P R A G M A T I C S

A. INTRODUCTION

a.1 Definition of Pragmatics

Language or linguistic is a tool of human interaction. It is to communicate with others.

Also the communication can connect two people things or more in order to understand
what they mean. People or language users as speakers usually feel more comfortable
and enjoyable to talk to someone who can respond to what they say. Via the language,
the speaker deliver the intended information to addressee where the addressee will
receive and respond according to the information requested. In fact, there are some
branch which developing in linguistics, mainly pragmatics.

According to Stalnaker (1972: 383) , the pragmatis is “the study of linguistic acts and
the contexts in which they are performed”. But there are some different view-definitions
of pragmatics in linguistics :
 Pragmatics is the study of speaker meaning.
It’s mean that pragmatically related to the study of meaning communicated by
speakers and interpreted by listeners.
 Pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning.
It’s mean that pragmatic focuses on the interpretation of what people mean in a
particular context and how the context affects what is said.
 Pragmatics is he study of how more gets communicated that is said.
It’s mean that how listeners can draw conclusions about what is said to interpret
the intended meaning of the speaker.
 Pragmatics is the study of the expression of relative distance.
It’s mean that how close or far the listener is, the speaker determines how much
needs to be said.
Well, the linguistic pragmatics focuses on the speaker, the meaning he or she
intended, and the addressee and his or her interpretation of the meaning of the
speaker in the context. Besides the advantages through pragmatic studies is that
one can talk about the meanings that people mean, their assumptions, their goals
or objectives and the types of actions they take when they speak. While the
disadvantage is that all these varied human concepts are very difficult to analyze
consistently and objectively.

P r a g m a t i c s 1
 P R A G M A T I C S

B. DISCUSSION

Of course the study of pragmatics focuses on the speaker, the meaning he or she
intended, and the recipient and his or her interpretation of the meaning of the speaker in
the context.

The “meaning“can be used as a function of context (including time, place, and

possibility of the world) into propositions, where propositions are functions of the world
which might be the value of truth. And also in the meaning there contextual meaning; how
people organize, what they want to say according to, with whom they speak, where, when
and under what circumstances.

In communication

Pragmatics involves communication between people ,therefore ,includes the human

element in particular intentions and interpretations. The study of pragmatic focuses to

P r a g m a t i c s 2
 P R A G M A T I C S

speaker meaning ; what people mean by their words as opposed to what individual words
or phrases mean.
Example : Could I have a cookie?" or "Those cookies look good," to mean "Give me
a cookie."
Pragmatic aspects of meaning involve the interaction between an expression’s
context of utterance and the interpretation of elements within that expression. Aspects of
meaning that depend on context but are governed by rules including deixis, speech acts,
and convensational implicature.

b.1 Deixis

Deixis or deictic expression is the term borrowed word from a Greek verb which
means 'pointing' or 'showing'. In pragmatics, deixis is a term used to indicate a word or
phrase that directly refers to an entity (objects, processes, attributes, and circumstances).
On other words, deictic expressions or indexicals are used by the speaker to refer to or
identify entities. Regulate interaction, the desire to convey and obtain information from the
addressee. The addressee must know what and which entity or process the speaker has
in mind. To help the addressee, the speaker resorts to the use of specific linguistic forms
called deixis, or indexicals, i.e. structures whose meaning is relative to a specific
situation.

There are five types of deixis :

 Person deixis
Person deixis is based on a three-part division: first person ( I ), second person (you),
and third person (he, she or it) neither speaker nor addressee. It’s mean that of
course, they may be drawn into the act of communication, and thus they may
become speakers and addressees.
Example : Somebody (i.e. he/she) didn’t clean the blackboard. vs. You did not clean
the blackboard.
If the speaker used he or she, instead of somebody, he or she would mean a
particular person (e.g. John or Mary). The indefinite third person pronoun somebody
makes it possible to replace the third person pronouns and thus avoid direct
reference. Indefinite pronouns and nouns are in fact third person noun phrases.

P r a g m a t i c s 3
 P R A G M A T I C S

 Spatial or place deixis

Spatial deixis is related to the concept of distance, where the relative location of
people and objects is shown.
Example : when the speaker says, the book here, he or she means the book close to
him or her. When he or she says that book, he or she means the book further away.
 Temporal or time deixis
Temporal deixis identifies entities and processes with respect to the temporal deictic
centre, which is the speaker’s time of utterance.
Example : He arrived. vs. He has arrived. The utterance He arrived requires a time
circumstance: without it the situation is felt to be incomplete (He arrived yesterday).
In English, the time divided to be three tenses such as past, present and future.
 Social deixis
The role of deictic expressions is to help the speaker to identify the referent. The role
of social deixis is to identify the social status of the addressee.
Example : Ms Fox.
Titles and names of profession also function as honorifics: Doctor,Coach,teacher,etc.
It is interesting as well as important to note that titles are not always associated with
particular names.
 Discourse deixis
The function of discourse deixis is to identify the entity (concrete or abstract) within a
situation created by the text. The identification involves reference to some part of the
text–preceding or succeeding the entity expressed deictically. Expressing a co-
reference relationship, discourse deixis is one of the most important cohesive
devices used in the text.
Example : Now listen to this. I won’t marry her. vs I won’t marry her. This is my last
words.
Discourse deixis is typically expressed by demonstrative (this : that) and third person
pronouns (he, she, it, they).

b.2 Conversational Implicature

In pragmatics which has implications for both the production and interpretation of
discourse is the concept of conversational implicature. Conversational implicature refer to
the conclusions made by the listener about the intended meaning of the speaker arising
from the use of the literal meaning of what the speaker is saying, the principle of
conversation and its principles. One of English philosopher H. Paul Grice, he introduced

P r a g m a t i c s 4
 P R A G M A T I C S

the idea of conversational implicature whose implications were concluded by the speaker
during the conversation. According to Grice (1975: 76) argues that “conversational
implicature refers to the inference a hearer makes about a speaker’s intended meaning
that arises from their use of the literal meaning of what the speaker said, the
conversational principle and its maxims”. In order for conversations to run smoothly and
interconnected, then between the speaker and the addressees must know cooperative
principle or maxim.
Grice based his cooperative principle on four sub-principles or maxim, there are :
 Maxim quality : what you say is assumed to be true
 Maxim quantity : be informative but not too much so
 Maxim relevance : be relevant to the purpose of the exchange
 Maxim manner : be perspicuous, avoid absurdity and ambiguity

When the rule of maxims is not obeyed in order to maintain the image of the opposite
person, this condition is called flouting the maxims.
Example :
A : So what do you think of Mark?
B : His flatmate’s a wonderful cook.
But if someone violates the maxim with the aim that the interlocutor cannot understand
what is being said, it means that he has violating the maxims. On other words that
speakers intentionally do not reveal the truth or intentionally cover up the truth.
Speakers, usually, do not expect the other person to know what they really want to say.
Example :
A : Does your dog bite?
B : No.
A : (Bends down to stroke it and gets bitten) Ow! You said your dog doesn’t bite!
B : That isn’t my dog.

C. CONCLUSION

The study of pragmatics is relationship on the speaker, the meaning he or she

intended, and the addressee and his or her interpretation of the meaning of the speaker
in the context. Beside the role of deixis is the most obvious way to describe the
relationship between language and context in the structure of the language itself. Words
like me, here, now are deictic words. These words have no fixed referents. My referent
said, here, now it can only be known if it is known also who, where, and the time when

P r a g m a t i c s 5
 P R A G M A T I C S

the words are spoken. The center of deixis orientation is speakers. And then the five
types of deixis such as person deixis, spatial or place deixis, temporal or time deixis,
social deixis, and discourse deixis. Beside that for production and pragmatic
interpretation using the concept of conversational implicature. Conversational
Implications refer to conclusions made by the listener about the intended meaning of the
speaker arising from the use of the literal meaning of what the speaker says, the
principle of conversation and its principles. The principle of conversation has four
maxims such as quality, quantity, relevance, and manner. When the rule of maxims is
not obeyed in order to maintain the image of the opposite person, this condition is called
flouting the maxims and violating the maxims; speakers intentionally do not reveal the
truth or intentionally cover up the truth.

References :

Grice, H. P. (1975), ‘Logic and conversation’, in P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (eds), Syntax and
Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press. Reprinted in A. Jaworski and
N. Coupland (eds) (1999), The Discourse Reader . London: Routledge, pp. 76.
Laurence, R. H & Gregory, W. 2006. The Handbook Of Pragamatics. Blackwell Publishing:
United Kingdom.
Paltridge, B. 2012. Discourse Analysis An Introduction 2nd edition. New York.
Stalnaker, Robert C. (1972). Pragmatics. In Donald Davidson and Gilbert Harman
(eds.),Semantics of Natural Language, p. 383. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Yule, G. 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford Unversity Press. New York.

P r a g m a t i c s 6