pragmatics-and-culture

PragmaticsacrosscultureCross-culturalPragmaticsOutlineDefinitionofPragmaticsDefinitionofCulture1.DefinitionofCross-culturalPragmatics2.ClassificationofCross-culturalPragmatics3.ResearchMethodsofCross-culturalPragmatics4.Equivalenceofcross-culturePragmaticsOutlinePragmaticsacrossculture1.Introduction2.Pragmaticpresuppositionsinculture3.Politenessandculture4.Cooperationandconversation5.Addressivity6.ThevoiceofsilenceConclusionDefinitionofpragmaticsPragmaticsisthestudyof“relationofsignstointerpreters”(Morris,1938),and“howutteranceshavemeaningsinsituation”(Leech,1983).Pragmaticsisthestudyofspeakermeaning,thestudyofcontextualmeaning,thestudyofhowmoregetscommunicatedthanissaid,andthestudyoftheexpressionofrelativedistance(GeorgeYule1985).Part1AccordingtoHuZhuanglin,pragmaticsisthestudyofmeaningincontext.ItdealswithparticularutterancesinparticularsituationsandisespeciallyconcernedwiththevariouswaysinwhichthemanysocialcontextsoflanguageperformancecaninfluenceinterpretationDefinitionofpragmaticsCultureis“thesoftwareofthemind”,thatisthesocialprogrammingthatrunsthewaywethink,actandperceiveourselvesandother.Inotherwords,yourbrainissimplythathardwarethatrunstheculturalprogramming.Theimplicationisthatcultureisnotinnate.DefinitionofCulturePart2Cultureisaniceberg,thefirstpart(10%)isthewayofdoing,itisexplicit,thesecondandthirdpart(90%)isthewayofthinking,itistacit(includeconsciousnessandsub-consciousness,super-ego,ego,id,)DefinitionofCultureDefinitionofCross-culturalPragmaticsCross-culturalpragmaticscanberegardedasasub-branchofappliedpragmaticsanditsmostlydrawsuponthefindingsofsociopragmatics(asabranchmacropragmatics)andmicropragmatics.Part3Withthispointofviewcross-culturalpragmaticscanbedefinedasthestudyofnormativesimilaritiesanddifferencesinusersoflanguagesintheirspecificcontextincommunicationacrosscultures.DefinitionofCross-culturalPragmaticsYoung(1998)definescross-culturalpragmaticsas“thestudyoflinguisticactioncarriedoutbylanguageusersfromdifferentethnolinguisticbackgrounds”.Yule（1996）statesthatthestudyofdifferencesinexpectationsbasedonculturalschemaispartofabroadareaofinvestigationgenerallyknownascross-culturalpragmatics”.ClassificationofCross-culturalPragmaticsBlum-Kulka（1989)SpeechactPragmatics言语行为的语用研究Social-culturepragmatics社交文化的语用研究Contrastpragmatics对比语用研究Inter-languagepragmatics语际语言的语用研究ClassificationofCross-culturalPragmatics何兆熊:(1)跨文化语用语言学(cross-culturalpragmalinguistics)研究,即对不同文化中相同或相似语言形式的语用功能的差异研究、不同文化对言语行为策略选择的差异研究等；(2)跨文化社交语用学(cross-culturalsociopragmatics)研究,即研究不同文化对各种语用参数(pragmaticparameters)的不同解释、不同文化在遵循的会话原则上的差异、不同文化在遵循的礼貌原则及其准则上的差异等；(3)语际语语用学(inter-languagepragmatics)研究,即对人们在使用第二语言进行跨文化言语交际的语用行为以及习得第二语言时的行为模式的研究。ResearchMethodsofCross-culturalPragmatics跨文化语用学研究的方法，除了语用研究中常见的描写、分析、理论阐释等方法之外，跨文化语用学还有一些相对独立和常用的方法。如对比和比较的方法、材料实证法和文化投射法等。对比和比较:可以观察到各种语用现象的共性和个性。材料实证法:通过对语料的收集、分析,对人们或自己提出的理论、假设进行验证的方法。文化投射法:其基础是描写和解释,是在作为表层的语言形式结构及语用规则和作为内核的文化蕴含及文化背景之间建立相应的联系。Equivalenceofcross-culturePragmatics“要合理地进行跨文化对比研究首先要确立对比的对等基础”（Lonner197927）所谓对等指的是在数量价值和意义等方面的等同。Gudykunst认为“进行跨文化对比必须要有五方面的对等，即功能对等，概念对等，语言对等，测量对等和抽样对等”（2000：303）Whatwearedealingwithhereisthepragmaticappropriatenessofaparticularexpressioninaparticularcontextofuse.Theproblemisthatthosecontextsofusetendtoberatherdifferentfromculturetoculture,andconsequentlyfromlanguagetolanguage.IntroductionPart4Thatculturalpresuppositioncanbemajorstumblingblocksontheroadtounderstandingmaysoundlikeatruism;yet,itisoftenoverlookedwhatthese“presuppositions”,inanactualsetting,havetosayaspreconditionstounderstanding.Therearemanyexamplesofinterculturalmisunderstandingsthatwereduetothepresenceofnon-acknowledged,andhencenotshared,pragmaticpresupposition.Pragmaticpresuppositionsinculture.Tourist:Isthereatoiletaroundhere?Attendant:Youwanttouse?Tourist(somewhatastonished):SureIdo.Attendant:Godownthesteps.ExampleThepragmaticpresuppositionsinJapaneseculturearedifferentfromthoseinWesterncountries.PolitenessandculturePolitenessisinseparablyconnectedwithculture.Politenessphenomenonisstronglyinfluencedbyculture.Differentcultureshavedifferentrealizationsofpolitenessstrategies.Rulesforpolitebehaviordifferfromonespeechcommunitytoanother.Linguisticpolitenessisculturallydetermined.Apoliteformofutteranceinoneculturemaybeimpoliteinanother.CooperationandconversationMuchofcurrentpragmaticthinkingisbasedonGrice’s“CooperativePrinciple”.However,manycriticismshavebeenutteredofit,oftenbasedontheassumptionthatnoteverybodyiswilling,ableorobligedtocooperate.Thediscussionontheso-calleduniversalityofcooperationoftenfocusesonthephenomenaofconversation.Whenitcomestoactualconversation,theassumptionisagainthatpeopleacrosscultureswillobeycertainrulesofcollaborationinordertomakeconversationhappenandhavetheflowoftalktoprogressassmoothlyaspossibleAddressivityTheterm“addressivity”wasoriginallycoinedbyMikhailM.Bakhtin.Itdenotesaconstantqualityofspeech:namely,thefactthatanyutteranceisaddressedtosomebody,everyutteranceis“dialogic”.Here,weconcentrateontheactofaddressingfromaninterculturalpointofview.FormsofaddressTh