Lecture Two

Mila university Center
Linguistics third year/ Semester 2

Teacher: Dr. BENNACER Fouzia
Lecture Two: Pragmatics

1. What is Pragmatics
Early works associated with pragmatics came from philosophers who tried to understand
how meaning is made when using language, they refused to accept that an understanding of the
real use of the language can be reached through explaining sentence forms and meaning. In other
words, a sentence or an utterance can do more than describing some state of affair, or state some
facts; using utterances such as ‘you’re fired’ or ‘I quit’ speakers perform actions. Hence, in
pragmatics language is not viewed as a system of representations but as a system of devices for
engaging in various sorts of social activity. Therefore, the intended meaning of a word or
utterance cannot be attained unless it is interpreted in the context in which it had appeared
(Devitt &Hanley, 2003).
Pragmatics is basically defined as “the study of language usage” (Levinson, 1983 p.5). Today
pragmatics has a very wide scope among which we find mainly:
1. Speech acts
2. Conversational Structure
3. Presuppositions
4. Implicatures
5. Deixis (extralinguistic reference)
2. Speech Act Theory
The theory examined the interrelationship between language utterances, their intentions, and how
these intentions are communicated. In other words, it seeks to find out how communicative goals
are achieved through the use of language. The main leaders of the theory are: Austin (1962) and
Searle (1969).
2.1. Austin’s
Speech Act Theory
Austin explained the complexity of ‘saying’ which is the doing of something, and named
utterances ‘locutionary acts’ because they have specific effects on both the speaker and the
hearer.
He suggested that the speaker does three different things at the same time when producing an
utterance, and distinguished between three types of acts:
a- The locutionary act: refers to the act of saying something. The production of a locution
includes the different dimentions of language (phonetics, syntax and semantics).
b- The illocutionary act: because “we do not just produce well-formed utterances with no
purpose, we form an utterance with some kind of function in mind” (Yule, 1996 p. 48),
the illocutionary act (illocutionary force/ the communicative force) refers to what the
speaker does with words. In other words, it is speaker-based and denotes the function of
the locutionary act, for instance, promising, requesting, advising, warning…
The same locution may have different illocutionary forces if produced in different
circumstances. For example; ‘the gun is loaded’ can be a threat, a warning, a statement…
However, the same illocutionary act can be accomplished using different locutionary
acts.
c- The perlocutionary act: it is hearer-based, it refers to the effects that the utterance has
on the feelings, thoughts and actions of the listener. However, the perlocutionary act may
not occur even if the speaker intends to achieve them, and they may occur when they are
not intended (Austin, 1962).
Examples:
- You can’t do that (locution)
- Protesting (illocutionary force)
- Stopping someone from doing something (perlocutionary act)
- Shoot her (locution)
- Ordering / urging/ advising (illocutionary act)
- Persuading (perlocutionary act)
2.2. Searle’s
Speech Act Theory
Searle (1979) suggested five types of illocuctionary acts:

a- Assertives; include speech acts in which the speaker attempts to describe the world and
commit him/her to the truth of the utterance. Examples of such acts include suggesting,
swearing, boasting, concluding, asserting, claiming…
b- Directives; include speech acts in which the speaker tries to get the listener do
something. They range from modest ones such as invitations to fierce ones such as
ordering. Examples of such acts include inviting, advising, requesting, begging,
commanding, ordering…
c- Commissives; include speech acts in which the speaker is committed or expresses his
intention to do an action or change in the future. Examples of such acts include
promising, planning, vowing, opposing, warning, offering…
d- Expressives; include speech acts in which the speaker expresses his psychological state
about a particular state of affairs. Examples of such acts include thanks, apologies,
congratulations, blames, condolences, welcomes…
e- Declarations; the successful performance of this type of speech act result in immediate
change in the world. Examples of such acts include resigning, declaring war, firing from
a job, marrying…
References
Austin, J (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford University Press.
Brown & Levinson (1987).
Devitt, M. & Hanley, R. eds. (2003). Speech acts and pragmatics. In the Blackwell Guide to the
Philosophy of Language.
Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics.Cambridge University Press.
O’Keeffe,A; Clancy,B& Adolphs,S (2020). Introducing Pragmatics in use (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Searle,J. (1969). Speech acts. Cambridge University Press.
Trudgill,P (2000). Sociolinguistics: An introduction to language to language and society (4th
ed.). Penguin Books.
Yule,G (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.

Lecture Two

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecture Two

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lecture Two

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mila university Center

Linguistics third year/ Semester 2

Lecture Two: Pragmatics

Searle (1979) suggested five types of illocuctionary acts:

Yule,G (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.

You might also like