General terms in pragmatics

1.      a. Wastebasket in a term of pragmatics is place of the investigation of abstract, potentially universal, features of language in the center of the work tables. Many of these notes on ordinary language in use began to be knocked off and ended up in the wastebasket. It was worked by the linguists and philosophers of language tended to push notes they had on everyday language use to the edges.

b. Structuralists and functionalist say about wastebasket

Structuralist of the wastebasket is abstract, potentially universal, features of language in the center of the work tables.

The overflowing of Wastebasket functionalist has the source of what will be discussed in pragmatics such as deixis, reference, presupposition, entailment, implicature, cooperative principles, speech act, speech event, politeness, and etc. The content of wastebasket is a stuff of difficult matters within formal systems of analysis and in order to understand the matters, we really have to look at how it goes there.

2.      The Phenomenon of speech level in every language is heavily emphasized by speakers.

In deixis point of view, it is included personal deixis which deictic categories of speaker, addressee, and others are elaborate with markers of relative social status. It is sometimes namely social deixis which addressee with higher status and addressee with lower status is different. It conveys the distinction of formality, social distance, and politeness. As an understanding of the context in this case, the social status of the speaker relative to the other participants is crucial to its use. Expressions which indicate higher status are described as honorifics. There are three main types of honorifics, categorized according to the individual whose status is being expressed; Addressee, Referent, and Participant.  Addressee honorifics express the social status of the person being spoken to (the hearer), regardless of what is being talked about. It does not concern the status of any participant, but the circumstances and environment in which the conversation is occurring. The classic example of this is diglossia, in which an elevated or "high form" of a language is used in situations where more formality is called for, and a vernacular or "low form" of a language is used in more casual situations.

For example in my own language system (Javanese):

Javanese speech is stratified into:

Ngaka (the impolite and informal colloquial "everyday" speech).

Krama is known as the polite and formal style. Krama is divided into two other categories: Krama Madya: semi-polite and semi-formal, and Krama Inggil: fully polite and formal Note- in Javanese, though the above is orthographically correct, the "a" is pronounced as an "o". All these categories are ranked according to age, rank, kinship relations, and intimacy. If a speaker is uncertain about the addressee’s age or rank, they commence with krama inggil and adapt their speech strata according to the highest level of formality, moving down to lower levels. Krama is usually learned from parents and teachers, and Ngaka is usually learned from interacting with peers at a younger age.

3.       

Semantics	Pragmatics
1.      Type 2.      Meaning 3.      sentence 4.      Context-Invariant 5.      Linguistics 6.      Literal 7.      Saying	1.      Token 2.      use 3.      Utterance 4.      Context-sensitive meaning 5.      Speaker’s meaning 6.      Non-literal use 7.      implying

Examples in my own languages (Indonesian):

1)      Kamu wangi sekali, habis ini kamu harus mandi ya!

This part of utterance is not the true meaning. Kamu wangi sekali here means your smell is very bad, not your smell is very good. Pragmatically, this kind of utterance purpose is to say with allusion in order to tease. The next following ‘habis ini kamu harus mandi ya!’ is the true meaning. Semantically, it is used to command or suggest the addressee to take a bath as soon as possible because of the bad smells.

2)      A   : Mama, tidur yuk?

B1 : Aku harus berangkat kerja pagi sekali besok

B2 : Tidak mau

This conversation between the husband and his wife above can be accomplished as an example. A expressed this kind of the words ‘tidur yuk?’ was not the real meaning of go sleep soon. He pragmatically used that expression to invite her doing something. To express what B1 said for the politeness respond, she rejected the invitation from her husband to make love indirectly using another utterance which implied ‘no’. If the wife says ‘no’ (B2) directly using semantically meaning, it will hurt the husband.

4.      A presupposition is speaker’s utterance / assumption. The person’s presupposition is influenced by his/her own idea, education background, social background and cultural background. The speaker’s utterance may also hold more specific presupposition. In the sentences, not speakers, have entailments. The entailments follow from the sentences, regardless of whether the speaker’s beliefs are right or wrong. They still focus on the sentences, logical form, convention and formal which text or co-text is influenced by linguistic environment, so the sense of relation between presupposition and entailment is from specific into generic. They are communicated without being said because of its logical nature generally discussed as much in temporary pragmatics as the more speaker-dependent notion of presupposition.

5.      Have you stopped beating your wife? Why is it difficult to answer?

Because it is a loaded question which a dangerous thing. A loaded question is a question with a false or questionable presupposition, and it is loaded with that presumption. The question above presupposes that you have beaten your wife prior to its asking, as well as that you have a wife. If you are unmarried, or have never beaten your wife, then the question is loaded. Since this example is a yes/no question, there are only the following two direct answers:  "Yes, I have stopped beating my wife", which entails "I was beating my wife." Or "No, I haven't stopped beating my wife", which entails "I am still beating my wife." Either direct answer entails that you have beaten your wife, which is, therefore, a presupposition of the question. So, a loaded question is one which you cannot answer directly without implying a falsehood or a statement that you deny. For this reason, the proper response to such a question is not to answer it directly, but to either refuse to answer or to reject the question.

6.      The relationship between conversational implicature and cooperative principles:

Conversational implicature is a nonconventional implicature based on an addressee’s assumption that the speaker is following the conversational maxims or at least the cooperative principle.  In daily communication, people are observing a set of basic rules of cooperating with each other so as to communicate effectively through conversation. This set of rules the cooperative principle elaborated in four sub-principles (maxims), that is the cooperative principle.

What is implied

What is said

 

7.       

The explanation of the picture above is a distinction between 'generalized' and 'particularized' conversational implicatures. Implicatures between which arise ‘by default’ without any particular context or special scenario being necessary and those which require such specific contexts. In contrast to the latter, the former are 'hard to distinguish from the semantic content of linguistic expressions, because such implicatures are routinely associated with linguistic expressions in all ordinary contexts. Note that in this case of such under-informative statements, the speakers use more ‘what is implied’ rather than ‘what is said’.