英语论文The Permeability of Pragmatic knowledge in ELT.docx
- 文档编号:9333140
- 上传时间:2023-02-04
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:17
- 大小:29.36KB
英语论文The Permeability of Pragmatic knowledge in ELT.docx
《英语论文The Permeability of Pragmatic knowledge in ELT.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《英语论文The Permeability of Pragmatic knowledge in ELT.docx(17页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
英语论文ThePermeabilityofPragmaticknowledgeinELT
ThePermeabilityofPragmaticknowledgeinELT
Ⅰ.AnintroductionofPragmatics
1.1TheConceptofPragmatics
Asubfieldoflinguisticsdevelopedinthelate1970s,pragmaticsstudieshowpeoplecomprehendandproduceacommunicativeactorspeechactinaconcretespeechsituationwhichisusuallyaconversation.Itdistinguishestwointentsormeaningineachutteranceorcommunicativeactofverbalcommunication.Oneistheinformativeintentorspeakermeaning(Leech,1983;SperberandWilson,1986).Theabilitytocomprehendandproduceacommunicativeactisreferredtoaspragmaticcompetence(Kaspe,1997)whichoftenincludesone’sknowledgeaboutthesocialdistance,socialstatusbetweenthespeakersinvolved,theculturalknowledgesuchaspoliteness,andthelinguisticknowledgeexplicitandimplicit.
Themodernusageoftheterm“pragmatics”isattributabletothephilosopherCharlesMorris(1938),whowasconcerntooutlinethegeneralshapeofascienceofsigns,orsemiotics(orsemioticsasMorrispreferred).Ontheonehand,theverybroaduseintendedbyMorrishasbeenretained.Ontheotherhand,andespeciallywithinanalyticalphilosophy,thetermpragmaticswassubjectedtoasuccessivenarrowingofscope.Withinsemiotics,Morrisdistinguishedthreedistinctbranchesofinquiry:
a)syntactic(orsyntax),beingthestudyof“theformalrelationofsignstooneanother”;b)semantics,thestudyof“therelationofsignstotheobjectstowhichthesignstointerpreters.”Withineachbranchofsemiotics,onecouldmakethedistinctionbetweenpurestudies,concernedwiththeelaborationoftherelevantmetalanguage,anddescriptivestudies,whichappliedthemetalanguagetothedescriptionofspecificsignsandtheirusage.
Fromtheviewofthefunctionofalanguage,Richardsetal(1992)describestheterm“pragmatics”as“thestudyoftheuseoflanguageincommunication,particularlytherelationshipsbetweensentencesandcontextsandsituationsinwhichtheyareused.”Pragmaticsincludesthestudyofa)howtheinterpretationanduseofutterancesdependsonknowledgeoftherealworld,b)howspeakersuseandunderstandspeechacts,c)howthestructureofsentencesisinfluencedbytherelationshipbetweenthespeakerandthehearer.Pragmaticsissometimescontrastedwithsemantics,whichdealswithmeaningwithoutreferenttotheuserandcommunicativefunctionsofsentences.(RichardJC,2000)Leechsuggeststhat“pragmaticscanbeusefullydefinedasthestudyofhowutteranceshavemeaninginsituations”(LeechGN,1983).Levinsonsummarizesvariouspossibledefinitionsfromtheviewsofdifferentscopesforpragmatics.Oneofhissuggestionsis“pragmaticsisthestudyofthoserelationsbetweenlanguageandcontextthataregrammaticalized,orencoredinthestructureofalanguage”(LevinsonSC,1983).
1.2TheBasictheoriesofPragmatics
ThenotionofimplicaturewasintroducedbyGrice(1975)toaccountforthedistinctionbetweenwhatissaidandwhatisimplicatedbyaspeaker,orinotherwords“whatthespeakercanimply,suggest,ormean,asdistinctfromwhatthespeakerliterallysays”(Brown&Yule,1983:
31).Leech(1983:
17&30-35)usestheterms“sense”(“meaningassemanticallydetermined”)and“force”(“meaningaspragmatically,aswellassemantically,determined”).Hestatedthat“theforcewillberepresentedasasetofimplicatures”.
Grice’spointofdeparture,andthecornerstoneofhisproposal,isthathumaninteractionhasasetofpurposes,ora“direction”mutuallyrecognizedandacceptedbybothinterlocutors(Grice,1975:
4548).HesummarizedthosesharedconventionsintheCo-operativePrincipleanditsConversationalMaxims(seeTable1).Gricepresentshisframeworkmoreasaproposaltobuilduponthanafullyworkedouttheory,andleavesseveralissuesopentofurtherdiscussion.Forinstance,herecognizesthepossibilityoftheneedformoremaxims(tentativelyproposingafifth:
“bepolite”).Leech(1983)introducesasetoffurtherprinciples,eachwithitsownmaxims.HeparticularlyhighlightsthePolitenessPrincipleasa“necessarycomplement”oftheco-operativeprinciple(op.cit:
80)(seeTable1).
CO-OPERATIVEPRINCIPLE(Grice,1975)
Makeyourconversationalcontributionsuchasisrequired,atthestageatwhichitoccurs,bytheacceptedpurposeordirectionofthetalkexchangeinwhichyouengaged.
MaximofQuantity
Makeyourcontributionasinformativeasisrequired.Donotmakeyourcontributionmoreinformativethanisrequired.
MaximofQuality
Donotsaywhatyoubelievetobefalse.Donotsaythatforwhichyoulackadequateevidence.
MaximofRelation
Berelevant
MaximofManner
Avoidobscurityofexpression.Avoidambiguity.Bebrief(avoidunnecessaryprolixity).Beorderly.
Table1.TheCooperativePrincipleanditsmaxims
THEPOLITENESSPRINCIPLE(Leech,1983)
Tactmaxim:
MinimizecosttootherMaximizebenefittoother
GenerosityMaxim:
MinimizebenefittoselfMaximizecosttoself
ApprobationMaxim:
MinimizedispraiseofotherMaximizedispraiseofself
ModestyMaxim:
MinimizepraiseofselfMaximizedispraiseofself
AgreementMaxim:
MinimizedisagreementMaximizeagreement
SympathyMaxim:
MinimizeantipathyMaximizesympathy
THEIRONYPRINCIPLE(Leech,1983)
Ifyoumustcauseoffence,atleastdosoinawaythatdoesn’tovertlyconflictwiththePolitenessPrinciple,butallowsthebearertoarriveattheoffensivepointofyourremarkindirectly,bywayofimplicature.
Table2.ThePolitenessandIronyPrinciples
Whatseemstohavebeenexcludedfromthediscussionofimplicatureisthemanipulationofpausesandphonologicalfeaturesinspokenlanguage,aswellaspunctuationandletter-typeinwrittenlanguage.Itcanbearguedthatmanipulationofsuchfeaturesaimingatleadinglisteners/readerstoworkoutimplicaturesiscompatiblewithGrice’sproposals,asthesefeaturescanbeusedbyspeakers/writerstoflouttheMaximofManner.Letustake
(1)asanexample:
(1)AsarewardBaldrick,takeashortholiday....(2”pause)...Didyouenjoyit?
(FromtheBBCvideoBlackAddertheThird,BBCV5713,1995)
Thepausebeforethequestionhelpsthelistenertoidentifythedurationofthepauseasthedurationofthe“shortholiday”.
Implicaturescanbecategorizedintwoways,accordingtowhethertheydependon(a)theCooperativePrincipleanditsMaxims,and(b)aparticularcontext.
a.RegardingtheCo-operativePrinciple&Maxims.
Conventional:
TheyarenotderivedfromtheCo-operativePrincipleanditsMaxims,butare“attachedbyconventiontoparticularlexicalitemsorexpressions”(Levinson,1983:
127).Leech(1983:
26)givestheexampleofgoodluckandbadluck.Althoughtheirstructureissimilar(good/bad+luck),useisdistinctlydifferent:
“goodluck”isawish,whereas“badluck”expressessympathy.
Non-conventional:
Theyarenotpartoftheconventionalmeaningoflinguisticexpressions.
Listeners/readersneedtouseavailablecluestoworkoutthenon-conventionalimplicaturesofspeakers/writers(Grice,1975:
50;Levinson,1983:
117).
b.RegardingContext.
Generalized:
Theydon’tdependonaparticularcontextfortheirinterpretation.Forexample,“Iwalkedintoahouse”willbeunderstoodtoimplicatethatthehousewasnotmine(Levinson,1983:
126).
Particularized:
Theycanonlybeworkedoutwithknowledgeofcontext.
Ⅱ.ThePresentProblemsinELT
Asaforeignlanguage,EnglishisgreatdifferentfromChinese,ournativelanguage.ItisverydifficultforustocreatetheenvironmentinwhichwecanacquireEnglisheasily.PragmaticshasfundamentalimportanceinELTinChina.Pragmaticshasthedynamiccharacteristic.WeshouldcreateproperpragmaticteachinginclassinordertodirectthelearningofEnglish.Inthisway,wecancultivatetheinterestoflearningEnglishandimprovethestudents’pragmaticcompetence.Forinstance,inlisteningandspeakingclass,today’stopicisfear.Traditionallysomelisteningmaterialsaregivenaboutsometerriblethings,andthensomequestionsareaskedafterlisteningtoit.Whilestudentsaretrainedtounderstandthemainidea,butstillcannotidentifymainevents,expressfearanddesperation.
2.1TheManifestationsoftheProblems
Withpolicyofreformingandopeninguptotheoutsideworld,Chinahasbeenincontinuouscontactwithmoreandmorecountriesandareas,duringwhichinterculturalandcross-culturalcommunicationbetweenChinesepeopleandforeignersinEnglish.China’sentriesintotheWTOandtheglobalizationoftheworldeconomyhavenecessitatedtheshiftofthemajorgoalofELTinChinafromfosteringlearners’“linguisticcompetence”to“cross-culturalcommunicativecompetence”.Improvinglearners’cross-culturalcommunicativecompetencehasbeenacknowledgedtobethemajorgoalofcurrentELTinChina.
AccordingtoWiddowson(1989),cross-culturalcommunicativecompetenceincludestwoaspects:
linguisticcompetence.Linguisticcompetenceismadeupofthreecomponentofcommunicativecompetence,istheabilitytoselectalinguisticformthatisappropriateforaspecificsituation,oruseEnglishappropriatelyinsocialinteraction.Linguisticcompetencehasbeenpaidmuchattentiontointeachingprograms,whilepragmaticcompetencehasbeenalmostneglectedinlanguageteachinginChina.
TheimbalancebetweenlanguageknowledgeanditsapplicationinChinaiscausedbytwomainreasons.First,foralongtimeinChina,languageteaching,influencedbystructuralism,putexcessiveemphasisonlanguageknowledge,ignoringitsapplication.Themajortasksandaimsofclassteachingarestuffinglanguageknowledge,whichfostersthemisunderstandingofconsi
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- 英语论文The Permeability of Pragmatic knowledge in ELT 英语论文 The
链接地址:https://www.bdocx.com/doc/9333140.html