Monday, 7 July 2025

Understanding Pragmatics in Everyday Communication

 Pragmatics, a key branch of linguistics, explores how people use language in real-life situations. It's not just about what words mean in theory (semantics), but how they function in context. As bilingual teachers in training, understanding pragmatics helps you guide learners not only in grammar and vocabulary but also in using language meaningfully and appropriately in various social situations.

1. What Is Pragmatics?

Pragmatics can be traced back to thinkers like Charles Morris and Rudolf Carnap (1934). However, it gained greater visibility thanks to scholars like Stephen Levinson (1983), who emphasized its scope by defining it as the study of "those principles that explain why some sentence combinations—like 'Fred's children are hippies' when Fred has no children—don't make sense in use."

Zufferey (2014) describes pragmatics as the study of language in use and the behaviour of its users, while Green (1996) sees it as the interpretation of intentional human actions—verbal or nonverbal—to accomplish communicative goals.

2. Semantics vs. Pragmatics

According to Recanati (1987), semantic meaning refers to the literal meaning of words, while pragmatic meaning depends on the speaker’s intention and the context. Consider this example: A lifeguard throws a volleyball near a swimmer struggling in the ocean. Semantically odd, but pragmatically, it signals a rescue.

3. Key Pragmatic Concepts

a) Deixis

Deixis refers to words like here, there, now, yesterday, you, me, which rely heavily on context to be understood. For example: "I’ll see you there." – Where is there? Only the speaker and listener know.

Types of deixis:

  • Personal deixis: me, you, him
  • Spatial deixis: here, there
  • Temporal deixis: now, then, tomorrow

b) Reference

George Yule (2014) defines reference as how language is used to identify something or someone. For example: "Where’s the spinach salad sitting?" (said by a waiter referring to a customer)

Words like he, she, it, my friend, or names like Chomsky are understood based on who is speaking and the situation.

c) Indexicality and Anaphora

These involve referring back to something already mentioned. Example: "We saw a video about a boy. He was washing a puppy. It was enjoying the bath."

d) Presupposition

Presuppositions are assumptions about what the listener already knows. For example: "When did you stop smoking?" assumes the person used to smoke.

4. Speech Acts

According to Lyons (1968), an utterance is any stretch of talk. When we say something like, “I promise to help,” we’re doing more than speaking—we're performing a speech act.

  • Direct Speech Acts: literal and explicit (e.g., “Did you eat?”)
  • Indirect Speech Acts: implicit and polite (e.g., “Can you pass the salt?”)

Yule (2014) also introduces the concept of face, or the emotional/social identity we want others to recognize. Politeness strategies help maintain others’ face:

  • Face-threatening: “Give me that book.”
  • Face-saving: “Could you pass me that book, please?”

Types of face:

  • Negative face: the desire for autonomy (freedom from imposition)
  • Positive face: the desire to be liked or included

5. Speech Act Theory (SAT)

a) John Austin’s Theory

Austin (1962) identified three levels:

  • Locutionary Act: The act of producing sounds and words.
  • Illocutionary Act: The speaker’s intention (promising, thanking, warning).
  • Perlocutionary Act: The effect on the listener (being persuaded, amused).

b) John Searle’s Reformulation

Searle argued that not all speech acts are explicit. A simple, “It’s cold in here,” might mean “Please close the window.”

c) Paul Grice’s Cooperative Principle

Grice (1967) proposed that effective communication depends on cooperation, guided by four maxims:

  • Quantity: Be informative, not excessive.
  • Quality: Be truthful.
  • Relation: Be relevant.
  • Manner: Be clear and orderly.

d) Relevance Theory

Sperber and Wilson (1995) argued that communication depends on cognitive effort vs. benefit. Listeners prefer messages that offer more insight with less mental work. For example: “You’ve won $500” is more relevant and impactful than “You may have won $10, $500, or $1,000.”

6. Nonverbal Communication

It’s not just about speaking! Communication also includes:

  • Oculesics (eye behavior)
  • Haptics (touch)
  • Kinesics (body language)

Nonverbal cues can regulate conversations, express emotions, or emphasize spoken words. Think of how a teacher’s raised eyebrow can say, “Are you sure about that?” without a word.

The truth is that understanding pragmatics empowers you not only to explain what language learners say, but why they say it—and how. It's a human, interactive process rooted in real life, not just textbook rules. You’ll find that even the smallest expressions carry emotional and social meaning, and by teaching these nuances, you help students become true communicators, not just speakers.

References

Green, M. (1996). Direct and indirect speech acts. In S. L. Tsohatzidis (Ed.), Foundations of Speech Act Theory (pp. 89–106). Routledge.

Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.

Morris, C. (1934). Foundations of the Theory of Signs. University of Chicago Press.

Recanati, F. (1987). Meaning and Force. Cambridge University Press.

Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and Cognition (2nd ed.). Blackwell.

Yule, G. (2014). The Study of Language (5th ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Zufferey, S. (2014). Pragmatics. Edinburgh University Press.

Carnap, R. (1934). Logical Syntax of Language. Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Harvard University Press.

Searle, J. R. (1980). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge University Press.

Grice, H. P. (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Harvard University Press.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment

How Politeness Helps Us Understand and Teach Language

  When we speak, we’re not just sharing ideas—we’re also building relationships. This is where politeness comes in. In the field of pragmat...