Pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning and speaker meaning. It examines how context contributes to meaning. Some key concepts in pragmatics include deixis, which examines words like I, you, here, and now that depend on context; presupposition, which are assumptions in language; speech acts, which are actions performed through language like requests or promises; and politeness, which is using language to respect face or self-image. Pragmatics analyzes how people communicate beyond just the words themselves.

1. Pragmatics
Mian Abdul-Rahman
Lecturer (Dept. of English)

2. Introduction
There are other aspects of meaning that depend more on
context and the communicative intentions of speakers.
Communication clearly depends on not only recognizing the
meaning of words in an utterance, but also recognizing what
speakers mean by their utterances. The study of what speakers
mean, or “speaker meaning,” is called pragmatics.
e.g. The cathedral ruined in the war, Brown (1998).
War of 1745 with the English instead of Second World War.

3. Continue…
Pragmatics is the study of “invisible” meaning, or how we
recognize what is meant even when it isn’t actually said or
written.
In order for that to happen, speakers (or writers) must be able
to depend on a lot of shared assumptions and expectations
when they try to communicate.
Pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning.
From the perspective of pragmatics, more is always being
communicated than is said.

4. Continue…

5. Context
As, pragmatics is concerned with context and there are
different types of context.
Physical Context
Linguistic Context
Physical context, is the location “out there” where we
encounter words and phrases (e.g. the word BANK on a wall
of a building is understood as a financial institution).
Linguistic context, also known as co-text is the set of other
words used in the same phrase or sentence (e.g. steep bank)

6. Deixis
There are some very common words in our language that can’t
be interpreted at all if we don’t know the context. These are
words such as here and there, yesterday, as well as pronouns
such as he and she. Same is the case with sentences e.g. You’ll
have to bring it back tomorrow because she isn’t here today.
Such expressions are technically known as deictic expressions
(also known as indexicals), from the Greek word deixis, which
means “pointing” via language.

7. Types of Deixis
Person deixis (i.e. used to indicate people): me, you, him,
her, us, them, that woman, those idiots
Spatial deixis (i.e. used to indicate location): here, there,
beside you, near that, above your head
Temporal deixis (i.e. used to indicate time): now, then, last
week, later, tomorrow, yesterday

8. Continue…
Deixis is clearly a form of referring that is tied to the speaker’s
context with the most basic distinction between deictic
expressions being ‘near speaker’ versus ‘away from speaker’. In
English the ‘near speaker’, or proximal terms, are ‘this’, ‘here’,
‘now’. The ‘away from speaker’, or distal terms, are ‘that’,
‘there’, ‘then’. Proximal terms are typically interpreted in terms
of the speaker’s location, or the deictic center, so that ‘now’ is
generally understood as referring to some point or period in time
that has the time of the speaker’s utterance at its center.

9. Reference
We assumed that the use of words to refer to people, places and
times was a simple matter. However, words themselves don’t
refer to anything. People refer. So, reference is defined as an
act by which a speaker (or writer) uses language to enable a
listener (or reader) to identify something. To perform an act of
reference, we can use proper nouns (Chomsky, Jennifer,
Whiskas), other nouns in phrases (a writer, my friend, the cat)
or pronouns (he, she, it).
It is sometimes assumed that these words identify someone or
something uniquely, but it is more accurate to say that, for each
word or phrase, there is a “range of reference.”

10. Inference
We can use names associated with things (salad) to refer to
people e.g. Mr. Spinach Salad, and use names of people
(Chomsky, Calvin Klein) to refer to things e.g. Can I borrow
your Iqbal?. The key process here is called inference. An
inference is additional information used by the listener to
create a connection between what is said and what must be
meant.

11. Anaphora
Consider the following example:
‘We saw a funny home video about a boy washing a puppy in a
small bath. The puppy started struggling and shaking and the boy
got really wet’.
The second (or subsequent) referring expression is known as
anaphora (“referring back”). The first mention is called the
antecedent. So, in the above example, a boy, a puppy and a small
bath are antecedents and The puppy, the boy, he, it and the bath
are anaphoric expressions.

12. Continue…
There is a much less common pattern, called cataphora,
which reverses the antecedent–anaphora relationship by
beginning with a pronoun (It), then later revealing more
specific information. This device is more common in stories,
as in this beginning: It suddenly appeared on the path a little
ahead of me, staring in my direction and sniffing the air. An
enormous grizzly bear was checking me out.

13. Presupposition
Presupposition is what a speaker (or writer) assumes is true or
known by a listener (or reader).
If someone tells you Your brother is waiting outside, there is an
obvious presupposition that you have a brother. And if you are
asked the question When did you stop smoking?, there are at
least two presuppositions involved. In asking this question, the
speaker presupposes that you used to smoke and that you no
longer do so.

14. Continue…
One of the tests used to check for the presuppositions
underlying sentences involves negating a sentence with a
particular presupposition and checking if the presupposition
remains true. Whether you say My car is a wreck or the
negative version My car is not a wreck, the underlying
presupposition (I have a car) remains true despite the fact
that the two sentences have opposite meanings. This is called
the “constancy under negation” test for identifying a
presupposition.

15. Speech Acts
This concept was proposed by John Langshaw Austin in 1962
one of the founders of pragmatic and later developed by John
R. Searle in 1969. They believe that language is not only used
to inform or to describe things, it is often used “to do things”,
to perform acts. In other words actions performed via
utterances are generally called speech acts.
Actions performed via utterances are generally called speech
acts and, in English, are commonly given more specific labels,
such as apology, complaint, compliment, invitation, promise,
or request.

16. Continue…
John Austin further distinguished three acts in one single
speech act or event we perform:
1. Illocutionary Act
2. Locutionary Act
3. Perlocutionary Act

17. Illocutionary Act
The illocutionary force is the speaker’s intention behind the
production of an utterance including its communicative point
and attitudes involved. It is some kind of intended message
that a speaker assigns to the sentence he utters.
e.g. “I promise not to be late again”

18. Locutionary Act
It can be defined as producing a meaningful linguistic
expression, uttering a sentence. It is the saying of something
which is meaningful and can be understood.
e.g. ‘your hands are dirty’
If you have difficulty with actually forming the sounds and
words to create a meaningful utterance (because you are a
foreigner of tongue-tied) then you might fail to produce a
locutionary act. It often happens when we learn a foreign
language.

19. Perlocutionary Act
It is the actual effect, an action or state of mind brought
about by or as a consequence of saying something
e.g. if I say ‘please open the window’ and you do so, I
have achieved my perlocutionary aim.

20. Continue…
Locutionary act:
there’s a lion in this field_ just saying it
Illocutionary act:
the ‘force’ of an utterance
there’s a lion in this field_ warning
Perlocutionary act:
the ‘effect’ of an utterance
there’s a lion in this field_ hearer is frightened, hearer avoids
going into the field

21. Continue…
This theory was further classified by John Searle. He states that
the taxonomy used by Austin is defective, especially in it’s
lack of clear criteria for distinguishing one kind of
illocutionary force from another.
Often the same utterances can have different illocutionary
force (intended function) in different contexts.
I predict that I’ll see you later
Ex: I’ll see you later I promise you that I’ll see you later
I warn you that I’ll see you later

22. Classification of Speech Acts
Searle divides illocutionary acts into five types:
Directive
Commisive
Representative/Assertive
Declarative
Expressive

23. Directive
Here the speaker tries to make the hearer do the act by:
asking, ordering, commanding, requesting, inviting,
demanding etc.
Example:
1. Give me your pen
2. Leave the town immediately

24. Commisive
Here the speaker commits himself or herself to the future
course of action by: promising, refusing, swearing,
guarantee, threatening etc.
Example:
1. I swear to tell the truth
2. I will repay the money

25. Representative/Assertive
The speaker asserts a proposition to be true by affirming,
believing, concluding, denying, reporting, stating etc.
Example:
1. An accident just happened down town
2. He is telling the truth

26. Declarative
The utterance made by speakers by altering the:
a) external status
b) condition of an object
c) situation or context
Example:
1. The class is dismissed
2. You are fired

27. Expressive
Here the speaker expresses an attitude towards or about state
of affairs by thanking, congratulating, apologizing,
praising etc.
Examples:
1. I apologize for not being on time
2. I must say your dress looks delightful

28. Politeness
In the study of linguistic politeness, the most relevant
concept is “face.” Your face, in pragmatics, is your public
self-image. This is the emotional and social sense of self that
everyone has and expects everyone else to recognize.
Politeness can be defined as showing awareness and
consideration of another person’s face.

29. Continue…
If you say something that represents a threat to another
person’s self-image, that is called a face-threatening act. For
example, if you use a direct speech act to get someone to do
something (Give me that paper!), you are behaving as if you
have more social power than the other person. If you don’t
actually have that social power (e.g. you’re not a military
officer or prison warden), then you are performing a face
threatening act.

30. Negative & Positive Face
Negative face is the need to be independent and free from
imposition. Positive face is the need to be connected, to
belong, to be a member of the group. So, a face-saving act
that emphasizes a person’s negative face will show concern
about imposition (I’m sorry to bother you . . .; I know you’re
busy, but . . .). A face-saving act that emphasizes a person’s
positive face will show solidarity and draw attention to a
common goal (Let’s do this together . . .; You and I have the
same problem, so . . .).

31. References
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. New York, USA: Oxford
University Press.
Yule, G. (2014). The Study of Language (5th ed.). New York,
USA: Cambridge University Press.