It is only due to making an assumption about the relevance of B’s response that we can understand it as an answer to A’s question

D). A number of different kinds of inference arise if we assume that the Maxim of Manner is being observed. The utterance The lone ranger rode into the sunset and jumped on his horse violates our expectation that events are recounted in the order in which they happen because the Maxim of Manner is flouted.

Another explanation of the fact why people are so often indirect in conveying what they mean was put forward by Geoffrey Leech in his book ‘Principles of Pragmatics’. He introduces the Politeness Principle which runs as follows: Minimize the expression of impolite beliefs; Maximize the expression of polite beliefs. According to G. Leech, the Politeness Principle is as valid as the Cooperative Principle because it helps to explain why people do not always observe Maxims of Conversation. Quite often we are indirect in what we say because we want to minimize the degree of impoliteness:

A: Would you like to go to the theatre?

B: I have an exam tomorrow.

B is saying ‘no’, but indirectly, in order to be polite.

Thus, grammarians point to the fact that pragmatics overlaps with discourse analysis. Both address meanings lying beyond semantic theory. They both deal with how people use language [Aitchison 2010: 104].

v Textual deictic markers

Etymologically deixis goes back to the Greek word ‘to show’. As a linguistic term deixis means ‘identification by pointing’. Deictic words, according to P. Kroeger, refer to something in the immediate speech situation, e.g. here, now, this, you, me, etc. [Kroeger 2006: 343]. Thus, deictic terms are used to refer to ourselves, to others, and to objects in our environment. They are also used to locate actions in a time frame relative to the present. Deictic terms can show social relationship, i.e. social relation of individuals to others. They may be used to locate parts of a text in relation to other parts.

Deictic expressions are typically pronouns, certain time and place adverbs (here, now, etc.), some verbs of motion (come/go), and even tenses. In fact, all languages have expressions that link a sentence to a temporal and spatial context and that help to determine reference.

Five major types of deictic markers can be identified: personal, place, temporal, textual and social deictic markers.

Person deixis refers to grammatical markers of communicant roles in a speech event. The first person is the speaker’s reference to self; the second person is the speaker’s reference to the addressee(s) and the third person is reference to others who are neither the speaker nor the addressee.

Place deixis refers to how languages show the relationship between space and the location of the participants in the text: this, that, here, there, in front of, at our place, etc.

Temporal deixis refers to the time relative to the time of speaking: now, then, today, yesterday, tomorrow, etc.

Textual deixis has to do with keeping track of reference in the unfolding text: in the following chapter, but, first, I’d like to discuss, etc. Most of the text connectors belong to this group.

Social deixis is used to code social relationships between speakers and addressee or audience. Here belong honorifics, titles of addresses and pronouns. There are two kinds of social deixis: relational and absolute. Absolute deictic markers are forms attached to a social role: Your Honor, Mr President, Your Grace, Madam, etc. Relational deictic markers identify people in relation to the speaker rather than by their roles in society: my cousin, you, her, etc. In English, social deixis is not heavily coded in the pronoun system. ‘You’ refers to both – singular and plural. Like many other languages, Russian including, English possesses ‘a powerful we’: We are happy to inform…, In this article we… We of this type is much less frequent though in English than in Russian.

Ø Recommended literature:

1. Бархударов Л.С. Структура простого предложения современного английского языка. – М.: Высшая школа, 1966. – С. 18-29.

2. Блох М.Я. Практикум по теоретической грамматике английского языка / М.Я. Блох, Т.Н. Семенова, С.В. Тимофеева. – М.: Высшая школа, 2004. – С. 309—324, 328-332, 353-357.

3. Блох М.Я. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка. – М.: Высшая школа, 2008. – С. 255-302, 392-404.

4. Иванова И.П., Бурлакова В.В., Почепцов Г.Г. Теоретическая грамматика современного английского языка. – М.: Высшая школа, 1981. – С. 266-281.

5. Ильиш Б.А. Строй современного английского языка. – Л.: Просвещение, 1971. – С. 191-216.

6. Иофик Л.Л., Чахоян Л.П., Поспелова А.Г. Хрестоматия по теоретической грамматике английского языка. – Л.: Изд-во «Просвещение», 1981. – С. 178-181.

7. Кобрина Н.А. Теоретическая грамматика современного английского языка: Учебное пособие / Н.А. Кобрина, Н.Н. Болдырев, А.А. Худяков. – М.: Высшая школа, 2007. – С. 184-219.

8. Хаймович Б.С., Роговская Б.И. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка. – М.: Высшая школа, 1967. – С. 246-256.

9. Худяков А.А. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка. – М.: Издат. центр «Академия», 2005. – С. 68-77, 126-128, 132-141, 175-184.

Ø Supplementary literature:

1. Блох М.Я. Теоретические основы грамматики. – М.: Высшая школа, 2004. – С. 144-167.

2. Гак В.Г. Теоретическая грамматика французского языка. – М.: Добросвет, 2000. – С. 542-543, 547-556.

3. Гулыга Е.В. Теория сложноподчиненного предложения в современном немецком языке. - М.: Высшая школа, 1971. – С. 47.

4. Гуревич В.В. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка. Сравнительная типология английского и русского языков. – М.: Флинта: Наука, 2003. – С. 54-64.

5. Левицкий Ю.А. Основы теории синтаксиса. – М.: КомКнига, 2005. – С. 188-197, 199-239.

5. Смирницкий А.И.Синтаксис английского языка. – М.: Изд-во литературы на иностранных языках, 1957. – С. 164-170, 173.

6. Современный русский язык / В.А. Белошапкова, Е.А. Брызгунова, Е.А. Земскова и др.; Под ред. В.А. Белошапковой. – М.: Азбуковник, 1999. – С. 775-784.

Дата добавления: 2017-01-14