Relationship between discourse and pragmatics meaning

Pragmatics - Wikipedia

relationship between discourse and pragmatics meaning

Pragmatics as the study of how the meaning of spoken and written discourse is S. Dryer, PhD's research includes the relation between syntax and discourse. International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) · Journal of a (wiki)project in comparative pragmatics directed by Joachim Grzega. Nov 18, Discourse analysis is the breaking down of discourse and analyzing it for its meaning, function, and structure. Pragmatics and discourse (verbal discourse) a.. .

Referential uses of language[ edit ] This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. April Learn how and when to remove this template message The referential uses of language are how signs are used to refer to certain items. A sign is the link or relationship between a signified and the signifier as defined by Saussure and Huguenin.

Discourse and Pragmatics

The signified is some entity or concept in the world. The signifier represents the signified. An example would be: This relationship can be further explained by considering what we mean by "meaning. Semantico-referential meaning refers to the aspect of meaning, which describes events in the world that are independent of the circumstance they are uttered in.

An example would be propositions such as: The meaning of this proposition does not rely on whether or not Santa Claus is eating cookies at the time of its utterance. Santa Claus could be eating cookies at any time and the meaning of the proposition would remain the same.

The meaning is simply describing something that is the case in the world. In contrast, the proposition, "Santa Claus is eating a cookie right now," describes events that are happening at the time the proposition is uttered.

Semantico-referential meaning is also present in meta-semantical statements such as: The meaning of the sign tiger is describing some animal in the world, which does not change in either circumstance. Indexical meaning, on the other hand, is dependent on the context of the utterance and has rules of use.

By rules of use, it is meant that indexicals can tell you when they are used, but not what they actually mean. As mentioned, these meanings are brought about through the relationship between the signified and the signifier.


One way to define the relationship is by placing signs in two categories: Referential indexical signs are signs where the meaning shifts depending on the context hence the nickname "shifters. The referential aspect of its meaning would be '1st person singular' while the indexical aspect would be the person who is speaking refer above for definitions of semantico-referential and indexical meaning. Another example would be: Close by A pure indexical sign does not contribute to the meaning of the propositions at all.

It is an example of a "non-referential use of language. Peirce 's Peircean Trichotomy. The components of the trichotomy are the following: If two people were in a room and one of them wanted to refer to a characteristic of a chair in the room he would say "this chair has four legs" instead of "a chair has four legs.

Non-referential uses of language[ edit ] Silverstein's "pure" indexes[ edit ] Michael Silverstein has argued that "nonreferential" or "pure" indices do not contribute to an utterance's referential meaning but instead "signal some particular value of one or more contextual variables.

The sorts of contexts that such indexes can mark are varied.

relationship between discourse and pragmatics meaning

Sex indexes are affixes or inflections that index the sex of the speaker, e. Deference indexes are words that signal social differences usually related to status or age between the speaker and the addressee.

Searle distinguished between these two types of acts as locutionary and illocutionary acts.

Discourse and Pragmatics

And the actual action that is caused by the words is the perlocutionary act. The words have a literal meaning, and perform the action of becoming legally married.

relationship between discourse and pragmatics meaning

They are also tied to the social situation in which they occur, the marriage ceremony, their partners speech and the speech of the marriage official. This example also highlights how various conditions can influence whether a specific speech act works or not. Austin called these felicity conditions, which Searle interpreted somewhat rigidly as rules.

Pragmatics is also specifically concerned with the theoretical perspective of the cooperative principle: This idea was introduced by Grice in which he provides four categories or maxims that help identify the operation of the cooperative principle in discourse: To do this he introduces the idea of the implicature which is a meaning that is not explicitly provided in the literal analysis of the words in discourse, but can be ascertained by looking at how speech interacts with the four maxims in various ways: A says this, B says this in response.

He uses these snippets to illustrate the fulfillment of the four maxims, and how this can give rise to implicatures, or meanings that are not explicitly provided in the literal text.

relationship between discourse and pragmatics meaning

In contrast Kasper also looks at pragmatics but uses much longer sequences of conversation. This makes sense because Kasper uses the lens of Conversation Analysis to examine pragmatics, or meaning making. CA requires looking at more than just pairs of utteranaces—at conversations. Kasper critiques the rationalist foundations of Speech Act theory, by questioning the idea that the meaning of an utterance is related to the internal state of the speaker, and that in turn, the listener receives and internalizes that meaning.

For Kasper meaning is co-constructed by participants, and rather than being transmitted it is emergent and highly contextual.

Taguchi provides an example of using cross-cultural speech act theory to look at competencies of language learners. Culture is an important dimension to understanding the speech acts because the mechanics of speech, and the significance of particular word choices are not necessarily portable across cultures.

Taguchi is specifically interested in how spending a year abroad can change the learners cultural awareness and their ability to general speech acts, or their language comptency. The specific research question was to see if cultutral adjustment is correlated with language skill.