SUMMARY OF PRAGMATICS

Individual final project of Pragmatics course

Supervised by:

Hermanto, M.Pd

By:

Asep Hermawan

(60403100317041)

SEKOLAH TINGGI KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN

(STKIP) BINA MUTIARA SUKABUMI

ENGLISH EDUCATION

2020
 PREFACE

First of all, give thanks for Allah love and grace for us. Thanks to Allah for
helping me and give us chance to finish this assignment timely. And I would like to say
thank you to Mr. Hermanto, M.Pd as the lecturer in STKIP BINA MUTIARA
SUKABUMI that always teaches us and give much knowledge about Pragmatics.
This assignment is the one of English task that summary of pragmatics. I
realized this assignment is not perfect. But I hope it can be useful for us. Critics and
suggestion is needed here to.
Hopefully we as a student in STKIP BINA MUTIARA SUKABUMI can
understand all about pragmatics especially in summary of pragmatics. Thank you.

The writer

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE................................................................................................................ 2
TABLE OF CONTENS ........................................................................................... 3
CHAPTER 1 (INTRODUCTIONS) ........................................................................ 1
1.1 Definition and background of Pragmatics ..................................................... 1
CHAPTER 2 (CONTENTS) ................................................................................... 2
2.1 Reference and Inference ................................................................................ 2
2.2 Presupposition and Entailment ...................................................................... 3
2.3 Methapor and Simile ...................................................................................... 5
2.4 Gramatical Meaning ...................................................................................... 6
2.5 Cooperation and Implicature ......................................................................... 7
2.6 Speech Act .................................................................................................... 8
2.7 Politeness and Interaction ............................................................................. 9
2.8 Fuzzy Concept ............................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.9 Discourse and Culture .................................................................................. 13
CHAPTER 3 (CONCLUSION) ............................................................................ 14
REFERENCES.......................................................................................................15

iii
 CHAPTER I
(INTRODUCTIONS)

1.1 Definition and background Pragmatics

Pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning. This approach also necessarily

explores how listeners can make inferences about what is said in order to arrive at an
interpretation of the speaker’s intended meaning. This type of study explores how a
great deal of what is unsaid is recognized as part of what is communicated. We might
say that it is the investigation of invisible meaning. Pragmatics is the study of how more
gets communicated than it is said.

This perspective then raises the question of what determines the choice between
the said and the unsaid. The basic answer is tied to the notion of distance. Closeness,
whether it is physical, social, or conceptual, implies shared experience. On the
assumption of how close or distant the listener is, speakers determine how much needs
to be said. Pragmatics is the study of the expression of relative distance. These are four
areas that pragmatics concerned with.

It has, consequently, more to do with the analysis of what people mean by their
utterances than what the words or phrases in those utterances might mean by
themselves. Pragmatics is the study of speaker meaning. This type of study necessarily
involves the interpretation of what people mean in a particular context and how the
context influences what is said not requires a consideration of how speakers organize
what they want to say in accordance with who they are talking to, where, when, and
under what circumstances.

1
 CHAPTER II
(CONTENTS)

2.1 Reference and Inference

The concept of reference is tied to the speaker's goals (for example, to identify
something) and the speaker's beliefs (for example, can the listener be expected to
know that particular something?). Reference is based on some locally successful choice
of expression. Successful reference is necessarily collaborative: the speaker and the
listener have the role of thinking about what the other has in mind.

Reference is not simply a relationship between the meaning of a word or phrase

and an object or person in the world. It is a social act, in which the speaker assumes that
the word or phrase chosen to identify an object or person will be interpreted as the
speaker intended.

Example: Mister Aftershave is late today.

The example above may serve to illustrate that reference is not based on an
objectively correct (versus incorrect) naming, but on some locally successful (versus
unsuccessful) choice of expression. We might also note from example that successful
reference is necessarily collaborative, with both the speaker and the listener having role
in thinking what the other has in mind.

Inference is the listener's use of additional knowledge to make sense of what is

not explicit in an utterance. For example, in a restaurant, one waiter can ask another,
Where’s the spinach salad sitting? and receive the reply, He’s sitting by the door. If
you’re studying linguistics, you might ask someone, Can I look at your Chomsky? and
get the response, Sure, it’s on the shelf over there.

2
2.2 Presupposition and Entailment

In pragmatics Presupposition is what the speaker assumes to be the case prior to

making an utterance. Entailment, which is not a pragmatic concept, is what logically
follows from what is asserted in the utterance. Speakers have presuppositions while
sentences, not speakers, have entailments. Take a look at the example below:

Jane's brother bought two apartments.

This sentence presupposes that Jane exists and that she has a brother. The speaker may
also hold the more specific presupposition that she has only a brother and her brother
has a lot of money. All these presuppositions are held by the speaker and all of them can
be wrong.

In Pragmatics entailment is the relationship between two sentences where the truth of
one (A) requires the truth of the other (B). For example, the sentence (A) The president
was assassinated. entails (B) The president is dead.

The concept of presupposition is often treated as the relationship between two

propositions. In the case below, we have a sentence that contains a proposition (p) and
another proposition (q), which is easily presupposed by any listener. However, the
speaker can produce a sentence by denying the proposition (p), obtaining as a result the
same presupposition (q).

Debora's cat is cute. (p)

Debora has a cat. (q)

When I say that Debora' s cat is cute, this sentence presupposes that Debora has a cat. In

Debora' s cat is not cute. (NOT p)

Types of Presupposition

The types of presupposition are:

Existential presupposition: it is the assumption of the existence of the entities named by

the speaker.

3
 For example, when a speaker says "Tom's car is new", we can presuppose that
Tom exists and that he has a car.

Factive presupposition: it is the assumption that something is true due to the

presence of some verbs such as "know" and "realize" and of phrases involving glad, for
example. Thus, when a speaker says that she didn't realize someone was ill, we can
presuppose that someone is ill. Also, when she says "I'm glad it's over", we can
presuppose that it's over.

Lexical presupposition: it is the assumption that, in using one word, the speaker
can act as if another meaning (word) will be understood. For instance:

Andrew stopped running. (>>He used to run.)

You are late again. (>> You were late before.)

In this case, the use of the expressions "stop" and "again" are taken to
presuppose another (unstated) concept.

Structural presupposition: it is the assumption associated with the use of certain

words and phrases. For example, wh-question in English are conventionally interpreted
with the presupposition that the information after the wh-form (e.g. when and where) is
already known to be the case.

When did she travel to the USA? ( >> she traveled)

Where did you buy the book? (>> you bought the book)

The listener perceives that the information presented is necessarily true rather than just
the presupposition of the person asking the question.

Non- factive presupposition: it is an assumption that something is not true. For example,
verbs like "dream", "imagine" and "pretend" are used with the presupposition that what
follows is not true.

I dreamed that I was rich. (>> I am not rich)

We imagined that we were in London. (>> We are not in London)

4
2.3 Methapor and Simile

In pragmatic perspectives on metaphor, the creation and interpretation of

metaphor is defined and explained in terms of the interactants’ communicative
intentions. In pragmatic approaches in general, metaphor is accounted for at the level of
utterance meaning (or speaker’s meaning) as opposed to sentence meaning. The nature
of a metaphorical utterance meaning has however been explained in various ways.

In the framework of Grice’s theory of the Cooperative Principle, metaphor is

treated as a specific type of conversational implicature (Grice 1989: 34), whereas in the
framework of Sperber & Wilson’s Relevance Theory, metaphor is theorized as a type of
loose language use (Sperber & Wilson 1986: 170).

HAPPY IS UP; SAD IS DOWN (from Lakoff & Johnson 1980)

a. You’re in high spirits.

b. My spirits rose.

c. I’m feeling down

A simile is a figure of speech that makes a comparison, showing similarities

between two different things. Unlike a metaphor, a simile draws resemblance with the
help of the words “like” or “as.” Therefore, it is a direct comparison.

We can find simile examples in our daily speech. We often hear comments like,
“John is as slow as a snail.” Snails are notorious for their slow pace, and here the
slowness of John is compared to that of a snail. The use of “as” in the example helps to
draw the resemblance. Now we know the definition of simile, let’s look at some
examples of common similes.

Common Examples of Simile

 Our soldiers are as brave as lions.

 Her cheeks are red like a rose.

5
2.4 Gramatical Meaning

In linguistic discourse, "pragmatics" refers to the strategies (exploitation of

shared knowledge, assumptions about communicative intent, etc.), by which language
users relate the dictionary/grammar meaning of utterances to their communicative value
in context.

When we encode an utterance, our hearer or reader can use dictionary/grammar

knowledge to decode it to the point of establishing its meaning in a kind of general-
purpose sense. In specific situations the following sentences, for example, might be
used to convey the messages shown in brackets (or other very different ones), and be
successfully understood as doing so.

 Your coat's on the floor. ('Pick up your coat.')

 Jane's got her exams on Friday. ('I can't come to lunch.')
 Let's not have a repetition of last time. ('Don't get drunk and start flirting with
Melissa.')
 It's Wednesday. ('Put the trash out.')

The linguistic discipline known as Pragmatics (what I am here calling "Pragmatics A")
takes this kind of problem as its principal subject matter. Textbooks on pragmatics (e.g.,
Levinson, 1983; Yule, 1996; Horn & Ward, 2004) concern themselves centrally with
the principles used by speakers/writers and hearers/readers to bridge the gap between
code meaning and context-determined meaning. Such works typically discuss, among
other things:

 the way context, shared knowledge, and familiarity with conventional schemata,
routines and genres all contribute to meaning, and are taken into account in
framing and interpreting utterances.
 the "co-operative principle" underlying successful communication, whereby
speakers and writers normally avoid saying too much or too little, give true
information, say what is relevant, and aim at clarity of expression (the maxims
of quantity, quality, relation and manner identified by the philosopher Grice).
 "implicature"--the ways in which the flouting of these maxims can be interpreted
(e.g., damning with faint praise, showing off, exaggeration for emphasis, irony,
metaphor).

6
2.5 Cooperation and Implicature

It is generally assumed that speakers and listeners involved in a conversation are

cooperating with each other. For instance, in order to accept a speaker's presuppositions,
the listeners necessarily need to assume that a speaker who says "my wife", is really
married. Thus, people having a conversation are generally assumed to being honest and
conveying relevant information.

Consider the following scene: In the cafeteria of a university, one student asks
another how she likes the sandwich she just started eating. The addressed student
replies:

A sandwich is a sandwich.

Merely looking at the sentence from a logical perspective reveals that it does not
have a communicative value since it expresses a tautology (like "new innovation", "free
gift"). Yet, when used in conversation we assume that the speaker intends to express
more than is actually said. Thus, the student who received the tautologous answer has to
assume that her fellow student is being cooperative and intends to communicate
something and then needs to work out the additional conveyed meaning,
called implicature.

Cooperation: both speaker and listeners has similar understanding to their conversation

Implicature: Expression of the listeners in responding the speaker. Another description

is less and general of the statement but the meaning is general.

For example:

In the middle of the lunch, a woman asks her friends about his lunch. Then her friend
responds by

“a vegetable is a vegetable”

Then the woman is understand, what her friend expression.

The meaning of “a vegetable is a vegetable” is general meaning; however the

woman is understand the expression of her friend. Understanding of the respond
expression is implicature while the understanding between the woman and her friends is
cooperation. The woman is known and understands why her friend responds by her own
expression.

7
2.6 Speech Act

Speech act theory hails from Wittgenstein's philosophical theories. Wittgenstein

believed meaning derives from pragmatic tradition, demonstrating the importance of
how language is used to accomplish objectives within specific situations. Speech
act theory is a subfield of pragmatics that studies how words are used not only to
present information but also to carry out actions.

Since 1970 speech act theory has influenced. The practice of literary criticism.
When applied to the analysis of direct discourse by a character within a literary work, it
provides a systematic...framework for identifying the unspoken presuppositions,
implications, and effects of speech acts [that] competent readers and critics have always
taken into account, subtly though unsystematically.

Criticisms of Speech Act Theory is about Although Searle's theory of speech

acts has had a tremendous influence on functional aspects of pragmatics, it has also
received very strong criticism.

Some argue that Austin and Searle based their work principally on their
intuitions, focusing exclusively on sentences isolated from the context where they might
be used. In this sense, one of the main contradictions to Searle's suggested typology is
the fact that the illocutionary force of a concrete speech act cannot take the form of a
sentence as Searle considered it.

"In speech act theory, the hearer is seen as playing a passive role. The illocutionary
force of a particular utterance is determined with regard to the linguistic form of the
utterance and also introspection as to whether the necessary felicity conditions—not
least in relation to the speaker's beliefs and feelings—are fulfilled. Interactional aspects
are, thus, neglected.

However, [a] conversation is not just a mere chain of independent illocutionary forces—
rather, speech acts are related to other speech acts with a wider discourse context.
Speech act theory, in that it does not consider the function played by utterances in
driving conversation is, therefore, insufficient in accounting for what actually happens
in conversation," (Barron 2003).

8
2.7 Politeness and Interaction

A linguistics interaction is necessarily a social interaction. Interaction occurs

when speaker and listener are active.

Factors which relate to social distance and closeness are established prior to an
interaction. Typically, social distance and closeness involve the relative status of the
participants, based on social values tied to such things as age and power.

However, there are other factors, such as amount of imposition or degree of

friendliness, which are often negotiated during an interaction. These are internal to the
interaction and can result in the initial social distance changing and being marked as less,
or more, during its course. These internal factors are typically more relevant to
participants whose social relationships are actually in the process o being worked out
within the interaction.

Face means the public self-image of a person. Ace refers to that emotional and
social sense of self that everyone has and expects everyone else to recognize.

In term of interaction, politeness can defined as the means employe4d to show

awareness for another person’s face. Showing awareness for another person’s face when
that other seems socially distant is often described in terms of respect or deference.

Politeness occurs in interaction.

Politeness is different in some culture particularly to each local culture.
Politeness happen when we are respected to the listener.

Some factor determined the politeness:

1. Lexical choice: Use the word could, would, or etc.

2. Sentence structure: We can use command sentence by using asking sentence.
3. Gesture and Posture: Use our part of body to support to our speech. We can not
use freely all part our body to support our speech act.
4. Intonation

9
 Example of Politeness:

[1] a. Excuse me, Mr. Buckingham, but can I talk to you for a minute?
b. Hey, Bucky, got a minute?

Politeness is correlated to degree relation The more we act politely then our
relation must be far close. On the contrary, the less we act politely then the relation must
be close. When the relation is not close, we can call someone by its title, Degree, (Mr,
Sir, Prof. or etc)

Face wants: people generally behave as if their expectations concerning their

public self-image will be respected within their everyday social interaction.
Face threatening act: speaking of speakers that represents a threat to another individual’s
expectations regarding self image.

Face is citra or image.

Politeness is use to keep person’s face.

Face Saving Act (menghargai orang lain): given the possibility that some action
might be interpreted as a threat to another’s face, the speaker can say something to lessen
the possible threat.

[2] Him: I’m going to tell him to stop that awful noise right now!
Her: Perhaps you could just ask him if he is going to stop soon because it's getting
a bit late and people need to get to sleep.
There are many different ways of performing face saving acts, since each person will
attempt to respects the face wants of others.

Negative and Positive Face

Negative face is the need to be independent and positive face is the need to be connected.

Negative Face: The need of the person to be independent, to have freedom of

action, and not to be imposed of by others.

10
 Positive Face: The need of the person to be accepted, even liked, by others, to be
treated as a member of the same group, and to know that his or her wants are shared by
others.

Negative politeness: a face saving act which is oriented to the person's negative
face will tend to show deference, emphasized the importance of the other’s time or
concerns, and even include an apology for the for the imposition or interruption

Positive Politeness: a face saving act which is concerned with the person’s
positive ace will tend to show solidarity, emphasize that both speakers want the same
thing, and that they have a common goal.

Self and Other: Say Nothing

[3] Self: (looks in bag)
Other: (offers pen) Here, use this.

When we need express our speak by say nothing, then we should express our sentence by
do something related our sentence.

Say Something: Off and On Record

[4] a. Uh, I forgot my pen.
b. Hmm, I wonder where I put my pen.

[5] a. Give me a pen.

b. Lend me your pen.

Positive and Negative Politeness

[8] a. How about letting me use your pen?
b. Hey, buddy, I’d appreciate it if you'd let me use your pen.

11
2.8 Fuzzy Concept

Fuzziness, which means the property of fuzzy language whose boundary is not
definite, is attached great importance by experts at home and abroad for a long time. At
the very beginning of the thesis, it is significant to have a brief review of the history of
the study on fuzzy language.

For the distinctive attributes fuzzy language performs certain functions in our
daily life. In this chapter, we would focus on its functions from the perspective of
pragmatics, which is the study of language in use, and concerned with practical results
and values.

Fuzzy language seems to deny the quantity maxim, but in this way it obeys the
quality maxim and guarantees the accuracy of information concerned. For instance:

a. She is about six years old.

b. The doctor said there was something wrong with your stomach.

Sentence a. uses the approximator “about” because the speaker is not sure about
it. If the speaker says: “she is six years old” the hearer might be misled. “Something” in
sentence b. suggests that the stomach is not in a healthy state. The doctor is not sure
whether it is serious or not, and the fuzzy word “something” helps avoid false
information. British law of slander formulates: “for any term not exceeding two years,
and to pay such fine as the court shall award.” “Not exceeding two years” only shows
the upper limit of time and “as the court shall award” does not explain the exact amount
of money .Thus, it can protect the legal right of the people concerned.

For something we are not sure about or lack sufficient information fuzzy
language can not only improve accuracy but also improve the flexibility of expressions.
For example, “He may be at home”. In this sentence the speaker is not very sure
whether he is at home or not.

12
2.9 Discourse and Culture

Discourse (from Latin discursus, "running to and from") denotes written and
spoken communications:

 In semantics and discourse analysis: Discourse is a conceptual generalization

of conversation within each modality and context of communication.
 The totality of codified language (vocabulary) used in a given field of intellectual
enquiry and of social practice, such as legal discourse, medical discourse, religious
discourse, et cetera.
 In the work of Michel Foucault, and that of the social theoreticians he
inspired: discourse describes "an entity of sequences, of signs, in that they are
enouncements (énoncés)", statements in conversation.
As discourse, an "enouncement" (statement) is not a unit of semiotic signs, but
an abstract construct that allows the semiotic signs to assign meaning, and so
communicate specific, repeatable communications to, between, and among objects,
subjects, and statements. Therefore, a discourse is composed of semiotic sequences
(relations among signs that communicate meaning) between and among objects,
subjects, and statements.
In this section, I shall consider some critical insights from cultural studies which
will lead us to a notion of culture as saturating the entire social life, all acts, facts and
artefacts, the professional domain of discourse research included, and not just discourse
as object. If this is true, then we shall have to create a new way of thinking and speaking
about discourse, beyond the universalist discourse. In the following, I shall first describe
these ideas on culture developed in cultural studies as well as linguistic anthropology
and then spell out accordingly a new way to construe discourse.

Finally, culture, as collective patterns of thinking, speaking and acting, is not

independent of individual persons and subgroups acting to reproduce, sustain and
transform it. Culture on the one hand and the person and subgroups on the other are
dialectically linked: the former guides the latter in social practice and at the same time is
reproduced, maintained and changed by the latter.

There are many resources of meaning-making; contextual features of language

use, including the characteristics of the speaker/hearer, their interests and desires,
strategies of interpretation, power relationships, can all become part of cultural
meaning-making practice. The cultural structuring of contexts, with which text and talk
are indissolubly bound up, makes a universal notion of language (or discourse for that
matter) untenable.

13
 CHAPTER III
(CONCLUSION)

1. Pragmatics is a science that has something to do with language and its users.
Reference is based on some locally successful choice of expression. Inference is the
listener's use of additional knowledge to make sense of what is not explicit in an
utterance. In pragmatics Presupposition is what the speaker assumes to be the case prior
to making an utterance. Entailment, which is not a pragmatic concept, is what logically
follows from what is asserted in the utterance.

2. Metaphor is accounted for at the level of utterance meaning (or speaker’s meaning)
as opposed to sentence meaning. A simile is a figure of speech that makes
a comparison, showing similarities between two different things.

3. In linguistic discourse, "pragmatics" refers to the strategies, by which language users

relate the dictionary/grammar meaning of utterances to their communicative value in
context.

4. Cooperation is both speaker and listeners has similar understanding to their

conversation. Implicature is expression of the listeners in responding the speaker..

5. Speech act theory is a subfield of pragmatics that studies how words are used not
only to present information but also to carry out actions.

6. A linguistics interaction is necessarily a social interaction. Interaction occurs when

speaker and listener are active. Politeness can defined as the means employe4d to show
awareness for another person’s face.
7. Fuzzy language seems to deny the quantity maxim, but in this way it obeys the
quality maxim and guarantees the accuracy of information concerned.

8. Discourse is a conceptual generalization of conversation within each modality

and context of communication. Culture is as collective patterns of thinking.

14
 REFERENCE

https://www.kompasiana.com/rahmawati7630/5b42c3cd16835f62cf137f65/presuppositi
on-and-entailment-in-pragmatics?page=3 (January, Sunday 26th 2020 at 08:12 pm)

http://soda.ustadistancia.edu.co/enlinea/dianacelis_PRAGMALINGUISTICS/reference_
and_inference.html (January, Sunday 26th 2020 at 08:56 pm)

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b3d3/370d8d1affd41d140126db1093e50f64c0d1.pdf

https://literarydevices.net/simile/ (January, Sunday 26th 2020 at 09:20 pm)

http://tesl-ej.org/ej42/a4.html (January, Sunday 26th 2020 at 09:45 pm)

http://www.ello.uos.de/field.php/Pragmatics/PragmaticsCooperationAndImplicatures
(January, Sunday 26th 2020 at 10:13 pm)

https://www.thoughtco.com/speech-act-theory-1691986 (January, Sunday 26th 2020 at

10:40 pm)

https://ridhaharwan.blogspot.com/2013/02/politeness-and-interaction-on-
pragmatics.html (January, Sunday 26th 2020 at 11:15 pm)

15