期刊文献+

Socio-cognitive Approach to Pragmatics 被引量:16

Socio-cognitive Approach to Pragmatics
原文传递
导出
摘要 Communication is not as smooth a process as current pragmatic theories depict it.In Rapaport's words "We almost always fail .Yet we almost always nearly succeed: This is the paradox of communication(Rapaport,2003:402)." This paper claims that there is a need for an approach that is able to explain this "bumpy road" by analyzing both the positive and negative features of the communicative process.The paper presents a socio-cognitive approach(SCA) to pragmatics that takes into account both the societal and individual factors including cooperation and egocentrism that,as claimed here,are not antagonistic phenomena in interaction.This approach is considered an alternative to current theories of pragmatics that do not give an adequate account of what really happens in the communicative process.They consider communication an idealistic,cooperation-based,context-dependent process in which speakers are supposed to carefully construct their utterances for the hearer taking into account all contextual factors and hearers do their best to figure out the intentions of the speakers.This approach relies mainly on the positive features of communication including cooperation,rapport and politeness while almost completely ignores the untidy,trial-and-error nature of communication and the importance of prior contexts captured in the individual use of linguistic units.The overemphasis on cooperative,societal,contextual factors has led to disregard individual factors such as egocentrism and salience that are as important contributors to the communicative process as cooperation,context and rapport.The socio-cognitive approach is presented as a theoretical framework to incorporate and reconcile two seemingly antagonistic sides of the communicative process and explain the dynamic interplay of prior and actual situational contexts. Communication is not as smooth a process as current pragmatic theories depict it. In Rapaport's words “We almost always fail [ ...]. Yet we almost always nearly succeed: This is the paradox of communication ( Rapaport, 2003: 402).” This paper claims that there is a need for an approach that is able to explain this “bumpy road” by analyzing both the positive and negative features of the communicative process. The paper presents a socio-cognitive approach (SCA) to pragmatics that takes into account both the societal and individual factors including cooperation and egocentrism that, as claimed here, are not antagonistic phenomena in interaction. This approach is considered an alternative to current theories of pragmatics that do not give an adequate account of what really happens in the communicative process. They consider communication an idealistic, cooperation- based, context-dependent process in which speakers are supposed to carefully construct their utterances for the hearer taking into account all contextual factors and hearers do their best to figure out the intentions of the speakers. This approach relies mainly on the positive features of communication including cooperation, rapport and politeness while almost completely ignores the untidy, trial-and-error nature of communication and. the importance of prior contexts captured in the individual use of linguistic units. The overemphasis on cooperative, societal, contextual factors has led to disregard individual factors such as egocentrism and salience that are as important contributors to the communicative process as cooperation, context and rapport. The socio-cognitive approach is presented as a theoretical framework to incorporate and reconcile two seemingly antagonistic sides of the communicative process and explain the dynamic interplay of prior and actual situational contexts.
出处 《外国语》 CSSCI 北大核心 2010年第5期2-20,共19页 Journal of Foreign Languages
关键词 CONTEXT COOPERATION EGOCENTRISM ATTENTION salience context cooperation egocentrism attention salience
  • 相关文献

参考文献66

  • 1Arnseth, Hans Christian and I. Ivar Solheim 2002. Making sense of shared knowledge. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Proceedings of CSCL 2002, Computer Support for Collaborative Learning: Foundations for a CSCL Community, pp. 102-110, (Boulder, Colorado, January2002).
  • 2Arundale, Robert B. 1999. An alternative model and ideology of communication for an alternative to politeness theory. Pragmatics 9:119 -154.
  • 3Arundale, Robert B. 2008. Against (Gricean) intentions at the heart of human interaction. Intercultural Pragmatics 5 (2) : 231 -256.
  • 4Bach, Kent. 1994. Conversational implicature. Mind and Language 9:124 - 162.
  • 5Bach, Kent. 2001. You don't say? Synthese 128:15 -44.
  • 6Barr, Dale J. & Boaz Keysar. 2005. Making sense of how we make sense: the Paradox of egocentrism in language use. In Colston, Herbert L., Albert, N. Kayz. ( Eds. ), Figurative Language Comprehension. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp. 21 -43.
  • 7Barsalou, Lawrence W. 1993. Challenging assumption about concepts [ commentary]. Cognitive Development 8: 169 - 180.
  • 8Barsalou, Lawrence. 1999. Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22:577 -609.
  • 9Burton-Roberts, N. 2005. Robyn Carston on semantics, pragmatics and 'encoding'. Journal of Linguistics 41: 389 - 407.
  • 10Burton - Roberts, N. 2006. Cancellation and intention. Newcastle Working Papers in Linguistics: 12 - 13:1 - 12.

同被引文献184

引证文献16

二级引证文献85

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部