Pragmatics and Discourse

INTENDED MEANING

Direct speech acts → intended meaning is the same as GF/CF , and it's not implied .

Indirect speech acts → intended meaning is different from GF , but the same as CF , so it is implied.

HOW DO WE COMMUNICATE IF WE SAY Z AND MEAN Y ????

In general terms we tend to use indirect speech acts , we tend to be reduced in explicitness . ( 95% of cases we are

indirect ) . Indirectness is what the speaker goes for.

Why does my hearer understand what I mean instead what I say ?

–

The Austin's approach is very philosophical . This is the way he answers to the previous question :

1) a) there must be a conventional procedure having a conventional effect

b) the circumstances and persons must be appropriated as specified in the procedure .

2) the procedure must be executed CORRECTLY and COMPLETELY .

3) Often a) the persons must have the requisite thoughts , feelings and intentions , as specified in the procedure

b) and if consequent conduct is specified , these relevant parties must do so .

IF WE DON'T RESPECT 1 and 2 we have MISFIRES → the act is null and void

“ “ “ “ 3 we have ABUSES

IF THE CONDITIONS ARE RESPECTED , THE COMMUNICATIVE EXCHANGE IS FELICITOUS . These are

conditions we need to satisfy even before the conversation takes place .A conversation among friend and an university

lecturer are DIFFERENT PROCEDURES .

The conditions pointed out by Austin are the felicity conditions . Felicity → I say A , I mean B and my hearer

understands B . These conditions don't apply only to conventional procedures , in fact, they apply to every speech act ,

they apply to everyday communication .

MISFIRES → we do not talk about abuses because there was no intention , the act is null and void so there is no effect (

as it has never been uttered) ( example : A teacher declares husband and wife two lovers . His words won't have any

concrete effect .

ABUSES → there is the intention ( when you are lying for example). Abuses are very difficult to detect and it is more

and more difficult if it is linked to the condition 3b).

SEARLE : PREPARATORY / ESSENTIAL/ SINCERITY CONDITIONS .

( N.b We are talking about verbal communication )

1) Preparatory conditions : if they do not hold , the act has not been carried out , it is null and void ( as Austin's

condition 1 said) , , declarative/directives are prepared by “ authority “ , commissives are prepared by the

ability to perform the act predicated in the prepositional content of the act .

2) Essential conditions : ( example : to speak the same language , role relationship recognised etc...) which

constitute an integral part of the speech acts ( you cannot change the context without changing the conditions

as well → ( look at 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 )---> if these conditions

are not applied we are communicating , but you are abusing your hearer .

If these conditions are respected , the communicative exchange will be successful . This model is intended to classify

Austin's one in much easier words . Austin's felicity conditions work in the same way than Searle's ones which are

easier to memorise .

These conditions ( Searle 1969 ) apply to every speech act and they are the basis of the communicative exchange , they

allow the exchange to take place .

( Forgetting something about our job is considered an abuse , because it is linked to consequent conduct ).

In a successful communicative exchange Speakers will be able to employ indirect speech acts and hearers will

understand the intended illocutionary force of the utterances, so that they can perform the intended perlocutionary effect

. Example : When our Teacher of English says to us “ Good morning , let's start !” and we are in a university lecture →

ALL CONDITIONS ARE RESPECTED so :

locutionary act : suggestion

– illocutionary act : order /command ( fall silent and star paying attention )

– perlocutionary effect : students fall silent and start paying attention.

–

If the felicity conditions applies we are not only able to understand what it is said but also the intention of the speaker .

In a successful communicative exchange only those utterances which have a right to be performed ( = the speaker

believes it is possible for the hearer to carry out the action and/or the act is in the hearer's best interest ) will see their

intended perlocutionary effect fulfilled.

Example : rd

context : ENGLISH 3 YEAR THEORETICAL MODUL . The teacher says:

Can you please be quiet ? OK !

– Jump out of the window ! THE TEACHER DOESN'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO SAY THIS , a fire-fighter

– would have the right to say this utterance in case of a wildfire .

The fire-fighter have the right to say this so the felicity conditions are fulfilled . ( Appropriate person to

– appropriate situation and the perlocutionary effect is fulfilled).

N.B felicity conditions → look at the definition of pragmatics made by Levinson 1985,cup, Cambridge

Therefore, felicity/preparatory conditions represent one of the answers , together with the presuppositions , modern

pragmatics gives to the question : How do we communicate if we say Z and we mean Y ?

Both felicity/prepratory conditions and presuppositions have non-linguistic and communicative significance and

constitute part of the background knowledge which can be relied on to the ?????grace?????? the intended meaning of

an utterance .

Example :

( A to B ) Have you stopped robbing banks ? → presuppositions : B used to rob banks

– Furthermore , they create expectations , which we constantly rely on when communicating ( or living, in

general) .

Violation of expectations is what , more than many other communicative devices , creates a “ striking effect “

( humour , fear, terror ) .

example : LOVE ME …........................MY BOYFRIEND IS OUT OF TOWN → we have an expectation which is

betrayed .

THE SOCIAL DIMENSION (1)

The use of speech acts vary according to social factors :

indirectness is a sign of politeness in many languages/cultures : directives are more often expressed as

– interrogatives than imperatives. Example : Could you please open the window ?--> The addition of please

marks the illocutionary force of the utterance as directive , even though the literal meaning of the rest of the

sentence is not directive . In English to be polite /polait/ it is used the interrogative form instead of the

imperative one . If we take please out , it is not clear whether the speaker is enquiring about to open or not the

window.

SOCIAL DIMENSION (2)

Indirectness is also used on account of formality of the context or social distance ( lack of familiarity , differences of

status , age,grades, education , occupation... ) . Those who are in a more powerful social position (can) use directness ,

while those who are in a less powerful social position tend to use indirectness .

Indirectness is also use because it allows for REPARATION ,example : an indirect accusation can always be repaired

,You can always repair the illocutionary force . We can repair what we have intended .

THE CULTURAL DIMENSION

The way of expressing speech acts is highly culture-bound.

Example :

“ HOW FAT YOU ARE ! “ → in India its illocutionary force is praising and congratulating . In Britain the illocutionary

force is deploring and criticising .

There are different ways of starting a communication according to the country we are analysing , in Britain a typical

utterance used in order to start a conversation is “ Hi, a bit cold today eh ? “ , this happens also in italy where people

usually talk about weather when they want to start talking to someone . However , in other countries such as Hong

Kong people ask “ Hi, have you had lunch ? “ when they want to get in touch with somebody .

MACRO- FUNCTIONS

Furthermore (inoltre), it should be noticed that over and above speech acts , Brown and Yule (1983) classify two macro-

function of talk :

1) TRANSACTIONAL : expression of content and transmission of factual information ( the extreme pole is

giving instructions to somebody in the street )

2) INTERACTIONAL : expression of social relations and personal attitudes , meant to show solidarity and

maintain social cohesion ( the extreme pole is phatic communion → at the bus stop “ My goodness , it's cold! “

→ language with no information content used purely to establish/ keep channels of communication open )

Most talk has a mixture of the two functions , although everyday human interaction is primarily interpersonal rather

than transactional . An example of “ phatic “ is when you are on the phone and your answer in “ PRONTO “ .

Utterances at the extreme pole of both macro-functions might be difficult to classify as speech acts .

FILLERS/ BACK CHANNELS

The utterance falling under the categories of fillers/back channels cannot be easily classified as speech acts .

FILLERS : “ They can go “ “you know “ → they have an interactional socially cohesive function = avoid silence so that

every speaker feels comfortable .

BACK CHANNELS : “ Was it ?” “ Oh really ? “ “ Uhm, Uhm “ → they also have an interactional , social function :

they show that the hearer is listening and encouraging the speaker to continue talking .

SEARLE'S CONCLUSION ABOUT SPEECH ACTS :

To be more specific , the apparatus necessary to explain the indirect part of indirect speech acts includes :

1) a theory of speech acts

2) certain general principles of cooperative conversation / MANCA DEL TESTO/

3) mutually shared factual background information of the speaker and the hearer → felicity condition 1 b) → the

circumstances and people must be apprpriate as specified in the procedure

examples :

Can you open the window please ? INDIRECT

– Can you play the guitar ? DIRECT

–

in the case of - can I open the window ? - Could I open the window ? - Do you mind if I open the window ? → 1

COMMUNICATIVE FUNCTION and 2 LE s .

APPROPRIACY TO CONTEXT

Prescriptive grammar and communicative use of language may differ ( can is used to express ability/permission or a

favour/command)

Different linguistic selections are to be used in different contexts ( can 75% formal, could 90% formal ) so that speakers

do not run the risk of being too formal or too informal . Also being too formal could be inappropriate in some contexts .

Indeed we acquire knowledge of and perceive sentences not only as grammatically correct , but also as appropriate and

inappropriate . In this light Hymes pointed out in 1971 that the ability to distinguish between what is appropriate or not

constitutes part of the COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE of speakers , which is to be distinguished from the

linguistic competence .

We need to remember that L