1.

Pragmatics

1.1. Definition of Pragmatics

Basically pragmatics is the study of speaker meaning as distinct from word or

sentences meaning, or pragmatics is the study of the relationship between word and uses
of the words. By the George`s book, there are some definiton of pragmatcs:

1. Pragmatics is the study of the speaker meaning. ( almost same with general
definiton of pragmataics above). It is means that pragmatics is concerned with the
study of me aning as a communication by the speaker and intrepreted by listener.
For example : if someone asks “ May I have a glass of water?” the listener
intreprets that the speaker is thirsty.
2. Pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning. It is means that pragmatics
involves the interpretation of what people mean in a particular context and how
the context influence what is said for. For example : someone asks you “ How are
you ?” and the second person answered “ Ahhh lovely weather today.” So you
can see it is grammatically correct is correct but doesn`t fit the context and the
situation.
3. Pragmatics is the study of how more gets communicated than is said. It is means
that pragmatics explores how listener can make inferences about what is said in
order to arrive at an interpretation of the speakers intended invisible meaning. For
example if someone asks you “ Please close the window.” The invesible meaning
of the person asking is that the person is freezing or that it is too noisy outside
depending on the situation.
4. Pragmatics is the study of the expression of relative distance. It is determine the
choice between the said and the unsaid. It is means , how close/ distant the
listener is, speakers determine how much needs to be said. Example :
A: There is a store over there ( Let`go inside)
B: No (I don`t want to go inside)
A: Why not ? (Why do you not want to go inside?)
B: I`m tired. ( I don`t want to because I`m tired)

1.2. Speech act

 A speech act is an utterance spoken in an actual communication situation. Speech
acts are realised certain verbs and attemps have been made to classify these according to type of
speech act. John Langsaw Austin begins his treatment by introducing a distinction betweeen
constative and performative verbs. The former are those which describe reality, e.g. rain in It
rained heavily all through the weekend. Such sentences have a truth value as they can be
evaluated as true or false. Performative verbs are quite different. They are instrumental in
achieving an interactional goal between two or more speakers. A typical example would be the
verb promise which realises a purely linguistic act. In the sentence I promise to help you with
the work no work is done but the sincere intonation to do so in the near future is expressed by the
speaker.

Utterances can be more than just a statement , for example:

 Compliments :” You looks wonderful today”

 Invitations : “ Do you fancy a tea, darling?’’
 Complaints or apologies :”Sorry, my bus was late”
 Promissing : “ I promise to came in the time this evining “
Any speech act will consist of three related act:
1. Locationary acts : The basic utterance producing a meaningful. For example A cow
is an animal or The earth is round.
2. Illucotionaray acts : The reason or purpose for uttering something. For example, a
promise or warning.
3. Perlocutionary acts : We utterance to inted something an effect. Perlocutionary
acts include those which have a visible effect on the speaker, such as insulting or
persuade someone.

1.3. Implicature

Here is some definition about implicature:

1. The term of implicature account for what a speakers can imply, suggest or
mean as distinct for what the speakers literatery( Grice 1975)
 2. It is something the speakers suggest or implies with an uuterance, even
though it is not literally expressed.
3. It is inferred assumption which can not be directly derived from overt
linguistics from by completion or enrichment.
So, from these definition we can conclude that implicature is indirect
meanig or implied meaning that arise by the explicit thing. It is means that
utterance that implies about something and different with actual meaning.

Implicature by George have two part:

a. Conventional implicature : that is largerly generated by the standing meaning of

certain linguistics expression. For example:
Joe is poor but happy.

This sentences implies poverty and happines are not compatible but in
spite of this joe is still happy. This sentences will always necessarily imply “
Surprisingly Joe is happy in spite of being poor”

b. Conversational implicature: That is depending on the assumption that the speaker

is following certain ritual principles of conversational exchange or conversational
context. For example:
The guest enter to the living room and said “ The room is hot.” This
statement has kinds meaning that will be implied such as:
1. Ask the host to turn on the fan.
2. Ask the host to open the window, and
3. Ask the host to talk in the terrace

Conversational implicature

Generalized conversational implicature Particularlized

Conversational
 Implicature

GCL PCL

GCL occur without reference to any particular features of the context and
PCL is stronly tied to the particular features of the context. For example

A:’’ What is is it?”

B : ‘’ Some of the request are already leaving. “

PCL : ‘’ It must be late.”

GCL : ‘’ Not at all of the quests are arleady leaving.”

By the English philospher H. Paul Grice ( 1913- 1988 ) was concerned

with the task of accounting for how humen beings behave in normal conversation.
To this and he introduced the nation of conversational implicatures which are
implications deduced by speakers during conversations. In order to be sucessful in
deducing the intended meanings of one’s interlocutors the letter must abide by
certain maxims of conversation.

Maxims of conversation

Quality What you say is assumed to be true

Quantity Be informative but not too much so

Relevamce Be relevant to the purpose of the exchange
Manner Be prespicuous, avoid absurdity and ambiguity.
Grice futhermore assumes that speakers keep to the cooperative principle.
This is un unspoken agreement between speakers in conversation to follow the
maxims of conversation, to interpret sensibly what is said by one’s interlocutor and
in general to abide by the conversation of linguistic interaction in conversation.
 Occasionally. The maxims may be flouted for deliberate effect, for instance when
one is being ironical or sarcastic or indeed when lying.
A further development of the conversational implicatures of Grice is what
is termed relevancy theory. The linguistics Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson applied
the nation of relevance to the structuring of conversation and maintain that a
contribution is relevant if the effort required to process it is small.

1.3. Politeness

Politeness is the pratical aplication of good manners or etiquete so as not to

offend others. It is culturally defined phenomenon and therefore what is considered polite in
one culture can sometimes be quite rude or simply eccentric in another cultural context.

In general politenes is an aspect of a speaker`s social behaviour which shows deferences

toward the wishes and concern of the adressee. There is a linguistics manifestation of
politeness, investigated seminally in a book by the English linguistic Penelope Brown and
Stepen C. Levinson ( 1979), which involves srtategies for miximissing deference in
exchanges;e.g. by employing indirect speech acts or by using formal adress terms. These
strategies aim that at a certain goal, to save the face of the addressee. The terms face refers to
the public self-image of speakers and can be subdivided into two main types. The positive
face refers to an individual’s wish to be respected and appreciated by others. Negative face
refers to the wish not to be restricted or impeded in the choices one makes concerning social
behaviour. Politeness is hence understood as a means of showing awareness of another’s
face. Social behaviour can constitute face saving acts by being diferential to others,
emphasizing the important of their wishes and concerns.

a. Variables in degrees of politeness

1. The social distance of the speaker
2. The relative “ power” of the speakers over the hearer.
3. The absolutely rangking of impositions in the particular culture.
b. Politeness strategies by Brown and Levinson
 1. Notice, attend to hearer.
2. Exaggerate.
3. Intensity interest to hearer.
4. Use in-group identity makers.
5. Seek agreement.
6. Avoid disagreement.
7. Purpose /raise / assert common ground.
8. Jokes.
9. Assert or presuppose speakers knowledge af and concern for heares wants.
10. Offer and promise.
11. Include both speaker and hearer in the activity.
12. Give (or asks) reasons.
13. Assume or assert reciprocity.
14. Give gifts to hearer ( goods, symphaty,understanding, cooperation).

1.4. Honorifics speech

Honorifics speech is a type of social deixis, as an understanding of the context. In this

case the social status of the speaker relative to the other participants or bystanders- is crucial
to it is use. There are three main types of honorifics, categorized according to the individual
whose status is being expressed:

1. Addressee : express the social status of the person being spoken to the hearer,
regardless of what is being talked about.
2. Referent : express the status of the person being spoken about. In this type of
honorific, both the referent ( the person being spoken about ) and the target ( the
person whose status is being expressed ) of the honorific expression are the same.
3. Bystander: express the status of someone who is nearby, but not a participant in
the conversation ( the overhearer)

1.4. Deixis
 Deixis mean pointing via language.. To accomplish this pointing deitic expression
or indexical are used. Deictic expressions depend on the speaker and hearer sharing the
same spatial( space) context, in face to face spoken interaction.

Example of deixis

Deixis Near to speaker Away to speaker

Person deixis Me, us , our, this girls etc. Him, that, that woman, etc.
Spatial deixis Here, this bed, behind me, etc There, those hills, over etc
Temporal deixis Now, today, this morning etc then, yesterday, last week,
next year.

There are three part of deictic expression:

1. Person deixis is clearly operates on a basic three-part devision, exemplified by the

pronoun for first person ( I ), second person ( you ) and third person ( he, she, it)
2. Spatial deixis is clearly relevant to the relative location of people and things
which is being indicated.
3. Temporal deixis : relates to time and it is indicating both the time coinciding with
the speaker`s utterance and the time of the speaker`s voice being heard.

1.6. Discouse analysis

Pragmatic and discourse analysis are two fields of study that are sometime
regarded as interdisciplinary beacause both share interest in those aspects of language that
are context –dependent. Discourse analisys is concerned with the analysis or spoken
language in section large than the sentence. Two mean features for succesfull discourse are :

1. Coherence ( based on semantic transparency )

2. Cohesion ( achieved through formal mechanisms such as a sentences connectors
and anaphoric elements).