Functional pragmatics

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Functional pragmatics (FP) is a language-theoretical approach which, based on Karl Bühler's field concept , develops a cross-lingual grammar representation based on the communicative functions of language, which are interpreted as socially functional functions. Functional pragmatics as an empirical and hermeneutic theory is based on a five-field model. It was founded by Konrad Ehlich and Jochen Rehbein , and Angelika Redder and Gabriele Graefen are involved in further development .

Basic category: linguistic action

In FP, language is understood as a form of action. Central categories for linguistic action are:

  • The historical foundations of linguistic action, not just in the lexicon
  • (Linguistic) action is connected with interaction , i. H. Action is designed to be cooperative
  • Linguistic action accomplishes individual goals and is embedded in social purposes, in groups or institutions

Communication: is a specific form of interaction in which 4 components work together: an extra-linguistic situation (P), linguistic signs (p), one (or more) speakers (also writers) and one (or more) listeners (also readers).

Levels of linguistic action

procedure

The procedure is the smallest unit of action that takes place in ellipses , deictic, expeditive (= directing, see below: 5 fields) or back-channel (listener signals). A procedure does not necessarily have a (determinable) illocution . An example would be the exclamation “fire” in a fire.

Speech act

A speech act consists of several procedures (speaking, writing, listening and reading) by one or more speakers and listeners.

Discourse / text

A discourse is a speaking situation, a text is a “stretched speaking situation”. Both text and discourse are combinations of language actions.

Five fields

Note: the grammatical terms and examples here refer to the German language.

Display field (" Deixis ")

A field already present at Bühler that causes the speaker to cause the listener (or listeners) to focus their attention on something (“there”). The personal pronouns 1st and 2nd person (singular and plural) also perform a deictic procedure. The use of tense (depending on the situation) can also have a deictic level: the present tense expresses closeness and the past tense expresses distance.

Symbol field

This field is also available at Bühler, but is more narrowly defined in Functional Pragmatics. The symbol field means a naming procedure. Here you will find the traditional content words, a noun designates an object, a verb an activity and an adjective a property. In semantics , this process is called “ reference ”. Functional pragmatics, on the other hand, sees this as a mental achievement; the speaker activates the corresponding knowledge in the listener by referring to a symbol (often a word, but also expressions, functional verb structures are possible).

Operational field

This is about knowledge processing. Linguistic knowledge is associated with other linguistic knowledge (focus connectivity). The conjunction “because” means the causal connection of linguistic units of knowledge. This field includes personal pronouns of the third person (singular or plural, "you" can, however, also perform deictic procedures), articles , adverbs , negation words , but also word order , sentence intonation and many particles . Both adverbs and particles are difficult to assign in traditional part-of- speech theory . In functional pragmatics, they are assigned to different fields according to their communicative function (procedure).

Steering field (expeditive field)

These are the means of linguistically contacting a listener and directly influencing actions. This includes, for example, the imperative forms (in the sense of the imperative endings of the verbs) or the direct salutations (“Hey you there!”) And interjections .

Malfeld (expressive field)

This is about expressing moods and atmosphere. In German this is mainly expressed through the stress .

Consequences of the theory

advantages

  • Since functional pragmatics is consistently based on linguistic action, intuitive questions can also be assumed in (early) language lessons. (Why do you say that?)
  • Many problems of part-of-speech assignment, especially in the problematic adverb and particle categories, can be avoided.
  • Linguistic field theory is also suitable for languages ​​in which individual words are difficult to identify.

Disadvantage)

The traditional parts of speech have to be refocused. This is a major relearning process for those familiar with the current part of speech classifications. The traditional parts of speech can, however, be combined with functional pragmatics, as was done here for argumentative purposes.

swell

  1. On the history of parts of speech: see Ehlich, Konrad (2007), in: Handbuch der deutschen Wortarten, Hoffmann, Ludger (Hg), Berlin (de Gruyter)
  2. Redder, Angelika, Wortarten als Basis der Grammarvermittlung, in: Köpke, Klaus-Michael / Ziegler, Arne (eds.) Grammar in the University and for Schools, Tübingen (Niemeyer) 2007, especially p. 142/143 shows the Consequences of functional pragmatics in relation to the teaching of “adverbs” and “particles”

literature

  • Ehlich, Konrad, functional-pragmatic communication analysis, goals and procedures, in: Hoffmann, Ludger (Hg), Linguistics. A reader, Berlin (de Gruyter) 2000
  • Hoffmann, Ludger (Hg), Handbook of German Parts of Speech, Berlin (de Gruyter) 2007
  • Redder, Angelika, parts of speech as a basis for teaching grammar, in: Köpke, Klaus-Michael / Ziegler, Arne (eds.) Grammar in the University and for School, Tübingen (Niemeyer) 2007
  • Rehbein, Jochen, The Concept of Discourse Analysis, in: Brinker, Antos, Heinemann, Sager (Eds.), Text and Conversational Linguistics. An international handbook of contemporary research, Berlin (de Gruyter) 2001