Тема “ Semantic Syntax . Pragmatic aspects of syntax” / Part 2
Цель: рассмотреть понятия speech act, constatives, performatives, illocutive power, locution, perlocutive effect, рассмотреть теорию речевых актов, сформировать навыки идентификации предикативной нагрузки предложения, сформировать навыки анализа речевых актов в диалогах.
Знания и умения, приобретаемые студентами: студенты должны усвоить основные понятия семантики предложений, уметь идентифицировать предикативную нагрузку предложения, анализировать речевые акты в диалогах.
Формируемые компетенции: ОПК–3.
Актуальность темы определяется тем, что в ее рамках осваиваются понятия speech act , constatives , performatives , illocutive power , locution , perlocutive effect, основные принципы грамматической категории числа, а также формируются навыки идентификации коммуникативных типов предложения.
Теоретическая часть
As the human activity is comprehended and performed under certain conditions, encouraged by the purpose to solve some tasks (so there is an aim), is realized in accord with possible consequences then speech activity should be studied with respect to all features.
In the basis of the theory of speech acts developing in the middle of 20th century lies the idea about the possibility of dividing all utterances made in the form of a sentence into two main types – constatives and performatives.
The founder of this theory, English philosopher J.L. Austin noticed that along with utterances describing a certain fragment or events of non-lingual world or situation – in other words, declaring a certain state of affairs in the world, there exist other utterances which do not denote anything beyond language and are actions, acts, activities of purely lingual character. Such speech acts received the name of performatives and became the object of the theory of speech acts. The first feature of performative utterances is their ability to be language signs of themselves. Their second feature is in the presence in any performative utterance of performative verb in the first person singular in present tense, in active voice, indicative mood: I name the boy Jack.
|
|
|
If we change even one parameter of the utterance, it becomes a constative. You (they, he, she)name(s) the boy Jack. It is the sign of non-lingual situation naming a boy by someone. While performing a speech act in the form of I name the boy Jack a speaker performs the action of naming a boy Jack and he can’t do it anyhow as pronounce such sentence. That’s why performatives are not sign analogue of the fragment of the world: they are certain facts of reality by themselves.
In the theory of speech acts there are different typologies of performative utterance. The common feature of all sentences is that the name of every type of performative utterance is the same of performative verb which is the most prominent representative of this or that pragmatic intention of the utterance. There exist:
1) speech acts – requestives: I request that you help me.
2) Speech acts – prohibitives: I prohibit your going there alone.
3) Speech acts – promises: I promise not to be late.
4) Speech acts – directives: I order you to obey.
The theory of speech acts has also enriched linguistics by such terms as locution, illocutive power, perlocutive effect of the utterance. Under locution we understand the act of speech production, the speech act itself, performing a speaker as the author and creator of the utterance. Under illocutive power the communicative intention of the speaker; it’s the illocutive power which forms the basis for classification of speech acts: threats, promises, orders, requests, prohibition, congratulations and so on. The perlocutive effect of the utterance is the behavioristic reaction of the listener on which the speaker accounts. The perlocutive effect can be expressed in action or in collection of actions.
Вопросы, выносимые на обсуждение
Points for discussion:
1. Explain the difference between direct and indirect speech acts.
2. Give examples of preformative verbs and utterances with them. What criteria should performative verbs have and why?
|
|
|
3. What does syntactic derivation imply?
4. What is considered to be the basic element of syntactic derivation?
5. What do the constructional relations of the kernel sentence consist in?
Задания
Exercise:
Study the dialogues and analyze them from the point of view of theory of speech acts.
№1
- “Hello, Manson. How are you? I wanted to be the first to welcome you to Aberalaw”.
- “Thanks, thanks, Doctor Lewellyn. It’s awfully good of you”.
№2
1) John: Hello, Brenda.
2) Brenda: Hello, John. You look a bit annoyed.
3) John: Do I? Well, when I was coming out of my office someone shouted Shut the door – just like that – without saying please.
4) Brenda: That was rather rude. Though I expect you had left someone in a draught from the open door, John.
5) John: Perhaps I had, but anyway it rather annoys me when people forget to say please.
6) Brenda: Well, I think it would be a good idea to go on talking today about please and other ways of making polite requests.
7) John: All right. Well, let’s go on with please. It can come either before or after the request, can’t it?
8) Brenda: Yes, you can say Please shut the door, or Shut the door, please.
9) John: And Will you shut the door, please? is another way of putting it which may sound more polite than please. and then there’s a phrase which can sound even more polite: Would you shut the door, please?
10) Brenda: But of course, the politeness of these phrases depends on the tone of voice, the way, in which you say them, doesn’t it?
11) John: And then there’s Would you mind shutting the door? Notice that after would you mind we have the gerund shutting.
12) Brenda: And we can use the “kindly” phrases – you know, Kindly pass the salt, and Will you or Would you kindly pass the salt?, but they’re not used quite as often as the please, are they?
13) John: No. But how are readers to know which to choose out of all these ways of making polite requests?
14) Brenda: Well, it depends on the circumstances, doesn’t it? For instance, if I had already asked someone to do several things for me, and then I asked him to do something more, I shouldn’t say please, I’d say Would you mind doing it? And, of course, I should say it in a very pleasant tone of voice!
|
|
|
Рекомендуемая литература
Основная литература:
1. Худяков, А. А. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка : [учеб. пособие для студ. филол. фак-тов и фак-тов иностранных языков вузов] / Худяков Андрей Александрович. - 3-е изд., стер. - М. : Академия , 2012. - 255 с. - (Высшее профессиональное образование). - Библиогр.: с. 219-224. - Терминол. указ.: с. 245-250. - На обл.: Языкознание. - ISBN 978-5-7695-6145-0 : 391-60.
2. Bloch M.Y. A Course in Theoretical English Grammar. - M., 2000. – p.6-26.
3. Блох М.Я. Теоретические основы грамматики – М., Высшая школа 2010.
Дополнительная литература:
1. Арутюнова Н.Д. Предложение и его смысл: логико-семантические проблемы. – М., 2000.
2. Слюсарева Н.А. Проблемы функционального синтаксиса современного английского языка. – М., 1981.
3. Бархударов Л.С. Структура простого предложения современного английского языка. - М., 1982.
Интернет-ресурсы:
1. http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms глоссарий, содержащий более 900 лингвистических терминов с перекрестными ссылками и списком источников (SIL International). Ред. Е. Е. Loos, S.Anderson. D.H.Day Jr., P.C.Jourdan, J.D.Wingate
2. https://www.thoughtco.com/theoretical-grammar-1692541 информационный обучающий ресурс, посвящённый вопросам теоретической грамматики
3. http://www.edufind.com/english/grammar/ информационный обучающий ресурс, посвящённый вопросам грамматики
Практическая работа №16
Дата добавления: 2019-03-09; просмотров: 286; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!