

Grammar


Tenses


Present

Present Simple

Present Continuous

Present Perfect

Present Perfect Continuous


Past

Past Simple

Past Continuous

Past Perfect

Past Perfect Continuous


Future

Future Simple

Future Continuous

Future Perfect

Future Perfect Continuous


Parts Of Speech


Nouns

Countable and uncountable nouns

Verbal nouns

Singular and Plural nouns

Proper nouns

Nouns gender

Nouns definition

Concrete nouns

Abstract nouns

Common nouns

Collective nouns

Definition Of Nouns

Animate and Inanimate nouns

Nouns


Verbs

Stative and dynamic verbs

Finite and nonfinite verbs

To be verbs

Transitive and intransitive verbs

Auxiliary verbs

Modal verbs

Regular and irregular verbs

Action verbs

Verbs


Adverbs

Relative adverbs

Interrogative adverbs

Adverbs of time

Adverbs of place

Adverbs of reason

Adverbs of quantity

Adverbs of manner

Adverbs of frequency

Adverbs of affirmation

Adverbs


Adjectives

Quantitative adjective

Proper adjective

Possessive adjective

Numeral adjective

Interrogative adjective

Distributive adjective

Descriptive adjective

Demonstrative adjective


Pronouns

Subject pronoun

Relative pronoun

Reflexive pronoun

Reciprocal pronoun

Possessive pronoun

Personal pronoun

Interrogative pronoun

Indefinite pronoun

Emphatic pronoun

Distributive pronoun

Demonstrative pronoun

Pronouns


Pre Position


Preposition by function

Time preposition

Reason preposition

Possession preposition

Place preposition

Phrases preposition

Origin preposition

Measure preposition

Direction preposition

Contrast preposition

Agent preposition


Preposition by construction

Simple preposition

Phrase preposition

Double preposition

Compound preposition

prepositions


Conjunctions

Subordinating conjunction

Correlative conjunction

Coordinating conjunction

Conjunctive adverbs

conjunctions


Interjections

Express calling interjection

Phrases

Sentences


Grammar Rules

Passive and Active

Preference

Requests and offers

wishes

Be used to

Some and any

Could have done

Describing people

Giving advices

Possession

Comparative and superlative

Giving Reason

Making Suggestions

Apologizing

Forming questions

Since and for

Directions

Obligation

Adverbials

invitation

Articles

Imaginary condition

Zero conditional

First conditional

Second conditional

Third conditional

Reported speech

Demonstratives

Determiners


Linguistics

Phonetics

Phonology

Linguistics fields

Syntax

Morphology

Semantics

pragmatics

History

Writing

Grammar

Phonetics and Phonology

Semiotics


Reading Comprehension

Elementary

Intermediate

Advanced


Teaching Methods

Teaching Strategies

Assessment
The co-construction of pragmatic acts
المؤلف:
Jonathan Culpeper and Michael Haugh
المصدر:
Pragmatics and the English Language
الجزء والصفحة:
189-6
21-5-2022
937
The co-construction of pragmatic acts
In the preceding examples we have seen how not only the speaker but also other participants can influence the trajectory of a pragmatic act as it develops in interaction. This, we have suggested, is another key characteristic of pragmatic acts in interaction, namely, that they are co-constructed by two or more participants rather than simply being the “output” of the speaker or tied to individual utterances. In some cases, the pragmatic act, by definition, cannot be achieved by one participant on their own, as noted with respect to collaborative speech acts. Bribing others is a case in point. If the recipient does not accept the offer of money and so on in order to gain some particular favor (or reject the offer in such a way as to register it as asking for a favor), it does not count as a bribe. Bribing is thus an instance of a pragmatic act where co-construction of an act itself surfaces in interaction (cf. Mey 2001). An important consequence of the way in which pragmatic acts are co-constructed by two or more participants is that they can sometimes involve multiple possible understandings. This is precisely the point explored by Thomas (1995: 195–204). She notes: “The concept of ambivalence is particularly important in taking forward the view of pragmatics as ‘meaning in interaction’ in which both speaker and hearer have a part to play.” Schegloff (2006: 147) argues that since participants pursue possible understandings of talk “along multiple lines ... they are therefore prepared to recognize even ones arrived at by others that might have been thought elusive”. In other words, pragmatic acts can initially be indeterminate and so mutual understanding of them is very often co-constructed (or interactionally achieved in CA parlance). The co-construction of pragmatic acts can be clearly seen in the case of utterances where speakers offer interpretive choices to recipients, or alternatively, recipients exercise their agency in such a way as to transform the upshot of the speaker’s preceding talk.
We have already seen such phenomena in our discussion of recipient meanings. Here we offer another brief example where unsaid pragmatic meanings (termed not-saying) arise in the course of the co-construction of a pragmatic act, namely, questioning, which, in turn, arises within the frame of a broader activity type, getting acquainted:

In [6.23], we find evidence of an utterance-type through which speakers can allow recipients to choose inclusive or exclusive interpretations of disjunctives, namely, utterances ending with a trailing-off or (Haugh 2011). It is evident that such utterances are (nominally) open to interpretation as either polar questions (p or not p) or alternative questions (p or q). The former necessarily presupposes an exclusive interpretation of or, while the latter presupposes an inclusive interpretation. Here, the speaker’s utterance can be understood in two ways by the recipient. Emma could understand Chris’s utterance as a polar question (“are they happy or not?”) or as an alternative question (“are they happy or generally satisfied”?). It is left up to Emma to choose.
One further point to note is that it should now be evident from our discussion of examples of “soliciting” and “trailing-off questioning” that many pragmatic acts are not “named” in vernacular discourse. Speech act theory picks up on many of the important social actions we can observe in interaction, at least it does for those we find in English. However, there are many other pragmatic acts that are not necessarily salient in folk discourse. Our job in pragmatics is to further our understanding of not only what ordinary folk can readily recognize through speech acts they name, but also pragmatic acts that are not always immediately obvious to the casual observer.
الاكثر قراءة في pragmatics
اخر الاخبار
اخبار العتبة العباسية المقدسة
الآخبار الصحية

قسم الشؤون الفكرية يصدر كتاباً يوثق تاريخ السدانة في العتبة العباسية المقدسة
"المهمة".. إصدار قصصي يوثّق القصص الفائزة في مسابقة فتوى الدفاع المقدسة للقصة القصيرة
(نوافذ).. إصدار أدبي يوثق القصص الفائزة في مسابقة الإمام العسكري (عليه السلام)