantics vs. Pragmatics:

conventional - situational
compositional meaning - constructed
truth-conditional - non-truth-conditional, intentional
type meaning - token meaning
potential meaning “blueprint” - actual meaning
sentence meaning: what is said - utterance meaning: what is meant
explicit implicit
linguistic knowledge - world and context knowledge
independent of speaker and listener - dependent on speaker, listener, shared knowledge

Question 4

micro-pragmatics

macro-pragmatics

Answer 4

micro-pragmatics:
antisyntactic tendency (pragmatic turn, reaction to structuralism and Chomsky´s
straightjacket, taking up of tradition of cultural anthropology)
philosophical tradition (Austin, Searle, Grice)

macro-pragmatics, widening the perspective:
social-critical tendency
ethno-methodological tradition (→ Discourse Analysis)

Question 5

which kind of meaning (intentions) require situational input (specific situations)

Answer 5

• deictics (personal, time, space, social, manner, discourse: e.g. “me” or “here”)
• irony
• metaphorical language
• vagueness and ambiguity

Question 6

speech act theory (Pragmatics)

Answer 6

https://www.thoughtco.com/speech-act-theory-1691986

Speech act theory is a subfield of pragmatics that studies how words are used not only to present information but also to carry out actions.

The speech act theory was introduced by Oxford philosopher J.L. Austin in How to Do Things With Words and further developed by American philosopher J.R. Searle. It considers the degree to which utterances are said to perform locutionary acts, illocutionary acts, and/or perlocutionary acts.

Question 7

what are the principles of conversation?

Answer 7

communicative principle

conversational principle
- Grice: cooperative principle (effort after meaning)
— content maxims (quality, quantity, relevance)
— form maxim (manner)
— speakers may opt out (e.g. no comment, white lies)
— violate (e.g. for deceptive purposes)
— flout (overtly violate to communicate efficiently
maxims may clash with each other or with politeness principles
—> criticism: too restrictive

politeness principle

• Leech: the principle of politeness;
• hedges, honorifics, leaving options, saving face
• Brown/Levinson´s notion of face: positive and negative face face-threatening acts indirectness as politeness strategy

Question 8

Implicatures (originally coined by Grice)

Answer 8

semantic implicatures = entailment
conventional implicatures = presuposition
conversational implicatures = pragmatic implicatures

Grice: locution (with semantic implicatures)
presupposition (with conventional/general implicatures)
utterance meaning (with conversational/particularized implicatures)

example: (How did you sleep?) The hamster did not stop making noises until 4 am.