All
 
|
 
 


The Pragmatic Approach in Eastern Europe
 
PIIS294939000028972-8-1
DOI10.18254/S294939000028972-8
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Elena Borisova 
Affiliation:
The State Academic University for the Humanites
Moscow City University
Address: Moscow, Russia
Irina M. Kobozeva
Affiliation:
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Institute of Linguistics RAS
Address: Moscow, Russia
Pavel Parshin
Affiliation:
MGIMO University
Moscow State Linguistic University
Address: Moscow, Russia
Journal nameLinguistica Fundamentalis
EditionIssue 2 (2)
Abstract

The paper is an attempt to briefly outline the history and the present state of the pragmatic approach to language in Eastern Europe, namely Slavic regions of theformer Soviet Union (Russia, Ukraine, and Belorussia) as well as Bulgaria and Serbia. Pragmatic studies in Poland and former Czechoslovakia are not reviewed as better known by scholars who are interested in linguistic pragmatics. It is our point that some results from Eastern Europe are relevant not only for the study of Slavic languagesbut also for the general linguistic pragmatics and therefore may be of interest for those who do not have reading knowledge of Slavic languages. The authors present a general view of the studies belonging to the pragmatic domain: the behavior and interaction of the participants of communicative events, its reflection in linguistic units, the analysis of specific aspects of communication, such as emotions, humor, implicite information etc. In Section 1 and 2 the predecessors of pragmatic approach are mentioned: Stylistics, Rhetoric, studies of funtional sentence perspective and verbal etiquette. In Section 3 the development and the state of the art of Pragmatics proper in USSR is outlined followed by Section 4 devoted to the studies based on the Conceptual Metaphor theory and Section 5 devoted to the  studies bordering Pragmatics: studies of the speech influence, language of Internet, affectiveness in language, humor and irony and some other topics. In Section 6 the specifics of the EastEuropean pragmatic studies is discussed. The paper was conceived as an introduction to the collection of articles  presented in this volume and those that shall appear in the next volumes of the journal “Fundamental Linguistics”. 

 

KeywordsSpeaker-Hearer interaction, implicit information in communication, social linguistics, cognitive studies, emotions, speech strategies, sarcasm
Received08.12.2023
Publication date08.12.2023
Number of characters16196
Cite   Download pdf To download PDF you should sign in
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Table of contents

1. Linguistics of language use
2. Pragmatics before Pragmatics
3. Linguistic pragmatics in the USSR
4. Pragmatical background of Linguistic studies
5. The Nowadays Studies bordering Pragmatics
5.1. Speech Influence (Perlocutive Linguistics)
5.2. Language of Internet
5.3. Affects in language
5.4. Humor and Irony
5.5. Grammar in Interaction.
5.6. Social Aspects in Pragmatic Studies
6. The Specifics of the East-European Pragmatic Studies
1

1. Linguistics of language use
2 Linguistic pragmatics, according to J. Verschueren [Verschueren, 1999], can be straightforwardly defined as ‘the study of language use’. The view of language as a dynamic (not static) phenomenon dates back at least to the activity of the Prague Linguistic Circle. (In fact, some observations concerning peculiarities of pragmatically governed usage of words, morphemes etc. was included into many earlier descriptions, but they had not been paid proper attention to.
3 The topics that are close to the agenda of pragmatics are functional styles (or registers) and Functional Sentence Perspective (topic-comment structures).
4 The stylistic paradigm of Russian and other Slavic languages has been worked out mostly in 1970s and formed a separate branch of Slavic linguistics called ‘functional stylistics’ that did not merged the pragmatics, at least in the Soviet linguistics.
5 As far as Functional Sentence Perspective is concerned, the investigations were held in different research domains and scientific schools. Sometimes there were intersections with pragmatic research held later.
6 The other schools of linguistics in the Soviet Union and some other Slavic countries in the 1950s to 1980s were also influenced by the Prague Circle and their intentions to take the speech activity into consideration One should mention the “’Meaning-Text’ Model” [Mel’chuk, 1974] and the Functional Grammar School in Leningrad (numerous works by A.V. Bondarko, see for example [Bondarko, 1984]). These descriptions did not take into account such important pragmatic aspects of speech activity as the characteristics of the Speaker and the Hearer, their interaction and many others.
7 Nevertheless, many investigations in various branches of linguistics touched upon the problems of pragmatics.
8

2. Pragmatics before Pragmatics
9 In process of time, the speech activity became an object of study necessary for applied purposes: for describing foreign languages, teaching speech communication etc. One should mention the tendencies in theoretical linguistics that lead to highlighting such problems.
10 Originally, the study of verbal etiquette was inspired by the interest to the culture of communication that was important in the post-revolution Soviet society. When teaching Russian as the second language became widespread, the cliches used in correct and polite speech became an object of describing. The important step in this direction was made by the PhD Thesis of Natalya Formanovskaya focused on formulae of e Russian speech etiquette. The principles of politeness were formulated there. Later on, the explorations in this topic were carried out in N. Formanovskaya and her disciples who were the first in Russia to pay attention to pragmatics of speech communication [Formanovskaya, 2007].
11 As to the interest in communication and its participants, the attempts are to be mentioned to formulate the distinctions between lexis and grammar in various speech situations: informal relations between communicators, official texts, scientific articles, and monographs. The choice of language units according to typical situations was associated with functional styles (in other tradition they are called registers). The studies and discussions about the number of styles lead to formulating the system of functional styles (registers). The idea of communicative organization of utterances (Functional Sentence Perspective, Information Structure) was being developed in the framework of different linguistic theories, e. g. in Generative Grammar. In Slavic tradition, mostly Russian and Czechoslovak, the investigations were held in syntax, as the word order was the main means of expressing the theme — rheme distinction. Later other means were also taken into consideration These are intonation patterns and particles that can mark deviations from the standard linear order of constituents.
12 Also worth mentioning are studies in rhetoric that were revived in the 1970s by Yu. V. Rozhdestvenski in his Moscow State University lecture courses after decades of oblivion. His innovative conception of rhetoric summarized in [Rozhdestvenski, 2003], although it was based on ancient tradition, significantly expanded the boundaries of this discipline subsuming the study of all modern practices of communication in politics, business, education etc. This line of research was followed by his former students, and the works of other representatives of «Moscow Rhetoric School of Yu. V. Rozhdestvenski» [Men’shenina, 2013]. Outside Moscow, the substantial contributions to the revitalizing of rhetoric were made by I.A. Sternin who founded the school of practical rhetoric in Voronezh.
13 These schools continue their investigations without considerable attempts of co-ordination with the mainstream linguistic pragmatics.
14

3. Linguistic pragmatics in the USSR
15 The first events and papers using the word “pragmatics” in its modern linguistic sense date back to the late 1970s – early 1980s. The first course of the Speech Act Theory in the USSR was first offered as optional in 1976 to the students of the Department of Structural and Applied Linguistics at Moscow State University (taught by I.M. Kobozeva, the post-graduate student of the same department on behalf of its head, V.A. Zvegintsev)1. The first conference on pragmatics was held in 1983 in Kalinin (now Tver’) State University initiated by I.P. Susov, the head of the chair of general linguistics, whose disciples now promote the ideas of pragmatics in East-European countries, e.g. Liliya Bezugla (V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University). 1. Two collections of seminal papers on linguistic pragmatics translated into Russian appeared later [Linguistic pragmatics, 1985; Speech act theory, 1986].

views: 33

Readers community rating: votes 0 

1. Baranov A.N. Deskriptivnaya teoriya metafory [The Descriptor Theory of Metaphors]. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoj kul'tury Publ., 2014.
2. Baranov A.N., Krejndlin G.E. Illokutivnoe vynuzhdenie v strukture dialoga [Illocutionary Compulsion in the Dialogue Structure]. In: Voprosy yazykoznaniya. 1992. N 2, pp. 84-99.
3. Batsevich F.S. Vstup do lіngvіstichnoї pragmatiki [Introduction into Linguistic Pragmatics]. Kiїv: Vidavnichij tsentr «Akademіya» Publ., 2011. (In Ukrainian)
4. Bondarko A.V. Funktsional'naya grammatika [The Functional Grammar]. Leningrad: Nauka Publ., 1984.
5. Borisova E.G., Martem'yanova Yu.S. Implitsitnost' v yazyke i rechi [Implicitness in Language and Speech]. Moscow: Yazyki russkoj kul'tury Publ., 1999.
6. Borisova E.G. Interaktivnyj podkhod v leksike i grammatike [Interactional Approach in Grammar and Lexys]. Moscow: Flinta Publ., 2021.
7. Donetskij regiolekt [Donetsk Regiolect], ed. by Terkulov V.I. Donetsk: Foliant Publ., 2018. 
8. Ermakova O.P. Ironiya i ee rol' v zhizni yazyka [Irony and its Role in the Language Life]. Kaluga: Tsiolkovsky Kaluga State Pedagogical University Publ., 2005.
9. Formanovskaya N.I. Rechevoe vzaimodejstvie: kommunikatsiya i pragmatika [Speech Interaction: Communication and Pragmatics]. Moscow: Ikar Publ., 2007.
10. Issers O.S. Kommunikativnye strategii i taktiki russkoj rechi [Communicative Strategies and Tactics in Russian Speech]. 5th ed. Moscow: Lki Publ, 2008.
11. Kaftandzhiev Kh. Teksty v pechatnoj reklame [Texts in Print Advertisements]. Moscow: Smysl Publ., 1995.
12. Kirilina A.V. Gendernye issledovaniya v lingvistike i teorii kommunikatsii: uchebnoe posobie dlya studentov vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenij [Gender Investigations in Linguistics and the Theory of Communications: textbook]. Moscow: «Rossijskaya politicheskaya ehntsiklopediya» (ROSSPEhN) Publ., 2004.
13. Kotov A.A. A Computational Model of Consciousness for Artificial Emotional Agents. In: Psychology in Russia. 2017. Vol. 10 (3). DOI:10.11621/PIR.2017.0304
14. Krejdlin G.E. Leksema dazhe [Lexeme dazhe]. In: Semiotika i informatika, 1975, iss. 6, pp. 102-115.
15. Krejdlin G.E. Neverbal'naya semiotika: [yazyk tela i estestv. yazyk] [Nonverbal Semiotics: [Body Language and Natural Language]]. Moscow: Novoe lit. obozrenie Publ., 2002.
16. Lingvisticheskaya pragmatika [Linguistic Pragmatics], comp. by N.D. Arutyunova, E.V. Paducheva. Novoe v zarubezhnoj lingvistike [New in Foreign Linguistics], iss. 16. Moscow: Progress Publ., 1985.
17. Mel'chuk I.A. Opyt teorii lingvisticheskikh modelej «Smysl – Tekst»: sematika, sintaksis [Outline of a “Meaning ⇔ Text” Linguistic Model Theory: Semantics, Syntax]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1975.
18. Men'shenina S.V. Moskovskaya ritoricheskaya shkola Yu.V. Rozhdestvenskogo: osnovatel' i posledovateli [Moscow Y. Rozhdestvenskys Rhetorics School: Foundator and Disciples]. In: Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya. 2013. N 1(21), pp. 125-130.
19. Norman B. Yu. Lingvisticheskaya pragmatika (na materiale russkogo i drugikh slavyanskikh yazykov): kurs lektsij [Linguistic Pragmatics (Based on Russian and Other Slavic Languages): lecture course]. Minsk: Belarusian State University Publ., 2009.
20. Osіpova T.F. Verbalїzatsїya maskulїnnikh ї femїnnikh strategїj ї taktik neverbal'noj kommunїkatsї [Verbalization of Masculine and Feminine Strategies and Tactics in Nonverbal Communication]. In: Lіngvіstichnі doslіdzhennya [Linguistic studies]: Zb. nauk. prats' KhNPU іm. G.S. Skovorodi, 2014, iss. 38, pp. 188-194. (In Ukrainian)
21. Paducheva E.V. Prezumptsii i drugie vidy neehksplitsitnoj informatsii v tekste [Presumptions and Other Types of Implicit Information in Text]. In: Nauchno-tekhnicheskaya informatsiya. Ser. 2. 1981. N 11, pp. 23-30.
22. Parshin P.B. Kommunikativnaya organizatsiya smysla i struktura znanij o mire (v svyazi so smyslom ‘dazhe’) [Communicative Organization of Sentence Meaning and the Structure of World Knowledge (in Connection with Meaning ‘dazhe’)]. In: Lingvisticheskie issledovaniya. Tipologiya. Dialektologiya. Ehtimologiya. Komparativistika. Sb. statej [Explorations in Linguistics. Typology. Dialectology. Etymology. Historical Linguistics. Collection of Papers]. Part 2, 1984. Moscow: Nauka Publ., pp. 55-65.
23. Pragmatika i problemy intensional'nosti [Pragmatics and Problems of Intension], ed. by N.D. Arutyunova. Moscow: INION Publ., 1988.
24. Rathmayr R. Die russischen Partikeln als Pragmalexeme. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften, 1985.
25. Reklamnyj tekst: semiotika i lingvistika [Advertising Text: Semiotics and Linguistics], ed. by Yu.K. Pirogova, P.B. Parshin. Moscow: Izd. dom Grebennikova Publ., 2000.
26. Rozhdestvenskij Yu.V. Printsipy sovremennoj ritoriki [Principles of Modern Rhetorics], ed. by V.I. Annushkin. Moscow: Flinta Publ, 2003.
27. Sharonov I.A. Mezhdometiya v rechi, tekste i slovare [Interjections in Speech, Text, and Dictionary]. Moscow: Russian State Social University Publ., 2008.
28. Shilikhina K.M. Ironiya v politicheskom dialoge [Sarcasm in Political Dialogue]. In: Politicheskaya lingvistika. 2011. N 4 (38), pp. 177-182.
29. Shmeleva E.Ya., Shmelev A.D. Russkij anekdot: tekst i rechevoj zhanr [Russian Canned Jokes: Text and Genre]. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskikh kul'tur Publ., 2001.
30. Skrytye smysly v yazyke i kommunikatsii: sbornik statej [Covert Senses in Language and Communication], comp.-ed.by I. A. Sharonov. Moscow: [b. i.], 2008.
31. Stalnaker R. Pragmatics. In: Semantics of Natural Language, eds. D. Davidson & G. Harman, Dordrecht: Reidel, 1972, pp. 380-397.
32. Susov I.P. Lingvisticheskaya pragmatika [Linguistic Pragmatics]. Moscow: «Vostok — Zapad» Publ., 2006.
33. Teoriya rechevykh aktov [Speech act theory], comp. by I.M. Kobozeva, V.Z. Dem'yankov. Novoe v zarubezhnoj lingvistike [New in Foreign Linguistics], iss. 16. Moscow: Progress Publ., 1986.
34. Tošović B. Internet-stilistika [Internet Stylistics]. Moscow: Flinta Publ., 2015.
35. Verschueren J., Östman J.-O., Blommaert J., Bulcaen Ch. Handbook of Pragmatics: 1997 Installment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 1999.

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up