PRAGMATICS

PRAGMATICSCeciliaF.GenuinoWhatispragmatics?p2AsystematicstudyofmeaningbyvirtueofordependentontheuseoflanguageAfieldofinquirycenteredonimplicature,presupposition,speechactsanddeixisAstudyontherelationofsignstotheirusersandinterpreters(Levinson,1983)PragmaticsasInterdisciplinaryPragmaticsLinguisticsandPhilosophyImplicaturePresuppositionSpeechactsDeixisSociolinguistics,Pcysholinguistics,DiscourseAnalysisFunctionalperspectiveInfluenceofverbalmessagestopeopleBiological,Psychological,SociologicalFunctionsofsignsPhenomenalOverlapsinPragmaticsSociolinguisticsPyscholinguisticsMEANINGNeurolinguiSticsWhypragmatics?1.Theinclusionofpragmaticcomponentcaneffectaradicalsimplificationofothercorecomponents:semanticsandsyntaxinanoveralltheoryoflinguisticability.p7Whypragmatics?2.Pragmaticsprovidescontextualorreal-worldknowledgenecessarytodeterminethespeakerintendedmeaningthroughlinguisticunderdeterminacythesisLinguisticallyencodedmeaningofasentenceunderdeterminesthepropositionexpressedbythespeakerwhenutteringasentenceIllustrationsofLinguisticsUnderdeterminacy1.Youandyou,butnotyou,standup.Analysis:Theuseofdeicticexpression“you”shouldbeaccompaniedbyphysicalbehavior(gestureoreyecontact)requiresextralinguisticphysicalcontextIllustrationsofLinguisticsUnderdeterminacyThesis2.1Theauthoritiesbarredtheanti-globalizationdemonstratorsbecausetheyadvocatedviolence.2.2Theauthoritiesbarredheanti-globalizationdemonstratorsbecausetheyfearedviolenceIllustrationsofLinguisticsUnderdeterminacyThesisLinguisticdisambiguationisneededtodeterminethereferenceoftheanaphoric“they”BackgroundassumptionisnecessaryIllustrationsofLinguisticsUnderdeterminacyThesis3.Johnislookingforhisglasses.3.1glasses=spectacles3.2.glasses=drinkingvesselsIllustrationsofLinguisticsUnderdeterminacyThesis4.Theyarecookingapples.4.1Whataretheydoinginthekitchen?Theyarecookingapples.4.2Whatkindofapplesarethose?Theyarecookingapples.IllustrationsofLinguisticsUnderdeterminacyThesisInsum:Pragmaticsisnecessarytofillthegapcreatedbylinguisticsunderdeterminacy.Pragmaticshastobeincludedasacomponentinanoveralltheoryoflinguisticability.Whypragmatics?3.Pragmaticscaneffectaradicalsimplificationofothercorecomponents–semanticsandsyntax–inanoveralltheoryoflinguisticabilityWhypragmatics?Illustrations1.Johnhashadninegirlfriends.1.1Johnhashadatleastninegirlfriends.1.2Johnhashadexactlyninegirlfriends.Whypragmatics?Semantically,thetwosentencesareambiguousbothlexicallyandlogicallyOccam’srazor/eraser(Ziff,1960)=entitiesarenottobemultipliedbeyondnecessity“nine”isambiguous?Whypragmatics?Pragmatically,obtaintheone-sided,lower-boundreading“atleastninegirlfriends”derivetheone-sided,upper-bounded“atmost”readingusingapragmaticinference,CONVERSATIONALIMPLICATUREWhypragmatics?ConversationalImplicatureThesentenceassertsorentailstheone-sided,lower-boundedreading“atleastninegirlfriends”Conversationallyimplicates,theone-sided,upper-boundedreading“atmostninegirlfriends”Whypragmatics?Theconjunctionoftheassertionandtheimplicature=twosided:upperandlower-boundedreading,exactlyninegirlfriendsWhypragmatics?Simplificationofsyntax1.TwotypesofabstractfeaturesofanaphorsbasedonPrinciplesandParametersTheory(Chomsky)andminimalistsyntax:1.1Anaphor1.2PronominalWhypragmatics?Anaphor=afeaturerepresentationofanNPwhichmustbereferentiallydependentandboundwithinanappropriatelydefinedminimalsyntacticdomainPronominal=afeaturerepresentationofanNPwhichmaybereferentiallydependentbutwhichmustbefreewithinsuchdomainWhypragmatics?FourTypesofNPsontheassumptionthatAnaphorsandPronominalsaretwoindependentbinaryfeatures:1.[+anaphor,-nominal]Overt:lexicalanaphorEmpty:NP-traceWhypragmatics?2.[-anaphor,+pronominal]Overt:PronounEmpty:pro3.[+anaphor,+pronominal]Overt:---Empty:PROWhypragmatics?4.[-anaphor,-pronominal]Overt:nameEmpty:wh-trace/variableWhypragmatics?TypesofEmptyCategories:1.NPTracesSusan’sbrotherwaskilledtintheAsiantsunami.2.PROsJohntriedPROtopasshisdrivingtestonthefirstattemptWhypragmatics?3.wh-traces/variablesWhodoyoulovet?Whypragmatics?TypesofOvertNPs1.LexicalanaphorsThecomposersadmiresthemselves/eachother.2.PronounsHeisItalianenoughtounderstandtheculture,andyetforeignenoughtoseeitspeculiarities.Whypragmatics?3.NamesJonathanSwiftwroteaneighteenth-centurysatirecalledGulliver’stravelWhypragmatics?Anaphors,pronominalsandreferentialexpressionsaresubjecttobindingconditionsA,B,CrespectivelyChomsky’sbindingconditions:A.AnaanaphorisboundinalocaldomainB.ApronominalisfreeinalocaldomainC.Anr-expressionisfreeWhypragmatics?BindingTheoryaccountsforthesyntacticdistributionofthe3typesofovertNP.Binding=anaphoricexpressionsinconfigurationalterms,appealingtopurelystructuralconceptslikec-command,governmentandlocality.Whypragmatics?A.Bachadoredhimself.“himself”isananaphorfallsunderbindingtheoryB.Bachadoredhim.“him”ispronominal;subjecttobindingconditionB.Bcannotbeboundinalocaldomain.thereisdisjointreferencebetweenHIMandBachWhypragmatics?C.BachadoredBachsecond“Bach”isanr-expressionCannotbeco-indexedwithfirstBachbyvirtueofbindingconditionWhypragmati