Pragmatics: Overview

Journal of Pragmatics, 2011

This is Volume 1 in the Handbook of Pragmatics Highlights series edited by Verschueren and Ostman. As the series approaches pragmatics as a highly interdisciplinary field of inquiry, the volume seeks to ''provide a practical and theoretical tool for achieving coherence in the discipline'' (p. xi). It demonstrates the ways in which the basic notions in the field of pragmatics are relevant to the interdisciplinary study of human interaction in the cognitive, social, cultural, and linguistic dimensions. The volume consists of 13 chapters which can be grouped into three thematically related parts. The first part, the opening chapter, provides an overview of the historical development of pragmatics in terms of its cross-disciplinary nature. The second part (chapters 2-8, 10, 12-13) consists of topics frequently discussed in pragmatics such as adaptability, channel, communication, context and contextualization, conversational logic, deixis, implicitness, presupposition, semiotics, and speech act theory. The third part (chapters 9 and 11) deals with non-verbal communication and primate communication, topics rarely touched upon in the field of pragmatics. The introduction to the volume, written by Verschueren, discusses the interdisciplinary roots of pragmatics. Verschueren contends that pragmatics originated from the unification of semiotics with different disciplines. He argues that pragmatics first took as its subject those topics which could not be suitably explored within syntax and semantics and later interacted in various ways with a number of disciplines. In accordance with this historical overview of pragmatics, Verschueren proposes to pursue a functional perspective on language-paying special attention to language use. That is, to make 'making choices' in communication as the core concept of current work. He notes that the interpretation of 'making choices' involves three hierarchically related notions: variability, negotiability, and adaptability, which are considered to be 'the interrelated properties of the overall investigation for linguistic pragmatics, the functionality of language' (p. 20). Verschueren's introduction provides detailed guidance to the principles underpinning this volume, and also implies that pragmatics is undergoing change as contributions from different disciplines deepen our understanding of the field. Each chapter of the second group of topics in this volume addresses the most salient issues in pragmatics, showing how the researchers' different backgrounds and interests have given rise to various interpretations of common notions in pragmatics. Adaptability is one of three key notions in Verschueren's model of pragmatics (1999/2000). In his model, Verschueren stresses the importance of adaptability by placing it at the core of language use. His discussion of adaptability focuses primarily on its contributions to pragmatic descriptions and explanations, including identification of context, the process of making choices in communication, and the importance of cognition in language use. But in this current article (chapter 2) 'Adaptability', Verschueren and Brisard shift their attention to the association between adaptability and evolutionary theory. They argue that language is by nature adaptive, and reflect on two different senses of adaption. In its biological sense, language emerges and develops adaptively to circumstances, while in its social-interactive sense, language functions adaptively to the process of communication. These two uses are not discrete as both are inseparable from human cognition. The authors not only emphasize the theoretical importance of an adaptability theory of pragmatics in the study of language use, but also exemplify some of the applications of adaptability to human-computer interaction, political rhetoric, language acquisition, accommodation theory, and language disorders. In chapter 3, 'Channel' by Slembrouck, the basic assumption of the author is that the conventional distinction of channel between spoken and written language in linguistic studies is 'crude and narrow' (p. 48), as channels of communication have a greater variation in language use. According to Slembrouck, the crudity can be exposed through a comparison between print and handwriting or between spoken television news and casual conversation. By probing into the complexities of written and spoken language, Slembrouck suggests that changes in channels of communication have an impact on the nature of institutionalized forms of language-use, and pragmatic research should stay abreast of what is happening in practice. He extends the sense of channel by taking into consideration non-verbal signs involved in representation and communication, including images and digital hypertext. Along with his focus on reexamining channels of communication, Slembrouck highlights some topics of current interest in pragmatics' research, such as multimodality. Some readers may find this section

Journal, 2016

This paper explores and exposes the historical development, scope and subject matter or object of study of Pragmatics as well as explaining with relevant data how pragmatics, Semantics and Discourse Analysis handle the study of meaning in language. Pragmatics, which is a branch of linguistics concerned with the use of language in social context, did not just appear in the study of language like a 'ghost' but has a historical origin, a scope that it covers, and a subject matter. In addition, this research, apart from arming us with the information on the origin, scope and subject matter of Pragmatics, had gone a step further to tell us how Pragmatics, in conjunction with Semantics, which is the study of the meaning of linguistic expression, and Discourse Analysis, which is the study of the ways in which language is used in texts and contexts, deal with the study of meaning in language at different levels, as separate disciplines of English and Linguistics.

Pragmatics is a very important aspect of language that helps in establishing the purpose of any communication. It accounts for the usage, the properties and the processes of language. Communication is not an isolated process. It occurs in continuum. It is a two-way channel between the speaker and the hearer with reversible roles and the complete comprehension of the utterance can be obtained only when the entire context is taken into consideration. The paper reviews the development of pragmatics as a separate branch of study focusing on its various aspects and elements. Speech acts which are the essence of any communication are an integral part of pragmatics. Keywords: Pragmatics, Utterance, Speech Acts, Deixis, Context, Reference.

This analysis aims at analyzing the essence of pragmatics and its relation to the current communication practices. In order to achieve the attempt I try to gather some definitions so that I can create a more reliable working definition which leads to better understanding toward the existence of pragmatics. Further, some theoretical concepts relevant to pragmatic are also employed so that I can find the relevance of pragmatics with the other current communication and teaching practices. Based on the analysis toward the elements of pragmatics (implicature and speech act), the relevant theories related to pragmatics and language teaching as well as the current researches on pragmatics in language teaching I can conclude that basically pragmatic is strongly connected to culture in which humans generally adopt in order to lead their lives. Pragmatics which constitutes the important part of linguistics is also in need of more comprehensive research/analysis due to its interconnection with the other aspects such as: culture, context, situation, participant, gender, channel, topic, facial expressions, gestures, proximity, posture and echoing which are unfortunately still separately analyzed by other relevant disciplines such as; teaching, linguistics, etc. All of the above aspects (which I divide into two broad aspects) are found to be intermingled in the process of communication. Based on the research data gathered I also found that most of the pragmatic researches seem to center on more practical issues such as: the use of the book, the teaching of pragmatic aspect, sociolinguistic/cultural awareness rather than a deep analysis on the language itself which tends to create vague and contradictory arguments even among the scholars in this field. Due to its connection to cultural aspects, the process of transferring pragmatic aspects should be more naturally oriented instead of formal through classroom learning this is because classroom learning is not considered sufficient to provide a more natural practice just like in the outer world. Thus, while the concept of pragmatics and the analysis of pragmatic elements covered by the two experts are certainly always worth-pondering, nevertheless, its application in language learning/teaching should be wisely in support of the students’ understanding since the theory of pragmatics tends to be more analytical and conceptual rather than practical. It is certainly the challenge for the next researchers to find more benefits of pragmatics in such a more practically viable manner so that pragmatics will never belong to those elitists coming from the other side of the world such as: philosophy or linguistics, and can be of significance to assist humans in their endless quest to find a better communication mode for the sake of their continuous survivability. Keywords: revisiting, pragmatics, elements, relevance, communication practices.

Pragmatics has to be defined in relation to al1 kinds of other enterprises within the field of Linguistics. Traditionally, Pragmatics has been conceived of as an additional component of a theory of Linguistics, on a par with disciplines such as Phonetics, Phonology, Morphology, and Syntax. My position with respect to the definition of Pragmatics is that you do not get very far if you try to define it as an additionai component to a theory of language. The reason is that for Pragmatics you cannot identi+ a specific unit of anaiysis. This is something that you can do for other domains in Linguistics. Phonology, for example, deals with speech sounds, Morphology with the structure of words, and Syntax with the structure of sentences, and even for Semantics there are a couple of typicai units of analysis. For instance, Lexical Semantics is involved with words, and most other kinds of Semantics deai with structures cailed propositions. Nothing of that sort can be identified with Pragmatics. It is more helpful if we adopt a broader approach whereby Pragmatics is defined as the cognitive, social and cultural s u d y of language and communication.' Pragmatics, the state of the art. A talk with TefVerschueren

International Journal of Language Studies, 2013

1999

Nurfani Alfira, 2021