Contrastive Pragmatics
Lecture 9
Introduction
Language is accepted as part of culture
The use of language reflects culture.
A study of such non-native language use can give
insight into the original cultural background
an analysis of two cultures in action.
Introduction
A great many factors play a role in
determining how an utterance will be
interpreted, among them the social status of
the participants and their expectations of
what others will do in certain situations.
Utterances may have more than one kind of
meaning.
please, may
Introduction
An obstacle may occur when native speakers of the
language used are monolingual, and cannot imagine
that the intentions of their partners may be different
than their own if they were to use the form and
expressions the others use.
The result may be a conflict.
Different use of language may lead to a simple lack
of understanding on the part of the native speaker or
the non-native speaker.
Maxims and politeness
Brown and Levinson (1978:100) state that most
conversations do not proceed in the brusque fashion
that would be the expected result of the adherence
to the cooperative principle, and that the reason they
do not is because people are being polite.
This politeness is often communicated by the
departure itself.
Maxims and politeness
Exchanges between native speakers are in many
circumstances almost semi-automatic, and yet
unintelligible to the listening non-native speaker.
As a participant, the non-native speaker is forced to
make these assumptions almost consciously.
Maxims and politeness
Politeness is important in cross-cultural
communication, for without a willingness to
presume good intentions on the part of the
partner, the communication will probably
break down.
Maxims and politeness
Some codes of politeness require that an offer of
food or drink first be turned down, to be accepted
only after repeated offers. If the first rejection is
accepted as such, and no repeated offer is made,
both partners may be confused and hurt by the
exchange.
Cross-cultural examples
The following examples stem from exchanges
between native speakers of Western Apache and
speakers of American English, where English was
used as the language of communication.
A difference in the perception of the maxim of
quantity is illustrated in the following example:
(1) She had a baby for him
Cross-cultural examples
An English speaker would consider She had a baby
sufficient, and if he were to be brought into the
statement at all, it would read ‘She had his baby.’
This usage of for him stems from the fact that
Western Apache society is arranged in clans, clan
membership being matrilineal. The clan of which one
is a member is the clan which one was “born to,”
whereas the clan of the father is the “born for” clan,
and the “born for” relationship is also important.
Cross-cultural examples
Thus, (1) illustrates a culturally determined difference
in the use of language, and is not a departure from
the maxim in the Apache view.
The maxim of quality, be truthful and sincere, is a
particularly difficult proposition, for the definitions
differ greatly.
(2) We were just sitting around telling lies.
Cross-cultural examples
This statement was received with shock by an
Apache.
Apaches take statements literally –– they do no use
understatement, overstatement or irony (with few
exceptions), and do not understand it in English as
English speakers intend it to be understood. For them,
the second maxim must be taken literally.
Cross-cultural examples
(3) A: How old are you?
B: I don’t know.
C: Oh, don’t be like that
In this exchange, an 11-year-old Western Apache girl
was, with (3b), reprimanding a (non-Apache) adult
for asking a direct personal question, and was in turn
reprimanded by her brother with (3c).
Cross-cultural examples
Perhaps this illustrates an overlapping of this maxim
and the “politeness” maxim, because the speaker of
(3a) is not aware of having been impolite, and thus
cannot see (3b) as the polite form of That is none of
your business. However, because of this
unawareness, the answer will be interpreted in
accordance with the second maxim.
Cross-cultural examples
The maxim of relevance.
(4) When are you leaving?
This question is posed to newcomers in a culture with
great regularity. The newcomer often does not, in
fact, know what is being asked, namely, whether a
stay is planned that will be long enough for it to be
useful to members of the culture to form
relationships with the visitor.
Cross-cultural examples
The maxim of manner requires that one be
perspicuous.
(5) You need about 124 sticks.
(6) I guess that’s right.
These two examples illustrate attempts by
native Apache speakers to introduce modal
particles into English. The Apache language
has a number of such particles which add
nuances of politeness to a statement.
Pragmatic errors
“pragmatic errors are the result of an
interactant’s imposing the social rules
of one culture on his communicative
behavior in a situation where the social
rules of one culture would be more
appropriate.” (Riley, 1989:234)
Pragmatic errors
Thomas (1983:99) defines and distinguishes
pragmalinguistic and socio-pragmatic errors
as follows:
pragmalinguistic failure.... occurs when the
pragmatic force mapped by S onto a given
utterance is systematically different from the
force most frequently assigned to it by native
speakers of the target language, or when
speech act strategies are inappropriately
transferred from L1 to L2.
Pragmatic errors
Sociopragmatic failure.... refers to the social
conditions [laced on language in use... while
pragmalinguistic failure is basically a linguistic
problem, caused by differences in the linguistic
encoding of pragmatic force, sociopragmatic failure
stems cross-culturally different perceptions of what
constitutes appropriate linguistic behavior.
Pragmatic errors
Englishman: “Can I help you with that?”
Japanese lady traveler (burdened with 2
suitcases, baby, etc.): “So sorry, so sorry,
you are very kind”
Pragmatic errors
“‘Po moemu’ (in my opinion) and ‘kaztesja’
(it seems to me) are often used in Russian
much as we use ‘I think’ in English. Normally
these expressions are used to deliver
considered judgments (“St. Sophia’a is, in my
opinion, the finest example of Byzantine
architecture in the Soviet Union .’ ‘It seems
to me there’s someone at the door.” “In my
opinion the film begins at eight.”) (Thomas
1983: 102).
Pragmatic errors
Hostess (to foreign visitor who has
given her a small present):
“Oh, you really shouldn't have!”
Visitor (anxious and puzzled): “But I ...
why not?”
sociopragmatic failure
A visiting professor from Japan entered
the office of his British opposite number.
After the briefest of introductions
(shaking hands, sitting down) he said
“How old are you?.”
sociopragmatic failure
Riley (1989:237) points out that there
are at least two other categories of
pragmatic error which should be taken
into consideration.
sociopragmatic failure
One of these categories, which we might
tentatively call inchoative, includes errors
which are their result of a failure to
appreciate the “true” value of discourse, in
both quantitative and qualitative terms.
The relative status of silence and speech and
the overall social role of discourse seems to
vary considerably from one culture to another.
sociopragmatic failure
Obviously, there are marked, intracultural variations too: ‘strong, silent
men’ may well find themselves married
to ‘gossips’, and differences in role and
personality also influence how much we
say and how much attention is paid to it.
sociopragmatic failure
Scollon and Scollon (1980) studied the social
and communicative relationships between
English-speaking Americans and Athabaskan
Indians. They drew the conclusion that the
reciprocal negative evaluations were in large
part due to rhetorical (‘inchoative’)
differences: The English speakers “talk to
strangers to get to know them,” whereas the
Athabaskans “get to know someone in order
to be able to speak.”
sociopragmatic failure
The French find an exchange of differing
points of view stimulating and enjoyable,
whilst for peoples as different as the Finns
and the Japanese (Kunihiro, 1975) “language
as an instrument of debate and argument is
considered disagreeable and is accordingly
avoided.”
In most European countries, precision and
fluency of expression are signs of intelligence
and high social status:
sociopragmatic failure
The other category of pragmatic errors
is non-linguistic.
not all communicative behavior is verbal
there are times when “actions speak
louder than words.”
sociopragmatic failure
The acts of passing the salt or opening the window,
shaking hands, lifting one’s hat, holding a door open,
picking up the phone are often subject to cultural
variation.
sneezing or starting a meal,
gesture, facial expression, posture and proxemies,
body adapters, etc.
Thank you for taking time to read these
slides.