Pragmalinguistics and sociopragmatics.
Date: 2015-10-07; view: 906.
Pragmatics is the brunch of linguistics which studies those aspects of meaning that cannot be captured by semantic theory. Pragmatics deals with how speakers use language in ways which cannot be predicted from linguistic knowledge alone. These ways demonstrate, in particular, the speakers' choice of linguistic units, the constraints that speakers encounter in social interaction, and the effects achieved by a message. In a narrow sense, pragmatics is concerned with what the speaker wants to say in his or her message, and with how listeners arrive at the intended meanings. This version of pragmatics is represented in the theory of speech acts. In a broad sense, pragmatics focuses on the general principles followed by humans when they communicate with one another. Hence, pragmatics is understood as the studies of both the intended content of a message and the ways it is conveyed. The two major branches of pragmatics are pragmalinguistics and sociopragmatics.
Pragmalinguistics focuses on language used in speech. It is the study of language use from the viewpoint of the language's structural resources. For instance, it may start with the pronoun system of a language, and examine the way in which people choose different available forms to express the range of attitudes and relationships (such as deference and intimacy). Pragmalinguistics incorporates pragmasemantics which analyzes the senses acquired by linguistic units in particular texts. Pragmasemantics borders on semantics proper. They can be viewed as ‘semantics of speech' and ‘semantics of language' respectively. Another branch of pragmalinguistics is general pragmatics (or pragmatics proper), which studies the principles governing the communicative use of language, especially as encountered in conversations. It focuses on the ways of conveying
the message rather than the message itself.
The areas that study the message are also text linguistics and discourse analysis. Text linguistics is primarily concerned with the organization of the message, or text, as a formal and semantic whole. Discourse analysis studies the organization of a text with regard to the situation of speech. In other words, it studies the text “plunged into life”. Text linguistics and discourse analysis, being immediately linked to pragmalinguistics, remain however individual linguistic fields.
Sociopragmatics examines the conditions on language use deriving from the social situation. For instance, it might begin with the social backgrounds of the participants of interaction and consider the way in which different factors (such as age, social status, gender, etc.) lead people to choose particular linguistic forms. Thus, sociopragmatics focuses on the speakers and the communicative situation. The latter serves as the context of interaction between the speakers who belong to one and the same culture (monocultural discourse) or to different cultures (cross-cultural discourse). The social background of the speakers is usually considered by sociolinguistics (to be discussed later). Cross-cultural discourse is studied within the framework of cross-cultural pragmatics.
18Pragmatics. Speech act, its constituents and aspects. Types of speech acts. Direct and indirect speech acts. Felicity conditions
Speech act and its constituents.
When humans speak, they pursue some goal and achieve some result. Therefore, utterances are somewhat similar to physical actions, which explains the term “speech acts”. Speech act is a communicative activity defined with regard to the intention of the speaker and the effect achieved on the listener. In this context, the act itself is called a locutionary act; the communicative intention of the act is called the illocutionary force; and the impact of the act upon the listener is called the perlocutionary effect.
The constituents of a speech act are the speaker (or writer), the listener (or reader), the message (an utterance or text), and the communicative situation (or situation of speech). These constituents relate to different branches of pragmatics (Figure 1).
The types of speech acts are defined with regard to their illocutionary force that reflects the communicative intention of the speaker. There are different typologies of speech acts. One of the most accepted (see Grammar: Communicative Grammar) distinguishes three basic types: informative acts, obligative acts, and constitutive acts.
Informative speech acts encompass all speech acts that convey information to the listener, ask information of the listener or state that someone lacks information. The information is about what one knows, thinks, believes or feels. Informative acts are subdivided into assertive acts and information questions. Assertive acts, or representatives, depict the world as seen by the speaker. E.g. The earth is flat. They haven't been there. I assume you are right. Information questions are inquiries about the lacking information. E.g. Where do you live?
Obligative speech acts show that the speaker imposes an obligation on somebody. In directive acts (order, command, request, proposal, advice, warning, suggestion, invitation, etc.), an obligation is imposed on the listener, e.g. Give me a cup of coffee. Make it black. Don't touch that. Could you lend me a pen, please? Why don't we go to the movies tonight? In commissive acts, the speaker imposes an obligation on himself or herself. Such acts (promise, offer, threat, menace, refusal, pledge, oath, etc.) show what the speaker intends to do. E.g. I'll be back. We will not do that.
Constitutive speech acts constitute, or create, a new social reality. Among such acts are declarative acts and expressive acts. Declarative acts change the physical world via an utterance (e.g. naming a person or thing, pronouncing somebody husband and wife, sentencing somebody to imprisonment, etc.). In order to perform a declaration appropriately, the speaker must have a special institutional role within a specific context. E.g. Referee: You are out! Jury Foreman: We find the defendant guilty. Expressive acts state what the speaker feels. They express the speaker's psychological states (pleasure, likes, dislikes, joys, sorrow or pain). Among such acts are thanks, praises, greetings, apologies, condolences, reproaches, reprimands, etc. E.g. I am really sorry. Congratulations! It's so nice of you! In using an expressive, the speaker attempts to change the psychological
Direct and indirect speech acts. A speech act is direct if it is associated with a specific syntactic structure. E.g. a declarative sentence used to make an assertion (The Earth rotates around the Sun), an interrogative sentence used to make a question (Does the Earth rotate around the Sun?) or an imperative sentence used as a command (Stand up!). A speech act is indirect if it is manifested with a syntactic structure typical of some other speech act. E.g. an interrogative or declarative sentence used as a directive (Why don't you have lunch? or The lunch is ready). Since one and the same syntactic structure may be used to manifest various types of speech acts, it is important to have the additional clues for identifying the communicative intention of the speaker. Such clues are provided by felicity conditions. (See Aitchison, p. 95-96).
Felicity conditions, or ‘happiness' conditions, are the appropriate circumstances under which a speech act can be recognized as intended. E.g., the sentence Our exam is in January is an assertion when said by a professor at the beginning of the semester; the same sentence may be interpreted as a directive (warning) when pronounced by the teacher at the end
of the semester. For some clear cases, the performance
will be infelicitous (inappropriate) if the speaker is not a specific person in a specific context, e.g. I sentence you to six months in prison – a judge in the courtroom.
A possible answer is to specify happiness conditions or felicity conditions - circumstances under which it would be appropriate to interpret something as a particular type of speech act. For example, if a genuine command has been given, the hearer must be physically capable of carrying it out, and must be able to identify the object(s) involved. Even this partial statement of the felicity conditions for commands would probably enable someone to identify 'Pick up that book!' and That book oughtn't to be on the floor' as genuine commands, and ‘Go jump in the lake!' and 'Gird up thy loins!' as pseudo-commands.
If we could fully identify the felicity conditions for each type of speech act, then we would have moved some way towards understanding how humans use language.
19Pragmatics, interpretation of a message. Frames, scripts, and implicatures. Pragmasemantics. Composition of a message: text linguistics and discourse analysis
A speech act evokes the image that contains knowledge stored in the form of frames, or some stereotypical situations which are compatible with the felicity conditions. A frame is retained in the memory as a pre-existing knowledge structure with a fixed static pattern. Frames are adapted to fit the present reality, and they can be altered as required. E.g. I bought a dress yesterday (STORE, or MARKET PLACE + SELLER + BUYER + CASH, or CREDIT CARD, or CHECK); Close the window, please (ROOM + OPEN WINDOW + COLD/NOISE + A PERSON WHO CAN CLOSE THE WINDOW).
(See Aitchison, p. 97).
While frames are static structures, scripts are dynamic structures. They model the pre-existing knowledge for interpreting event sequences. E.g. I must go to the dentist (GIVE YOUR NAME TO THE RECEPTIONIST à MAKE AN APPOINTMENT à COME TO THE DENTIST à HAVE YOUR TEETH EXAMINED à ONE TOOTH HAS A CAVITY à HAVE THE CAVITY STOPPED à LEAVE THE DENTIST).
Frames and scripts applied in interpreting a message by the participants of interaction are based on background knowledge. It is the information shared by the participants and taken for granted. Background knowledge includes presuppositions and implicatures.
Presupposition fits into the meaning of an individual linguistic expression – its signified or referential (contextual) meaning. Presuppositions are conventional, conversational, and cultural. Conventional presupposition is information associated with the conventional meaning (the signified) of a linguistic expression. E.g. (grammar) an imperative sentence is typically understood as a command, e.g. Pass the salt. Open the window. Keep silence; (lexicon) He has recovered (He was ill). Conversational presupposition is information obvious from the referential situation, or a particular situation of speech, e.g. Jane has left for Kiev (the speakers know who Jane is). Cultural presupposition is information shared by people who belong to one and the same culture, e.g. We'll have to elect a new Verhovna Rada. The Congress voted against this bill.
Implicature results from a combination of two or more linguistic expressions which look like incompatible formally, but which are compatible semantically because the meaning of the unsaid part of the utterance is easily inferred by the listener. In other words, the listener must assume that the speaker means to convey more than is being said, e.g. I hope, you have seen Peter. – Oh, I wasn't in town on Monday (= I haven't seen Peter who has already left by now).
Pragmasemantics, which borders on semantics, centers on the senses that a linguistic unit acquires in a particular message or text. Such meanings are also called functional meanings, or referential meanings, as they relate to definite referents in a concrete situation of speech. A linguistic unit, such as a word, may have several meanings, or senses (LSV), from which only one fits into the utterance. E.g. I've bought this chair at the auction . The lecture is given by the chair of the Department of English. Further, a particular sense may have a number of referents, from which only one is actualized as the referential meaning and is to be entailed by the listener. E.g. chair as a piece of furniture: large, antique, with a red seat, etc.; chair as the head of a department: John Smyth, aged 45, tall, black haired, etc. Entailment of referential meanings is grounded on frames, scripts, and various presuppositions: conventional, situational, and cultural. Situational presuppositions are particularly important for deictic words, such as pronouns, the semantics of which is made obvious only within some context.
MESSAGE: composition
Text linguistics is concerned with formal and semantic means which provide textual cohesion and coherence. Conventionally, textual cohesion (ñâÿçíîñòü) means that a message, text in particular, is a structural unit. It exists as a whole due to a number of cohesive linguistic means, such as repetition, synonyms, anaphora and cataphora, comlex and compound sentences, linking words then, hence, therefore, after that, firstly, secondly, etc. Textual coherence (öåëîñòíîñòü) is primarily associated with the content of a message. Coherence is provided by the familiar and expected relationships in experience which we use to connect the meanings of words and
utterances, even when those connections are not explicitly made
(e.g. Plant sale is understood as ‘Somebody sells plants', but Garage sale is understood as ‘Something is sold in a garage'). Coherence is grounded on frames and scripts as stereotypical knowledge structures of knowledge. Implicit connections may be quite sophisticated in literary, especially poetic, texts, the meaning of which is created via a somewhat unconventional integration of concepts. The link between them may require an effort on behalf of the reader.
Discourse analysis is concerned with the message, text in particular, placed within a particular communicative situation and considered with regard to the intention of the speaker, and the effect on the listener. Illocution and perlocution of a text cause its specific form and content, which is reflected in various genres and styles. Genre and style have their patterns, or standards, which must be observed in the composition of a message, or text. Hence, discourse analysis overlaps with stylistics. (See Aitchison, p. 97-99).
Discourse analysis is the study which deals with this topic. It overlaps with stylistics, the study of linguistics and literature. Devices which maintain the smooth flow of communication are particularly important in written language, where there is no one available to clarify unclear points
Taking it in turns
Conversation is not just a case of linking sentences together. On a more basic level, it fits into a conventional framework. Consider the 'dialogue' below:
Mother: And how's my pretty little darling then?
Âabó: Ugh...Ugh.
Mother: Î what a nice bit of wind that was! You must be feeling better!
Baby: Goo, goo.
This brief snatch of 'conversation' illustrates one important fact about human speech: people take it in turns to talk. Even ifone of the participants cannot speak, the other one pretends that the non-talker has taken their turn. But we can go further than simply noting the
Pragmatics. Cooperative principle. Grice's maxims. Floating and deception. (Lecture 3; Aitchison, p. 63-65).
20Cooperative principle. Grice's maxims, or maxims of conversation. Breaking the cooperative principle. Multiple conversational implicatures. (See Aitchison, p. 63-65). Intentional violation of the maxims of conversation is called flouting /`flautin/ (Russ. èçä¸âêà, Ukr. ãëóçóâàííÿ). In this case, the speaker remains cooperative, but expresses his or her thought very indirectly, often metaphorically. The listener is expected to be aware of what the speaker said. E.g. Student: How do you like my paper, professor? – Professor: The title is good. Kate: Ann has a new boyfriend. – Ann: I don't like elephants. Floating differs from deception, an intentional violation of the maxims, which is hidden from the hearer. The speaker makes the listener believe that the statement is true, while it is not.
21Pragmatics. Face. Face-saving and face-threatening. Hedges. Principle of politeness. Positive politeness and negative politeness strategies (Lecture 3; Aitchison, p. 100-101; Masters' presentation).
Principle of politeness. Principle of politeness is based on two major social requirements: “No criticism” and “No interference”. These requirements mean that the speaker should apply face-savings acts, or utterances and actions which help to avoid a potential threat to a person's public self-image. Conversely, the speaker should not apply face-threatening acts, or utterances and actions which may threaten a person's public self-image. The linguistic media that mediate the norms of social behavior and provide the speaker's face-saving through courtesy, rapport, deference, and distance include special words and phrases (please, be so kind, it will be very nice of you), syntactic patterns (Open the window, will you?, Would/could you open the window, please), appropriate tones of voice, and acceptable forms of address. According to the principle of politeness, indirect forms of imperative speech are more preferable than the direct forms. One more medium for demonstrating politeness is hedges, or caution notes. E.g. As far as I know, they are married. You are ill, I guess. (See Aitchison, p. 100-101).
There are two types of politeness strategies. Positive politeness strategies aim to show solidarity with the listener. The speaker proposes to the listener some common action, which is most frequently expressed by the inclusive “we” and “let's”. E.g. Let's go to the movies this week. Why don't we go to the movies this week? We really should go to the movies this week. Negative politeness strategies, on the other hand, show that the speaker respects the listener's desire not to be imposed upon. The speaker inquires after the listener's ability or willingness to do something. E.g. – I am having a party next Saturday night. Can you come? a) – Oh, I am sorry. I am leaving for Kyiv on Saturday. b) – Oh, yes, thank you. I'll be there. The speaker can also express his or her desire indirectly. E.g. It's cold in the room (= ‘Close the window').
22Pragmatics. Talking in turns. Adjacency pairs. Repairs.
Talking in turns. In conversation, speakers talk in turns. This is a social ritual partially prescribed by conventions. Talking in turns includes such regular phenomena as adjacency pairs, repairs, and interruptions. Adjacency pairs (See Aitchison, p. 99-100). Repairs (See Aitchison, p. 100). Interruptions are initiated by the listener who interrupts the speaker. Interruptions may be caused by the content of the utterance, the form of the utterance, and the communicative context. E.g. (content) You are to blame! You…– No, I am not guilty; (form) Shut up! I am… – Mind your language;
(context) We are going to see a detective and… --
Well, I guess it's not a telephone talk.
SITUATION OF SPEECH: Cross-cultural pragmatics.
The study of differences in expectations based on cultural patterns of communication is part of a broad area of investigation generally known as cross-cultural pragmatics. Since conversational strategies are culturally variable, i.e. they differ from country to country, such differences have to be considered in teaching foreign languages. The examples of variations are:
direct negative answers to questions vs. elusive negative answers to questions;
compliments are accepted vs. compliments are rejected;
the speaker should inflate the listener (Eastern countries) vs. the speaker is not expected to inflate the listener (Western countries);
social rituals which require various adjacency pairs;
turn taking: talking simultaneously (Southern countries) vs. waiting for a pause to join in the conversation (Northern countries);
the use of silence and laughter as communicative signals;
etc.
23Sociolinguistics: definition. Speech community: monolingual and bilingual. National language vs. ethnic language. National language and standard language (Lecture 4).
Sociolinguistics, as a branch of linguistics, studies the ways in which languages are integrated with human society (specifically, with reference to such notions as race, ethnicity, class, gender, and social institutions). (See Aitchison, p. 103). Sociolinguistics borders on sociohistirical linguistics which studies the forms and uses of language in society, and how particular linguistic functions and types of variation develop over time within specific languages, speech communities, social groups and individuals.
In sociolonguistics, the notion of ‘a language' cannot be defined on the basis of geography, or ethnicity, or mutual intelligibility of its speakers. E.g. a geographical definition of a language would separate British, American, and Australian English, which is obviously unsatisfactory; numerous people who live in Ukraine regard themselves as ethnic Ukrainians, yet speak Russian; Ukrainian and Russian or Dutch and German are not only mutually intelligible, they are also structurally more alike than some dialects of Chinese. Faced with this dilemma, sociolinguists prefer the term ‘a speech community' to the term ‘a language'. Speech community is any group of people who consider that they speak the same language or language variety. Such a group can vary in size from a tiny cluster of speakers to whole nations or supranational groups (such as the Russian-using speech community in Asia). Speech communities using a single language are called monolingual. However, the majority of world's speakers are bilingual, i.e. they are in command of two and more languages. The use of a particular language in a monolingual and bilingual speech communities is primarily associated with a national language.
National language is a language which is considered to be the chief language of a nation state. A national language is grounded on the respective ethnic language; however, they are not identical. A nation is a large community of people united geographically, politically, economically, culturally, and linguistically (they speak one common language). An ethnos is a community of people united only culturally and linguistically. The major differences between a national language and an ethnic language:
a national language exists in its spoken and written forms, while an ethnic language may exist only in its spoken form and use another language in writing;
the lexical and grammatical systems of a national language are more elaborated;
a national language has its standard, or norm;
a national language is polifunctional: it is used in various spheres of life, where it has stylistic variations.
A national language (as well as a language that has no national status) may have its varieties governed by regional, occupational, social, personal, and situational factors. Such varieties are also called lects. The latter include dialects (regional, or geographical, varieties of language), sociolects (social varieties demonstrated by a social class or occupational group), and idiolects (varieties demonstrated by an individual speaker). A prestige variety of language used within a speech community is called a standard language. A standard language provides an institutional norm for such purposes as the media and language teaching. Linguistic forms that do not conform to this norm are often called nonstandard.
28Bilingualism is a speech situation where an individual community controls two (or more) languages, e.g. English and French spoken in Canada, English and Hindi spoken in India, Dutch and French spoken in Belgium, Ukrainian and Russian spoken in Ukraine. In simultaneous bilingualism, the languages are learned at the same time; in sequential bilingualism, the second language is acquired after the first one. The term ‘multilingualism' may substitute the term ‘bilingualism', but is often contrasted with it, by emphasizing the use of more than two languages by a speech community (or an individual). E.g. German, French, Italian, and Rhaetian / ri: n/ (Rhaeto-Romance) spoken in Switzerland. Bilingualism should be distinguished from diglossia.
Diglossia /dai glosi / is a sociolinguistic situation where two
very different varieties of a language co-occur throughout a speech community, each performing an individual range of functions, and each having acquired some degree of status as a standard. The varieties are usually described as high (H) and low (L), corresponding broadly to difference in formality. High is used in such contexts as sermons, lectures, speeches, news broadcasts, and newspaper editorials, and is learned at school. Low is used in everyday conversation, radio soaps, folk literature,
and other informal contexts. Diglossic languages are
\ widespread; among them are Arabic, Modern Greek, Swiss German, and the languages of the Dravidian family.
Language planning and language policy.
Language planning is a deliberate, systematic, and theory-based attempt to solve the communication problems of a multi-lingual community by studying its various languages or dialects, and developing an official language policy concerning their selection and use. Corpus planning deals with the selection and codification of norms, as in the writing grammars and the standardization of spelling. Status planning deals with the initial choice of language, including attitudes towards alternative languages and the political implications of various choices. Status planning determines the choice of the country's national and official languages. (See Aitchison, p. 117).
A national language is the chief language of a nation state used for both domestic and international purposes. An official language is the language which is used only domestically in such public domains as the law courts, government, and broadcasting. In many countries (especially those where a particular ethnos considerably prevails over the other ethnic groups, e.g. France), there is no difference between the national and the official language. However, in a multilingual speech community, such as Belgium, Singapore, or Ghana, there may be no uncontroversial candidate for a national language, and one or more of the languages used in the area may be designated official. Several countries have two or more official languages representing the interests of their chief population groupings. E.g. Switzerland, where Swiss German (spoken by 65% of the population), French (19%), Italian (12%), and Rhaetian (1%) are official languages; Canada, where English and French are considered to be official languages; English is used for international purposes, and French is the official regional language of Quebec. The choice of national and official languages is often grounded on the language dominance.
Language dominance is a situation in a multilingual community where one language is held to be more important than the others. This situation may arise because the language has more speakers, has a more prestigious history, or has been given an influential role by the government. The attempts of the government or educational authorities to manipulate a linguistic situation in a particular direction should be careful, since the sudden imposition of a particular language by decree may well result in failure. Similarly, within a bilingual individual, we may speak of one language being the dominant language – the person knows it better or uses it more often. This is usually the person's mother tongue. However, it need not always be so: many of the people who left continental Europe for the USA in the 1930s ended up with English as their dominant language.
30Sociolinguistics. Language contact. Convergence of dialects. Convergence of languages (via proximity and via assimilation).
Language contact is a situation of geographical contiguity or close social proximity between languages or dialects, so that a degree of bilingualism comes to exist within a community. The languages (also called contact vernaculars) then begin to influence each other, such as by introducing loan words or making changes in pronunciation and even grammar. Language contact may cause convergence of dialects and convergence of individual languages. Convergence of individual languages may result in the appearance of a new language. The most dramatic examples of such languages are pidgins and creols. Not infrequently, convergence results in the form of a language that becomes standardized and acquires the status of a national language.
Convergence of dialects takes place when one of the dialects spoken in a particular region integrates the features of the neighboring dialects, and thus becomes more elaborated. E.g. the Russian language, traced back to the 11th century, is based on the central (Moscow) dialect, which in the 16th – 17th centuries became standardized, having integrated the features of the northern and southern dialects. Same holds for the Ukrainian language, traced back to the 14th century. Among the three groups of its dialects – south-eastern, south-western, and northern – the basic dialects are south-eastern, which developed into a standard language in the 17th -18th centuries, having acquired some features of the other dialects.
Convergence of languages has two major cases: convergence via proximity and convergence via assimilation.
Convergence via proximity is found within adjacent speech communities (mostly living on the frontier of two countries), which tend to borrow words and sounds from each other. The grammatical systems of such languages remain intact. The set of phonetic and lexical forms borrowed into the target language from the source language or languages is called the adstratum. E.g. the Polish words and prosody borrowed into Ukrainian used in the West of Ukraine; the words from the languages of American Indians borrowed into American English and Canadian English. In some cases, the proximity of several speech communities and their intensive contacts may affect not only the sound system and the vocabulary of languages, but their grammatical systems as well. Dew to the borrowings from morphology and syntax, even genetically dissimilar languages may become alike. Such languages form a linguistic area. E.g. the Balkan linguistic area that includes Bulgarian, Macedonian, Serbo-Croatian, Albanian, and New Greek. (See Aitchison, p. 155 –156).
Convergence via assimilation is found within mixed speech
communities living on one and the same territory. Typically, one of such communities is socially dominant. It may be assimilated with the dominated community, which results in the appearance of a new
\ethnos. One of the two languages may substantially influence the grammatical system of another language. Such an influence may happen in two directions: a dominated language, which was previously spoken in this region, may influence the dominant language, and vive versa. A set of forms inherent in the previous (dominated) language, which influenced the structure of the later (dominant) language, is called the substratum. E.g. the set of Celtic forms that caused modification of the Latin language in ancient Gaul. A set of forms inherent in the later (dominant) language, which influenced the structure of the previous (dominated) language, is called the superstratum. E.g. the set of Norman French forms that caused modification of Old English. The substratum and superstratum cause substantial changes in the language which remains native for some speech community.
Pidgin is a native language of no one. It emerges when members of two mutually unintelligible speech communities attempt to communicate. A pidgin is used at first in a limited set of circumstances. It typically develops on trade routes and in costal areas, so it is often called a trade language. The phonology, syntax and lexicon in a pidgin are simpler than in an ordinary language. A pidgin is usually based on one language, though it soon acquires an admixture of other languages, as well as an independent construction of its own. Many pidgins are based on European languages, reflecting the history of colonialism, e.g. Tok Pisin spoken in Papua New Guinea is based on English, but it also has plenty of non-English syntactic constructions. Some pidgins are based on the native tongues of a region, e.g. African pidgins based on Bantu. The number of pidgins in the world amounts to 50; they are mostly used in South-East Asia, Oceania, and Africa. Sometimes pidgins are given an official status by the community, e.g. Tok Pisin. (See Aitchison, p. 118 –119).
Pidgins contrast with creoles, which evolve when pidgins acquire native speakers. The process of expanding the structural and stylistic range of the pidgin is called creolization. Once the pidgin becomes a creole, ist system rapidly develops: the syntax becomes more complex, and extra vocabulary items are created. Fairly soon, if it continues to develop, a creole is very likely to be indistinguishable from a ‘full' language. In some circumstances, a creole can be devoured by its parent, if the latter has more prestige in the society. The words and constructions from the base language gradually replace the creole ones. This process is known as decreolozaion. (See Aitchison, p. 119 – 120).
Auxiliary language is a language which has been adopted by a speech community for such purposes as international communication, trade, or education, though only a minority of the community may use it as a mother tongue. The function of an auxiliary language can be performed by a natural language, which is termed in this case ‘lingua franca', and artificial languages.
Lingua franca originally meant ‘Frankish tongue', which wasused as a common language in the Mediterranean area in the Middle Ages. This language, which integrated French, Provencal, and Italian words, was mostly restricted to trade. Arab and Turkish merchants called Europeans ‘Franks'. In contemporary sociololinguistics, lingua franca is any natural auxiliary language used to permit routine communication between ethnic groups of people who speak different native languages. Lingua franca can be one of the languages or dialects of a particular region, or a ‘neutral' language which is not native for the peoples in this region, or a pidgin grounded on some native or European language. Lingua francas are very common in heavily multilingual regions, e.g. Russian in the former republics of the USSR, Hindi in India, Swahili in East Africa.
When a lingua franca starts to be used in different communicative spheres,
it becomes a koine. The term ‘koine' initially referred to the Greek language, which was a common spoken and written language for Eastern Mediterranean countries in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. In contemporary sociolinguistics, koine is understood as any (mostly spoken) language that provides a social integration of some region. Koine occupies an intermediate position between a lingua franca and a standard language. E.g. the central (Moscow) dialect in the 16th – 17th centuries.
International languages are lingua francas that have a widespread use as a medium of communication among different countries. At present, international communication is provided by the group of most spread languages known as ‘the Club of World Tongues'. These languages – English, Arab, Spanish, Chinese, Russian, and French – have a legal status as the ‘official' or ‘working' languages of the United Nations Organization and UNESCO. English is the most used language in the fields of science and technology. Another group of international languages is applied by world religions. These languages are: Latin used by the Catholic Church, Old Church Slavonic used by the Orthodox Church, Arab used by Islam, Sanskrit used by Hinduism and Buddhism.
Artificial languages have been invented to serve some practical purposes. Several have been devised in an attempt to solve ‘the problem of Babel'. These languages are the focal concern of interlinguistics. In the 17th – 20th centuries, more than 1,000 artificial languages were devised. Among the most notable are Volapuk, Esperanto, Ido, Novial, and Interlingua.
Volapuk /voul `pyk/, the first large-scale proposal of its kind, was invented by Martin Schlyer in 1879. The word means ‘world speak'. In Volapuk, the words of natural languages (English, German, French, Latin, etc.) are modified and become
non-recognizable, e.g. Engl. world > vol, speak > puk.
The grammar has a synthetic type: it includes a considerable number of morphological categories (2 numbers and 4 cases for nouns; 3 persons, 6 tenses, 4 moods, 2 voices, and 2 aspects for verbs). This principle of construing a language was ineffective, and the further projects involved mostly international words and the analytical type of grammar where morphological categories were minimized.
| <== previous lecture | | | next lecture ==> |
| Psycholinguistic evidence. | | |