Interpreting Texts. Part 3 Language in Use

Adriana Vizental

Interpreting Texts

An Introduction to Linguistic Analysis Second edition, revised

Part 3. Language in use Manipulating meaning & communicative strategies

Editura Universităţii „Aurel Vlaicu”, Arad 2019

ISBN GENERAL 978-973-752-824-7 ISBN vol 3 : 978-973-752-827-8

Interpreting texts. Part 3

Language in use. Manipulating meaning & communicative strategies

Contents

Language in use. Manipulating meaning & communicative strategies 5 A. Context & meaning 6 1. The linguistic context 6 Model analyses 1. The dictionary vs. the world 6 Text 1. Knowledge of the dictionary 6 Text 2. Knowledge of the world 7 2. The non-linguistic context. Discourse analysis 7 Model analyses 2. Meaning in context 8 Text 1. Features of the context. I have no knife 8 Text 2. Deixis. Do this now … 8 3. Manipulating the context 10 Model analyses 3. Manipulating context 10 Text 1. Manipulating discourse types. Snickers 10 Text 2. Manipulating setting & participants. Strip Search 12 B. Language in use. Doing things with the language 16 1. Speech acts & levels of meaning 16 Model analyses 4. Language functions & text interpretation 16 Text 1. Saying vs. doing. Eighth Sin 16 Text 2. Disambiguating meaning. Get Lucky 17 2. Indirectness 19 Model analyses 5. Factors that govern indirectness 19 Text 1. Offering. Coca Cola 19 Text 2. Asking for help 19 Model analyses 6. Strategies of indirectness 20 Text 1. Avoidance. The Dursleys 20 Text 2. Inciting by way of presupposition & entailment. The threat of communism 21 C. Language in interaction 24 1. Cooperation & conversational implicature 24 Model analysis 7. Four levels of meaning. B&Bs in Scotland 24 Model analyses 8. The Maxims of cooperation 25 Text 1. Observing the Maxims: implying more meaning. Marlboro Classics 26 Text 2. Flouting the maxims: implying a different meaning. Female keywords 27 Model analyses 9. Cooperation & indirectness. Examples 28

2. Negotiating meaning 30 Model analyses 10. Managing ambiguity & misunderstanding 30 Text 1. Locution vs. illocution. A classroom interaction 30 Text 2. Context & reference. An SMS exchange 30 Text 3. Interpreting metaphor. My Fair Lady 31 Text 4. Strategic vagueness. Snatch 32 3. Power positions (P) 34 Model analyses 11. Negotiating power positions 34 Text 1. Staging & imposition. My Fair Lady: Alphie vs. Henry Higgins 35 Text 2. Manipulating D & P. The King’s Speech 37 D. Politeness & indirectness 40 1. Strategies of politeness 41 Model analyses 12. Keeping communication lines in good repair 41 Text 1. Negative politeness with redress. Pretty Woman 41 Text 2. Doing FTAs off the record. Vintage car Costică 43 2. Flouting the Maxims of cooperation & politeness 44 Model analysis 13. Miscommunication & tragedy. Crash 44 E. The democratization of modern discourses 46 Model analyses 14. Great speeches & persuasion 48 Text 1. Indirectness, politeness & persuasion. I have a dream... 48 Text 2. The user-friendliness of modern discourses. TED talks 50 Final conclusions & suggestions for further work 54 Projects suggested 54 Tips for your PowerPoint presentation 63 Model projects 65 Model project 1. Participants and communicative roles. Interview for Code Club 65 Model project 2. Strategies of indirectness. Locution vs. illocution in print advertising 67 Model project 3. Persuasion. A football coach’s inspirational speech (PPT) 73 https://www.slideshare.net/Vizental/3apersuasion-inspirational-speech Model project 4. Negotiating power positions in The walking Dead ( PPT) 79 https://www.slideshare.net/Vizental/3bnegotiating-powerpositions-the-walking-dead Model project 5. The politeness of advertising. E.U. YES LA VOT 85 https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/k6jyGmPsL4dzfp Bibliographic suggestions for Part 3 of Interpreting texts 90

Interpreting texts. Part 3

Language in use. Manipulating meaning & communicative strategies1

Part 1 of Interpreting texts surveyed the relationship between language & personal image – hence the question, Who’s the speaker? –, giving precedence to oral communication. Part 2. Text & message. Special effects and manipulating meaning, has tried to answer the question of how the sender (S) exploits language to create a richer and more subtle message; the majority of the texts surveyed were written. The tools employed for the analyses were those provided by the branches of linguistics2: phonetics/phonology, grammar, semantics and discourse analysis (especially after the introduction of multi-modal texts). Furthermore, survey of ways in which writers exploit and manipulate language to enhance its efficiency, or how context affects the meaning of the lexical text, involved the introduction of some notions of pragmatics. The gap between linguistic competence and communicative language competence3 was also discussed in Part 2. It was argued that word choice, grammatical complexity and stylistic accuracy pertain to S’s socio-linguistic competence; that exploitation and manipulation of the language involve S’s strategic competence; that interlocutors often rely on their knowledge of the world (i.e. pragmatic knowledge) to interpret a text correctly; etc. Pragmatic phenomena – e.g. context, language functions and Speech Acts, indirectness, cooperation, politeness – will be surveyed more thoroughly in Part 3 of Interpreting texts – Language in use. Manipulating meaning & communicative strategies. Among the questions to be answered are: How does context affect the meaning of the text? How does S do things with the language? How do interlocutors negotiate meaning? How can S appear to be polite? How does S manage to attract attention and persuade? Etc. Note. The participants/interlocutors are referred to as:  Sender (S), who may be the Speaker (S), the writer of the text, the company advertising a product, etc.;  Receiver (R), who may be the Hearer (H), the Target Audience (TA), or someone else  Actor/Addresser (A), i.e. the active character, the speaker or interpreter of the text; the Represented Participant of visuals.

1 As theoretical support for Part 3, see Interpreting text. Part 4: Annexes 1 – 8. See also the Bibliography at the end of each volume of Interpreting texts. 2 See Interpreting text. Part 4: Annex 1 (A). The linguistic framework. 3 See Interpreting text. Part 4: Annex 1 (B). Communicative language competence.

A. Context & meaning4

It was mentioned in the previous volumes that communication takes place in a context, i.e. an environment that affects the meaning of S’s words. At this point, let us survey the notion of context more thoroughly.

1. The linguistic context

Each word/utterance comes within a linguistic context, consisting of the words, sentences/utterances or paragraphs that precede and/or follow it and together with which they convey a coherent message. The linguistic context affects the meaning of the individual items, and at the same time, it helps the hearer to disambiguate ambiguous constructs. Jokes are very good examples to show how imaginative speakers can play with the language. On the other hand, jokes also show that linguistic competence alone (i.e. knowledge of the dictionary and of grammar) is often insufficient for decoding an ambiguous text: receivers need to make use of their pragmatic competence (i.e. their knowledge of the world, or encyclopedic knowledge) to understand such texts. Consider the following jokes:

Model analyses 1. The dictionary vs. the world

Goal of the analyses: to survey the effect context on the meaning of a text; - to show that R needs both knowledge of the dictionary and knowledge of the world to decode ambiguous texts Text 1. Knowledge of the dictionary

A panda bear goes into a fast food, orders a hamburger, eats it, shoots several people and leaves the place. A man who happened to see it all, asks in surprise, ‗Why did you do that?‘ ‗Look up ―panda‖ in the dictionary,‘ replies the bear. The man goes home, looks up ‗panda‘ in the dictionary and reads: ‗panda = animal that eats shoots and leaves.‘

The panda bear in the joke is obviously not a competent speaker of English. He is unable to handle the ambiguity that results from:  lexical homonymy: o shoot: 1. to hit/wound with a missile; 2. young plant o leaves: 1. pl. of leaf, i.e. expanded organ of plants; 2. departs  grammatical homonymy: o shoots: 1. verb, present, 3rd pers. sg.; 2. noun, plural o leaves: 1. noun = part of a plant; 2. verb = to depart, present, 3rd pers. sg.  punctuation: in the case of a succession of three predicates, a comma is placed after the first one: “... eats, shoots and leaves.” Those who enjoy the joke are obviously better speakers of English than he is. But to thoroughly enjoy such types of texts, the receiver must generally rely on his knowledge of the world and of society; in this case: panda bears do not speak, they are unlikely to go into a fast food or to have a gun, etc.

4 For the theoretical support, see Interpreting text. Part 4: Annex 8. Discourse analysis & pragmatics (A)

In addition, numerous funny texts exploit realities going on in the world or in a certain region; to understand them, we need our pragmatic knowledge.

Text 2. Knowledge of the world

They once said that a black man would be President when pigs flew. His first 100 days and – wham!! Pig's flu!

Just like the panda joke, this one also relies on  R’s knowledge of the dictionary, o the idiom when pigs fly = never o homonymy: flew = past tense of “to fly”; flu = a disease  But R also needs knowledge of the world/encyclopedic knowledge, i.e. to know about: o the racial discrimination raging in America o the nearly simultaneous occurrence of . a disease that terrified the entire world (pig’s flu) . the election of the first African-American president of the USA; Tragic moments are well-known to produce examples of excellent (black) humor. Conclusion Competent communicators need not only a mental dictionary, but also a rich mental encyclopedia.

Task 1. Analyze the relationship between our knowledge of the dictionary and that of the world required for understanding the following texts:

A. So I‘m in a bar and two very large women with accents are sitting across from me. I say, ―Cool accents, are you two ladies from Scotland?‖ One of them yells, ―It‘s Wales, you idiot.‖ So I said, ―OK, are you two whales from Scotland?‖ I don‘t remember much after that.

B. WHEN ADVERTISING DOES ITS JOB, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE KEEP THEIRS Good advertising doesn‘t just inform. It sells. It helps move product and keep businesses in business. Every time an ad arouses a consumer‘s interest enough to result in a purchase, it keeps a company going strong. And it helps secure the jobs of people who work there. IAA (the International Advertising Association)

2. The non-linguistic context

Words, sentences, paragraphs, i.e. texts, are produced in a more complex context, that of the real-world environment in which they occur. Text and context together make up what linguists term discourse, and the analysis of language in its situational/pragmatic context is known as discourse analysis. As main features of the situational context (or context of utterance), linguists propose the following:  the participants/interlocutors/interactants, i.e. o the sender of the message (speaker/writer); o the receiver of the message (addressee, target audience, receiver non-targeted, etc.) o the social distance (D) between the interlocutors, their respective status and role;

 the setting/situation, i.e. o the time and o the place where the exchange occurs;  the activity type: e.g. shopping, teaching, bargaining, etc.  the type of discourse/genre: e.g. political speech, highbrow or tabloid article, formal or casual conversation, etc.  the function of the message, i.e. the sender’s intention: to praise, criticize, inform, persuade, etc.  the sender’s paralanguage, e.g. friendly, ironic, sensual, etc. A change in any of the features of the situational context can trigger serious changes of meaning. Take, for example, the utterance:

Model analyses 2. Meaning in context Goal of the analyses: to establish the effect of context on the meaning of the text.

Text 1. Features of the context

I have no knife.

Situation 1: in a restaurant (setting)  spoken by a guest (speaker)  who wants to have a meal (activity type) and  addressed to a waiter (addressee)  irritated tone of voice (paralanguage)  S is making a request (function) Meaning: “Please bring me a knife.” Situation 2: S is intercepted by the police (activity type)  at night, in a dark alley (setting)  by the police (addressee)  frightened tone of voice (paralanguage)  S is trying to defend himself/herself (function) Meaning: “I’m unarmed, please don’t shoot”; etc. It is equally true that the way people use the language influences events: at a serious meeting, a good joke can relieve the tension and make the atmosphere friendly.

Text 2. Deixis. Do this now …

The print ad (1999) to the right, which says,

Do this now! Get this free! ….

requires some real-world or visual support to clarify its meaning. Deictic terms5 – in this case now and this – “point to” some item that is situated outside the text, i.e. in the situational context. But in this case, the advertiser manipulates the deictic terms for special effects. This ad exploits several types of deixis:  person deixis: the 2nd pers. you included in the imperative verbs do and get can function as singular or plural, depending on the reader of the ad;  place-deictic (demonstrative) this – encoded visually (gesturally, paralinguistically) as arrows – stands for: o in its first occurrence, for an action, i.e. filling out a form and thus participating in a raffle o in the second, it refers to an object to be obtained o in fact, it refers to one out of several items that can be won; o this denotes proximity, but the distance between the sender of the ad and the receiver, or the receiver and the object, is distal;  time-deictic now o does not stand for coding time (CT), i.e. the moment when the ad was written, o but for receiving time (RT), i.e. the moment the ad is read o since it is an ad published repeatedly in a paper, RT is also relative: it includes . all the moments the ad is read . all the receivers (you) who read; Conclusion Advertisers manipulate deixis so as - to reduce social distance (connotation: I know you well and you are like me, clever, successful, …) - to make the action to be performed, thus winning of the prize, look easy; etc. Obviously, by changing discourse type – my text is a course of linguistics, not advertising –, I also changed the meanings and functions of the deictic words: what you do now is read the text and learn about the variable nature of deictic terms.

Task 2. Establish a situational context for each of the utterances below, then change one or several of its features to detect differences of meaning. Add 5 examples of your own:

The door is open. I see my children twice a year. I declare war to Russia. I like that dress. You should always tell the truth. He doesn’t seem to understand what love is. Etc.

5 See Interpreting text. Part 4: Annex 8. Discourse analysis & pragmatics (A 2)

3. Manipulating the context

Task 3. The adjoining BMW poster (2004) says:

Our hardware runs better without windows.

Analyze it by establishing the relationship between text and context.

Model analyses 3. Manipulating context Goal of the analyses: to survey ways in which S can obtain special effects by intentionally changing various features of the context

Text 1. Manipulating discourse type. Snickers (2012)

In the men‘s changing room, after game. Men getting dressed. Joan Collins: Which one of you losers nicked my deodorant? Laughs and jeers from players. Player1: Who‘d wanna smell like you? Joan Collins (sniggering): Would ‗f smelled like you … Player2: Brilliant. Witty. Joan Collins (throws towel at player): Zip it, shrimpy! …… Joan Collins: You know, you‘re bad at football, but at least you‘re short … Player2: Woah! Player3 (approaching): Dan, eat a Snickers. Joan Collins: Why? Player3: Because you turn into a rotten diva when you are hungry. Joan Collins (bites into a bar of chocolate) Player3: Better? Dan: Better. Voiceover & written text: You‘re not you when you are hungry. Image of a Snickers bar being broken to show the nutty inside. Voiceover & written text: Snickers. Get some nuts. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uii3VhELiuE

Analysis a. Type of text: written but simulating oral communication - lots of elliptical sentences & missing links e.g. Better? = [Are] [you] [feeling] better? (both subject and predicate are elided) e.g. Why [should I eat a Snickers]? - Word choice: Origin/stylistic level: simple words, mostly Germanic, … - neologisms of Latin origin, deodorant (affixation), diva - many slangy terms, e.g. loser, nick, rotten, … - slangy idiom, e.g. turn into a rotten diva Figurative speech: metaphor revitalized6: you turn into a rotten diva o semantic anomaly/ tautology: You’re not you when you are hungry o banter, based on upsetting expectations: You know, you’re bad at football, but at least you’re short . adversative but conventionally implicates opposition of meaning . at least suggests that the second part of the sentence contains some positive info . but in fact both parts – bad at football and short carry negative meaning Connotations: - of virility: Get some nuts. - of anger and bad temper: losers, bad at football … - of close D: young male teasing, e.g. you’re bad at football, but … - Grammar: - simple sentences, mostly main clauses, e.g. Eat a Snickers - one complex sentence (by subordination), main clause missing …. Because you turn into a rotten diva / when you are hungry. - Style: colloquial, slangy, inappropriate for a middle-aged female star Textness: - cohesion (connectivity): even though Joan Collins’ presence in the locker room seems incongruous, she and her words are explainable in the context of advertising - coherence (logical meaning): the text is advertising a bar of chocolate b. Context: Context 1. Type of discourse: colloquial face-to-face conversation - activity type: washing and getting dressed - situation: in the men’s locker room; after the game Speaker A: Joan Collins = metaphor revitalized, for one of the members of the team “turned into a rotten diva” (idiom) - hearers (H): the other members of the team - social distance: close D (member of the same team) - paralanguage: irritated tone of voice and gestures - function: complaining about a missing deodorant Speaker B: one of the guys, who realizes that his mate is grumpy because he is hungry - hearer (H): the hungry of the team turned into a “rotten diva” - activity type: offers him a bar of chocolate - function: to change his mood by appeasing his hunger Context 2. Type of discourse: advertising - sender (S): the producer of the Snickers chocolate bar - target audience (TA)/receiver (R): young, male, sporty

6 See also Interpreting text. Part 2. Model analyses 6 (Toyota & Lamisil)

- function: to promote a product Techniques of attention catching: - visual metaphor: the hungry player has actually turned into a diva - humor: a handy technique to attract the audience’s good will - close D: slangy style, close-up shots, familiar setting (for sports fans), actors socially close to TA. - sound & visual effects: alluring sounds/image of the character biting into the chocolate

Conclusion This kind of metaphor would be unsuitable in most other types of discourse (an elderly female diva is incongruous in the setting of a men’s locker room after a match. Advertising, however, exploits funny incongruities for their attention-catching effect: the revitalized metaphor makes the commercial funny. In other words, the type of discourse affects the meaning and acceptability of the text and of the techniques employed.

Task 4. Find techniques that are suitable only for specific discourse types. Discuss. As type of discourse you may think of fantasy novels/films, political discourses, sermons, etc.

Text 2. Manipulating setting & participants. Strip Search (2004) An HBO drama film, directed by Sidney Lumet, script by Tom Fontana Theme: the question of individual liberties in the aftermath of the terrorist attack on the USA (September 11, 2001). Subject: The film is built around two parallel stories/plots: Plot 1: the People’s Republic of China - Linda Sykes (Maggie Gyllenhaal), a young American student presently living in China, is arrested with no hard evidence. - She is interrogated by a military officer (Ken Leung) about unspecified activities which may or may not be related to terrorist plots. Plot 2: in the USA; - Sharif Bin Said (Bruno Lastra), an Arab student, is arrested in New York City. - He is interrogated by FBI Agent Karen Moore (Glenn Close) about unspecified activities which may or may not be related to terrorist plots. Texts: The dialogues are practically identical, but the meanings are quite different, due to the different contexts in which the actions unfold. Below is a transcript of the first interview – both that in China and the USA –, with the relative roles encoded as Prisoner and, respectively, Investigator.

Prisoner: Why am I here? Investigator: Were you hurt when the officers arrested you? Prisoner: Arrested? Investigator: I told them to be respectful. Prisoner: Why have I been arrested? I haven't done anything wrong …. Listen. I know that I am a foreigner and as such I may not be aware of all the laws you people have, but I can't imagine what crime I've committed. Investigator: How long have you been in this country? Prisoner: A year. Maybe a little more. Investigator: Well, I can see why that may not be enough time to learn our laws. Prisoner: Well, not all of them. No. The basics. The ones that are common everywhere. You know. Against murder or stealing. Investigator: Perhaps I misspoke. You were not arrested. You've simply been brought in for questioning. Prisoner: An interrogation. Investigator: An interview. Prisoner: Because ... I'm a suspect? Investigator: Subject of an inquiry, an investigation into crimes, some of which may not as yet have been committed. Prisoner: Oh, you think I may commit a crime? Investigator: Anyone's capable given the proper circumstances. My own mother was arrested for shoplifting, she's an old lady. Prisoner: I have no criminal record, no prior arrests or convictions either here or at home. Investigator: Good. Prisoner: I would like to see a lawyer, contact my embassy. Investigator: Why? Prisoner: Because, not knowing the local laws, I am afraid that … Investigator: You will indict yourself? Prisoner: No. I don't know my rights. You haven't read me my rights. Investigator: That's because you aren't charged with anything. Prisoner: Then I can go? Investigator: No. Prisoner: I can be held without being charged? Investigator: Yes. Prisoner: For how long? Investigator: Seven days. Six months. However long it takes. Prisoner: Takes for what? Investigator: You to tell me what I need. Prisoner: You mean confess. Confess to a crime that may or may not have been committed. That I may have committed not knowing it's a crime or

that may not even be a crime! Investigator: Yet! ……….. Photograph doesn't do you justice. You're much more handsome. Or maybe the word's ... pretty. Look... Ooh. You've been to so many places. Russia. Cyprus. Venezuela. Israel. You're not Jewish. Indonesia. Now, there's a hotbed of terrorism. What were you doing there? Prisoner: It's none of your business. ……………………… Investigator: ……………. one does not have to be a foreigner to be disloyal. Prisoner: Disloyal? What do you consider disloyal? Investigator: Speaking negatively about our government, criticizing our leaders. Prisoner: Well, that's dissent. There is a difference between disloyalty and dissent. Investigator: I'm sure in your mind that's true. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yagdzfx2PRI&t=2354s https://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/movie_script.php?movie=strip-search

Against the different sociopolitical backgrounds, the similar dialogues acquire different meanings. Setting: a. geographical context 1. Linda is detained in communist China; China is a country famous for its cruelty against those who oppose the regime 2. Sharif is arrested in the USA, a democratic country known for observing human rights; b. historical moment: 1. After the Tiananmen Square Massacre of students manifesting against the regime (1989). 2. In the aftermath of the terrorist attack on the USA on September 11, 2001. Cultural stereotypes - Linda is an American citizen, unlikely (at least, supposedly) to engage in terrorist acts. - Sharif is Arab, under high suspicion in the Western world after 9/11. Receivers’ response (probable): sympathy for Linda; suspicion about Sharif. - Both investigators view their prisoners as members of a different, probably hostile, race; Activity/discourse type: police interrogation - the interrogation room: China: shabby, fan does not work; USA: clean and hygienic; The investigators: China: male, young to middle-aged o educated, speaks perfect English with an American accent o member of a big nation, but no world leader (does not expect the prisoner to speak Chinese; needs to learn English) USA: female, middle-aged – a sign of women’s emancipation/power positions (high P) o a representative of a world-leading nation (expects prisoner to speak English; does not need to learn foreign language) . both investigators play “good cop” (e.g. enquire about the prisoner’s comfort, talk about their own problems and dissatisfactions (their own mother, being a public servant, etc.), but . both are cold, ruthless and prejudiced, viewing the prisoner as a probable wrongdoer, rather than possibly innocent.

The prisoner (R): China: female, young, student, educated o animated by intellectual curiosity (travelled extensively), or possibly by other motives o tolerant (well-adapted to the new environment of Chinese students) USA: male, young, student, educated o well-traveled, animated by intellectual curiosity, or possibly by other motives o eager to integrate, to be perceived as a member of the new environment (USA) Social distance (D) between S & R: distal, official (far D) Power relations (P) between S & R: great power discrepancy (the interrogator is in high P): - gender relations: male – female conflicts - apart from the interrogator’s arrogant and sadistic attitude, it is probably more painful for Sharif (a member of the Arab/Muslim world) to accept the female FBI agent’s high power position Conclusion The meaning of the same text may be completely different in a different context. In this case, by changing the ethnic background of the setting (China vs. the USA), the participants (American- Caucasian tourist vs. Muslim immigrant), gender stereotypes (investigator male – female), etc., the senders (the writers and producers of this film) managed to influence our feelings and reactions.

Task 5. Analyze in the text above different meanings resulting from different context. - being arrested - in communist China, with its irrational fear about anti-communist spying - in democratic USA, with its phobia against Arab terrorists - being hurt when arrested; being afraid - the investigator’s request that the police be respectful; … - holding a person arrested as subject of an inquiry, an investigation into crimes; … - some of those crimes may not as yet have been committed - the prisoner’s request to see a lawyer, to contact his embassy - not knowing one’s rights; having them read to you as a prisoner; - being held without being charged - having been to many places - Indonesia….a hotbed of terrorism; etc.

Task 6. Analyze another excerpt from Strip Search in terms of the effect of context upon its meaning.

Investigator: My government has started fingerprinting foreigners from certain countries, but I'm not sure that's enough. Maybe the best solution would be to put ankle bracelets, you know, monitoring devices, on specific visitors. I mean, not you. In order to keep an eye on their movements. That way we'll know where they go, who they associate with, what they're up to. Anyway... that's what I think, but... who am I? Just a lowly cog in a rusty wheel. Ignored, unappreciated. Underpaid. ………………………….. Investigator: You see, that's the problem with my concept about the ankle bracelets, one does not have to be a foreigner to be disloyal. Prisoner: Disloyal? What do you consider disloyal? Investigator: Speaking negatively about our government, criticizing our leaders. Prisoner: Well, that's dissent. There is a difference between disloyalty and dissent. Investigator: I'm sure in your mind that's true.

B. Language in use. Speech Acts (SA)7

1. Speech Acts & levels of meaning

Among the greatest breakthroughs in linguistics are J.L. Austin’s observations that  there is often a serious gap between o what S says and o what S means . e.g. S may say You may be right – and mean I don’t think you are right  people use language not only to say things, but also to do things . e.g. S’s utterance You may be right may function as a contradiction/criticism Austin used the term Speech Act to name the action performed with the help of the utterance. According to him, S’s utterance consists of:  locution, i.e. S’s utterance itself  illocutionary force, i.e. the force S gives his utterance so as to do a certain action  perlocution, i.e. its effect on R

Levels of meaning. According to Thomas (1995), utterances convey meaning on three levels8:  an abstract meaning o the receiver (R) must first process the dictionary (abstract/lexical/ denotative) meanings of the individual lexical items o i.e. he must see what the terms could mean according to the dictionary  a contextual (or utterance) meaning, i.e. the receiver must: o assign sense and reference to the individual items in the context of their utterance o determine the best interpretation for the utterance in the given context o work out lexical and syntactic ambiguities o determine the right “reading” for the items/text according to the context  the illocutionary force of the utterance, i.e. R must o decide what S wants to do by uttering his words (the speech act of the utterance)

Model analyses 4. Language functions & text interpretation

Goal of the analyses: to interpret texts from a functional perspective

Text1. Saying vs. doing. Eighth Sin (2000)

Eighth Sin. Denim from Hell. Eden can wait.

7 For the theoretical support, see Interpreting text. Part 4: Annex 8. Discourse analysis & pragmatics (B) 8 A 4th level of meaning will be introduced later on in this volume, in section C. Language in interaction. Cooperation & conversational implicature. See also Model analysis 7. B&B in Scotland.

a. Locution (the text): an advertisement for a brand of perfume, Eighth Sin  vocabulary: relies heavily on our pragmatic knowledge o connotations: - of religious (Christian) sinfulness: sin, Hell, Eden;  of fashion and modernity: denim  of the attraction of “the forbidden fruit,” of sinfulness: o manipulates meaning by upsetting common knowledge:  religion speaks of the 7 deadly sins, so the 8th must be even more deadly (the perfume is so good that even Eden can wait)  grammar/structure: it consists of three graphical sentences, of which: o the first two are unattached nominals, e.g. Eighth Sin. Denim … o they evade choice of mood: no Subject, no Finite element o the 3rd – Eden can wait – grammatically full sentence  textness: typical for “little texts,” i.e. it makes up a coherent and meaningful text because its cohesion runs at a deeper level than that of the lexical-grammatical structure. b. Illocutionary force: since it is a product ad, its function is to urge receivers to buy it; c. Perlocution: the ad is successful if people actually buy the perfume. Conclusion All product ads perform a single Speech Act, i.e. they urge people to buy. This single Speech Act, however, comes in the form of countless locutions (linguistic forms/texts), i.e. advertisers urge people to buy in countless different ways. The function of the locution is, in most cases, to carry connotations and to dispose the prospective buyer favorably.

Text 2. Disambiguating meaning. Get Lucky (2000)

Level 1: knowledge of the dictionary R first establishes the entire range of possible (lexical) meanings of the words. Both get (vb.) and the lucky (adj.) are polysemantic: get (vb.) – 59 meanings; lucky (adj.) – 3 meanings (Webster) - most likely reading: “Become lucky/Become fortunate.” BUT, this reading does not make sense in the context of advertising. Level 2: pragmatic knowledge R establishes the referent of the term Lucky: - Lucky = cigarettes (Lucky Strike) = a proper noun, not an adjective, Thus: the reading “fortunate” is not good. - another meaning must be found for get (a reading that should collocate with a (proper) noun). Most probable reading = “Obtain/Acquire Luckies!” Level 3: R establishes the SA /illocutionary force of the utterance Product ads, such as this one, perform a single Speech Act: they urge people to buy.

Correct reading: “Buy Lucky Strike cigarettes” (Speech Act: an urge to buy) Conclusion The ad’s aim is to exploit ambiguity on two levels:  linguistic: o polysemy: to get = obtain, buy, become, … and o conversion: lucky = adjective; Luckies = proper noun  visual: o story 1 (the big picture) tells us of a guy (we can only see his arm) who . got lucky while hitchhiking (a car has stopped to pick him up) . he may get lucky sexually, too (connotations carried by the picture of the pretty blonde driver) o story 2: the picture of the packet of cigarettes (bottom, right) . + the brand name in big white letters (bottom, left) The visual, and especially story 2, is more salient  by color contrast  by our pragmatic knowledge: we know that: . it is an advert/poster (by its place, shape, etc.) . the function (SA) of ads is to urge to buy

Task 7. The speaker can use the same locution to perform various SAs. Find contexts and establish various illocutionary forces for the locutions below, then analyze 3 utterances of your own:

That’s great! Are you sure? I don’t think that is the case!

Task 8. The same SA can be performed with the help of various locutions. Find as many locutions as you can to perform each of the following speech acts:

- congratulate your neighbor for winning an important prize - apologize for forgetting about H’s birthday - invite H to your party

Task 9. Analyze along the 3 levels of meaning some of the short texts included earlier or later in this volume, or find your own examples.

2. Indirectness9

The main difference between the various locutions that are used to perform the same speech act is their degree of indirectness. S assesses the situational context in which the interaction takes place and formulates his utterance more or less (in)directly.

Model analyses 5. Factors that govern indirectness

Goal of the analyses: to identify reasons that make S grade the indirectness of his utterance.

A speaker who views his interlocutor as socially distant (far D) and/or in a power position (high P), who feels that he is imposing on H and/or is asking for a favor, will formulate his utterance carefully and quite indirectly. For example:

Text 1. Offering. Coca-Cola

Coca-Cola. Enjoy!

A direct imperative is generally perceived as rude, so that it is mostly avoided in educated communication. In this case, however, it is an advertising strategy aimed at:  reducing P: S appears as one individual speaking to another, not as a powerful company  reducing D: o a direct urge (imperative verb) is mostly used when talking to with someone who is close to you; R is made to perceive the product as available o manipulation of person deixis: you – S seems to be speaking directly to R  reducing size of imposition: o S seems to be offering R a product (low imposition) o instead of asking R to buy a product (high imposition)  presenting the act a S’s right (to enjoy the product), not an obligation to buy/drink … Paralanguage – supports the user-friendly message of the advertising copy: - cheerful tone of voice - visual: a happy family reunion, smiles, Christmas, the color red, etc.

Text 2. Asking for help

I was wondering if you could perhaps tell me…

When asking for a favour, S builds up an indirect request:  he uses formal style & word choice, grammatical complexity  he questions the act (I was wondering…), rather than assert it

9 For the theoretical support, see Interpreting text. Part 4: Annex 8. Discourse analysis & pragmatics (B); etc.; see also Vizental (2009). Meaning and communication.

 he distances himself from the act by using the past tense (was),  he lowers the modality of his utterance (modal can/could, instead of will/would),  he introduces an additional low-modality marker (perhaps)  he uses a soft and tentative tone of voice, etc. Conclusion When offering something (e.g. Text 1), S need not formulate his utterance indirectly because he is doing H a favour. Conversely, when he is asking for a favour (Text 2), especially if H is socially distant and in high P position (older, socially or professionally superior, etc.), he makes his utterance indirect so as not to insult H or hurt his feelings.

Task 10. Find contexts which can make the utterances below acceptable. Move over, will you. Would you mind terribly if I asked you to move over a bit? There’s not enough room for me here, I’m afraid.

Model analyses 6. Strategic indirectness

Speakers may formulate their utterances indirectly for various reasons. The texts below illustrate two such reasons; there will be numerous other examples in the other texts.

Goal of the analyses: To identify reasons that make S indulge in strategies of indirectness.

Text 1. Evasive hinting. The Dursleys

"Er – Petunia, dear – you haven't heard from your sister lately, have you?" As he had expected, Mrs. Dursley looked shocked and angry. After all, they normally pretended she didn't have a sister. "No," she said sharply. "Why?" "Funny stuff on the news," Mr. Dursley mumbled. "Owls... shooting stars... and there were a lot of funny-looking people in town today..." "So?" snapped Mrs. Dursley. "Well, I just thought ... maybe ... it was something to do with ... you know ... her crowd." J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHXSvCMpCGM

Analysis Subject of the novel: Harry Potter’s parents were murdered by the Dark Wizard Voldemort when Harry was only a baby. Ever since, Harry, who is a wizard himself, has been brought up by his maternal Aunt Petunia and her husband, Vernon Dursley. The Dursleys’ main aim in life is to appear

normal middle-class people, so they desperately reject all association with witchcraft (they even pretend Petunia didn’t have a sister). Situational context: Strange things are happening in the neighborhood where the Dursleys live. Speech Acts: Vernon Dursley is trying to get information out of his wife regarding Harry’s possible involvement in recent acts of witchcraft. Indirectness: Reason: Both Vernon and Petunia are afraid that witchcraft occurring in their neighborhood will compromise their well-guarded image of normalcy. Techniques: - a tentative approach: - time filler Er - - name + term of endearment (to gain her good-will) - negative polarity, you haven’t heard … - assertion turned into question by the final tag (have you?) - indirect reference to the subject, hinting: - avoids using the term “witchcraft”; instead talks about her dead sister (metonymy) - refers to witchcraft vaguely (euphemistically) as funny stuff - enumerates strange occurrences, but vaguely (does not insist on any of them) - an even more tentative conclusion: distances himself from reality by using - a lowered modality: past tense, mental process – thought - additional low-modality markers: maybe - hedging: discourse marker well - adverb just – to reduce imposition, to distance himself from facts - time filler you know … - circumlocution: her crowd – to avoid direct reference to the wizarding world - vagueness: something to do with … – to avoid direct reference to witchcraft Paralanguage: - intentionally very flat intonation (marked) so as to cover up emotions - soft and tentative tone of voice: frightened of his wife’s reaction, but especially of the things that may upset his own comfort - tightly restrained facial expression - very closed-mouthed speech, as though afraid someone might overhear him. Etc.

Conclusion Mr. Dursley goes to great lengths of strategic indirectness (hinting) so as to avoid mentioning a subject that he perceives as highly unpleasant (witchcraft).

Text 2. Inciting by way of presupposition & entailment

How are we reacting to the realities of our world? What do we think of the steady gain of Communism – of the millions killed, tortured and enslaved by this criminal conspiracy? Do we still laugh at Khrushchev‘s claim that our children will live under Communism? Do we shrug off Cuba? Will we shrug off Mexico? Are we concerned about the certain, documented, real influence Communism exercises in Washington? Do we watch with curiosity? Do we pull down the curtain on these disturbing thoughts? Do we draw down the warm covers of apathy around our necks? Report published by the John Birch Society in the U.S.A. in 1964 (quoted by Geoffrey Leech, Semantics, 1981)

Analysis Subject: In the days of the Cold War, American politicians – represented here by the John Birch Society – expressed their concern regarding the growing threat of Communism in the world, as well as regarding the apparent lack of reaction of the American government. Technique: indirectness, i.e. the writer’s position is presented obliquely o by way of presupposition and entailment o nothing is asserted overtly: the paragraph consists entirely of rhetorical questions Utterance Asserted by presupposition Entailment How are we reacting to the We are reacting to the realities We are not reacting realities of our world? of our world appropriately. What do we think of the steady Communism is gaining steadily. Communism is a threat gain of Communism ... of the millions killed, tortured Millions have been killed / We should react against such a and enslaved ... tortured / enslaved under situation. communism. ... by this criminal conspiracy Communism is a criminal We should take measures conspiracy. against all criminal conspiracies. Do we still laugh at We used to laugh at We should not laugh at Khrushchev’s claim ...? Khrushchev’s claim ... Khrushchev’s claim ...... Khrushchev’s claim that our Khrushchev has claimed that We should fight against all children will live under the USA will be Communist communist manifestations in Communism? the USA. Do we shrug off Cuba? We used not to care that our Our communist neighbor Cuba neighbor Cuba is communist. represents a serious threat. Will we shrug off Mexico? Mexico will also become Mexico should not become communist. communist ... the certain, documented, real There is documented influence We should be concerned about influence Communism exercises of communism in Washington. it. in Washington Are we concerned about We are not concerned ... We should be concerned about Communist influence in it. Washington?

Do we watch with curiosity? ... People are not aware of the Do we draw down the warm threat. We should wake up and take covers of apathy around our We are apathetic. measures. necks?

Presupposition:  in the noun phrases: S presents as unquestionable a number of facts about Communism: o … the steady gain of communism…; a criminal conspiracy … o … Khrushchev’s claim that our children … ; etc.  in the verb phrases: the fact that the American government is not doing enough to protect the country from the threat o Do we still laugh ...? (still presupposes “we used to laugh”) o Do we draw down the warm covers of apathy around our necks? (presupposes “we are apathetic and do nothing to protect ourselves”) Connotations: of passivity, conveyed by o the lexical chain: shrug off, watch with curiosity, the warm covers of apathy ...

o repetition, Do we shrug off Cuba? Will we shrug off Mexico? – connoting a repeated passive attitude); note the different tenses of the verbs; o highly modulated intonation, e.g. How are we reacting ...? (Tone 1+) Do we shrug off Cuba? Will we shrug off Mexico? (Tone 2, Tone 2+) o exasperated tone of voice: connoting despair at the government’s passivity; etc. Entailment: measures must be taken to change the situation. Illocutionary force of the whole text: an urge to action.

Conclusion By exploiting presupposition and entailment, a skilful speaker/writer may be even more persuasive than one who puts his ideas into words directly and straightforwardly. By their very indirectness, e.g. by the sly implication that S does not want to harm or provoke, presupposition and entailment may incite receivers into forceful action.

Task 11. Analyze the following three texts to reveal the way they manipulate presupposition and entailment to convey S’s intended meaning and perform the intended speech act.

A. Situation: One of the greatest orators of all times, Marcus Tullius Cicero, is well remembered for his Catilinarian Orations (63 B.C.), exposing to the Roman Senate Catilina’s plot to overthrow the Roman government. Cicero’s aggressive opening lines to Oratio in Catilinam Prima are still widely remembered:

Latin text: Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra? Quam diu etiam furor iste tuus nos eludet? Quem ad finem sese effrenata iactabit audacia? English translation: When, O Catiline, do you mean to cease abusing our patience? How long is that madness of yours still to mock us? When is there to be an end of that unbridled audacity of yours, swaggering about as it does now? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catiline_Orations#Oratio_in_Catilinam_Prima_in_Senatu_Habita

B. An advert from a telephone company:

KallMart. When was the last time you were ROBBED!? Stop paying high rates!

C. On a big poster along the road

Aviva (insurance company). This ad will be here tomorrow. Will you?

C. Language in interaction10

1. Cooperation & conversational implicature. Levels of meaning

The gap between what S says and what S means has preoccupied other linguists, too. Foremost among them was Paul Grice, who tried to answer the question of how, with so much indirectness characterizing ordinary communication, conversation still goes on successfully: in most cases, R understands correctly what S means. To explain how communication works, Grice formulated his Cooperative Principle, according to which interlocutors are rational individuals who “cooperate” in the act of communication, i.e. o S often implies/implicates11 . more meaning than what his words say, or . a different meaning than what his words say o R makes inferences, i.e. educated guesses regarding S’s intended meaning . and thus interprets S’s additional/different information. This also means that we must add a further level of meaning12. Consider the following example:

Model analysis 7. Four levels of meaning. B&Bs in Scotland

Goals of the analysis: to asses the way interlocutors cooperate in face-to-face conversation . to investigate the notions of implicature and explicature

A: We are going to Scotland next month. B: I know some excellent B&Bs there and I have an album.

Analysis A’s contribution Level 1: knowledge of the dictionary R (speaker B) must establish the entire range of possible meanings of A’s words - we = plural, self-including reference - go, Scotland, next month – unambiguous Level 2: knowledge of the world R (speaker B) establishes the referents of the terms: - we – deictic, includes A’s family or friends, according to case; B must rely on the background knowledge he shares with A to identify those referents - go – may mean: for touristic reasons, for educational purposes, etc. (shared background) - next month – deictic, so relative, e.g. June, if the exchange takes place in May Level 3: R’s inferences regarding A’s implicatures - R (speaker B) fills in A’s missing links on the basis of their shared background e.g. [My wife and I] are going to Scotland next month [for a holiday].

10 For theoretical support see Interpreting text. Part 4: Annex 8. Discourse analysis & pragmatics (C); See also Vizental (2009). Meaning and Communication. 11 Hence the term “conversational implicature.” See Interpreting texts. Part 4: Annex 8 (C). 12 See also Model analysis 4.Text 2. Disambiguating meaning. Get Lucky; and Jenny Thomas’ text reproduced in Task 21, Text B later on in this volume.

Level 4: decoding the illocutionary force (SA) of S’s utterance e.g. S (speaker A) knows that R (speaker B) has already been to Scotland (shared background) = SA/illocution: S is asking for information, help, … B’s contribution Level 1: knowledge of the dictionary R (speaker A) must establish the entire range of possible meanings of B’s words: - know, some, excellent, there ... – unambiguous - B&B – ambiguous (several meanings) - album – ambiguous (what kind?) Level 2: knowledge of the world R (speaker A) must use his pragmatic knowledge to: - establish the referent of I – person deictic, B’s self-reference - disambiguate B&B: Bread & Breakfast, i.e. comfortable and quite inexpensive hotels/motels - there – place deictic, distal; anaphoric co-reference (i.e. Scotland, mentioned previously by A) Level 3: B’s implicatures/explicatures – A’s inferences - R (speaker A) must fill in B’s missing links e.g. I know some excellent Bed & Breakfast [hotel]s there – explicature [I can give you their addresses] (implicature) and I have a [tourist] album (explicature) [of Scotland] (implicature) [which I can lend you] and [which will help you a lot] – implicature Level 4: decoding the illocutionary force of B’s utterance, - S (speaker B) is informing A about some excellent opportunities in Scotland - S (speaker B) is offering to help A with information. Conclusion In the act of communication, interlocutors cooperate. S implies/implicates more meaning than his words convey, and R makes inferences regarding S’s intended meaning and the illocutionary force of S’s utterance. To bridge the gap between what S has said and what S has meant, R may rely on his knowledge of the world, on the background knowledge he shares with S, or on some other factors.

Model analyses 8. The Maxims of cooperation Ordinary communication (especially face-to-face conversation) is minimal: there are numerous missing links, i.e. pieces of information left out by S, to be retrieved by R on the basis of his knowledge of the world or of the background he shares with S (especially if the interlocutors are socially close), e.g. see the text in Model analysis 7 analyzed above. To explain how cooperation works within linguistic exchanges, Grice proposed 4 maxims of cooperation – of Quality, of Quantity, of Relevance and of Manner –, which communicators may follow in two ways: by observing the Maxims or by flouting/violating the Maxims.

Goals of the analyses: Text 1: to asses ways in which communicators can observe the Maxims of cooperation Text 2: to asses ways in which communicators can flout the Maxims of cooperation

Text 1. Observing the Maxims: implying more meaning. Marlboro Classics

Since ellipsis and missing links reduce social distance (D), they are extensively exploited by advertising: some are so sketchy and vague that one may wonder about their very textness. And yet, they are obviously coherent, their cohesion being semantic and logical, rather than structural. Consider the following text:

Marlboro Classics. Authentic American Style. Traditional Quality Label. Maximum comfort is great to wear. For strength & endurance.

Level 1. Knowledge of the dictionary The ad has practically no grammatical structure  it consists of five orthographic sentences, separated by full stops  but only one (the 4th) has a predicate  the other four are mere noun phrases  each graphical sentence functions as an independent unit  there are absolutely no explicit connective devices (e.g. no referential ties) And yet: the receiver views them as connected because  they have unity of meaning (coherence)  the cohesion of this ad relies on semantic factors, e.g. on the lexical chain Marlboro – authentic – style – etc. Level 2. Knowledge of the world (pragmatic knowledge)  the graphical sentences are placed on the same sheet of paper  they come sequentially – adjacent utterances  such “little texts” are typical for the discourse of advertising  for decoding such texts, R relies on: o his knowledge of Marlboro products (cigarettes, but also denim clothes) o other Marlboro ads seen previously (showing a lonely cowboy; connotations: of independence, of tradition, of rebellious casual wear; etc.) Level 3. Illocutionary force (SA) Discourse type: advertising; a product ad Function/SA = an urge for customers to buy those products Level 4. Conversational implicature - there are numerous missing links, i.e. S implicates more meaning that what he says - R makes inferences regarding the factual gaps - by making educated guesses regarding what S wanted to say + according to his own personality and knowledge, e.g. in interpreting connotations e.g. R may get the following text: Marlboro Classics [are] authentic[ally] American [in] style. [They are marked by a] traditional quality label. [They provide] maximum comfort [, which] is great to wear. [They are made] for strength & endurance. Obviously, the full version sounds artificial in the context of advertising, thoroughly lacking the immediacy and spontaneity the original text conveys. The language of advertising is specific, quite different from the Standard English of written texts. It is much closer to the texts produced in ordinary colloquial speech, where sentences are shorter and often elliptical.

Conclusion Advertising copywriters simulate in writing oral communication (the sentences are very short and highly elliptical). In doing so, they hope to . make the text more interesting . reduce social distance (D), thus making the product appear desirable and available.

Text 2. Flouting the Maxims: implying a different meaning. Female keywords

Female keywords & their meanings A: Fine. B: This is the word women use at the end of any argument when they feel they are right but can't stand to hear you argue any longer. It means that you should shut up. From LaughNet, Aug. 2004, adapted

Analysis Situational context: LaughNet (an Internet site with funny texts and videos) Linguistic context: a list of utterances that women typically say to their partners when they are upset and their interpretation by a knowledgeable male communicator. Interlocutors: A = female; role: speaker B = male, educated/knowledgeable in interpreting female attitudes Role: Receiver, then Speaker/interpreter - then speaker, interpreter of A’s utterance A: says (locution): Fine! Paralanguage: negative (angry voice/facial expression) SA (illocutionary force): - a refusal to continue to argue - a request/order that her interlocutor should stop talking Cooperation: - flouting the Maxim of Quality (saying the opposite of what she means: it is not fine) - flouting the Maxim of Quantity (she is saying less than what she means) - flouting the Maxim of Manner (she is being ambiguous) Implicature: the situation is definitely not fine, but … B: in the role of Receiver, - makes inferences/interprets A’s implicatures: A wants to end the argument - in the role of Speaker, makes further implicatures: e.g. that you should shut up; women are unreasonable, … -that men need to learn how to interpret their attitudes and words Conclusion Speakers (not only female) often say things they do not really mean. Among the reasons they do so are: - a typical human tendency to exaggerate (5 minutes = litotes) - a desire to make their contribution to the exchange more interesting (here, S says the opposite of what she means) - a desire to conceal some unpleasant truth; etc. In spite of such indirectness, the world-wise receiver generally interprets S’s utterances correctly by making the correct inferences.

Task 12. Analyze other examples from the same text, or find similar ones, and discuss the way which S & R cooperate.

Female keywords & their meanings Nothing. 'Nothing' means something and you should be on your toes. 'Nothing' is usually used to describe the feeling a woman has of wanting to turn you inside out, upside down, and backwards. 'Nothing' usually signifies an argument that will last ―five minutes‖ and end with the word ―Fine.‖

Thanks a lot. A woman will say 'Thanks a lot' when she is really ticked off at you. It is usually followed by a loud sigh. This signifies that you have hurt her in some callous way. Be careful not to ask what is wrong after the loud sigh, as she will only tell you 'Nothing.' From LaughNet, Aug. 2004, adapted

Model analyses 9. Cooperation & indirectness. Examples

Goal of the analyses: to survey ways in which communicators cope with indirectness by following the cooperative Maxims.

Communication is a complex phenomenon which goes on quite smoothly in spite of massive indirectness and apparent irrationality of numerous exchanges. This is because world-wise interlocutors “cooperate,” they know not only to fill in missing links (when the maxims of cooperation are observed), but also to interpret correctly apparently illogical utterances (when the maxims of cooperation are flouted/violated). Obviously, the maxims mostly overlap, which makes R’s work more complicated, but not impossible. Consider that following examples:

Text 1 A: Could you help me move some furniture this weekend? B: My daughter is coming home from college.

- intended meaning: NO - speech act/illocutionary force: refusing + giving reason for refusal - strategies: - indirectness (missing link): *I can’t … because] my daughter is … - politeness: B knows it is not polite to refuse unless one gives a reason - causes of indirectness: shared background, knowledge of the world; saving effort; (S knows that R can fill in the missing information) - cooperation: - S is observing the Maxims, but implies more meaning than what he says - R makes inferences: - S is flouting the maxim of relevance: his answer seems to be unrelated to his invitation (A is asking for help, B is talking about his daughter) - R fills in the missing link by relying on his knowledge of similar texts: adjacent utterances are generally related (textness: coherence & cohesions) SO: R interprets S’s utterance as a refusal and as a reason for the refusal

Text 2 Johnny: Dad, can I take the car tomorrow? Dad: Sure, I love walking to work.

- the father’s intended meaning: NO - speech act/illocutionary force: refusing, being ironic, making fun of his son - strategy: indirectness - cause of indirectness/S’s desire to be funny - cooperation: the utterance may be true or not; in fact - S implies a different meaning from what he says (the very opposite meaning) i.e. S is flouting the maxim of Quality - R makes inferences on the basis of his knowledge of his father: SO: R interprets S’s utterance as meaning the opposite of what S says

Text 3 A: Did you like the performance last night? B: Well, it was not exactly what I expected.

- B’s intended meaning: I didn’t really like it - speech act/illocutionary force: answering a question, giving personal opinion - strategy: indirectness, vagueness (hedge: Well …) - cause of indirectness: politeness (S does not want to speak badly of the person) - cooperation: - S implies a more meaning than what he says S says more than necessary, i.e. he is flouting the maxim of Quantity S is intentionally vague, i.e. is flouting the maxim of Manner - R makes inferences to bridge the gap between what S says and what S means SO: R interprets S’s intended meaning correctly

Text 4 Nike. Just do it.

- context: the discourse of advertising = “loaded language” (function/aim: to persuade) - speech act/illocutionary force: an urge to buy the product range - strategy: indirectness, vagueness (Who? Do what? etc.) - cause of indirectness: the need of advertising to be interesting, persuasive - cooperation: - S implies a different meaning than what S says (locution: Nike. Just do it; intended meaning: “Buy Nike products”) S is flouting the maxim of Manner (he is being vague) S is flouting the maxim of Quantity (saying less than necessary); etc. - R makes inferences: R relies of his knowledge of the function of advertising: to persuade SO: R bridges the gap between what S says and what S means

Task 13. Find 3 jokes and identify the implicatures/explicatures.

Task 14. Analyze 3 advertising texts in terms of indirectness and violations of the Maxims.

2. Negotiating meaning

Given the great number of missing links and the huge amount of indirectness that characterizes ordinary exchanges, there are numerous cases of ambiguity. To overcome misunderstandings, interlocutors have to negotiate meaning. In other words, if R does not know what inferences to make, or does not make the correct inferences, he will ask S to reformulate his utterance and clarify his meaning. The causes for misunderstandings are varied; the following examples illustrate some such cases:

Model analyses 10. Managing ambiguity & misunderstanding

Goal of the analyses: to identify causes of misunderstandings and ways to manage them.

Text 1. Locution vs. illocution. A classroom interaction

Teacher (to student being late): Nice to see you. Student: You, too, teacher. Teacher: I was being sarcastic Student: Oh!!!

S (the teacher) says: S means: GAP Nice to see you. You are late again. R (the student) interprets S’s locution at S’s illocutionary force (Speech Act): face value (thinks it is a greeting) criticizing, scolding - does not get S’s illocutionary force S must reformulate, be specific, explain No gap S says what he means (being sarcastic) S says: I was being sarcastic R finally understands S’s real meaning Conclusion Cause of misunderstanding: R does not identify S’s illocution, but interprets it locution literally.

Text 2. Context & reference. An SMS exchange

ME: Send 37 pgs. SON: Sent. 27. ME: Typical exaggeration. SON: Mum. I said 27 + annexes. 30. Put down the sword. ME: For God‘s sake, man. I was talking about me. That I exaggerate. Son: Sorry.

Analysis: Interlocutors: mother and son (both touchy) Type of text: an SMS exchange – little text o no full sentences, still has textness (coherence & cohesion); no paralanguage Linguistic context: previous discussions/exchanges o Son talked about something that he wrote and wanted to show Me Non-linguistic context: o touchy interlocutors o previous conflicts, hurts Linguistic analysis: Utterance 1: elliptical: Material Process, Goal (indirect object me) elided missing links: [the] 37 pgs [that you were telling me about] Utterance 2. elliptical, missing links: [I have already] sent [them. They are only] 27 [pgs, not 37] Utterance 3. Typical exaggeration. - ambiguous: elliptical: the referent is not mentioned (Who is exaggerating?) - illocutionary force: “Me” is making fun of herself; but Son misunderstands referent Utterance 4. Mum. I said 27 + annexes. 30. - full sentences: their very length and complexity shows irritation a. illocutionary force: explains/justifies himself (I said ...) b. illocutionary force: asks Me to stop attacking him (Put down … = metaphor) Utterance 5. invocation of God, informal term of address, emphatic intonation - long, full sentences, compound Tone 43: high emotional charge - illocution: clarifying and apologizing Utterance 6. Sorry: SA: accepting and apologizing; unmarked Tone 1 Conclusion Cause of misunderstanding: S’s ambiguity: Typical exaggeration. o R misinterprets the target of the criticism (thinks Me is criticizing him, not herself) o i.e. R misinterprets the referent of S’s utterance

Text 3. Interpreting metaphor. My Fair Lady (1964)

Eliza: … I know what lessons cost as well as you do and I‘m ready to pay. Higgins: How much? Eliza: Now you‘re talkin‘. I thought you‘d come off it for a chance to get back a bit of what you chucked at me last night. You‘d had a drop in, ‗i‘t you? ………….. Higgins: How much do you propose to pay me for these lessons? Eliza: Oh, I know what‘s right. My lady friend gets French lessons for 15 pence an hour from a real French gentleman. You wouldn‘t have the face to ask me the same for teachin‘ me my own language as you would for French. I won‘t give more than a shillin‘. Take it or leave it. Higgins: Do you know, Pickering, if you think of a shilling not as a simple shilling, but as a percentage of this girl‘s income, it works out as fully equivalent of…er…60 or 70 pounds from a millionaire. By George, it‘s enormous. It‘s the biggest offer I ever had. Eliza: Sixty pounds? What are you talkin‘ about? Where would I get pounds? I never offered you pounds! Higgins: Hold your tongue! Eliza: But I ain‘t got 60 pounds! My Fair Lady (1964) http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/2.MyFairLady.Lessons.mp4

Analysis Situation: Eliza has come to ask Higgins to teach her “good English” so that she can become a lady in a flow’r shop ‘stead of sellin’ at the corner of Tottenham Court Road. She is ready to pay for the lessons. And yet, their negotiation does not go smoothly. Miscommunication, due to:  different values, to the widely different social statuses of the interlocutors o Eliza evaluates Higgins’ financial situation by her own standards:  she thinks he needs to work to make money  she thinks he would be pleased to get back a bit of what (he) chucked at her the night before o Eliza assesses people by the standards of her own class:  she thinks Higgins had been drunk the night before  she thinks he had been irresponsibly generous because he had been drunk  Eliza’s inability to differentiate between literal and metaphoric speech o Higgins evaluates Eliza’s offer correctly, in terms of percentage of a person’s income … if you think of a shilling not as a simple shilling, but as a percentage of this girl’s income, it works out as fully equivalent of … er … 60 or 70 pounds from a millionaire. o he is impressed by the sacrifice the girl is willing to make to improve her status By George, it’s enormous. It’s the biggest offer I ever had. o Eliza interprets his words literally: she thinks Higgins is actually asking for 60 pounds. Causes of miscommunication (apart from Higgins’ obvious rudeness):  Eliza’s inability to think and behave by the standards of Higgins’ social class (poor sociolinguistic competence)  Eliza’s insufficient pragmatic knowledge (she cannot interpret metaphor) .

Text 4. Strategic vagueness. Snatch (2000) Director and screenwriter Guy Ritchie

Mickey: Ya Tommy? Come about the caravan? Tommy: Mr. O'Neill. Mickey: Fuck, man. Call me Mickey. Tommy: How are you? Mickey: Eh, the weather's been kind to us, but the horses, you know… (referring to Tommy‘s companion): Fuck me! Would you look at the size of him? How big are you? Hey kids, how big is he? Kid: Big man, that‘s for sure. Mickey: Hey, Mam, come and look at the size of this fella. Bet you box a little, can't you, sir? Eh, you look like a boxer. Mickey’s mother: Get out of the way, Mickey … see if the fellas would like a drink. Tommy: Oh, I could murder one. Mickey’s mother: Be no murdering done around here, I don't mind telling ya. Mickey: … Cup of tea for the big fella? Come on! Mickey’s mother: Don't be silly, Mickey. Offer the man a proper drink, right? (asking Tommy) Is the big fella not coming with us? Tommy: Nah, he's minding the car. Mickey’s mother: What does he think we are, thieves? Tommy: Oh, no, nothing like that, Miss O‘Neill. He just…likes looking after cars. Mickey: Good dags. Do you like dags? Tommy: Dags?

Mickey: What? / Mickey’s mother: Yeah, dags. / Mickey: Dags. You like dags? Tommy: Oh, dogs. Sure, I like dags. I like caravans more. (Mickey nods him in) Mickey’s mother: You're very welcome. http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/The%20Pikey%20Caravan%20-%20Snatch%20(18).mp4

Analysis Situational context: Gangster Tommy and boxer Gorgeous George visit the camp of Irish Travelers (gypsies, referred to as “pikeys”) to buy a caravan from them. The sellers are Mickey O’Neill (Brad Pitt) and his mother. Miscommunication 1: between Mickey and Tommy Tommy is concerned for their own safety and worried for their car, so wants to get out as soon as possible. But Mickey is “doing business” (negotiating for the price of the caravan), so he wants to throw his interlocutor off the track; therefore, under the pretense of being polite, he intentionally digresses from the subject, e.g. - he talks about the “size” of Tommy’s companion - he includes the children around in the discussion - he talks about dogs - he offers Tommy a drink (Mickey feigns British politeness and offers him tea); etc. Causes for the miscommunication: Tommy does not understand what Mickey and his mother are saying because  of their strange accent (pikey), e.g. they say dags instead of “dogs”  Mickey’s strategic indirectness and violation of the Maxims of cooperation: o Mickey talks about all kind of things unrelated to the purpose of Tommy’s visit: George’s size, dogs, a drink …  i.e. he flouts the Maxim of Relevance Miscommunication 2: between Mickey’s mother and Tommy  Mickey’s mother tells her son to offer their guests a drink  Tommy accepts (SA) by uttering a slangy idiom: I could murder one.  Tommy’s mother makes the inference that he is alluding to violence typical for gypsy communities (cultural stereotype)  she takes offence and becomes defensive: o Be no murdering done around here, I don't mind telling you. Conclusion Cause of miscommunication: R (Mickey’s mother) interprets metaphor at face value and . finds implicature where none was intended.

Task 15. Analyze the following text and discuss the way in which S & R negotiate meaning. The interlocutors also negotiate power positions (P). Can you define this new notion? Teacher: [Imagine that] the government of the United States could rid the world of terrorism forever, but only if for a single day, you gave up all of your rights as American citizens. What would you say? Would you do it? Student: Sure. Teacher: OK. The government says it could rid the world of terrorism forever if you give up all of your rights for a week. Would you do it? Come on. A week. Student: A week. A week, all right? Teacher: A month? … A year? A year. … Just a year. … Ten years? … Ten years.

Student: No. Teacher: A lifetime. Student: Absolutely not. No way. Strip Search (2004)

3. Power positions (P)13

Pragmatics focuses on the way people use the language so as to obtain real-world advantages – from very simple ones, such as an answer to a question, to complex ones, e.g. a loan from a bank or the approval of friends. In this context, the notion of power (P) is central.

Task 16. Analyze the following text and discuss the way in which S (the men in the elevator) & R (the elevator itself) negotiate power position. Decide who is the winner of the power contest in this case.

S1: Where's the buttons? S2: No, no they've installed voice recognition technology in this lift. I heard about ‗t. S1: Voice recognition technology? In a lift? In Scotland? Ever tried voice recognition technology? S2: Naw. / S1: They don't do Scottish accents. / S2: Eleven. Elevator: Could you please repeat that? S1: Eleven. S2: Eleven…eleven. S1: Eleven! Elevator: Could you please repeat that? S2: E-le-ven! S1: Whose idea was this? You need to try an American accent. Eleven. Eleven. S2: That sounds Irish, not American. Eleven. (...) Elevator: Please speak slowly and clearly. S2: Smart arse! S1: Eleven. Elevator: I'm sorry, could you please repeat that? S1: Eleven! If you don't understand the lingo, away back hame in yer ain country. (…) S1: Oh, just take us anywhere, ye cow! Just open the doors! Elevator: This is a voice-activated elevator. Please state which floor you would like to go to in a clear and calm manner. (…) You have not selected a floor. S2: I have! Eleven! Elevator: If you would like to get out of the elevator without selecting a floor, simply say, "Open the doors, please." S1: Please? Please? Suck my wullie. (…) Please? Pathetic. Elevator: Please remain calm. S2: Oh fu……wud ye let me up tae that… get me up there…right, just wait fer it tae speak… Elevator: You have not selected a floor. S2: Up yours, ye cow! You don't let us out these doors, I'm

13 For the theoretical background see Interpreting text. Part 4: Annex 8. Discourse analysis & pragmatics (A, B, C); etc.

gonnae come tae America, I'm gonnae find whatever desperate actress gave yer voice, and I'm gonnae go tae the electric chair fer ye. (…)

Burnistoun - Voice Recognition Elevator in Scotland https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAz_UvnUeuU&hd=1

Model analyses 11. Negotiating power position (P)

Goal of the analyses: to survey ways in which S manipulates language and presents his point in a persuasive way so as to “get things done” his way (high P).

Text 1. Staging & imposition. My Fair Lady (1964). Alphie vs. Henry Higgins

Doolittle (talking to Pickering): Professor Higgins? Higgins (from up in the library): Here! Doolittle: Where? Good morning, Governor. I come about a very serious matter, Governor. Higgins: Brought up in Houndslow. Mother Welsh, I should think. What is it you want, Doolittle? Doolittle: I want my daughter, that's what I want. See? Higgins: Of course you do. You're her father, aren't you? Doolittle: I'm glad to see you have a spark of family feeling left. Higgins: She's in there. Yes, take her away at once. Doolittle: What? Higgins: Take her away. Do you think I am going to keep your daughter for you? Doolittle: Now, is this reasonable, Governor? Is it fairity to take advantage of a man like that? The girl belongs to me. You got 'er. Where do I come in? Higgins: How dare you come here and attempt to blackmail me! You sent her here on purpose! Doolittle: Don't take a man up like that, Governor. Higgins: The police shall take you up. This is a plan a plot to extort money by threats. I shall telephone the police. Doolittle: Have I asked you for a brass farthin'? I leave it to this gentleman 'ere. Have I said a word about money? Higgins: Well, what else did you come for? Doolittle: What would a bloke come for? Be 'uman, Governor. Higgins: Alfred, you sent her here on purpose. Doolittle: So help me, Governor, I never did. Higgins: How did you know she was here? Doolittle: … Well, she sent back for her luggage and I got to 'ear about it. She said she didn't want no clothes. What was I to think from that, Governor? I ask you, as a parent, what was I to think? Higgins: So you came here to rescue her from worse than death, eh? Doolittle: Yes, sir, Governor. That's right. Yes. Higgins: Mrs. Pearce! Eliza's father has come to take her away. Give her to him, will you? Doolittle: Now wait a minute, Governor. Wait a minute. You and me is men o' the world, ain't we? Higgins: Men of the world, are we? Perhaps you'd better go, Mrs. Pearce. Doolittle: I think so indeed, sir! Here, Governor. I've took a sort of a fancy to you and if you want the girl, I ain't so set on 'avin' her home again (…). All I ask is my rights as a father. You're the last man alive to

expect me to let her go for nothing. (…) So what's a five pound note to you? An' what's Eliza to me? Col. Pickering: I think you should know, Doolittle that Mr. Higgins' intentions are entirely honorable. Doolittle: Of course they are, Governor. If I thought they wasn't, I'd ask 50. Col. Pickering: You mean, you'd sell your daughter for 50 pounds? Have you no morals, man? Doolittle: No, I can't afford 'em, Governor. Neither could you if you was as poor as me. (…) Col. Pickering: Why not? Doolittle: Look at it my way. What am l? I ask ya, what am l? I'm one o' the undeserving poor, that's what I am. … [But] I don't need less than a deservin' man, I need more. … I'm playin' straight with you. I ain't pretendin' to be deservin'. No, I'm undeservin' and I mean to go on bein' undeservin'. I like it an' that's the truth. But will you take advantage of a man's nature do him out of the price of his own daughter …? Is five pounds unreasonable, I put it to you?

My Fair Lady (1964) https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=my+fair+lady+full+movie http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/m/my-fair-lady-script-transcript.html Analysis Situational context: Alphred Doolittle, Eliza’s father, a person who only cares about his daughter for the occasional money he can get from her, has heard that Eliza has moved into the house of Professor Higgins. Suspecting an illicit affair, Alphie comes to the latter’s house in the hope of extorting some money from him. Power positions (P): o Alphie enters Professor Higgins’ house in a position of high power (high P): o he has a right to be there: I come about a very serious matter, Governor. o he has been “taken advantage of”: Is it fairity to take advantage of a man like that? o he has been dispossessed: The girl belongs to me. You got 'er. o Higgins upsets power relations by: o staging the scene: he climbs to the upper level of his library, so that he is looking down on Alphie, thus making him look small and feel powerless o he upsets Alphie’s expectations . by acknowledging that it is his right to claim his daughter . by insisting that he take his daughter away . by insisting that Eliza is imposing on him Take her away. Do you think I am going to keep your daughter for you? . by accusing Alphie of extortion and threatening to inform the police: This is a plan, a plot to extort money by threats. Alphie lowers his claims (low P, defensive paralanguage) and begins to negotiate: o he appeals to his justified fatherly feelings and rights, I ask you, as a parent, … o he claims he has not come for money: Have I asked you for a brass farthin'? o he appeals to Higgins’ feeling: Be 'uman, Governor. o he appeals to Higgins’ reason: I ask you, … what was I to think? o he tries to preserve power position (high P) by reducing social distance (close D): . claims common ground: You and me is men o' the world, ain't we? Higgins pretends to sympathize with Alphie, acknowledging his rights So you came here to rescue her from worse than death, eh? o continues to insist that Alphie take his daughter away: Mrs. Pearce! Eliza's father has come to take her away. Give her to him, will you? Alphie begins to show his true face: o he softens his paralanguage even further o he lowers his power position (low P), insisting on the rightfulness of his enterprise: All I ask is my rights as a father. o he expresses sympathy for Higgins: I've took a sort of a fancy to you and You're the last man alive to expect me to let her go for nothing.

o he asserts his wish to negotiate terms: I ain't so set on 'avin' her home again but what I might be open to is an arrangement. o he acknowledges that Higgins’ intentions are honorable and admits to his own mercenary purposes: Of course they are, Governor. … If I thought they wasn't, I'd ask 50. o he strategically lowers his social status . by debasing himself: I'm one o' the undeserving poor . by admitting to his mercenary purposes: Pickering: You mean, you'd sell your daughter for 50 pounds? Have you no morals, man? Doolittle: No, I can't afford 'em, Governor. o he plays the card of honesty: I'm playin' straight with you. I ain't pretendin' to be deservin'. No, I'm undeservin' and I mean to go on bein' undeservin'. o he appeals to their moral judgement: But will you take advantage of a man's nature do him out of the price of his own daughter… o he appeals to their reason and compassion: Is five pounds unreasonable, I put it to you? o and yet, he preserves his pride: No, I'm undeservin' and I mean to go on bein' undeservin' Conclusion In spite of Higgins’ confident beginnings and high competence in power negotiations, this power contest is won by poor, uneducated and undeserving Alphie, who manages:  not only to avoid an open conflict  but also to build a positive atmosphere  to make his interlocutors respond to him, even if with condescension  to obtain what he has come for, i.e. five pounds to have a drink with his chums and “the missus” Thus the high P finally goes to Alphie.

Text 2. Manipulating D & P. The King’s Speech (2010)

Lionel: I prefer Lionel. My family calls me far worse. What shall I call you? Prince Albert: The Duke of York is appropriate. Lionel: Oh please. Prince Albert: Your Royal Highness then. Lionel: Much more informal. Prince Albert: Prince Albert? Or Frederick? Arthur? George? I've lots of names to choose from. Lionel: How about Bertie? Prince Albert (flushes): Only my family uses that. Lionel: That's what I'll call you then. We must be true equals. Prince Albert: If we were equal I wouldn't be here, I'd be at home with my family and no-one would give a damn. http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video- Main/The%20Kings%20Speech%20Movie%20Trailer%20Official%20(HD).mp4

Analysis Situational context: Prince Albert, heir to the throne of Great Britain, has a bad stutter that prevents him from functioning properly in his social and political role. To overcome his predicament, he has decided to see a speech specialist, a highly unconventional one, as it turns out. Lionel Logue is Australian, not even a true doctor, but with some experience and good results in the field. Attitudes: Prince Albert: conflicting feelings  he is desperate: he needs to get rid of his defect, so he is willing to try out anything o but he is reluctant to be in Logue’s office and is highly skeptical about the efficiency of any treatment: they had already tried out everything  he feels his royal responsibilities as a burden o but he is also proud and eager to become king  he is naturally proud and self-important: he considers that his doctor should address him by one of his official titles (The Duke of York or Prince Albert) or by the social deictic Your Royal Highness o but not because he is a vain person: the attitude results from his upbringing, as well as from his present role and position  he is offended by Lionel’s disrespectful attitude o but accepts it out of despair for help  he is shy but arrogant (his shyness makes him even more arrogant) Lionel Logue: confident, self-possessed  he is unimpressed by his patient’s social status: treats him like he would any other patient  modest and unpresumptuous: he admits that he cannot help his patient unless the latter himself wants to help himself  direct and honest in his life (loves his modest office) and in his approach to his patients  dedicated to his profession (not much interested in the financial side)  determined and focused on results: rejects categorically whatever he deems counterproductive to his patient’s treatment or behavior. Conclusion Logue skillfully manipulates power positions (P) and social distance (D) by: . refusing to be intimidated by Prince Albert’s arrogance and claims (high P) . offering to be addressed by his first name (equal P & close D) . deciding to address his patient not only by his a first name, but by a diminutive for it (Bertie, from Albert), thus placing his patient in lower power position than himself (high P for himself); by accidentally picking (in spite of Prince Albert’s objections) the nickname used by the members of the family, he manages to make the relationship intimate (close D) . forcefully reducing D between himself and his patient: he refuses to go to the Royal Palace for the treatment and insists that his patient come to his office (equal P & close D) . obtaining results (however small) in his treatment of his patient, and thus gaining his patient’s trust (high P); etc.

Task 17. The classroom, with its classical teacher-student relationship, is an excellent ground for power negotiation. Watch the full sketch from which the excerpt below was extracted (Lauren Cooper and Doctor Who clash in class, 2007) and suggest reasons for Lauren’s behavior.

Mr. Logan: Morning. Class: All right. [a:it] Mr. Logan: As I‘m sure you‘re aware, my name is Mr. Logan, I‘m your new English teacher, nice to meet you all, hope you‘re all ready to get to grips with some Elizabethan literature, let‘s now turn to page 53 in our poetry textbooks. I think we‘ll dive straight in with the Bard himself. Lauren: Sir? Mr. Logan: Yeah? Lauren: Are you English, sir? Mr. Logan: No, I'm Scottish. Lauren: So you ain't English, then? Mr. Logan: No, I'm British. Lauren: So you ain't English, then? Mr. Logan: No, I'm not, but as you can see, I do speak English. Lauren: But I can't understand what you're sayin', sir. Mr. Logan: Well, clearly you can. Lauren: Sorry, are you talkin' Scottish now? Mr. Logan: No, I'm talking English. Lauren: Right. Don't sound like it. Mr. Logan: Okay, whatever you want. Now! Let's get on with Shakespeare. Lauren: I don't think you're qualified to teach us English. Mr. Logan: I am perfectly qualified to teach you English. Lauren: I don't think you are, though. Mr. Logan: You don't have to be English to teach it! Lauren: Right, have we got double English or double Scottish? Mr. Logan: Is your name Lauren Cooper, by any chance? Lauren: Yeah...why? Mr. Logan: Your reputation precedes you. Lauren: Innit, though? Mr. Logan: So! Shakespeare's sonnets. Lauren: Sir? (…) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHAJ4VFStUE&hd=1

D. Politeness & indirectness. Communicative strategies14

Linguistic politeness does not refer to actual feelings or respect; it merely investigates S’s strategic usage of the language aimed at obtaining real-world results and, at the same time, avoiding negative consequences, such as hurting H’s feelings.

Task 20. Analyze the following examples from the perspective of the theories of politeness:

 Use ‗cushions‘15, e.g. actually, as a matter of fact, I‘m afraid, with respect, to be honest, to put it bluntly, etc.  I‘m afraid we‘ll have to close the factory and make everybody redundant.  With respect that‘s not what I thought you said yesterday! (= ‗You have changed your line!‘)  To put it bluntly, you haven‘t exactly been the best employee! (= OK, I‘ve tried to be diplomatic, now I‘m going to say what I really mean!)  Use modals (conditional forms using modals sound more polite); use seem (= It‘s obvious!)  That would be difficult. (= That is too difficult.)  If I could just ask you to sign this before you leave… (just seems to reduce imposition)  That might not be very convenient. (= That is not convenient.)  With respect, you don‘t seem to understand. (= Obviously you don‘t understand...)  Use ‗qualifiers‘ in addition to modals; use not very/entirely/completely/wholly + a positive adjective to express something negative!  There might be a short delay. (= There will be a delay. We hope it won‘t be too long…)  That might be rather difficult. (= We can‘t do that.)  I‘m not entirely convinced. (= I‘m not at all convinced.)  Use a question form to make a suggestion.  Could we do that later? (= I think we should that later.)  Is it OK if we stop for lunch now? (= I think we should stop now.)  Put the negative first.  I don‘t think he‘s coming. (= I think he isn‘t coming.)  Make the suggestion even more indirect by putting the question negatively.  Wouldn‘t it be better to finish it tomorrow? (= I think it would be better to finish it tomorrow.)  Can‘t we change the timetable? (= I think we should change the timetable.)  Indirect questions sound more diplomatic than direct ones.  I wonder what the time is. (= What is the time?)  Please could you tell me where the office is? (= Where is the office?)  Use comparatives.  Wouldn‘t it be better if we changed the timetable? (= Let‘s change the timetable.)  Would you be more prepared to move if we increased your salary? (= We know you don‘t want to move; would you change your mind if…?)  The -ing form in the past indicates that you are prepared to be flexible.  We were hoping to finish today. (= We would prefer to finish today if possible.)  We were wondering if you liked it. (= We‘d like to know if you like it.)  Avoid taking personal responsibility for something you find difficult to say.  I‘m afraid I am unable to agree to that. (= I don‘t want to agree to that.)  We‘re not in a position to go ahead yet. (= We‘re not ready/don‘t want to do it yet.) Diplomatic language, after © Rita Baker, Lydbury English Centre

14 For theoretical support see Interpreting text. Part 4: Annex 8. Discourse analysis & pragmatics (D); see also Vizental (2009). Meaning and Communication. 15 In linguistics they are referred to as “hedges.”

1. Strategies of politeness

Model analyses 12. Keeping communication lines in good repair

Goal of the analyses: to survey ways in which S can manipulate language to appear polite.

Text 1. Negative politeness with redress. Pretty Woman (1990) Strategies of negative politeness with redress (Brown & Levinson, 1978/1987) are most common in cases of social distance (far D). Such strategies enable the speaker to show deference (even when he does not really feel the need for it), to minimize the size of his imposition, to give R a choice, etc. The excerpts below show how the speaker can appear to be polite when he is actually not polite at all, and still preserve a smiling face.

Situational context: Vivian Ward, a prostitute on Hollywood Boulevard, is picked up by Edward Lewis, a rich and handsome businessman. Feeling neglected by his absent girlfriend and taking a liking to Vivian, Edward proposes that she spend the entire week with him. To make her presentable for social occasions, Edward gives Vivian money to buy some decent clothes.

Text 1a Saleswoman: May I help you? Vivian: I'm just checkin' things out. Saleswoman: Are you looking for something in particular? Vivian: No. Well, yeah. Uh, something... conservative. Saleswoman: Yes. Vivian: You got nice stuff. Saleswoman: Thank you. Vivian: How much is this? Saleswoman: I don't think this would fit you. Vivian: Well, I didn't ask if it would fit. I asked how much it was. Saleswoman: How much is this, Marie? Shop owner: It's very expensive. Saleswoman: It's very expensive. Vivian: Look, I got money to spend in here. Saleswoman: I don't think we have anything for you. You're obviously in the wrong place. Please leave. http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video- Main/Pretty%20Woman%20Shopping%20part%201%20Movieclip%20with%20captions.wmv.mp4

Text 1b Saleswoman: May I help you? Vivian: No, thank you. Hi. Saleswoman: Hello. Vivian: Do you remember me? Saleswoman: No, I'm sorry. Vivian: I was in here yesterday. You wouldn't wait on me. Saleswoman: Oh. Vivian: You work on commission, right? Saleswoman: Uh, yes. Vivian: Big mistake. Big. Huge! I have to go shopping now. http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video- Main/Pretty%20Woman%20(Julia%20Roberts)%20Shopping%20scene.mp4

Text 1a Context of Text 1a: Dressed in the typical garb of her profession (stiletto boots, lots of skin showing), but with lots of money in her purse, Vivian enters an exclusive boutique. Vivian Appearance: a prostitute Pronunciation: clipped (checkin'), slangy interjections (Well, yeah) Word choice: slangy: stuff, checkin' things out Grammar: elliptical utterances: You [have] got nice stuff; I*‘ve+ got money … Paralanguage/Attitude: - at first evasive/insecure: Something... conservative. - then aggressive: Look, I got money to spend in here. Politeness: tries to be nice: congratulates H on the “nice stuff” they have (positive politeness) Cooperation failure: when the saleswoman tells her the dress would not fit her (indirectness) Vivian thinks R did not understand her (that H did not make the correct inferences) o then she understands the latter’s meaning and illocutionary force (SA) and feels humiliated The saleswoman Appearance: dressed elegantly, appropriately for the context Pronunciation: careful, standard American English Word choice & grammar: educated Are you looking for something in particular? Paralanguage: positive: smiling face, soft voice Attitude: supercilious, condescending Politeness: says rude things indirectly (does FTA off record: violates Maxim of Quality) I don't think this would fit you. Meaning: You don’t have that much money. - phrases her rejection more categorically, albeit indirectly (negative politeness on record) I don't think we have anything for you. -does FTA on record, boldly, without redressive action (rude) You're obviously in the wrong place. Please leave. Text 1b Context of Text 1b: Vivian got professional help and acquired a complete new wardrobe. Dressed very elegantly, and with several expensive shopping bags in her hands, she goes back to the shop that rejected her the day before. Vivian Appearance: very elegant, affluent Pronunciation: careful, standard American English Word choice & grammar: careful, educated Paralanguage: positive -- wide smile, soft tone of voice Attitude: confident, friendly; makes a show of her present affluence Cooperation: opens communication lines by implicating shared background (… remember me?) - clarifies: I was in here yesterday. You wouldn't wait on me. (Speech Act: a reproach) - implicates (more meaning/a different meaning): You work on commission, right? Implicature: You lost a lot of money Speech Act: revenge Politeness: does the FTA off record, gives hints (violates Quantity Maxim) Big mistake. Big. Huge! I have to go shopping now. Conclusion Unlike the saleswoman, Vivian manages – by gradual exposure to an educated environment – to take her revenge and still abide by the principles of politeness.

Text 2. Doing FTAs off the record. Vintage car Costică (Romanian commercial, 2015)

With the huge amount of new products to be sold and the impressive budgets spent on promoting them, advertising has become “big business” today. To catch the target audience’s attention and good will, and thus induce sales, product promotion needs to be reinvented with every new occurrence. In the early days of advertising, extensive praise of the product’s qualities and a direct urge to buy were viewed as sufficient. Nowadays, however, advertising also follows the tenets of strategic communication, indirectness being employed more and more extensively. When the product advertised concerns some delicate issue (e.g. ads for certain cosmetic products or medicines), the message needs to be strategically indirect so as not to hurt the receiver’s feelings. Consider the following example:

Vă prezentăm cel mai tare model vintage: îl cheamă Costică . Caracteristici:  tracţiune 2 x 2,  airbag pe faţă,  combustibil fasole cu ciolan standard,  noxe mult peste limitele legale, Dar pentru asta există Carbocit, comprimat care absoarbe gazele de eşapament şi aşa Costică devine EcoCostică.

Carbocit, te scapă de noxe! http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/Carbocit.mp4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTGI3ehXeJw Analysis Subject: The ad promotes a medicine for an unpleasant ailment: flatulence Technique: indirectness by metaphor (violates Maxim of Quality) and humor Type of communication: o multi-modal: text + video running in parallel o the two messages clash, i.e. they both complement & contradict each other o a. language: o text format/vocabulary: typical for car ads (describing features/components) o vocabulary: o car jargon: traction, 2 x 2, air bag, pollutants well above legal limits, exhaust gases, fuel, … o vocabulary: food products (beans with pork) and medicines (Carbocit, comprimat) b. visual: presents a human Actor – male, middle aged, with a protruding abdomen – o driving, crashing into other people, eating, watching TV, being flatulent and the smell driving his dog away o then taking the pill and driving his car peacefully, with his happy dog by his side. Politeness o for the sake of politeness, the message is presented indirectly (FTAs off record) o the human participant never looks the audience in the eyes (oblique perspective) o over-generalized, i.e. flouting the Maxim of Manner o he is objectified/reified (metaphor: man = a car)

o Implicature : a flatulent person is sub-human Clashes  of modes: text + visual = humorous effect  of connotations: o the word vintage (in English, in the Romanian text) carries connotations of elegance and worth (far D), as well as of deference (high P) o the name of the character, Costică (diminutive), connotes intimacy and affection (close D & P) Conclusion By using metaphor, and thus avoiding direct reference to an unpleasant physical ailment, the advertiser managed to produce a funny, and yet informative, commercial. With this kind of usage of the language and other communicative modes, we may also speak of a politeness of advertising.

2. Flouting the Maxims of cooperation & politeness

Model analysis 13. Miscommunication & tragedy. Crash (2004) Producer, director and co-writer Paul Haggis

Goal of the analysis: to show that tragedies are often triggered by miscommunication (failure of cooperation and/or non-abidance by the principle of politeness), rather than by criminal conspiracies.

Hansen: I think you're having fun. Peter: Yeah, whatever. (Peter lets it go, but it still digs at him. Then he notices the plastic statue of St. Christopher on the dash. And he starts to laugh.) Hansen: Something else funny? Peter (still laughing): Oh, yeah. Hansen: Yeah, what's that? Peter: People, man. People. Hansen: People like me? Peter: No, no, I'm not laughing at you. Hansen: Yeah, I can see that. Why don‘t you laugh outside? Peter: Why are you getting all bent outta shape? Hansen: Not getting bent, man, just pulling over. (And he does.) Peter: Come on, man, keep driving. I said I'm not laughing at you. Hansen: And I'm not telling you to get the fuck out of my car. Peter: Why you being a fuckin‘ jerk? Man, just drive the car. Hansen: I got a better idea: get out now. Peter: Fine. You want me to show you? I'll show you. (Peter thrusts his hand deep into his jacket pocket. Hansen reacts instinctively) Hansen: Take your hand out of your pocket! Put your hands where I can see them! Peter: Who the fuck do you think you‘re talking to? Hansen: Put your hands where I can see ‗em!

Peter: You wanna see what's in my hands?! I'll show you what's in my fucking hands! (Peter jerks his hand up out of his pocket and Hansen swings his revolver out with his left hand and fires, hitting Peter dead in the chest. Peter looks down at the hole in his chest, looks at his right hand, opens it to reveal the plastic statuette.)

http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/Crash.mp4

Analysis Plot summary: Police officer Hansen has had a rough day: among other things, he witnessed unjustified violence by one of his older colleagues and has negotiated successfully a dangerous clash between an angry man and two policemen. Now he is driving home in civilian clothes. He passes a hitchhiker, “a black kid.” He pulls over and Peter runs up to the car, opens the door and climbs in. Peter is on the wrong side of the law (he steals cars), but he is a friendly and non-violent person; he always contradicts with a laugh his friend Anthony’s racist views. Now Peter is returning home, after a failed car theft. Context of the excerpt: Peter, who is thankful for the pickup, begins to chat in a friendly way to Hansen, who is not much older than himself. But Hansen becomes suspicious because several things Peter says (he loves country music, had spent the day ice skating …) do not match with the class stereotype, and the policeman also notes Peter’s muddy shoes and a small tear in his baggy coat. Increasing tension, caused by: Peter  unable to negotiate meaning, due to:  his disregard of the rules of polite indirectness  his incorrect assessment of the social context: o social distance (D): his style is socially inappropriate (does not show sufficient deference):  Why you getting all bent outta shape? (group specific idioms) o power positions (P): Peter does not know Hansen is a policeman o size of imposition (R): Hansen is doing him a favor, but instead of apologizing . he tells (not asks) Hansen to drive on (uses an imperative) . accuses him of being unreasonable  he does not interpret Hansen’s illocution correctly: Hansen: Put your hands where I can see them! (= an order coming from a policeman)  does not manage to get his meaning through because of his indirectness & ambiguity, i.e.:  his failure of Cooperation: flouts the Maxims o he flouts the Maxim of Manner (he makes vague implicatures): Just people, man o he flouts the Maxim of Quantity, i.e. says less than required (does not explain what he is laughing about: I said I'm not laughing at you.  his ambiguous illocutionary force: o does not make clear who/what he is laughing about o his final words sound like a threat (SA), even though they are meant to be friendly You wanna see what's in my hands?! I'll show you what's in my fucking hands!  his socio-linguistic incompetence: uses bad language: o dishonorifics, swear words: man, fuckin’ jerk  his negative paralanguage (at first ambiguous, then aggressive tone of voice/facial expression)  does not manage to keep communication lines in good repair because:  flouts Maxims of Politeness:

o flouts the Maxim of Tact: instead of apologizing, he insists that Hansen drive on:  Why you being a fuckin’ jerk? Man, just drive the car. o flouts the Maxim of Modesty: he presents Hansen’s driving on as the latter’s obligation, rather than a favour to himself:  Come on, man, keep driving – uses imperatives (FTA) o does FTAs boldly, without redress: Come on, man, keep driving, o verbally assaults person who did him a favor (FTA)  Who the fuck do you think you’re talking to? Hansen  thinks in cultural stereotypes:  he does not believe Peter when he says that he loves country music and ice skating  i.e. he thinks Peter is telling an untruth (flouting the Maxim of Quality)  is afraid of losing face (Politeness): thinks that Peter is laughing at him  fails to negotiate meaning correctly (Cooperation)  does not make the correct inferences (due to Peter’s ambiguous utterances)  does not interpret Peter’s intended meaning correctly Peter: Fine. You want me to show you? I'll show you. . Peter’s intended meaning: We have something in common. . Peter’s intention: to claim common ground with H by showing an in-group membership marker (the statue of St. Christopher)  does not interpret Peter’s illocutionary force correctly (Speech Act): . Hansen thinks it is a threat (is afraid for his own life) Causes for the miscommunication:  Peter flouts several Maxims of Cooperation  Peter flouts several Maxims of Politeness  Peter uses negative paralanguage: aggressive attitude  Peter flouts social rules: disobeys police warning (puts his hand in the pocket)  Hansen fails to cooperate correctly: draws the wrong inferences  Hansen interprets Peter’s meaning and SAs wrongly  Hansen’s conclusions are affected by cultural stereotypes  Hansen’s attitude and behavior are influenced by his professional status (police officer)  They have both had a hard day. What makes the end even more tragic is that all along the movie Hansen had shown great tolerance and courage.

E. The democratization of modern discourses

Great linguists, such as Norman Fairclough, have remarked (1992) that, after the 1950s, a general democratization of discourses can be observed. Conversational discourse (i.e. the type characteristic for informal relations) and reduction of social distance (close D) by informality of tone and style have become more and more widespread. Responsible for this are the media, e.g. television, the printed press, advertising, etc. The reverse phenomenon, however, is equally true: democratization of discourses is a consequence of the reduction of power distances in the real world. Structurally, the democratization of discourses takes the form of a more accessible vocabulary, less complex grammar, of elliptical and minimally articulated utterances, as well as an “elimination of

overt markers of hierarchy and power asymmetry in types of discourse where power relations are unequal.” In public speeches we also notice a turn, from the detached, impersonal, presentations of earlier times, to a warmer and friendlier attitude, a personal perspective (i.e. expressing one’s own thoughts and feelings), a closer interaction with the audience and a more polite (indirect) expression of one’s opinion and will.

Task 21. Set two decades apart, the two texts below illustrate the democratization of even such high-level discourses as scientific texts (linguistics, in this case). Read and analyze them.

A. Discussion for and against semantic universals usually seems to assume that a language forms a static, closed conceptual system, and that once the fixed categories of the language have been acquired, our semantic equipment is complete. If this were true, it would cause us to take very seriously the sinister idea that our language is a mental straitjacket, which determines our thought processes and our assumptions about the universe. But fortunately for the human race, language is only a mental straitjacket if we allow it to become one: the semantic system, like any other system relating to human society, is continually being extended and revised. In a language like English, new concepts are introduced in large numbers day by day and week by week, and in very little time (owing to modern mass communications) become familiar to many people. These new concepts are eventually not felt to be strange, but are fully assimilated into the language, and so become part of our standard mental equipment. Geoffrey Leech, Semantics (1981), Chapter 3

B. Some years ago I went to stay with my brother and his family, including his son, aged about 5. I had with me an electric toothbrush, into which I had recently put new batteries. My brother asked to see the toothbrush, but when he tried to operate it, it would not work. Me: That‘s funny. I thought I had put in some new batteries. Nephew: /Going extremely red/: The ones in my engine still work. Let us look at these two utterances from the point of view of both the speakers and the hearers. My remark had been a genuine expression of surprised irritation, addressed to the family at large and I did not expect any response, except perhaps sympathetic murmurings about the poor quality of batteries and this is how the adults understood it. My nephew, however, misinterpreted the force of my utterance as an accusation and inferred (wrongly) that he was a suspect. We can spell out the interpretation of the boy‘s contribution as follows:

Step 1 … The hearer‘s first step is to assign sense and reference to his words. In this case, this was not difficult; the boy was asserting that he had batteries in the engine of his toy train which were in working order. Step 2 The hearer works out the speaker‘s intention in uttering those words; we all understood him to have implied that he was not responsible for the fact that my batteries were flat. The pragmatic force of his utterance was to deny guilt. Step 3 Nevertheless, everyone present inferred from the evidence (from our knowledge of how little boys behave, from the fact that he blushed, from the attempt to deflect attention from his toy and, indeed, from the fact that he spoke at all) that he had in fact switched the batteries. Jenny Thomas, Meaning in Interaction: an introduction to Pragmatics (1995, p.59-60)

Model analyses 14. Great speeches & persuasion

Great speeches have always impressed audiences both by the lofty ideals expressed and by the speaker’s ability to make audiences share his views and feelings. Whether great political speeches or popular TED talks, they impress the public by the universally true ideas and feelings the Addresser conveys.

Goal of the analyses: to investigate the effectiveness of a great speech.

Text 1. Indirectness, politeness & persuasion. I have a dream...

Addressing an audience of 250,000 people on the occasion of the historic March on Washington on August 28, 1963, Martin Luther King decided to abandon his prepared notes. Feeling that his speech needed a turn and recalling a theme he had used in earlier speeches, gospel vocalist Mahalia Jackson called out, “Tell them about the dream, Martin.” The next section is entirely improvised (though not produced without prior thinking).

... I have a dream ... that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. […] With this faith we will be able to work together, play together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day. […] And when this happens – when we let freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, and from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God‘s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spirituals: "Free at last! Free at last! Great God almighty, we are free at last!" http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/i%20have%20a%20dream%20video.mp4

Analysis Situational context: speaking in front of a multitude of people assembled for the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom (August 28, 1963). Topic: Luther King’s own dream of a better world, where all people are judged by their merits Illocutionary force (SA): an urge to become more tolerant, to build a new kind of world Indirectness:  Luther King speaks of his own dream of a better world (1st person address – personal approach)  he avoids the directive function of the language: there is no direct urge to the audience to change behavior (no imperative verb, no 2nd person you address) Effectiveness: the huge impact and everlasting fame of Luther King’s speech comes from  his personal approach and emotional involvement: he is talking about his own children, his own dreams  the relevance of his ideas in the socio-political context (time and place): o it was an America ripe for change o huge gathering: people come to Washington from all over the USA to support the cause King stands/speaks for (the abolition of segregation)

o he was addressing a young audience thirsting for new ideas and attitudes:  his subject matter: he speaks of generally human issues – children, dreams, freedom o does not avoid unpleasant or embarrassing ones, e.g. going to prison  Luther King’s well-known oratorical skills o his para- and body language:  warm, friendly, hopeful tone of voice; smile  wide gestures, body swinging (as if speaking from the pulpit) o his sing-song diction:  slow, rhythmic utterances  intonation: flow and musicality, typical for African-American sermons o prosodic features:  euphony-alliteration: the content of their character  rhyme and rhythm: lengthened vowels: / ’a:i hævə’dri:m/ to work together, play together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, ... o his informal style – connoting close D (as if talking to friends, equals) o his word choice: simple words – accessible to everybody: dream, children, live, ...  connotations: of equality, of democracy: all, together - of innocence, of purity: all of God’s children – - of racial discrimination vs. tolerance: black men and white men,… o grammar: chains of simple coordinated sentences/phrases:  e.g. …will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character - … we will be able to work together, play together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that … o figurative speech and rhetorical devices  rhetorical repetition: And when this happens, when we let freedom ring … - every village and every hamlet, and from every state and every city, .. ... to work together, play together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together ...  enumeration (hyponymy), lexical chains – to suggest multitudes & equal P: - all of God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, …  antithesis: will not be judged by ... but by ...; black men and white men …  metaphor: when we let freedom ring; to speed up that day … Conclusion The effectiveness and persuasive power of Luther King’s speech results form . the beauty and relevance of his ideas . his personal approach; his subtle indirectness . his rhetoric skills: language, body language, rhetorical devices, etc. By the beauty of his speech, both in terms of ideas and of delivery, Martin Luther King managed to persuade the masses who were listening to him to change their intolerant ways and become better persons. His non-violent pleas ultimately managed to change human relations in America and world-wide.

Text 2. The user-friendliness of modern discourses. TED talks.

An adjective borrowed from technical jargon, the term “user-friendly” can give us a clear idea of what “democratization of discourses” actually means. To illustrate it, let us analyze Sir Ken Robinson’s approach in his 2010 TED talk.

1. Exposing the subject 12:56 We know three things about intelligence. One, it's diverse. We think about the world in all the ways that we experience it. We think visually, we think in sound, we think kinesthetically. We think in abstract terms, we think in movement. Secondly, intelligence is dynamic. If you look at the interactions of a human brain, as we heard yesterday from a number of presentations, intelligence is wonderfully interactive. The brain isn't divided into compartments. In fact, creativity -- which I define as the process of having original ideas that have value -- more often than not, comes about through the interaction of different disciplinary ways of seeing things…

2. Stand-up comedian 09:51 And I like university professors, but you know, we shouldn't hold them up as the high-water mark of all human achievement. They're just a form of life, another form of life. But they're rather curious, and I say this out of affection for them. There's something curious about professors in my experience -- not all of them, but typically, they live in their heads. They live up there, and slightly to one side. They're disembodied, you know, in a kind of literal way. They look upon their body as a form of transport for their heads. (Laughter) Don't they? It's a way of getting their head to meetings. (Laughter) If you want real evidence of out-of-body experiences, get yourself along to a residential conference of senior academics, and pop into the discotheque on the final night. (Laughter) And there, you will see it. Grown men and women writhing uncontrollably, off the beat. (Laughter) Waiting until it ends so they can go home and write a paper about it. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 13: 33. … there‘s a shaft of nerves that joins the two halves of the brain called corpus callosum. It‘s thicker in women... this is probably why women are better at multi-tasking. Because you are, aren‘t you? There‘s a raft of research, but I know it from my personal life. If my wife is cooking a meal at home – which is not often, thankfully. (Laughter) No, she is good at some things, but if she's cooking, she's dealing with people on the phone, she's talking to the kids, she's painting the ceiling, she's doing open-heart surgery over here. If I'm cooking, the door is shut, the kids are out, the phone's on the hook, if she comes in I get annoyed. I say, "Terry, please, I'm trying to fry an egg in here. Give me a break."

3. Illustration 14:50 … a conversation I had with a wonderful woman who maybe most people have never heard of, Gillian Lynne. Have you heard of her? Some have. She's a choreographer, and everybody knows her work. She did "Cats" and "Phantom of the Opera." She's wonderful. I used to be on the board of The Royal Ballet, as you can see. Anyway, Gillian and I had lunch one day and I said, "How did you get to be a dancer?" It was interesting. When she was at school, she was really hopeless. And the school, in the '30s, wrote to her parents and said, "We think Gillian has a learning disorder." She couldn't concentrate; she was fidgeting. I think now they'd say she had ADHD. Wouldn't you? But this was the 1930s, and ADHD hadn't been invented at this point. It wasn't an available condition. (Laughter) People weren't aware they could have that. (Laughter) Anyway, she went to see this specialist. So, this oak-paneled room, and she was there with her mother, and she was led and sat on this chair at the end, and she sat on her hands for 20 minutes while this man talked to her mother about the problems Gillian was having at school. Because she was disturbing people; her homework was always late; and so on, little kid of eight. In the end, the doctor went and sat next to Gillian, and said, "I've listened to all these things your mother's told me, I need to speak to her privately. Wait here. We'll be back; we won't be very long," and they went and left her.

But as they went out of the room, he turned on the radio that was sitting on his desk. And when they got out, he said to her mother, "Just stand and watch her." And the minute they left the room, she was on her feet, moving to the music. And they watched for a few minutes and he turned to her mother and said," Mrs. Lynne, Gillian isn't sick; she's a dancer. Take her to a dance school." I said, "What happened?" She said, "She did. I can't tell you how wonderful it was. We walked in this room and it was full of people like me. People who couldn't sit still. People who had to move to think." Who had to move to think. They did ballet, they did tap, jazz; they did modern; they did contemporary. She was eventually auditioned for the Royal Ballet School; she became a soloist; she had a wonderful career at the Royal Ballet. She eventually graduated from the Royal Ballet School, founded the Gillian Lynne Dance Company, met Andrew Lloyd Webber. She's been responsible for some of the most successful musical theater productions in history, she's given pleasure to millions, and she's a multi-millionaire. Somebody else might have put her on medication and told her to calm down. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY

Analysis Situational context: TED talks TED (< Technology, Entertainment and Design) = a non-profit organization aimed at spreading ideas. TED talks cover all topics — from science to business and global issues. Topic of the excerpt: intelligence, creativity, and educators Illocutionary force (SA): an urge to educators . to change attitudes, e.g. to adopt a more open view regarding problem students . to reconsider priorities, e.g. education of the body is as important as that of the mind Indirectness & politeness:  he makes his point by giving examples, not by urging audiences directly  he reduces imposition by using modal and negative forms (politeness) e.g. we shouldn't hold them up as …  he diminishes power positions (low P) by making gentle fun of academics They look upon their body as a form of transport for their heads.  he reduces social distance o by including himself with the public (1st pers. pl. we), e.g. We know three things … o by dissociating himself from academics (though he belongs to the category) by using 3rd pers.pl. they / them Approach: . scientifically documented: o e.g. there’s a shaft of nerves that joins the two halves of the brain called corpus callosum. . but informal, casual style . personal: talks about his family (son, wife, friends), about his own experiences o gives personal views on things e.g. … we shouldn't hold [university professors] up as the high-water mark of all human achievement. They're just a form of life, … . interactive: he discusses with the audience o close D: calls persons in the audience by their first name . positive: appreciative of others’ work o refers to/praises earlier presentations, gives feedback on them . humorous: gives funny examples, cracks jokes ADHD hadn't been invented at this point. It wasn't an available condition. o exaggerates the funny sides, e.g. professors dancing . paralanguage: very positive: relaxed, laughs a lot and delights in the audience’s laughter

Style of address: mixed  Section 1 – scientific: gives competent and documented information about the subject o formal: educated word choice, complex grammar, full sentences We think visually, we think in sound, we think kinesthetically. We think in abstract terms, we think in movement. o elegant metaphors They look upon their body as a form of transport for their heads.  Section 2 – humorous: sounds like a stand-up comedian o colloquial, oral: simple words, reformulations, responding to the public’s reaction - elliptical utterances: leaves many sentences (but never ideas) unfinished If my wife is cooking a meal at home – which is not often, thankfully. (Laughter) No, she is good at some things, … o quoting his own words I say, "Terry, please, I'm trying to fry an egg in here. Give me a break." o using outrageously exaggerated metaphors (hyperbole) ... if she's cooking, she's dealing with people on the phone, she's talking to the kids, she's painting the ceiling, she's doing open-heart surgery over here.  Section 3 – personal: the example used to illustrate his point is a personal acquaintance (Gillian Lynne, the dancer and choreographer) o informal, narrative; simple language and direct style o warm and emotional recollection of a memorable personal experience (a conversation with a friend) o quoting friend’s words to make the story more vivid o the happy conclusion of the story is presented in inverted order:  what the protagonist managed to accomplish: She's been responsible for some of the most successful musical theatre productions in history, she's given pleasure to millions, and she's a multi- millionaire.  what might have happened to her had she not met a competent doctor: Somebody else might have put her on medication and told her to calm down. i.e. to serve as a warning against the dangers of a bad educational system Final remarks: again personal (I) and including the audience (we); indirect urge: I believe our only hope for the future is to adopt a new conception of human ecology,... … our task is to educate their whole being, so they can face this future. Effectiveness: Even though he did not use any video support to enliven his presentation, Sir Ken Robinson managed to make his TED talk memorable and persuasive due to: . his expertise in the domain discussed (education) . the clarity of his exposition and its logical structure . the well-chosen examples used to illustrate his points . his positive attitude, his interaction with the audience . his conversational style and personal approach . his quality humor directed at himself as well as his peers . his obvious concern with regards to the future of the young generation, etc.

Task 22. Compare Martin Luther King’s speech to Abraham Lincoln’s famous Gettysburg Address, delivered on November 19, 1863 during the American Civil War, four and a half months after the Union armies defeated those of the Confederacy at the Battle of Gettysburg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gettysburg_Address).

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/gettysburg.htm

Task 23. Rudyard Kipling’s poem If can be viewed as a father’s speech to his son, or a teacher’s to his students. Analyze it along the same lines and identify its persuasive character.

Task 24. Watch and analyze another TED talk, e.g. Jamie Oliver’s, Teach every child about food (2010) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go_QOzc79Uc

Task 25. Watch and analyze Nick Vujicic’s speech Stand strong (2013), considered to be the best life changing inspirational video of all time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lrXTvOTncU

Final conclusions & suggestions for further work

The Model analyses proposed in the three volumes of Interpreting texts have taken text analysis along the branches of linguistics – i.e. from phonetics, through grammar and semantics, to discourse analysis and pragmatics – and they have also investigated communicative language competencies, as suggested by the CEFR (see Interpreting text. Part 4: Annex 1, A & B). Part 1 has focused mainly on identifying the speaker (S) by investigating mainly S’s linguistic competence (i.e. his pronunciation, grammatical accuracy and complexity, word choice and style, etc.), but interest in para- and body language, as well as in the way S adapts his linguistic and non- linguistic behavior to the social context (interlocutors, situation, activity and discourse type …) has taken us to the level of socio-linguistic competence. Furthermore, it was shown that S often manipulates personal image and social distance (see Model analyses 4 – Doing accents; Model analyses 8 – My Fair Lady; etc.), which attest to S’s pragmatic and strategic competence. Our main concern in Part 2 was the way the sender (S) exploits language to built character, create atmosphere, enhance suspense, etc. Written texts were mainly used for the text analyses, even when those texts were meant to be spoken (e.g. advertising, film scripts, etc.), instruments for analysis being provided mainly by semantics, discourse analysis and functional grammar. Versions of the same texts (e.g. written, audio and video – see Model analysis 11 for How to train your dragon), and multimodal texts (e.g. print ads or commercials, see Model analysis 13 & 14) highlighted the idea that non-linguistic components of communications (e.g. voice, picture, etc.) add meaning to the text. The analyses in Part 3 have focused on strategic communication, on S’s pragmatic and strategic competence, the main concern of the surveys being:  the way S uses the language indirectly and functionally (speech acts), how he cooperates and negotiates meaning, etc.  the way S exploits and manipulates language so as to obtain real-world results (e.g. power position P) and/or avoid negative consequences (politeness), etc.

Projects suggested

Project 1. Participants & communicative roles

Task 1a. Read the following text and decide:

1. the type of text 2. the activity type 3. its register and style (pronunciation, word choice, grammar) 4. the social status of S (who is talking?) 5. the social status of R (to whom?) 6. the social distance (D) between the interactants (S & R) 7. the power relationship (P) between the interactants 8. the respective roles of the interactants 9. a situation (time and place) where the conversation is likely to take place

10. the illocutionary force of S’s utterance/speech 11. S’s communicative strategies: of indirectness, of cooperation, of politeness, etc. 12. Establish the probable effect of the speech.

I keep remembering you being about two. I‘m gonna tell my friends that too. You‘re nearly three, you should toughen up a bit. When my mum and dad say you don‘t do that, you don‘t do that. When Mum and Dad say no ... And you don't spit. That boy‘s old enough. You‘re only two; you‘re not old enough for that boy to do a fight. Not old enough. That boy‘s older than you. He‘s… maybe he‘s nine or ten. Or maybe eight. Just toughen up a bit. Think about it Gabriel, think about it.

Task 1b. Now watch the video on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r- b7d48eA8M&feature=player_embedded; answer again the points above, then answer 3 additional questions: 1. Consider S’s age; discuss the role she assumes and the language she employs. 2. Explain how such changes in the context affect its meaning and effect. 3. Consider the following comment by the children’s mother. Argue for and against: Delilah‘s very bossy — it is how little girls are. She has scolded Gabriel in the past. But it is as much about trying to teach him. They are good little buddies really.

Task 2. Watch the video on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxhGIajRsq4 and establish:

1. the type of discourse 2. the type of text 3. the context (situation, activity type) 4. the function of the interview 5. the function of the video 6. the participants in the discourse (S, R, other participants) and their roles 7. the social statuses of the participants 8. the social distance (D) between the speakers (the interviewers) and the receivers/ addressees (the interviewees) 9. the power relationship (P) between the interviewers and the interviewees 10. the kind of info the children react negatively/indifferently to 11. the pieces of info the children react positively to 12. the children’s paralanguage 13. the children’s behavior in terms of communicative language competence 14. Why do you think most candidates fail to attract the children’s attention? 15. Why do you think the children react positively to the last candidate?

Code Club. The interview Children Interviewers: Your name? Niklas Zennstroem: My name is Niklas Zennstroem. Children: So why would you like to work at Code Club? Niklas Zennstroem: I have made a few software done on something called Skype. I think I have a little … Children: Anything else? Niklas Zennstroem: Well I have a few others but they were not as big but… Children: Next! Joanna Shields: My name is Joanna Shield … Children: What do you think you can do for Code Club? Joanna Shields: I was chief executive of a company called BEBO. Children: Justin Bieber?! Joanna Shields: No, ah, actually a company called BEBO. Children: Next. Children: As you know, Code Club is an after school activity aiding to teach children the basics of coding. What do you think you bring to the table? Chad Hurley: Well I‘m Chad Hurley, I created YouTube. Children: Oh, I know – did you do that one where the baby bites the other baby‘s finger? Chad Hurley: No! I don‘t make videos! Children: Next! Dame Tessa Jowell:: Tessa Jowell, actually it‘s Dame Tessa Jowell … Children: Next. Children: Tell us a bit about yourself Brent and Martha. Brent Hoberman (Co-Founder - mydeco.com, made.com & PROfounders Capital): We started lastminute.com Children: Next. Children: Sit down. What‘s you name? Sir Tim Berners-Lee: Tim Berners-Lee. Children: What do you think you bring to the table? Tim Berners-Lee: I invented the World Wide Web. Children: Anything else? Tim Berners-Lee: Anything else. Well I —- Children: Next. Children: We were hoping for Prince Harry to be honest with you, Mr. Windsor. So why would you like to work for Code Club? HRH The Duke of York: I think it‘s a very useful skill particularly for people like yourselves and young people and I think it opens up huge opportunities in the future. And I suppose I know some influential people. Children: Like who? HRH The Duke of York: My mother. Children: You‘re hired. Written text Let‘s teach our next generation to code. CODE CLUB. Get your school involved at codeclub.org.uk

Now read Model project 1. Participants and communicative roles, later on in this volume.

Project 2. Society & times

Task 1. Cockney vs. Chav16

From a social point of view, My Fair Lady’s Eliza, and Catherine Tate’s Lauren Cooper (see the English class sketch reproduced partially earlier in this volume, see Task 17) illustrate a roughly similar category: the Chav17 underclass represents the bottom of present-day British system – its members are unemployed or of lower income working class background, mostly dependent on benefits and living in public housing or council estates (Sharing a stair case). Thanks to the present-day British welfare system, though, Chavs are no longer dirty or dressed in rags18. Compare Eliza and Lauren Cooper in terms of their linguistic and non-linguistic behaviour and establish the role of the historic context in the change.

Task 2. Select two novels or two films based on novels – an older one and a recent one – and analyze how things have changed due to the situational context. You may focus on changes in: . the roles of men and women . people’s ways of life . relationships among people; etc.

Task 3. Analyze how a piece of literature is adapted to new contexts (time or place). You may focus . on different films based on the same literary product (e.g. Hamlet, Sherlock Holmes, Oliver Twist, A Christmas Carol, Wuthering Heights, …) . on children’s stories (e.g. Snow White, Beauty and the Beast, Rapunzel, etc.). . on something else.

Task 4. Select 2 novels/films and analyze the way social distance (D) and changes in D are reflected in the language:  relationships among children-parents, husband-wife, boss-employee, etc.  the respective social/professional roles of men and women and the resulting D e.g. women in high P positions in the police, politics, etc.  the view regarding age, e.g. a “granny” figure in the past and today (in thrillers)

16 See also Vizental (2011). “Meaning, Image and Attitude (II)” http://www.jhss.ro/en/archive.htm 17 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chav; in Yorkshire and North Eastern England the term charver is used. 18 On the contrary, Chavs are known to dress in costly label clothes, especially in tracksuits and hoodies made by “name” brands such as Nike, Reebok, Adidas, Burberry, Helly Hansen or Henleys.

Project 3. Multi-modal & cooperative communication

Task 1. Select a product (e.g. telephones, cosmetics, sports equipment, etc.) or idea (protecting the environment) as advertised through different types of ads. You may also insist on the idea of brand image. e.g. Apple, Coca-Cola or Nike advertized along the years, in print ads and commercials, etc. As models, see in Part 2 of Interpreting texts Task 27 Fig. 10, Coca-Cola), Task 31 (Fig.14, Harley Davidson), or Task 32 (Fig 15, for shoes – also analyzed later on in this volume, in Model project 2. Strategies of indirectness. Locution vs. illocution in print advertising).

Task 2. Select a multi-modal text, analyze the way it conveys its message and determine the sender-receiver cooperation required (Speech Act, implicature, inferencing, etc.). e.g. see the Greenpeace commercial (international, 1996) on http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/Greenpeace.mp4 e.g. see the Doing Nothing commercial (Germany, 1998) http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/Doing%20nothing.mp4 You may use the outlines for Model analysis 15, Text 2 (Don’t drink & drive) or Model project 2 (for Dacia Duster) in Interpreting texts: Part 2.

Project 4. Indirectness & negotiation of meaning

Task 1. Find 3 short conversations and analyze them in terms of levels of meaning

As models, see Model analyses 4, Text 2 (Lucky Strike) and Model analysis 7 (B&B in Scotland).

Task 2. Find from your personal experience at least 3 texts similar to those discussed in Model analyses 10 (Ambiguity & misunderstanding) and analyze them in terms of Speech Act (illocutionary force) and cooperation (implying and inferencing).

Task 3. Find 3 short conversations from a novel of a movie and analyze them in terms of negotiation of meaning. e.g. The film Crash (2004) consists of a series of conflicts between pairs of people who obviously fail to negotiate meaning. See Model analysis 13 in the present volume.

Task 4. Analyze President Obama's 2015 White House Correspondents' Speech in terms of strategies of indirectness and politeness. Pay special attention to the message conveyed by the two speakers’ paralanguage:

OBAMA: You know, I often joke about tensions between me and the press, but honestly, what they say doesn‘t bother me. I understand we‘ve got an adversarial system. I‘m a mellow sort of guy. And that‘s why I invited Luther, my anger translator, to join me here tonight. LUTHER: Hold on to your lily white butts! OBAMA: In our fast-changing world, traditions like the White House Correspondents‘ dinner are important. LUTHER: I mean, really! What is this dinner? And why am I required to come to it? Jeb Bush, do you really want to do this! OBAMA: Because despite our differences, we count on the press to shed light on the most important issues of the day. LUTHER: And we can count on Fox News to terrify old white people with some nonsense! (inaudible) That was ridiculous. OBAMA: We won‘t always see eye to eye. LUTHER: And, CNN, thank you so much for the wall-to-wall Ebola coverage. For two whole weeks, we were one step away from ―The Walking Dead.‖ Then y‘all got up and just moved on to the next day. That was awesome. Oh, and by the way, if you haven‘t noticed, you don‘t have Ebola! OBAMA: But I still deeply appreciate the work that you do. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6NfRMv-4OY

Project 5. Persuasion

Task 1. Compare two speeches made on similar occasions by very different types of people and analyze their strategies of persuasion. Decide what makes their speeches interesting and relevant to the audience. e.g. Steve Jobs' 2005 Stanford Commencement Address (1) vs. President Obama’s Rutgers University Commencement Address (2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc (1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkCABjFT32A (2)

e.g. Tony Blair’s General election victory speech, 1997 (1) vs. President Bill Clinton’s Second Inaugural Address on January 20, 1997 (2) http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=222 1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tu33kA83Rfo (2)

e.g. Queen Elizabeth’s tribute at Diana Princess of Wales’ death (1) vs. Michelle Obama eulogy for writer Maya Angelou (2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTrqFE1nbIc (1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Xc8ta-AtEM (2)

Task 2. Listen to at least three TED talks and analyze the strategies of persuasion employed by the speakers. Decide what makes a confident public speaker also successful in life. e.g. Lizzie Velasquez, How do you define yourself? (TEDxAustinWomen) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzPbY9ufnQY or Sally Kohn, What can we do about the culture of hate? https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ted+talks+sally+kohn

Task 3. Make a list of features that show R whether S is successful in life or not. Decide how a positive attitude could help us build a better world. Consider the plights of and solutions proposed by speakers such as Lizzie Velasquez, Nick Vujicic, or the speakers in: e.g. Kate Simonds, I'm 17 (TEDxBoise) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OkOQhXhsIE e.g. Amal Kassir, The Muslim on the airplane (TEDxMileHighWomen) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIAm1g_Vgn0

Task 4. Test your conclusions against Dr. Ivan Joseph’s speech, The skill of self confidence TEDxRyersonU – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-HYZv6HzAs

Project 6. Negotiating power positions (P)

Task 1. Consider the scene where Margaret Thatcher, the Iron Lady (Meryl Streep), faces the American ambassador, General Haig (see the PPT in Interpreting texts: Part 1). Establish who gains power position (high P) and how.

Haig and Margaret sit facing each other, flanked by senior ministers. GENERAL HAIG: So you are proposing to go to war over these Islands. They're thousands of miles away, a handful of citizens, politically and economically... insignificant, if you'll excuse me – MARGARET: Just like Hawaii, I imagine. G.H.: I'm sorry? M.T.: 1941, when Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. Did America go cap in hand and ask Tojo for a peaceful negotiation of terms? Did she turn her back on her own citizens there because the islands were thousands of miles from mainland United States? No, no, no! We will stand on principle or we shall not stand at all. G.H.: But Margaret with all due respect when one has been to war.... M.T.: With all due respect sir, I have done battle every single day of my life, and many men have underestimated me before. This lot seem bound to do the same but they will rue the day.

http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/Video%203%20The%20Iron%20Lady.mp4

Task 2. Consider a similar scene in which Queen Elizabeth (Kate Blanchet) confronts the Spanish ambassador (view I, too, can command the wind, sir! on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMpigAUQt_4 )

Task 3. Life-and-death confrontations in the courtroom are probably the best examples for power negotiation. They involve a lot of indirectness, especially because one of the parties at least is guilty and has something to hide; as a result, they require a lot of cooperation and inferencing.

Analyze the scenes below from Harper Lee’s novel To Kill a Mocking Bird, or from the 1962 film adaptation (starring Gregory Peck as Atticus Finch), to see how a skillful lawyer Atticus Finch forced out the truth of false witness Mayella Ewell, helping the accused Tom Robinson to gain power position. Plot summary: Mayella Ewell, eldest daughter of Bob Ewell, a violent drunkard, wrongfully accuses Tom Robinson, a respectable young black man, of raping her.

Mayella Ewell interviewed by Atticus Finch ―You‘re becoming suddenly clear on this point. A while ago you couldn‘t remember too well, could you?‖ ―I said he hit me.‖ ―All right. He choked you, he hit you, then he raped you, that right?‖ ―It most certainly is.‖ ―You‘re a strong girl, what were you doing all the time, just standing there?‖ ―I told‘ja I hollered‘n‗kicked‘n‘fought—‖ Atticus reached up and took off his glasses, turned his good right eye to the witness, and rained questions on her. Judge Taylor said, ―One question at a time, Atticus. Give the witness a chance to answer.‖ ―All right, why didn‘t you run?‖ ―I tried…‖ ―Tried to? What kept you from it?‖ ―I—he slung me down. That‘s what he did, he slung me down‘n got on top of me.‖

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44TG_H_oY2E

Tom Robinson interviewed by Atticus Finch ―Why did you go inside the fence lots of times?‖ Tom Robinson‘s forehead relaxed. ―She‘d call me in, suh. Seemed like every time I passed by yonder she‘d have some little somethin‘ for me to do—choppin‘ kindlin‗, totin‘ water for her. She watered them red flowers every day—‖ ―Were you paid for your services?‖ ―No suh, not after she offered me a nickel the first time. I was glad to do it, Mr. Ewell didn‘t seem to help her none, and neither did the chillun, and I knowed she didn‘t have no nickels to spare.‖ ―Where were the other children?‖ ―They was always around, all over the place. They‘d watch me work, some of ‗em, some of ‘em‘d set in the window.‖ ―Would Miss Mayella talk to you?‖ ―Yes sir, she talked to me.‖

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44TG_H_oY2E

http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/t/to-kill-a-mockingbird-script.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Kill_a_Mockingbird#1962_film

Tips for your PowerPoint presentation

First of all, you will have to establish - your goal, i.e. what you want to demonstrate, e.g. o how interlocutors negotiate meaning, indirectness & misunderstandings o how interlocutors negotiate power positions (P) o how interlocutors employ strategies aimed to persuade/to avoid hurting feelings, … - find the texts that best illustrate your ideas Start working in a Word document: it is easier to develop and organize your ideas. Then you can transpose it section by section into your PowerPoint template. Remember that your PowerPoint presentation needs to be visual, i.e. easily accessible at first glance. Therefore: - use a simple template: basic colors; do not use a template with complicated lines or shapes - use a picture or two (but no more than that) to illustrate your assertions - the text used should be no longer than 25 lines (you will have to select the essential part) - include the site where the video can be accessed; if the video is too long, mention the minute/seconds for the essential part - in your analysis, do not use full sentences: write down the basic info in the form of ideas, with the essentials highlighted (e.g. bold, or a different colour) - rehearse your presentation; use full sentences to expose your idea. You may practice by transposing some of the Model analyses into PowerPoint format.

Suggested PPT framework

NOTE 1 You will have to make changes to the framework suggested below so as to adapt it your material and (especially) your goal:  decide what information is the most important and place it in initial position  then organize the rest according to your estimation of the relative importance of facts  analyze in detail the relevant information, skip the features that are not relevant

NOTE 2 Don’t forget to illustrate each assertion with examples from the text.

Page 1. Title, author, course, scientific advisor Your title must refer both to o your goal (e.g. Persuasion) and o the material used (e.g. A football coach’s inspirational speech) Page 2 may include  the goal of your project (a short sentence)  the plot of the whole novel/film  the summary of the excerpt  the context of the excerpt, e.g. information about pervious events, characters, … Page 3. The text/excerpt (no more than 20 lines)

Pages 4-5. Language (include only relevant features) & “non-language”  pronunciation  grammar: accuracy and complexity  word choice: origin, figurative usage, idioms, rhetorical devices, connotations, etc.  style; social meaning carried by the language; social status of S & R; social distance (D); etc.  paralanguage and body language Page 6. Textness  type of text (oral vs. written, type of discourse, etc.)  coherence, i.e. clarity, unity of meaning  cohesion, e.g. explicit connectives, ellipsis, missing links, underlying logical/semantic ties  FSP analysis: cohesion, conjunction, lexical chains, consistency …

Page 7-8. Language in use/Manipulating the language  context & change of meaning  lexical creativity, playing with the language for additional meaning  illocutionary force (SA) and indirectness  communicative strategies: accomplishing real-world goals (why S employs those strategies) o manipulating social distance (D) o arousing R’s interest (exploitation of the language) o of politeness, etc. Page 9. Negotiating meaning: cooperation  implicating and making inferences  managing ambiguities,  failure of cooperation; etc. Page 10. Negotiating power positions (P) Page 11. Conclusion Your conclusion must answer the question formulated in your goal, e.g. How does S manage to … (e.g. persuade/avoid negative consequences …) ? Page 12. Bibliography The bibliography must include o theoretical support (e.g. books of phonetics, of grammar, semantics, discourse analysis, pragmatics, etc., both printed and online (e.g. the present Students’ book for Interpreting texts); - make sure that you quote the source correctly (site and date of access) - the material/texts surveyed: o source of the video (e.g. YouTube …) o source of transcript (e.g. http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts…)

Model projects

Model project 1. Participants & communicative roles. Interview for Code Club

View the video on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxhGIajRsq4 See the text at Suggestions for projects earlier in this volume.

Analysis 1. Discourse: advertising 2. Function: to address the target audience TA = children aged 9-11 and their parents - to “inspire the next generation to get excited about computer science and digital making.” 3. Context: obviously staged Situation: a classroom Activity type: an interview conducted by a board of 3 children Participants in the discourse: - S = Code Club, “an after school activity aiding to teach children the basics of coding” - R = the target audience (TA) - Actors: the interactants - 3 children (two boys and a girl, about 10 years old) - 6 VIPs (“big names”), all highly qualified and successful 4. Type of text: interview, face-to-face interaction (obviously staged) 5. Function of the interview (pretended): to hire someone for Code Club 6. Social statuses of the participants: - the children; Role = board of interviewers - the VIPs, famous and rich; Roles = candidates for a job in Code Club Candidate 1: Niklas Zennstroem, Swedish entrepreneur best known for founding several high-profile online ventures, including Skype Candidate 2: Joanna Shields, VP & Managing Director of EMEA – Facebook; former Managing Director for Google Europe, Russia, Middle East & Africa Candidate 3: Chad Hurley, Co-Founder & Chief Executive – AVOS Systems, creator of YouTube. Candidate 4: Tessa Jowell, British Minister for the Olympics Candidate 5: Brent Hoberman, Co-Founder – mydeco.com, made.com & PROfounders Capital; Co-founder (with wife Martha) of www.lastminute.com Candidate 6: Tim Berners-Lee, Director/Professor – WC3/MIT, inventor of the World Wide Web Candidate 7: Prince Andrew, The Duke of York (son of Queen Elizabeth II), addressed by the children as “Mr. Windsor” 7. Social distance (D) between the speakers (the interviewers) and the addressees (the interviewees): far D (age, social and financial status, fame, etc.) 8. Power relationships (P): - reversed: the children are in power position (high P): they may (and do) reject the candidates 9. Children’s reactions: a. negative/indifferent: - to famous names, VIPs: Niklas Zennstroem, Chad Hurley, … - to technological or financial achievement: Skype, YouTube, www.lastminute.com

- to social status and titles: Dame Tessa Jowell, Duke of York, etc. b. positive: - to the name of a young and famous pop singer, e.g. Justin Bieber (though mistaken for BEBO) - to funny videos, e.g. that one where the baby bites the other baby’s finger - to young celebrity, e.g. We were hoping for Prince Harry - to the word mother 10. The children’s paralanguage: - negative, when not interested or bored:  contemptuous (tone of voice, facial expression, boy pretending to fall asleep and collapses onto the floor)  they make faces, dismissive gestures of the hand, etc., e.g. Anything else? - positive when something attracts their attention:  jump to attention, faces light up, triumphant voice, e.g. You’re hired. 11. The children’s communicative behavior: Socio-linguistic appropriateness: flouted  the children address older candidates from a position of social superiority  they do not adapt their language to the relative social status and distance between themselves and the candidates Pragmatic competence: observed  the children understand their role and high power position (high P) very well, i.e. they assume adult roles by virtue of their “authority”  they convey their illocutionary force indirectly, but very clearly: - e.g. Next! = a rejection Strategic competence: flouted  The children breach the rules of politeness, doing FTAs on record, boldly, without redressive action: they are rude, they dismiss the candidates contemptuously, thus hurting their feelings. 13. Why do you think the candidates failed to attract the children’s attention? The candidates flout the Maxim of Relevance: the facts they mention are of no importance (i.e. not relevant) to children. 15. Why do you think the children react positively to the last candidate? The children respond to the key-words influential people and mother, the notion of “mother” (not that of “queen”) being relevant in and essential to a child’s world.

Conclusion Even though they are rich and powerful, the candidates lack the strategic skills required to attract the interviewers’ attention and good will. This is because in the real world qualifications are not sufficient: persuasion is accomplished by more subtle methods and strategies need to be established on a case-to- case basis.

Model project 2. Strategies of indirectness. Locution vs. illocution in print advertising

Goal: to survey how ads manipulate text and visual to accomplish their persuasive function Focus: - how S & R cooperate: S implicates more meaning, R makes inferences - how receivers bridge the gap between what ads say and what they do Material: three types of ads19 for the same type product: shoes 1. compound ad: Church’s shoes (a) 2. complex ad: Camper shoes (b) 3. sophisticated ad: Royal Elastics (c)

Selling shoes Analysis a. A compound ad: Church’s shoes Compound ads: focus on the product, whose image they try to enhance The text: minimal, conveys basic information regarding the product’s name and availability The picture: glossy; carries the persuasive power of the ad - highlights the shoe and presents it in such a way as to delight R’s senses. The text:  Vintage English Shoes London, Paris, New York, Milan, Brussels, Hong Kong, Tokyo Church‘s English shoes made exclusively in Northampton, England, for over 120 years. For information: Fax …… Northampton, England, Church‘s English shoes. The copy consists of: Slogan: Vintage English Shoes o an enumeration of the world capitals where the makers have shops o an elliptical descriptive sentence regarding the place of production (… shoes made exclusively …) and the longstanding manufacture (…120 years…) o contact information, signature line (bottom right) of location and sender; the format looks like the sender of a letter (not of an ad), thus simulating personal communication. Style: euphemistic by - word choice: church, vintage, exclusively, …; elegant, descriptive sentence - high-sounding slogan - the enumeration of world capitals Connotations:  of holiness: church; of expensive luxury  of value and time: Church’s shoes are vintage, i.e. a term borrowed from the field of wines, i.e. the shoes are presented as equally valuable as old wine  of tradition and exclusiveness: mention of the number of years elapsed since the firm’s foundation (120 years)

19 For types of ads, see Vizental (2008a). Working with Advertisements.

 of gentlemanly activity, of tradition and expertise;  of exclusive “Englishness”: their manufacture only in Northampton stands testimony for the product’s rarity and high quality.  of high demand: the list of cities where the product can be bought Social meaning (target audience): exclusive, high class, old family

The picture: a shoe in a wine cellar among cobwebbed bottles of wine

Interaction: - an offer picture, i.e. the shoe is placed obliquely, does not “look” at us - an analytical process: of being: the shoe is there for our admiration Modality: - realistic, but featured in heightened modality: - the shoe is foregrounded by its intense color and perfect shine - its vectorial position (to suggest dynamism and force) - its oblique perspective, connoting discreteness, indirectness Salient by: - color contrast: with the context (the bottles) and the background (the wall of the cellar) - cultural salience: old wine cellar - the words shoes and exclusively in the copy are paralinguistically highlighted (bold type) Connotations of the visual: - of tradition; of gentlemanly activity - of expertise (“connoisseurs”) Social meaning (carried by the image of the wine cellar): - landed gentry (people belonging to a high social class, those who own a lot of land) - financial affluence (owners of such a house, with such a wine cellar, must be rich) Composition: copy + visual complement each other,  they convey the same message (main character = the shoe)  address the same target audience: English, high class, moneyed Interactive communication

Cooperation The ad flouts all the Maxims of cooperation  of Quality: the shoe is anomalous in the context of wine bottles o i.e. the shoe is a visual simile for the old bottles of wine  of Quantity: the copy says less than S means (it does not say “Buy …”)  of Manner: it is intentionally ambiguous, the message is not clear  of Relevance: the wine bottles are irrelevant in the context of shoe manufacture and commerce This means that S implies a different meaning from what is said. R will have to make inferences: To disambiguate the message and to make the correct inferences, R will have to use his pragmatic knowledge. Context Knowledge of the discourse of advertising will tell R that the function of product ads is to urge TA to buy the product advertised. Illocutionary force (Speech Act): an indirect urge to buy Church’s shoes

Politeness: ads are intrinsically intrusive, i.e. they are face threatening acts (FTAs) - but this ad is perceived as less intrusive/polite - it is indirect, i.e. it avoids an imperative formulation (“buy”) - it is off record, i.e. it flouts the Maxims of cooperation

b. A complex ad: Camper shoes

Complex ads: focus on the image of the receiver, whose image and status they try to enhance (in this case, R’s health and happiness resulting from possessing Camper shoes) The text: minimal: brand name, slogan, copy consisting of two sentences, site The pictures: carry the persuasive power of the ad - picture 1 (above): gives indication regarding the target audience (TA) - picture 2 (below): highlights the product The text  Camper. Slow shoes for fast people. Walk, don‘t run. Camper is a different way of thinking and of walking through life. The brand name (Camper): connotes people who like to spend time in the open, e.g. camping The slogan: - introduces the type of people who should buy the shoes (fast people, i.e. active people) - for whom it offers slow shoes, i.e. shoes that can help them feel comfortable The copy: - urges the buyer to relax and enjoy himself (Walk, don’t run), because - Camper represent much more than mere shoes: they offer a different way of thinking and of walking through life. o i.e. the product also promises to improve the buyer’s life Style: succinct (elliptical), but elegant (metaphoric: a way a walking through life) Connotations: of dynamism (fast people), of comfort (slow shoes; walking though life) o of improved comfort/life: different way of thinking and of walking through life Social meaning: people of all social classes who are dynamic and love outdoor activities

The visual: 2 pictures + text Picture 1: a flower stand and three Actors, men of different ages, probably farmers Picture 2: the Actor = a shoe; larger than life (compared to the human Actors in Picture 1) Modality: Picture 1: realistic, slightly heightened modality; colorful and vivid (flowers and smiling people) - background and atmosphere hold first place - presents the Actors, who look happy - connotation: the comfort and joy resulting from wearing Camper shoes o the shoe is not the main character: it is worn by the represented participants . it merges into the picture (and also into the characters’ lives) o suggestion: R’s status and comfort will be improved if he buys Camper shoes Picture 2. The single shoe/Actor featured at the bottom of the page – functions as “foundation” for the easy and comfortable life the product promises. - lowered modality (decontextualized)

Interactive meaning:

Picture 1. a demand picture: the men are looking straight at R, inviting R to be like them - frontal perspective, eye level, i.e. connoting equality - a narrative reaction process: the Actors tell a story by looking R in the eyes Picture 2. an offer picture: the shoe offers itself to be admired and bought - high angle: the shoe is shown as available - an analytical process: of being: the shoe is there for our admiration Composition Picture 1 – no text Main character/Actors = the TA (simple people, hard workers, living outdoors) Picture 2 + copy: Main character/Actor = the shoe; rather sophisticated; elegant shoe + metaphorical text The style of the two parts contradicts each other to a certain extent, but the impact of the visual in Picture 1 prevails. Social meaning: shoes for working people of all ages, male Connotations: of comfort (the men look happy and at ease)

Interactive communication: Cooperation The ad flouts several Maxims of cooperation  of Quantity: the copy says more than what S means (means: Buy ...!)  of Manner: it is intentionally ambiguous, the message is not clear  of Relevance: the represented participants do not belong to the same class as those who read glossy magazines (the receivers of the ad) To disambiguate the message, R will have to use his pragmatic knowledge and make inferences accordingly. Context: the discourse of advertising Illocutionary force (Speech Act): an indirect urge to buy Camper shoes. Politeness: the ad is perceived as “polite” thanks to its indirectness and its off record strategy (i.e. it flouts Maxims of cooperation).

c. A sophisticated ad: Royal Elastics In the age of style and classiness, shoes and accessories (both luxury and athletic) may be presented as items of sophistication. Sophisticated ads - focus both on the image of the product and that of the customer - convey their message by way of metaphor or symbolism e.g. present dream-like fantasies or explore hidden or subconscious feelings - promise indulgence of the senses, heightened sensations and exquisite experiences

The text: minimal: the brand name (Royal Elastics)

The picture: - carries the ad’s persuasive power Interaction:  an offer picture: the woman, the man’s legs, the shoes, are disposed obliquely, offering themselves to our admiration  frontal perspective, eye level, i.e. connoting equality  apparently a realistic modality (fully contextualized, we can see the mountains in the background), but obviously staged (the position of the man’s legs)  a symbolic process: the Actors have a strange story to tell o the young woman is physically overwhelmed and sexually enthralled: o woman and shoe (high position) are engaged in a master-and-slave-like relationship o a second pair of sneakers of the same make – on the woman’s feet – merely supports the message of the ad (i.e. the product presented a 2nd time) Modality - the shoes become salient, i.e. are shown as dominating, by their o position (low angle), salient color (brilliantly white) o vectorial disposition (connoting movement) o human support (you can see legs), which enhances the sense of domination Paralanguage: - The expression on the woman’s face – suggesting (sexual) rapture and total surrender Interactive communication:

Cooperation The ad flouts all the Maxims of cooperation  of Quantity: there is no copy at all to convey S’s meaning  of Quality: the message is not true, the shoes are not sexually overwhelming; o figurative meaning: metaphor, euphemism  of Manner: it is intentionally ambiguous  of Relevance: such shoes are no usual toys in sexual games R will have to make inferences and use his pragmatic knowledge Context: the discourse of advertising Speech Act/Illocution: an indirect (metaphoric/symbolic) urge to buy Royal Elastics Politeness: the ad is perceived as less intrusive thanks to its indirectness, its off record (figurative) character and humor.

Conclusions

Similarities: Differences: - same subject matter: shoes - they address different target audiences (age, - all three contain language and picture social class, way of life, preoccupation) - the role of the copy is secondary (function: to - they address different needs of TA name the product and support the visual) - they employ different techniques of persuasion - all three ads convey their message indirectly - they promoted shoes through different types of (two of them by metaphor) ads

Product Church’s shoes Camper shoes Royal Elastics Type of ad Compound Complex ad Sophisticated ad

Type of product an exclusive commodity, a a “necessity” (i.e. less sophisticated (even if a “luxury,” i.e. designed for a expensive); very sturdy necessity) leisurely kind of life and comfortable i.e. expensive, highlighted for its own value Improved image of The image of the shoe is The metaphoric the product improved with the help of context enhances the the context in which it is meaning and role of placed (in a wine cellar, the shoe. among cobwebbed bottles of old wine). Target audience an exclusive clientele, people of lower social youngish, (TA) English gentry status, people who sophisticated (people spend a lot of time who know how to outdoors dress stylishly), sporty Improved image of people who buy/wear disposed to (sexual) TA such shoes are wise, experiencing they will feel more comfortable, their life will be improved Message Church’s shoes are Camper shoes are Royal Elastics are both sophisticated status comfortable; in comfortable and symbols for an exclusive addition, they improve improve the social high-class clientele. the image of the image of the wearer. wearer. But you need to be open to challenges.

General conclusion

Just like style, multi-modal texts make their linguistic and visual choices and combinations according to the receiver targeted, who interpret it by abiding by the general principles of pragmatics. With product ads, the locution (i.e. the content of the ad, linguistic and/or visual) can vary greatly. But their illocutionary force is the same: they all urge their target audiences to buy the product. Whether its perlocutionary effect is positive or negative depends on the advertiser’s skill and inventiveness.

Model project 3. Persuasion. A football coach’s inspirational speech

PowerPoint: //www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/vqrnzt7yK0HsoK

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnpRvOGZEm8

Any Given Sunday (Oliver Stone, 1999); Al Pacino - Best football speech ever: (Web. June 2017)

Model project 4. Negotiating power positions in The Walking Dead PowerPoint: //www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/eXkhAJWj1ucKCi Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QK3M_k3lYcA The Walking Dead 7x16. (TV Series 2010 - ). Rick Tells Negan That He Will Kill Him

Model project 5. The politeness of advertising. E.U. YES LA VOT PowerPoint: https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/k6jyGmPsL4dzfp

Bibliographic suggestions for Part 3 of Interpreting texts

Brown, Gillian & George Yule. 1983. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brown, Penelope & Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness – Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Carter, Ronald (2008). Working with Texts – A Core Introduction to Language Analysis. 3rd edition. Intertext. Carston, Robyn. 2002. Thoughts and Utterances. The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell. Cook, Guy. 1992. The Discourse of Advertising. London & NY: Routledge. Elena Croitoru. 2007. “Negotiating the Meaning of Grammatical Constructions With Some English Confusables.” In Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies Vol.3, No.1. (Web Oct. 2015) Cruse, D. Alan. 2004. Meaning in language: An introduction to semantics and pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cruse, D. Alan. 2007. A Glossary of Semantics and Pragmatics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univ Press. Fairclough, Norman. 1989. Language and Power. London: Longman. Fairclough, Norman. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press. Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold. Fairclough, Norman. 2003. Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge. Ervin Goffman, Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. Routledge, Jul 12, 2017. Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd Edition. London-NY-Sydney- Auckland: Arnold. Hymes, Dell. 1974. Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach. University of Pennsylvania Press (Routledge, Oct 16, 2013) Kress, Gunther & Theo van Leeuwen. 1996. Reading Images – The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge. Lakoff, George. 1993. “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor”. In Metaphor and Thought, ed. Andrew Ortony, pp. 202-251, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lazar, Michelle (ed.). 2005. Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Gender, Power and Ideology in Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Leech, Geoffrey N. 1981. Semantics. The Study of Meaning. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman. Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. Levinson, S.C. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge: MIT Press. Mey, Jacob L. 2001. Pragmatics: an introduction. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Teun A. Van Dijk 2008. Discourse and Context. A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge Univ. Press. Teun A. Van Dijk. 2009. Society and Discourse. How social contexts control text and talk. Cambridge University Press. Teun A. Van Dijk. 2008. Discourse and Power. Contributions to Critical Discourse Studies. Houndsmills: Palgrave MacMillan. Teun A. Van Dijk. "Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis.” (Web. Sept. 2015) Teun A. Van Dijk. “Critical Discourse Analysis” (Web. Sept. 2015) Thomas, Jenny. 1995. Meaning in Interaction: an Introduction to Pragmatics. London: Longman. Vizental, Adriana. 2017. Annexes to Interpreting texts. An introduction to linguistic investigation.Online. Vizental, Adriana. 2009. Meaning and Communication: from Semantic Meaning to Pragmatic Meaning. Arad: Editura Universităţii "Aurel Vlaicu". Vizental, Adriana. 2008a. Working with Advertisements: from Functional Grammar to Cooperative Communication. Arad: Editura Universităţii "Aurel Vlaicu".

Vizental, Adriana. 2008b. Phonetics and Phonology: an Introduction. 3rd ed. revised. Arad: “Aurel Vlaicu” University Press. Vizental, Adriana. 2002. The Pragmatics of Advertising. Ph.D. Thesis. Arad: "Vasile Goldiş" University Press. Vizental, Adriana. 2015. CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) & CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages), at the International Conference Bilingual Education and CLIL methodology in teaching English with Erasmus + Programme Billingual Education: A Step Ahead, Nov. 19th, 2015, Arad. Vizental, Adriana. 2011. “Meaning, Image and Attitude (II).” In Journal of Humanistic and Social Studies. Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. Arad: “Aurel Vlaicu” University, Year II, No. 1, pp.35-46. http://www.jhss.ro/en/archive.htm; Vizental, Adriana. 2002. “Advertising and Manipulation of Deixis.” In Studia Universitatis “Vasile Goldiş”. Arad: Editura Universităţii Vasile Goldiş. pp. 212-230 Vizental, Adriana. 2002. “Advertising and Manipulation of Deixis.” In Studia Universitatis “Vasile Goldiş”. Arad: Editura Universităţii Vasile Goldiş. pp. 212-230. Widdowson, Henry. 1998. “The Theory and Practice of Critical Discourse Analysis.” Applied Linguistics 19/1: 136–151. Wardhaugh, Ronald (1986/2006). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics, 5th edition, Blackwell Textbooks in Linguistics, Blackwell Publishing Yule, George (1995). The Study of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Texts analyzed Written texts Leech, Geoffrey N. 1981. Semantics. The Study of Meaning. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Thomas, Jenny (1995). Meaning in Interaction: an Introduction to Pragmatics. London: Longman. Oratio_in_Catilinam_Prima https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catiline_Orations#Oratio_in_Catilinam_Prima_in_Senatu_Habita Diplomatic language, after © Rita Baker, Lydbury English Centre

Film excerpts Strip Search Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pemUUIv9iZc&t=837s Script: https://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/movie_script.php?movie=strip-search Harry Potter Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTxlh65Pe14 Script: http://tomfeltonandmore.tripod.com/home/id9.html Snatch Video: http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/The%20Pikey%20Caravan%20- %20Snatch%20(18).mp4 Script: http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/snatch.pdf My Fair Lady Video: http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-\Main/2.MyFairLady.Lessons.mp4 https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=my+fair+lady+full+movie Script:http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/m/my-fair-lady-script- transcript.html (Web, 2014)

The King’s Speech Video: http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video- Main/The%20Kings%20Speech%20Movie%20Trailer%20Official%20(HD).mp4 Script: http://www.imsdb.com/scripts/King%27s-Speech,-The.html Crash Video: http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/Crash.mp4 Transcript: http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/c/crash-script-transcript- paul-haggis.html Pretty Woman Videos: http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video- Main/Pretty%20Woman%20Shopping%20part%201%20Movieclip%20with%20captions. wmv.mp4 http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video- Main/Pretty%20Woman%20(Julia%20Roberts)%20Shopping%20scene.mp4 Script: http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/p/pretty-woman-script-transcript- julia.html To Kill a Mockingbird Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44TG_H_oY2E http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/To%20Kill%20a%20Mockingbird%20(4- 10)%20Movie%20CLIP%20-%20Atticus%20Cross- Examines%20Mayella%20(1962)%20HD.mp4 Script: http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/t/to-kill-a-mockingbird-script.html Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Kill_a_Mockingbird#1962_film

Sketches, YouTube postings Catherine Tate – Lauren Cooper and the English teacher Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHAJ4VFStUE&hd=1 Script: http://tennant-love.livejournal.com/969569.html Burnistoun – Voice Recognition Elevator in Scotland https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAz_UvnUeuU&hd=1 You need to toughen up a bit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-b7d48eA8M&feature=player_embedded Code Club – The Interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxhGIajRsq4

Commercials Snickers (commercial, 2012) – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uii3VhELiuE Carbocit (Commercial, Romania, 2016) http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/Carbocit.mp4 Dacia Duster: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lonMbbMUliU Greenpeace (commercial, International, 1996) http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/Doing%20nothing.mp4 Doing nothing (commercial, Germany, 1998) http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video-Main/Greenpeace.mp4 Speeches Abraham Lincoln Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, edited by Roy P. Basler and others. http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/gettysburg.htm

Martin Luther King Audio: http://vizentaladriana.ro/videos/Video- Main/i%20have%20a%20dream%20video.mp4 Transcript: http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/mahalia-jackson-the-queen-of-gospel-puts- her-stamp-on-the-march-on-washington Sir Ken Robinson (TED talks, 2007) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY President Obama's 2015 White House Correspondents' Speech https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6NfRMv-4OY

PowerPoint presentations Al Pacino – Any Given Sundays PowerPoint presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Vizental/3apersuasion-inspirational-speech Video:https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=al+pacino+inspirational+speec h+with+english+subtitles Script: http://movie-scripts.net/A/AnyGivenSunday.pdf The Walking Dead PowerPoint presentation: https://www.slideshare.net/Vizental/3bnegotiating-powerpositions-the-walking-dead Video: Rick Tells Negan That He Will Kill Him | The Walking Dead 7x16. YouTube, 13 Apr. 2017. Web. 01 June 2017. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QK3M_k3lYcA . Transcript: http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/view_episode_scripts.php?tv- show=the-walking-dead&episode=s07e16

E.U. YES LA VOT (election slogan) https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/k6jyGmPsL4dzfp