Fraser - 1996 - Pragmatic Markers

Fraser, B. Pragmatic markers [J]. Pragmatics, 1996 (6): 167-190. PRAGMATICPRAGMATICPRAGMATICPRAGMATICMARKERSMARKERSMARKERSMARKERS Bruce Fraser Boston University March 1996 I.I.I.I. INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION Simply stated, I take pragmatics to be an account of the process by which the language user takes a sentence representation provided by the grammar and, given the context in which the sentence is uttered, determines what messages and what effects the speaker has conveyed.1 My concern in this paper is with a part of that process, namely, the ways in which the linguistically encoded information of sentence meaning provides an indication of the direct, literal messages intended by the speaker. Let me set the framework within which I will be working. First, I assume that every sentence has a Direct Message Potential. Derived from sentence meaning, this is a specification of those messages that can be potentially communicated by the utterance of the sentence. Of course, the message potential of a sentence is seldom realized completely. Performance features and context typically modify what is actually conveyed by the utterance, excluding some messages, modifying others, and adding still others. The sentence “Sit down,” for example, has the potential of conveying a request, among other messages, by virtue of its meaning. Imposing the appropriate rising intonation when uttering this sentence can modify the message from a request to a question, and an angry tone of voice can add the message, not present in the linguistic encoding, that the speaker is upset. But what I will look at in this paper is the starting point of the process of pragmatic interpretation: the message potential that derives from the meaning of the sentence itself, before any consideration of performance or context occurs. Second, I assume that sentence meaning, the information encoded by linguistic expressions, can be divided up into two separate and distinct parts. On the one hand, a sentence typically encodes a proposition, perhaps com plex, which represents a state of the world which the speaker wishes to bring to the addressee’s attention. This aspect of sentence meaning is generally 1 There are many versions of what constitutes pragmatics. The reader is referred to Blakemore (1992), Green (1987), Levinson (1983), Mey (1993), and Verschueren (1983) for differing and at times conflicting treatments of the subject. This version of the paper has some corrections and amendation not found in the published text. 168 168 referred to as the propositional content (or content meaning) of the sentence. On the other hand, there is everything else: mood markers such as the declarative structure of the sentence, and lexical expressions of varying length and complexity. It is on this “everything else” that I will focus. Specifically, I propose that this non-propositional part of sentence meaning can be analyzed into different types of signals, what I have called Pragmatic Markers (cf. Fraser 1990), which correspond to the different types of potential direct messages a sentence may convey. These pragmatic markers, taken to be separate and distinct from the propositional content of the sentence, are the linguistically encoded clues which signal the speaker’s potential communicative intentions. Messages, and hence their associated pragmatic markers, fall into four types. First, there is a single, basic message, which uses the sentence proposition as its message content. Basic markers, which signal more or less specifically the force (the kind of message in contrast to its content) of the basic message, include sentence mood and lexical expressions. These markers are il lustrated by the examples in (1), with the pragmatic marker in boldface type.2 (1) a) IIII regretregretregretregret that he is still here. b) AdmittedlyAdmittedlyAdmittedlyAdmittedly, I was taken in. c) The cat is very sick. Sentence (1a) is an expression of regret, and sentence (1b) an admission. Sentence (1c) has no lexical basic marker, as do the first two, but its declarative mood signals that it is the expression of belief (a claim, a report) that the state of the world expressed by the propositional content is true. Second, there are commentary messages, which provide a comment on the basic message. Commentary messages, and hence the presence of commentary markers, are optional--a sentence need not contain any. When they do occur, their message is typically very general, with a single word often signaling both the message force and content. Obviously, they constitute pragmatic idioms. The sentences in (2) illustrate this type of marker. (2) a) StupidlyStupidlyStupidlyStupidly, Sara didn't fax the correct form in on time. b) FranklyFranklyFranklyFrankly, we should be there by now. In (2a), for example, the basic message is (arguably) a report while the commentary message, signaled by stupidly, is that the speaker believes Sara’s failure to act to have been stupid. In (2b), 2 I use the terms “force” and “content” in roughly the same way as they are used in discussions of illocutionary acts. However, I avoid use of the latter term since my focus is on the messages people communicate rather than the illocutionary acts they perform. 169 169 the frankly signals that the basic message which follows is, in the speaker’s opinion, not going to be well received by the addressee. Third, there are parallel messages, also optional, which signal an entire message separate from the basic and any com ment ary messages. The sentences in (3) are il lustrative of parallel markers. (3) a) JohnJohnJohnJohn, you are very noisy. b) InInInIn God'sGod'sGod'sGod's name,name,name,name, what are you doing now? In (3a), for example, the speaker, in addition to the basic message of a claim that John is being very noisy, is conveying a message, signaled by John, that it is John who is being addressed, while in (3b), the in God’s name signals exasperation on the part of the speaker. Finally, there are discourse messages, again optional, which signal a message specifying how the basic message is related to the foregoing discourse. The sentences in (4) illustrate these markers. (4) a) Jacob was very tired. So,So,So,So, he left early. b) Martha's party is tomorrow. IncidentallyIncidentallyIncidentallyIncidentally, when is your party? Here, in (4a), the so signals that the report that he left early is a conclusion based on the message conveyed by the preceding sentence, while in (4b), the incidentally signals that the following basic message is going to reflect a shift in topic. To summarize to this point, a basic marker signals the force ofofofof the basic message, a commentary marker sig nals a message which comments onononon the basic message, a parallel marker signals a message inininin additionadditionadditionaddition totototo the basic message, and a discourse marker signals the relationshiprelationshiprelationshiprelationship of the basic mes sage to the foregoing discourse. Although it is rare to find all four types of pragmatic markers in a single sentence, it does occur, as in (5).3 (5) I appreciate that you are a member of the Police Benevolent Association and a supporter of the baseball league. However,However,However,However, quitequitequitequite franklyfranklyfranklyfrankly Sir,Sir,Sir,Sir, IIII estimateestimateestimateestimate that you were going a bit more than 86 miles per hour. Before looking at these four types of markers in detail, I want to make a few general re marks. First, to reiterate a point made above, pragmatic markers are not part of the propositional content of the sentence. They are separate and distinct. It follows from this that for a given lexical expression (e.g., truthfully, amazingly) in a particular sentence, there is no overlapping of 3 Various phonological phenomena such as intonation and stress can, at times, take the place of these lexical pragmatic markers, particularly commentary markers. However, I will not consider them in this paper. 170 170 functions. When an expression functions as one type of pragmatic marker, it does not function as a part of the propositional content; and vice versa. In addition, when an expression is functioning as one type of pragmatic marker, it cannot at the same time function as a second type. In some cases when there are homophonous expressions, for example, truthfully, the expression cannot occur in the same frame, so there is no question of ambiguity. For example, in (6a), (6) a) TruthfullyTruthfullyTruthfullyTruthfully, you should have answered. b) You should have answered truthfully. c) TruthfullyTruthfullyTruthfullyTruthfully, you should have answered truthfully. the speaker signals that the manner of speaking is truthful, not disingenuous, whereas in (6b), the truthfully is part of the proposition and modifies the manner of answering. The interpretation of the expressions cannot be inter changed. In fact, (6c) shows that the two meanings can co-exist with no problem. However, there are a few cases like “Now where are we?” where there is an ambiguity. Is it the adverbial now, with a time interpretation; or is it the discourse marker now, with a focusing function? When there is a comma intonation present, it is always the latter. Second, pragmatic markers carry meaning. But whereas basic, commentary, and parallel markers, like the sentence proposition, have representational meaning, in virtue of which they denote concepts, the discourse markers have procedural meaning and specify how the sentence of which they are a part is related to the preceding discourse. I will address these points as we go along.4 Third, pragmatic markers signal messages that apply only to the direct basic message. They do not apply to any indirect messages which may be implicated by the direct basic message. For ex ample, the indirect interpretation of (7a) (7) a) UnfortunatelyUnfortunatelyUnfortunatelyUnfortunately, I am cold. b) ConfidentiallyConfidentiallyConfidentiallyConfidentially, would you like a drink? c) Candidly,Candidly,Candidly,Candidly, he is married to his work. (=He is dedicated to his work.) d) IIII suspectsuspectsuspectsuspect his mind rusted on vacation. (=I suspect he got a little out of practice.) as a request to turn up the heat is unaffected by the commentary marker unfortunately. Similarly, the indirect message in (7b), that the speaker is asking if the addressee will stay and talk with him after being brought the drink, is unaffected by the marker confidentially. In (7c-d) where the 4 In Fraser (1985) I wrote of pragmatic formatives signaling rather than having a content meaning. Blakemore (1987) introduces the contrasting terms representational versus procedural meaning, and I have adopted this terminology. 171 171 di rect mes sage is taken to be figurative not literal, the pragmatic markers apply to the figurative, direct inter pretations, but not to any indirect interpretations.5 Fourth, nearly all pragmatic markers may occur in sentence-initial position (though is one exception) and usu ally occur there. There are occasions when they will occur medially or finally, as in (8), but in these cases the marker is set off by a comma intonation to distinguish it from a homo phonous form used as part of the proposition. (8) a) John is, IIII admitadmitadmitadmit, the best person by far for the job. b) She was, confidentiallyconfidentiallyconfidentiallyconfidentially, a bright scholar and a fantastic athlete. c) Harry is going to go, howeverhoweverhoweverhowever. Finally, pragmatic markers are drawn from all segments of the grammar. Verbs, nouns, and adverbs as well as idioms such as ok are all pressed into service as pragmatic markers. But for the most part, the meaning of the expression, when used as a pragmatic marker, is the same as when it is used as a propositional formative and it is only its function which differs. In those cases where there is a difference, the lexical expression must be marked for the different meaning. With these preliminary comments out of the way, let us turn now to a detailed examination of the types of pragmatic markers. II.II.II.II. BASICBASICBASICBASICMARKERSMARKERSMARKERSMARKERS Basic markers have representational meaning which means they contribute conceptual information over and above that of the propositional meaning. Specifically, they represent information which signals more or less specifically the force of the direct basic message of the sentence. This meaning distinction between propositional content and basic prag matic markers was proposed by Searle (1969:30), who wrote: We can distinguish two (not necessarily separate) elements in the syntactical structure of the sentence, which we might call the propositional indicator and the illocutionary force indicator. The illocutionary force indicator shows how the proposition is to be taken, or to put it another way, what illocutionary force the utterance is to have; that is, what illocutionary act the speaker is performing in the utterance of the sentence. Illocutionary force indicators in English include at least: word order, stress, intonation contour, punctuation, the mood of the verb and the so called performative verbs. (page 30) 5 Figurative use doesn't change the force of the basic message but only its content. 5 Figurative use doesn't change the force of the basic message but only its content. 172 172 While not agreeing with Searle completely, I will work within the spirit of his suggestion and will consider structural, lexical, and hybrid basic markers. In the following section I will consider the following basic markers: A. Structural basic markers B. Lexical basic markers Performative expressions Pragmatic idioms C. Hybrid basic markers Declarative-based hybrids Interrogative-based hybrids Imperative-based hybrids A.A.A.A. StructuralStructuralStructuralStructural BasicBasicBasicBasic MarkersMarkersMarkersMarkers The first and most general of the basic markers is the syntactic structure of the sen tence itself, its mood. Except for some idiomatic structures, every English sentence falls into one of three syntactic types (declarative, imperative, or interrogative) and each type signals a general force for the basic message. The declarative structure signals the expression of belief by the speaker that the sentence propositional content represents (or did, or will represent) a true state of the world. The speaker of “John slid down the slope,” for example, is committed to expressing the belief that John slid down the slope, although what type of belief--a claim, an assertion, an admission, a confession, or an acknowledgment--is left open. Stylistic variations of the canonical declarative form which retain the sentence propositional content do not alter the speaker's commitment of belief. In contrast, the imperative structure signals the speaker's expression of desire that the addressee bring about the state of the world described in the propositional content. The action desired may be verbal, as in (9a), or non-verbal, as in (9b). (9) a) Tell me the answer. b) Bring that book over here. Unlike the declarative structure, the imperative mood has no stylistic variations. The third major structure of English is the interrogative mood. Similar to the im pera tive, it signals speaker expression of desire, in this case for addressee verbal re sponse. Here we find syntactic variations distinguishing between YES/NO-questions, (10a-b), and WH-questions, (10c-f), with the latter type having a number of stylistic vari ations, some involving more than one WH word: (10) a) Did you see him? b) Can you do that? c) Who are you? 173 173 d)Who did you see? e) You saw whom? f) Who did you see where? As with declarative sentence variations, if the propositional content remains constant, the speaker attitude associated with the interrogative form, the expression of desire that the addressee make a verbal response, does not change. It is interesting that the three major syntactic constructions of English signal only two (belief and desire) of the many propositional attitudes a speaker might hold toward the message (propositional) content. Except for a few special cases, which will be discussed below, speaker attitudes of commitment, in tention, praise, blame, or anger are not signaled by specific syntactic structures. There is no syntactic structure which signals the speaker’s intention to convey a promise, an apology, or a criticism as there is for a claim and a request. B.B.B.B. LexicalLexicalLexicalLexical BasicBasicBasicBasic MarkersMarkersMarkersMarkers In contrast to only three structural basic pragmatic markers, there are many lexical basic pragmatic markers. They can be analyzed into two major groups: performative expres sions, which essen tially refine the force signaled by the sentence mood, and pragmatic idioms. I will con sider these in turn. PerformativePerformativePerformativePerformative ExpressionsExpressionsExpressionsExpressions Surely the most well-known lexical device for signaling the basic mes sage force specifically is the performative expression, illustrated in the following examples.6 (11) a) IIII promisepromisepromisepromise that I will be there on time. b) IIII (hereby)(hereby)(hereby)(hereby) apologizeapologizeapologizeapologize for running over your cat. c) IIII (hereby)(hereby)(hereby)(hereby) requestrequestrequestrequest that you stay just a bit longer. These canonical performative expressions contain a first person singular subject, in some cases an object you, and a verb in the non-negative present tense which denotes a propositional attitude specifying the speaker's view towards the following proposition. There are literally hundreds of performative verbs which serve as basic markers and specify, more precisely than the sentence structure, the basic message force. The performative expression is the first of what will be several instances of standardized forms throughout the paper. For example, sentence (11a) does not literally mean that the speaker is conveying a promise. Rather, it constitutes a direct report by the speaker of what the speaker is 6 There are ordinary performative expressions such as I claim, I promise, and I request which deal with everyday messages, and institutional expressions such as I baptize you..., You are fired!, You’re out! which depend on an institution and the appropriate speaker for their success. We will not consider these latter types in this paper. 174 174 presently doing (I ignore the habitual reading of the sentence). As Bach & Harnish (1979) argue, this sentence only indirectly conveys a promise. Nevertheless, the performative expression I promise (you) has become standardized, with the result that it is routinely heard not in its reporting sense but in its promising sense. The direct meaning has, in the words of Morgan (1978) become “short circuited.” Thus, sentence (11a) is effectively ambiguous. We have two separate meanings: i) an expression of belief (a report) that I promise that I will be there on time; and ii) a promise that I will be there on time.7 Let us now turn to some of the numerous variations. (12) a) Non-first-person, singular subject : WeWeWeWe inviteinviteinviteinvite youyouyouyou to apply again, Mr. Jones. b) Negative verb: IIII dondondondon’’’’tttt agreeagreeagreeagree that she is the best. (=disagreedisagreedisagreedisagree) c) Displaced performative expression: John is, IIII admitadmitadmitadmit, not quite all there. d) Passive voice: YouYouYouYou areareareare cautionedcautionedcautionedcautioned to avoid all liquid after 9 p.m. e) Progressive: IIII amamamam (hereby)(hereby)(hereby)(hereby) askingaskingaskingasking