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:
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’.
No comments:
Post a Comment