Hornoiu Lec III Pragmatica

aUniversitatea OVIDIUS Constana
Departamentul ID-IFR
Facultatea Litere
Specializarea Romana- engleza
Forma de nvm!nt ID " IFR
#nul de studiu III
Semestrul I
Vala$il ncep!nd cu anul universitar %&&'-%&(&
Caiet de Studiu Individual
pentru
Limba engleza contemporana
Pragmatica
Individual study book
for
Contemporary English Language
Pragmatics
Coordonator disciplin: conf univ dr !I"#" $%&#%I'
)ragmatics and ot*er areas o+ linguistic investigation
Contemporary English Language ( Pragmatics
I#)&%!'C)I%#
,*e course addresses t*e IIIrd -ear students. /nglis* minors. and is meant to
provide an introduction to pragmatics0 Its aim is to +amiliarize students 1it* t*e
2e- notions in t*e +ield o+ pragmatics3 speec* acts. conversational implicatures.
presupposition. inde4icals. 1*ile anc*oring t*em in t*e users5 cognitive
2no1ledge a$out t*e 1orld0

/n6o- and good luc27
Contemporary English Language - Pragmatics 2
Contemporary English Language * Pragmatics
C%#)E#)S
'nit
+
,
-
.
)itle
I8,RODUC,IO8
)R#9:#,ICS #8D O,;/R #R/#S OF LI89UIS,IC
I8V/S,I9#,IO8
O$6ectives Unit (
(0(
(0%
,est Unit (
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit (
<i$liograp*- Unit (
)R/SU))OSI,IO8
O$6ectives Unit %
%0(
%0%
,est Unit %
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit %
<i$liograp*- Unit (
,=)/S OF )R/SU))OSI,IO8S
O$6ectives Unit >
>0(
>0%
>0>
,est Unit >
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit >
<i$liograp*- Unit >
I:)LICI, :/#8I89
O$6ectives Unit ?
?0(
?0%
,est Unit ?
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit ?
Page
%
@
A
A
B
'
((
((
(%
(>
(>
(?
(@
(A
(A
(B
(C
(C
%&
%%
%>
%@
%@
%A
%B
%B
%C
>%
>>
>?
/
0
1
<i$liograp*- Unit
D/IDIS
O$6ectives Unit @
@0(
@0%
,est Unit @
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit @
<i$liograp*- Unit @
,;/ ,;/OR= OF S)//C; #C,S
O$6ectives Unit A
A0(
A0%
,est Unit A
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit
<i$liograp*- Unit A
I8DIR/C, S)//C; #C,S
O$6ectives Unit B
B0(
,est Unit B
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit B
<i$liograp*- Unit B
<I<LIO9R#);=

%>
>@
>A
>A
?&
?%
?>
?>
?@
?A
?A
@&
@%
@>
@>
@?
@@
@@
@C
@C
@'
A&
'nit +
Pragmatics and other areas of linguistic investigation
Contents
O$6ectives Unit (
(0(
(0%
(0>
,est Unit(
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit (
<i$liograp*- Unit (

Page
@
A
A
B
'
((
((
%23EC)I4ES 'nit +
to distinguis* $et1een pragmatics and ot*er areas o+ linguisitic investigation
to de+ine pragmatics in relation to t*e concepts o+ speaker meaning,
contextual meaning, and relative distance
to understand t*e di++erence $et1een t*e #merican and Continental approac*
to pragmatics
++ !efinitions and background: pragmatics and other areas of language investigation
Ee- 1ords
;o1 to do it
semiotics. s-nta4. semantics. pragmatics. sing. language user
,*e modern usage o+ t*e term pragmatics is attri$uta$le to t*e p*ilosop*er C*arles
:orris 1*o 1as concerned to outline t*e +rame1or2 o+ a science o+ signs. *e called
semiotics Fit*in semiotics. :orris distinguis*ed t*ree distinct $ranc*es linguistic
inGuir-3
( Synta5 * t*e stud- o+ t*e H+ormal relation o+ signs to one anot*erI0 In ot*er 1ords.
synta5 is t*e stud- o+ t*e relations*ips $et1een linguistic +orms. *o1 t*e- are
arranged in seGuences and 1*ic* seGuences are 1ell-+ormed0 ,*is t-pe o+ stud-
generall- ta2es place 1it*out considering an- 1orld o+ re+erence or an- user o+ t*e
+orms0
( Semantics * t*e stud- o+ Ht*e relations o+ signs to t*e o$6ects to 1*ic* t*e signs
are applica$le Jt*eir designataKI0 So semantics is t*e stud- o+ t*e relations*ips
$et1een linguistic +orms and entities in t*e 1orld. i0e0 *o1 1ords literall- connect to
t*ings0 Semantic anal-sis also attempts to esta$lis* t*e relations*ip $et1een ver$al
description and states o+ a++airs in t*e 1orld as accurate JtrueK or not Ji0e0 +alseK.
regardless o+ 1*o produces t*at description0 In t*is regard. 1e can spea2 o+
semantics as $eing trut*-conditional0
( Pragmatics * t*e stud- o+ Ht*e relation o+ signs to interpretersI0 )ragmatics is t*e
stud- o+ t*e relations*ips $et1een linguistic +orms and t*e users o+ t*ose +orms0 In
t*is t*ree-part distinction. onl- pragmatics allo1s *umans into t*e anal-sis0 ,*e
advantage o+ stud-ing language via pragmatics is t*at one can tal2 a$out people5s
intended meanings. t*eir assumptions. t*eir purposes. t*eir goals and t*e 2inds o+
actions t*at t*e- are per+orming 1*en t*e- spea20
)ragmatics is concerned 1it* t*e stud-ing o+ meaning as communicated $- a
spea2er and interpreted $- a listener Jor readerK0 It *as more to do 1it* t*e anal-sis
o+ 1*at people mean $- t*eir utterances rat*er t*an 1*at t*e 1ords or p*rases t*at
occur in t*ose utterances mig*t mean $- t*emselves0 Pragmatics is the study of
speaker meaning.
,*is t-pe o+ stud- necessaril- involves t*e interpretation o+ 1*at people
mean in a particular conte4t and *o1 t*e conte4t in+luences 1*at is said0 It reGuires
a consideration o+ *o1 spea2ers organize 1*at t*e- intend to sa- in accordance 1it*
1*o t*e- are tal2ing to. 1*ere. 1*en and under 1*at circumstances0 Pragmatics is
the study of contextual meaning.
,*is $ranc* o+ linguistic investigation also e4plores t*e 1a- listeners ma2e
in+erences a$out 1*at is said in order to arrive at an interpretation o+ t*e spea2er5s
intended meaning0 Pragmatics is the study of how more gets communicated than is
said.
,*e c*oice $et1een 1*at is said and 1*at remains unsaid ma- $e tied to t*e
notion o+ distance0 Closeness 1*et*er it is p*-sical. social or conceptual implies
s*ared e4perience0 ,a2ing into account *o1 close or distant t*e listener is. spea2ers
determine *o1 muc* needs to $e said0 Pragmatics is the study of the expression of
relative distance.

Evaluation test ++
)rovide de+initions o+ t*e +ollo1ing concepts3
- semiotics
- s-nta4
- pragmatics
#ns1ers to evaluation test (0( on page ((
+, )he "merican vs the Continental approach
Ee- 1ords ,*e #merican approac* to pragmatics. t*e Continental approac* to pragmatics.
sociolinguisitics. *onori+ics. speec* acts
Since :orris5s introduction o+ t*e tric*otom- s-nta4. semantics. and pragmatics. t*e
last term *as come to $e used in t1o ver- distinct 1a-s0 First. according to t*e
"merican approach. pragmatics is t*e stud- o+ t*ose relations $et1een language
;o1 to do it
and conte4t t*at are grammaticalized. or encoded in t*e structure o+ language0 In
ot*er 1ords t*is approac* deals 1it* t*e e4pression o+ pragmatic relations 1it* t*e
*elp o+ strictl- linguistic means. suc* as t*e rules o+ grammar operating on
p*onological. morp*ological and s-ntactic elements0 ,*is is a strictl- linguisticall-
oriented de+inition0 Suc* a scope +or pragmatics 1ould include t*e stud- o+ dei5is
and pro$a$l- t*e stud- o+ presuppositon and speech acts It 1ould e4clude t*e
stud- o+ principles o+ language usage t*at could not $e s*o1n to *ave an impact on
t*e grammar o+ languages0 ,*us t*e e4tremel- important pragmatic concept o+
conversational implicature and the principle of politeness 1ould lie outside t*e
scope o+ t*is approac* to pragmatics0 ;o1ever. suc* a scope +or pragmatics *as t*e
advantage o+ dra1ing a clear-cut distinction $et1een pragmatics and neig*$ouring
+ields li2e sociolinguistics and ps-c*olinguistics0
Second. 1it*in t*e Continental approach to pragmatics a t*eor- o+
language as a user5s interest s*ould rest on a t*eor- o+ t*e user0 Since t*e user is a
mem$er o+ a particular *uman societ-. suc* a t*eor- s*ould comprise ever-t*ing
t*at c*aracterizes t*e user as a person 1*ose use o+ language depends on t*e rules
and norms t*at are valid at an- time. in an- place in t*e communit- in 1*ic* *e"s*e
is living0 ,*is is a return to t*e vie1 o+ pragmatics espoused $- :orris t*at
Hpragmatics is a$out ever-t*ing *uman in t*e communication process.
ps-c*ological. $iological and sociologicalI0 ,*is de+inition. 1*ic* is still generall-
used on t*e Continent. incorporates as muc* societal conte4t as possi$le0 Fit*in t*is
t*eoretical +rame1or2 sociolinguistics. +or instance. $ecomes part o+ pragmatics.
$eing. as some linguists argued. applied pragmatics0
In t*is course o+ lectures 1e s*all assume. +or 1or2ing purposes. t*at
pragmatics eGuates 1it* a t*eor- o+ language understanding t*at ta2es conte4t into
account. in order to complement t*e contri$ution t*at semantics ma2es to meaning0
In ot*er 1ords. pragmatics is t*e stud- o+ all t*ose aspects o+ meaning not captured
in a semantic t*eor-0 ;o1ever. one o$6ection to suc* a de+inition could $e t*at t*e
scope o+ pragmatics 1ould var- according to t*e 2ind o+ semantic t*eor- adopted0
#t t*is point one s*ould attempt a conceptual clari+ication and tr- to delimit
t*e scope o+ pragmatics $- a $oundar- dra1ing e4ercise0 ,*us t*e upper $ound o+
pragmatics is provided $- t*e $orders o+ semantics and t*e lo1er $ound $-
sociolinguistics Jand per*aps ps-c*olinguistics. tooK
9iven t*e di++iculties o+ dra1ing a neat dividing line $et1een semantics and
pragmatics. t*e $est strateg- seems to restrict semantics to trut*-conditional content0
)ragmatics is meaning minus trut* conditions0 #s +ar as t*e lo1er $ound is
concerned. i0e0 t*e $order $et1een pragmatics and sociolinguistics. *ere t*ings are
even more pro$lematic0 Dra1ing a $oundar- $et1een sociolinguistic and pragmatic
p*enomena is an e4tremel- di++icult enterprise0 Let us consider an instance o+
sociolinguistic p*enomena and as2 *o1 it +alls 1it* respect to % o+ our de+initions o+
pragmatics. t*e most restrictive de+inition Ji0e0 t*e #merican approac*K and t*e
$roadest one Ji0e0 t*e Continental approac*K0
Consider honorifics most simpl- e4empli+ied $- t*e polite singular pronoun
o+ address in some /uropean languages Ji0e0 t*e ,"V distinctionK0 I+ 1e ta2e t*e vie1
t*at pragmatics is concerned onl- 1it* grammaticall- encoded aspects o+ t*e
conte4t. t*en 1e mig*t propose a tid- division o+ la$our $et1een pragmatic and
sociolinguistic accounts o+ *onori+ics3
a0 )ragmatics 1ould $e concerned 1it* t*e meaning o+ *onori+ics Je0g0 1it* t*e
speci+ication t*at V encodes t*at t*e addressee is sociall- distant or superiorK
$0 Sociolinguistics 1ould $e concerned 1it* t*e recipes +or t*e usage o+ suc*
items Je0g0 t*e speci+ication t*at among some segment o+ t*e speec*
communit-. V is used to aunts. uncles. teac*ers. etc0K0 I+ 1e ta2e pragmatics
to $e t*e stud- o+ t*e contri$ution o+ conte4t to language understanding.
consider 1*at *appens 1*en an aunt t*at normall- gives *er nep*e1 ,.
s1itc*es on one occasion to V0 In order to predict and account +or t*e
intended ironic or angr- meaning a pragmatic t*eor- must *ave availa$le t*e
detailed recipe +or usage t*at tells us t*at V is not t*e normal usage. and t*us
not to $e ta2en at +ace value0 So on t*is $roader scope +or pragmatics.
pragmatic accounts o+ language understanding 1ill at least need access to
sociolinguistic in+ormation0 It is +rom t*is point o+ vie1 t*at 1e can consider
sociolinguistics to $e applied pragmatics0
Evaluation test +,
/4plain and illustrate t*e di++erence $et1een t*e #merican and t*e Continental
approac* to pragmatics0
#ns1ers to evaluation test (0% on page ((
Instead o+
summar-
,*is is t*e end o+ Unit (0 I recommend t*at -ou revise t*e main topics o+ t*is unit0
It is time +or -ou to ta2e ,est Unit ( 1*ic* t*en s*ould $e *anded in to -our course
instructor0
)est 'nit +
I Comment on t*e +ollo1ing assertions3
1. Pragmatics is the study of speaker meaning.
2. Pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning.
3. Pragmatics is the study of how more gets communicated than is said.
4. Pragmatics is the study of the expression of relative distance.
II /4plain and illustrate t*e #merican approac* to pragmatics0
III /4plain and illustrate t*e Continental approac* to pragmatics0
"ns6er to the evaluation test
"ns6er ++ Re+er to Section (0(0 to c*ec2 -our ans1ers
"ns6er +, Re+er to Section (0%0 to c*ec2 -our ans1ers
2ibliography 'nit +
Davis. S0 J(''(K. Pragmatics. A eader, O4+ord Universit- )ress
9reen. 90 J(''AK. Pragmatics and !atural "anguage #nderstanding, $2
nd
edn%,
La1rence /rl$aum #ssociates. Inc0 )u$lis*ers
Leec*. 90 J('C>K. Principles of Pragmatics, Longman
Levinson. S0 J('C>K. Pragmatics, Cam$ridge Universit- )ress
:e-. L0 J(''>K. Pragmatics& An 'ntroduction, <lac21ell
'nit ,
P&ES'PP%SI)I%#
Contents
O$6ectives Unit %
%0(0
%0%
,est Unit%
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit %
<i$liograp*- Unit %

Page
(>
(>
(?
(@
(A
(A
%23EC)I4ES '#I) ,
,o understand t*e concepts o+ presupposition and entailment
,o +amiliarize onesel+ 1it* Frege5s t*eor- o+ presupposition
,o distinguis* $et1een presupposition and entailment
,o de+ine and illustrate constanc- under negation
,+ 7rege8s theory of presupposition
Ee- 1ords
;o1 to do it
)resupposition. re+erence. in+erence. entailment
:an- o+ t*e issues t*at are central to t*e concept o+ presupposition 1ere +irst raised
$- Frege J(C'%K 1*o argued t*at Mi+ an-t*ing is asserted t*ere is al1a-s an o$vious
presupposition t*at t*e simple or compound proper names used *ave a re+erence50 I+
one asserts3
J(K Eepler died in miser-
t*ere is a presupposition t*at t*e name (epler designates somet*ing0 :oreover. *e
1ent on to sa- t*at MEepler designates somet*ing5 is not part o+ t*e meaning o+
MEepler died in miser-5N i+ it 1as t*en MEepler died in miser-5 1ould *ave t*e logical
+orm MEepler died in miser- O Eepler designates somet*ing5 and t*us t*e sentence
MEepler didn5t die in miser-5 1ould $e eGuivalent to MEepler didn5t die O t*e name
Eepler *as no re+erence50 ,*at *e +elt 1ould $e a$surd0 ,*ere+ore MEepler designates
somet*ing5 is t*e presupposition o+ $ot* MEepler died in miser-5 and its negative
counterpart MEepler didn5t die in miser-50
Frege s2etc*es a t*eor- o+ presupposition along t*e +ollo1ing lines3
JiK Re+erring p*rases and temporal clauses carr- presuppositions to t*e
e++ect t*at t*e- do in +act re+er0
JiiK # sentence and its negative counterpart s*are t*e same set o+
presuppositions0
JiiiK In order +or a sentence or assertion to $e true or +alse its presupposition
must $e true or satis+ied0
In t*e earl- @&s Stra1son distinguis*ed $et1een sentences and uses o+ sentences to
ma2e statements t*at are true or +alse0 #ccording to Stra1son. sentences are not true
or +alse. onl- statements are0 ;ence t*e statement3
J%K ,*e Eing o+ France is 1ise
ma- *ave $een true in sa- (AB& and +alse in (BB&. $ut in ('B& t*e statement cannot
$e said to $e eit*er true or +alseN t*e Guestion o+ its trut* or +alsit- does not even
arise0 Stra1son claimed t*at t*ere is a special 2ind o+ relations*ip $et1een
,*e Eing o+ France is 1ise
and
J>K ,*ere is a present Eing o+ France
namel- t*at J>K is a precondition +or J%K $eing 6udgea$le as eit*er true or +alse0 ;e
called t*is relation presupposition and argued t*at it is a special species o+
in+erence. distinct +rom logical implication or entailment. a species 1*ic* derives
+rom conventions a$out t*e use o+ re+erring e4pressions0 :ore +ormall-. *e *eld t*at
a statement # presupposes a statement < i++ < is a precondition o+ t*e trut* or +alsit-
o+ #0 Follo1ing Frege. Stra1son argued t*at a negative sentence. 1*en uttered. 1ill
preserve its presuppositions0
Evaluation test ,+
(0 :ention t*e main points in Frege5s t*eor- o+ presuppostion
%0 9ive a $rie+ account o+ Stra1son5s later develpoments regarding t*e t*eor- o+
presuppostion
#ns1ers to evaluation test %0( on page (A
,, Presupposition vs entailment
Ee- 1ords
;o1 to do it
presupposition. entailments. constanc- under negation
,*e simplest vie1 o+ semantic presupposition 1ould $e $ased on t*e +ollo1ing
de+inition3
# sentence # semanticall- presupposes anot*er sentence < i++
JaK in all situations 1*ere # is true. < is true
J$K in all situations 1*ere # is +alse. < is true
Frege5s and Stra1son5s claim t*at presuppositions are preserved in negative
sentences and statements provides us 1it* an operational test +or identi+-ing
presuppositions generall- re+erred to as constancy under negation In order to
identi+- t*e presuppositionJsK. 1e simpl- ta2e a sentence. negate it Ji0e0 negate t*e
main ver$ or t*e topmost clause in a comple4 sentenceK and see 1*at in+erences
survive. i0e0 1*at in+erences are s*ared $- $ot* t*e positive and t*e negative
sentence0
J?K Lo*n managed to stop in time
*as t*e +ollo1ing in+erences3
J@K Lo*n stopped in time
JAK Lo*n tried to stop in time
From t*e o+ J?K
JBK Lo*n didn5t manage to stop in time
1e cannot in+er J@K since its main point is to den- J@K0
,*us on t*e $asis o+ t*e negation test and t*e assumption o+ its su++icienc- JAK is t*e
presupposition o+ $ot* J?K and JBKN J@K is t*e entailment o+ J?K0 So negation alters a
sentence5s entailments. $ut it leaves its presuppositions untouc*ed0
# semantic entailment is de+ina$le as +ollo1s3
# semanticall- entails < J#PQ<K i++ ever- situation t*at ma2es # true. ma2es <
true i0e0 in all 1orlds in 1*ic* # is true. < is true0
Evaluation test ,,
De+ine and illustrate t*e +ollo1ing concepts3 entailment. presupposition. constancy
under negation
#ns1ers to evaluation test %0% on page (A
Instead o+
summar-
,*is is t*e end o+ Unit %0 I recommend t*at -ou revise t*e main topics o+ t*is unit0
It is time +or -ou to ta2e ,est Unit % 1*ic* t*en s*ould $e *anded in to -our course
instructor0
)est unit ,
(0 9ive a $rie+ account o+ Frege5s t*eor- o+ presupposition
%0 /4plain and illustrate t*e di++erence $et1een presupposition and entailment
"ns6er ,+ Re+er to Section %0(0 to c*ec2 -our ans1ers
"ns6er,, Re+er to Section %0%0 to c*ec2 -our ans1ers
2ibliography 'nit ,
Davis. S0. Pragmatics. A eader, O4+ord Universit- )ress. (''(
9reen. 9. Pragmatics and !atural "anguage #nderstanding, $2
nd
edn%, La1rence
/rl$aum #ssociates. Inc0 )u$lis*ers. (''A
Leec*. 90. Principles of Pragmatics, Longman. ('C>
Levinson. S0. Pragmatics, Cam$ridge Universit- )ress. ('C>
:e-. L0. Pragmatics& An 'ntroduction, <lac21ell. (''>
'nit -
)9PES %7 P&ES'PP%SI)I%#S
Contents
O$6ectives Unit >
>0(0
>0%0
>0>
,est Unit>
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit >
<i$liograp*- Unit >

Page
(C
(C
%&
%%
%>
%@
%@
%23EC)I4ES '#I) -
,o understand t*e concepts o+ semantic and pragmatic presupposition
,o identi+- t*e main t-pes o+ semantic presuppositions
,o de+ine and illustrate t*e main t-pes o+ semantic presuppositions
,o identi+- t*e presupposition triggers
,o de+ine and illustrate pragmatic presupposition
-+ )9PES %7 SE:"#)IC P&ES'PP%SI)I%#
Ee- 1ords
;o1 to do it
e4istential presupposition. +active presupposition. le4ical presupposition. structural
presupposition. non-+active presupposition. counter-+actual presupposition
(0 ,*e e5istential presupposition is assumed to $e present in possessive
constructions3
-our car RR -ou *ave a car
and more generall- in an- de+inite noun p*rase0 <- using an- o+ t*e +ollo1ing
e4pressions t*e S is assumed to $e committed to t*e e4istence o+ t*e entities named3
t*e Eing o+ S1eden RR t*e Eing o+ S1eden e4ists
t*e cat RR t*ere is a cat
t*e girl ne4t door RR t*ere is a girl living ne4t door
%0 ,*e presupposed in+ormation +ollo1ing a ver$ li2e know can $e treated as a +act
and is re+erred to as factive presupposition0 # num$er o+ ot*er ver$s suc* as
reali)e, regret as 1ell as p*rases involving *e and aware, odd and glad *ave factive
presuppositions:
S*e realized *e 1as ill0 RR ;e 1as ill0
Fe regret telling *im0 RR Fe told *im0
I5m glad t*at it5s over0 RR It5s over0
>0 ,*ere are also ot*er +orms t*at ma- $e treated as t*e source o+ le5ical
presuppositions In le4ical presuppositions. t*e use o+ one +orm 1it* its asserted
meaning is conventionall- interpreted 1it* t*e presupposition t*at anot*er non-
asserted meaning is understood0 /ac* time 1e sa- t*at someone managed to do
something t*e asserted meaning is t*at Mt*e person succeeded in some 1a-50 F*en
1e sa- t*at someone didn+t manage t*e asserted meaning is t*at Mt*e person didn5t
succeed50 In $ot* cases. *o1ever. t*ere is a presupposition Jnon-assertedK t*at Mt*e
person tried to do somet*ing50 So managed is conventionall- interpreted as asserting
Msucceeded5 and presupposing Mtried50 Ot*er e4amples o+ le4ical items t*at trigger
le4ical presuppositions include stop, start, again3
;e stopped smo2ing0 RR ;e used to smo2e0
,*e- started complaining0 RR ,*e- 1eren5t complaining $e+ore0
=ou are late again0 RR =ou 1ere late $e+ore0
?0 In addition to t*e presuppositions associated 1it* t*e use o+ certain 1ords and
p*rases. 1e can also identi+- t*e class o+ structural presuppositions In t*is case.
certain sentence structures *ave $een anal-zed as conventionall- and regularl-
presupposing t*at part o+ t*e structure is alread- assumed to $e true0 For e4ample. a
wh- interrogative construction is conventionall- interpreted 1it* t*e presupposition
t*at t*e in+ormation a+ter t*e wh- +orm is alread- 2no1n to $e t*e case0
F*en did *e leaveS RR ;e le+t0
F*ere did -ou $u- t*at $oo2S RR =ou $oug*t t*e $oo20
F*o is t*e pro+essor o+ linguistics at :I,S RR Someone is t*e pro+essor o+
linguistics at :I,0
,es-no interrogatives and alternative interrogatives presuppose t*e dis6unction o+
t*eir possi$le ans1ers3
Is t*ere a pro+essor o+ linguistics at :I,S RR /it*er t*ere is a pro+essor o+ linguistics
at :I, or t*ere isn5t0
Is 8e1castle in /ngland or is it in #ustraliaS RR8e1castle is in /ngland or
8e1castle is in #ustralia0
So +ar 1e *ave considered conte4ts in 1*ic* presuppositions are assumed to
$e true0 ,*ere are. *o1ever. instances o+ non(factive presuppositions associated
1it* a num$er o+ ver$s suc* as dream, imagine, pretend, etc0 ,*ese ver$s are used
1it* t*e presupposition t*at 1*at +ollo1s is not true0
I dreamt t*at I 1as ric*0 RR I 1as not ric*0
Fe imagined 1e 1ere in ;a1aii0 RR Fe 1ere not in ;a1aii0
;e pretends to $e ill0 RR ;e is not ill0
Second t-pe if- clauses are associated 1it* counter(factual
presuppositions, meaning t*at 1*at is presupposed is not onl- not true. $ut is t*e
opposite o+ 1*at is true. i0e0 it is contrar- to +acts0
I+ -ou 1ere m- +riend. -ou 1ould *ave *elped0 RR =ou are not m- +riend0
Evaluation test -+
(0 De+ine and illustrate t*e +ollo1ing concepts3
- e4istential presuppositions
- +active presuppositions
( le4ical presuppositions
%0 identi+- t*e presuppositions triggered $- t*e p*rases or structures in italics3
aK Lo*n managed to pass t*e e4am0
$K .he (ing of /ngland visited us0
cK 0ary+s dog is cute0
dK ,*e- started complaining0
eK 1hile C*oms2- 1as revolutionizing linguistics. t*e rest o+ social science 1as
asleep
+K 1hat Lo*n lost was *is 1allet0
gK 1hen did -ou leaveS
*K 's 8e1castle in /ngland or in #ustraliaS

#ns1ers to evaluation test >0( on page %@
-, Presupposition triggers
Ee- 1ords
;o1 to do it
)resupposition trigger. de+inite description. +active ver$. implicative ver$. c*ange o+
state ver$. iterative. temporal clause. non-restrictive relative clause
#ssociated 1it* t*ese t-pes o+ presuppositions are various 1ords or aspects o+
sur+ace structure in general0 ,*ese presupposition-generating linguistic items are
re+erred to as presupposition triggers ,*e +ollo1ing list includes various t-pes o+
presupposition triggers3
a0 !efinite descriptions
Lo*n sa1 the man with two heads0 RR ,*ere e4ists a man 1it* t1o *eads0
$0 7active verbs
:art*a regrets going to Lo*n5s part-0 RR :art*a 1ent to Lo*n5s part-0
Lo*n was aware t*at :art*a 1as at *ome0 RR :art*a 1as at *ome0
Lo*n reali)ed t*at *e 1as in de$t0 RR Lo*n 1as in de$t0
It was odd *o1 proud *e 1as0 RR ;e 1as proud0
Furt*er +active ver$s include3 know, *e sorry-indifferent-sad-glad T t*at- clause0
c0 Implicative verbs
Lo*n managed to open t*e door0 RR Lo*n tried to open t*e door0
Lo*n forgot to post t*e letter0 RR Lo*n oug*t to *ave posted t*e letter" intended to
post t*e letter0
d0 Change of state verbs
Lo*n stopped $eating *is c*ildren0 RR Lo*n *ad $een $eating *is c*ildren0
Loan *egan to $eat *er *us$and0 RR Loan *adn5t $een $eating *er *us$and0
<us* continued to rule t*e 1orld0 RR <us* *ad $een ruling t*e 1orld0
Furt*er c*ange o+ state ver$s3 start, finish, carry on, cease, leave, enter, arrive,
come.
e0 Iteratives
,*e +l-ing saucer came again. RR ,*e +l-ing saucer came $e+ore0
Clinton returned to po1er0 RR Clinton *eld po1er $e+ore0
Furt*er iteratives3 another time, come *ack, repeat.
+0 )emporal clauses
2efore Stra1son 1as even $orn. Frege noticed presuppositions0 RR Stra1son 1as
$orn0
1hile C*oms2- 1as revolutionizing linguistics. t*e rest o+ social science 1as asleep0
RR C*oms2- 1as revolutionizing linguistics0
3ince C*urc*ill died 1e5ve lac2ed a leader0 RR C*urc*ill died0
As Lo*n 1as getting up. *e slipped0 RR Lo*n 1as getting up0
g0 #on(restrictive relative clauses
;illar-. who clim*ed /verest in 1453. 1as t*e greatest e4plorer o+ our da-0 RR
;illar- clim$ed /verest in ('@>0
Evaluation test -,

Identi+- t*e semantic presuppositions and speci+- t*e triggers in t*e +ollo1ing
utterances3
(0 I $egan 6ogging a+ter a visit to t*e doctor0
%0 I continued 6ogging a+ter m- son $ecame a +aster runner t*an me0
>0 I stopped 6ogging a+ter a visit to t*e doctor0
?0 ,*e ): didn5t remem$er to 2eep a record o+ *er instructions at t*e time arms
1ere e4ported to IraG0
#ns1ers to evaluation test >0% on page %@
-- Pragmatic presupposition
Ee- 1ords
;o1 to do it
)ragmatic presupposition. semantic presupposition. implicature
So +ar 1e *ave dealt 1it* semantic presuppositions0 ;o1ever. no semantic t*eor- o+
presupposition is li2el- to $e via$le0 #n- purel- semantic approac* to
presupposition is unsatis+actor- since it cannot account +or statements li2e t*e
+ollo1ing
;e died *efore *e made a 1ill
as opposed to
;e su++ered a series o+ illnesses *efore *e made a 1ill RR ;e made a 1ill
6e died *efore he made a will does not presuppose 6e made a will0 Clearl- 1*at 1e
2no1 a$out t*e 1orld 1ill not $e consistent 1it* assuming t*at later *e made a 1ill0
In t*is case t*e presupposition is an in+erence 1e dra1 as a result o+ $ringing
toget*er a linguistic +orm and an understanding o+ t*e 1orld0
,*is e4ample *as $roug*t us to t*e concept o+ pragmatic presupposition0 Imagine
someone sa-s3
,ell :adonna I5m at lunc*
,*ere 1ouldn5t $e muc* point in sa-ing t*is unless t*e S e4pected :adonna to
appear in t*e near +uture and assumed t*at t*e ; 2ne1 1*o :adonna 1as and 1as
1illing to pass t*e message on0 Unless t*ese conditions are met t*ere is somet*ing
1rong 1it* JK0 Fe can t*ere+ore assume t*at t*ese conditions are presupposed0
,ell :adonna I5m at lunc*
RR :adonna is li2el- to appear soon
; 2no1s 1*o s*e is
; 1ill pass t*e message on
,*is sort o+ $ac2ground assumption 1ill $e called pragmatic presupposition
$ecause it is clearl- related to t*e conte4t o+ utterance0
.ell 0adonna '+m at lunch also presupposes .here is such a person as 0adonnaN
,*is presupposition is not related to t*e conte4t o+ utterance. it is t*ere+ore
conventional0 Conventional or semantic presuppositions are triggered $- le4ical or
structural items0
)ragmatic presuppositions are non-conventional in t*e sense t*at t*e- are not
determined $- a linguistic item alone. $ut $- a com$ination o+ a linguistic item and
1*at 1e 2no1 a$out t*e 1orld0 <ot* conventional and pragmatic presuppositions
s*are a common +eature. namel- t*e- $ot* precede 1or2ing out t*e implicature
1*ic* in t*is case is t*at Mt*e person 1*o le+t t*e message is an4ious to avoid
:adonna50
Instead o+
summar-
,*is is t*e end o+ Unit >0 I recommend t*at -ou revise t*e main topics o+ t*is unit0
It is time +or -ou to ta2e ,est Unit > 1*ic* t*en s*ould $e *anded in to -our course
instructor0
)est unit -
(0 De+ine and illustrate t*e +ollo1ing concepts3 non-+active presuppositionsN structural
presuppositionsN counter+actual presuppositions
%0 /4plain t*e di++erence $et1een semantic and pragmatic presuppositions0
>0 Consider t*e +ollo1ing e4ample3
One o+ t*e +ormer prime ministers. 1*o 1as $arel- tolerated $- t*e Uueen. regrets
t*at s*e stopped ta2ing notes 1*en allo1ing e4ports to IraG0
aK Identi+- t*e presuppositions
$K Speci+- t*e le4ical items or t*e structures 1*ic* trigger t*em0
"ns6ers to the evaluation tests
Evaluation test -,
(0 I did not 6og $e+ore J$eganKN t*e doctor e4ists Jt*eKN I visited t*e doctor Ja+ter
T temporal clauseK
%0 I 1as 6ogging $e+ore JcontinuedKN I *ave a son Jm- sonKN m- son $ecome a
+aster runner t*an me Ja+ter T temporal clauseKN m- son *ad not $een a +aster
runner t*an me $e+ore J$ecameK
>0 I used to 6og $e+ore t*e visit to t*e doctor re+erred to JstoppedKN I visited t*e
doctor Ja+ter T temporal clauseKN t*e doctor e4ists Jt*eK
?0 ,*e ): s*ould *ave 2ept a record o+ *er instructions Jdidn5t remem$erKN *er
instructions e4isted"s*e gave instructions J*erKN arms 1ere e4ported to IraG
Jat t*e time T temporal clauseKN IraG e4ists Jproper name IraGK
2ibliography 'nit -
nd
edn%, La1rence
'nit.
I:PLICI) :E"#I#;
Contents
O$6ectives Unit ?
?0(0
?0%
,est Unit?
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit ?
<i$liograp*- Unit ?

Page
%B
%B
%C
>%
>>
>?
%23EC)I4ES '#I) .
,o understand t*e concepts o+ natural and non-natural meaning
,o +amiliarize onesel+ 1it* 9rice5s Cooperative principles and t*e ma4ims
o+ conversation
,o de+ine and illustrate standard implicatures
,o de+ine and illustrate +loutings
,o calculate conversational implicatures
,o de+ine and illustrate conventional implicature
.+ #atural vs non(natural meaning
Ee- 1ords
;o1 to do it
natural meaning. non-natural meaning. conventional meaning
Consider t*e +ollo1ing pro$lem3
;o1 is it t*at 1*en -ou as2 me *o1 :anc*ester United did. and I repl-3
J(K ,*e- 1on
-ou sometimes 2no1 t*at I am telling -ou t*at t*e- pla-ed $rilliantl- Ji0e0 1*en t*e-
1ere pla-ing in an /uropean competitionK and sometimes t*at t*e- did rat*er poorl-
Ji0e0 1*en t*e- 1ere pla-ing a non-league side in t*e F# CupKS ,*e meaning o+ they
won is clear3 t*e team re+erred to $- they scored more goals t*an t*e team t*e- 1ere
pla-ing against0 #nd -et t*is stated meaning is o+ten less important t*an t*e ot*er
meaning t*at -ou understand +rom m- utterance and I no1*ere state0
Let5s consider anot*er e4ample3 t*e advertisement +or instant tea 1*ic*. li2e t*e
advertisement +or Coca-Cola. promotes its product 1it* t*e legend3
J%K It5s t*e taste
<- itsel+ t*is statement means ver- little. $ecause 1e are not told 1*at t*e taste is or
does0 #nd -et -ou and I understand it to mean t*at t*e taste is good0 :ore puzzling
still. 1*en a c*ild comes $ac2 +rom sc*ool and starts *is destructive 6ourne- t*roug*
t*e $iscuit $arrel and *e is as2ed 1*- *e didn5t eat *is sc*ool dinner and *e replies
J>K It5s t*e taste
1e understand *im to mean e4actl- t*e opposite3 t*at t*e taste is not good0 ;o1 can
t*e same sentence $e understood to conve- t1o meanings t*at are e4actl- t*e
opposite o+ one anot*erS
In order to solve t*is pro$lem 1e need +irst to dra1 a distinction $et1een 1*at t*e
linguistic p*ilosop*er )aul 9rice called t*e natural and non(natural meaning <nn(
meaning= o+ utterances li2e they won0 ,*e natural meaning is t*at t*e team
re+erred to $- they scored at least one goal more t*an t*e team t*e- 1ere pla-ing
against0 Unli2e t*is natural meaning. t*e non(natural meaning is varia$le and on
di++erent occasions. as 1e *ave seen. could $e t*at t*e team re+erred to pla-ed
particularl- 1ell or onl- rat*er modestl-0 ,*is non-natural meaning is not part o+ t*e
conventional meaning o+ t*e e4pression0

Evaluation test .+

/4plain t*e di+++erence $et1een natural and non7natural meaning as de+ined $-
9rice0 Suppl- relevant e4amples to support -our e4planation
#ns1ers to evaluation test ?0( on page >>
., )he cooperative principles and the ma5ims of conversation
Ee- 1ords
;o1 to do it
cooperative principle. ma4ims o+ conversation. conversational implicature.
conventional implicature. +louting
9rice argued t*at spea2ers intend to $e cooperative 1*en t*e- engage in
conversation0 One 1a- o+ $eing cooperative is +or a spea2er to give as muc*
in+ormation as is e4pected0 ,*us an addressee 1*o 2ne1 t*at :anc*ester United
1ere pla-ing a top team in an /uropean competition mig*t $e e4pecting t*e spea2er
to sa- t*at t*e- *ad done Guite 1ell considering t*e circumstances0 Since they won
1ould $e more t*an 1as e4pected. it 1ould impl- t*at :anc*ester United *ad done
$rilliantl-0 Conversel-. an addressee 1*o 2ne1 t*at :anc*ester United 1ere pla-ing
a non-league side mig*t $e e4pecting t*e spea2er to sa- t*at t*e- *ad scored dozens
o+ goals or t*at t*e- *ad 1iped t*e opposition out0 ;earing onl- they won. less t*an
mig*t $e e4pected. t*e addressee 1ould dra1 t*e in+erence t*at t*e- pla-ed rat*er
poorl-0 <ecause they won in t*e +irst conte4t is more t*an t*e addressee 1as
e4pecting and in t*e second less. in eac* case it gives rise to a non-conventional
meaning 1*ic* 1as called $- 9rice implicature 9rice coined t*is 1ord to cover
an- non-conventional meaning t*at is implied. i0e0 conve-ed indirectl- t*roug* *ints
and understood implicitl- 1it*out ever $eing e4plicitl- stated0
#ccording to 9rice. t*ere is a set o+ assumptions 1*ic* guide t*e conduct o+
conversational e4c*anges and 1*ic* can $e +ormulated as guidelines +or e++icient
and e++ective use o+ language in conversation to +urt*er cooperative ends0 9rice
identi+ied as guidelines o+ t*is sort +our $asic ma4ims o+ conversation 1*ic* 6ointl-
e4press a general cooperative principle ,*e cooperative principle states3
:ake your contribution such as is re>uired at the stage at 6hich it occurs? by
the accepted purpose of the talk e5change in 6hich you are engaged
Fit*in t*is principle. 9rice suggested t*e +ollo1ing +our ma4ims3
@uantity: JiK :a2e -our contri$ution as in+ormative as is reGuired J+or t*e current
purposes o+ t*e e4c*angeK
JiiK Do not ma2e -our contri$ution more in+ormative t*an is reGuired
@uality: :a2e -our contri$ution one t*at is true0
JiK Do not sa- 1*at -ou $elieve to $e +alse0
JiiK Do not sa- t*at +or 1*ic* -ou lac2 adeGuate evidence
&elation: <e relevant
:anner: <e perspicuous
JiK #void o$scurit- o+ e4pression
JiiK #void am$iguit-
JiiiK <e $rie+
JivK <e orderl-
;o1ever. people do not al1a-s +ollo1 t*ese guidelines to t*e letter0 F*en tal2 does
not proceed according to t*eir speci+ications Ji0e0 1*en t*e- are not ad*ered on a
super+icial levelK. *earers assume t*at contrar- to appearances t*e principles are
nevert*eless ad*ered to at some deeper level0 ,*e in+erences t*at arise in order to
preserve t*e assumption o+ cooperation are called $- 9rice conversational
implicature
,*ere are at least t1o 1a-s in 1*ic* conversational implicatures can $e created3
eit*er $- a$iding $- t*e ma4ims. in 1*ic* case 1e *ave to do 1it* 1*at Levinson
J('C>K calls standard implicature. or $- +louting t*em giving t*us rise to +loutings
or e4ploitations0
9rice +urt*er distinguis*ed $et1een generalized and particularized conversational
implicatures ;eneralized conversational implicatures arise irrespective o+ t*e
conte4t in 1*ic* t*e- occurN in ot*er 1ords. t*e- arise 1it*out a particular conte4t
or special scenario $eing necessar-0
I 1al2ed into a *ouse0 CI: ,*e *ouse is not mine0
Some people $elieve in 9od0 CI: 8ot all people $elieve in 9od0
Damon ;ill did 1ell in *is +irst season in Formula (0 CI: ;e did not 1in t*e
c*ampions*ip0
,*ese utterances al1a-s give rise to t*e same implicature. no matter 1*at t*e
conte4t0 Particularized conversational implicatures. on t*e ot*er *and. are derived
not +rom t*e utterance alone. $ut +rom t*e utterance in conte4t0 ,*e utterance
,*e dog is loo2ing ver- *app-0
ma- implicate
)er*aps t*e dog *as eaten t*e roast $ee+
i+ it occurs in a particular setting illustrated $-3
#3 F*at on eart* *as *appened to t*e roast $ee+S
<3 ,*e dog is loo2ing ver- *app-S
9eneralized conversational implicatures are in+erred irrespective o+ t*e conte4t o+
utterance and result +rom t*e e4istence o+ t*e Uuantit- and :anner :a4ims0
)articularized conversational implicatures are in+erred in relation to a conte4t and
result +rom t*e e4istence o+ t*e :a4im o+ Relation0 In $ot* cases. *o1ever. t*ese
in+erences arise +rom t*e assumption t*at t*e spea2er is o$serving t*e ma4im and t*e
C)0 ,*us $ot* generalized and particularized conversational implicatures can $e
regarded as su$t-pes o+ standard implicature0
Conversational implicatures can also $e derived on t*e $asis o+ t*e spea2er5s
+louting or e4ploiting a ma4im Ji0e0 on t*e spea2er5s not a$iding $- t*e ma4imK as in
t*e +ollo1ing e4amples 1*ere t*e spea2er +louts t*e ma4im o+ Guantit-3
I+ *e does it *e does it0 CI: It5s no concern o+ ours0
Far is Far0 CI: ,erri$le t*ings ma- *appen0
Floutings or e4ploitations o+ t*e ma4im o+ Gualit- give rise to iron- and metap*or0
Conventional implicatures. unli2e conversational implicatures. are pragmatic
in+erences t*at are not derived +rom pragmatic in+erences li2e t*e ma4ims. $ut are
simpl- attac*ed $- convention to particular le4ical items0 ,*e- are not dependent on
t*e conversational conte4t and cannot t*ere+ore $e c*anged $- invo2ing anot*er
conte4t0 2ut +or instance *as t*e same trut*-conditional content as t*e con6unction
and0 From a logical point o+ vie1 t*e value o+ *ut in con6oining t1o p*rases or
sentences is t*e same as t*at o+ and Ji0e0 t*e con6oined sentences 1it* *ut *ave t*e
same trut* conditions as t*ose 1it* and3 one is true in e4actl- t*e same cases as t*e
ot*erK0 ;o1ever. *ut *as an additional conventional implicature to t*e e++ect t*at
t*ere is some contrast $et1een t*e t1o con6uncts. alt*oug* t*ere is no strict
universall- valid la1 t*at 1ould impose *ut rat*er t*an and in an- particular
conte4tN in man- cases t*e t1o are almost interc*angea$le0
Evaluation test .,
(0 De+ine and illustrate conventional implicature
%0 For eac* ma4im o+ conversation proposed $- 9rice give e4amples o+ standard
implicatures and +loutings"e4ploitations
>0 For eac* o+ t*e +ollo1ing e4amples. re+er to t*e ma4imJsK +loutedN e4plain how
t*e- are +louted and speci+- t*e implicature
aK Comment scatc*ed in dirt on a 1*ite car3 H #lso availa$le in 1*iteI0
$K F*ile 1al2ing *is dog. # meets <
<3 1*ere are -ou goingS
#3 to t*e V-/-,
cK
#3 Lo*n doesn5t seem to *ave a girl+riend t*ese da-s
<3 ;e5s $een driving to 8e1 =or2 ever- 1ee2end
dK )ro+essor # is as2ed $- *is pro+essional colleague )ro+essor < to evaluate +or a
position at an #merican universit-. candidate Smit*. a +ormer student o+ #5s0
)ro+essor # 1rites a letter o+ recommendation consisting o+ t*e +ollo1ing paragrap*3
:r0 Smit*5s command o+ /nglis* is e4cellent. and *e al1a-s attended *is classes
regularl-0
/4plain 1*- t*is recommendation ma2es Smit*5s +ailure sure0
#ns1ers to evaluation test ?0% on page >>
Instead o+
summar-
,*is is t*e end o+ Unit ?0 I recommend t*at -ou revise t*e main topics o+ t*is unit0
It is time +or -ou to ta2e ,est Unit ? 1*ic* t*en s*ould $e *anded in to -our course
instructor0
)est unit .
(0 In #ugust"Septem$er (''% a F; Smit* advertisement +eaturing various items o+
stationar- appeared on *oardings in <ritain0 ,*e poster $ore t*e legend3
aK Fe don5t sell uni+orms
,*is advertisement 1as +ollo1ed $- a series o+ MFe don5t sellV5 posters 1*ic*.
among ot*er t*ings. included an advertisement s*ortl- $e+ore C*ristmas +eaturing
videos o+ romantic +ilms $earing t*e legend
$K Fe don5t sell *an2ies
Speci+- t*e implicatures +or t*e t1o advertisements and e4plain *o1 t*e- illustrate
t*e non-conventional nature o+ conversational implicature0
%0 F*at can -ou ma2e o+ t*e +ollo1ing advertisement ta2en +rom t*e For Sale
section in t*e C*icago Fee2l- Reader J#ugust. %'. (''%K3
:oving out o+ countr-0 /ver-t*ing must go0 ;us$and. dog. micro1ave. ,V. VCR.
personal 1ord processor. appliances0 9reat deals0 Call Ori. >(%-?&?-%>'(
Re+er to suc* issues as semantic and pragmatic presuppositionsN conversational
implicature. speec* acts
>0 /4plain and illustrate t*e concept o+ standard implicature
Evaluation test .+ Re+er to Section ?0(0 to c*ec2 -our ans1ers
Evaluation test .,
For Guestions ( O % re+er $ac2 to Section ?0%0 to c*ec2 -our ans1ers
>0 JaK t*e ma4ims o+ Gualit- and mannerN CI3 t*e car s*ould $e 1as*edN J$K t*e ma4im o+ mannerN CI3
# 1ould rat*er not *ave t*e 1ord vet pronounced in +ront o+ *is dog. $ecause t*e dog is a+raid o+ t*e
vetN JcK t*e ma4im o+ relation CI3 Lo*n *as a girl+riend in 8e1 =or2"Lo*n *as so muc* to do in 8e1
=or2 *e +inds no need +or a girl+rien"Lo*n *as too man- $usiness o$ligations in 8e1 =or2 to *ave
time +or a girl+riendN JdK t*e ma4ims o+ Guantit- and relevanceN CI3 Smit*5s Guali+ications +or t*e
position in Guestion are inadeGuteN
2ibliography 'nit .
nd
edn%, La1rence
'nit /
!EIAIS
Contents
O$6ectives Unit @
@0(0
@0%
,est Unit @
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit @
<i$liograp*- Unit @

Page
>A
>A
?&
?%
?>
?>
%23EC)I4ES '#I) /
,o understand t*e concept o+ dei4is
,o +amiliarize onesel+ 1it* concept o+ deictic centre
,o identi+- t*e main t-pes o+ dei4is
,o de+ine and illustrate t*e main t-pes o+ dei4is
,o distinguis* $et1een deictic and non-deictic usages o+ inde4icals
/+ )ypes of dei5is
Ee- 1ords
;o1 to do it
dei4is. deictic centre. pro4imal. distal. s*i+t in point o+ vie1
Language is used to re+er to persons and"or t*ings eit*er directl- Ji0e0 direct
re+erence- e0g0 namesK t*us leading us to persons or t*ings or indirectl- $- means o+
indirect re+erence0 F*en using language indirectl- 1e need to *ave recourse to ot*er
linguistic as 1ell as non-linguistic strategies in order to esta$lis* t*e correct
re+erence0 Consider t*e +ollo1ing e4ample3
#3 F*o5s t*ereS
<3 It5s me0
,*e pronoun me re+ers to an MI5 and an- MI5 is a spea2ing me0 ,*e utterance MIt5s me5
is al1a-s true $ut is totall- unin+ormative 1*en it comes to esta$lis*ing t*e
spea2er5s identit-0 ,*e re+erent o+ I c*anges 1it* t*e person uttering it0 /ver-$od-
can sa- I and 1*oever sa-s it points to anot*er o$6ect t*an ever-$od- else0 Lust t*e
same point could $e made a$out +irst- and second-person pronouns 1e and -ou.
a$out demonstratives and speci+ic time and place adver$s li2e no1 and *ere. to
mention 6ust a +e10 ,*ese le4ical items are re+erred to as deictic terms-indexical
expressions or simpl- indexicals. ,*e- are a particular 2ind o+ re+erential
e4pressions 1*ere t*e re+erence is not 6ust semantic $ut includes a re+erence to a
particular conte4t in 1*ic* t*e semantics is put at 1or20 In ot*er 1ords. 1e s*ould
al1a-s re+er to t*e conte4t i+ 1e 1ant to esta$lis* t*e proper re+erence o+ deictic
1ords0 ,*us t*e +unction o+ suc* inde4ing e4pressions is to tell us 1*ere to loo2 +or
a re+erence0
Fe are no1 in a position to de+ine t*is p*enomenon0 !EIAIS is a
p*enomenon t*at directl- relates an utterance to a time. place. person. and social
$ac2ground0 /t-mologicall- coming +rom t*e 9ree2 1ord +or pointing or indicating.
it *as as +ocal elements t*e use o+ +irst- and second-person pronouns.
demonstratives. speci+ic time and place adver$s. tense and a variet- o+ ot*er
grammatical +eatures lin2ed in a straig*t+or1ard 1a- to t*e conte4t o+ utterance0
Dei4is concerns t*e 1a-s in 1*ic* languages encode or grammaticalize +eatures o+
t*e conte4t o+ utterance"speec* event. as 1ell as 1a-s in 1*ic* t*e interpretation o+
utterances depends on t*e anal-sis o+ t*at conte4t o+ utterance0
In t*e /uropean linguistic and p*ilosop*ic traditions one usuall- mentions
t*e categories o+ person. place and time in t*is connection0 ,*e e4planation +or t*is
tripartition is t*at all inde4ing"pointing is done $- living *uman $eings and t*ere+ore
all inde4ical e4pressions *ave to $e related to3
- t*e person 1*o *as uttered t*em
- pointing in a particular place
- and at a particular time0
Person dei5is concerns t*e encoding o+ t*e role o+ participants in t*e speec* event
in 1*ic* t*e utterance is delivered0 ,*e categor- +irst person is t*e
grammaticalization o+ t*e spea2er5s re+erence to *imsel+. t*e second person is t*e
encoding o+ t*e spea2er5s re+erence to one or more addresses. t*e t*ird person is t*e
grammaticalization o+ t*e spea2er5s re+erence to persons and entities t*at are neit*er
spea2ers nor addresses o+ t*e utterance in Guestion0 Familiar 1a-s in 1*ic* suc*
participant-roles are encoded are t*e pronouns and t*eir associated predicate
agreements as 1ell as vocatives0 In some conte4ts t*ird-person pronouns are distal
+orms in terms o+ person dei4isN using a t*ird-person pronoun 1*ere a second-person
one could $e possi$le is a 1a- o+ communicating distance. not necessaril- spatial.
$ut emotional and social distance0
Place dei5is concerns t*e encoding o+ spatial locations relative to t*e location o+ t*e
participants in t*e speec* event0 :ost languages grammaticalize at least a distinction
$et1een P&%AI:"L Ji0e0 close to spea2erK and !IS)"L Ji0e0non-pro4imal to
spea2er. sometimes close to addresseeK0 ,*is distinction is encoded in
demonstratives Jt*is t*atK. deictic adver$s o+ place J*ere t*ereK and in some ver$s
suc* as come and go0
Come to $ed0 W come signals movement to1ards t*e spea2er" deictic centre"central
place
9o to $ed0 W go signals movement a1a- +rom t*e spea2er"deictic centre"central place
Spea2ers ma- pro6ect t*emselves into ot*er locations prior to t*eir actuall- $eing in
t*ose locations0
I5ll come later W come signals movement to1ards t*e addressee5s location
)ime dei5is concerns t*e encoding o+ temporal points or spans relative to t*e
time at 1*ic* an utterance 1as spo2en. t*at is relative to coding time0 ,ime dei4is is
grammaticalized in t*e s-stem o+ tenses deictic adver$s o+ time. suc* as now,
yesterday, this week, last year, etc0 #ll t*ese e4pressions depend +or t*eir
interpretation on 2no1ing t*e relevant utterance time0 I+ 1e don5t 2no1 t*e coding
time o+ a note on an o++ice door suc* as3
<ac2 in an *our0
1e 1on5t 2no1 i+ 1e *ave a s*ort or a long 1ait a*ead0
#part +rom t*e traditional categories o+ dei4is mentioned so +ar.
pragmaticians *ave identi+ied ot*er categories namel- discourse dei5is? social
dei5is? emphatic dei5is and reminder dei5is0 ,o $egin 1it* let us consider t*e case
o+ discourse dei5is
!iscourse dei5is concerns t*e use o+ e4pressions 1it*in some utterance to
re+er to some portion o+ t*e discourse t*at contains t*at utterance0
e0g0 I $et -ou *aven5t *eard this story 8 this story re+ers to a +ort*coming portion o+
discourse
.hat 1as t*e +unniest stor- I5ve ever *eard W 1*ere that re+ers to a preceding portion
o+ discourse0
Discourse dei4is also concerns t*e 1a- in 1*ic* an utterance signals its relation to
surrounding te4t0 For instance. t*e utterance-initial anyway indicates t*at t*e
utterance t*at contains it is not addressed to t*e immediatel- preceding discourse.
$ut to one or more steps $ac20 Since discourse un+olds in time. time-deictic and
place-deictic e4pressions can $e used to re+er to portions o+ discourse3
in t*e last""ne4t c*apter""paragrap*
in t*is c*apter
Social dei5is concerns t*e social distinctions t*at are relative to participant
roles. particularl- aspects o+ t*e social relations*ip *olding $et1een spea2er and
addressees or spea2er and some ot*er re+erent0 It is encoded t*roug*out t*e
morp*ological s-stem in *onori+ics and in c*oices regarding pronouns. summon
+orms. vocatives and titles o+ address0 So +ar as social dei4is is concerned t*ere are
t1o $asic 2inds o+ sociall- deictic in+ormation3 relational and a$solute0 ,*e +ormer
*as to do 1it* t*e +ollo1ing relations t*at t-picall- get e4pressed3
(0 t*e relation $et1een spea2er and re+erent Je0g0 re+erent *onori+icsKN $-
emplo-ing re+erent *onori+ics. respect is conve-ed $- re+erring to t*e target
o+ respectN e0g0 in t*e tu"vous t-pe o+ distinction t*e re+erent coincides 1it*
t*e addressee
%0 t*e relation $et1een spea2er and addressee Je0g0 addressee *onori+icsKN t*is
relation encodes respect to t*e addressee 1it*out re+erring to *im0
>0 t*e relation $et1een spea2er and $-stander Ji0e0 $-stander"audience
*onori+icsK J$-stander is a cover-term +or participants in audience role and
+or non-participating over *earersK W e0g0 ta$oo. aspects o+ ro-al *onori+ics
?0 t*e relation $et1een spea2er and setting W *as to do 1it* t*e +ormalit-
levelsN alt*oug* most languages are used di++erentl- in +ormal settings. in
some t*e distinction +ormal vs0 in+ormal is +irml- grammaticalized in t*e
e4istence o+ *ig* and lo1 diglossic variants0
,*e relations mentioned in J(K. J%K and J>K concerns relative ran2 and respect0
,*e second t-pe o+ sociall- deictic in+ormation is re+erred to as absolute social
dei5is0 It concerns JaK t*e +orms reserved +or certain spea2ers. i0e0 aut*orized
spea2ers Je0 g0 in ,*ai t*e morp*eme khro* is a polite particle t*at can onl- $e used
$- male spea2ersK and J$K +orms reserved +or aut*orized recipients Je0g0 restrictions
on most titles o+ address suc* as ,our 6onour, 0r PresidentK0
Emphatic dei5is concerns t*e s*i+t +rom that to this to s*o1 empat*- and
+rom this to that to signal emotional distance JL-ons ('BBK0
:e- J(''>K mentions anot*er 2ind o+ dei4is t*at *e calls reminder dei5is as
in3
I met this girl t*e ot*er da-0
In t*e a$ove utterance this girl is used to re+er to Ma certain -oung lad-5 1*ose
identit- needs no +urt*er introduction $ecause eit*er *er identit- is o+ no interest to
t*e stor-. or *er identit- is alread- esta$lis*ed in some ot*er 1a-0
Dei4is is generall-. $ut not invaria$l- organized in an egocentric way. i0e0 t*e
spea2er and MI5 are identical JLevinson ('C>K0 I+ 1e t*in2 o+ deictic e4pressions as
anc*ored to speci+ic points in t*e communicative event. t*en t*e unmar2ed
anc*orage points constituting t*e deictic centre are assumed to $e as +ollo1s3
(0 t*e central person X t*e spea2er
%0 t*e central time X t*e time at 1*ic* t*e spea2er produces t*e utterance. i0e0
t*e coding time
>0 t*e central place X t*e spea2er5s location at utterance time
?0 t*e discourse centre X t*e point 1*ic* t*e spea2er is currentl- at in t*e
production o+ *is utterance
@0 t*e social centre X t*e spea2er5s social status and ran2. to 1*ic* t*e status
and ran2 o+ t*e addresseeJsK or re+erents is relative
;o1ever. deictic 1ords ma- $e used in 1a-s t*at s*i+t t*is deictic center to ot*er
participants0 ,*is state o+ a++air is re+erred to as deictic pro9ection JL-ons ('BBK or
shifts in point of view JFillmoreK3
I am going to London
I am coming to London
:oreover in some languages distal terms can $e used to distinguis* $et1een Mnear to
t*e addressee5 and Ma1a- +rom $ot* t*e spea2er and t*e addressee50
Evaluation test /+
(0 De+ine and illustrate t*e +ollo1ing concepts3
- person dei4is
- place dei4is
- time dei4is
- social dei4is
- discourse dei4is
- emp*atic dei4is
- reminder dei4is

%0 Consider t*e +ollo1ing utterances3
JaK Fe are going to London0
J$K Fe are coming to London0
In 1*ic* o+ t*e t1o is we am$iguous $et1een an e4clusive and an inclusive
interpretation0 #ccount +or -our c*oice0
#ns1ers to evaluation test @0( on page ?>
/, !eictic and non(deictic usages of inde5icals
Ee- 1ords
;o1 to do it
inde4ical e4pression. gestural usage. s-m$olic usage. deictic centre. non-deictic
usage. anap*oric usage
!eictic usages

Deictic e4pressions *ave as $asic or central a deictic usage0 ;o1ever. most o+ t*ese
e4pressions *ave non-deictic usages as 1ell0 ,*us it is essential to distinguis*
$et1een deictic usage and non-deictic usage on t*e one *and. and. 1it*in deictic
usage. $et1een gestural usage and s-m$olic usage0 Follo1ing Fillmore J('B(K. 1e
s*all de+ine terms used in a gestural deictic 1a- as t*ose deictic e4pressions t*at can
onl- $e interpreted 1it* re+erence to an audio-visual-tactical. and in general a
p*-sical. monitoring o+ t*e speec* event0 /4amples o+ inde4ical e4pressions used in
a gestural deictic 1a- 1ould include demonstratives used 1it* a selecting gesture. as
in3
.his one5s genuine. $ut this one is a +a2e0
or second or t*ird person pronouns used 1it* some p*-sical indication o+ t*e
re+erent Je0g0 gesture or direction o+ gazeK. as in3
6e5s not t*e Du2e. he is0 6e5s t*e $utler0
<- contrast. s-m$olic usages o+ deictic terms generall- reGuire +or t*eir
interpretation onl- 2no1ledge o+ t*e $asic spatio-temporal parameters o+ t*e speec*
event and. on some occasion. participant-role and discourse and social parameters0
,*us it is su++icient to 2no1 t*e location o+ t*e participants in order to interpret3
.his cit- is reall- $eauti+ul
and to 2no1 t*e set o+ potential addressees in t*e situation in order to interpret3
,ou can all come 1it* me i+ -ou li2e
and to 2no1 1*en t*e interaction is ta2ing place in order to 2no1 1*ic* calendar
-ear is $eing re+erred to in3
Fe can5t a++ord a *olida- this -ear
,o sum up. gestural usages reGuire a moment-$--moment p*-sical monitoring o+ t*e
speec* event +or t*eir interpretation. 1*ile s-m$olic usages ma2e re+erence onl- to
co-ordinates o+ t*e social conte4t availa$le to participants antecedent to t*e
utterance0
#%#(!EIC)IC 'S";ES
In non-deictic usages. t*e deictic terms are interpreted relative to t*e te4t and not
relative to t*e situation o+ utterance0 Fit*in non-deictic usage 1e need to distinguis*
$et1een anaphoric and non(anaphoric usages0 #n anap*oric usage is 1*en some
term pic2s out as re+erent t*e same entit- or class o+ o$6ects t*at some prior term in
t*e discourse pic2ed out0 ,*us in t*e +ollo1ing e4ample he can $e interpreted as
re+erring to 1*oever it is t*at :ohn re+ers to3
Lo*n came in and he lit t*e +ire0
;o1ever. as L-ons J('BBK points out a deictic term ma- $e used $ot* anap*oricall-
and deicticall-0 For e4ample. in3
I 1as $orn in "ondon and *ave lived there ever since
.here re+ers $ac2 to 1*atever place "ondon re+ers to. $ut at t*e same time contrasts
1it* here on t*e deictic dimension o+ space. locating t*e utterance outside London0
Similarl-. it is possi$le +or gestural usage to com$ine 1it* non-deictic anap*oric
usage3
I cut a +inger3 this one
;ere this one re+ers to 1*atever a finger re+ers to. $ut simultaneousl- must $e
accompanied $- a presentation o+ t*e relevant +inger0
Evaluation test /,
(0 De+ine and give e4amples o+ inde4icals used non-deicticall-0
%0 De+ine and give e4amples o+ inde4icals used $ot* deicticall- and anap*oricall-0

>0 Consider t*e +ollo1ing utterances3
aK I 2no1 -ou5ll en6o- reading t*e c*apter0
$K F*en I sa- -ou *ave to read t*e c*apter. I mean -ou *ave to read it and -ou *ave
to read it and -ou *ave to read it0
cK =ou never 2no1 1*et*er to read ever- c*apter or s2ip one or t1o0
Consider eac* underlined instance o+ t*e personal pronoun you and account +or its
usage Ji0e0 gesturall- or s-m$olicall- in a deictic 1a- or non-deicticall-K
?0 Consider t*e +ollo1ing utterance delivered $- +at*er and addressed to *is son3
I *ope -ou5re going to do 1ell t*is -ear
:ention > re+erents o+ t*e e4pression this year
#ns1ers to evaluation test @0% on page ?>
Instead o+
summar-
,*is is t*e end o+ Unit @0 I recommend t*at -ou revise t*e main topics o+ t*is unit0
It is time +or -ou to ta2e ,est Unit @ 1*ic* t*en s*ould $e *anded in to -our course
instructor0
)est unit /
(0 ,r- to t*in2 o+ utterances in 1*ic* t*e +ollo1ing 1ords mig*t $e used JaK
gesturall-. J$K s-m$olicall- in a deictic 1a-. JcK non-deicticall-3 this, now,
*ehind, here, there and you.
%0 Spend a +e1 minutes tr-ing to decide 1*et*er we and our can $e used non-
deicticall-0
>0 ,*ird-person pronouns he. she. it and they are not usuall- considered deictic
$ecause t*e- re+er to o$6ects and persons alread- mentioned in t*e discourse
JantecedentsK0 Do -ou agree t*at all t*ird-person pronoun are non-deicticS
Can -ou t*in2 o+ utterances 1*ere t*ese pronouns are used deicticall-S
?0 Some 1ee2s a+ter *is 1i+e died. ,*omas ;ard- 1rote t*e poem M#+ter a
Lourne-50 It included t*e +ollo1ing line apparentl- addressed to *is deceased
1i+e3 H F*at *ave -ou +ound to sa- o+ our pastI or. more accuratel-. it
included t*is line and t*e 1ord now W $ut I am not telling -ou 1*ere *e
placed now0 JaK ;o1 man- grammatical positions can -ou +ind +or now in
t*is lineS J$K Consider eac* position and decide 1*et*er now is used
deicticall- or non-deicticall-. and i+ deicticall- 1*et*er it is used
s-m$olicall- or gesturall-0 JcK Can -ou dra1 an- conclusions a$out t*e
relations*ip $et1een 1*ere now is placed in t*e line and deictic usage in
generalS
@0 De+ine and give e4amples o+ inde4icals used deicticall- in a s-m$olic 1a-0

A0 De+ine and give e4amples o+ inde4icals used deicticall- in a gestural 1a-0
Evaluation test /+
For Guestion (. re+er $ac2 to Section @0(0 to c*ec2 -our ans1ers
%0 JaK we is am$iguous $et1een an inclusive and an e4clusive interpretationN J$K we is e4clusive
Evaluation test /,
For Guestions ( O %. re+er $ac2 to Section @0%0 to c*ec2 -our ans1ers
>0 JaK deictic O s-m$olicN J$K deictic and gesturalN JcK non-deictic
?0 Suggested ans1ers3 calendar -ear. sc*ool -earN t*e -ear up until *is ne4t $irt*da-

2ibliography 'nit /
nd
edn%, La1rence
'nit 0
)$E )$E%&9 %7 SPEEC$ "C)S
Contents
O$6ectives Unit A
A0(0
A0%0
,est UnitA
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit A
<i$liograp*- Unit A

Page
?A
?A
@&
@%
@>
@>
%23EC)I4ES '#I) 0
,o understand t*e concepts o+ per+ormative and constative
,o +amiliarize onesel+ 1it* #ustin5s t*eor- o+ speec* acts
,o distinguis* among t*e locutionar- act. t*e illocutionar- act and t*e
perlocutionar- e++ect
,o +amiliarize onesel+ 1it* Searle5s ta4onom- o+ speec* acts
,o de+ine and illustrate t*e classes o+ speec* acts proposed $- Searle
0+ "ustin8s theory of speech acts
Ee- 1ords
;o1 to do it
per+ormative. constative. +elicit- conditions. logical positivism. mis+ire. a$use.
e4plicit per+ormative. implicit per+ormative. locutionar- act. illocutionar- act.
perlocutionar- act
In a series o+ lectures given in ('@@ and later pu$lis*ed under t*e title 6ow to ;o
.hings with 1ords. #ustin attac2ed t*e doctrine o+ logical positivism 1*ic*
+louris*ed in t*e >&s0 #ccording to logical positivism. unless a sentence can $e
tested +or its trut* or +alsit-. it 1as strictl- spea2ing meaningless0 ,*us according to
t*is doctrine. most et*ical. aest*etic and literar- discourses. not to mention most
ever-da- utterances 1ere meaningless0
#ustin argued t*at some ordinar- language declarative sentences. contrar- to
logical positivist assumptions. are not used 1it* an- intention o+ ma2ing true or +alse
statements0 ,*ese sentences are not used to descri$e states o+ a++aires. $ut are rat*er
activel- used to do t*ings0 #ustin re+ers to t*ese special sentences and t*e utterances
realized $- t*em as performatives Performatives. unli2e constatives 1*ic* can $e
assessed in terms o+ trut* or +alsit-. cannot $e true or +alse0 ;o1ever. t*e- can go
1rong i0e0 t*e- can $e unhappy or infelicitous0 I+ someone sa-s
I c*risten t*is s*ip Uueen /lisa$et*
*e ma- not succeed in so c*ristening t*e vessel. i+. +or instance. it is alread- named
ot*er1ise or *is not t*e appointed namer or t*ere are no 1itnesses or $ottles o+
c*ampagne0
)er+ormatives *ave to meet certain conditions i+ t*e- are to succeed or $e
*app-0 #ustin re+ers to t*ese conditions as felicity conditions and distinguis*es t*e
+ollo1ing t*ree categories3
#0 JiK ,*ere must $e a conventional procedure *aving a conventional e++ect0
JiiK ,*e circumstances and persons must $e appropriate. as speci+ied
in t*e procedure0
<0 ,*e procedure must $e e4ecuted JiK correctl- and JiiK completel-0
C0 ,*e person must *ave t*e reGuisite t*oug*ts. +eelings and intentions as
speci+ied in t*e procedure. and i+ conseGuent conduct is speci+ied t*en t*e
relevant parties must so do0
Violations o+ t*ese conditions are all o+ eGual status0 Violations o+ # and < give rise
to misfires i0e0 t*e intended actions +ail to come o++ and conseGuentl- t*e act is void
as in t*e +ollo1ing e4amples
- t*e clerg-man $aptizing t*e 1rong $a$- or t*e rig*t $a$- 1it* t*e 1rong
name Jviolation o+ #KN
- t*e a$sence o+ an upta2e in t*e case o+ $ets i0e0 t*e procedure is not carried
out completel- Jviolation o+ <K
Violations o+ C conditions are abuses0 ,*e act is not void. $ut it is in+elicitous0 In
ot*er 1ords t*e action is per+ormed $ut in+elicitousl- or insincerel-0 /4amples
include insincerities. promising to do somet*ing 1it*out *aving t*e intention o+
doing so0
On t*e $asis o+ t*ese o$servations #ustin argues t*at
- some sentences. per+ormatives. are special3 uttering t*em DO/S t*ings and
does not merel- sa- t*ings i0e0 report states o+ a++airsN
- t*ese per+ormative sentences ac*ieve t*eir corresponding actions $ecause
t*ere are speci+ic CO8V/8,IO8S lin2ing t*e 1ords to institutional
proceduresN
- unli2e constatives. 1*ic* can $e assessed in terms o+ trut* or +alsit-.
per+ormatives can onl- $e assessed as +elicitous or in+elicitous according to
1*et*er t*eir +elicit- conditions are met or not0
Dra1ing t*e distinction $et1een performatives and constatives allo1s #ustin to
c*aracterize t*e +ormer as first person indicative active sentences in the simple
present tense Consider t*e +ollo1ing e4amples
I $et -ou @ pounds it 1ill rain tomorro1
as opposed to
I am $etting -ouV00
I $etted -ou00
;e $ets -ouV0
Onl- t*e +irst one is a per+ormative. t*e ot*ers are constatives0
;o1ever. t*ere are plent- o+ ot*er uses o+ +irst person indicative sentences in t*e
simple present t*at can $e said in demonstration. as a report o+ a concurrent action3
I no1 $eat t*e eggs till +lu++-
So #ustin ma2es use o+ anot*er criterion in order to isolate per+ormatives alone0 ;e
argues t*at onl- per+ormative usage can co-occur 1it* t*e adver$ here*y and t*us
one can isolate t*e per+ormative ver$s $- seeing 1*et*er t*e- 1ill ta2e t*e adver$
here*y0
,*us per+ormative utterances are identi+ia$le $ecause t*e- *ave t*e +orm o+
+irst person. indicative active sentences in t*e simple present 1it* one o+ a delimited
set o+ per+ormative ver$s as t*e main ver$. 1*ic* 1ill collocate 1it* t*e adver$
here*y0
;o1ever. t*e +ollo1ing per+ormative utterance
I *ere$- 1arn -ou
can $e e4pressed eGuall- 1ell as3
=ou are *ere$- 1arned
I +ind -ou guilt- o+ doing it
=ou did it
9uilt-7
:oreover. per+ormative ver$s can $e used non-per+ormativel-. per+ormative
utterances ma- contain no ver$ at all. utterances evincing t*e properties t*at are said
to $e c*aracteristic o+ per+ormatives. are not necessaril- per+ormative as in3
#3 ;o1 do -ou get me to t*ro1 all t*ese partiesS
<3 I promise to come0
In vie1 o+ all t*ese pro$lems. #ustin eventuall- re6ects 1*at *e proposes at
t*e $eginning0 First. t*ere is a s*i+t +rom t*e vie1 t*at per+ormatives are a special
class o+ sentences 1it* peculiar s-ntactic and pragmatic properties to t*e vie1 t*at
t*ere is a general class o+ per+ormative utterances t*at include $ot* e5plicit
performatives Jt*e old +amiliar classK and implicit performatives or primary
performatives. t*e latter including lots o+ ot*er 2inds o+ utterances. i+ not all0 ,*us
t*ere is a s*i+t +rom t*e dic*otom- per+ormative vs0 constative to a general t*eor- o+
speec* acts in 1*ic* constatives are 6ust particular mem$ers o+ a special su$-case0
/4plicit per+ormatives suc* as ' here*y warn you are seen as a relativel-
specialized 1a- o+ $eing unam$iguous or speci+ic a$out 1*at act one is per+orming
in spea2ing0 Instead one can emplo- implicit performatives t*at ma2e recourse to
less e4plicit devices li2e3
- mood as in3
S*ut it7 W instead o+ MI order -ou to s*ut it5
- adverbs
I5ll $e t*ere 1it*out +ail W instead o+ MI promise I5ll $e t*ere5
- particles
,*ere+ore D W instead o+ MI conclude t*at D5
- intonation to distinguis* $et1een a 1arning a Guestion or a protest in
It5s going to c*arge
#n important +eature o+ implicit per+ormatives. according to #ustin. is t*at in
principle an- implicit per+ormative can $e put into t*e +orm o+ an e4plicit
per+ormative0
Initiall- #ustin claimed t*at t*e onl- 2inds o+ utterances t*at are not doing
actions as 1ell as. or instead o+ reporting +acts or events are statementsBconstatives0
Later in *is course o+ lectures. *o1ever. #ustin re6ects t*e dic*otom- $et1een
per+omatives and constatives. arguing t*at t*ere is no incompati$ilit- $et1een
utterances $eing trut*-$earers and simultaneousl- per+orming actions0 ,*e utterance3
I 1arn t*e dog 1ill $ite
seems simultaneousl- to per+orm t*e action o+ warning and to issue a prediction.
1*ic* can later $e assessed as true or +alse0 :oreover. *e argued t*at presupposition
+ailure. in t*e domain o+ constatives pla-s t*e same role as +elicit- conditions do in
t*e case o+ per+oramatives0 #ustin concludes t*at t*e distinction $et1een statements.
as trut*-$earers. and per+ormatives. as action-per+ormers. can no longer $e
maintained0 # statement suc* as
I am alone
can $e put into t*e +orm o+ an e4plicit per+ormative as in3
I state t*at I am alone
,*us statements or constative are merel- a special case o+ per+ormatives0 #ll
utterances. in addition to conve-ing a certain meaning. per+orm speci+ic actions.
t*roug* *aving speci+ic forces0
#ustin isolates t*ree $asic senses in 1*ic* in sa-ing somet*ing one is doing
somet*ing. and *ence t*ree 2inds o+ acts t*at are simultaneousl- per+ormed3
JiK the locutionary act? *aving a locutionary meaning? can $e de+ined as
t*e utterance o+ a sentence 1it* a speci+ic sense and re+erence0
JiiK the illocutionary act? *aving an illocutionary force is t*e ma2ing o+ a
statement. o++er. promise. etc0. in uttering a sentence $- virtue o+ t*e
conventional +orce associated 1it* it. or 1it* its e4plicit per+ormative
parap*rase0
JiiiK the perlocutionary act? *aving a perlocutionary effect. is t*e $ringing
a$out o+ e++ects on t*e audience $- means o+ uttering t*e sentence0
,o ta2e an e4ample. in t*e +ollo1ing utterance uttered $- a *us$and to *is 1i+e at a
part-
It5s getting late
t*e locutionary meaning o+ t*e utterance is a simple re+erence to t*e lateness o+ t*e
*ourN t*e illocutionary force o+ t*e act. 1*ic* constitutes a suggestion or a
proposal. is eGuivalent to sa-ing MLet5s go *ome no15N t*e perlocutionary effect
ma- $e t*at o+ persuading t*e addressee to per+orm t*e suggested action0
#ustin argues t*at t*e locutionar- act and t*e illocutionar- act are detac*a$le
and t*ere+ore t*e stud- o+ meaning ma- proceed independentl- $ut is necessaril-
supplemented $- a t*eor- o+ illocutionar- acts0 :ore trou$lesome is t*e distinction
$et1een t*e illocutionar- act and t*e perlocutionar- act0 ,*e +ollo1ing e4amples o+
*is 1ill indicate *o1 *e intend it to appl-3
S*oot *er7
in appropriate circumstances *as t*e illocutionar- +orce o+. variousl-. ordering,
urging, advising t*e addressee to Ms*oot *er5. $ut t*e perlocutionar- e++ect o+
persuading, forcing or frightening t*e addressee into s*ooting *er0
=ou can5t do t*at7
;as t*e illocutionar- +orce protesting and t*e perlocutionar- e++ect o+. sa-. c*ec2ing
t*e addressee5s action. or $ringing *im into *is senses or even anno-ing *im0
#ustin suggests t*e +ollo1ing operational test t*at *elps us distinguis*
$et1een t*e illocutionar- and t*e perlocutionar- acts3 i+ t*e *-pot*etical
illocutionar- +orce can $e parap*rased as an e4plicit per+ormative. t*en t*e act
per+ormed is an illocutionar- actN i+ t*is is not possi$le . t*en t*e act per+ormed is a
perlocutionar- act0
Evaluation test 0+
( /4plain and illustrate t*e di++erence $et1een performatives and constatives
%0 For eac* o+ t*e +ollo1ing e4amples. speci+- t*e illocutionar- +orce o+ t*e second
utterance3
aK Customer3 I5d li2e to $orro1 mone- to $u- a ne1 car
:anager3 ,*is is a $uilding societ-
$K )atient3 ,*is is pro$a$l- going to sound sill-
Doctor JinterruptingK3 8ot at all
cK #3 #nd as i+ t*at 1asn5t enoug*. m- grandmot*er died on C*ristmas Da-
<3 I don5t 2no1 1*at to sa-
#ns1ers to evaluation test A0( on page @>
0, Searle8s ta5onomy of speech acts
Ee- 1ords direction o+ +it. illocutionar- +orce indicating device. representatives. directives.
commisives. e4pressives. declarations
#ustin5s 1or2 *as given rise to man- t*eories regarding speec* acts. t*e most
signi+icant o+ 1*ic* $eing Searle5s ta4onom- J('BBK0 ;is classi+ication s-stem lists
+ive t-pes o+ illocutionar- acts. c*aracterized as +ollo1s3
&epresentativesBassertives W represent a state o+ a++airsN t*e- *ave a 6ord(to(6orld
;o1 to do it
direction o+ +it. i0e0 t*e intention is to ma2e t*e 1ords +it t*e 1orldN t*e ps-c*ological
state e4pressed is a belief. in 1*ic* an- proposition can occurN c*aracteristic
per+ormative ver$s t*at *elp us identi+- t*e illocutionar- +orce. and t*ere+ore
re+erred to as illocutionar- +orce indicating devices. include3 claim, assert, report,
confirm. confess, etc.N e0g0 W statementsN t*e- carr- t*e value true or +alse3 t*e-
s*ould matc* t*e 1orld in order to $e trueN t*eir illocutionar- point is to commit t*e
S to somet*ing $eing t*e case. to t*e trut* o+ t*e e4pressed proposition0
!irectives * direct t*e addressee to1ards doing somet*ing. i0e0 t*e- get t*e ; to do
some volitional actN t*e- a 6orld(to(6ord direction o+ +it. i0e0 t*e 1orld is adapted
to t*e uttered 1ords Jt*e- ma2e t*e 1orld +it 1ords via t*e *earerKN t*e
ps-c*ological state e4pressed3 a 1is*. a desireN e4amples o+ directives include
orders. 1is*esN per+ormative ver$s3 ask, order, command, implore, *eg, challenge,
etc.
Commisives are t*ose 2inds o+ S#s t*at spea2ers use to commit t*emselves to some
+uture actionN t*e- *ave a 6orld(to(6ord direction o+ +it. i0e0 t*e- ma2e t*e 1orld +it
1ords via t*e spea2erN t*e ps-c*ological state e4pressed3 an intention Jt*e- e4press
1*at t*e spea2er intendsKN e4amples o+ commisives include promises. t*reats.
re+usals. pledges. etc0N per+ormative ver$s3 promise. s1ear. vo1, etc.
E5pressives are t*ose 2inds o+ S#s t*at state 1*at t*e spea2er +eels0 ,*e- e4press a
1ide range o+ ps-c*ological states and can $e li2es. disli2es. statements o+ pleasure.
pain. 6o-. sorro10 ,*e- *ave no direction o+ +itN e4amples o+ e4pressives include
congratulations. condolences. etc0N per+ormative ver$s3 thank, congratulate,
apologi)e, condole, etc.
!eclarations are t*ose 2inds o+ S#s t*at c*ange t*e 1orld via t*eir utterance0 ,*e-
correspond to #ustin5s original class o+ per+ormatives Ji0e0 e4plicit per+ormativesK0
,*e- e4press no ps-c*ological stateN t*e- *eavil- rel- on e4tralinguistic
conventions3 t*e spea2er *as to *ave a special institutional role. in a speci+ic conte4t
in order to per+orm a declaration +elicitousl-N t*e- *ave t1o directions o+ +it3 6ord(
to(6orld Jma2e 1ords +it t*e 1orldK and 6orld(to(6ord Jma2e t*e 1orld +it 1ords
i0e0 1ords c*ange t*e 1orldKN e4amples o+ declarations include e4communication.
c*ristening. etc0N per+ormative ver$s3 declare, *apti)e, name, appoint, elect,
pronounce, etc.
Evaluation test 0,

De+ine and illustrate t*e +ollo1ing concepts3
- direction o+ +it
- illocutionar- +orce indicating device
- representatives"assertive
- directives
- commisives
- e4pressives
- declarations
#ns1ers to evaluation test A0% on page @>
Instead o+
summar-
,*is is t*e end o+ Unit A0 I recommend t*at -ou revise t*e main topics o+ t*is unit0
It is time +or -ou to ta2e ,est Unit A 1*ic* t*en s*ould $e *anded in to -our course
instructor0
)est unit 0
(0 9ive a $rie+ account o+ #ustin5s t*eor- o+ speec* acts
%0 Discuss and illustrate t*e structure o+ a speec* act
>0 Consider )resident Eenned-5s +amous announcement in <erlin s*ortl- a+ter t*e
Fall 1as erected3
Ic* $in ein <erliner
In 1*ic* *e intended to sa- literall- t*at *e 1as a <erliner0
;o1ever. $ecause t*e person 1*o 1rote *is speec* *ad a limited 2no1ledge o+
9erman. *e managed instead to sa- t*at *e 1as a 2ind o+ ca2e3
Ic* $in einJeK <erliner JtorteK
I am a <erliner Jca2eK
Despite *is mista2e. *is audience understood 1*at *e 1anted to sa- and applauded
loudl-0
Comment on t*e utterance +rom a pragmatic point o+ vie10 Re+er to suc* issues as
conversational implicature. speec* acts. and dei4is0
Evaluation test 0+
For Guestion (. re+er $ac2 to Section A0(0 to c*ec2 -our ans1ers
%0 JaK re+usal to meet a reGuestN J$K invitation to descri$e s-mptomsN JcK e4pression
o+ s-mpat*- or condolence
Evaluation test 0, Re+er to Section A0%0 to c*ec2 -our ans1ers
2ibliography 'nit 0
#ustin. L0 . 6ow to ;o .hings with 1ords, J%
nd
edn0K. Claredon )ress. ('B@
Levinson. S0 . Pragmatics, Cam$ridge Universit- )ress. ('C>
:e-. L0 . Pragmatics& An 'ntroduction, <lac21ell. (''>
Searle. L0 /xpression and 0eaning. 3tudies in the .heory of 3peech Acts, Cam$ridge
Universit- )ress. ('C(
'nit 1
I#!I&EC) SPEEC$ "C)S
Contents
O$6ectives Unit B
B0(
,est UnitB
#ns1ers. suggestions to test - Unit B
<i$liograp*- Unit B

Page
@@
@@
@C
@C
@'
%23EC)I4ES '#I) 1
,o understand t*e concepts o+ direct and indirect speec* acts
,o distinguis* $et1een direct and indirect speec* acts
,o speci+- t*e steps in t*e in+erential c*ain +or a given indirect speec* act
1+ Indirect speech acts
Ee- 1ords
;o1 to do it
sentence structure. communicative +unction. literal act. indirect act. in+erence
# di++erent approac* to distinguis*ing t-pes o+ speec* acts can $e made on t*e $asis
o+ structure0 # +airl- simple structural distinction $et1een t*ree general t-pes o+
speec* acts is provided. in /nglis*. $- t*e t*ree $asic sentence t-pes0 ,*ere is an
easil- recogniza$le relations*ip $et1een t*e t*ree structural +orms Jdeclarative.
interrogative. imperativeK and t*e t*ree general communicative +unctions Jstatement.
Guestion. command"reGuestK as in3
=ou 1ear a seat $elt0 Jdeclarative W statementK
Do -ou 1ear a seat $eltS Jinterrogative W Guestion K
Fear a seat $elt7 Jimperative W commandK
F*enever t*ere is a direct relations*ip $et1een a structure and a +unction. 1e *ave a
direct speec* act0 F*enever t*ere is an indirect relations*ip $et1een a structure and
a +unction. 1e *ave an indirect speec* act0 ,*us a declarative used to ma2e a
statement is a direct S#. $ut a declarative used to ma2e a reGuest is an IS#0 ,*e
utterance3
It5s cold outside
is a declarative 1*en it is used to ma2e a statement. $eing parap*rased as MI *ere$-
tell -ou a$out t*e 1eat*er5 it is +unctioning as a direct S#0 F*en it is used to ma2e a
reGuest"command. in 1*ic* case it can $e parap*rased as MI *ere$- reGuest o+ -ou
t*at -ou close t*e door5. it is +unctioning as an IS#0
Di++erent structures can $e used to accomplis* t*e same $asic +unction as in t*e
+ollo1ing e4ample 1*ere t*e S 1ants t*e ; not to stand in +ront o+ t*e ,V3
:ove out t*e 1a-7
Do -ou *ave to stand in +ront o+ t*e ,VS
=ou5re standing in +ront o+ t*e ,V0
=ou5d ma2e a $etter door t*an a 1indo10

#n indirect speec* act is an illocutionar- act t*at is per+ormed su$ordinatel- to
anot*er JliteralK illocutionar- act0 It is indirect in t*e sense t*at its success is tied to
t*e success o+ t*e +irst act0 ,*us t*e addressee s*ould correctl- identi+- t*e +irst act
Ji0e0 t*e direct"literal actK i+ *e 1ants to interpret t*e indirect speec* act +elicitousl-0
,*e spea2er5s primar- illocutionar- intent is t*at o+ t*e indirect speec* act0 ;is
secondar- illocutionar- intent is t*at o+ t*e act literall- associated 1it* t*e particular
sentence +orm0
Indirect speec* acts are also $ased on t*e mec*anism o+ conversational implicature0
,*ere 1ill $e an in+erential c*ain lin2ing t*e literal and t*e indirect speec* acts0 ,*e
+irst step 1it*in t*is in+erential c*ain is to notice t*at t*e literal illocutionar- +orce is
not relevant enoug* under t*e circumstances0 Consider t*e +ollo1ing utterance3
Can -ou pass t*e saltS
In uttering it t*e spea2er is per+orming t1o speec* acts3 t*e literal act and t*e
indirect speec* act0 Interrogative sentences are used to +ormulate Guestions. 1*ic* in
t*eir turn are reGuests +or in+ormation0 In our e4ample t*e in+ormation is a$out t*e
a$ilit- o+ t*e ; to pass t*e salt and t*e relevant ans1ers are M-es. I can5 or Mno. I
can5t50 ,*is is t*e direct"literal act suc* an utterance is doing0 ;o1ever. t*is is not
t*e spea2er5s primar- illocutionar- intent0 ,*e intended meaning"interpretation is
t*at o+ an indirect speec* act. i0e0 a reGuest +or action or a directive t*e e4plicit
per+ormative $eing MI reGuest o+ -ou to pass t*e salt50 In order to arrive at t*e
interpretation intended $- t*e spea2er 1e need to dra1 a series o+ in+erences0 ,*is
in+erential c*ain includes t*e +ollo1ing steps3
(K S could not $e merel- as2ing 1*et*er I Jt*e addresseeK *ave t*e a$ilit- to pass t*e
salt $ecause it is mutuall- $elieved t*at t*e ans1er is M-es5N so t*e Guestion 1ill $e
irrelevant. it 1ill +lout t*e ma4im o+ relevance and it 1ill also sin against t*e ma4im
o+ Gualit- $- $reac*ing t*e sincerit- condition associated 1it* -es"no Guestions.
namel- S does not 2no1 and *e sincerel- 1ants to 2no1 1*et*er somet*ing is or is
not t*e case0
%K Since S is $elieved to $e cooperative J*e is $elieved to $e a$iding $- t*e C)K t*an
t*ere is anot*er illocutionar- act t*at *e is per+orming and t*at lin2s t*e
circumstances to as2ing 1*et*er I Jt*e addresseeK *ave t*e a$ilit- to pass t*e salt.
suc* t*at in as2ing t*is Guestion S is per+orming t*at act0
JaK # preparator- condition +or an- directive is ;5s Jt*e addressee5sK a$ilit- to
per+orm t*e act predicated. in t*is case passing t*e salt0
J$K ,*ere+ore S *as as2ed me a Guestion. t*e a++irmative ans1er to 1*ic* 1ould
entail t*at t*e preparator- condition +or reGuesting me t*e salt is satis+ied
JcK Since S *as alluded to t*e satis+action o+ a preparator- condition +or a reGuest.
t*en it is li2el- t*at *e 1ants me to $ring a$out t*e o$edience conditions +or t*at
reGuest0
,*us appl-ing t*is line o+ reasoning 1e reac* t*e conclusion t*at3
>K S is as2ing me J;K 1*et*er I *ave t*e a$ilit- to pass t*e salt and is t*ere$-
reGuesting me J;K to pass *im t*e salt0
Evaluation test 1+

(0 /4plain t*e di++erence $et1een direct"literal act and indirect act
Suppl- appropriate e4amples to illustrate t*e distinction mentioned a$ove0
%0 Consider t*e +ollo1ing statement 1*ic* can $e used as an apolog-3
' should never have done that.
/4plain t*e steps in t*e in+erential c*ain t*at ena$les to calculate t*e indirect act
#ns1ers to evaluation test B0( on page @C
Instead o+
summar-
,*is is t*e end o+ Unit B0 I recommend t*at -ou revise t*e main topics o+ t*is unit0
It is time +or -ou to ta2e ,est Unit B 1*ic* t*en s*ould $e *anded in to -our course
instructor0
)est unit 1
9iven t*e +ollo1ing utterance3
Do -ou 2no1 1*o5s going to t*at meetingS
aK speci+- t*e direct act
$K speci+- t*e indirect act
cK e4plain t*e steps in t*e in+erential c*ain t*at ena$les to calculate t*e indirect act
Evaluation test 1+
For Guestion (. re+er $ac2 to Section B0(0 to c*ec2 -our ans1ers
%0
(K S could not $e merel- stating t*at S s*ould never *ave done t*at0 <ecause it is
mutuall- $elieved $- S and ; t*at t*e act a++ected ; in some negative 1a-. t*at S
s*ould not do suc* t*ings0 So S is not conve-ing in+ormation and 1ould $e violating
t*e ma4im o+ Guantit-0
%K Since S is $elieved to $e cooperative. t*ere is anot*er illocutionar- act t*at S is
per+orming and t*at lin2s t*e circumstances to stating t*at one s*ould never *ave
done t*at act. suc* t*at in stating t*at one s*ould never *ave done t*at act. S could
also $e per+orming a second act0
>K S is stating t*at S s*ould never *ave done t*at and t*ere$- apologizing +or *aving
done it0 <asis +or t*is in+erence3 it is mutuall- $elieved t*at people o+ten regret
doing t*ings t*e- $elieve t*e- s*ould not *ave done0 ,*ere+ore S5s primar-
illocutionar- intent under t*ese circumstances is to apologize +or doing #0

2ibliography 'nit 1
#ustin. L0 . 6ow to ;o .hings with 1ords, J%
nd
edn0K. Claredon )ress. ('B@
Levinson. S0 . Pragmatics, Cam$ridge Universit- )ress. ('C>
:e-. L0 . Pragmatics& An 'ntroduction, <lac21ell. (''>
Searle. L0 /xpression and 0eaning. 3tudies in the .heory of 3peech Acts, Cam$ridge
Universit- )ress. ('C(
2I2LI%;&"P$9
#ustin. L0 J('B@K. 6ow to ;o .hings with 1ords, J%
nd
edn0K. Claredon )ress
nd
edn%, La1rence /rl$aum
#ssociates. Inc0 )u$lis*ers. (''A
Searle. L0 /xpression and 0eaning. 3tudies in the .heory of 3peech Acts, Cam$ridge Universit-
)ress. ('C?

Hornoiu Lec III Pragmatica

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Hornoiu Lec III Pragmatica

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

aUniversitatea OVIDIUS Constana

Potrebbero piacerti anche