阅读7crossculture pragmatic failure.docx
《阅读7crossculture pragmatic failure.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《阅读7crossculture pragmatic failure.docx(13页珍藏版)》请在冰点文库上搜索。
![阅读7crossculture pragmatic failure.docx](https://file1.bingdoc.com/fileroot1/2023-5/4/46247ab8-a364-4b7c-b307-8f7e52c9acbd/46247ab8-a364-4b7c-b307-8f7e52c9acbd1.gif)
阅读7crossculturepragmaticfailure
CROSS-CULTURALPRAGMATICFAILUREANDIMPLICATIONSFORLANGUAGETEACHING
GabrielaPohl
"Perhapsthefascinationthatthestudyofcross-culturalpragmaticsholdsforlanguageteachers,researchers,andstudentsoflinguisticsstemsfromtheserioustroubletowhichpragmaticfailurecanlead.No"error"ofgrammarcanmakeaspeakerseemsoincompetent,soinappropriate,soforeign,asthekindoftroublealearnergetsintowhenheorshedoesn'tunderstandorotherwisedisregardsalanguage'srulesofuse"(Rintell-Mitchell,1989,citedinTrosborg1994,p.3).
INTRODUCTION
AsamigranttoAustraliaIhavelongbeeninterestedinlookingatthesourcesofmisunderstandingswhichcanarisebetweenanglo-saxonAustraliansandGerman-backgroundspeakers.Whatisit,whichmakessomeGermanpeople,eveniffluentspeakersofEnglish,comeacrossasserious,blunt,overbearing,evenarrogant?
Howcanwebetterassistsecondandforeignlanguagestudentstonotonlydeveloplinguisticbutalsointer-culturalcompetencies?
Whatknowledge,attitudesandskillsshoulda"globallycompetent"(Lambert,1999)personpossess?
Throughmyreadings,Iamincreasinglyconvincedthattheanswerliesinthestudyofcross-culturalpragmatics.AsThomas(1983)haspointedout:
"Everyinstanceofnationalorethnicstereotypingshouldbeseenasareasonforcallinginthepragmaticistanddiscourseanalyst!
"(p.107).
AtthebeginningofmyresearchIreferredtoanumberofcross-culturalcomparativestudieswhichexaminespecificaspectsofpragmaticsacrossvariouslanguageandethnicgroups,forexample:
praisingandcomplimentinginthePolishandEnglishlanguage(Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk,1989);issuesoffaceinaproblematicChinesebusinessvisittoBritain(Spencer-Oatey&Xing,2000);JapaneseandEnglishresponsestounfoundedaccusations(Tanaka,Spencer-Oatey&Cray,2000);argumentationandresultingproblemsinthenegotiationofrapportinaGerman-Chineseconversation(Günthner,2000);etc.Whilethesestudiesareveryinteresting,theywereinitiallytoospecifictoassistmeingaininganoverviewoftheissuesinvolvedincross-culturalpragmatics.Ithereforedecidedtostartwithasearchforpragmaticuniversals,andtomovefromtheretowardsculture-specificpragmatics,inter-culturalinteractionsandpragmaticfailure,andfinallytowardsimplicationsforlanguageteaching.Thisarticlesummarizesmyfindingsalongeachofthesesteps.
ARETHEREPRAGMATICUNIVERSALS?
Yule(1996,p.4)describespragmaticsas"thestudyoftherelationshipsbetweenlinguisticformsandtheusersofthoseforms".Whilesyntaxisthestudyofhowlinguisticformsarearrangedinsequence,andsemanticsexaminestherelationshipbetweenlinguisticformsandentitiesoftheworld,pragmaticsisconcernedwiththenotionofimplicature,i.e.impliedmeaningasopposedtothemerelexicalmeaningexpressed(Grice,1967,citedinThomas1995,p.56).Therearetimeswhenwesay(orwrite)exactlywhatwemean,butmuchmorefrequentlywearenottotallyexplicit,asinthefollowingexchangewithisadaptedfromWierzbicka(1991,p.391):
Example1:
Twowomendiscussingtheirchildren:
A:
HowisTomgoingatschool?
B:
Ah,well...youknowwhattheysay:
boyswillbeboys.
A:
Yeah,butgirlsarenoeasier...youknowwhatJessdidtheotherday?
...
SpeakerBdoesnotexplicitlystatehowTomisprogressingatschool.Still,herremark"boyswillbeboys",whichisatautologyandliterallyquitemeaningless,providessufficientinformationtoherinterlocutorfortheconversationtocontinuesmoothly.Inthiscase,SpeakerBconveyedmorethantheliteralmeaningofherwordswouldsuggest.Atothertimestheimplicatureofwhatissaidmaybequitedifferentfromthemeaningofthewordsused,asinthefollowingexample:
Example2:
Onbeingdisturbedbythenext-doorneighbour'slawnmowerearlyonSundaymorning:
A:
Greatwaytowakeup!
B:
(grumpily)Sureis.
TheaboveexchangeisanexampleofwhatGricehastermedconversationalimplicature,whiletheuseoftheword'but'inthefollowingexampleprovidedbyThomas(1995,p.57)isoneofconventionalimplicature:
Example3:
"Myfriendswerepoor,buthonest."
Regardlessofthecontextinwhichitoccurs,theword'but'carriestheimplicaturethatwhatfollowswillruncountertoexpectations.The'expectation'inexample3being,that"poorpeoplearedishonest".
Obviously,languageusersmustsharecertainrulesandconventionswhichenablethemtounderstandoneanotherinthemanyinstanceswherethemeaningandtheintent,i.e.theillocutionaryforce(Yule,1996,p.48),ofutterancesarenotexplicitlystated.Inhistext"Logicandconversation"Grice(1975,citedinThomas1995,pp.61-63)suggestsfourconversationalmaximsandtheCooperativePrinciple(CP)toexplainthemechanismsthroughwhichpeopleinterpretimplicature.Grice'sCooperativePrinciplestates:
Makeyourcontributionsuchasisrequired,atthestageatwhichitoccurs,bytheacceptedpurposeordirectionofthetalkexchangeinwhichyouareengaged.
Grice'sformulatedtheconversationalmaximsofQuantity,Quality,RelationandMannerasfollows:
Quantity:
makeyourcontributionasinformativeasisrequired(forthecurrentpurposeoftheexchange).Donotmakeyourcontributionmoreinformativethanisrequired.
Quality:
Donotsaywhatyoubelievetobefalse.Donotsaythatforwhichyoulackadequateevidence.
Relation:
Berelevant.
Manner:
Avoidobscurityofexpression.Avoidambiguity.Bebrief(avoidunnecessaryprolixity).Beorderly.
Grice(1975,citedinThomas1995,p.65)proposedthatspeakersfrequentlyandblatantlyfailtoobserveanyofaboveconversationalmaximstopromptthehearertolookforameaningwhichisdifferentfrom,orinadditionto,theexpressedmeaning.Lookingbackatexample2above,apragmaticallycompetentlistenerismostlikelytointerpretthespeaker'sutteranceof"Greatwaytowakeup!
"asasarcasticremarkandtounderstandthatthespeakerisexpressingannoyanceatbeingwokenupbytheneighbour'slawnmower.However,asecondlanguagelearner,evenifs/heisquitefluentinEnglish,maynotnecessarilyarriveatthesameconclusion.
LikeGrice,otherwritershaveattemptedtoformulateuniversalsinlanguageuse.BrownandLevinson(1987,citedinSpencer-Oatey2000,pp.12-13)proposetheconceptoffaceasauniversalhumanneedandthekeymotivatingforceforpolitenessandrapportmanagement.Theymaintainthatfaceconsistsoftworelatedaspects:
negativefacerepresentingthedesireforautonomy,andpositivefacerepresentingthedesireforapproval.However,BrownandLevinsonaswellasGrice'shavetheircritics.LinguistssuchasMatsumoto(1988),Ide(1989)andMao(1994,allcitedinSpencerOatey2000,p.13)refertotheimportanceof"socialidentity"asaconceptinJapaneseandChinesesociety,whichhasbeenomittedinBrownandLevinson'snotionofface.Similarly,Wierzbicka(1991,pp.67-68)describesaspectsofGrice'sandBrownandLevinson'sworkas"ethnocentric"withastrong"anglo-centricbias"andcautionsagainstattemptstoformulatelanguageuniversalsattheexpenseofculture-specifics.
AnotherattemptatfindinglanguageuniversalswasmadebyLeech(1983,citedinSpencer-Oatey2000,p.39),whoformulatedsixpolitenessmaximsasfollows:
1.TACTMAXIM
a.minimizecosttoother
b.maximizebenefittoother
2.GENEROSITYMAXIM
a.minimizebenefittoself
b.maximizecosttoself
3.APPROBATIONMAXIM
a.minimizedispraiseofother
b.maximizepraiseofother
4.MODESTYMAXIM
a.minimizepraiseofself
b.maximizedispraiseofself
5.AGREEMENTMAXIM
a.minimizedisagreementbetweenselfandother
b.maximizeagreementbetweenselfandother
6.SYMPATHYMAXIM
a.minimizeantipathybetweenselfandother
b.maximizesympathybetweenselfandother.
Leech(1983,citedinBond,Zegarac&SpencerOatey2000,p.56)proposesthatthemaximsofpolitenessworkinconjunctionwithGrice'sfourconversationalmaxims,above,butconcedesthattheymayvaryinimportancefromculturetoculture.Forexample,inthecontextofrespondingtocompliments,theModestyMaximclearlyoutweighstheAgreementMaximinJapanesesociety,whileinEnglish-speakingsocietiesitiscustomarilymorepolitetoacceptacompliment"graciously",i.e.tofindacompromisebetweenviolatingtheModestyMaximandviolatingtheAgreementMaxim(Leech,1983,p.137).
Clearly,itisdifficultifnotimpossibletocomeupwithuniversallyapplicablerulesforlanguageuseaseachculturehasmoreorlessculture-specificpragmaticfeatures.
CULTURE-SPECIFICPRAGMATICFEATURES
Manyculture-specificpragmaticfeaturesareimplicit,buttheyarenonethelesscentralincommunicativeencounters.Thefollowingarejustsomeexamples:
mentalsets:
aframeofmindinvolvinganexistingdispositiontothinkofaproblemorasituationinaparticularway(Sternberg,1995,citedinZegarac&Pennington2000,p.166);e.g.whatisthemeaningofanofferofcoffeeafterameal;isitaninvitationbythehosttostayalittlelongerorapolitehinttogueststhatitistimetoleave?
schemata:
apre-existingknowledgestructureinmemoryinvolvingacertainpatternofthings(Yule,1996,p.88);e.g.whatconstitutesanapartment,aholiday,aschool,arestaurantetc.
scripts:
apre-existingknowledgestructureforinterpretingeventsequences(Yule,1996,p.87);e.g.avisittothedoctor,shoppingatasupermarket,phoningtomakeanappointmentatahairdressingsalon,etc.
speechevents:
asetofcircumstancesinwhichpeopleinteractinsomeconventionalwaytoarriveatsomeoutcome(Yule,1996,p.57);eg.