THEME 5

PRAGMATIC SYNTAX

1. Linguistic pragmatics
2. Speech acts: Definition and classifications
3. Maxims of conversation
 Key terms
O linguistic pragmatics O expressive
O speech act O declarative
O locution O conversational maxims
O illocution O maxim of quantity
O perlocution O maxim of quality
O performative verb O maxim of relevance
O assertive O maxim of manner
O directive
O commissive
1. LINGUISTIC PRAGMATICS

The term “pragmatics”

has been introduced by
Charles William Morris
(1901-1979), American
semiotician and
philosopher.
 Pragmatics

in the narrow sense in the broad sense

O involves only O involves all kinds of
linguistic signs signs and thus relates
to all kinds of human
activities, including
baseball and stock
market
Linguistic pragmatics
is concerned with the ability of language
users to pair sentences with the context in
which they would be appropriate
e.g.
Of course.
It’s different.
 Susie is a heavy smoker.
O intrinsic meaning (inseparable from this
sentence): Susie smokes a large quantity of
tobacco every day;

O context-dependent (pragmatic) meaning?

 Pragmatic meanings of
Susie is a heavy smoker
O 1 [Jessica is trying to have smoking banned in offices]:
- Can you ask Susie to sign this petition?
- Susie is a heavy smoker.
O 2 [Jessica is trying to arrange a blind date for Dave, a non-
smoker who hates cigarette smoke]:
- Would Susie like to go out with Dave?
- Susie is a heavy smoker.
O 3 [Jessica, a medical researcher, is looking for smokers to take
part in some medical tests]:
- Do you know of anybody I could ask?
- Susie is a heavy smoker.
Situational context Initiating Response The message
replica replica communicated by
(Jessica’s) (Jessica’s Jessica’s
interlocutor) interlocutor
[Jessica is trying to Can you ask Susie is a heavy Susie is unlikely to
have smoking Susie to sign this smoker. sign the petition, so
banned in offices] petition? there’s no point in
asking her.

[Jessica is trying to Would Susie like Susie is a heavy Dave and Susie
arrange a blind date to go out with smoker. won’t get on, so
for Dave, a non- Dave? there’s no point in
smoker who hates fixing them up.
cigarette smoke]

[Jessica, a medical Do you know of Susie is a heavy Susie will be a

researcher, is anybody I could smoker. suitable person for
looking for smokers ask? your study.
to take part in some
medical tests]
Does this single unvarying sentence actually
mean all of these different things?
O These three meanings have been conveyed as a result
of the interaction between what was said and the
context in which it was said.
O Each time the context changes, so does what is
communicated. This variable, context-dependent
relationship between what is said and what is
conveyed is the focus of pragmatics.
 Much of our contextual
knowledge is the knowledge of:
O who is speaking and who is listening;
O when and where the conversation is taking place;
O what is being discussed (the object, or referent,
situation);
O general facts about the world we live in (those
relevant to the conversation).
Communicative / communication situation

S’s knowledge H’s knowledge

S the object situation H

time / place
 2. SPEECH ACTS: DEFINITION
AND CLASSSIFICATION
A speech act can be defined as an attempt at doing
something purely by speaking. There are very many
things that we can do, or attempt to do, simply by
speaking:
-make a promise
-ask a question
-order or request somebody to do something
-make a threat
-name a ship
-pronounce somebody husband and wife, etc.
Each one of these is a particular speech act.
By saying Beware of the bull!, you not only say
something (inform), you warn someone.

By analogy:
I’ll give you my best scarf (promise);
Are you hungry? (asking for information);
Don’t even think of it! (ordering someone not to
do something);
You'll get what you deserve! Just you wait!
(threatening)
 Speech acts belong to the domain of pragmatics,
and their study, called speech-act theory, is a
prominent part of that discipline.

The study of speech acts was

introduced by the British
philosopher
John Langshaw Austin
(26 March 1911–8 Feb 1960)
in “How to Do Things With
Words” (1962).
 Speech-act theory has been developed by

the American
philosopher John
Rogers Searle (born
July 31, 1932)

“Speech Acts: An Essay

in the Philosophy of
Language” (1969)
Austin originally distinguished three aspects of a
speech act:
- the locutionary act (the act of saying
something, its basic content),
- the illocutionary act (what you’re trying to do
by speaking),
- the perlocutionary act (the effect of what you
say).
Today, however, the term “speech act” is often
used to denote specifically an illocutionary act:
promising, threatening, informing, persuading,
defending, blaming, etc.

The intended effect of a speech act is its

illocutionary force.
 Performative verbs
Using a performative verb in a sentence does something
extra over and above the statement. The following
sentences illustrate the usage of performative verbs:
O I bet you 20 hryvnas our team wins.
O I challenge you to a match.
O I dare you to step over this line.
O I promise to improve.
O I resign!
O I pronounce you husband and wife.
The sentences they are used in are typical performative
sentences.
 In all these sentences, the speaker correlates
with the subject (i.e., the sentences are in the
first person) who by uttering the sentence is
accomplishing some additional action;
 In addition, all these sentences are affirmative,
declarative and in the present tense.
Every utterance is some kind of speech act.
Even when there is no explicit performative
verb, we recognize an implicit performance of:
• stating, as in It is raining.
• questioning, as in Is it raining?
• ordering, as in Leave!
In all these instances, we could see, if we
choose, an actual performative verb:
• I state that it is raining;
• I ask if it is raining;
• I order you to leave.
Specify the illocutionary force of How old
are you? in the situation below:

(a) [A young boy is talking to a colleague

of his father]: It’s my birthday today.
[The colleague]: Many happy returns.
How old are you?
Specify the illocutionary force of How old
are you? in the situation below:

(b) [A father is talking to his son, 15,

smoking]: How old are you?
 Specify the illocutionary force of How
old are you? in the situation below:

(c) [A psychiatrist is talking to a female

patient]: What do you do?
[The woman]: I am a nurse, but my
husband won’t let me work.
[The psychiatrist]: How old are you?
 J. Searle’s classification
of speech acts
Speech act class Provisional description
Assertive giving information

Directive telling someone to do something

Commissive committing oneself to doing

something
Expressive expressing a feeling

Declarative performing a ritual act

 Assertives
They commit the speaker to something being the case.
The different kinds of assertives are:
• suggesting
• putting forward
• swearing
• boasting
• concluding
Example: No one makes a better cake than me.
 Directives
They try to make the addressee perform an action.
The different kinds of directives are:
• asking
• ordering
• requesting
• inviting
• advising
• begging
Example: Could you close the window?
 Commisives
They commit the speaker to doing something in
the future.
The different kinds of commissives are:
• promising
• planning
• vowing
• betting
• opposing
Example: I'm going to Paris tomorrow.
 Expressives
They express how the speaker feels about the situation.
The different kinds of expressives are:
• thanking
• apologizing
• welcoming
• deploring
Example: I am sorry that I lied to you.
 Declarations
They change the state of the world in an
immediate way.

Examples:
You are fired;
I swear,
I beg you.
 3. GRICE’S CONVERSATIONAL
MAXIMS (GRICEAN MAXIMS)
As speakers and hearers, we share certain implicit
conversational rules for how to communicate
spoken messages. These conversational rules are
crucial for successful communication, and we are
well aware of how to follow them, or in some cases
how to ignore them, in order to convey a particular
message. Lack of shared knowledge regarding these
rules can lead to communication breakdown.
 Maxims of conversation:
the shared rules that speakers use in
interactions
Proposed by the
philosopher Herbert
Paul Grice
(March 13, 1913 –
August 28, 1988)
1975 – “Logic and
Conversation”
1989 – “Studies in the
Way of Words”
 Grice noted that although much of our speech
is nonliteral, we have a remarkable ability to
accurately grasp what our conversational
partners mean, even when the meaning the
speaker is trying to convey and linguistic
meaning are quite different.
For example:
a boy says to a girl with whom he has fallen in
love, I can’t get you out of my head.
The girl answers teasingly: I must feel very
cramped in such a small space .
Often what we say is not literally what
we mean:
OCan you pass the salt?
OWould you mind washing the dishes?
OYou’re standing on my foot.
OIt’s cold in here.
OIs ice cold?
Grice suggested that the proper
interpretation of nonliteral speech resulted
from what he termed the "cooperative
principle" and its associated maxims
(rules) of discourse.
 MAXIM FORMULATION
of quantity • make your contribution as informative as it is
required for the current purposes of the
conversation;
• do not make your contribution more
informative than is required
of quality • do not say what you believe to be false;
• do not say that for which you lack adequate
evidence
of relevance / • make your contribution relevant
relation
of manner • avoid ambiguity,
• avoid obscurity,
• be brief,
• be orderly
Which maxim(s) of conversation is not observed?

A: Where is Bill?
B: There is a yellow VW outside Susan’s house.

A: How many surrealists does it take to screw in a

light bulb?
B: Fish! (“Linguistic Theories of Humor” by
Salvatore Attardo)
POLONIUS: What do you read, my lord?
HAMLET: Words, words, words.
POLONIUS: What is the matter, my lord?
HAMLET: Between who?
POLONIUS: I mean, the matter that you read, my lord.
HAMLET: Slanders, sir: for the satirical rogue says
here that old men have gray beards, that
their faces are wrinkled, their eyes purging
thick amber and plum-tree gum, and that
they have a plentiful lack of wit, together
with most weak hams: all which, sir, though
I most powerfully and potently believe, yet I
hold it not honest to have it thus set down;
for yourself, sir, should grow old as I am, if
like a crab you could go backward
(Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii)