Pragmatics

The Perlocutionary Act of Advertising Slogans

“…One of the gaps among so many is that the compatibility of perlocutionary acts with conceptual metaphor. The perlocutionary act is defined as "the bringing about of effects on the audience by means of uttering the sentences, such effects being special to the circumstances of utterance" [1]. The perlocution is the act done by saying something.…”

“…The language in advertising slogans is so typical that it can transmit novel meaning, arouse resonance much easier than others, provide economy with better effects, leave the audience a much deeper impression and most importantly, achieve the effect of advertising/selling. Likewise, the perlocutionary act proposed by Austin [1] is of great help to interpret advertising slogans especially as effective. Advertising slogans are more likely to attain the perlocutionary effect on the potential target consumers compared with other types of genres with regard to the above-mentioned characteristics.…”

Tools and Resources for Visualising Conversational-Speech Interaction

“…With the growing recent interest in processing multimodal interaction, beginning with projects such as NIST Rich Transcription [3], AMI [4], and CHIL [5], there has been considerable research into collecting and annotating very large corpora of audio and visual information related to human spoken interactions [6], and subsequently huge efforts into mining information in the resulting data [7] and making the information available to researchers from various related disciplines [8]. Consequently, much research has also been devoted to interface and access technologies, particularly using web browsers [9].…”

“…One of the basic and frequently repeated assumptions of conversation analysis is that people talk in turns, and that usually only one person talks at a time [2]. Levinson has defined conversational speech as "a kind of talk in which two or more participants freely alternate in speaking" [3]. This alternation accords well with our sense of the rhythm of a conversation, but it is not well supported by a quantitative analysis of a large number of telephone conversations where people were paid "just to talk" to each other [4].…”

Of babies and bath water: Is there any place for Austin and Grice in interpersonal pragmatics?

“…The move towards a 'discursive' approach to pragmatics seems to have gained momentum in the field of politeness research largely as a reaction to Brown and Levinson's (1978;1987) treatment of linguistic politeness, much of which is entrenched in Gricean and Austinian pragmatics. Critics of Brown and Levinson (Eelen, 2001;Watts, 2003;Mills, 2003) have shown that this traditional approach to language in use (also characterised by Leech, 1983 andLevinson, 1983) has a number of weaknesses, largely arising out of a tendency to focus on speaker intention and decontextualised utterances. The 'answer' to these criticisms is generally thought to lie with a discursive approach to data analysis, since it has the benefit of using stretches of naturally-occurring instances of language in use.…”