大三语言学基础Week-VII:Pragmatics-(A-General-View).ppt_第1页
大三语言学基础Week-VII:Pragmatics-(A-General-View).ppt_第2页
大三语言学基础Week-VII:Pragmatics-(A-General-View).ppt_第3页
大三语言学基础Week-VII:Pragmatics-(A-General-View).ppt_第4页
大三语言学基础Week-VII:Pragmatics-(A-General-View).ppt_第5页
已阅读5页,还剩12页未读 继续免费阅读

下载本文档

版权说明:本文档由用户提供并上传,收益归属内容提供方,若内容存在侵权,请进行举报或认领

文档简介

1、1,语言学 Linguistics Week VII Pragmatics A General View,2,Part II Pragmatics Chapter 1 A General View of Pragmatics 1.1 Wastebasket of Pragmatics 1.2 Context in Pragmatics 1.3 History and Definition of Pragmatics 1.4 Why the Necessity of Pragmatics Study?,3,Chomskyian dichotomy of sentence structure: d

2、eep structure and surface structure.,S(1) I slept badly. S(2) Colorless green ideas sleep furiously. S(3) Flying planes can be dangerous.,different deep structures may merge into a single ambiguous surface structure,4,1.1 Wastebasket of Pragmatics When Chomsky threw his “green ideas” “furiously” int

3、o the wastebasket of semantics, others who claim themselves to be syntactic analysts or semanticists continue doing so, each contributing new rules and assertions to the study of language and leaving behind plenty of waste for latecomers to deal with. “The semantics basket being filled to the brim,

4、another waste-basket had to be created to catch the overflow” (Mey). And this “another waste-basket” is Pragmatics.,5,1.2 Context in Pragmatics That scholars have left such a plenty of waste behind seems to suggest that the meaning of a sentence is more elusive and uncertain than we can imagine. The

5、refore, what weve discussed in Part I, be it syntactic study or semantics, seems to be mainly concerned with, in a sense, the static aspects of language. However, language in use is a rather complicated matter, and the elusiveness and uncertainty of meaning render all the theories so far mentioned c

6、ontroversial and weak under attack. Meaning, in fact, is rather dynamic, and is dependent upon context. Sentences without context can result in ambiguity.,6,Scenario 1: A: I just met the old Irishman and his son, coming out of the toilet. B: I wouldnt have thought there was room for the two of them.

7、 A: No silly, I mean I was coming out of the toilet. They were waiting. Scenario 2: What are we going to do about Baba, she asked. What do you mean? She cant remember anything. Did she ask you whether she was taking medicine? No. No shes not or no she didnt ask? She didnt ask. She was supposed to, I

8、 said. Well, she didnt.,7,The concept of “context” in pragmatics is different from that referred to in traditional linguistics. It is viewed, by pragmaticians, as dynamic, too. A dynamic context is an environment that is in steady development, prompted by the continuous interaction of the people eng

9、aged in language use. Context is the quintessential pragmatic concept; it is by definition proactive, just as people are. By contrast, a pure linguistic description is retroactive and static: it takes a snapshot of what is the case at any particular moment, and tries to freeze that picture. Pure des

10、criptions have no dynamics; they can never capture the richness of the developments that take place between people using language; the synchronic snapshot of the here and now, the classical hic et nunc, is a philosophical abstraction. (Mey, 2001: 14),8,Context,He Zhaoxiongs Classification of Context

11、,Linguistic knowledge,Extra-linguistic knowledge,Knowledge of the language in use,Knowledge of the previous text of verbal communication,Background knowledge,Situational knowledge,Mutual knowledge,Encyclopedic Knowledge (Common Sense),Social norms of a specific culture,Conversational Rules of a spec

12、ific culture,Time the relation between the sign and its meaning; the relation between the sign and the sign user.,10,After that, the study of pragmatics began to take shape. However, for a long time, pragmatics “can hardly be considered an autonomous field of study” (Bussmann, 2000: 374): It was once subsumed under the term “sociolinguistics”. In 1970s, pragmatics became almost exclusively identified with Speech Act theory suggested by Austin A bit later: with conversation analysis. And, the distinction between pragmatics and semant

温馨提示

  • 1. 本站所有资源如无特殊说明,都需要本地电脑安装OFFICE2007和PDF阅读器。图纸软件为CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.压缩文件请下载最新的WinRAR软件解压。
  • 2. 本站的文档不包含任何第三方提供的附件图纸等,如果需要附件,请联系上传者。文件的所有权益归上传用户所有。
  • 3. 本站RAR压缩包中若带图纸,网页内容里面会有图纸预览,若没有图纸预览就没有图纸。
  • 4. 未经权益所有人同意不得将文件中的内容挪作商业或盈利用途。
  • 5. 人人文库网仅提供信息存储空间,仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对用户上传分享的文档内容本身不做任何修改或编辑,并不能对任何下载内容负责。
  • 6. 下载文件中如有侵权或不适当内容,请与我们联系,我们立即纠正。
  • 7. 本站不保证下载资源的准确性、安全性和完整性, 同时也不承担用户因使用这些下载资源对自己和他人造成任何形式的伤害或损失。

评论

0/150

提交评论