Scribd
Upload
105 views

Pragmatics Lesson 1

The document discusses the key differences between semantics and pragmatics. Semantics is the study of meaning that does not consider context, focusing only on vocabulary, grammar, and the conceptual meaning of words. Pragmatics studies meaning in context by examining the speaker's intended meaning, contextual factors, and listener inferences to understand what is implied beyond literal meaning. An example shows that pragmatics interprets the utterance "I'm so hungry I could eat a horse" as implying extreme hunger rather than a literal meaning. Understanding the difference between semantic and pragmatic meaning can improve one's linguistic ability.

Uploaded by

phong lê
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
105 views

Pragmatics Lesson 1

The document discusses the key differences between semantics and pragmatics. Semantics is the study of meaning that does not consider context, focusing only on vocabulary, grammar, and the conceptual meaning of words. Pragmatics studies meaning in context by examining the speaker's intended meaning, contextual factors, and listener inferences to understand what is implied beyond literal meaning. An example shows that pragmatics interprets the utterance "I'm so hungry I could eat a horse" as implying extreme hunger rather than a literal meaning. Understanding the difference between semantic and pragmatic meaning can improve one's linguistic ability.

Uploaded by

phong lê
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Semantics and pragmatics: same or different?

It is said that semantics and pragmatics are two main branches of study in
linguistics. They both study the meaning and the significance of words in a
language. However, there is a distinct difference between semantics and
pragmatics. I will analyze the differences between those two in the eassay
below.

The key difference between semantics and pragmatics is the fact that semantics


is context independent whereas pragmatic is context dependent. Simply,
semantics doesn’t consider the context. Pragmatics considers the context.

The study of semantics does not take context into consideration; it is only
concerned with grammar and vocabulary and conceptual meaning of a word.
The meaning of a sentence remains constant whenever a certain expression is
uttered. Thus, it can be said that semantics only analyses what that particular
expression mean in a very general sense.

Pragmatics, in contrast, is a broad field which analyses the context in addition


to grammar, vocabulary and conceptual meaning. Instead of examining what
the expression means, this field studies what the speaker means in using a
certain word or expression. They consider different factors surrounding the
utterance such as the speaker’s intended meaning, contextual factors, and
listener’s inferences in order to interpret the utterance. In simple words,
pragmatics deal with what is implied in an utterance.

Example:
I’m so hungry I could eat a horse.

If we examine this utterance semantically, we’d only be concerned with the


conceptual meaning, grammar, vocabulary, and the literal meaning.

However, if we are to examine this utterance in pragmatics, we’d also


examine the context and what the speaker is trying to imply from this
utterance. Is the speaker really going to eat a horse? Or is he trying to imply
that he is extremely hungry? Is the speaker making a general comment? Or is
he asking for food by this comment? Then we’d understand that the meaning
of this sentence cannot be taken in a literal sense.
In conclusion, when learning the English language, understanding the
differences between semantic and pragmatic meaning can be a valuable tool
to maximize our linguistic ability. 

parameters that govern language use for communication

there are three relevant factors Power, Distance, and Rank of Imposition.
Those three factors are essential to determine how polite an utterance that
is uttered by the speaker to the hearer will be.

Power is a value that is labeled not to individual, but to roles or role-sets


while distance or social distance is the closeness between the speaker and
the hearer or the way the speaker treats the hearer in particular way.
And rank of imposition somehow relates to how ‘urgent’ the intention of the
speaker will be .

Here are the examples for power, distance, and also rank of imposition:
22 Excuse me sir, would it be alright if I smoke?
23 Mind if I smoke?
Both utterances above show the same intention from the speaker, i.e. he
intended to smoke.
However, the different utterances happen if they are uttered by different
people. 22 might be said by an employee to his boss, while 23 might be said
by the boss to the employee in the same situation. The example above
clearly shows that different power brings different strategy in uttering same
intention.

24 Excuse me, would you by any chance have the time?


25 Got the time, mate?
Utterance 24 might be uttered when the speaker and the hearer were
distant, strangers from different parts for example, whether 25 was used
when the speaker and the hearer were close or intimate

26 Look, I’m terribly sorry to bother you but would there be any chance of
your lending me just enough money to get a railway ticket to get home? I
must have dropped my purse and I just don’t know what to do.
27 Hey, got change for a quarter? Let’s imagine that both utterance 26 and
27 above were said by the frustrated traveler to a stranger. However,
utterance 26 considers the FTA to be much more serious than 27.
It shows that the ranking of imposition in 26 is higher than it is in 27

. On the other hand, it is stated that social factors influencing the choice of
one variety any set of linguistics forms which patterns according to social
factors Holmes, 1992: 6 are as follows: 1. Participants : who is speaking and
who are they speaking to? 2. Setting : where they are speaking? 3. Topic :
what is being talked about? 4. Function : why they are speaking? Besides,
these four scales below also related to the factors above Holmes, 1992: 8-
10:

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy