M.A.K. Halliday
“A rich and adaptable instrument”
In an educational context the problem for linguistics is to elaborate some account of language that is relevant to the work of the English teacher.
It is not necessary, to sacrifice a generation of children, or event one class roomful, in order to demonstrate that particular preconceptions of language are inadequate or irrelevant. In place of a negative and somewhat hit and miss approach, a more fruitful procedure is to seek to establish certain general positive criteria of relevance. These will relate, ultimately, to the demand that we make of language in the course of our lives.
We tend to underestimate both the total extend and the functional diversity of the part played by language in the life of the child.
Perhaps the simplest of the child´s models of language, and one of the first to be evolved, is what we may call the instrumental model. The child becomes aware that language is used as a mean s of getting things done.
Language as an instrument of control has another side to it, since the child is well aware that language is also a means whereby others exercise control over him. Closely related to the instrumental model, therefore is the regulatory model of language. This refers to the use of language to regulatory behavior of others.
A single incident has little significance; but such general types or regulatory behavior; through repetition and reinforcement determine the child´s specific awareness of language as a means of behavioral control.
Closely related to the regulatory function of language it its function in social interaction , and the third of the models that we may postulate as forming part of the child´s image of language is the interactional model.
Language is used to define and consolidate the group , to include and to exclude, showing who is the one of us and who is nor, no impose status, and to contest status that is imposed and humor, ridicule, deception, persuasion, all the forensic and theatrical arts of language are bought into play .
Again there is a natural link here with another use of language, from which the child derives what we may call the personal model. This refers to his awareness of language as a form of his own individuality, in the process whereby the child becomes aware of himself, and in particular in the higher stages of the process, the development of his personality language playas an essential role. We are not talking here merely of expressive language, language used for the direct expression of feelings and attitudes, but also of the personal element in the interactional function of language since the shaping of the self trough interaction with others is very much a language-mediated process.
The child was heuristic model of language derived from his knowledge of how language has enable him to explore his environment.
The heuristic refers to language as a means of investigating reality a way of learning about things. This scarcely needs comment since every child makes quite obvious that is what language is for by his habit of constantly asking questions.
Imaginative models of language; and this provides some further elements of the metalanguage with words like story make up and pretend.
Language in its imaginative functions is not necessarily about anything at all; the child´s linguistically created environment does not have to be a make believe copy of the world of experience, occupied by people, things and events.
The dominant model it is very easily for the adult, when he attempts to formulate his ideas about the nature of language, to be simple unaware of most of what language means to the child; this is not because he no longer uses language in the same variety of different functions, but because only one of these functions in general, is the subject of conscious attentions, so that the corresponding models is the only to be externalized.
Pragmatics
For Charles Morris that pragmatics is the science of the relation of signs to their interpreters. Pragmatics is concerned not with language as system or product per se, but rather with the interrelationships between language form, messages and languages users.
In the code-model, communication is seen as an encoding-decoding process, when a code is system that enables the automatic pairing of messages (meanings, internal to senders and receivers), and signals (what physically transmitted, (sound, smoke visual, writing) between the sender and the receiver.
The code mode has the merit of describing one way in which communication can be achieved.
Pragmatic perspectivse on language use.
Pragmatic meaning
One task of pragmatics is to explain how participants in a dialogue such as the one above move from the decontextualized meanings of the words and phrases to a grasp of their meaning in context
Assigning reference in context
The process of Assigning reference also involves the interpretations of “deictic expression”. These are linguistic items that point to contextually salient referents without naming them explicitly.
Assigning sense in context
These observations show that contextual meaning (reference and sense) is not fully determined by the words are used: there is a gap between the meaning of the words used by the speaker and the thought that the speaker intends to express by using those words on a particular occasion.
Inferring illocutionary force
This theory which was generated by the philosopher John Austin (1975) and developed Josh Searle views language as a form of action, that when we speak, we do things like make requests, make statements, offer apologies and so on.
Working out implicated meaning.
Deriving an interpretations that satisfies the Co-operative principles is effected through the maxims which the communicator is presumed to abide by:
Truthfulness: (communicators should do their best to make contributions which are true).
Informativeness: (communicators should do their best to be adequately informative)
Relevance: (communicators should do their best to make contributions which are relevant)
Style: (communicators should do their best to make contributions which are appropriately short and clearly expressed)
Explaining the impact of social factors.
Leech proposes a set of “politeness maxims” such as the modesty maxim and the agreement maxim which operate in conjunction with the co operative maxims. They are worded as rules (for example minimize praise of self, maximize agreement between self and other), but in fact they aim to describe the interactional principles that underlie language use.
The pragmalinguistic perspective focuses on the linguistics strategies that are used to convey a given pragmatic meaning, whereas the sociopragmatic perspective focuses on the socially based assessments, beliefs and interactional principles that underlie peoples’ choice of strategies.
A sociopragmatic perspective focuses on the social judgment associated with such a scenario, for example what the relationship between the participants is and the social acceptability of reaching for food in such context.
Conversational patterns and structure.
An approach that starts from the commonsense observation that people take turns in conversation, and that relies on descriptions of naturally occurring data discover the rules involved in the patterning of conventional exchanges. The utterances in pair are ordered, in that the first member of a pair requires a second member.
The role of context
Context plays a major role in the communication process, and so important task for pragmatic theory is to elucidate this process, it is widely accepted that the following features of the situational context have a particularly crucial influence on people´s use of language:
The participants: their roles, the amounts of power differential between them, the degree of distance-closeness between them the number of people present.
The message content: how costly or beneficial the message is to the hearer and/or speaker, how face threatening it is whether it exceeds or stays within the rights and obligations of the relationship.
The communicative activity: how the norms of the activity influence language behavior such as right to talk questions, discourse structure, and level of formality.
Unfortunately, context is sometimes taken to be concrete aspects of the environment in which an exchange takes place and that have bearing on the communication process.
One of the main problems of pragmatic is to explain the constant updating of contextual assumptions in the course of a communicative exchange.
Pragmatics research: Pragmatics and methods
There a re two broad approaches to pragmatics, a cognitive-psychological approach and a social-psychological approach.
Cognitive pramatics are primarily intereted in exploring the relation between the decontextualized, linguistic meaning of utterances, what speakers mean by their utterances on given occassions, and how listeners interpreter those utterances on those given occasions.
