Linguistica inglese., Schemi e mappe concettuali di Linguistica Inglese

Scarica Linguistica inglese. e più Schemi e mappe concettuali in PDF di Linguistica Inglese solo su Docsity! INTRODUCTION. PRAGMATICS. “Let him have it” = gun or bullet? • What is 'it'? Literal or non-literal meaning of the utterance? • Issues that lie at the heart of pragmatics: • assignment of sense (eg. polysemy); • assignment of structural meaning; • assignment of reference. Sense assignment.
 “Catch the ball”.
 “We are going to the ball”.
 Sense assigned fitting with construction in the hearer's head. Sense assignment can be exploited for humour. Structural meaning.
 “The woman hit the man with the umbrella” syntactic ambiguity.
 [instrumental = hit with the umbrella], but also [prepositional phrase = the man with the umbrella]. Reference assignment.
 “He suggested meeting there the following day and reminded them to have it with them, that he would have it too”.
 Who is he? Where is there? Who are them? What is it? Utterance meaning.
 “I was coming back from Canada, driving through Customs, and the guy asked: "Do you have any firearms?" I said: "What do you need?"
 Request or inquiry? • Meanings cannot be straightforwardly decoded from words and structures with the help of dictionaries or through semantic or morphosyntactic analysis. • Lexical meaning, dictionary meaning and speakers' meaning might not coincide. • Pragmatic and semantic 'meaning' are not the same. Pragmatics.
 The study of how more gets communicated than is said, the 'invisible meaning of utterances.
 The study of contextual meaning, it is concerned with context and with how the context influences what it is being said.
 The study of interactional meaning, both speakers and hearers are involved: speakers er and hearers infer, speakers mean and hearers understand, or speakers 'code' and hearers decode, the generation of meaning is the product of interaction. “In the corridor outside my room 1 once picked up a piece of card on which someone had printed OUT OF ORDER in large letters. Now, from my knowledge of the English language (that is, from my abstract linguistic knowledge), I know that the phrase out of order has a range of possible senses, including not in the correct sequence (c.g. of books on a library shelf), not permissible (e.g. of a question at a meeting) or not working (c.g. of a machine). My knowledge of the world (which here included knowledge of the sort of things people in my department usually put up notices about) told me that the last sense was by far the most likely and I surmised that the writer was warning somconc that something was not (or had not been) working. Assigning reference determining what was being referred to — was more difficult. I decided that the notice must refer to a machine in the corridor where I had found it, but there were several possible candidates, including a coffee machine, a laser printer and a photocopier. 1 Moreover, since I had no idea when the message had been written and whether the notice had fallen off the machine or had been removed deliberately, I had no means of knowing whether or not the warning still applied”.
 From Jenny Thomas, Meaning in Interaction (London and New York: Longman, 1995), 13. "In the late 1960s, two elderly American tourists who had been touring Scotland reported that, in their travels, they had come to a Scottish town in which there was a great ruined cathedral. As they stood in the ruins, they saw a small boy and they asked him when the cathedral had been so badly damaged. He replied in the war. Their immediate interpretation, in the 1960s, was that he must be referring to the Second World War which had ended only twenty years earlier. But then they thought that the ruins looked as if they had been in their dilapidated state for much longer than that, so they asked the boy which war he meant. He replied the war with the English, which, they eventually discovered, had formally ended in 1745." T-P-S: What aspect of the meaning of the word WAR do the interlocutors share and what do they not share? The scope of pragmatics. The 'narrow view'.
 - Distinguishes pragmatics as the area dealing with context, but underlines aspects in common with syntax and semantics. - “micro-view" of context = users and interpreters but not social relations and situations. - In this view pragmatics = another component of a theory of language. - Topics: reference and deixis, presupposition, speech acts, implicature. - Linguists: eg. Paul Grice, Sperber and Wilson. 
 The 'broad view'. • Pragmatics as a "general cognitive, social, and cultural perspective on linguistic phenomena in 
 relation to their usage in forms of behaviour" (Verschueren, 1999). • Pragmatics = superordinate field with linguistics and other disciplines as subfields, not only 
 within linguistics but cognitive, social or cultural fields too. • The ”macro-view” of context, actual usage and how cultures, institutions, social situations influence and are influenced by language. 
 Often pragmatic studies involve dynamic interrelation between the two.
 Syntax = mono-rel. between linguistic signs.
 Semantics = dyadic rel. between linguistic signs and referents.
 Pragma = triadic relationship between linguistic signs, things in the world, their users and interpreters. 
 Pragmatics of Englishes.
 "Pluricentric languages like English are particularly interesting in the study of pragmatics because each society which uses this language adheres to different socialisation norms, and IrE is considerably different from other varieties of English" (Hickey, 2017).
 Irish English › The Pragmatics of Irish English (2005) by Anne Barron and Klaus P. Schneider Anna Wierzbicka and cross-cultural pragmatics. It has to do with intercultural issues.
 Variational pragmatics = relatively recent development in the study of pragmatics of English which considers variation [cf. the notion of 'variation' in our other modules]. 
 Different cultures and languages (or language varieties) have different ways of using language and conveying pragmatic meaning > (1985) "Different cultures, different languages, different speech acts: English vs. Polish" › Crosscultural Pragmatics (1991)
 2 • “I'll come over in a few minutes”. 
 Answering machine: "I am not here at the moment, please leave a message". The situation: presumably the person is calling someone asking them to come over for a coffee, we have to study and understand the situation. • Personal deixis.
 Operates with a three part division: 1 (speaker, centre) YOU (hearer) OTHERS (party being talked about) › Person very important in English because a subject always has to be present: compulsory, you and I in core lexicon for frequency (2nd and 3rd position after "the" › definite expressions) l and YOU = deictic, proximal, both present in the moment.
 OTHERS, i.e. she/he/they = anaphoric (although they can be used deictically), not sharing the context a that moment, elsewhere › in certain languages these expressions of proximity/ distance are also used to mark social relations › social deixis (tu vs Lei in Italian). In English social deixis relies on vocatives: names, titles, eg. Sharon vs Mrs Marsh vs madam. We have elements through which we can establish social expressions, social deixis. 
 • Spatial deixis.
 It operates with a proximity/distance contrast: here/there, this/ that › not necessarily restricted to physical spatial relations, but also proximity in terms of 'nearness' in time and psychologically (also empathetic deixis). 
 It’s expressed through adverbs (here, there), demonstratives (this, that, these, those) It’s a two-term system not in all languages (and neither has it always been so in English).
 • Temporal deixis. 
 Typically expresses relationship between deictic centre and time of the speaker's utterance expressed through adverbs (now, then, today, tomorrow, yesterday, next year...) and verb tense (I live here, If I had a yacht, she's going to get it) › the psychological basis of time deixis seems to be similar to that of place, i.e. Temporal events can be treated as objects moving in space away from the speaker (the weeks gone by) or towards the speaker (the incoming week), the centre is always the speaker. Referring expressions can help construct context, because the centre is the speaker and so the psychological hypothesis of the speaker influences the choice, the selection of the expressions. The speaker influences the choice of the expressions in the hearer’s/interlocutor’s mind. It also depends on the common ground shared by the interlocutors. There are maxims that interlocutors have to respect. l1] “She came along the alley and up the back steps the way she always used to”. “The way she always used to” it presupposes that there is a relationship between the speaker7writer and the person he is talking about.
 [2] “So we lost the Rams and the Raiders (= two professional football teams of Los Angeles). Lost our innocence. But hold the flowers. Put away the handkerchiefs. Stop the sobbing. We still have the Rose Bowl (= Los Angeles stadium), haven't we?”. Without the explanations in the brackets someone could possibly not understand, there’s not necessarily a shared knowledge between the speaker and a possible interlocutor. The choice of referring expression is influenced by the speaker's assumptions about the status of the referent in the hearer's mind i.e. it is activated, has already been mentioned, shared situational context). 
 • “Hello, is that the maternity hospital?”. • “Yes”.
 • “Can you send an ambulance round, the wife is about to have a baby”. • “Is this her first baby?”.
 • “No, this is her husband”. 5 The choice of referring expression in influenced by assumptions regarding the common ground shared by the interlocutors, 
 Which is the referring expression in the following examples and what does it refer to?
 [1] “Can I borrow your Fisiak? Yes it’s in my bag.” (Book, Fisiak is the name of the author). [2] "My eleven-thirty cancelled so I had an early lunch.” (It’s an appointment, they’re referring to it using the time of the appointment). [3] “Where is the Caesar salad sitting? By the window.” (The problem here is that Caesar is in capital letter, it can be the person who ordered the salad or it can refer to the container of the salad). For each of these sentences there’s a particular issue with the sense which is given by pragmatic elements. Referring expressions don't always refer. 0. “You cannot trust trains to be on time these days”. Trains are not human being and so what’s this process? We assign human related properties to objects, “these days” it’s a deictic expression and it means “nowadays” in general.
 1. “There was a good crowd there”. “Good crowd” means that there were a lot of people, “there” is a spatial deixis which refers to something that they have said before.
 2. "Well, then I'll have a notice sent to you”. Here we have a personal deixis by means of the pronoun “you”, it means that maybe they are talking but the relationship is established within the centre “I” and the “You”.
 3. "Now if after a time they found that that wasn't making any impact on the company they would call for an all out strike”. We have “they”, “now” and “that”, we have 3 deictic elements: now is time, they is a person and that is a demonstrative pronoun. Schema theory. 
 Theory of knowledge formulated by cognitive psychologists (also referred to as frames/framing theory, scripts, scenarios...) attempting to account for how people comprehend, learn from and remember meanings in texts.
 1. Through Schema/schemata, schema theory: we have a schemata in our mind enable us to construct an interpretation that contains more information than what is received from the language itself. When we approach text we have to made form the gaps from our schemata, info that we have in our mind and we draw from this schemata in order to understand what we read or listen to; when we read, listen to texts we supply extra bits of information from our schematic knowledge: “Rocky slowly got up from the mat, planning his escape. He hesitated a moment and thought. Things were not going well. What bothered him most was being held, especially since the charge against him had been weak. He considered his present situation. The lock that held him was strong but he thought he could break it. He knew, however, that his timing would have to be perfect.”
 Who is Rocky? What is the topic of this passage? We may presuppose that Rocky is a dog, “Things were not going well...” maybe this is one element that may us thing that may it isn’t a dog, at the end we understand that Rocky is a prisoner, a person, who is been held there. So tetre’s a schema that have to be activated, once activated, a schema gives rise to expectations, which are knowledge based associative inferences (our experiences , knowledge) Identify the referring expressions/presuppositions in the following texts. “The chair for visitors has been replaced at the table. Marchbanks, alone and idle, is trying to find out how the typewriter works.
 Hearing someone at the door, he steals guiltily away to the window and pretends to be absorbed in the view. Miss Garnett, carrying the notebook in which she takes down Morell's letters in short- hand from his dictation, sits down at the typewriter and sets to work transcribing them, much too busy to notice Eugene. When she begins the second line she stops and stares at the machine.” 6 Ex. “There is no way but this, Sir Andrew.”
 SIR ANDREW
 "Will either of you bear me a challenge to him?”
 SIR TOBY BELCH
 “Go, write it in a martial hand; be curst and brief; it is no matter how witty, so it be eloquent and fun of invention: taunt him with the licence of ink: if thou thou'st him some thrice, it shall not be amiss; and as many lies as will lie in thy sheet of paper, although the sheet were big enough for the bed of Ware in England, set 'em down: go, about it.
 Let there be gall enough in thy ink, though thou write with a goose-pen, no matter: about it.”
 SIR ANDREW
 “Where shall I find you?”
 SIR TOBY BELCH
 “We'll call thee at the cubiculo: go.”
 Exit SIR ANDREW”
 —> piece taken from a play, “thoust” stated for the 2 pers sing, “them”; lot of deiectic expression, we can infer but we don’t know precisely what is going on, we can presuppose that Sir Toby is inviting Andrew to write a letter (quite tough letter), he encourages him to be tough and we understand that there are different characters even if only two of them are on the stage, “it, him, them” many personal deiects and “thous’t” as “you” which put social distance in to the exchange Identify the referring expressions in the following dialogue and group them as definite expressions, deictics or anaphoric expressions:
 * Oh look at that, the Bay View over there. That's the hotel where Judy is having her reception. * Oh, right yeah.
 * And if I don't loose enough weight I won't be there.
 * That's a lie!
 Identify the presuppositions in the examples below. Which linguistic forms trigger the presuppositions? What type of presuppositions are they?
 “He claims to be ill”.
 “I started running”.
 “When did you two meet?”
 “Does your dog bite?” Referring expressions: I and She, she.
 Deiects “that’s pulled down” we presuppose that the person who us answering knows who’s the 7 Implicature. In conversations speakers may: • Write or say exactly what they mean. • Write or say exactly the opposite of what they mean. • Write or say exactly what they mean without being explicit › implicated meaning which gives rise to implicature. Conventional implicature = the meaning is implicated in particular words or phrases: “She was cursed with a stammer, unmarried but far from stupid…”; “They were poor and yet very happy”; “Even if young he is really wise”. Conversational implicature = set of principled expectations by which speakers make implicated meaning available to hearers, with reference to the cooperative principle. The cooperative principle is linked to Grice and is the basis for his pragmatics theory, with this principle we imply that speakers… This is done through the exploitation of conversational maxims. According to the cooperative principle, speakers "make their conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which they are engaged" (Grice, Logic and conversation, 1975). The cooperative principle is further elaborated into conversational maxims: -Quantity; -Quality , in this case it’s more a principle than a maxim, that is the principle of sincerity; -Relation; -Manner. Conversational implicature arises through the exploitation of these maxims. Through the conversational implicature the speaker makes available for the hearer some kind of extra meaning: A. Have you met Eric's parents? B. I met his mother A. Is Eric a nice colleague? B. He is always on time COMMENT: B overspecifies, or in other words offers more information than required, thus exploiting the maxim of quantity. The failure to observe quantity generates an implicature, something sounds off, something like, why hasn't B just said yes or no? From the implicature triggered by the failure to obs. quantity we understand more than is said = B has not met Eric's father,or it was more important to meet his mother, etc. COMMENT: B does not provide information relevant to the question asked he exploits the maxim of relation. This apparent failure to observe the cooperative principle generates an implicature. B 10 finds a strategy to communicate more than is said = that the colleague is not nice, that being on time is the only positive thing about him, etc. Non-observance of maxims. These are based on different particular context. FLOUTING (or exploiting) the speaker blatantly fails to observe a maxim because s/he wishes to prompt the hearer to look for a meaning. Flouting is the form of non-observance that generates the conversational implicature. Can be used for humour. OPTING OUT for legal or ethical reasons, generally explicit reference is made to the fact that one is opting out “it was told to me in confidence, I cannot tell, I won't say any more, no comment”. SUSPENDING taboos, refraining from uttering certain names (You-know-who for Voldemort, The Scottish Play' for Macbeth), not speaking ill of others, not mentioning the dead, not being clear in poetry... suspension is bound to culture and context. INFRINGING inability, problem, mistake, slips. VIOLATING deliberate lie, intentional misleading. [1] An English athlete, Dianne Modahl, the defending Commonwealth Games 800 metres champion, pulled out of her opening race and returned to England. Caroline Searle, press officer for the England team, said: "She has a family bereavement; her grandmother has died". The next day it was announced that Ms Modahl had been sent home following positive test for drugs. [2] A. You've got your paper. B. Yes. A. Is it nice? B. Not bad. A. What does it say? B. Nothing much. [3] [4] A. That cake looks nice B. Would you like some? [5] A. How is that gorgeous girlfriend of yours? B. She is no longer my girlfriend. 11 A. Oh, dear. I wouldn't get too gloomy about it. Rumour has it she never stopped bonking old Toby de Lisle... B. She is now my wife. Culpeper and Haugh chapters: 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 (not 4.3.1 and 4.3.2) [1] A. 'Where have the meatballs disappeared?' B. 'The dog looks very happy' Are the maxims observed in this example? If not, how? [2] What do we mean by implicature in Pragmatics? How many types of implicature can you remember? Provide examples. [3] In what sense is what Grice formulated called a 'principle'? What does it attempt to explain about verbal interaction? Who amongst the participants it focusses on? [4] ls it right to say that the conversational maxims must be observed for conversation to be successful? Why or why not? Try to explain using examples. Exercise implicatures. a. It was very foggy and a car accident occurred. → The implicature is that the car accident occurred because of the fog. b. He has been unhappy since his dog died last year. → The presupposition is that he had a dog and the implicature is that he is unhappy because his dog died. c. She finished her degree and got married. → The presupposition is that she attended a degree corse and got a degree and had a boyfriend, the implicature is that she got married after getting her degree. d. Speaker A: It’s cold in here. Speaker B: I’ll turn the heat up. → The implicature is that speaker B thinks that he has to turn the heat up because speaker A is cold, and so he wants to have the heat turned up. e. Speaker A: Where’s Harry?. Speaker B: Jani’s taking a holiday in Bermuda now. → Speaker B makes the implicature that Harry is on holiday with Jani, so we presuppose that they are related one to the other. f. Speaker A: What’s the weather prediction? Speaker B: Bring your coat. → Speaker B is making the implicature that is going to be cold. 12 • Austin distinguished three kinds of actions in each utterance: These are basic concepts in pragmatics, they are three cases of a successful speech act: LOCUTION = the production of a meaningful utterance, this is the actual utterance itself, is the act of communication, the physical act of saying something i.e. the physical act and its apparent meaning. ILLOCUTION = this is the performance of an act in saying something, the act the utterance performs (i.e. to promise, to warning, to request…). That’s not the physical message but it’s the message itself which is transmitted through words and through the locution. It may not correspond to the literal meaning of the words. Message conveyed through the locution. PERLOCUTION = what is achieved by saying something, the effects on the feelings, thoughts, behaviours of the participants. The effect of the utterances which, again, does not necessarily correspond to the locution, to what has been said. It acts as different consequences on different participants in a conversation. NOTE: meaning as sense and reference is separated from performing a function, “It is too dark in here” → we can analyse this sentence with different levels, this sentence may implicitly trigger a reaction or an implicature because the speaker may mean that they need more light (?). Example: The professor says: “and that is enough for today” → “that is enough for today” is the locution, the illocution is the message implied (the lesson is finished), the perlocution is the effect on the students which understand that they can leave the class. 15 Directness and indirectness. The notion of directness and indirectness and of literal and intended meaning have been a chief concern of speech act theory: 1.“When will this homework be finished?”. 2.“Could you finish your homework?”. 3.”Finish your homework!”. 4.“I order you to finish your homework” Some sentences are more direct than others, n1 is a way to say to the interlocutor to finish, n2 a more particular way to ask, more polite, n4 this is not polite. Indirectness = it’s when locution is at odds with illocution (with the message), because the message conveyed does not correspond to the utterance. • “Could you finish your homework?” = a question is used to express an order, a suggestion or advice (it also depends on the tone). Often conventional, it can be so recurrent that it is not perceived as indirect, because we perceive it to be direct. • “Can you give me the salt?” = INDIRECT but CONVENTIONAL so that it is recognised as being a request. Indirectness is generally associated with greater politeness in English: - “Would you mind terribly opening the window?” not a question, very polite utterance; - “Could I possibly borrow your pen?”; - “Would it be a major inconvenience if I asked you to phone back later?” not a question, a request or sometimes an order. The message is always the same, the locution is differente but the message conveyed is always the same. A speech act is direct when the two layers, levels correspond. Decide whether the following can be regarded as speech acts, if they are implicit or explicit, direct or indirect. - Father to child leaving home for school in the morning: "You must go now” → speech act explicit direct. Here we have a declarative, but it’s actually an order, there is a mismatch between the sentence style and the message conveyed. - Flatmate A to flatmate B: “How about taking out the rubbish?” → speech act implicit indirect, we have an apparent question but we have a sort of suggestion. - Student to teacher in class: “It's rather cold in here” → implicature which can be carried out by someone, it’s not a speech act. -Friend A to friend B: “Shall I give you a lift into town?” → speech act explicit indirect. -Family member assembling cabinet in the living room: "This would be a lot easier if someone gave me a hand” → implicit indirect. 16 1. Speech acts can be implicit or explicit, direct and indirect. 2. Locution is the utterance and illocution is the message conveyed by the locution… 3. Sometimes … may vary depending on the speakers, on their background and not the context. WHAT IS POLITENESS? One of the most analysed, explored principles nowadays in linguistics. There are also a number of thesis which are being elaborated on politeness. It may vary depending on different cultures, there are people around the world who are more polite than others (like Japanese people), there are also differences in western cultures (if we compare Americans with British people we will see a different way of speaking, behaving and using certain markers). How do you make a request in your workplace, as opposed to your home? - “Open the window”. - “Open the window please”. - “Open the window, love/mum/John”. - “Would you mind opening the window?” - “Would you mind opening the window, honey/dad/Kate?” - “Are you by any chance leaving? In that case, could you possibly open the window on your way out please?” Different gradation of the same request. How might the language of the request vary depending on whether you are addressing your boss, a colleague, your parent, your sibling or child? It varies a lot, the first 3 sentences have the same basic root construction and something is added, which changes the register. The 4 and 5 sentence have a basic structure, both question but the 5 adds names. The last one has two questions, but only the first one is a real question. All of these play on politeness, which is a very interesting principle, it can contribute to convey the right message and it varies because the gradation/level of politeness varies. What are the elements that contribute to changing the level of politeness in a conversation? It may depend on: different environment, relationships, roles, age, cultures, status, power, gender, wether you belong to a certain group or not (any kind of group). What is politeness? • One of the most researched topics in contemporary linguistics. • "Scholarly definitions of the term [...] have been predicated for several decades on a more or less tacit attempt to extrapolate a theoretical, abstract notion of politeness, capable of transcending lay conceptualizations and being cross-culturally valid" (see politeness' in Concise Encyclopaedia of Pragmatics, 2nd edn). It has to be cross-culturally valid, which is the problem, politeness may vary culturally because it depends on the context. Several influential theories in pragmatics: • Robin Lakoff (1973): pioneering work linking politeness to cooperative principle to explain why speakers are not always 'clear' (cf. indirect requests), so he dedicated some of his works to indirect requests. 17 * Inclusive / solidarity * Imperative * Declarative * Optimism * Deference * Impersonalise * Apologise * Minimise imposition * Hedging * Ingroup name * Conventionally indirect * Indirect / hint H: “I’m sure you will help me find the hall”, it’s a declarative, it’s a request, positive (because he’s trying to seek agreement, solidarity, collaboration). G: “Show me the hall mate”, it’s imperative, it’s a request, positive (we have “mate”). E: “I’m sure it will work if I try again”, it’s a declarative, it’s a request/command, positive (he’s trying to be optimistic), it’s personalised. There are problems with some of the theories and models we have been studying, these theories have been … by scholars who belong to western culture and so, for example, in the principle “don’t impose”, this is a western cultural related value and that’s an issue. As a matter of fact different cultures, languages, visions may express different speech acts. According to this other scholar: * in Brown and Levinson "freedom from imposition" is seen as one of the most important guiding principles of human interaction BUT it is an Anglo cultural value. * avoidance of direct and explicit speech acts seems to express special concerns of modern Anglo culture. In fact, different cultures, different languages (or language varieties), different speech acts: "I was learning new ways of speaking, new patterns of communication, new modes of social interaction. I was learning the Anglo rules of turn-taking ('let me finish!, T haven't finished yet!). I was learning not to use the imperative (Do X!') in my daily interaction with people and to replace it with a broad range of interrogative devices (Would you do X?' Could you do X?' "Would you mind doing X? "How about doing X?' "Why don't you do X?' 'Why not do X?', and so on)." (Wierzbicka, 1997: 119-120) [From A. Wierzbickas article on Intercultural Pragmatics in The Concise Encyclopaedia of Pragmatics, 2006, p. 293, Wierzbicka is commenting on a story told by Amy Tan in her 2003 book The Opposite of Fate] Aware of the limitations of her communicative competence in English, Amy Tan's mother often got her daughter to speak to people on the phone pretending that she was her mother. For example, when Amy was fifteen, she had to call her mother's stockbroker in New York presenting herself as "Mrs. Tan." "And my mother was standing in the back whispering loudly, Why he don't send me check, already two weeks late. So mad he lie to me, losing me money. And then I said in perfect English, 20 'Yes, I'm getting rather concerned. You had agreed to send the check two weeks ago, but it hasn't arrived. Then she began to talk more loudly. 'What he want, I come to New York tell him front of his boss, you cheating me?' And I was trying to calm her down, make her be quiet, while telling the stockbroker, 'I can't tolerate any more excuses. If I don't receive the check immediately, I am going to have to speak to your manager when I'm in New York next week: And sure enough, the following week there we were in front of this astonished stockbroker, and I was sitting there red-faced and quiet, and my mother, the real Mrs. Tan, was shouting at his boss in her impeccable broken English.” The second one is more polite and the function of the sentence is complaining. In the second sentence she’s threatening and she’s negative, even if she’s between being formal and informal. Culpeper and Haugh chapters: 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.5 [1] For each of the examples below decide whether it is a direct or indirect speech act (a), whether it appeals to the negative or positive face (b), and whether it suggests a relationship of distance, deference or camaraderie (c): * I am terribly sorry to bother you, but is there any chance you might be willing to help me repaint my room? * Give me a hand hon, will you? You help me repaint my room, I buy you drinks and dinner [2] Can you explain the concept of 'face' in pragmatics? Provide examples. Is it true or false that face-saving acts for the positive face show deference and emphasize the importance of other people's concerns? [3] "'Distancing cultures weave remoteness into their language." Please explain this statement by Robin Lakoff with reference to politeness and cross-cultural pragmatics. Is this observation relevant to some of the pragmatic differences between UK and US Englishes, or between any other varieties of English? 21