语言学教程Chapter8.LanguageinUse
环球时代胡壮麟语言学课件Chapter 8
b. I bequeath my watch to my brother.(我把手表遗赠给我弟弟。) c. I bet you sixpences it will rain tomorrow. (我用六便士跟你打赌明
天会下雨。)
d. I promise to finish it in time. (我答应按时完成。) e. I apologize. (我道歉。) f. I declare the meeting open. (我宣布会议开始。) g. I warn you that the bull will charge. (我警告你这头公牛会撞人。)
Language in Use 10
Chapter 8
Language in Use
8.1 Speech act theory言语行为理论(by Austin) 8.1.2 illocutionary act行事行为理论(by Austin) Act and locutionary（发话） – utterance meaning of illocutionary（行事）– purpose doing things perlocutionary（取效）– effect
Language in Use 4
Chapter 8
Language in Use
semantic (related to words and sentences) （语义学/固定意义）
Meaning contextual (related to utterances) （语用学/附加意义） 但在文献中，"sentence句子"和"语句"并不总是分 得很清楚的。研究这种意义的学科叫语用学 pragmatics。因为这种意义部分来自语言的使用环 境，语用学也可以被定义为研究语言使用的学科。 那么我们就可以说pragmatics=meaning – semantics (语用学意义=意义 – 语义学意义)。
Chapter 8 Language in Use语言的使用
semantic
pragmatics
1.What Is Pragmatics?
• It is concerned with the study of meaning as communicated by a speaker or writer and interpreted by a listener or reader. • It has, consequently, more to do with the analysis of what people mean by their utterances than what the words or phrases in those utterances might mean by themselves. • A general definition of pragmatics is the study of how speakers of a language use sentences to effect successful communication.
• • • • • •
Prediction analysis: DOG(BARK);BAG(BEING HEAVY) An utterance In a certain situation with a certain purpose Some possible interpretations How to understand the sentences depends on the context in which it is uttered and the purpose for which the speaker utters it.
• 8.3.1 Relevance theory
Chapter8语言学
Chapter8语言学Chapter 8 Language in UseWhat is pragmatics? What’s the difference between pragmatics and semantics?Pragmatics is the study of the use of language in communication, particularly the relationships between sentences and the contexts and situations in which they are used. Pragmatics includes the study of(1) How the interpretation and use of utterances depends on knowledge of the real world;(2) How speakers use and understand speech acts;(3) How the structure of sentences is influenced by the relationship between the speakerand the hearer.Pragmatics is sometimes contrasted with semantics, which deals with meaning without reference to the users and communicative functions of sentences.8.1 Speech act theory8.1.1 Performatives and constatives1. Performative: In speech act theory an utterance which performs an act, suchas Watch out (= a warning).2. Constative: An utterance which asserts something that is either true or force.E.g. Chicago is in the United States.3. Felicity conditions of performatives:(1) There must be a relevant conventional procedure, and the relevantparticipants and circumstances must be appropriate.(2) The procedure must be executed correctly and completely.(3) Very often, the relevant people must have the requisite thoughts, feelingsand intentions, and must follow it up with actions as specified.8.1.2 A theory of the illocutionary act1. What is a speech act?A speech act is an utterance as a functional unit in communication. In speechact theory, utterances have two kinds of meaning.Propositional meaning (locutionary meaning): This is the basic literal meaning of the utterance which is conveyed by the particular words and structureswhich the utterance contains.Illocutionary meaning (illocutionary force): This is the effect the utterance or written text has on the reader or listener. E.g. in I’m thirsty, the propositionalmeaning is what the utterance says about the speaker’s physical state. Theillocutionary force is the effect the speaker wants the utterance to have on thelistener. It may be intended as request for something to drink.A speech act is asentence or utterance which has both propositional meaning and illocutionaryforce.A speech act which is performed indirectly is sometimes known as an indirectspeech act, such as the speech act of the requesting above. Indirect speech acts areoften felt to be more polite ways of performing certain kinds of speech act, such asrequests and refusals.2. Locutionary act: A distinction is made by Austin in the theory of speech actsbetween three different types of acts involved in or caused by the utterance ofa sentence. A locutionary act is the saying of something which is meaningfuland can be understood.3. Illocutionary act: An illocutionary act is using a sentence to perform afunction.4. Perlocutionary act: A perlocutionary act is the results or effects that areproduced by means of saying something.8.2 The theory of conversational implicature8.2.1 The cooperative principle1. The cooperative principle (CP)Cooperative principle refers to the “co-operation” between speakers in using the maxims during the conversation. There are four conversational maxims:(1) The maxim of quantity:a. Make your contribution as informative as required.b. Don’t make your contribution more informative than is required.(2) The maxim of quality: Try to make your contribution one that is true.a. Don’t say what you believe to be false.b. Don’t say that for which you lack adequate evidence.(3) The maxim of relation: Say things that are relevant.(4) The maxim of manner: Be perspicuous.a. Avoid obscurity of expression.b. Avoid ambiguity.c. Be brief.d. Be orderly.2. Conversational implicature: The use of conversational maxims to implymeaning during conversation is called conversational implicature.8.2.2 Violation of the maxims[In fact this is taken from one of my essays. Only for reference. ^_^ - icywarmtea]1. Conversational implicatureIn our daily life, speakers and listeners involved in conversation are generally cooperating with each other. In other words, when people are talking with eachother, they must try to converse smoothly and successfully. In accepting speakers’presuppositions, listeners have to assume that a speaker is not trying to misleadthem. This sense of cooperation is simply one in which people having aconversation are not normally assumed to be trying to confuse, trick, or withholdrelevant information from one another.However, in real communication, the intention of the speaker is often not the literal meaning of what he or she says. The real intention implied in the words iscalled conversational implicature. For example:[1] A: Can you tell me the time?B: Well, the milkman has come.In this little conversation, A is asking B about the time, but B is not answering directly. That indicates that B may also not no the accurate time, but throughsaying “the milkman has come”, he is in fact giving a rough time. T he answer Bgives is related to the literal meaning of the words, but is not merely that. That isoften the case in communication. The theory of conversational implicature is forthe purpose of explaining how listeners infer the speakers’ intention through thewords.2. The CPThe study of conversational implicature starts from Grice (1967), the American philosopher. He thinks, in daily communication, people are observing aset of basic rules of cooperating with each other so as to communicate effectivelythrough conversation. He calls this set of rules the cooperative principle (CP)elaborated in four sub-principles (maxims). That is the cooperative principle.We assume that people are normally going to provide an appropriate amount of information, i.e. they are telling the relevant truth clearly. The cooperativeprinciple given by Grice is an idealized case of communication.However, there are more cases that speakers are not fullyadhering to the principles. But the listener will assume that the speaker is observing the principles“in a deeper degree”. For example:[2] A: Where is Bill?B: There is a yellow car outside Sue’s house.In [2], the speaker B seems to be violating the maxims of quantity and relation, but we also assume that B is still observing the CP and think about the relationshipbetween A’s question and the “yellow car” in B’s answer. If Bill has a yellow car,he may be in Sue’s house.If a speaker violate CP by the principle itself, there is no conversation at all, so there cannot be implicature. Implicature can only be caused by violating one ormore maxims.3. Violation of the CP(1) The people in conversation may violate one or more maxims secretly. Inthis way, he may mislead the listener.For this case, in the conversation [2] above, we assume that B is observing the CP and Bill has a yellow car. But if B is intentionally trying tomislead A to think that Bill is in Sue’s house, we will be misled without knowing. In this case, if one “lies” in conversation, there is no implicature in the conversation, only the misleading.(2) He may declare that he is not observing the maxims or the CP.In this kind of situation, the speaker directly declares he is not cooperating. He has made it clear that he does not want togo on with the conversation, so there is no implicature either.(3) He may fall into a dilemma.For example, for the purpose observing the first principle of the maxim of quantity (make your contribution as informative as is required), he may be violating the second principle of the maxim of quality (do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence).For this case, Grice gave an example:[3] A: Where does C live?B: Somewhere in the south of France.In [3], if B knows that A is going to visit C, his answer is violating the maxim of quantity, because he is not giving enough information about where C lives. But he has not declared that he will not observe the maxims. So we can know that B knows if he gives more information, he will violate the principle “do not say that for which you lack ad equate evidence”. In other words, he has fallen into a “dilemma”. So we can infer that his implicature is that he does not know the exact address of C. In this case, there is conversational implicature.(4) He may “flout” one or more maxims. In other w ord s, he may beobviously not observing them.The last situation is the typical case that can make conversational implicature. Once the participant in a conversation has made an implicature, he or she is making use one of the maxims. We can see that from the following examples:[4] A: Where are you going with the dog?B: To the V-E-T.In [4], the dog is known to be able to recognize the word “vet” and to hate being taken there. Therefore, A makes theword spelled out. Here he is “flouting” the maxim of mann er, making the implicature that he does not want the dog to know the answer to the question just asked.[5] (In a formal get-together)A: Mrs. X is an old bag.B: The weather has been quite delightful this summer, hasn’t it?B is intentionally violating the maxim of relation in [5], implicating thatwhat A has said is too rude and he should change a topic.8.2.3 Characteristics of implicature1. Calculability2. Cancellability / defeasibility3. Non-detachability4. Non-conventionality8.3 Post-Gricean developments8.3.1 Relevance theoryThis theory was formally proposed by Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson in their book Relevance: Communication and Cognition in 1986. They argue that all Griceanmaxims, including the CP itself, should be reduced to a single principle of relevance,which is defined as: Every act of ostensive communication communicates thepresumption of its own optimal relevance.8.3.2 The Q- and R-principlesThese principles were developed by L. Horn in 1984. The Q-principle is intended to i nvoke the first maxim of Grice’s Quantity, and the R-principle the relation maxim,but the new principles are more extensive than the Griceanmaxims.The definition of the Q-principle (hearer-based) is:(1) Make your contribution sufficient (cf. quantity);(2) Say as much as you can (given R).The definition of the R-principle (speaker-based) is:(1) Make your contribution necessary (cf. Relation, Quantity-2, Manner);(2) Say no more than you must (given Q)8.3.3 The Q-, I- and M-principlesThis tripartite model was suggested by S. Levinson mainly in his 1987 paper Pragmatics and the Grammar of Anaphor: A Partial Pragmatic Reduction of Bindingand Control Phenomena. The contents of these principles are: Q-principle:Speaker’s maxim: Do not provide a statemen t that is informationally weaker than your knowledge of the world allows, unless providing a stronger statement wouldcontravene the I-principle.Recipient’s corollary: Take it that the speaker made the strongest statement consistent with what he knows, and therefore that:(1) If the speaker asserted A (W), and form a Horn scale, such that A (S) ||(A (W)), then one can infer K ~ (A (S)), i.e. that the speaker knows that the strongerstatement would be false.(2) If the speaker asserted A (W) and A (W) fails to entail an embedded sentenceQ, which a stronger statement A (S) would entail, and {S, W} form a contrast set, thenone can infer ~ K (Q), i.e. the speaker does not know whether Q obtains or not.I-principleSpeaker’s maxim: the maxim of minimizationSay as little as necessary, i.e. produce the minimal linguistic information sufficient to achieve your communicational ends.Recipient’s corollary: the enrichment ruleAmplify the informational content of the speaker’s utterance, by finding the most specific interpretation, up to what you judge to be the speaker’s m-intended point.M-principleSpeaker’s maxim: Do not use a prolix, obscure or marked expression without reason.Recipient’s corollary: If the speaker used a prolix or marked expression M, he did not mean the same as he would have, had he used the unmarked expression U –specifically he was trying to avoid the stereotypical associations and I-implicatures of U.。
胡壮麟《语言学教程》笔记第8-9章
Chapter 8 Language in Use1. 语义学与语用学的区别1.1 语用学（Pragmatics）Pragmatics is the study of the use of language in communication, particularly the relationships between sentences and the contexts and situations in which they are used.（语用学是研究语言实际运用的学科，集中研究说话人意义、话语意义或语境意义。
）1.2 区别Pragmatics is sometimes contrasted with semantics, which deals with meaning without reference to the users and communicative functions of sentences.（语用学主要研究在特定的语境中说话人所想要表达的意义，语义学研究的句子的字面意义，通常不考虑语境。
）2. 合作原则及其准则（Herbert Paul Grice）2.1. 合作原则(Cooperative Principle)说话人经常在话语中传达着比话语表层更多的信息，听话人也能够明白说话人所要表达的意思。
格莱斯认为一定存在一些管理这些话语产生和理解的机制。
他把这种机制称作合作原则。
2.2. 准则(maxims)数量准则(quantity)①使你的话语如（交谈的当前目的）所要求的那样信息充分。
②不要使你的话语比要求的信息更充分。
质量准则(quality)设法使你的话语真实①不要讲明知是虚假的话②不要说没证据的话关系准则(relation)所谈内容要密切相关方式准则(manner)要清晰。
①避免含糊不清②避免歧义③要简练（避免冗长）④要有序3. 言语行为理论（Speech Act Theory）---John Austin3.1. 施为句&叙事句(Performatives & Constatives)施为句是用来做事的，既不陈述事实，也不描述情况，且不能验证真假；叙事句要么用于陈述，要么用于验证，可以验证真假。
Chapter 8 Language in Use语用学
I promise to love you!
I fire you!
When uttering the above sentences, the speaker is actually doing something, instead of stating or describing something. Besides the conventionalized cases, the idea of performing certain acts while speaking can be broadened to include non-conventional acts such as promising, requesting and suggesting.
do not state a fact or describe a state, and are not verifiable.
Some Examples of Performatives “I do.” “I name this ship Elizabeth.” “I give and bequeath my watch to my
If we divide meaning into two major sides: the side more closely related to the words used, the more constant, inherent side of meaning (which is studied under the heading of semantics) and the side more closely related to the context, the more indeterminate side, or something extra (which is studied under the heading of pragmatics), then we can say pragmatics =meaning-semantics.
chapter8 Language in Use
Semantics and Pragmatics
Semantics: what language means
(sentence meaning)
Pragmatics: what people mean
(speaker’s meaning) （utterance meaning）
Similarity
• The utterance which performs an act is called a performative (行事话语)。
•I name the ship the Queen Elizabeth. •I declare the meeting open. •I resign. •I pronounce you husband and wife.
• Though performatives cannot be true or false, they can be felicitous or infelicitous.
Felicity Conditions
• Felicity Conditions (合适条件) are conditions needed for success or achievement of a performative.
Pragmatics and semantics are both linguistic study of meaning
Difference
• Semantic meaning: the more constant, inherent side of meaning • Pragmatic meaning: the more indeterminate, the more closely related to context • Pragmatic = meaning - semantics
语言学教程胡壮麟(第四版) 第8章
Chapter 8 Language in Use一、Some basic notions in pragmatics(1) 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, and the relationship between the speaker and the hearer, etc. The relevant constraints of the communicative situation that influence language use. For example, my bag is heavy.(2) Pragmatics vs. semanticsSemantics studies the literal meaning of a sentence. (without taking context into consideration) Pragmatics studies the intended meaning of a speaker. (taking context into consideration)(3) Sentence meaning and utterance meaning 句子意义和话语意义二、Speech act theoryThe first major theory in pragmatics, proposed by Austin. It is a theory which analyzes the role of utterances about the behavior of the speaker and the hearer in interpersonal communication. It aims to answer the question “What do we do when using language?” According to this theory, we are performing different kinds of acts when we are speaking.(1) Two types of utterances:① Performatives: sentences that don’t state a fact or describe a state and are not verifiable. It performs an act, including non-conventional acts such as promising, requesting and suggesting. E.g.:“I name this ship Elizabeth.”“I bet you six pounds it will rain tomorrow.”① Constatives: statements that either state or describe and are verifiable.Felicity conditions for performatives to be appropriate:A. (i) there must be a relevant conventional procedure,(①) the relevant participants and circumstances must be appropriate.B. The procedure must be executed(①) correctly and(①) completely.C. The relevant participants must(①) have the requisite thoughts, feelings and intentions, and(①) follow it up with actions as specified.(2) Austin’s new model of speech acts:Austin suggests that a speaker might be performing three acts simultaneously when speaking:①The first one is locutionary act: an act of saying something, that is, an act of making a meaningful utterance. It is an act of making the sentence and it is a description. For example, when someone says”It is cold here”, its locutionary act is the saying of it with its literal meaning the weather is cold here.①The second one is illocutionary act: an act performed in saying something, that is, in saying X, I was doing Y. And it indicates the speakers’ intention. For example, when we say”It is cold here”, its illocutionary act can be a request of the hearer to shut the window.①The third one is perlocutionary act: an act performed as a result of saying something, and the act is not related with the speaker’s intention. For example, “The weather is cold here.” Its perlocutionary act can be the hearer’s shutting the window or his refusal to comply with the request.Of the three acts, what speech act theory most concerned with is the illocutionary act. It trys to explain 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)——— H: That’ the phone. (1)——— W: I’ m in the bathroom. (2)——— H: Okay. (3)This seemingly incoherent conversation goes on successfully because the speakers understand each other’s illocutionary acts:1) Asking his wife to go and answer the phone.2) A refusal to comply with the request; asking her husband to answer the phone instead.3) Accepting the wife’s refusal and accepting her request, meaning “all right, I’ll answer it.”(3) Searle’s classification of illocutionary acts:Searle has made great contribution to the development of the speech act theory. According to Searle, speech act are divided into five general categories. That is, five general types of things we do with language. Each type has a common, general purpose. They are representatives, directives, commsives, expressives, declarations. (阐述类、指令类、承诺类、表达类、宣告类）三､The theory of conversational implicature 会话含义理论The second major theory in pragmatics. Proposed by Grice.In daily communication, people are observing a set of basic rules of cooperating with each other so as to communicate effectively through conversation. He calls this set of rules the cooperative principle elaborated in four maxims.(1) Cooperative principle (CP)In making a conversation, all participants are expected to observe a general principle: Make your conversational contribution such as is 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:1) The maxim of quantity1) Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes of the exchange).2) Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.2) The maxim of qualityTry to make your contribution one that is true.1) Do not say what you believe to be false.2) Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.3) The maxim of relationBe relevant.4) The maxim of mannerBe perspicuous.1) Avoid obscurity of expression.2) Avoid ambiguity.3) Be brief.4) Be orderly.(2) Conversational implicatureAccording to Grice, it refers to the extra meaning not contained in the utterance, but understandable to the listener. Only when he shares the speakers’ knowledge or he knows why and how, he violates intentionally one of the four maxims of CP.The following provides different circumstances of the violation of CP and its maxims.1) Violation of the maxim of quantityA:When is Lucy’s birthday party?B:Sometimes next month.A:Where is X?B:He’s gone to the library. He said so when he left.2) Violation of the Maxim of qualityHe is made of iron. (Metaphor)Every nice girl loves a sailor.3) Violation of the maxim of relationA: How do you like my painting?B: I’m afraid I don’t have any eye for beauty. A: What time is it?B: The postman has just arrived.4) Violation of the maxim of mannerA: Shall we get something for the kids?B: Yes. But I veto I-C-E-C-R-E-A-M.A:Where is your mother?B: She is either in the room or at the market. (3) Characteristics of implicature(4) Politeness Principle (PP)Leech suggests that CP can’t explain why people are often so indirect in conveying what they mean. Conversational interaction is a social behaviour. Choice of linguistic codes is central in language use. There are social and psychological factors that determined the choice.Besides being cooperative, participants try to be polite. And the speakers consider the matter of face for themself and others. Based on this observation, Leech proposed PP, which contains six maxims.1.Tact 策略Minimize cost to other.Maximize benefit to other.2.Generosity 宽宏Minimize benefit to self.Maximize cost to self.3.Approbation 赞扬Minimize dispraise of other.Maximize praise of other.4.Modesty 谦虚Minimize praise of self.Maximize dispraise of self.5.Agreement 赞同Minimize disagreement between self and other.Maximize agreement between self and other.6.Sympathy 同情Minimize antipathy between self and other.Maximize sympathy between self and other.四、Post-Gricean Developments3.Levinson’s Q- , I- and M- principles。
LanguageinUsePPT课件
7 I’m not very interested in politics. My friends aren’t either. I’m not very interested in politics, nor are my friends.
8 I won’t be doing much tonight. My roommate won’t be doing much either. I won’t be doing much tonight, nor will my roommate.
I’m thinking of going to the lecture on post-colonial literature, and so is Li Ming. 5 I think the facilities in our college have improved over the last few years. In my opinion the teaching has also got better.
Language in Use
4 Translate the sentences into Chinese.
1 On university campuses in Europe, mass socialist or communist movements gave rise to increasingly violent clashes between the establishment and the college students, with their new and passionate commitment to freedom and justice.
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
5
• Sentence meaning: What does X mean? • Utterance meaning: What do you mean
by X?
– Dog! – My bag is heavy. – “Janet! Donkeys!” (David Copperfield)
utterance meaning, & contextual meaning.
3
• Speaker’s meaning
(A father is trying to get his 3year-old daughter to stop lifting up her dress to display her new underwear to the assemble.)
• Performative verbs: name, bet, etc.
13
• I do. • I name this ship Queen
Elizabeth. • I bet you sixpence it will rain
tomorrow. • I give and bequeath my watch to
– Father: We don’t DO that.
– Daughter: I KNOW, Daddy.
dresses.
You don’t WEAR
4
• Utterance Meaning vs. Sentence Meaning
• Utterance vs. Sentence
– Sentence: abstract units of the language system.
Chapter Eight Language in Use
2
1. Definition of Pragmatics
• The study of language in use. • The study of meaning in context. • The study of speakers’ meaning,
– It was a hot Christmas day so we went down to the beach in the afternoon and had a good time swimming and surfinng: the more constant, inherent side of meaning
my brother. • I promise to finish it in time. • I apologize. • I declare the meeting open. • I warn you that the bull will
14
• Felicity conditions: A. (i) There must be a relevant
coffee? B: Coffee would keep me
awake. 3. A: 我带的钱不够，今天买不了。
B: 那就下次再买吧。
10
2. Speech Act Theory
• John Austin (1911-1960) • How to Do Things with
Words (1962) • speech acts: actions
conventional procedure. (ii) the relevant participants and circumstances must be appropriate. B. The procedure must be executed correctly and completely. C. Very often, the relevant people must have the requisite thoughts, feelings and intentions, and must follow it up with actions as specified.
6
• It’s cold in here.
7
• Contextual Meaning: meaning in context
– The meaning of the sentence depends on who the speaker is , who the hearer is, when and where it is used.
15
• Problems with felicity conditions
– I go to the park every Sunday. – I teach English.
12
• Performatives: utterances which are used to perform acts, do not describe or report anything at all; the uttering of the sentence is the doing of an action; they cannot be said to be true or false.
• Pragmatic meaning: the more indeterminate, the more closely related to context
9
1. A: Are you going to the seminar?
B: It’s on linguistics. 2. A: Would you like some
performed via utterances
11
• Constatives vs. performatives • Constatives: utterances which roughly
serves to state a fact, report that something is the case, or describe what something is, eg: