Pragmatic Rules--Language Use
·
Certainly, there is a lot to keep in
mind as we combine various words into sentences to express our thoughts. It's a
wonder we can do it at all, let alone so effortlessly.
·
But wait, there is more. The toughest
part is yet to come--Pragmatic constraints.
·
To me, there is a close analogy between
language and a gun.
·
For example, Language Form
(phonology, morphology and syntax) is analogous to the gun itself.
NOTES: Some further thoughts on Pragmatics
·
Semantics
(Language Content) is analogous to the ammunition for a gun.
·
With just Form and Content alone, there
is enough linguistic skill to make communication possible. The same is true for
a gun and bullets. With these, one is able to shoot at something.
·
But give a gun to a person who does not
know the rules of its use and tragic life altering consequences can occur.
·
No less is true of language. If we
don't understand the rules of its use we can seriously hurt ourselves
and/or others. The rules that apply to the use of language are called Pragmatics.
NOTES: Here is
a short discussion on Pragmatics
Pragmatics addresses the question, "Is the
communication doing what we intended it to do?"
·
The basic question in Pragmatics is,
"Is the communication doing what we intended it to do?"
·
There are three factors effecting the outcome of a communication.
There are three factors in a verbal communication: Locution.
Illocution, and Perlocution.
·
The three components of a
communication, from a pragmatic point of view, are:
o
Locution--the semantic or literal
significance of the utterance;
o
Illocution--the intention of the
speaker; and
o
Perlocution--how
it was received by the listener.
·
Here is a fictitious example (although
a very similar one in Washington recently resulted in the firing of a very high
government official). Take the word "howlee._
·
The American Dictionary of Fictitious
words defines this word as, "Early missionary slang meaning--one who howls
a lot." That is the locutionary significance.
·
To a local inhabitant of Hawaii, the
word "howlee" historically has the meaning
of an outsider. The word usually connotes considerable contempt.
·
To tourists in Hawaii, the word "howlee" signifies an aura of honorary Hawaiian status.
These, then, are the three perlocutionary
possibilities.
When Locution, Illocution and Perlocution
are out of balance, serious miscommunications can occur.
·
So one day when I drop my iron-wood
surfboard on my toe and am loudly lamenting, a Hawaiian lifeguard comes and
says, "What's the matter howlee?"
·
What is he really saying? Is it
"What is wrong, you contemptible excuse for a worm;" or "What is
wrong my honored and welcomed visitor;" or "What is wrong sir that
you are howling so?"
·
This is the illocutionary
consideration.
·
If I perceive the word "howlee" in its negative sense, then I may complain
bitterly to his supervisor that he was disrespectful and perhaps even
threatening. This could result in his termination as a lifeguard.
·
How sad that would be if indeed his
intent with the word "howlee" had really
been either purely semantic (meaning person who howls) or positive (meaning
honored guest).
·
On the other hand maybe he really had
an attitude problem.
NOTES: See a real example of a Pragmatic
Disaster.
Pragmatic rules help us coordinate the structure of the
utterance with the context of the message.
·
To be an effective speaker (i.e., one
who gets his message across without hurting himself or someone else), I must be
aware of these three factors: Perlocution, Locution
and Illocution.
·
Then I must apply the rules of
discourse that will insure that they are correctly coordinated in my utterance.
·
The way we do this, by and large, is by
coordinating the structure of the utterance with the context of the message.
·
This can be a cognitive quagmire! But
children quickly begin to learn and apply these rules as soon as they begin to
talk, if not earlier.
·
What are these rules? There are many
but we will examine just a enough to get a flavor of
what it is all about.
·
The first set involves coordinating the
non linguistic (Expressive Graded) cues with the
intent of the linguistic component of the message.
Pragmatically, the message must be coordinated with the non linguistic context--Non Verbal and Paralinguistic cues.
·
These non linguistic cues were pretty
well summed up in Hall_s discussion of "Body
Language." From our standpoint, they can be divided into Non Verbal, and
Paralinguistic Aspects.
·
Non Verbal
Aspects: One important non verbal cue is eye gaze. Once, I asked this young
lady why she didn_t show up or our date, and she
said, looking everywhere except at me, "I'_m
sorry, but I missed the bus."
·
In our culture, failing to look a
person in the eyes connotes a air of insincerity.
Hence, I might have read from this that she missed the bus on purpose. In
addition, her body posture, which was extremely tense, and her physical
proximity to me (she was crouched all of the way across the room) added to my
notion that there was more to her statement than the simple, "I'm
sorry..." linguistic message
Non Linguistic Contextual cues can totally change the Locutionary content of a linguistic message.
·
Furthermore, her facial expression,
(lips drawn back, teeth bared and nostrils flared) also seemed to run contrary
to the locutionary content. But what began to
convince me was the gestural motions she made with her clenched hand and
extended finger that appeared to me more aggressive than concilliatory.
·
Paralinguistic Aspects: There were
curious auditory cues also which I detected.
·
Her vocal quality possessed a notable
hissing demeanor; the intensity of her voice was so great that a man three
blocks away turned and apologized; her prosody was strictly monotone with her
articulation drawn out to three times the normal speed; and her fluency was
notably off, since she blocked on the word "sorry" for 30 seconds. Of
course, I immediately asked her to marry me and she
accepted.
Pragmatically, the linguistic message must be balanced
internally with an array of verbal rules of discourse.
·
Pragmatic verbal rules of discourse:
Soon after we were married, I noticed an almost exclusive use of
"Commands" in my wife's linguistic communications to me.
·
I could have sworn before we were
married that there had been more of a Variety of Speech Acts, including
informative statements, questions, and exclamations, etc.
·
Turn taking too, seems to have gone by
the board.
·
It used to be that I would say
something, then she would reply and I would respond etc.
·
Now she says something; then she
elaborates on it; and then she contradicts it; and finally argues the point at
great length.
·
After 35 minutes I am reminded that
Quantity and Conciseness are pragmatic parameters to be prized.
·
Of course, my wife too complains that I
have changed since our marriage.
Ignoring the verbal rules of discourse can result in a loss
of friends.
·
She complains that as she talks, I
provide no Verbal Feedback.
·
Instead of occasionally nodding my head
and saying, "mmm hmm," or "Yes," like I used to do, she
says that I now simply stare in a mute and motionless trance with my eyes
crossed and my lower jaw drooping.
·
As a couple, of course, we have been accused, by ex- friends, of Topic Selection
pragmatic errors.
·
This is because, they say, when they
would meet us we always started talking about Ezmerelda,
our three year old daughter. Since she was born, no other topics
of conversation exists. To talk to us was to discuss for 30 minutes Ezmerelda's attempts to tie her shoe lace.
·
Of course, its
not a problem anymore because we don't have many conversations since our
friends don't seem to exist.
One of the most important Verbal aspects to be considered is
Lexical Selection.
·
Of course, there are many other
Pragmatic Verbal considerations including:
·
Maintaining a topic (many kindergarten
children start a new topic with almost each new sentence);
·
Changing a Topic (folks get bored if
you have only one topic of interest);
·
Introducing a topic (its necessary to
provide not too much, nor to little information in the process).
·
In regards to providing enough
pre-information, I recall we almost gave my wife's mother a stroke when we
broke the news about the birth of Ezmarelda, since we
had neglected to mention that my wife was pregnant.
·
Perhaps, one of the most important
Verbal Pragmatic Rules deals with Lexical Selection. I suspect that my wife
turned down my first proposal of marriage because of my choice of words.
Words selected incorrectly relative to the situation can
loose their intended communicative impact.
·
When I proposed the first time, I
believe I said, "Thunder thighs, will you get with it?" She on the
other, hand was very Clear and Concise in her answer. She said "NO!"
·
Context plays a very important role in
word selection. If I'm trying to promote my wife's boxing career I use many
expletives and talk about her "flailing massive fists of steel."
·
But if I want to get her a job at the
University Day Care Center, what do I do?
·
I use words like "really
wonderful," and "soft and gentle."
·
If I chose my words incorrectly
relative to the context of the situation, my message would loose it's intended impact.
·
Who is going to hire a fighter with
"soft and gentle hands" who thinks the opportunity to exchange
physical contact with another human being is really wonderful."
·
Sometimes, the external context is so
subtle we fail to even recognize it. I think this was nicely
described by Dr. Deborah Tannen, Ph.D., in her
book, That's not what I meant!
·
She describes how pragmatic confusions
between genders can lead to terrible and unnecessary arguments. Here is one
that always catches me.
·
My wife comes home from work (she
teaches professional wrestling at the Simi Valley Cultural Center) and mentions
how distraught she is because they keep giving her the poorest athletes, while
at the same time evaluating her on their overall performance.
·
I develop a brilliant and detailed plan
to enable her to reverse the problem. But when I outline it to her she gets
annoyed and says "Butt out (explative, explative and others!...)"
NOTES:
Here is some information on gender talk differences.
NOTES:
Dr. Tannen and Pragmatics.
NOTES:
Even more on Dr. Tannen.
NOTES:
That's not what I meant, by Dr.Tannen
Gender cultural differences provide a subtle contextual
background that can cause communication disasters.
·
She claims I'm always meddling in her
business. I am defensive and annoyed that my plan is wasted;
and so the argument goes with neither of us really knowing why or what it is
all about.
·
Dr. Tannen
notes that the wife's remark is basically a process of sharing information (the
illocution).
·
However, the husband,
hears a cry for help (the perlocution).
·
The dissonance occurs in the context of
the differences between the gender cultures.
·
Girls grow up in the habit of playing
and sharing with other girls. Boys, on the other hand, join "gangs"
and compete for dominance within the group. Hence, when men confront a problem
they perceive it as a challenge and call "to get the upper hand."
·
So, the wife, who was simply sharing a
bit of daily news, is surprised and annoyed at the uninvited intrusion by her
spouse, who in turn feels unjustly unappreciated.
Pragmatic Rules can make a good communication, but they do
not necessarily make a good person.
·
Whether it is asking daddy for
permission to go to the Prom; or asking the boss to hire me; or asking a girl
out on a date; or asking the PTA members to vote for me, or just getting along
with my wife, pragmatics rules are the name of the game. But a wor
·
They are only rules. Many children with
a history of language disorders, who still fail to abstract these rules appear to be true nerds. They put their foot in their
mouths with every sentence they try.
·
However, basically, they are often
good, albeit frustrated persons, with a will, but no capacity to communicate
and socialize.
·
On the other hand, there are those who
master the pragmatic skills and appear as angels--but in reality
are the worst kind of devils.
·
Ted Bundy (mass murder of women)
possessed pragmatic skills that could charm a humming bird off a tree. But as a
human, he was the worst of beasts.
Speaking
of "Beasts," our next topic is considered by some to be a
"Bear." But I think it's a beauty since it bares
on something most of depend upon for social intecourse...our
hearing.