语用失误.docx

1、语用失误12Chapter Three Analysis of Pragmatic FailureIn cross-cultural communication people with different cultural backgrounds often encountermisunderstanding between each other even though they find little difficulties in understandingthe literal meaning of their utterances.As it is demonstrated in th

2、e following communicationevent,a Chinese sport correspondent was going to cover the Worlds Fastest Woman 100-meterrace in Chengdu,China.He had a chance meeting with Marion Jones of the United States,World100-meter champion,and her friend,Hunter,on board the same flight.Correspondent:(eager to strike

3、 up a conversation and complimentary)You look very much like ONeil.Hunter:(flaring up with wide-open eyes)Nonsense!I dont look like him.Obviously,the conversation came to an abrupt end because of Hunters strong resentment tobe likened to ONeil.Meanwhile,the correspondent might be at a complete loss

4、as to whyHunter got irritated since what he said is a well-accepted conversational beginning and a polite,good-humored compliment for average Chinese people.Such miscommunication often happens,not because of the non-native speakersgrammatical incompetence as revealed in their inaccuratepronunciation

5、 or grammatical mistakes of the target language,but because of their pragmaticincompetence,which is called pragmatic failure as distinguished from grammatical error.Therefore,pragmatic failure,which causes communication breakdown,has become more andmore worthy of attention in cross-culture communica

6、tion.In this chapter the issue is going to beexplored,which mainly concerns the communication between Chinese English learners andEnglish native speakers.3.1 Definition of Pragmatic FailurePragmatic failure was first proposed by Jenny Thomas(1983:91)to refer to“the inability tounderstand what is mea

7、nt by what is said.”Thomas notes that pragmatic failure has occurred onany occasion(1983:94)on which H(the hearer)perceives the force of Ss(the speakers)utterance as other than S intended he or she should perceive it.For example,pragmatic failurewill occur,if:A:H perceives the force of Ss utterance

8、as strong as or weaker than S intended s/he shouldperceive it;B:H perceives as an order an utterance,which S intended s/he should perceive as a request;C:H perceives Ss utterance as ambivalent where S intended no ambivalence;D:S expects H to be able to infer the force of his/her utterance,but is rel

9、ying on the system13of knowledge or beliefs which S and H do not share.He Ziran points out that pragmatic failures are not the errors in diction,but those mistakesfailing to fulfil communication because of infelicitous styles,incompatible expressions andimproper habit(He Ziran,1997:205).Qian Guanlia

10、n defines that although the speaker uses thesentences which are grammatically correct,he unconsciously violates the norms of interpersonalrelationship and social norms in speech,or takes no notice of time,hearer and context(QianGuanlian,2001:59).In certain degree,He Ziran and Qian Guanlian have the

11、same opinion anddiscuss pragmatic failures in the social and cultural context,pointing out that when pragmaticfailures occur,the two sides in the communication are in the condition of being unconsciousabout their reasons,which cause pragmatic failures.The nature of pragmatic failure is that it fails

12、to achieve the speakers goal.This kind of failure often happens especially in the cross-culturalcommunication.3.2 Classification of Pragmatic FailureJenny Thomas(1983)has distinguished two kinds of pragmatic failure:pragmalinguisticfailure and sociopragmatic failure,which are derived from Leech.Leec

13、h put forward thedistinction between pragmalinguistics and sociopragmatics as two sub-branches of pragmatics,by which he meant to facilitate the general pragmatics,since“general pragmatics,as studied here,is a fairly abstract study”.Therefore,we need“detailed pragmalinguistic studies which arelangua

14、ge specific and detailed sociopragmatic studies which are culture specific”.(1983:11).Thomas then adopted the terms to facilitate studies on pragmatic failure.3.2.1 Pragmalinguistic FailurePragmalinguistic failure occurs when learners do not express themselves in a linguisticallyappropriate manner.I

15、n cross-cultural communication,it“arises when the pragmatic forcemapped by students onto a given utterance is systematically different from the force mostfrequently assigned to it by native speakers of the target language,or when speech act strategiesare inappropriately transferred from L1 to L2”(Th

16、omas,1983:99).One kind of such failuresarises when two languages share the same expression but use it in different situations.Forexample,it is common in Chinese to give a response to thanks by saying“没关系(mei guan xi)”.If,however,a Chinese learner of English were to translate“mei guan xi”into English

17、 literally as“Never mind”in response to an expression of gratitude such as“Thanks a lot.Thats a greathelp.”,the English addressee would not be able to interpret the utterance as an acknowledgementof thanks.Though the literal meaning of“Never mind”is equal to the Chinese“mei guan xi”,thecommunicative

18、 conventions behind the two expressions are different.“mei guan xi”in Chinese14is uttered in response to either thanks or apology while the English expression“Never mind”isused only in declination to an apology.Thus,the force of the utterance would be lost and theChinese learner of English would hav

19、e failed to make his or her meaning understood.Pragmalinguistic failure also stems from pragmatic ambiguity,that is,a speaker intends oneforce,but another interpretation of the intended force is possible.Take the followingconversation for example:A telephone conversation between a professor and a fo

20、reign student illustrates the studentsfailure to interpret the intended speech act:Professor:Hello,is Mr.Ma there please?Student:Yes.Professor:Oh-may I speak to him please?Student:Yes.Professor:Oh-are you Mr.Ma?Student:Yes,this is Mr.Ma.Here student responds to professors question as if it were an e

21、xistential question rather thana summons.In this case,the speaker is generally unaware that more than one interpretation isavailable.Such pragmatic ambiguity is not difficult for native speakers to interpret because in aspecific context one meaning is usually more prominent than the others,and thus

22、is usually takenfirst.The Chinese students,who are not exposed to the everyday conversation of the targetlanguage,however,have great difficulty in interpreting it.3.2.2 Sociopragmatic FailureSociopragmatic failure refers to that kind of miscommunication resulting from ignorance ornegligence of socia

23、l or cultural differences of the speaker or the listener in cross-culturalcommunication.The diversity in social value systems and cultural and language norms are notalways well interpreted.Thus,misunderstanding of ones intention is inevitably caused and is farmore delicate and difficult to deal with

24、 since it involves the speakers cultural knowledge of thetarget language.Let us look at the following examples:Situation:In the classroom,Mr.Smith congratulates Li Ying on her success in theexamination.Mr.Smith:I was told that you passed the college entrance examination.Congratulations.You really di

25、d a very good job.Li Ying:Just lucky.Lis response shows modesty and humility,for in Chinese culture,direct acceptance of acompliment would imply conceit or lack of manner.In English culture,people would accept15praise naturally by saying“Thank you”or“I am glad you think so.”without being thoughtimmo

26、dest or arrogant,on the contrary,they think such humility and modesty imply weakness,incompetence and a lack of self-confidence.Different reaction to praise leads to sociopragmaticfailure.While the way to offer commendation may sometimes bring about the failure.Forexample:After Prof.Smith finished h

27、is lecture,several students went up to him and said,“Prof.Smith,youve made a wonderful lecture.”In an investigation carried out by He Ziran(1985)almost one hundred percent of thesubjects considered the statement of commendation completely appropriate and thought surelythe addressee would accept it h

28、appily.But in England or in America,a good academic lecturemeans that it must be practical and realistic,not wonderful.Such a statement gives theimpression that the speaker is flattering and insincere.We can see such sociopragmatic failures are due to the different social values between Chineseand w

29、esterners,which are related to the beliefs,customs,concepts of the world,and otherculture-specific factors of English speaking community.Without adequate cultural knowledge,we cant identify them at all.3.3 Causes of Pragmatic FailureToday,few would deny that cross-cultural communication is a process

30、 of avoidingpragmatic failure with the purpose to achieve successful communication between people underdifferent cultural backgrounds.Then what exactly causes pragmatic failure?There are variousreasons behind pragmatic failure.The major causes are:1)Culture Difference,2)InappropriateTransfer,and 3)I

31、gnorance of the Context,4)Lack of Pragmatic Knowledge,and 5)Ethnocentrism.The following part will explain each of them.3.3.1 Culture DifferenceIn cross-cultural communication,cultural difference inevitably creates barriers to effectivecommunication,because Chinese people and western people comply wi

32、th different sets of normsand rules of social interaction.The Chinese learners of English may be quite familiar with theEnglish grammatical rules,but they may ignore the fact that the native speakers of English speakdifferently,respond to compliments and apologize differently,engage in different forms of politeinteraction,adopt different ways of making requests and so on.Unaware of the differencesbetween Chine