
3.2. Message: composition
Text linguistics is concerned with formal and semantic means which provide textual cohesion and coherence. Conventionally, textual cohesion (связность) 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 (целостность) 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).
3.3. Conveyng a message (general pragmatics)
Cooperative 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. издёвка, Ukr. глузування). 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.
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’).
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.