Appunti modulo teorico inglese III

Introduzione agli appunti

Ciao! Questi appunti si dividono in più parti. La prima parte contiene le slides integrate dalle spiegazioni prese a lezione con la professoressa Zurru, dettagliate, con esempi fatti da lei e con domande possibili all'esame. La seconda parte è la trascrizione (in italiano) di un ricevimento con la prof, dove chiarisce gli argomenti che creano più problemi all'esame. Suggerisco comunque di leggerla dopo aver già studiato.

Consigli sulle dispense

Alcuni consigli su dove trovare alcune parti del programma nelle dispense fornite:

• Propositional, implied, intended, perceived Meaning in context
• Meaning potential
• Situational Context - Contextual variables Pragmatics (5)
• Background knowledge context/ knowledge of the world (KOW) - Encyclopaedic/cultural vs. (inter)personal KOW Teaching (149) Pragmatics (6)
• Co-text Teaching (120) Pragmatics (7)
• Deixis Meaning in L. (401)
• Reduction in explicitness Teaching (147)
• Cohesion vs. coherence Teaching (145)
• Cohesive devices Pragmatics (8)
• Dimensions of lexical meaning Towards (62)
• Value-free vs. Value-loaded words Teaching (139)
• Shannon and Weaver’s adapted model, positivist and structuralist perspectives: communication as a product vs. communication as a process Teaching (141)
• Entailments Teaching (108)
• Presuppositions Meaning in L. (42)
• Assumptions
• Relation between linguistic exponents and communicative functions Teaching (105)
• Speech act theory: explicitness (performativity) vs. implicitness, constative vs. performatives, Searle’s macro-classes Meaning in L. (365) Pragmatics (13)
• Directness vs. Indirectness Teaching (112)
• Felicity conditions (Austin) Meaning in L. (376) Towards 7320
• Preparatory/essential/sincerity conditions (Searle) Meaning in L. (376) Teaching (158)
• Macro-functions of talk: transactional vs. interactional
• Appropriacy to Context Teaching (128)
• Conversation analysis: turn-taking, transition relevance place (TRP), adjacency pairs, sequences, attributable vs. non-attributable silence, interruptions vs. overlaps. Pragmatics (2 5-49)
• Conventional vs. Conversational implicatures Teaching (160)
• The Cooperative Principle Meaning (417) Teaching (159) Pragmatics (339)
• Maxims of the Cooperative Principle Teaching (159)
• Politeness: Brown and Levinson vs. Leech’s Politeness Principle Meaning (426) Teaching in fondo Pragmatics (43)
• Relevance: Sperber and Wilson Meaning in L. (433) Pragmatics (41)

NB: Questo programma è del 2019/2020, ma come si può notare gli argomenti e le dispense sono gli stessi. In bocca al lupo!

English theoretical module III 2019/2020

Pragmatics and discourse

How communication works? You can speak for a long time without communicate, and we can communicate even without speaking. The communication, is the interaction: we are involved on 50% of the process. There are very specific forms of communication:

• Jokes
• Riddles
• Politicians (skillful communicators)
• Silent
• Films (horror, thriller..)
• Facial expressions
• The way we dress..

Language and linguistics are umbrella terms which include more smaller terms and definitions, or specific discipline/branches which are included and which study specific arguments. We can think language as a pyramid:

• Pragmatics
• Communication
• Semantics/Syntax Propositional meaning and structure of sentences
• Phonetics/Phonology Graphemes, phonemes, sounds

Propositional meaning the literal meaning of a preposition (es: This is a computer); is stable even if you use it in a different way.

Communication The interest of different studies (marketing, politics..)

Linguistic competence vs. communicative competence

≠ Linguistic competence Communicative competence

• Linguistic competence → phonology, graphology, syntax..
• Communicative competence → Knowledge of the strategies to use the language as a means of communication, cooperation, politeness, appropriateness, relevance.

The underlying ideas in pragmatics are very difficult.

• Implicit grammar knowledge (Laura li ha letti)
• Explicit grammar knowledge (Laura ha letto dei libri)
• Implicit communicative competence (Do you like my dress? I like the → c’è tutto un processo che bisogna spiegare) colour
• Explicit communicative competence (Do you..dress? Yes)

This word alone doesn’t exist, because we have different Meaning types of various meanings

• Propositional meaning (To take literally, for example the riddle have to be taken literally to solve it. This meaning always exists)
• Figurative meaning (Absence of literal meaning, implied meaning beyond, figurative meaning, ex. I’m so hungry I could eat →a horse exaggeration)

“I like the colour” → is not figurative, like a metaphor, and includes a shift between propositional and intended meaning because:

Takes into account the fact that speakers often imply more than what Pragmatics they say, focuses on the relationship between Language, Meaning and Context. Are called like this because the people which are Dead languages (Greek, Latin) able to use them as a means of communication (functional meaning) are dead. Meaning doesn’t exist until we create it or decode it.

• The smallest Sentence unit of analysis in syntax (frase)
• Sintagma Phrase
• Proposizione Clause

Difference between sentence and utterance

A unit of syntax made up with a sequence of words that realizes the function of subject, predicate and object.

• In written communication → inizia con una maiuscola e finisce con un punto finale (full stop), quindi una pausa
• In spoken communication → When there are pauses between one sentence and another → Everything Utterance which is included between 2 pauses (if we stop for few moments while we are speaking there will be 2 utterances); nothing to do with graphology or grammatical; no need to be face to face; no need to be a sentence or to be grammatically correct.

‘Pizza quando diciamo “Ah-a” intendendo (ad es. tonight?’ Oppure per esempio al telefono ‘ti sto ascoltando’: imply something beyond) Utterance can be also → a silence, non-verbal communication (gestural), facial communication.

Difference between word and term

• Specialized language (like doctor, lawyer..) made up by all the Terminology lexems which are used in a specialized language rely to a specialized area to identify one to one the concepts (ad es. Mal di testa emicrania)

Pragmatics has its terminology. Pragmatics is the relation between:

• Meaning (so far) examples of types
  • Propositional meaning
  • Figurative meaning
  • Implied meaning
  • Intended meaning
  • Perceived meaning
• Language
• Context (not easy to define) place, time, people, language, age, nationality
  • Situation made up of
  • Without the context we cannot understand ANY communicative text (there are exceptions like riddles)
  • Anything which is related and influences the communicative meaning in any way, what turns language into a means of communication: without context language is only a code.
  • Like in literature: Jane Austen was revolutionary putting her in the context of her time. Another example: lesson → context of educational university system.

Example: only 2% of the times there is A: Door! only a propositional meaning (come se stessimo facendo una lista di oggetti ad esempio), most of the times there is another meaning beyond, but there are a lot of interpretations if we build the right context.

• A: Door! (Intended meaning: Go open the door)
• B: I’m in the bath! (vasca) (Intended meaning: I can’t open the door)
• A: Ok. (Intended meaning: Then I will go)

Meaning in context and social word which influences the context; is not implied in the language but are things we already know.

• Physical and social world: Bilocation doesn’t exist
• Not socially acceptable to open the door wearing a towel

Socio-psychological factors influencing communication

• “I can’t open the door like this”
• “I’m relaxing, I’m not moving”
• Time I’m doing something else
• Place Home (can’t be a gym because there is a bath)
• A shared apartment? (They know each other language informal having a situation → bath confidential)

We start from the propositional meaning, put it in a context and understand the intended meaning.

How pragmatics explain all of this?

Speaker’s meaning → based on assumptions of knowledge hypothesis based on:

1. Factual evidence or on previous knowledge shared by both speaker and hearer; is a message which has an intended meaning which very often is implied (but not always).
2. The hearer interprets the message and decodes its implied meaning if any (otherwise misunderstanding take place).
3. Their decoding of the message leads them to formulate further assumptions and test them through their own utterances, and so on and so forth.

Contextual underlying intended/implied utterance elements assumptions

(I’m not going this “Go open the door" “Door!” *Knock at the door* time)

Cohesion vs. coherence

• Cohesion grammatical and lexical unity of the text; the way the text makes links with and within itself. It is the way the context hangs together.
• Coherence it is in the meaning, the content of the text: there has to be a logical progression in its meaning; the text needs to show unity of meaning and thematic and logical procession to be considered coherent.
• A text can be cohesive (linked by grammatical units) and not coherent.
• Language making links with itself, making its grammatical and lexical relationship explicit → verbal signs present in the text (conjunctions..)

Referring expression/referent

Reference → To point to an entity Deixis → they refer to. (Person deixis, place deixis, time deixis)

Context outside, exophora

• The first mention of the Exophoric reference → referent
• Refers to entities which have been mentioned in a previous Intertextuality conversation or text

Context inside, cohesion

• Grammatical cohesion
  • (Endophoric) Reference (Endophora)
    • Anaphora
    • Cataphora → Presuppositional pool
    • Associative Endophora
  • Substitution (tend to be endophoric)
  • Ellipsis
• Lexical cohesion
  • Repetition
  • Synonyms
  • Superordinates
  • General words

Referring expressions

• Reference I went with Francesca and David.
• Deixis Person They were like this.
• Deixis Place They were like this.
• Deixis Time Next day, now look, the picture shows.

Cohesion grammatical

• Reference Exophora I went with Francesca and David.
• Endophora
  • Anaphora My sister made a cake. She…
  • Cataphora >>> They’re coming: your relatives will be here for…
  • Associative Endophora Youtube is a popular video sharing website..
• Substitution Boy are not born more confident than (endophoric) girls. Society makes them so because…
• Ellipsis “He’s afraid you’re going to die of pneumonia” “I will, too..” (die of pneumonia)

Lexical cohesion

• Repetition It was chrysanthemums when I married him, and chrysanthemums when you were born…
• Synonyms When 80 mice escaped… ….The rodents had escaped from…
• Superordinates Flowers = Tulips, roses…
• General words Thing, stuff, place, person, woman.

Conditions for each macro-class of illocutionary forces and Austin’s conditions

There is quite no difference between Searle

What are the conditions for each macro class?

Searle’s macro-classes of illocutionary forces (and related performative verbs)

1. Declarations: expressions which change the world by their very utterance (I declare, I resign, etc.)
2. Representatives (Assertives): state what the speaker believes to be the case, what s/he thinks it’s true (describe, state, hypothesize etc.)
3. Commissives: commit the speaker to future action (promise, vow, volunteer etc.)
4. Directives: aimed at making the hearer do something (command, request, forbid etc.)
5. Expressives: state what the speaker feels (apologize, regret etc.)

Example: I apologize, I regret, I’m sorry, I want help, I need help.

Modality

Depends on the modal verb

Shall: Deontic, non-epistemic usually

Preparatory/essential/sincerity conditions (Searle)

1. Preparatory conditions → they “prepare the ground” for the speech act to take place; if they not hold, the act has not been carried out, it is null and void → (Austin’s condition 1; declaratives/directives are “prepared” by authority; commissives are “prepared” by the ability to perform the act predicated in the propositional content of the act)
2. Essential conditions (e. g. to speak the same language, role relationship recognized, etc.), which constitute an integral part of the speech act (viz. You cannot change the context without changing these conditions as well) → (Austin’s condition 2; if not respected, the act has not been carried out)
3. Sincerity conditions (one must have the intention to be truthful) → (Austin’s condition 3) → the communicative exchange will be successful/felicitous → the hearer will be able to understand the illocutionary force (implied intended meaning) and not only the illocutionary act (propositional meaning)

Speakers will be able to employ indirect speech acts and hearer will understand the Intended illocutionary force of utterances, so that they can perform the Intended perlocutionary effect.

Directive vs. commissive

S= Speaker H= Hearer A= Act

Typical exercise at the exam

What are the conditions by Searle or Austin in this situations? (You have to make a distinction between them; you can use one or other, but they are not the same!)

In which case we have directness and in which we don’t? Why?

Esempi

EX 1:

A: I love you so much!

B: Aww, sweetheart, I love you, too.

EX 2:

A: Here, I brought you pie.

B: I love you so much!

Fare l’analisi step by step. Perché il contest è differente? Chiarificare il contesto prima di tutto!

1: The utterance is used by the speaker, they are probably in a relationship. The illocutionary force is used to express love. There is directness: is saying love, and expresses love too.

2: The utterance is used by the hearer. The usual reply would be “Thanks”. Is hyperbolic, an exaggeration (like “Marry me!”). The illocutionary force is used to express gratitude or appreciation, which is different from expressing love. There isn’t directness: is saying love, but expresses something else.

Locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts

EX 1: (English 3rd year theoretical module) Prof. Zurru: Good morning, let’s start.

• Locutionary act= suggestion
• Locutionary form= command order/command (“fall silent and start paying attention”)
• Perlocutionary effect= non-verbal reaction: students fall silent and start paying attention

EX 2: (English 3rd year theoretical module) Prof. Broccias: Good morning, let’s start.

Perlocutionary effect would be different: at least one of the students would ask what’s going on.

1. Prof. Zurru: Can you please be quiet?
2. Prof. Zurru: Jump out of the window!

Has not the right to be performed, but with a different context it does:

3. Fire-fighter (during a wildfire): Jump out of the window!

How do we communicate if we say Z and we mean Y?

• Therefore, felicity (preparatory/essential/sincerity) conditions represent one of the answers, together with presuppositions, modern pragmatics gives to this question.
• Both felicity/preparatory/essential/sincerity conditions and presuppositions have non-linguistic and communicative significance and constitute part of the background knowledge which can be relied on to grasp the intended meaning of an utterance.
• Furthermore, they create Expectations, which we constant