Introduction of socio pragmatics in education

introduction to sociopragmatics

1. Introduction to
RizkiNurfidaPambayun, M.Pd
Socio Pragmatics

2. Sociolinguistics
•Sociolinguistics is a branch of Linguistics which concerns with the scientific study of
language.
AccordingtoSpolsky(1998:3),sociolinguisticsstudiesseveralthings,suchasthe
connectionbetweenlanguageandsociety,betweenlanguage’susersandsocietyin
wherethelanguage’suserslive.Healsostatesthatoneoftheprimaryfunctionof
languageistotransfermeaning,moreoverlanguageisalsousedtocreateandmaintain
thesocialrelationshipbetweenthedebatersoftheconversation.
•In line with Spolsky(1998), Holmes (1995:1) also states that sociolinguistics deals with
language and society. It explains about the different use of language in different social
contexts and identifies the social function of language in conveying the social
meaning.

3. Scope of Sociolinguistics
The stereotype between men and women’s language and its relationship with politeness
Genderstereotypeisarealitythatexistsinsocietysincelongtimesago.Relatedtothiscase,Talbot(inHolmes,2003:
468)definesthemeaningofstereotype,heexplainsthatstereotypingsomeonemeanstogiveacertainlabelrelated
toattitude,personalityandanyotherswhichcaninterpretawholegroup.Inlinewiththisdefinition,womenare
generallyconsideredasaweakergroupthanmen.
Then,Pearson(1985:178-198)dividesthesedifferencesintothreetypes,theyare:substantivedifferences,structural
differences,andsubstantivedifferencesmergingintostructuraldifferences.
Thedifferencesabovethenaffecttheuseofpolitenessstrategiesbetweenmenandwomeninhavingconversations.
ItisstatedbyMills(2003:203),thatintermoflinguisticsbehavior,womenaredifferentthanmen,especiallyinusing
politenessstrategy.Theytendtobeconcernedwithcooperation(morepositivelypolitethanmen)andavoidanceof
conflict(morenegativelypolitethanmen).Furthermore,sheexplainsthatthesedifferentcharacteristicsbetweenmen
andwomeninlanguageareasaneffectoftheassumptionthatwomenareweakerthanmen.

4. PragmaticsisabranchofLinguistics.Leech(1983:6)definespragmaticsas“thestudy
ofmeaninginrelationtospeechsituations”.Itmeansthatinpragmatics,the
meaningofaconversationisseenthroughthesituationofthespeechitself.
While,Mey(1993:5-7)definespragmaticsasastudyabouthowthelanguageis
usedbypeopleintheirdailylivestocommunicatetheirinterests.
In addition, Yule (1996: 3) divides the definitions of pragmatics into four. First,
pragmatics is focused on speaker meaning. Thus, it more concerns in the meaning
of utterances as communicated by the speaker and interpreted by the listener.
Second, pragmatics concerns on the speaker’s utterance means in a particular
context and how the context influences his or her utterance. Third, pragmatics is
the study of additional meaning of utterances, in this term pragmatics deals with
the use of implicatureon the speaker’s utterances. The last is pragmatics as the
study of the relative distance’s expressions.
Pragmatics

5. a.Politeness in Concept
b.Relation between Cooperative Principles (CP) and Politeness Principles
(PP)
c.Maxims of Politeness Principles
The scope of Pragmatics

6. Socio Pragmatics
Socio pragmatics is identified with the
interaction between language and culture.
Indeed, it is in studies of cross-cultural
pragmatics and inter-language pragmatics
that one can occasionally encounter the term
“sociopragmatics”.

7. Fromthisverybroadperspective,
sociopragmaticsfocusesontheroleof
socialconditionsandvariablesin
determiningtheuseoflanguageto
meananddothingsintheworld.Itthus
liesattheintersectionoflinguisticsand
sociology,aspacealsotraditionally
occupiedbysociolinguistics,whilealso
takinginaspectsofanthropologyand
(social)psychology.
THE SCOPE OF
SOCIOPRAGMATICS

8. Afirstpassatdelimitingthescopeofthisratherbroadconceptualizationofsociopragmaticsisto
followtheoriginaldistinctionbetweenpragmalinguisticsandsociopragmaticsasdistinctavenues
ofresearch,whichfallunder,butaresomewhatseparatefrom,generalpragmatics,asarguedby
Leech(1983).Onthisview,pragmalinguisticsexaminestherelationshipbetweenformsandthe
meaningstheycanexpress,whilesociopragmaticsexaminesthedistributionofform/meaning
pairsindifferentcontextsandtheextenttowhichtheyareappropriatetothosecontexts.Thelatter
ismostcloselyalignedwithsociology,asrepresentedinFigure1.2,echoingtheviewof
sociopragmaticsaslyingattheintersectionoflinguisticsandsociologywesawinFigure1.1.

9. Asecondviewistoregardsociopragmaticsasarisingfromafusionbetween(classical)pragmaticsand
(classical)sociolinguistics,asrepresentedinFigure1.3.Holmes(2018)mostclearlyarticulatesthis
view.Shedescribespragmaticsasinvolvingthestudyoftheuseoflanguageincontext,specifically,
“howindividualsuselinguisticresourcestoproduceandinterpretmeaningininteraction,and
sometimestochangerelationships”(11).Sociolinguistics,ontheotherhand,involvesthestudyof
languageinsociety,resultingindescriptionsofvariationinthelinguisticresourcesavailablein
speechcommunities,and“systematicaccountsofhowsocialvariablesinfluencelinguisticchoices
fromamongthoseresources”(Holmes2018:11).Onthisview,sociopragmaticsinvolves
“identifyingandanalysingevidenceforsocietalnormsandhowtheyaresubscribedtoand
contested”(Holmes2018:15).

10. Sociopragmatics: FoundationsSociopragmaticsand Pragmalinguistics
Generalpragmatics:‘thegeneralconditionsofthe
communicativeuseoflanguage’;
Sociopragmatics:1‘morespecific“local”conditionson
languageuse’;and
Pragmalinguistics:‘theparticularresourceswhicha
givenlanguageprovidesforconveyingparticular
illocutions’.
(exampleofillocution=Ketikaseseorangberkata
"Apakahadagaram?"dimejamakan,tindak
ilokusiadalahpermintaan:"tolongberisaya
garam"meskipuntindaklokusi(kalimatharfiah)
adalahuntukmenanyakankeberadaangaram
Note:lokusiadalahapayangdikatakandan
dimaksudkan,ilokusiadalahapayangdilakukan,
danperlokusiadalahapayangterjadisebagai
akibatnya.
wecouldsaythatsociolinguisticsismainly
concernedwiththesystematiclinguistic
correlatesofrelativelyfixedandstable
socialvariables(suchasregionoforigin,
socialclass,ethnicity,sex,age)ontheway
anindividualspeaks.Pragmatics,onthe
otherhand,ismainlyconcernedwith
describingthelinguisticcorrelatesof
relativelychangeablefeaturesofthatsame
individual(suchasrelativestatus,social
role)andthewayinwhichthespeaker
exploitshis/her(socio)linguisticrepertoire
inordertoachieveaparticulargoal.
Sociopragmatics
Roots and Definition

11. Asalreadymentioned,Leech(1983:10)statedthatsociopragmaticsdealswith‘more
specific“local”conditionsonlanguageuse’.‘Specific’hereobviouslycontrastswith
the‘general’ofgeneralpragmatics.Thisisofsomehelpindelimiting
sociopragmatics.However,itisimportanttounderstanditasmeaningaspecific
occasionofuseandnotjusttheoneoffspecificsofanoccasion.Asocial
constructionistordiscursiveapproachmightfocusonthespecificsofanoccasion,and
howtheytogetherconstructparticularpotentialformeanings.Asociopragmatic
approachmightdothattoo,butwouldnotshyawayfromencompassingthemore
generalelementsthataredeployed
Sociopragmaticsand Context

12. Variouslanguagescholarshavesuggestedthreelevelsofcontext.Forexample,Dittmar(1997:
99–100)positsthatsociolinguisticsfallsinto‘socialdialectology’(i.e.‘variationist
sociolinguistics’),‘interactionalsociolinguistics’andthe‘sociologyoflanguage’.Halliday
makesathree-waydistinction:‘text’,‘contextofsituation’and‘contextofculture’(seee.g.
HallidayandHasan,1989:44–7).Fairclough(1992:chapter3),discussingCriticalDiscourse
Analysis,elaboratesa‘three-dimensionalconceptionofdiscourse’,comprising‘text’(formal
linguisticfeatures),‘discursivepractice’(atypeofsocialpracticeinvolvingtheproduction
andinterpretationoftexts)and‘socialpractice’(actionsrelatingtosocialstructures,e.g.
ideologies,institutions,powerrelations).

13. Sociopragmaticsis positioned on the more social side of
pragmatics, standing in contrast to the more linguistic side. It is
focussed on the construction and understanding of meanings
arising from interactions between language (or other semiotic
resources) and socio-cultural phenomena. It is centrally
concerned with situated interaction, especially local, meso-level
contexts (e.g. frames, activity types, genres). It often considers
norms emerging in such contexts, how they are exploited by
participants, and how they lead to evaluations of (in)
appropriateness.
Conclusion