Cover not available
Part of
The Functional Perspective on Language and Discourse: Applications and implications
Edited by María de los Ángeles Gómez González, Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco Gonzálvez-García and Angela Downing
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 247] 2014
► pp. 209–222

‘Pragmatic punting’ and prosody

Evidence from corpora

ORCID logo | Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Spain
The aim of this chapter is to present the notion of “pragmatic punting” as the cognitive process that confirms that communication in interaction has achieved its goal. The theoretical tenets of this mechanism are based on the principles of communicative context and on the Dynamic Model of Meaning. The study compares the prosodic patterns of pragmatic markers in the London-Lund Corpus and in the LINDSEI Corpus (the Spanish section) in order to describe the prototypical realization of pragmatic punting in native and non-native English conversation respectively. The results show the disparity in the use of pragmatic punting between both groups of speakers. The conclusions indicate that the improvement of the non-natives’ awareness of the intonation patterns and distribution of pragmatic markers would contribute to the improvement of their communicative competence.
Published online: 16 May 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.247.11rom
References (34)
References
Bolinger, Dwight. 1958. “A Theory of Pitch Accent in English. ” Word 14: 109–149.Google Scholar
Brazil, David. 1975. Discourse Intonation 1/2 . Birmingham University Press, Birmingham.Google Scholar
Cruttenden, Alan. 1997. Intonation . 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeRose, Keith. 1999. “Contextualism: An Explanation and Defense.” In The Blackwell Guide to Epistemology , ed. by John Greco, and Ernest Sosa, 187–206. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Fetzer, Anita, and Etsuko Oishi (eds). 2011. Context and Contexts: Parts Meet Whole? ­Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giora, Rachel. 2003. On Our Mind: Salience, Context and Figurative Language . Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles, and Alessandro Duranti. 1992. “Rethinking Context: An Introduction.” In Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon , ed. by Alessandro Duranti, and Charles Goodwin, 1–42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gussenhoven, Carlos. 1984. On the Grammar and Semantics of Sentence Accents . Dordrecht: Foris Publications.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1967. Intonation and Grammar in British English . The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 1970. A Course in Spoken English . Oxford: University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K., and Ruqaiya Hasan. 1989. Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective . 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. “Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Developments in Conversation Analysis.” Sociolinguistics Newsletter 1: 1–16.Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan. 2006. “On my Mind: Thoughts about Salience, Context and Figurative Language from a Second Language Perspective.” Second Language Research 22: 219–237. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. “Dueling Contexts: A Dynamic Model of Meaning.” Journal of Pragmatics 40: 385–406. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan, and Zhang Fenghui. 2009. “Activating, Seeking, and Creating Common Ground: A Socio-cognitive Approach.” Pragmatics and Cognition 17: 331–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ladd, D. Robert. 1996. Intonational Phonology . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Leckie-Tarry, Helen. 1995. Language and Context. A Functional Linguistic Theory of Register . London: Pinter Publishers.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1923. “The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages.” In The Meaning of Meaning , ed. by Charles K. Ogden, and I. A. Richards, 296–336. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” In Structures of Social Action , ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Recanati, Francois. 2002. “Does Communication Rest on Inference?” Mind and Language 17: 105–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Romero-Trillo, Jesús. 1997. “Your Attention Please. Pragmatic Mechanisms to Obtain the Addressee’s Attention in English and Spanish Conversations.” Journal of Pragmatics 28: 205–221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. “A Mathematical Model for the Analysis of Variation in Discourse. ” Journal of Linguistics 37: 527–550.Google Scholar
. 2002. “The Pragmatic Fossilisation of Discourse Markers in Non-native Speakers of English. ” Journal of Pragmatics 34: 769–784. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. “Pragmatic Markers.” In Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics , 4522–4528. Oxford: Blackwell.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Romero-Trillo, Jesús and Tíscar Espigares, 2012. “The Cognitive Representation of Nature in Language: A Taxonomy.” Pragmatics and Cognition 20: 168–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Romero-Trillo, Jesús, and E. Lenn. 2011. “Do You (Mis)Understand What I Mean? Pragmatic Strategies to Avoid Cognitive Maladjustment.” Journal of English Studies 9: 223–241.Google Scholar
Romero-Trillo, Jesús, and L. Maguire. 2011. “Adaptive Context: The Fourth Element of Meaning.” International Review of Pragmatics 3: 228–241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Romero-Trillo, Jesús, and Jessica Newell. 2012. “Prosody and Feedback in Native and Non-native Speakers of English.” In Pragmatics and Prosody in English Language Teaching , ed. by Jesús Romero-Trillo, 117–132. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John. 1969. Speech Acts . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition . 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre. 2011. “Parallels and Differences in the Treatment of Metaphor in Relevance Theory and Cognitive Linguistics. ” Intercultural Pragmatics 8: 177–196.Google Scholar
The corpora
Romero-Trillo, Jesús, and M. Fernández Agüero. 2010. “Spanish Subcorpus.” In LINDSEI Corpus , ed. by Gäetanelle Guilquin. Louvain: Louvain la Neuve Press.Google Scholar
Svartvik, Jan, and Randolph Quirk. 1980. A Corpus of Spoken English . Lund: University Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Deng, Delin, Fenqi Wang & Ratree Wayland
2023. The pitch contour of the French discourse markerdonc: A corpus-based study using generalized additive mixed modeling. Journal of French Language Studies 33:3 ► pp. 324 ff. DOI logo
Romero-Trillo, Jesús
2015. ‘It is a truth universally acknowledged’…, you know?. Pragmatics and Society 6:1 ► pp. 117 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 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.