Pragmatics Seminar Semantics and Pragmatics Andrew McIntyre

Transcription

1 Pragmatics Seminar Semantics and Pragmatics Andrew McIntyre 1 Deixis Some basic deictic notions Types of deixis Shifting deictic centre References Implicatures Grice s Maxims Examples of implicatures generated by the maxims Cases where maxims are not followed Types of implicatures Some properties of implicatures Scalar implicatures Consequences of the Q PRINCIPLE Consequences of the R PRINCIPLE Presupposition Deixis 1.1 Some basic deictic notions Deixis = the phenomenon whereby the reference of certain expressions cannot be determined without knowing to the extralinguistic context of the utterance (who uttered it where and when): (1) I will meet you here this afternoon at 3. The deictic centre = reference point of the text or utterance, by default the speaker/here/now. Gestural deixis: Reference determined by non-linguistic gesture (pointing, eye contact...): (2) a. YOU are to work with HER. (3) Put this candle HERE and that one THERE. (4) [looking at map]: Neuchâtel is HERE, not HERE. (5) [handing sb. sth.]: Here you are. / Here it is. (6) It s THIS long/loud. (7) Horowitz played the passage THIS way. [demonstrates on piano/plays recording] (8) When I say now start running.... NOW! [time of saying now is temporal pointing ] Remoteness: Modern Standard English, unlike other languages, has two-place spatial & temporal deixis; other languages have more elaborate systems. Proximal: near reference point: here, now Distal: removed from reference point: there, then Other languages (e.g. some English dialects) have a three-place deictic system: (9) here (near speaker), there (near hearer), yonder (near neither speaker nor hearer). There are various ways of expressing degrees of remoteness more exactly than the two-place system of English allows: (10) right here, right then, this very book, way over there The size of the proximal area is relative and depends on the context: (11) Cuthbert is here. [in this room? in this town? in this country?...] (12) My arm hurts here. [at doctor s] 1.2 Types of deixis Spatial deixis: Determiners: this/that Verbs specifying motion toward/away from speaker: come/go Adverbs (intransitive prepositions): here/there; hither/hence, thither/thence Temporal deixis: Adverbs/PPs: now/then; this year/that year; at this/that point; yesterday; two days ago Tense: present tense (proximal) vs. past/future tense (distal) Personal deixis: First person (Speaker: I, we) Second person (hearer: you) A. Many linguists (e.g. Huang 2007:133ff) see gestural uses of 3 rd person pronouns (like her in (2)) as deictic, and the anaphoric use of 3 rd person pronouns (like that in the sentence below) as nondeictic. Try to explain why anaphoric pronouns are not deictic. I saw a woman sitting at the next table. She was reading a newspaper. B. The distal forms there, then are more often anaphoric than are the proximal forms here, now. For a related reason, non-anaphoric there is more likely to be gestural than here is. Explain these facts. C. First person plural pronouns can be inclusive or exclusive. These have distinct forms in some languages but are mostly formally identical in English. Explain this with reference to the following examples. 1. [cult member to journalist:] We believe that the Great Plastic Cow guides human destiny. 2. [Nine Inch Nails song:] You and me, we re in this together now. 3. a. Let us go home. (ambiguous) b. Let s go home. c. *Let s take you home. Social deixis: The T/V distinction: French tu/vous, German du/sie, Middle English thou/ye); metaphorical proximity/distance on a social hierarchy (age, power, class) or in terms of familiarity/solidarity. Deictic because choice of forms depends on speaker. (13) All that he did was by thy instigation, thou viper; for I thou thee, thou traitor. [Said at Sir Walter Raleigh s trial, 1603] D. Can you think of ways of expressing something like the T/V distinction in Modern English? Textual deixis: metaphoric deixis in texts, often borrowing spatial/temporal deictic words: (14) [in book:] I will shortly begin my defense of the Flat Earth Hypothesis. At this point it should be noted that my argumentation will be hard to follow unless we recall some points made in chapter 3. I will therefore briefly summarise that chapter here. There I argued that (15) Listen to this: John said to Bob Go fly a kite. He didn t like that. (16) Look to the left, then to the right, then cross the road in that order. (17) hereby, therefore (=because of that), the above, the former/latter; par la présente, 2

2 1.3 Shifting deictic centre Shifting deictic centre (=deictic projection): (18) [from a textbook:] Do exercise seven now! (19) His opponent hit the ball into the net. Now he had won the tournament. Shifting deictic centre as source of ambiguity: (20) [on the phone]: There s a hospital at the opposite end of town. (21) [letter from London to Sydney]: We will try to visit you this winter? The possibility of deictic shift seems to depend partly on the lexical items in question. Come is usable (a) of motion to speaker or hearer (at either utterance time or arrival time), or (b) of motion to a place normally occupied by speaker or hearer, whether or not they are there at utterance or arrival time (Huang 2007:161): (22) Should they come to your office now or stay here? (23) Stuart will come to our flat tomorrow, but neither of us will be there. (24) *Stuart will come to our former flat tomorrow, but neither of us will be there. E. Are go and here as flexible as come? F. The uses of here below (not accepted by all speakers) might appear to involve a shifting centre of deixis, but they can also be seen as non-deictic. Why? 1. [said in Paris:] He will arrive at Sydney Airport soon. % Here he will hold a press conference. 2. In a few minutes we will reach Central Station. % The train terminates here. K. Work out the difference between bring and take in the examples below. 1. Can you {take/*bring} me there? 2. {Take/*Bring} this rubbish away, please! 3. Who {brought/*took} him here? L. Can you reconcile the following sentences with the answer to the last question? 1. I will {bring/take} it to you. 2. I will {bring/take} it to them. 3. You should {bring/*take} it to me. 4. You should {bring/take} it to her. 5. She should {bring/?? take} it to you. 6. He should {bring/take} it to her. 1.4 References Apart from the chapters on deixis in the textbooks by Huang, Grundy, Cruse, Levinson (see courseplan for references), consult also: Huddleston, R. & Pullum, G The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge. Ch. 17. G. Can you think of contexts where the following would be possible (without substance abuse). 1. I m not here now. 2. That s me there. 3. Unfortunately, I died recently. H. Explain the following data (with Tuesday the 9 th of January as utterance time): 1. a. *this Tuesday / *this Monday / *this Wednesday b. this Friday 2. a. this week/month/year/semester/academic year b. *this day c. *this fortnight 3. a. *This Christmas we stayed at home. b. % This Sunday we went to the park. I. Identify a deictic and a non-deictic reading of the underlined expressions. You may have to think of special contexts to do this. 1. There s the school. The university is opposite. 2. Wurstbrot H. Smith s book argues for the Flat Earth Hypothesis. This is discussed in chapter I met this weird person at a party yesterday. 4. Let s take the other road. 5. An upright piano is in the middle of the room. The cat is behind the piano. 6. When did they arrive and when did they go away and when did they return? 7. Cynthia is upstairs. 8. The president is going to hold a press conference today. 9. There s a computer in the main office. This computer is not much good. 10. When you write long texts, you should the files to yourself in case the computer crashes. 11. Gwendoline is to the left of Ethel on the photo. 12. The police found him in a local disco. J. Complete the following equations. What is the generalisation covering all of them? 1. this book + that book = [ ] books [] = these or those? 2. me + you = [ ] 3. me + them = [ ] 4. you + them = [ ] 3 4

3 2 Implicatures Implicature: That which is implied rather than being said explicitly: (25) A: Do you know the time? B: The bank is still open. (26) A: Do you like my singing on the CD I leant you? B: The guitar solo in the last song was great. Thanks to it I didn t jump out the window. M. If you were writing a phrasebook for English learners, would you include (25) in the section on how to tell the time? If not, why not? 2.1 Grice s Maxims Philosopher H. Paul Grice 1 proposed the Cooperative Principle and some Maxims which interact to explain many implicatures that exist. (27) THE CO-OPERATIVE PRINCIPLE: Make your contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged. (28) Grice s Maxims (=Gricean Maxims, conversational maxims) a. MAXIM OF QUALITY: Try to make your contribution one that is true, specifically: i. Do not say what you believe to be false ii. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence b.maxim OF QUANTITY: i. Make your contribution as informative as is required for the current purposes of the exchange ii. Do not make your contribution more informative than is required c.the MAXIM OF RELEVANCE: Make your contributions relevant d.the MAXIM OF MANNER: Be perspicuous, and specifically: i. Avoid obscurity ii. Avoid ambiguity iii. Be brief iv. Be orderly The maxims are not moral laws or commands. They are rather assumptions about how a cooperative speaker will communicate. E.g. (28)c) means Hearers assume (if there is no evidence to the contrary) that speakers are giving information relevant to the current discourse. So if something sounds irrelevant, hearers try to find a way in which it IS relevant. 2.2 Examples of implicatures generated by the maxims +> indicates an implicature triggered by an expression. (29) It snowed in Sydney in > The speaker/writer believes the statement is true. (by QUALITY) (Hence: *It snowed in Sydney in 1836 but I don t believe it did.) (30) A: Who did you have lunch with? B: George, Martha and Anna. +> Nobody else was present at the lunch. (by QUANTITY) (cf. *George, Martha and Anna. I had dinner with Christine.) (31) A: I have nearly run out of petrol. B: There s a garage round the corner. +> The garage is open now and sells petrol. (by RELEVANCE) N. How does the Maxim of Manner apply to I went to the kitchen and made some coffee. 2.3 Cases where maxims are not followed Distinguish different types of situations in which the maxims are not followed: A. Deliberate deception (uncooperative speaker lying or telling half-truth etc.) 1 Grice, H. P Logic and conversation. In. P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3, Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press 1975, Reprinted (1989) in Studies in the Way of Words, ed. H. P. Grice, pp Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 5 B. Clashes between maxims: one maxim violated to ensure that another is fulfilled. (32) A: When does the second-hand shop shut today? B: Some time between 5 and 8. +> B doesn t know exactly. (QUANTITY violated, so as not to violate QUALITY) C. Opting out of maxims using hedges like the following (some from Huang, p.26) (33) a. I don t know if this is true, but... b. I don t know if this is relevant, but... c. I may be belabouring the obvious, but... d. I don t want to change the subject, but... e. As far as I know... f. Oh, by the way... g. I can t remember the other two names you re asking for. h. I m no expert, but... i. Anyway, moving right along... k. I don t know if I can explain general relativity clearly, but... l....or something... O. Which of the expressions in (33) opt out of which maxim? D. Flouting (exploiting) maxims: infringement of maxims with the following 3 characteristics: (i) The infringement is blatant. Speaker thinks hearer will notice the infringement. (ii) The cooperative principle is being adhered to (despite appearances). (iii) The infringement has the purpose of generating an implicature. Examples: (34) (concert review:) Divina Cantalina produced a series of sounds which followed the score of Mozart s aria Non mi dir. +> The performance was lousy. (Using the underlined bit instead of sang flouts MANNER iii, implying that sang is inappropriate: her vocalisations can t be called singing.) (35) Job recommendation letter for a candidate for a physics professorship: TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Dr. Smith plays golf well, is always sober during his classes, and never hits his students hard. Yours truly... +> Smith is a bad candidate for the job. (To avoid violating QUALITY and being impolite by writing a negative reference, the writer violates RELEVANCE/QUANTITY. Reader assumes by QUANTITY that there are no relevant good qualities of Smith which could be mentioned.) (36) In job recommendation: You will be lucky if you can get Mr. Jones to work for you. +> Jones is lazy. (Flouts MANNER by choosing an ambiguous way of saying You will be lucky if you can get Mr. Jones to become your employee. Reader assumes writer would have avoided this violation of MANNER had the laziness implicature not been intended.) (37) A: John s wife is such a stupid cow. B: It s nice weather, isn t it. +> A s comment should not be discussed. (Flouts RELEVANCE) (38) War is war. (Tautologies of this type flout QUANTITY.) (39) Some phenomena relying on the flouting of QUALITY a. Irony b. Metaphor c. Hyperbole d. Understatement 6

4 P. Use the maxims to explain what is odd or uncooperative about the following exchanges: 1. Frank: I want to buy this book. Do you have $10 on you? Jill: No, I don t have $10 on me. I have Jane: Why did you hit him? Cyril: Because I wanted to hurt him. 3. Anna: I m injured. It would help if you call me an ambulance. Mervyn: Ok, You re an ambulance. 4. Nurse: Did you drink alcohol in the hospital? Patient: If I did not opt for a negative answer, I would be extricating myself from a situation in which I might not be able to escape the accusation of mendacity. 5. Colleen: When is your birthday? Stuart: It was on the 22 nd of March this year. 6. Boss: I heard there were only two people in the office yesterday. Who wasn t there? Secretary: Julius Caesar, Egbert of Wessex, Leonardo da Vinci, and I could, um, name lots of others, but it would take quite a while. Q. Identify conversational implicatures in the answers below, and explain which maxims trigger them and how they do so. 1. Cecilia: Are you going to walk to university? Max: No, I m going to fly there in a spaceship. 2. Basil: What does the chicken soup taste like? Francine: It tastes like chicken soup. 3. David: I m going to tell that skinhead bloke to stop being an obnoxious moron. Katie: I didn t know you like hospital food. 4. George: Where s the sleeping bag? Sarah: It s either in the garage or the cellar. 5. Gertrude: Are you coming to the party tonight? Arthur: I have an assignment due tomorrow. R. The implicature in (i) below is usually attributed the Maxim of QUANTITY (e.g. Huang, p. 28, Levinson, p.106). Why is this questionable, at least given the formulation of the maxim? (i) She has three children. +> She has no more than three children. (ii) If you have three young children, the state pays for special childcare services. S. While three in (i) above would normally be taken to mean three and no more than, three can sometimes mean three or more, as in (ii) above. Can you think of other contexts where implicatures of the type seen in (i) do not hold? Can you think of a context where three might mean three or less? 2.4 Types of implicatures Particularised implicatures applying to specific contexts. Generalised implicatures applying almost always whenever the expressions triggering them are used. (p.29: generalised conversational implicature not the same as a conventional implicature) (40) Some people left the room. (+> Not all people left the room) (41) I found a relevant article in an office today. (+> not in my office) T. If someone says something implausible, their conversation partner might reply with one of the following statements. Which of them are generalised? (Hint: Google the expressions to find how they are used. a. If that s true then I m the Queen of Sheba b. If that s true then Attila the Hun was a nice person. c. Pigs might fly. d. If that s true then Paris Hilton is getting a Nobel Prize Some properties of implicatures Defeasibility: Implicatures can be cancelled, e.g. by the following factors (Huang, p.32): If they contradict semantic entailments. (42) a. Many people hated the film. (+> Not all people hated it.) b. Many people hated the film. In fact, everybody hated it. If they contradict world knowledge. (43) a. John and Mary bought a flat in Elm St. (+> A single flat, shared by J & M.) b. The Americans and Russians tested an atom bomb in Reinforceability: It does not sound gravely redundant to express information that would otherwise be assumed by the hearer on the basis of an implicature (Huang, p.34): (44) Some people left, but not everyone. Non-detachability: sentences with synonymous expressions trigger the same implicatures (unless the implicatures arise by the maxim of MANNER). (45) {Somebody/Someone left}. +> Not everybody left. (46) He married {three times/thrice}. +> Not four times. U. Do you think that the underlined expressions below violate any Gricean maxims? 1. I honestly didn t see anybody enter the room before the murder happened. 2. I m not lying when I say that I think Grandma is a fantastic percussionist. V. Grice noted that his maxims apply to non-linguistic interaction between people. Which of the following observations about non-linguistic behaviour corresponds to which of the maxims? 1. If you want me to drive your car and the car is locked in the garage, you would give me the keys to the garage as well as to the car. 2. If I am making dinner and you want me to help you, you would pass me ingredients for the dinner being made, and not a good book. 3. If you are a piano teacher giving Mary her first piano lesson, you will not try to teach Mary a very complicated piece. 4. If I obviously want to put sugar in my coffee, and there is no spoon in the sugar jar, you would give me a spoon, not a falk or a trick rubber spoon that bends when you stick it in the sugar. 7 8

5 2.6 Scalar implicatures Revisions of Grice s work by Larry Horn (cf. Huang ch. 2 and Kearns ch. 11) (47) THE Q PRINCIPLE: Say as much as you can (without violating QUALITY and R PRINCIPLE) THE R PRINCIPLE: Say no more than you must (without violating QUALITY and Q PRINCIPLE) Consequences of the Q PRINCIPLE The hearer assumes that speaker has made the strongest statement possible. This usually generates an implicature and no more. This is relevant to Q-scales like those exemplified below. (Here <x,y> indicates that x is semantically stronger than, and therefore entails, y.) (48) a. <three, two, one> b. They have two children. [+> not three] (49) a. <all, most, many, some> b. Many of the people here have written a text message in the last 24 hours. (50) a. <hot, warm> b. The weather was warm that day. (51) a. <the, a> b. Everybody has their own opinion about a US President. W. Why does none not belong in the Q-scale in (49)a)? X. Suggest other members of Q-scales associated with the underlined expressions below. 1. It is possible that Jane will win. 2. I believe he will arrive soon. 3. How did the exam go? - I passed. 4. I tried to clean the silver. 5. The photographs are similar. 6. [at 9 a.m., to person wanting doctor s appointment ASAP]: You can see the doctor at midday. 7. [teacher to school student]: The essay is due next Tuesday. 8. She limited herself to three coffees per day. Y. How is the Q principle relevant to the interpretation of or as it relates to that of and in the following examples. 1. He plays guitar or sings. 2. He plays guitar and sings. 3. Speaker A: He plays guitar or sings. Speaker B: You re right: he does both. b) Maxim of relevance: (56) I went to Berlin last week. The hotel was good. (+> the hotel referred to was the one that I stayed at on that trip and in Berlin.) (57) It s an old vase and on the base of the vessel are four Chinese characters. (+> vessel=vase.) c) World knowledge: (58) He doesn t drink. (+> He doesn t drink alcohol.) Z. Find R implicatures for (the underlined parts of) the following. 1. Bush is coming to Europe. 2. the nude bathing opponents 3. the government drug policy 4. he s sitting at the desk B. If two expressions x and y can express the same thing, and y is longer than x, then the use of y will create an implicature that x does not hold, often suggesting a non-stereotypical situation. (59) a. The cd is {inside/in} the computer. [inside +> not in cd drive] b. The chair is {underneath/under} the table. c. The saucepan is {on top of/on} the stove. (60) a. Mervyn ceased to be in the bank and came to be in the supermarket. b. Mervyn went from the bank to the supermarket. (61) a. The soldier caused the prisoner to die. b. The soldier killed the prisoner. Qualifications about Q scales: on a Q scale, a stronger expression won t block a weaker expression if (i) the expressions aren t from the same register/variety of the language and (ii) if the stronger expression is longer. (52) a. <iff, if> b. He will go to the party if Jane goes. (53) a. <be a native speaker of (a language), speak (a language)> b. She speaks Russian Consequences of the R PRINCIPLE A. In apparent violation of the Q Principle, speakers often choose expressions which are less specific than what they want to say because they realise that a more specific statement would be redundant. Reasons/examples for this (some from Huang, p.47ff): a) An implicature leads the hearer to assume that the speaker is referring to a stereotypical situation: (54) I was in the supermarket. I pushed the trolley to the checkout. (+> Trolley had stuff in it, and I was going to pay for it.) (55) I moved the car out of the garage. (+> By driving it, not pushing it.) 9 10

6 3 Presupposition Presupposition (preliminary definition): A proposition associated with a sentence which is assumed to be true even if the sentence is negated. (>> indicates a presupposition) (62) a. They realised that that Ann was right. >> Ann was right. b. They did not realise that Ann was right. >> Ann was right. (63) a. The present king of France is bald. >> There is a king of France now. b. The present king of France is not bald. >> There is a king of France now. (64) a. I forgot to shut the window. >> I should have shut it. b. I did not forget to shut the window. >> I should have shut it. Presuppositions are triggered by particular words (e.g. those underlined above). AA. Factive verbs like realise in (62) above presuppose that their complement clauses are true, while non-factive verbs like think do not. Replace realise in (62) above with the expressions below and decide whether they are factive or not. regret, decide, remember, believe, notice, acknowledge, claim, be certain, be disappointed BB. What presuppositions are triggered by the underlined words in the sentences below? If the answer is not obvious, consider the (non-)negated form of the sentence. 1. Fred stopped buying newspapers. 2. Jane managed to get sick. 3. Clive rang before / after Louise left the office. 4. If cows could sing, the areas around this town would be culturally interesting. 5. Who were you speaking to a minute ago? 6. It isn t Al Quaida that is trying to ruin my life. 7. What Grandma blew up was not my car. 8. Frankie didn t leave the room. 9. She didn t buy THAT book. [capitals indicate stress] 10. Gertrude called Egbert a conservative before HE insulted HER. CC. Identify (the triggers for) the unwanted presuppositions in the examples below. Reformulate them to eliminate the presuppositions. 1. [spokesman for a company:] The papers spread rumours about the fact that our company exploits developing countries, but we say that they should not do so. 2. CUTHBERT: That you didn t ring me shows that you think I am a boring loser. CUTHBERT S ADMIRER: That I didn t ring was not because you are a boring loser. 3. [letter to tax office:] In your letter of the 2 nd of May, my attempt to claim fraudulent tax deductions was the illegal action which you accused me of. DD. What presupposition in the quotation below might lay Bush open to the accusation of deliberate deception, given the fact that the evidence for Bush s claim consisted solely of letters between officials in Iraq and Niger which were later acknowledged to be forgeries? The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. [G.W. Buch, State of the Union address 2003] 2 EE. Answers to yes/no questions like the example below are considered a test for presuppositions. Why? Did you manage to put poison in anyone s drink? The notion presupposition compared to other notions Entailment: A proposition which inevitably follows from the meaning of another proposition: (65) They raised the prices. The prices rose. (66) Martha got a degree in medicine. Martha got a degree. Presuppositions compared to entailments: Entailments, unlike presuppositions, are affected by negation. This can be illustrated by comparing the following example with its negated variant. (67) I put the car in the garage. The car ended up in the garage. >> The car was not in the garage at the relevant time. Presuppositions compared to implicatures: Implicatures can be affected by negation and are nondetachable (unlike presuppositions, which are intimately associated with particular lexical items). Cancellation of presuppositions Presuppositions can (like implicatures) be cancelled if they contradict world knowledge, semantic entailments present in the context, or if they are explicitly denied or called into question. (68) He didn t stop buying newspapers because he s never bought one in his whole life. (69) He doesn t regret deceiving his wife because he never deceived her. (70) Now that John s love affairs are being discussed on TV, I bet John regrets being married at least if he IS married. (71) If he doesn t own a car, the petrol prices won t make him regret buying one. FF. What is the difference in the presuppositions associated with before in the examples below? Speculate on what is responsible for the distinction. 1. She went to Africa before she finished her first novel. 2. She died before she finished her first novel. 3. She died before she reached the hospital. 4. We hope these irresponsible lunatics will be voted out of office before they start World War III. 4. [instructions for computer software:] When you experience difficulties with this product, please visit our website. 5. [Non-native speaker at customs at airport:] Why do you expect to find the heroin in my suitcase? 11 2 Example from Wechsler, S The Pragmatics of Political Deception. Handout. Available under 12