Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)
Cohesion and Coherence Major approaches to discourse analysis Group members Pham Thi Nguyet – K18C Trần Thị Thu Trang ( 85) – K18C Trần Thị Thu Trang ( 86) – K18C Dao Thi Sang – K18C Do Thi Thu Phuong – K18C Supervisor Pr Dr Nguyen Hoa AN INTRODUCTION TO DIFFERENT MAJOR APPROACHES TO DA 1 1 From Schiffrin’s view 1 2 From Nguyen Hoa’s view 1 4 MAJOR APPROACHES TO DA 2 1 The pragmatic approach 2 2 The speech act approach 2 3 The interactional and sociolinguistic approach 2 4 Functional vs Formal P.
Major approaches to discourse analysis Group members : Pham Thi Nguyet – K18C Trần Thị Thu Trang ( 85) – K18C Trần Thị Thu Trang ( 86) – K18C Dao Thi Sang – K18C Do Thi Thu Phuong – K18C Supervisor : Pr Dr Nguyen Hoa 1 AN INTRODUCTION TO DIFFERENT MAJOR APPROACHES TO DA 1.1 From Schiffrin’s view 1.2 From Nguyen Hoa’s view MAJOR APPROACHES TO DA 2.1 The pragmatic approach 2.2 The speech act approach 2.3 The interactional and sociolinguistic approach 2.4 Functional vs Formal Paradigms APPROACHES’ VIEW ON SOME ISSUES ( CENTRAL TO DA) 3.1 On structure and function 3.2 On context From Nguyen Hoa’s view (2003:79) Major approaches to DA Pragmatics Conversational analysis Interactional sociolingusitics Functional vs formal paradigms Ethnography of communication major approaches to DA s om n’ Fr fri hi ew Sc vi Speech act theory interactional sociolinguistics pragmatics ethnography of communication Conversational analysis variation analysis Pragmatic approach to DA • Be based primarily on the philosophical ideas of H.J.Grice Focuses: meaning, context and communication of constructed utterances in hypothetical context Why Pragmatics is an approach to DA? - Pragmatics is most concerned with analyzing speaker meaning at the level of utterances rather than text But utterances situated in context, pragmatics often ends up including discourse analysis and providing means of analyzing discourse along the way Meanings in Pragmatics Together with the literal meanings or propositional/ conventional meanings, these assumptions are the basis to draw specific inferences about intended meanings or speaker meanings Meanings in Pragmatics Grice’s pragmatic approach allows speaker meanings to be relatively free of conventional meanings What speaker intends to communicate needn’t be related to conventional at all, and not conventionally attached to the words being used • E.g Sam is a boy E.g Sam is a boy Expansion The speaker may intend to create in the hearer a recognition of the intention to convey that proposition about the world, i.e about Sam’s identity Replacement How speaker-meanings arise? Cooperative Principle ( CP) 10 Teacher: Freddy, what does this word say? Freddy: I don’t know Teacher: Well, if you don’t want to try someone else will Freddy? Freddy: Is that a “p” or a “b”? Teacher ( encouraging) it’s a “p” Freddy: Pen The teacher’s response: Well, if you don’t want to try someone else will” indicates her interpretation of Freddy’s I don’t know not only in terms of the literal meaning But also as an indication that Freddy did not wish to try to answer the question - However, I don’t know had final rising intonation which can be understood in African American community that Freddy need some encouragement - The teacher here did not retrieve the contextual presuppositions needed to accurately interpret Freddy’s message from his using rising intonation 30 Functional vs formal paradigms 31 There are two paradigms: functional and formal They provide different assumptions about the nature of language and goals of linguistics First language is functional in the sense that it communicates information or emotions Second, to this job, language has to behave as a unit; therefore it is formal Functional vs formal paradigms Consider the example: - Are you free for the party today? - I have to take my wife to see her mother 32 (Functional: express social and expressive meanings) (formal): question and answer Functional vs formal paradigms Hymes distinguishes between the two as follows: Formal - Structure of language as grammar - Analysis of code prior to analysis of use - Referential function, fully semanticized as norms - Elements & structures analytically arbitrary 33 Functional - Structure of speech as ways of speaking - Analysis of use prior to analysis of code - Lots of stylistic or social functions - Elements & structures as ethnographically appropriate Functional vs formal paradigms Formal -Functional differentiation of languages, varieties, styles - Speech community as matrix of code-repertoires, or speech styles (diversity) - Fundamental concepts taken as problematic and to be investigated 34 Functional -Functional equivalence of languages; all languages essentially equal -Single homogeneous code and community (replication of uniformity) - Fundamental concepts such as speech community, speech act, fluent speaker, functional of speech and of languages, taken for granted or arbitrarily postulated Functional vs formal paradigms 35 Formalists regard language primarily as a mental phenomenon Functionalists tend to regard it as a societal phenomenon Formalists tend to explain linguistic universals as deriving from a common genetic linguistic inheritance Functionalists to explain them as deriving from the universality of uses to which language is put in society Functional vs formal paradigms 36 Formalists explain children’s acquisition of language in terms of a built-in human capacity to learn language Functionalists explain in terms of the development of the child’s communicative needs and abilities in society Formalists study language as an autonomous system Functionalists study it in relation to social function Functional vs formal paradigms 37 In short, we can say that functionalism is based on two general assumptions A language has functions that are external to the linguistic system itself B External functions influence the internal organization of the linguistic system Formalism argue that functions not impinge on the internal organization of language (though social and cognitive) Language has two defining characteristics: autonomy and modularity APPROACHES’ VIEW ON structure and function Each approach depends upon both structure and function Begin with functions and end up incorporating structures 38 Speech act theory (a) S Do you want to go out for dinner at Rose restaurant? H: Yes (b) S: That’s a romantic restaurant H: Yes © S: Do you promise you’ll be there? H: Yes (a): the function of Yes is an answer to a question (b): the function of Yes is an agreement with an assertment ©: the function of Yes is making a promise Each of these functions is dependent upon the preceding act Identifying speech act function of an utterance often requires looking at where it occurs in relation to other utterances Speech act functions lead to discourse structure 39 Interactional sociolinguistics 40 (a) Are you free for lunch today? (b) I have to some work on discourse analysis all day (a) can have a number of functions resulting from different contexts – other than a questioning function It may be said to function as a display of solidarity with (b) ( conative function) and to display gender identity( an emotive function) by using a conventionalized form of indirectness to check on (b)’s availability If so, it would be impolite to respond negatively by just saying No it would be more appropriate to provide a reason for nonavailability Pragmatics Gricean pragmatics is a functional approach to discourse ( Levinson, 1983:97) A: Where’s Bill? B: There’s a yellow VW outside Sue’s house 41 B’s utterance violates the maxim of quantity and relevance Because we try to interpret B’s utterance as cooperative at some level, we infer that Bill may be at Sue’s house – We interpret that B’s utterance as an answer to A’s question Two utterances can be heard to create a sequential position or structure Put another way, the sequential identity / discourse structure emerges from the cooperative principle Different approaches to context 42 Different approaches make different assumptions about what aspects of context are relevant to the production and interpretation of utterances Speech act theory and pragmatics view context as “knowledge”, interactional sociolinguistics view context as “knowledge’ and as “situation” Context may help to separate multiple functions of utterances from one another References • • • • Grice H P.( 1975) Logic and conversation Speech Act New York Academic Press Levison, S (1983) Pragmatics Cambridge University Press Nguyễn Hịa(2003) Phân tích diễn ngơn Một số vấn đề lý luận phương pháp Schiffrin, D (1994) Approaches to discourse Oxford: Blackwell, 43 ` 44 ...1 AN INTRODUCTION TO DIFFERENT MAJOR APPROACHES TO DA 1.1 From Schiffrin’s view 1.2 From Nguyen Hoa’s view MAJOR APPROACHES TO DA 2.1 The pragmatic approach 2.2 The speech... relation to other utterances Speech act functions lead to discourse structure 39 Interactional sociolinguistics 40 (a) Are you free for lunch today? (b) I have to some work on discourse analysis. .. Paradigms APPROACHES? ?? VIEW ON SOME ISSUES ( CENTRAL TO DA) 3.1 On structure and function 3.2 On context From Nguyen Hoa’s view (2003:79) Major approaches to DA Pragmatics Conversational analysis