Impoverished pragmatics? The semantics-pragmatics interface from an intercultural perspective

Author:

Kecskes Istvan1

Affiliation:

1. University at Albany, State University of New York , Albany , NY , USA

Abstract

Abstract The semantic-pragmatic interface debate is about how much actual situational context the linguistic signs need in order for them to be meaningful in the communicative process. There is evidence that interlocutors in intercultural interactions rely more Some of the ideas in the paper are based on chapter six in Kecskes (2019). on the compositional meaning of linguistic signs (semantics) than contextually supported meaning (pragmatics) because actual situational context cannot help pragmatic implication and interpretation the way it does in L1 communication. At the same time in pragmatic theory there seems to be an agreement between the neo-Gricean account and the post-Gricean account on the fact that the process of implicature retrieval is context-dependent. But will this L1-based contextualism work in intercultural interactions? Is pragmatics impoverished if interlocutors can only partly rely on pragmatic enrichment coming from context and the target language? The paper argues that in fact pragmatics is invigorated rather than impoverished in intercultural communication. A new type of synchronic events-based pragmatics is co-constructed by interlocutors. Instead of relying on the existing conventions, norms and frames of the target language interlocutors create their own temporary frames, formulas and norms. There is pragmaticization of semantics which is a synchronic, (usually) one-off phenomenon in which coded meaning, sometimes without any specific pragmatic enrichment coming from the target language, obtains temporary pragmatic status. This pragmatic enrichment happens as a result of interlocutors’ blending their dictionary knowledge of the linguistic code (semantics) with their basic interpersonal communicative skills and sometimes unusual, not necessarily target language-based pragmatic strategies that suit them very well in their attempt to achieve their communicative goals.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Linguistics and Language,Communication,Language and Linguistics

Reference44 articles.

1. Apresjan, Valentina. 2019. Pragmatics in the interpretation of scope ambiguities. Intercultural Pragmatics 16(4). 421–463.

2. Archibald, Alasdair, Alessia Cogo & Jennifer Jenkins. 2011. Latest trends in ELF research. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

3. Bach, Kent. 2004. Minding the gap. In C. Bianchi (ed.), The semantics/pragmatics distinction, 27–43. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

4. Bach, Kent. 2007. Regressions in pragmatics (and semantics). In N. Burton-Roberts (ed.), Pragmatics, pp. 24–44. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

5. Bezuidenhout, Anne. 2004. Procedural meaning and the semantics/pragmatics interface. In C. Bianchi (ed.), The semantics/pragmatics distinction, 101–131. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3