Pragmatics
?Austin – How to do things with
words
?Grice – The Cooperative
Principle
?Goffman – Face
?Brown and Levinson – Politeness
?Wierzbicka – Culture and
Cognition
J,L,Austin How to do things with words.
? Locutionary Acts
? Saying something
about something
? Illucutionary acts
? Doing something by
saying something
? Performatives.
? Perlocutionary Acts
Performatives
1,The uttering of the words is,,the performance of which is
also the object of the utterance.
2,Circumstances around the performative must be appropriate
1,good faith v,bad faith
2,Other things have to go right (happy) (felicities)
3,Must be an accepted conventional procedure
4,Particular persons must be appropriate for the
invocation of the act
5,Procedure must be executed correctly and completely
6,Person must have those thoughts and feelings requisite
of the act
7,Must actually conduct themselves subsequently.
Performatives
3,Sinning against rules will make the
performance unhappy
4,Explicit (I bet,I promise,...) v
Implicit performatives (where the
performative is only a possibility
(might,perhaps,(you might be wrong)
5,Entails (all men blush) v,Implies v
Presupposes (all Jacks children are
bald presupposes that Jack has
children.
Examples of Austin?s Performatives
1,Verdictives,Delivering a verdict,
judgement official or unofficial,acquit,convict,find (as a
matter of fact),hold,interpret as,understand,read it as,rule,
calculate,reckon,estimate,locate,place,date,measure,
put it at,make it,take it,grade,rank,rate,assess,value,
describe,characterize,diagnose,analyze,
2,Exercitives,Giving a decision in favor or against a certain
course of action from a position of power,
appoint,degrade,demote,dismiss,excommunicate,name,
order,command,direct,sentence,fine,grant,levy,vote for,
nominate,choose,claim,give,bequeath,pardon,resign,
warn,advise,plead,pray,entreat,beg,urge,press,
recommend,proclaim,announce,quash,counterman,annul,
repeal;,enact,reprieve,veto,dedicate,declare closed,
declare open
Examples of Austin?s Performatives
3,Comissives,Commits the speaker to a course of
action; implies obligation
promise,covenant,contract,undertake,bind
myself,give my word,…
4,Behabitives,Adopting an attitude in reaction to
the behavior of others
1) apologize,2) thank,3) sympathy 4) attitudes 5)
greetings,6) wishes,7) challenges (dare,defy,
protest,challenge),
5,Expositives,Expounding one's views,clarifying
? 1,affirm,deny,state,describe,class,identify;
2,remark,mention,
Points to remember
? Austin demonstrated that while some
words were used to describe things (a
locutionary act),other words (and
sentences) did things.
? The variety of words on the previous
slide point this out clearly.
? Austin’s work introduced a new field of
language study now known as pragmatics.
? Bourdieu pointed out that conditions of
the performative are all associated with
the institution.
Institutions (Bourdieu) and Speech Acts
1,Roles:
1,Particular persons must be appropriate for the
invocation of the act
2,Practices:
1,Must be an accepted conventional procedure
2,Must be executed correctly and completely
3,Other Considerations
1,Sincerity,Person must have those thoughts and
feelings requisite of the act
2,Consistency,Must actually conduct themselves
subsequently.
H,P,Grice
Conversational Implicature
A,How is C getting on in his job [at
the bank]?
B,Oh quite well,I think; he likes his
colleagues,and he hasn?t been to
prison yet.
i,What is the implicature?
i,While A hasn’t been to prison,he is
the sort of person who could easily
end up there.
ii,What is a Conversational
Implicature as opposed to Strictly
Speaking?
The Cooperative Principle and the Maxims
? The Principle CP
? Make your conversational contribution such as is required,at the
stage at which it occurs,by the accepted purpose or direction of the
talk exchange in which you are engaged.
? Specific Maxims
? Quality,make contribution 1) as informative and 2) not more
informative than required.
? Quality,don?t say 1) what you believe to be false and 2) that for
which you lack adequate evidence.
? Relation,Be relevant
? Manner,1) avoid obscurity; 2) avoid ambiguity; 3) be brief; 4) be
orderly.
? Others? Aesthetic,social,or moral,be polite,...
? Cultural Differences,What is relevant,polite,true will vary from culture
to culture.
A man who by saying that p [he?s not in jail] has implicated q [he?s
likely to steal money] may be said to have conversationally
implicated q provided that:
1,He is presumed to have followed the maxims or at least
the CP.
2,The supposition that he is aware that (q) is required in
order to make his saying (p) consistent with this
presumption;
3,The speaker thinks that it is within the hearer to workout
that the supposition is required.
4,And not what happens if it does not.
Conventional Schema
(things that are assumed to be in place)
? The conventional meaning of the words used,
together with the identity of any references that may
be involved.
? The CP and its maxims
? The context,linguistic or otherwise,of the utterance;
? Other items of background knowledge; and
? The fact … that all relevant items falling under the
previous headings are available to both participants
and both participants know or assume this to be the
case.
Group A,No maxims violated
? Petrol Example
? A,I am out of petrol,B,There is a garage around the corner.
? B would be infringing the maxim of,be relevant” unless he
thinks that A can by petrol at the garage.
? Jail example,presumption that connection between implication
and prison statement is obvious.
? The Smith Example
? A,Smith doesn?t seem to have a girlfriend these days,B,He
has been paying a lot of visits to New York lately,
? In this example too,the speaker implicates that which he
must be assumed to believe in order to preserve the
assumption that he is observing the maxim of relation.
Group B,Conflict between Maxims
An example in which a maxim is violated,but its violation is to be
explained by the supposition of a clash with another maxim.
? A,Where does C live? B,Somewhere in the south of
France,
? B is being vague (violating maximum of quality by
saying less) because to be more informative he would
have to say something he does not know thus
violating the maxim of quality.
Group C,Flouting
? Letter of recommendation,Dear Si,Mr X?s command of English is
excellent,and his attendance at tutorials has been regular,Yours,etc.
? President:,I never had sex with that woman.”
? Flouting allows one to say things through implicature without actually
saying it (without directly lying).
?,Since the truth of a conversational implicatum is not required by the
truth of what is said (...) The implicature is not carried by what is said,
but only by the saying of what is said,or by ?putting it that way.”
Examples that involve exploitation,that is a procedure by
which a maxim is flouted for the purpose of getting in a
conversational implicature by means of something of the
nature of a figure of speech.
The Universality of the CP and Maxims
? Grice assumes the the CP and the maims are universal
? We may also add that while universal they may not act
in the same way.
? Different background knowledge.
? Different ways of resolving conflicts (Group B) or
flouting (Group C).
? Do you really think I look nice in this outfit?
? Explain breakdowns in cross-cultural communication.
? The utility of these maxims in ordinary conversation.
Basis for the cooperative principle
? If it is universal is it genetic?
? If it is not genetic,why is it there and
how/
? The social contract.
Erving Goffman,On Face-Work,An analysis of
Ritual Social Interaction
? The concept of face,
? The presentation of the self to the other.
? Could be in positive or negative terms.
? Everyday terms
? Maintaining face,Loose Face,Wrong face,
Out of face,Poise,Save face,Give face
? Line,a specific type of face in a specific
situation.
? Basic structural feature of social interaction.
Face continued
? Rule of self respect,
? One is expected to maintain face
? Rule of considerateness,
? person must go to certain lengths to save the feelings
and the face of others present.
? The Face-Threatening Act.
? Something that does damage to one?s face.
? Face Work:
? Maintaining face; correcting dammage
? Often habitualized,Cultural variation,Individual variation
Basic Kinds of Facework
? Total avoidance to avoid possible FTA
? Defensive measures,avoidance; Shift topics; suppress
feelings; hedging feelings,…
? Protective maneuvers,
? Show respect and politeness; Show discretion about feelings
on topics that might embarrass others; Employs
circumlocutions and deceptions; Employs courtesies; joking
manner; neutralize offending activities by explaining them in
advance.
? Denial of FTA or the face threatening nature of the incident.
? Loss of control (ironically) others may protectively turn away
from him to give him time to assemble himself.
The Corrective Process
? Ritual,one’s face is a sacred thing
? The Stages
? Acknowledgement,Begins with acknowledge threat to face,
(The interchange,seems to be a basic concrete unit of social activity.0
? The challenge,participants call attention to the misconduct
? The offering,whereby a participant,typically the offender,is given a chance to
correct for the offence and re-establish the expressive order.
? explain as a meaningless act,a joke,unintentional,a mistake,unavoidable,not
acting himself,under the influence of something or somebody
? The acceptance (or not) by the offended of offering
? Gratitude by the offender (ritual equilibrium re-established)
When participants find themselves in an established state of ritual
disequilibrium or disgrace,and an attempt is made to re-establish a
satisfactory ritual state for them.
Variations
? The offender patently refuses to heed the warning and continues
with the offending behavior.
? Possibly calling offended’s bluff,Untenable position because
face for offender cannot be derived from it.
? The offender withdraws in a visible huff (showing righteous
indignation)
? Emotions play an important part in this process.
? both ways of salvaging face,but with high costs
? Some cultures apologize freely others with reluctance.
? The Liberian apology:
? I’m sorry your feelings were hurt when I said that.
The Game
? Every face-saving practice which is allowed to neutralize a
particular threat opens up the possibility that the threat will be
willfully introduced for what can be gained by it.
? If a person knows that his modesty will be answered by
other?s praise for him,he can fish for complements.
? He can arrange for favorable events to appear.
? Sudden withdrawal leading to need for repair.
? Cooperation in face-work
The Ritual Roles of the Self,Two senses:
? The self as an image pieced together from the expressive
implication of the full flow of events in an undertaking;
? The self as a player [agent] in a ritual game who copes
honorably or dishonorably,diplomatically or undiplomatically,
with the judgmental contingencies of the situation.
? Add this perspective to the view of the Self by G.H,Mead.
? Human need to be social
Greetings and Leave Taking
? How are greetings and leave-takings relevant to Goffman?
? Leave-takings are face threatening.
? Two ways to say good by
? Blessing,Sidong fayn (CP),Adieu,
? Will see again,Ma lo sina hoe (Mende) Au Revoir,See
ya later.
? Greetings (Has our relationship changed since we last met?
? What about Aloha and Ciao which mean both hello and
good bye?
So what?
? Universal human nature is not a very human thing,By acquiring
it,the person becomes a kind of construct,built up,not from
inner psychic propensities,but from moral rules that are
impressed upon him from without.
? The general capacity to be bound by moral rules may well belong
to the individual,but the particular set of rules which transforms
him into a human being derives from requirements established in
the ritual organization of social encounters,[the social contract]
? Similarly,the human nature of a particular set of persons may be
specifically designed for the special kind of undertakings in which
they participate [e.g.,cultural varition].
? Similarities between Goffman and Grice
Politeness,
Brown and Levinson
? Assumptions
? Based on Goffman?s concept of face
? Face,The public self-image that every member wants to
claim for himself.
? A communication (speech act) may contain an
imposition on the,face” of the Hearer.
? Language Universals extend beyond the confines of
grammar.
Two types of face,Positive and Negative
? Positive Face,Honor
? The public self,
? The positive consistent self-image
or ?personality? (crucially including
the desire that this self-image be
appreciated and approved of) by
interactants.
? the want of every member that his
wants be desirable to at least some
others.
? Similar to the perspective of,me” of
Mead,
? The,honor” of Weber.
? Negative Face,Privacy
? Invented by Brown and Levinson
? The concept of the right to privacy.
? The basic claim to territories,
personal preserves,rights to non-
distraction
? the want of every ?competent adult
member? that his actions be
unimpeded by others.
? Similar to the perspective of the,I” of
Mead
? Similar to freedom of action and
freedom of imposition.
Intrinsic FTAs
? It follows that,certain kinds of acts intrinsically
threaten face,.,when they,run contrary to the
wants of the addressee or speaker.
First Distinction,Kinds of face threatened
? S threatens H’s Negative Face
[imposition]
? Those that put pressure on H to act,
Orders and Requests; Suggestions
and Advice; Remindings; Threats and
warnings.
? Those that put H in debt (offers,
promises)
? Those that expression desire or envy
of H?s possessions which lead H to
think that he has to protect them
(complements,envy,expressions of
strong emotion (hatred,anger,lust))
? S threatens H’s Positive face
? negative evaluation,
disapproval(criticism);
disagreement
? indifference to H?s positive face,
violent emotions (reason to fear
S); irreverence; bad news about
H (good news about S); raising
divisive topics (politics); non-
cooperation; wrong terms of
address
Second distinctions,
Threats to H?s face versus threats to S?s
? Those that offend S’s negative
Face
? S expressing thanks,S
acceptance of H?s thanks; S?s
excuses; S acceptance of offers;
S?s response to H?s faux pas;
unwilling promises and offers
? Those that damage S’s
positive face
? apologies; acceptance of a
complement; breakdown of
physical control,self-
humiliation,confessions,
emotional leakage
Strategies for
doing FTAs
On Record (direc
tly Com-municatin
g the FTA directly
and un-equivocally
(I promise to,..)
Without redressive action,baldly
With redressive action Redress,
action that gives face to addresse
e by attempting to counteracting t
he potential face damage of the F
TE
Positive politeness Oriented towa
rd the positive face of H [honor]
Negative politeness Oriented tow
ard redressing the negative face
[privacy]
Off Record (indirect),This strategy,involves some ambiguity so that H is not obligated to re
spond (Damn,I?m out of cash cf,Grice.
Don?t do the FTA
Sociological variables (331)
? Computing the Weightiness of an FTA
? Wx = D(S,H) + P (H,S) + Rx
? D = Social Distance between S and H for the purposes
of that act and as determined by such things as the
frequency of interaction and the kinds of material and
nonmaterial goods exchanged....
? P = Power differential (Weber?s sense),Degree to
which H can impose his own plans and own face at the
expense of S?s plans and face.
?,I think you will take me to the store.”
Conclusion,Pragmatics
? Austin,Speech Acts (Illocutionary Acts)
? The linkages of these acts with institutions (Bourdieu).
? The range of vocabulary in any language that have to do with speech acts.
? Grice:The Cooperative Principle and conversational Maxims
? A Universal that is pragmatically grounded
? Helps explain implicature and variation
? Goffman,Face
? Activities involved in the presentation of self
? Pragmatically based universal
? Brown and Levinson,Politeness (positive and negative face)
? Types of strategies for interaction,
? Positivistic rules,(structuralist?
? Universals versus cultural variation?
Summary
Ricoeur Structuralism v Post structurali
sm
The dialectical relationship between langue and p
arole
Mead Symbolic Interactionism The role of language
The socially constructed self
Berger &
Luckmann
Basis for institutions The importance of the face to face interaction.
Austin Illocutionary Acts Connection of words with institutions.
Grice CP and Maxims Uses of implicature
Goffman Face Importance of face work to humans
Tannen Frames,Schema and Knowled
ge
Elaboration of Discourse
Fairclough Power/Ideology The inclusion of power and ideology in the analysi
s of texts.
The End
?Austin – How to do things with
words
?Grice – The Cooperative
Principle
?Goffman – Face
?Brown and Levinson – Politeness
?Wierzbicka – Culture and
Cognition
J,L,Austin How to do things with words.
? Locutionary Acts
? Saying something
about something
? Illucutionary acts
? Doing something by
saying something
? Performatives.
? Perlocutionary Acts
Performatives
1,The uttering of the words is,,the performance of which is
also the object of the utterance.
2,Circumstances around the performative must be appropriate
1,good faith v,bad faith
2,Other things have to go right (happy) (felicities)
3,Must be an accepted conventional procedure
4,Particular persons must be appropriate for the
invocation of the act
5,Procedure must be executed correctly and completely
6,Person must have those thoughts and feelings requisite
of the act
7,Must actually conduct themselves subsequently.
Performatives
3,Sinning against rules will make the
performance unhappy
4,Explicit (I bet,I promise,...) v
Implicit performatives (where the
performative is only a possibility
(might,perhaps,(you might be wrong)
5,Entails (all men blush) v,Implies v
Presupposes (all Jacks children are
bald presupposes that Jack has
children.
Examples of Austin?s Performatives
1,Verdictives,Delivering a verdict,
judgement official or unofficial,acquit,convict,find (as a
matter of fact),hold,interpret as,understand,read it as,rule,
calculate,reckon,estimate,locate,place,date,measure,
put it at,make it,take it,grade,rank,rate,assess,value,
describe,characterize,diagnose,analyze,
2,Exercitives,Giving a decision in favor or against a certain
course of action from a position of power,
appoint,degrade,demote,dismiss,excommunicate,name,
order,command,direct,sentence,fine,grant,levy,vote for,
nominate,choose,claim,give,bequeath,pardon,resign,
warn,advise,plead,pray,entreat,beg,urge,press,
recommend,proclaim,announce,quash,counterman,annul,
repeal;,enact,reprieve,veto,dedicate,declare closed,
declare open
Examples of Austin?s Performatives
3,Comissives,Commits the speaker to a course of
action; implies obligation
promise,covenant,contract,undertake,bind
myself,give my word,…
4,Behabitives,Adopting an attitude in reaction to
the behavior of others
1) apologize,2) thank,3) sympathy 4) attitudes 5)
greetings,6) wishes,7) challenges (dare,defy,
protest,challenge),
5,Expositives,Expounding one's views,clarifying
? 1,affirm,deny,state,describe,class,identify;
2,remark,mention,
Points to remember
? Austin demonstrated that while some
words were used to describe things (a
locutionary act),other words (and
sentences) did things.
? The variety of words on the previous
slide point this out clearly.
? Austin’s work introduced a new field of
language study now known as pragmatics.
? Bourdieu pointed out that conditions of
the performative are all associated with
the institution.
Institutions (Bourdieu) and Speech Acts
1,Roles:
1,Particular persons must be appropriate for the
invocation of the act
2,Practices:
1,Must be an accepted conventional procedure
2,Must be executed correctly and completely
3,Other Considerations
1,Sincerity,Person must have those thoughts and
feelings requisite of the act
2,Consistency,Must actually conduct themselves
subsequently.
H,P,Grice
Conversational Implicature
A,How is C getting on in his job [at
the bank]?
B,Oh quite well,I think; he likes his
colleagues,and he hasn?t been to
prison yet.
i,What is the implicature?
i,While A hasn’t been to prison,he is
the sort of person who could easily
end up there.
ii,What is a Conversational
Implicature as opposed to Strictly
Speaking?
The Cooperative Principle and the Maxims
? The Principle CP
? Make your conversational contribution such as is required,at the
stage at which it occurs,by the accepted purpose or direction of the
talk exchange in which you are engaged.
? Specific Maxims
? Quality,make contribution 1) as informative and 2) not more
informative than required.
? Quality,don?t say 1) what you believe to be false and 2) that for
which you lack adequate evidence.
? Relation,Be relevant
? Manner,1) avoid obscurity; 2) avoid ambiguity; 3) be brief; 4) be
orderly.
? Others? Aesthetic,social,or moral,be polite,...
? Cultural Differences,What is relevant,polite,true will vary from culture
to culture.
A man who by saying that p [he?s not in jail] has implicated q [he?s
likely to steal money] may be said to have conversationally
implicated q provided that:
1,He is presumed to have followed the maxims or at least
the CP.
2,The supposition that he is aware that (q) is required in
order to make his saying (p) consistent with this
presumption;
3,The speaker thinks that it is within the hearer to workout
that the supposition is required.
4,And not what happens if it does not.
Conventional Schema
(things that are assumed to be in place)
? The conventional meaning of the words used,
together with the identity of any references that may
be involved.
? The CP and its maxims
? The context,linguistic or otherwise,of the utterance;
? Other items of background knowledge; and
? The fact … that all relevant items falling under the
previous headings are available to both participants
and both participants know or assume this to be the
case.
Group A,No maxims violated
? Petrol Example
? A,I am out of petrol,B,There is a garage around the corner.
? B would be infringing the maxim of,be relevant” unless he
thinks that A can by petrol at the garage.
? Jail example,presumption that connection between implication
and prison statement is obvious.
? The Smith Example
? A,Smith doesn?t seem to have a girlfriend these days,B,He
has been paying a lot of visits to New York lately,
? In this example too,the speaker implicates that which he
must be assumed to believe in order to preserve the
assumption that he is observing the maxim of relation.
Group B,Conflict between Maxims
An example in which a maxim is violated,but its violation is to be
explained by the supposition of a clash with another maxim.
? A,Where does C live? B,Somewhere in the south of
France,
? B is being vague (violating maximum of quality by
saying less) because to be more informative he would
have to say something he does not know thus
violating the maxim of quality.
Group C,Flouting
? Letter of recommendation,Dear Si,Mr X?s command of English is
excellent,and his attendance at tutorials has been regular,Yours,etc.
? President:,I never had sex with that woman.”
? Flouting allows one to say things through implicature without actually
saying it (without directly lying).
?,Since the truth of a conversational implicatum is not required by the
truth of what is said (...) The implicature is not carried by what is said,
but only by the saying of what is said,or by ?putting it that way.”
Examples that involve exploitation,that is a procedure by
which a maxim is flouted for the purpose of getting in a
conversational implicature by means of something of the
nature of a figure of speech.
The Universality of the CP and Maxims
? Grice assumes the the CP and the maims are universal
? We may also add that while universal they may not act
in the same way.
? Different background knowledge.
? Different ways of resolving conflicts (Group B) or
flouting (Group C).
? Do you really think I look nice in this outfit?
? Explain breakdowns in cross-cultural communication.
? The utility of these maxims in ordinary conversation.
Basis for the cooperative principle
? If it is universal is it genetic?
? If it is not genetic,why is it there and
how/
? The social contract.
Erving Goffman,On Face-Work,An analysis of
Ritual Social Interaction
? The concept of face,
? The presentation of the self to the other.
? Could be in positive or negative terms.
? Everyday terms
? Maintaining face,Loose Face,Wrong face,
Out of face,Poise,Save face,Give face
? Line,a specific type of face in a specific
situation.
? Basic structural feature of social interaction.
Face continued
? Rule of self respect,
? One is expected to maintain face
? Rule of considerateness,
? person must go to certain lengths to save the feelings
and the face of others present.
? The Face-Threatening Act.
? Something that does damage to one?s face.
? Face Work:
? Maintaining face; correcting dammage
? Often habitualized,Cultural variation,Individual variation
Basic Kinds of Facework
? Total avoidance to avoid possible FTA
? Defensive measures,avoidance; Shift topics; suppress
feelings; hedging feelings,…
? Protective maneuvers,
? Show respect and politeness; Show discretion about feelings
on topics that might embarrass others; Employs
circumlocutions and deceptions; Employs courtesies; joking
manner; neutralize offending activities by explaining them in
advance.
? Denial of FTA or the face threatening nature of the incident.
? Loss of control (ironically) others may protectively turn away
from him to give him time to assemble himself.
The Corrective Process
? Ritual,one’s face is a sacred thing
? The Stages
? Acknowledgement,Begins with acknowledge threat to face,
(The interchange,seems to be a basic concrete unit of social activity.0
? The challenge,participants call attention to the misconduct
? The offering,whereby a participant,typically the offender,is given a chance to
correct for the offence and re-establish the expressive order.
? explain as a meaningless act,a joke,unintentional,a mistake,unavoidable,not
acting himself,under the influence of something or somebody
? The acceptance (or not) by the offended of offering
? Gratitude by the offender (ritual equilibrium re-established)
When participants find themselves in an established state of ritual
disequilibrium or disgrace,and an attempt is made to re-establish a
satisfactory ritual state for them.
Variations
? The offender patently refuses to heed the warning and continues
with the offending behavior.
? Possibly calling offended’s bluff,Untenable position because
face for offender cannot be derived from it.
? The offender withdraws in a visible huff (showing righteous
indignation)
? Emotions play an important part in this process.
? both ways of salvaging face,but with high costs
? Some cultures apologize freely others with reluctance.
? The Liberian apology:
? I’m sorry your feelings were hurt when I said that.
The Game
? Every face-saving practice which is allowed to neutralize a
particular threat opens up the possibility that the threat will be
willfully introduced for what can be gained by it.
? If a person knows that his modesty will be answered by
other?s praise for him,he can fish for complements.
? He can arrange for favorable events to appear.
? Sudden withdrawal leading to need for repair.
? Cooperation in face-work
The Ritual Roles of the Self,Two senses:
? The self as an image pieced together from the expressive
implication of the full flow of events in an undertaking;
? The self as a player [agent] in a ritual game who copes
honorably or dishonorably,diplomatically or undiplomatically,
with the judgmental contingencies of the situation.
? Add this perspective to the view of the Self by G.H,Mead.
? Human need to be social
Greetings and Leave Taking
? How are greetings and leave-takings relevant to Goffman?
? Leave-takings are face threatening.
? Two ways to say good by
? Blessing,Sidong fayn (CP),Adieu,
? Will see again,Ma lo sina hoe (Mende) Au Revoir,See
ya later.
? Greetings (Has our relationship changed since we last met?
? What about Aloha and Ciao which mean both hello and
good bye?
So what?
? Universal human nature is not a very human thing,By acquiring
it,the person becomes a kind of construct,built up,not from
inner psychic propensities,but from moral rules that are
impressed upon him from without.
? The general capacity to be bound by moral rules may well belong
to the individual,but the particular set of rules which transforms
him into a human being derives from requirements established in
the ritual organization of social encounters,[the social contract]
? Similarly,the human nature of a particular set of persons may be
specifically designed for the special kind of undertakings in which
they participate [e.g.,cultural varition].
? Similarities between Goffman and Grice
Politeness,
Brown and Levinson
? Assumptions
? Based on Goffman?s concept of face
? Face,The public self-image that every member wants to
claim for himself.
? A communication (speech act) may contain an
imposition on the,face” of the Hearer.
? Language Universals extend beyond the confines of
grammar.
Two types of face,Positive and Negative
? Positive Face,Honor
? The public self,
? The positive consistent self-image
or ?personality? (crucially including
the desire that this self-image be
appreciated and approved of) by
interactants.
? the want of every member that his
wants be desirable to at least some
others.
? Similar to the perspective of,me” of
Mead,
? The,honor” of Weber.
? Negative Face,Privacy
? Invented by Brown and Levinson
? The concept of the right to privacy.
? The basic claim to territories,
personal preserves,rights to non-
distraction
? the want of every ?competent adult
member? that his actions be
unimpeded by others.
? Similar to the perspective of the,I” of
Mead
? Similar to freedom of action and
freedom of imposition.
Intrinsic FTAs
? It follows that,certain kinds of acts intrinsically
threaten face,.,when they,run contrary to the
wants of the addressee or speaker.
First Distinction,Kinds of face threatened
? S threatens H’s Negative Face
[imposition]
? Those that put pressure on H to act,
Orders and Requests; Suggestions
and Advice; Remindings; Threats and
warnings.
? Those that put H in debt (offers,
promises)
? Those that expression desire or envy
of H?s possessions which lead H to
think that he has to protect them
(complements,envy,expressions of
strong emotion (hatred,anger,lust))
? S threatens H’s Positive face
? negative evaluation,
disapproval(criticism);
disagreement
? indifference to H?s positive face,
violent emotions (reason to fear
S); irreverence; bad news about
H (good news about S); raising
divisive topics (politics); non-
cooperation; wrong terms of
address
Second distinctions,
Threats to H?s face versus threats to S?s
? Those that offend S’s negative
Face
? S expressing thanks,S
acceptance of H?s thanks; S?s
excuses; S acceptance of offers;
S?s response to H?s faux pas;
unwilling promises and offers
? Those that damage S’s
positive face
? apologies; acceptance of a
complement; breakdown of
physical control,self-
humiliation,confessions,
emotional leakage
Strategies for
doing FTAs
On Record (direc
tly Com-municatin
g the FTA directly
and un-equivocally
(I promise to,..)
Without redressive action,baldly
With redressive action Redress,
action that gives face to addresse
e by attempting to counteracting t
he potential face damage of the F
TE
Positive politeness Oriented towa
rd the positive face of H [honor]
Negative politeness Oriented tow
ard redressing the negative face
[privacy]
Off Record (indirect),This strategy,involves some ambiguity so that H is not obligated to re
spond (Damn,I?m out of cash cf,Grice.
Don?t do the FTA
Sociological variables (331)
? Computing the Weightiness of an FTA
? Wx = D(S,H) + P (H,S) + Rx
? D = Social Distance between S and H for the purposes
of that act and as determined by such things as the
frequency of interaction and the kinds of material and
nonmaterial goods exchanged....
? P = Power differential (Weber?s sense),Degree to
which H can impose his own plans and own face at the
expense of S?s plans and face.
?,I think you will take me to the store.”
Conclusion,Pragmatics
? Austin,Speech Acts (Illocutionary Acts)
? The linkages of these acts with institutions (Bourdieu).
? The range of vocabulary in any language that have to do with speech acts.
? Grice:The Cooperative Principle and conversational Maxims
? A Universal that is pragmatically grounded
? Helps explain implicature and variation
? Goffman,Face
? Activities involved in the presentation of self
? Pragmatically based universal
? Brown and Levinson,Politeness (positive and negative face)
? Types of strategies for interaction,
? Positivistic rules,(structuralist?
? Universals versus cultural variation?
Summary
Ricoeur Structuralism v Post structurali
sm
The dialectical relationship between langue and p
arole
Mead Symbolic Interactionism The role of language
The socially constructed self
Berger &
Luckmann
Basis for institutions The importance of the face to face interaction.
Austin Illocutionary Acts Connection of words with institutions.
Grice CP and Maxims Uses of implicature
Goffman Face Importance of face work to humans
Tannen Frames,Schema and Knowled
ge
Elaboration of Discourse
Fairclough Power/Ideology The inclusion of power and ideology in the analysi
s of texts.
The End
