chapter8 language in use exercises - 答案
凤凰职教第二册unit8 language in use
例：write (vt) rise (vi)主动语态被动语态现在分词过去分词
时态
现在时writingbeing written rising risen
完成时having written having been written having risen
二、
1.分词作定语
（1）分词前置
课 堂 教 学 安 排
注意：选择现在分词还是过去分词，关键看主句的主语。如分词的动作是主句的主语发出，分词就选用现在分词，反之就用过去分词。
(Being) used for a long time, the book looks old.
由于用了很长时间，这本书看上去很旧。
Using the book, I find it useful.
时态
现在时 writing being written rising risen
完成时 having written having been written having risen
课 堂 教 学 安 排
教学过程
主要教学内容及步骤
Step1
Phonetics
Step2
Grammar
A Phonetics: Rhythm
1. Listen and read the following sentences.
2. Mark the stressed syllables on the following sentences and then read them.
B. Grammar: Participles
一、
1.分词的性质：具有形容词性质，可以在句中担任表语、定语、宾补、状语，现在分词表示主动，且动作在进行;过去分词表示被动，或动作已完成。
Chapter 8 language in use
Chapter 8 language in use“A policeman is coming.” : The meaning of the words + structural meaningA description of something in realityA warningThe second type of meaning is sometimes referred to as speaker’s meaning, utterance meaning or contextual meaning, and the discipline that concentrates on this type of meaning is called pragmatics = meaning - semantics.Speech act theory(重点)This is the first major theory in the study of language in use. It originated with the Oxford philosopher Austin and presented in How to Do Things with Words.Performatives（言语行为句）and constatives（表述句）Austin classifies sentences in two categories: performatives and constatives. Performatives do not describe things. They can not be said to be true or false. Uttering them is, or is a part of, doing an action, e.g.I name this ship Queen Elizabeth.I apologize.I declare the meeting open.I sentence you ten years of imprisonment。
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
Chapter 8 Language in Use
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 speaker and 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, such as 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 relevant participants 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, feelings and 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 speech act 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 structures which 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 propositional meaning is what the utterance says about the speaker’s physical state. The illocutionary force is the effect the speaker wants the utterance to have on the listener. It may be intended as request for something to drink. A speech act is a sentence or utterance which has both propositional meaning and illocutionary force.A speech act which is performed indirectly is sometimes known as an indirect speech act, such as the speech act of the requesting above. Indirect speech acts are often felt to be more polite ways of performing certain kinds of speech act, such as requests and refusals.2. Locutionary act: A distinction is made by Austin in the theory of speech acts between three different types of acts involved in or caused by the utterance of a sentence. A locutionary act is the saying of something which is meaningful and canbe understood.3. Illocutionary act: An illocutionary act is using a sentence to perform a function.4. Perlocutionary act: A perlocutionary act is the results or effects that are produced 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 imply meaning during conversation is called conversational implicature.8.2.2 Violation of the maxims1. 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 each other, they must try to converse smoothly and successfully. In accepting speakers’ presuppositions, listeners have to assume that a speaker is not trying to mislead them. This sense of cooperation is simply one in which people having a conversation are not normally assumed to be trying to confuse, trick, or withhold relevant 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 is called 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 through saying “the milkman has come”, he is in fact giving a rough time. The answer B gives is related to the literal meaning of the words, but is not merely that. That is often the case in communication. The theory of conversational implicature is for the 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 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 (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 cooperative principle given by Grice is an idealized case of communication.However, there are more cases that speakers are not fully adhering 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 relationship between 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 or more maxims.3. Violation of the CP(1) The people in conversation may violate one or more maxims secretly. In this 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 to mislead 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 to go 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. Buthe 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 adequate 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 ofC. In this case, there is conversational implicature.(4) He may “flout” one or more maxims. In other words, he may be obviously 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 the word spelled out. Here he is “flouting” the maxim of manner, 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 that whatA 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 Gricean maxims, including the CP itself, should be reduced to a single principle of relevance, which is defined as: Every act of ostensive communication communicates the presumption 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 invoke the first maxim of Grice’s Quantity, and the R-principle the relation maxim, but the new principles are more extensive than the Gricean maxims.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 Binding and Control Phenomena. The contents of these principles are:Q-principle:Speaker’s maxim: Do not provide a statement that is informationally weaker than your knowledge of the world allows, unless providing a stronger statement would contravene 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 <S, W> 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 stronger statement would be false.(2) If the speaker asserted A (W) and A (W) fails to entail an embedded sentence Q, which a stronger statement A (S) would entail, and {S, W} form a contrast set, then one 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.。
Chapter 8 Pragmatics 语用学 语言学教程 胡壮麟.ppt
(c) The room was wanted for a meeting.
பைடு நூலகம்
(2) I can’t work under untidy circumstances.
are acts.
8.1.1 Performatives and constatives Austin (How to Do Things with Words,
1962) Consider these sentences: a) I name this ship Elizabeth. b) I bequeath my watch to my brother. c) I now pronounce you man and wife. d) I bet you sixpence it will rain
A. (i) There must be a relevant conventional procedure, and
(ii) the relevant participants and circumstances must be appropriate.
B. The procedure must be executed (i) correctly and (ii) completely.
Possible contexts:
(a) A request to someone to tidy up the circumstances.
(b) It was an excuse for not wanting to do something there.
语言学教程Chapter8.LanguageinUse
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.
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.
- 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)。
I. Choose the best answer.
1. Pragmatics is generally the study of natural language understanding, and specifically the study of how _____ influences the interpretation of meanings.
A. word
B. context
C. sentence
D. language form
2. Speech Act Theory is the first major theory in the study of language in use, which originated from the Oxford philosopher______.
A. Herbert Paul Grice
B. Dan Sperber
C. Deirdre Wilson
D. John Langshaw Austin
3. The second major theory in pragmatics is the theory of conversational implicature, proposed by Oxford philosopher_____.
A. J. Austin
B. Halliday
C. Herbert Paul Grice
D. Saussure
4. The following maxims are the Cooperative Principles EXCEPT______.
A. Quantity Maxim
B. Quality Maxim
C. Distance Maxim
D. Relation Maxim
5. Which of the following is NOT the characteristic of conversational implicature?___
A. Calculability
B. Cancellability
C. Non-detachability
D. Conventionality
6. The notion of ____is essential to the pragmatic study of language.
A. communication
B. context
C. speech act theory
D. words
7. When a speaker expresses his intention of speaking, such as asking someone to open the window, he is performing_____.
A. an illocutionary act
B. a perlocutionary act
C. a locutionary act
D. none of the above
8. What essentially distinguishes semantics and pragmatics is the notion of _____.
A. reference
B. meaning
C. antonymy
D. context
9. According to the conversation maxim of _____suggested by Grice, one should speak truthfully.
A. quantity
B. quality
C. relevance
D. manner
10. Which of the following is not the principle of Speech Act Theory?
A. illocutionary act
B. locutionary act
C. perlocutionary act
D. prelocutionary act
11. In specifying the manner of CP, Grice mentioned all the following except____.
A. Be relevant
B. avoid ambiguity
C. be brief
D. avoid obscurity of expression
12. The sentence “I veto I-C-E C-R-E-AM-S” violates the maxim of ____.
A. quality
B. quantity
C. manner
D. relation
II. Fill in the blanks.
1. __Perlocutionary____Act refers to the effects on the audience by means of uttering the sentence.
2. According to Austin, though __performatives___ can not be true or false, there are still conditions for them to meet to be appropriate or felicitous.
3. The felicity conditions suggest that there must be a relevant conversational procedure, and the relevant _participants and circumstances____ must be appropriate.
4. The characteristics of implicature can be summarized as __calculability____,_cancellability______,_non-detachability_______,___non-conve ntionality______.
5 .In Austin’s How to do things with word, he first distinguishes performatives and _constatives_____, later on Austin made a flesh start to distinguish __locutionary act___, __illocutionary act____ and perlocutionary act.。