Cover not available
Article published In:
Historical (socio)pragmatics at present
Edited by Matylda Włodarczyk and Irma Taavitsainen
[Journal of Historical Pragmatics 18:2] 2017
► pp. 315–336

Context and historical (socio-)pragmatics twenty years on

| Manchester Metropolitan University

This paper has two purposes. First, it constitutes an exploration of context from the perspective of some prominent historical pragmaticians, and/or as demonstrated by publications which represent/exemplify a particular approach within historical pragmatics (Jacobs and Jucker 1995; Archer and Culpeper 2003, 2011; Nevala 2011; Traugott 2004, 2011; 2012; Jucker and Taavitsainen 2014) as well as related disciplines such as historical sociolinguistics (Nevalainen and Raumolin-Brunberg 2003). Second, it explores my own (evolving) view in respect to context, often in response to the influential work of others, as evidenced in a selection of my work (Archer 2005, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014).

Keywords: academic positioning, context(s), corpus linguistics, decontextualisation and recontextualisation, mental aspects
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Pragmatic developments in the history of English
    • 2.1Sociopragmatic/pragmalinguistic distinction within cross-cultural pragmatics
    • 2.2Sociopragmatic/pragmalinguistic distinction within historical pragmatics
  • 3.Sociopragmatic investigations with pragmalinguistic interests
    • 3.1Person reference in Late Modern English
    • 3.2The sociophilological approach
      • 3.2.1Pragmatic annotation (within the Sociopragmatic Corpus)
      • 3.2.2The contextual shaping effect(s) of the datasets used
  • 4.Recontextualising decontextualised results
  • 5.A coming together of the component and perspective views
  • 6.Mental aspects of pragmatic theory
    • 6.1Clashing reality paradigms and representational frames
    • 6.2Framing others
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 9 February 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00008.arc
References
2011 “Libeling Oscar Wilde: The Case of Regina vs. John Sholto Douglas”. Journal of Politeness Research 7 (1): 73–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 “Assessing Garrow’s Aggressive Questioning Style”. In Gabriella Mazzon (ed.), English Historical Dialogue Studies, 301–20. Milano: FrancoAngeli.Google Scholar
2013 “Historical Pragmatics: Evidence from the Old Bailey”. Transactions of the Philological Society: 1–13.Google Scholar
2014 “Exploring Verbal Aggression in English Historical Texts Using USAS: The Possibilities, The Problems and Potential Solutions”. In Irma Taavitsainen, Andreas H. Jucker and Jukka Tuominen (eds), Diachronic Corpus Pragmatics, 277–301. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Archer, Dawn and Jonathan Culpeper
2003 “Sociopragmatic Annotation: New Directions and Possibilities in Historical Corpus Linguistics”. In Andrew Wilson, Paul Rayson and Tony McEnery (eds), Corpus Linguistics by the Lune: Studies in Honour of Geoffrey Leech, 37–58. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2009 “Identifying Key Socio-pragmatic Usage in Plays and Trial Proceedings (1640–1760): An Empirical Approach via Corpus Annotation”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 10 (2): 286–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “Identifying key Socio-Pragmatic Usage in Plays and Trial Proceedings (1640–1760): An Empirical Approach via Corpus Annotation”. In Jonathan Culpeper (ed.), Historical Sociopragmatics, 109–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Archer, Dawn and Peter Grundy
(eds) 2011 Pragmatics Reader. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Archer, Dawn and Bethan Malory
2017 “Tracing Facework Strategies over Time Using Semi-Automated Methods”. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22 (1): 27–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brewer, John
1997 ““The Most Polite Age and the Most Vicious”: Attitudes towards Culture as a Commodity, 1660–1800”. In Ann Bermingham and John Brewer (eds), The Consumption of Culture 1600–1800, 341–61. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope and Steven C. Levinson
1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
A Corpus of English Dialogues 1560–1760
2006 Compiled under the supervision of Merja Kytö (Uppsala University) and Jonathan Culpeper (Lancaster University).Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan
2010 “Historical Sociopragmatics”. In Andreas H. Jucker and Irma Taavitsainen (eds), Historical Pragmatics, 69–95. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(ed.) 2011 Historical Sociopragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fowler, Roger
1986 Linguistic Criticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce, Ellen Rintell and Joel Walters
1981 “An Approach to Conducting Research on the Acquisition of Pragmatic Competence in a Second Language”. In Diane L. Larson-Freeman (ed.), Discourse Analysis, 75–81. Newbury House: Rowley Mass.Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul
1975 “Logic and Conversation”. In Peter Cole and J. L. Morgan (eds), Syntax and Semantics. Vol 3: Speech Acts, 41–58. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Allen
1990 “Research on Conflict Talk: Antecedents, Resources, Findings, Directions”. In Allen Grimshaw (ed.), Conflict Talk: Sociological Investigations of Arguments in Conversation, 139–59. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, William
1965 [1577] “The Description of England”. In Holinsched’s Chronicles: England, Scotland and Ireland, I, England, 221–42. London: AMS Press.Google Scholar
Holland, Merlin
2004 The Real Trial of Oscar Wilde. HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Andreas and Andreas H. Jucker
1995 “The Historical Perspective in Pragmatics”. In Andreas H. Jucker (ed.), Historical Pragmatics: Pragmatic Developments in the History of English, 3–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H.
(ed.) 1995 Historical Pragmatics: Pragmatic Developments in the History of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 “Historical Pragmatics”. Language and Linguistics Compass 21: 894–906. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas and Irma Taavitsainen
2000 “Diachronic Speech Act Analysis: Insults from Flyting to Flaming”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1 (1): 67–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 “Diachronic Corpus Pragmatics: Intersections and Interactions”. In Irma Taavitsainen, Andreas H. Jucker and Jukka Tuominen (eds), Diachronic Corpus Pragmatics, 3–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kay, Christian, Jane Roberts, Michael Samuels and Irené Wotherspoon
2009 Historical Thesaurus of the OED. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
King, Gregory
1972 [1695] “Ranks, Degrees, Titles and Qualifications”. In Joan Thirsk and J. Phillips Cooper (eds), Seventeenth-Century Economic Documents, 751–57. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Labov William
1994 Principles of Linguistic Change: Internal Factors. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin T.
1990 Talking Power: The Politics of Language. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
1983 Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam A. and Richard J. Watts
2008 “Relational Work and Impoliteness: Negotiating Norms of Linguistic Behaviour”. In Derek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher (eds), Impoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, 77–99. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marmaridou, Sophia
2011 “Pragmalinguistics and Sociopragmatics”. In Wolfram Bublitz and Neal R. Norrick (eds), Foundations of Pragmatics, 77–106. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nevala, Minna
2011 “Altering Distance and Defining Authority: Person Reference in Late Modern English”. In Jonathan Culpeper (ed.), Historical Sociopragmatics, 61–82. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu and Helena Raumolin-Brunberg
2003 Historical Sociolinguistics: Language Change in Tudor and Stuart England. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rissanen, Matti
1989 “Three Problems Associated with the Use of Diachronic Corpora”. ICAME Journal 131: 16–19.Google Scholar
Roever, Carsten
2004 “Difficulty and Practicality in Tests of Interlanguage Pragmatics”. In Diana Boxer and Andrew D. Cohen (eds), Studying Speaking to Inform Second Language Learning, 283–301. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Schwenter, Scott. A. and Elizabeth C. Traugott
1995 “The Semantic and Pragmatic Development of Substitutive Complex Prepositions in English”. In Andreas H. Jucker (ed.), Historical Pragmatics, 243–73. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taavitsainen, Irma and Andreas H. Jucker
2010 “Trends and Developments in Historical Pragmatics”. In Andreas H. Jucker and Irma Taavitsainen (eds), Historical Pragmatics, 3–30. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Taavitsainen, Irma, Andreas H. Jucker and Jukka Tuominen
(eds) 2014 Diachronic Corpus Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas, Jenny
1981 Pragmatic Failure. Unpublished MA dissertation. University of Lancaster.Google Scholar
1983 “Cross-cultural Pragmatic Failure”. Applied Linguistics 4 (2): 91–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C.
2004 “Historical Pragmatics”. In Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward (eds), The Handbook of Pragmatics, 538–61. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
2011 “Constructing the Audiences of the Old Bailey Trials 1674–1834”. In Päivi Pahta and Andreas H. Jucker (eds), Communicating Early English Manuscripts, 69–80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2012 “On the Persistence of Ambiguous Linguistic Contexts over Time: Implications for Corpus Research on Micro-changes”. In Joybrato Mukherjee and Magnus Huber (eds), Corpus Linguistics and Variation in English: Theory and Description, 231–46. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C. and Richard B. Dasher
2005 Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Verschueren, Jef
1999 Understanding Pragmatics. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Wattam, Stephen, Paul Rayson, Marc Alexander and Alistair Baron
2014 “Experiences with Parallelisation of an Existing NLP Pipeline: Tagging Hansard”. Proceedings for the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC): 4093–6.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 11 other publications

Barron, Anne
2021. Synchronic and Diachronic Pragmatic Variability. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 182 ff. DOI logo
Bustos-Gisbert, Eugenio
2023. Orality, feigned orality and the expression of (dis)politeness: the system of pronominal address in Gonzalo de Berceo. Lengua y Sociedad 22:1 ► pp. 381 ff. DOI logo
Bös, Birte
2024. Chapter 5. Self- and other-positioning in eighteenth‑century newspapers. In Self- and Other-Reference in Social Contexts [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 342], ► pp. 89 ff. DOI logo
Kádár, Dániel Z. & Kim Ridealgh
2019. Introduction. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 20:2 ► pp. 169 ff. DOI logo
Marmaridou, Sophia
2023. Sociopragmatics and Context. In The Cambridge Handbook of Language in Context, ► pp. 205 ff. DOI logo
Moiseiuk, Iuliia
2021. The functions of heraldic symbols in the English fiction. Cognition, Communication, Discourse :22 ► pp. 42 ff. DOI logo
Palander-Collin, Minna & Minna Nevala
2024. Chapter 1. Self- and other-reference in social contexts. In Self- and Other-Reference in Social Contexts [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 342], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Wilk, Nicole M.
2021. Sturm. Nie war mehr Hermeneutik in der Korpuslinguistik (gefragt). Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 51:4 ► pp. 719 ff. DOI logo
Włodarczyk, Matylda & Irma Taavitsainen
2017. Introduction. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 18:2 ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. The Sociopragmatics of Stance [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 329], DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. Fundamentals of Sociopragmatics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 13 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.