Deixis and distance BASIC CONCEPTS I
The phenomenon of deixis ('pointing/indicating' via language) constitutes the singlemost obvious way in which the relationship between language and context is reected in the structure of languages themselves any linguistic form used to accomplish this pointing is called a deictic expression (or indexical sign ) - among the rst forms to be used by very young children - used in face-to-face spo!en interaction" to be easily understood by the people present (but di#cult for someone not right there and then or in dar!ness)$ I'll put this here. here. Meet me here a week from now with a stick about this big Listen, I’m not disagreeing disagreeing with you but with you, and not about this, but about this
%f the semantic content of a sentence is identied with its truth conditions" then utterances with deictic elements cannot be assessed (without context information) I am the mother of Napoleon There is a man on Mars
&ow should indexicals be accomodated so that the notion of logical conseuence can be applied to them a. ohn !enry McTa"itty McTa"itty is si# feet tall and weighs $%% pounds b. ohn !enry McTa"it McTa"itty ty is si# feet tall c. I am si# feet tall and weigh $%% pounds d. I am si# feet tall
while b$ can be inferred from a$" the only way for d$ to be a valid inference from c$ is if they were uttered by the same spea!er s pea!er (need for pragmatic indices or reference points
THE DEICTIC CENTER
proximal vs$distal there is a basic distinction between things 'near' or 'away from' the spea!er
proximal proximal terms* this" here" now distal terms* that" there" then These terms are dened in relation relation to the deictic center* - central person is the spea!er - central time is the time of utterance production - central place is the spea!er+s location at utterance time - disourse center is the point which the spea!er is currently at in the production of his/her utterance - social center is the spea!er+s social status to which the status of the adressee(s)/referent(s) is relative the structural distinctions between direct and indirect (reported) speech are reected in the switch from proximal to distal forms other languages may have more distinctions than ,nglish* e$g$" in apanese demonstrative pronouns (.this+ / .that+) will distinguish between 'that near the addressee' (sore0) and 'that distant from both spea!er s pea!er and addressee' (are0) with a third term being used for the proximal proximal 'this near the spea!er' (!ore0) (!ore0) DEICTIC USAGE
gestural* terms used in gestural deictic way can only be
interpreted with reference to an audio-visual-tactile" and in general a physical" monitoring of the speech event This one’s genuine, but this one’s fake (with selecting gesture) !e’s !e’s not the &uke. !e is. !e’s !e’s the butler. butler. oici( (1resentative in 2rench) symbolic* symbolic usages of deictic terms reuire for their
interpretation only !nowledge of the basic spatio-temporal parameters of the speech event (and occasionally participant role" discourse and social parameters) This city is really beautiful (general location is su#cient) )ou )ou can all come with me if you like (set of potential addressees) *e can’t afford a holiday this year (general time) !! deictic expressions can be used in a non-deictic function !! +h, I did this and that There we go )ou )ou can ne"er tell what age they are nowadays DEICTIC USAGE: EXERCISE
proximal proximal terms* this" here" now distal terms* that" there" then These terms are dened in relation relation to the deictic center* - central person is the spea!er - central time is the time of utterance production - central place is the spea!er+s location at utterance time - disourse center is the point which the spea!er is currently at in the production of his/her utterance - social center is the spea!er+s social status to which the status of the adressee(s)/referent(s) is relative the structural distinctions between direct and indirect (reported) speech are reected in the switch from proximal to distal forms other languages may have more distinctions than ,nglish* e$g$" in apanese demonstrative pronouns (.this+ / .that+) will distinguish between 'that near the addressee' (sore0) and 'that distant from both spea!er s pea!er and addressee' (are0) with a third term being used for the proximal proximal 'this near the spea!er' (!ore0) (!ore0) DEICTIC USAGE
gestural* terms used in gestural deictic way can only be
interpreted with reference to an audio-visual-tactile" and in general a physical" monitoring of the speech event This one’s genuine, but this one’s fake (with selecting gesture) !e’s !e’s not the &uke. !e is. !e’s !e’s the butler. butler. oici( (1resentative in 2rench) symbolic* symbolic usages of deictic terms reuire for their
interpretation only !nowledge of the basic spatio-temporal parameters of the speech event (and occasionally participant role" discourse and social parameters) This city is really beautiful (general location is su#cient) )ou )ou can all come with me if you like (set of potential addressees) *e can’t afford a holiday this year (general time) !! deictic expressions can be used in a non-deictic function !! +h, I did this and that There we go )ou )ou can ne"er tell what age they are nowadays DEICTIC USAGE: EXERCISE
%dentify whether the deictic expressions in the following utterances are used gesturally" symbolically or on-deictically 3 )ou, you" but not you are dismissed gestural 4 % met this weird guy the other day non-deictic 5 6et+s go now rather than tomorrow tomorrow symbolic 7 This city stin!s symbolic 8 Now that+s not what % said non-deictic 9 :ove it from here to there gestural ; This nger hurts gestural < =hat did you say symbolic > &ello" is &arry there symbolic 3? % did it ten years ago PERSON DEIXIS I
each person in a conversation constantly shifts from being '%' to being 'you' @ Ahildren may go through stages of acuisition where this is problematic* ead you a story( basic three-part division spea!er" addressee" others (3$" 4$" 5$ person) mar!ers of relative social status" so-called honorifics" may be used (see also social deixis) @ T/V distinction* familiar vs$ non-familiar addressees (tu vous" du - sie" tu- usted) @ higher status" older" more powerful spea!ers tends to use the familiar form toward a lower status" younger" less powerful addressee$ @ on-familiar forms express distance" are often of 5rd person origin *ould his highness like some coffeeomebody didn't clean up after himself. PERSON DEIXIS II
Inclusion/exclusion distinction *
spea!er and others without addressee vs$ spea!er and addressee included 'we' Let’s Let’s go to the mo"ies -Let’s go to see you tomorrow
@ some languages grammaticaliBe this distinction" e$g$ 2iCian 'keimami' we excl$ 'keda' we incl$
Vocatives (special address forms for names" titles" !inship
terms) are noun phrases that refer to an addressee" but are not syntactically or semantically incorporated as the arguments of a predicate (they are also set apart prosodically) call/summons* !ey you, you /ust scratched my car with your frisbee( address* The truth is, Madam, nothing is as good nowadays summons* utterance/conversation-initial" independent speech acts (gestural) address* parentheticals that can occur anywhere in an utterance (symbolic) SPATIAL SPATIAL DEIXIS I
locations can be specied relative to other obCects or xed reference points The station is $%% yards from the cathedral 0abul lies at latitude 12 degrees, longitude longitude 3% degrees
locations can be deictically specied relative to the location of participants at the time of spea!ing It’s It’s $%% yards away 0abul is 2%% miles west of here
basic distinction* here/there - additional older/dialectal forms* yonder" hither" thence (the latter two including the notion of motion toward or away from the spea!er) sp ea!er) other languages* @ Tlingit has demonstratives for .this one right here+" .this one nearby+" .that one over there+" .that one way over there+ @ :alagasy even has a six-way contrast for this dimension SPATIAL SPATIAL DEIXIS II
et et other languages do not organiBe demonstratives in this way (i$e$" distance in concentric circles from a xed deictic center)" but b ut with respect to contrasts between participant roles* 6atin* .hic+ (close to spea!er)" .iste+ (close to addressee)" .ille+ (remote from spea!er and addressee) Tur!ish* Tur!ish* .bu+ (close to spea!er)" .Eu+ (close to addressee)" addressee)" .o+ (remote from spea!er and addressee)
Famal has a four-way distinction based on four !inds of participant role* (i) close to spea!er" (ii) close to addressee" (iii) close to audience (other members of the conversational group)" (iv) close to persons present but outside the conversational group %n Gustralian and Hew Iuinean languages there are also systems that produce large arrays of demonstratives (.upriver/downriver from spea!er+" .visible/not visible to spea!er+" .above/below/at level with the spea!er+) some verbs of motion" e$g$" come/go" retain a deictic sense when they are used to mar! movement toward ('Aome to bed') or away from the spea!er ('Io to bed') SPATIAL DEIXIS III
location from the spea!er's perspective can be xed mentally as well as physically$ Fpea!ers temporarily away from their home location will often continue to use 'here' to mean the physically distant home location$ Fpea!ers are also able to proCect themselves into other locations prior to actually being in those locations" as when they say '%'ll come later' (J movement to the addressee's location)
Deictic Projection
@ The phrase '% am not here now' should be nonsensical$ %t is of course possible to say this on your answering machine" proCecting that 'now' will apply to any time somebody calls and not to when the words are recorded (proCecting one's presence into the future and a diKerent location)$ @ Fimilar eKect of indirect speech ('here' is not the actual location of the person telling the story) I was looking at this little puppy in a cage with such a sad look on its face. It was like '+h, I'm so unhappy here, will you set me free Psychological Distance as the pragmatic basis of spatial
deixis @ physical and psychological distance often correlate with each other" but deictic elements can
be used to express psychological distance (empathetic deixis) only ('% don't li!e that smell') TEMPORAL DEIXIS I
proximal 'now' indicates both the time coinciding with the spea!er's utterance and the time of the spea!er's voice being heard (the hearer's now) distal 'then' applies to both past and future time relative to the spea!er's present time No"ember $$nd, 4561- I was in cotland then. &inner at 781% on aturday- +kay, I'll see you then
non-deictic temporal reference li!e calendar and cloc! time islearned later than deictic references such as .tomorrow+" .today+" .tonight+" .this wee!+ all deictic expressions depend on !nowing the relevant utterance time (2illmore 3>;3)$ @ time the utterance was made J coding time (AT) @ time the utterance is heard/read J receiving time (LT) Deictic imultaneity * AT J LT (normal verbal utterance situation) @ complication in written messages and pre-recordings of media programs 9ack in an hour :ree beer tomorrow
%n this case a decision has to be made about whether the deictic center remains on the spea!er (and AT) or is proCected on the addresse (and LT) TEMPORAL DEIXIS II
the psychological basis of temporal deixis is similar to that of spatial deixis$ Temporal events can be treated as obCects that move toward or away from us ('the coming wee!'" 'the approaching year' --- 'in days gone by'" 'the past wee!') This program is being recorded today, *ednesday ;pril 4st , to be relayed ne#t Thursday This program was recorded last *ednesday ;pril 4st, to be relayed today I write this letter while chewing peyote I wrote this letter while chewing peyote
choice of verb tense expresses temporal deixis @ present tense is proximal* '% live here now' @ past/future are distal* '% lived there then / % will be in 6ondon by then'
@ conditional/unli!ely event also treated as deictically distant I could be in !awaii
Discourse or text deixis (2illmore 3>;8" 6yons 3>;;) deals with
expressions within an utterance that refer to portions of the unfolding discourse in which the utterance is located$ >ff, pff, pff8 that is what it sounded like This is what phoneticians call creaky "oice This sentence is not true This sub/ect will be addressed in the ne#t chapter I bet you ha"en’t heard this story That was the funniest story I’"e e"er heard
Glso included in disccourse deixis are expressions which signal an utterance+s relation to surrounding text (e$g$" utterance-initial .anyway+) AGMT%NH* a discourse-deictic expression refers to a linguistic expression or chun! of discourse itself" but not to the same entity as a prior linguistic expression (see anaphor) ;8 That’s a rhinoceros 98 pell it for me ;8 That’s a rhinoceros 98 I like it Toen "eflexivity
Discourse-deictic use of .it+ Gnaphoric use of .it+ SOCIAL DEIXIS I
ocial Deixis deals with the encoding of social distinctions
that are relative to participant roles" particularly aspects of the social identities of and the relationship between spea!er and addressee(s) or spea!er and some referent "elational ocial Deixis
(i) spea!er and referent (e$g$ referent honorics) (ii) spea!er and addressee (e$g$ addressee honorics) (iii) spea!er and bystander (e$g$ audience honorics) (iv) spea!er and setting (e$g$ formality levels) #onorifics* describing a relation concerninh relative ran! or respect (Aomrie 3>;9)
- other grammaticaliBed relationships* !inship relations" totemic relations" clan membership Leferent honorics* respect conveyed by referring to the target of respect - T/O distinction (tu @ vous etc$) Gddressee honorics* respect conveyed without (necessarily) referring to the target - apanese/Porean* .the soup is hot+ with choice of linguistic alternates" e$g$" for .soup+ to express respect for the addressee complex speech levels (anything one says is sociolinguistic) Gudience honorics* respect conveyed for participants in audience role or non-participating overhearers - Dyirbal alternative vocabulary in the presence of taboo relatives 2ormality levels* diKerent language use in particular formal settings - apanese/Tamil* diKerent style (vocabulary" syntax) / diglossic variant (diKerences across phonology" morphology" syntax" lexicon) SOCIAL DEIXIS II
$bsolute ocial Deixis
authoriBed spea!ers* only certain typed of spea!ers may use particular words/morphemes - Thai* .!hrQb+ politeness particle only used by men" .!hQ+ only by women - apanese rst pronoun only used by the emperor authoriBed recipients* only certain types of addresse may be addressed with certain words/morphemes titles of address (.ou &onor+" .:r$ 1resident+) - Tunica* pronouns diKering with sex of addressee" e$g$ two words for .they+ depending on whether one is spea!ing to a man or a woman socially deictic information can be encoded anywhere in the linguistic system lexicon (alternates/suppletives)* e$g$" apanese (also wea!ly in ,nglish .elevated+ terms" e$g$ .residence+ for .home+" .dine+ for .eat+" .lady+ for .woman+" .steed+ for .stallion+
morphology (a#xes" particles)* Thai phonology (segmental" prosody)* Rasue" TBeltal (honoric falsetto) mixtures of all elements* avanese" Tamil" :adurese
Reference and inference BASIC CONCEPTS
reference: act in which a speaker/writer uses linguistic forms to enable a listener/reader to identify something (‘words don't refer, people do’) referring expressions proper nouns ('!hakespeare', '"awaii') definite noun phrases ('the author', 'the island') indefinite noun phrases ('a man', 'a woman', 'a beautiful place') pronouns ('he', 'she', 'them') #he choice of e$pression depends largely on what the speaker assumes the listener already knows (in shared %isual conte$ts & deictic e$pressions) inference% as there is no direct relationship between entities and words, the listener's task is to infer correctly which entity the speaker intends to identify by using a particular referring e$pression can use %ague e$pressions ('the blue thing', 'that icky stuff', 'whatsisname')
can use e$pressions focusing on one feature ('ister ftersha%e is late today‘) reference needs to use ob*ecti%ely correct naming, but can work with locally successful REFERENTIAL AND ATTRIBUTIVE USE
+ot all referring e$pressions ha%e identifiable physical referents indefinite noun phrases can refer to a physically present entity: '#here's a man waiting for you' an unknown entity assumed to e$ist: '"e wants to marry a woman with lots of money' an entity that does not e$ist: '-e'd like to sign a ninefoottall basketball player' use in b (entity only known in terms of descripti%e properties) is an attributive use meaning 'who/whate%er fits the description' referential use has one specific entity in mind (.onnellan 011) attributi%e use is also possible with definite +2s: '#here was no sign of the killer' (when talking about a mysterious death, referential use when a particular person had been identified, chased into a building, but escaped) e$pressions themsel%es do not ha%e reference but are in%ested with referential function in a conte$t by a speaker/writer NAMES AND REFERENTS
con%ention between all members of a cultural/language community: collaboration of the intention to identify and the recognition of intention '!hakespeare' does not refer only to a specific person: ?an I borrow your hakespeare)eah it's o"er there on the table con%entional set of entities (eg things the writer produced) hakespeare takes up the whole bottom shelf *e're going to see hakespeare in London I hated hakespeare at school 'the cheese sandwich' can refer to a person *here's the cheese sandwich sitting !e's o"er there by the window pragmatic connection between proper names and ob*ects con%entionally associated within a socioculturally defined community
THE ROLE OF CO-TEXT
#he ability to identify intended referents does not *ust depend on the understanding of the referring e$pression, but is aided by the linguistic material, or co-text, accompanying it 9ra@il wins *orld ?up ('wins -orld 3up' limits the range of possible interpretations) the referring e$pression pro%ides a range of reference, a number of possible referents The cheese sandwich is made with white bread The cheese sandwich left without paying co-text% linguistic part of the en%ironment in which a referring e$pression is used context% physical en%ironment and (speech) con%entions, eg, a restaurant The heartAattack mustn't be mo"ed
4n talking and writing we ha%e to keep track of who or what we are talking about for more than one sentence at a time In the film, a man and a woman were trying to wash a cat. The man was holding the cat while the woman poured water on it. !e said something to her and they started laughing. initial/introductory reference is often indefinite ('a man', 'a woman', 'a cat') subse5uent reference with definite +2s ('the man, 'the cat', 'the woman') or with pronouns ('it', 'he', 'she') Reference to already introduced referents is called anaphoric reference (initial e$pression: antecedent subse5uent e$pression: anaphor) anaphoric reference need not be e$actly identical to antecedent: >eel and slice si# potatoes. >ut them in cold salted water. ('them' now refers to 'the si$ peeled and sliced potatoes')
sometimes re%ersal of antecedentanaphor order I turned the corner and almost stepped on it. There was a large snake in the middle of the path. cataphoric pattern ('it' is a cataphor) ANAPHORIC REFERENCE II
-hile definite nouns and pronouns can act as anaphors, ellipsis can as well (6ero anaphor) >eel an onion and slice it. &rop the slices into hot oil. ?ook for three minutes. #he last utterance '3ook for three minutes' works with the e$pectation that the listener will be able to infer that the speaker intends to identify the peeled onion slices 4t is possible to make inferences when anaphoric e$pressions are not linguistically connected to their antecedents I /ust rented a house. The kitchen is really big *e had ?hardonnay with dinner. The wine was the best part. The bus came on time, but he didn't stop ‘4 *ust rented a house #he kitchen is really big’ re5uires the inference that if $ is a house, then $ has a kitchen to make an anaphoric connection knowledge in the listener is assumed (can be specific, eg one must know that 3hardonnay is a wine, can lead to lack of grammatical agreement (bus he)) the social dimension of reference is tied to the effect of collaboration con%ersation partners must ha%e something in common/share something (social closeness) !uccessful reference means that an intention was recogni6ed, %ia inference, indicating a kind of shared knowledge and hence social connection ANALYSIS EXERCISE
#he following te$t was found on the back wall of an airline toilet (in an merican irlines plane): 278!8 9!8 #"8 #R!" 3+#4+8R ;R +<#"4+= #"8R #"+ #478# 228R -hat are possible interpretations of this> -hat is the most likely interpretation and what is necessary to arri%e at it> #he following notice was found on the back wall of the men’s toilet in the 9ni%ersidade ;ederal de ?rasilia
!8 8.93., @=98 2287 + 74A (?e educated, throw the paper in the waste basket) -hat is the most likely interpretation here> 4s the note ambiguous> "ow is understanding of these contradictory messages dependent on the conte$t> -hat does ‘anything other’ in the merican notice refer to> -hat is the paper referred to in the ?ra6ilian notice>
!peech acts and e%ents BASIC CONCEPTS !peakers can perform actions while making utterances !ituation: t work, boss has great deal of power )ou're fired
more than *ust a statement, actually ends your employment ther e$amples:
)ou're so fantastic (compliment) )ou're welcome (acknowledgement of thanks) )ou're cra@y( (e$pression of surprise)
ctions performed %ia utterances are called speech acts (eg, apology, complaint, compliment, in%itation, promise, re5uest) #he speaker normally e$pects that his or her communicati%e intention will be recogni6ed by the hearer
both speaker and hearer are helped by the circumstances surrounding the utterance #hese circumstances (including other utterances) are called the speech event The tea is really cold( !ituation : n a wintry day, the speaker reaches for a cup of tea, belie%ing that it has been freshly made, takes a sip, and produces the utterance complaint !ituation ?: n a really hot summer's day the speaker is being gi%en a glass of iced tea, takes a sip, and produces the utterance praise +o simple utterancetoaction correspondence is possibleBBB
PHILOSOPHICAL BACKGROUND 0CDs: logical positi%ism (unless a sentence can be tested for its truth or falsity, it is strictly speaking meaningless) %s -ittgenstein: ‘eaning is use’ ustin 01E: - theory of !peech cts - series of lectures (posthumously published as ‘"ow to do things with words’) truth conditions are not central to language understanding - performati%es %s constati%es I christen this ship the Imperial :lagship Mao
- speech act goes wrong if F ship already has another name F 4 am not authori6ed to name it F there are no witnesses, slipways, bottles of champagne felicity conditions (conditions performati%es must meet to succeed) !earle 010: - systemati6ation of ustin’s work, creating speech act theory’s impact on linguistics
- felicity conditions constitute %arious speech acts (illocutionary acts) - typology of speech acts
and e%ents SPEECH ACTS n action performed by producing an utterance consists of three related acts locutionary act: basic act of utterance, producing a meaningful linguistic e$pression ;ha mokofa ( not a locutionary act) I'"e /ust made some coffee ( locutionary act) illocutionary act:function/communicati%e force of the utterance (also called illocutionary force), can be a statement, offer, e$planation etc perlocutionary act:intended effect of the action (also called perlocutionary effect ) - speecht acts are often interpreted narrowly as *ust the illocutionary force of an utterance - the same locutionary act can count as different illocutionary forces I'll see you later can be a prediction, promise or warning "ow can speakers be sure that the intended illocutionary force will be recogni6ed by the hearer> I&IDs and felicity conditions
IFIDS n I&ID (Illocutionary &orce Indicating Device ) is an e$pression with a slot for a %erb that e$plicitly names the illocutionary act being performed - such %erbs are called performative verbs
I promiseBwarn you that ...
- they are not always made this e$plicit in con%ersation ;8 ?an I talk to Mary 98 No, she's not here. ;8 I'm asking you A can I talk to her 98 ;nd I'm telling you A he is not here((((
most of the time there is no performati%e %erb mentioned ther 4;4.s beside performati%e %erbs: word order, stress, intonation, %oice 5uality (lowered for warnings/threats) )ou're going( CI tell you DE )ou're going- CI reFuest confirmation about DE ;re you going- CI ask you if DE
acts and e%ents FELICITY CONDITIONS &elicity conditions: e$pected or appropriate circumstances for a speech act to be recogni6ed as intended I sentence you to si# months in prison performance will be infelicitous if the speaker is not a *udge in a courtroom general conditions: language is understood, no playacting, nonsense content conditions: eg for promises/warnings the content of the utterance must be about a future e%ent (promise: the e%ent will be an act by the speaker) preparatory conditions: pree$isting conditions about the e%ent, eg, promise: e%ent will not happen by itself, e%ent will be beneficial warning: it's not clear if the hearer knows that the e%ent will occur, the e%ent will not ha%e a beneficial effect sincerity conditions: attitude of the speaker, eg,
promise: speaker genuinely intends to carry out the future action warning: speaker genuinely belie%es the future e%ent will not ha%e a beneficial effect essential conditions: change of state in the speaker, eg, promise: change of state from nonobligation to obligation to carry out action warning: change of state from noninformation of bad future e%ent to information
THE PERFORMATIVE HYPOTHESIS I Performative #ypothesis: ne way to think about the speech acts being performed %ia utterances is to assume that underlying e%ery utterance (9) there is a clause containing a performati%e %erb (Gp) which makes the illocutionary force e$plicit I
- the sub*ect must be first person - the ad%erb 'hereby' indicates that utterance counts as an action - Gp in the present tense - indirect ob*ect in second person singular ?lean up this mess I hereby order you to clean up this mess The work was done by Hlaine and myself I hereby tell you that the work was done by Hlaine and myself
implicit performatives explicit performatives (primary perormatives )
THE PERFORMATIVE HYPOTHESIS II
#his type of analysis makes clear what elements are in%ol%ed in the production and interpretation of utterances: in synta$ a refle$i%e pronoun (like 'myself') re5uires an antecedent ('4') within the same sentence structure (it can be found in the e$plicit performati%eBB) it can be shown that some ad%erbs naturally attach to the e$plicit performati%e clause rather than the implicit %ersion: !onestly, he's a scoundrel
problem: e$plicit utterance may change interpretation (%ersions are not e5ui%alent) I hereby order you to clean up this mess )ou're dumber than a rock
has a more serious impact than does not really work as an insult as ?lean up this mess - I hereby insult you that you're dumber than a rock
('insult' may not be a performati%e %erb) -e don't how many performati%e %erbs there are in any languageBB
SPEECH ACT CLASSIFICATION I declarations: - speech acts that change the world %ia their utterance - the speaker has to ha%e a special institutional role, in a specific situation >riest8 I now pronounce you husband and wife eferee8 )ou're out ury :oreman8 *e find the defendant guilty
the speaker changes the world %ia words
representatives :- speech acts that state what the speaker belie%es to be the case or not - statements of fact, assertions, conclusions and descriptions are all e$amples of the speaker representing the world as he/she belie%es it is The earth is flat ?homsky didn't write about peanuts It was a warm sunny day
the speaker makes words fit the world (of belief) expressives: - speech acts that state what the speaker feels
they e$press psychological states and can be statements of pleasure, pain, likes, dislikes, *oy, sorrow I'm really sorry ?ongratulations( +h yes, great, mmmmm((
the speaker makes words fit the world (of feeling)
SPEECH ACT CLASSIFICATION II directives : - speech acts that speakers use to get someone else to do something - they e$press what the speaker wants, they are commands, orders, re5uests, suggestions and can be positi%e or negati%e imme a cup of coffe. Make it black ?ould you lend me a pen, please &on't touch that the speaker attempts to make the world fit the words %ia the hearer commissives: - speech acts that speaker use to commit themsel%es to some future action - they e$press what the speaker intends, they are promises, threats, refusals, pledges - they can be performed by the speaker alone, or by as a member of a group
I'll be back I'm going to get it right ne#t time *e will not do that the speaker undertakes to make the world fit the words %ia the speaker
!ummary !peech ct #ype .irection of fit ;orm (! H speaker, A H situation) .eclarations words change the world ! causes A Representati%es make words fit the world ! belie%es A 8$pressi%es make words fit the world ! feels A .irecti%es make the world fit words ! wants A 3ommissi%es make the world fit words ! intends A
EXERCISE 3lassify the following speech acts 4’ll make him an offer he can’t refuse (ario 2u6o) commissi"e E 4 bapti6e this baby @ohn declarati"e C ?etter remain silent and be thought a fool, than open your mouth and remo%e all possible doubt (3hinese pro%erb) directi"e I 4f’d known 4 was gonna li%e that long, 4’d ha%e taken better care of myelf (8ubie ?lake) e#pressi"e J 4 came, 4 saw, 4 con5uered (@ulius 3aesar)
DIRECT AND INDIRECT SPEECH ACTS I -hene%er there is a direct relationship between a structure and a function Direct peech $ct )ou wear a seat belt.
*ear a seat belt(
DIRECT AND INDIRECT SPEECH ACTS II #here is a typical pattern in 8nglish whereby asking a 5uestion about the hearer's assumed ability ('can you', 'could you') or future likelihood with regard to doing something ('will you', 'would you') normally counts as a re5uest to actually do that something ?ould you pass the salt*ould you open this4ndirect speech acts are generally associated with greater politeness than direct speech acts
SPEECH EVENTS I n indirect re5uest can be interpreted as 5uestion whether the necessary conditions for a re5uest are in place, ie, a preparatory condition would be that the speaker assumes that the hearer is able ('3+') to perform the action content condition concerns the future action that the hearer -477 perform the action 3ontent condition ;uture act of hearer '-477 you do A>' (H hearer will do A) 2reparatory condition "earer is able to perform act '3+ you do A>' (H hearer 3+ do A)
Kuestioning a hearerbased condition for making a re5uest results in an indirect re5uest - there is a definite difference between asking someone to do A and asking someone if the preconditions for doing A are in place - asking about preconditions technically doesn't count as making a re5uest, but allows the hearer to react as if the re5uest had been made (H less of an imposition on the hearer, smaller risk of refusal) n utterance is part of a larger social situation in%ol%ing people with some kind of social relationship and particular goals peech 'vent H the set of utterances produced in such a situation
SPEECH EVENTS II speech event is an acti%ity in which participants interact %ia language in some con%entional way to arri%e at some outcome
- may include one ob%ious central speech act - may include other utterances leading up to and subse5uently reacting to that central action ;8 +h, Mary, I'm glad you're here. 98 *hat's up ;8 I can't get my computer to work. the re5uest is the whole speech e%ent, 98 Is it broken- not a single speech act ;8 I don't think so. 98 *hat's it doing- no actual re5uest is made ;8 I don't know. I'm useless with computers. 98 *hat kind is it ;8 It's a Mac. &o you use them 98 )eah. ;8 &o you ha"e a minute 98 ure. ;8 +h, great - the 5uestion '.o you ha%e a minute>' could be characteri6ed as a prere5uest, allowing the hearer to say that she's busy or that she has to be somewhere else - the response '!ure' is taken to be an acknowledgement not only of ha%ing time a%ailable, but a willingness to perform the unstated action
2resupposition and entailment BASIC CONCEPTS Presupposition and entailment describe two different aspects of information that need not be stated as speakers assume it is already known by listeners Lthese concepts used to be much more central to pragmatics than they are now, but they are still important to understand the relationship between pragmatics and semanticsM
presupposition: something the speaker assumes to be the case before making an utterance !peakers, not sentences, ha%e presuppositions
BB not the same meaning as in ordinary usage (‘@ohn wrote "arry a letter, presupposing he could read’)BB
entailment: something that logically follows from what is asserted in the utterance !entences, not speakers, ha%e entailments
8$ample analysis: Mary's brother bought three horses. presuppositions: ary e$ists, ary has a brother, ary has only one brother, ary's brother is rich speaker's sub*ecti%e presuppositions, all can be wrong entailments: ary's brother bought something, bought three animals, two horses, one horse etc entailments follow from the sentence regardless of whether the speaker's beliefs are right or wrong L?ecause of its logical nature, entailment is not generally discussed as much in contemporary pragmatics as the more speakerdependent notion of presuppositionM
esupposition and entailment HISTORICAL BACKGROUND I 3oncern with this topic originates with debates in philosophy, specifically debates about the nature or reference and referring e$pressions ;rege (N0E): 4f anything is asserted there is always an ob%ious presupposition (‘Gorausset6ung’ in the original) that the simple or compound proper names used ha%e a reference 4f one therefore asserts ‘Oepler died in misery’, there is a presupposition that the name Oepler designates something (‘Oepler designates something’ is not part of the meaning of ‘Oepler died in misery’) (i) referring phrases carry presuppositions to the effect that they do indeed refer
(ii) a sentence and its negati%e counterpart share the same set of presuppositions (iii) in order for assertion to be either true or false, its presuppositions must be true or satisfied
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND II Russell (0DJ): !entences that lack proper referents are meaningful (%s (iiii) in ;rege) The 0ing of :rance is wise #he sentence is meaningful because it is simply false The 0ing of :rance is not wise can be taken in two ways: a there is a Oing of ;rance and he is not wise (narrow scope of negation) b there is no Oing of ;rance and he is not wise (wide scope of negation) (‘#he Oing of ;rance is not wise because there is no such person’)
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND III !trawson (0JD): !entences must distinguished from uses of sentences Russell’s conflation of the distinction led him to think that because ‘#he Oing of ;rance is wise’ is meaningful, it must be either true are false !entences aren’t true or false, only statements are #he statement of ‘#he Oing of ;rance is wise’ may ha%e been true in 1PD and false in PPD, but in 0PD it cannot sensibly be said to be
either true or false, due to the none$istence of a Oing of ;rance the 5uestion of its truth or falsity does not e%en arise there is a precondition for ‘#he Oing of ;rance is wise’ to be true or false and that is ‘#here is a present Oing of ;rance’ #his is a presupposition
PRESUPPOSITION 2resupposition is treated as a relationship between two propositions Mary's dog is cute
+egation does not change the relationship of presupposition Mary's dog isn't cute
constancy under negation H the presupposition of statement remains constant (ie, true) e%en when that statement is negated H"erybody knows that ohn is gay
speakers disagree about %alidity of p, but not of 5
TYPES OF PRESUPPOSITION I 7inguistic forms (words, phrases, structures) are indicators (or triggers) of potential presuppositions which can only become actual presuppositions in conte$ts with speakers
'xistential Presupposition speaker is committed to the e$istence of the entities named the 0ing of weden the cat the girl ne#t door the ?ounting ?rows your car
? &active Presupposition certain %erbs/construction indicate that something is a fact H"erybody 0N+* that ohn is gay
TYPES OF PRESUPPOSITION II 3 (exical Presupposition #he use of a form with its asserted meaning is con%entionally interpreted with the presupposition that another, nonasserted, meaning is understood !e M;N;H& to repair the clock
>H& smoking
. tructural Presupposition certain sentence structures con%entionally and regularly presuppose that part of the structure is already assumed to be true -h5uestions: *hen did he lea"e-
*here did you buy the bike-
TYPES OF PRESUPPOSITION III 8 )on-factive Presupposition certain %erbs/constructions indicate that something is not a fact / not true I &H;MH& that I was rich HTHN& to be ill
; *ounterfactual Presupposition structures mean that what is presupposed is not only not true, but is the opposite of what is true, ie contrary to facts If you were my friend, you would ha"e helped me
!9R< #ype 8$ample 2resupposition e$istential the A && A e$ists facti%e 4 regret lea%ing && 4 left nonfacti%e "e pretended to be happy && "e wasn't happy le$ical "e managed to escape && "e tried to escape structural -hen did she die> && !he died counterfactual 4f 4 weren't ill && 4 am ill
TYPES OF PRESUPPOSITION III 4dentify the respecti%e presuppositions and classify them according to type
@ohn didn’t reali6e that he was in debt JJ ohn was in debt facti"e E ?efore !trawson was e%en born, ;rege noticed presuppositions JJ trawson was born structural C 4f "annibal had only had twel%e more elephants, the Romance languages wouldn’t e$ist now JJ !annibal didn’t ha"e 4$ more elephants counterfactual I @ohn didn’t see the man with two heads JJ there e#ists a man with two heads e#istential J 3arter returned to power JJ ?arter was in power before le#ical 1 4t wasn’t "enry that kissed Rosie JJ someone kissed osie structural P ;red hallucinated that he had won a billion .ollars JJ :red didn’t win a billion &ollars nonAfacti"e N gatha accused 4an of plagiarism JJ ;gatha thinks plagiarism is bad
2resupposition and entailment THE PROJECTION PROBLEM I #here is a basic e$pectation that the presupposition of a simple sentence will continue to be true when that simple sentence becomes part of a more comple$ sentence Projection Problem: the meaning of some presuppositions (as 'parts') doesn't sur%i%e to become the meaning of some comple$ sentences (as 'wholes') 8A278 +7
f r && +# 5 H& speaker uttering d presupposed e (which is the opposite of b) g 4 imagined that Oelly was ill and nobody reali6ed that she was ill (H r Q p) h r Q p && +# 5 H& 5 can no longer be assumed to be true
THE PROJECTION PROBLEM II 8A278 +7
#he presupposition does not pro*ect because it is o%erruled by an entailment: '"e didn't get her pregnant' entails '=eorge didn't get ary pregnant' as a logical conse5uence #herefore '=eorge regrets getting ary pregnant but he didn't get her pregnant' includes the presupposition 5 in the first half and the entailment +# 5 in the second half the entailment is more powerful
THE PROJECTION PROBLEM III 8ntailments can also cancel e$istential presuppositions a. The 0ing of Hngland "isited us b. The 0ing of Hngland does not e#ist
the speaker uttering b does not simultaneously belie%e that there is a Oing of 8ngland (presupposition) and that there is no Oing of 8ngland (entailment) 2resuppositions should be thought of as potentials (they are defeasible), they only become actual presuppositions when intended by the speaker to be recogni6ed as such
;t least ohn won’t ha"e to regret that he did a >h&
.espite the use of ‘regret’ only the conte$t/knowledge can decide whether @ohn did a 2h. or not !peakers can indicate that a potential presupposition is not presented as a strong assumption *hat's that guy doing in the parking lot !e's looking for his car or something.
ORDERED ENTAILMENTS =enerally speaking, entailment is not a pragmatic (ie ha%ing to do with speaker meaning), but a purely logical concept o"er chased three sFuirrels
Relationsship of entailment between p and 5: p SS 5 ad are e$amples of bacground entailments (there are more) the speaker can communicate usually by means of stress T the order of importance of the entailments o"er chased T!HH sFuirrels +H chased three sFuirrels
foreground entailment 3leftconstructions can fulfil the same purpose
It was +H that chased the sFuirrels
3ooperation and implicature BASIC CONCEPTS -e assume that speakers and listeners in%ol%ed in con%ersation are generally cooperating with each other for reference to be successful it was proposed that collaboration is a necessary factor in accepting speakers' presuppositions, listeners normally ha%e to assume that a speaker who says 'my car' does ha%e a car and is not trying to mislead the listener
2eople ha%ing a con%ersation are not normally assumed to be trying to confuse, trick, or withhold rele%ant information from each other sense of cooperation 4n the middle of their lunch hour, one woman asks another how she likes the hamburger she is eating, and recei%es the answer: ; hamburger is a hamburger
Tautology: statement that is always true, but has no communicati%e %alue 4n a con%ersation the speaker using a tautology intends to communicate more than is said #he additional con%eyed meaning is an implicature (here: the hamburger tastes as usual, she has no opinion whether it's good or bad) 4mplicature stands as a paradigmatic e$ample of the nature and power of pragmatic e$planations of linguistic phenomena 4t is intended to contrast with terms like (logical) implication, entailment or conse5uence
THE COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE !cenario: #here is a woman sitting on a park bench and a large dog lying on the ground in front of the bench man comes along and sits down on the bench Man8 &oes your dog bite*oman8 No.
#he man erroneously assumed that more was communicated than what was said
this is not a problem in%ol%ing presuppositions because the assumption that the woman has a dog is true for both speakers ;rom the man's perspecti%e the woman's answer pro%ided less information than e$pected
gi%ing sufficient information is an e$ample for the cooperative principle of con%ersation #here are four subprinciples, called conversational maxims according to =rice (0PJ) (key ideas deli%ered in the -illiam @ames lectures at "ar%ard in 01P) *ooperative Principle : ake your con%ersational contribution such as is re5uired, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk e$change in which you are engaged
MAXIMS +uantity ake your contribution as informati%e as is re5uired (for the current purposes of the e$change)
E .o not make your contribution more informati%e than is re5uired ? +uality (#ry to make your contribution one that is true) .o not say what you belie%e to be false E .o not say that for which you lack ade5uate e%idence 3 "elation ?e rele%ant . ,anner (?e perspicuous) %oid obscurity of e$pression E %oid ambiguity C ?e brief (a%oid unnecessary proli$ity) I ?e orderly !ummary: -e assume that people are normally going to pro%ide an appropriate amount of information, tell the truth, be rele%ant and try to be as clear as they can !peakers rarely mention these principles, e$cept when they may be in danger of not fully adhering to them hedges
HEDGES I hedges: cautious notes to indicate that a speaker is aware of ma$ims, but fears not to adhere to them completely !peakers are aware of the ma$ims and show that they are trying to obser%e them 8$amples Kuality ;s far as I know, they're married I may be mistaken, but I thought I saw a wedding ring on her finger I'm not sure if this is right, but I heard it was a secret ceremony in !awaii !e couldn't li"e without her, I guess
8$amples Kuantity ;s you probably know, I am terrified of bugs o, to cut a long story short, we grabbed our stuff and ran I won't bore you with all the details, but it was an e#citing trip
8$amples Relation +h by the way, his nephew is a member of parliament ;nyway, that's also part of the program I don't know if this is important, but some of the files are missing This may sound like a dumb Fuestion, but whose handwriting is this Not to change the sub/ect, but is this related to the budget-
and implicature HEDGES II 8$amples anner This may be a bit confused, but I remember being in a car I'm not sure if this makes sense, but the car had no lights I don't know if this is clear at all, but I think the other car was re"ersing
!ituations where speakers may not follow the e$pectations of the cooperati%e principle: in courtrooms and classrooms, witnesses and students are often called upon to tell people things which are already wellknown to those people (%iolation of the 5uantity ma$im) speciali6ed institutional talk is different from con%ersation 8$amples for speakers not following the ma$ims on purpose No comment My lips are sealed
(these statements are not as informati%e as re5uired, but interpreted as communicating more than is said, ie, the speaker knows the answer) 22R8+# G47#4+ ; #"8 A4! 4! #"8 O8< # #"8 +#4+ ; *)V'"$TI)$( I,P(I*$T."' BBB
CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURE ?asic assumption in con%ersation: 9nless otherwise indicated, the participants are adhering to the cooperati%e principle and the ma$ims ?harlene8 I hope you brought the bread and the cheese &e#ter8 ;h, I brought the bread
3harlene assumes the .e$ter is cooperating and aware of the 5uantity ma$im 4f he did not mention the cheese, he must ha%e done so on purpose !he infers that what is not mentioned, was not brought .e$ter has con%eyed more than he said %ia a conversational implicature ?harlene8 b c &e#ter8 b
!peakers communicate meaning %ia implicatures listeners recogni6e the communicated meanings %ia inference
GENERALIZED CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURE &oobie8 &id you in"ite 9ella and ?athy-
-hen no special background knowledge of the conte$t of the utterance is re5uired to make the necessary inferences, it is called a generalied conversational implicature 8$ample: indefinite articles are typically interpreted as an A F& not speaker's A I was sitting in a garden one day. ; child looked o"er the fence.
not my garden, my child
Kuantity ma$im: 4f the speaker were capable of being more specific/informati%e he/she would ha%e said 'my garden' and 'my child' ohn has two >h&s
Kuality ma$im: speaker belie%es what she/he asserts to be true #herefore sentences like --ohn has two >h&s but I don’t belie"e he has
are anomalous (socalled ,oore0s Paradox)
SCALAR IMPLICATURES -ords of a certain type can be classified as e$pressing one %alue from a scale of %alues, eg, terms for e$pressing 5uantity Qall, most, many, some, fewJ Qalways, often, sometimesJ Qmust, should, mayJ Qn, R, S,2,1,$,4J
-hen producing an utterance, a speaker selects the one word from the scale which is the most informati%e and truthful (5uantity and 5uality) I'm studying linguistics and I'"e completed some of the reFuired courses.
'some' creates the implicature F& not all scalar implicature: when any form in a scale is asserted, the negati%e of all forms higher on the scale is implicated
The linguistic courses are sometimes really interesting 'sometimes' creates the implicatures F& not often, F& not always It's possible that they were delayed implicates F& not certain (as a higher %alue on the scale of likelihood) This should be stored in a cool place implicates F& not must (on a scale of obligation) implicates F& not fro6en (on a scale of coldness)
!peakers may correct themsel%es on the use of scalar implicatures: I got some of this /ewelry in !ong 0ong A um actually I think I got most of it there.
PARTICULARIZED CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURE I ost con%ersations take place in %ery specific conte$ts in which locally recogni6ed inferences are assumed particularied conversational implicatures by far the most common type of implicature, therefore usually *ust called implicatures ick8 !ey, coming to the party tonightTom8 My parents are "isiting seems to %iolate ma$im of rele%ance 4n order to make #om's response rele%ant, Rick has to draw on assumed knowledge that one college student e$pects another to ha%e (#om will be spending the e%ening with his parents, who are unlikely to come to the party, conse5uently F& #om not at party) Lloyd8 *hat if the G blockades the ulf and all the oil*inston8 +h come now, 9ritain rules the seas( any reasonably informed participant in the 0PD’s (and today) would know that ?’s utterance is blatantly false #hat being so, -inston cannot be trying to decei%e 7loyd "is seeming %iolation of the ma$im of 5uality must be intended to mean something different, namely the opposite ( irony) 2ossibilities: hyperbole (‘4’m star%ing’), metaphor (‘!he de%oured this book’), irony (friendly way of being offensi%e: ‘4 *ust lo%e being woken up at I am by a fire alarm’), sarcasm (less friendly form of irony: ‘-hy don’t you lea%e all your dirty clothes on the floor>’), banter (offensi%e way of being
friendly, can ha%e a flirtatious element: ‘’)
PARTICULARIZED CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURE II ;nn8 *here are you going with the dogam8 To the A H A T
!am 'flouts' (ie does not adhere to) the ma$im of manner #he dog is known to recogni6e the word '%et' and to hate being taken there, therefore !am produces a more elaborate, ie less brief, %ersion ane8 ohn still has not said if he’ll come 9eth8 !e’ll either come or he won’t
?eth flouts the ma$im of 5uantity by saying nothing informati%e "er true informati%e inference must be something like ‘calm down, there’s no point in worrying, we can’t do anything about it anyway’ 7eila has *ust walked into ary's office and noticed all the work on her desk Leila8 *hoa( !as you boss gone cra@y Mary8 Let's go get some coffee.
ary flouts the ma$im of rele%ance 7eila has to infer some local reason (eg, the boss is nearby) for why ary makes a nonrele%ant remark !tandardi6ed flouting of rele%ance: 9ert8 &o you like ice cream Hrnie8 Is the >ope ?atholic-
n and implicature EXERCISE
-hich =ricean ma$ims ha%e been flouted in the following e$ample> : 7et’s get the kids something ?: kay, but 4 %eto 4 T 3 T 8 3 T R T 8 T T E : -here’s ?ill> ?: #here’s a yellow G- outside !ue’s house C : #eheran’s in #urkey, isn’t it> ?:
PROPERTIES OF CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURES I con%ersational implicatures are defeasible ?ecause implicatures are part of what is communicated and not said, speakers can always deny that they intended the communicate such meanings
)ou ha"e won fi"e dollars(
4t is easy to suspend the implicature F& only fi%e by adding 'at least' )ou ha"e won at least fi"e dollars( )ou ha"e won fi"e dollars, in fact, you'"e won ten( )ou ha"e won fi"e dollars, that's four more than one(
8A39R!4+: 7=437 R8!+4+= Deductive inferences are not defeasible Inductive inferences are defeasible i. If ocrates is a man, he is mortal i. I ha"e dug up 4%%4 carrots ii. ocrates is a man ii. H"ery one of the 4%%4 carrots is orange AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
iii. Therefore, ocrates is mortal iii. Therefore, all carrots are orange if premises i and ii are true, ?9#: then whate%er else is true or false, iii is true i". The 4%%$nd carrot is green implicatures are more like inducti%e inferences than deducti%e ones
PROPERTIES OF CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURES II con%ersational implicatures are non-detachable (e$cept those due to the ma$im of manner) n implicature is attached to the semantic content of what is said, not to linguistic form, and therefore implicatures cannot be detached from an utterance simply by changing the words of the utterance for synonyms 4f for e$ample an ironic interpretation of ‘@ohn’s a genius’ (ie, @ohn’s an idiot’) is forced by flouting, then it does not matter, if it is worded differently
ohn’s a mental prodigy ohn’s a big brain ohn’s an enormous intellect
PROPERTIES OF CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURES III con%ersational implicatures are calculable ;or e%ery putati%e implicature it should be possible to construct an argument showing how from the literal meaning or the sense of the utterance on the one hand, and the cooperati%e
principle and the ma$ims on the other hand, it follows that an addressee would make the inference in 5uestion to preser%e the assumption of co operation con%ersational implicatures are non-conventional 3on%ersational implicatures are not part of the con%entional meaning of linguistic e$pressions !ince you need to know the literal meaning/sense of a sentence before you can calculate its implicatures in a conte$t, the implicatures cannot be part of the meaning n utterance can be true, while its implicature is false: !erb hit ally
?y the 5uantity ma$im this would implicate !erb hit ally but didn’t kill her
but a speaker might say ‘"erb hit !ally’ ne%ertheless, attempting to mislead
CONVENTIONAL IMPLICATURES I *onventional implicatures are not based on the cooperati%e principle or the ma$ims #hey don't ha%e to occur in con%ersation and depend on special conte$ts for interpretation #hey are associated with specific words and result in additional con%eyed meanings when those words are used 'but' ‘p but 5’ will be based on the con*unction p Q 5 plus an implicature of contrast between the information in p and the information in 5 Mary suggested black, but I chose white p Q 5 (F& p is in contrast to 5)
'e"en'