Pragmatics – the Study of Meaning

Pragmatics focuses on conversational implicature; that is, what is meant by a speaker's utterance that is not literally expressed. Instead, it is suggested, implied, or hinted at. In spoken language, body language and tone greatly influence how we are understood. In written language, word choice, syntax, punctuation, etc. contribute to how a text is interpreted.

Person A: Oh, it’s freezing in here!

Person B: Yes, someone left the window open all night.

Person A: Why do you say it like that? It wasn’t me.

Person B: No, I’m sure the window fairy came by.

Person A: Why does everything have to be a fight?

When we communicate, our utterances are interpreted. In the example above, one person interprets the other's statement about the window as an accusation. But if we look at the statement 'someone left the window open all night', there is no accusation there. Person A interprets it as an accusation not based on the words but from the way the words are said, or based on previous conversations with person B. When person B goes on to blame a fictional creature for the open window, person A does not interpret that as an attempt to offer a reasonable explanation for the open window. Instead, they see it as an invitation to start a fight. We can also assume that the two people have had several fights earlier. The study of how we communicate, and how we are able to interpret what we hear or read, is what the study of pragmatics is all about.

Usually, people do not speak in deliberate, specific, and concise ways, so how are we able to understand them? The linguist H.P. Grice suggested that we all adhere to a principle of cooperation. When someone says something, we assume it will be relevant for us in some way and we look for the meaning that will be relevant for us. You may have noticed that it is easier to communicate with close family members or friends? That is because you have more context and background information, and there are fewer possible interpretations to choose from. Interpretation will take place more effortlessly.

Person C: I am so sorry. I am ten minutes late.

Person D: Well, you are just the worst person in the world, now everything is ruined.

Now, if person C and D are friends, it is easy to interpret person D's statement as a joke. If they are strangers or people who do not like each other, we also have to allow for the possibility that the statement is meant literally.

It is interesting to note that the personal experiences of the person we are talking to will influence how they interpret what we say. In the same way, our personal experiences will influence how we interpret what others tell us.

Let's take the example of a group of students who have recently gotten to know each other at university. Two of them have talked about taking the ferry to Denmark for the weekend to go shopping, and they want the others to come along.

Person A: So B and I have decided to go to Denmark. We'll have fun on the boat, and then go shopping, and we'll be back in plenty of time for our test on Tuesday.

Person C: Cool, what time does the boat leave? (Thinking: This will be great fun. We'll spend more time together and get to know each other better).

Person A: 6:30 p.m. on Friday. It costs 25 pounds one way.

Person D: Sits quietly thinking: They haven't said they want me to come. I guess they don't like me very much after all. Perhaps I should just get up and leave.

Person C and D react very differently to the conversation. Person C assumes they are invited and just wants to know when they are leaving. Person D believes that unless they are explicitly invited, the others do not want them to come. This could reflect person C's and D's past experiences. Perhaps person D has often been excluded in the past, or haven't had many friendships before, while person C has more self-confidence and sees it as natural that the others would want them to come along. Person A and B both expect that if they tell their friends that they are planning something fun, their friends will understand that they are invited. Since the four friends are unaware that they do not share the same interpretation of what is said, misunderstandings and hurt feelings could be the result.

Since conversation moves so fast, it can be difficult to take into account the fact that our interpretations of other people's statements are coloured by our past experiences, personal biases, and pre-judgements. However, we should always try to give others the benefit of the doubt, and if other people say things we take offence at, we may want to ask a few questions to make sure we have interpreted them as they intended.

We often think of meaning as being inherent in the words we use, but that is not the case. For example, if we talk to someone about buying a table, we think that both of us share an understanding of what a table is, and what kind of table we are going to buy.

However, depending on their use there is a myriad of tables, and even if we have narrowed it down to a specific type of table, there will be many different styles. So, what we mean when we use the word 'table' may be very different from what the person we are talking to pictures in their mind.

Person A: I need to buy a new table for work.

Person B: What kind of table are you looking for? A conference table, or a meeting room table, or something you can use as a desk?

Person A: Oh, no I am a sound-engineer. I am going to buy a new mixing table. I have used Soundcraft so far, but I think I would like to try a Presonus.

Simple conversations like these show us that even when we speak the same language and use the same words, there is a myriad of different interpretations possible for what is being said.

The French linguist Ferdinand de Saussure pointed out that the relationship between the word, which he called 'sign', and what it represents is arbitrary. A linguistic sign is not a link between a thing and a name for that thing, but between a concept and a sound pattern. We may have the concept of a table in our minds when we talk to someone about tables, but this concept may be adjusted to fit the meaning of the word in the conversation we are having; it is not fixed or permanent. Let's imagine you have been using a chair as a table, and someone asks you to 'bring the table over here, into the light'. You would not then suddenly be confused as to why they are talking about tables when there isn't one in the room. However, if you just entered the room, and didn't know that the chair was -standing in' for the table, you would probably be very confused to be asked to move a non-existing object.

In English the concept of a table is associated with the sound pattern table, and this may seem like the only possible thing it could be called. However, in Norwegian we call a table bord, and it is linked to the same concept as 'table'. This shows us that although the link between concept and sound pattern is something that is agreed upon or shared in a language; it is neither inherent nor obvious that the physical object should be called by that particular name. If the majority of people who spoke the language agreed, the sound pattern used to describe the object could be changed.

From these examples, we can see that different concepts can share the same sound patterns. Since we know that words can have different meanings, we have no trouble interpreting these sentences. One aspect of language that pragmatics seeks to explain, is how we are able to understand what is meant when we use words that have several different meanings.

Pragmatics allows linguists to explore many interesting questions such as 'How does humour work'? Why do we find some statements funny, while others fall flat? 'How does politeness work?' Why do we find some people polite and others rude, even when they say more or less the same things? 'How do miscommunications arise?' 'Why do conflicts so easily arise between some people, while others communicate smoothly?' These are just a few of the topics that can be explored in pragmatics.