Band 16, Heft 2 -

This paper proposes a research agenda for studying the building blocks of amicable communication and their role in fostering sociability between states. Against the backdrop of linguistic-pragmatic, international relations, and communication theories, it first theorizes the state as a communicating actor in social interactions and conceptualizes amicable actions and their potential to advance relations in interstate communication. On the basis of 2,180 amicable statements performed by a variety of international actors in a range of communicative contexts, a classification according to variations, intended goals, and prevalence of amicable actions is suggested. The findings show a preference to perform interstate communication through solidarity-oriented and expressive actions. Asserting friendship and thanking were found to be the most popular actions, frequently utilized by international actors in a range of ceremonial contexts. Paying respect and expressions of honor were found to be the most frequent strategy for showing one’s deference to the other’s sovereignty and autonomy. In the conclusions, we argue for the importance of studying the pragmatics of interstate communication and point to factors that need to be confronted in the future in order to answer the overarching question: Under what conditions do amicable actions achieve their ends?

They are a good deal more than amusing (or embarrassing) errors of speech. The collection and analysis of such errors provides important clues to how speech is organized in the nervous system. Victoria A. Fromkin (1973: 110) Also, most current linguistics fails to consider various kinds of anomalous data which actually reveal very important information about the structure of the mental system which underlies our linguistic abilities, including slips of the tongue and unintentional puns. Sydney M. Lamb (1999: 9) Abstract The socio-cognitive approach to pragmatics [SCA] is based on two fundamental hypotheses: (1) speaker and hearer are equal participants in the communicative process, (2) communication is the result of the interplay of intention and attention, as this interplay is motivated by the individuals’ private socio-cultural backgrounds. In this paper, I aim at showing that relational network theory (which has been mainly developed by the American neurolinguist Sydney M. Lamb) allow us to account not only for aspects corresponding to intention or attention, but also for “smooth communication” and “bumpy communication” (being the latter the dimension which includes unintended meanings). Four actual slips of the tongue will be relevant examples thanks to which it can be recognized how cooperation and intention are in a highly complex interaction together with the substantial elements of the individual traits: attention, private experience, egocentrism, and salience. Within this context, the relational account is epistemologically crucial. Firstly, it allows us to represent the neurocognitive structures that enable a person to produce or understand utterances. Secondly, it helps us to suggest that canonical pragmatics (like Speech Acts Theory, Gricean Pragmatics, Relevance Theory) cannot even consider actual and relevant phenomena like slips of the tongue, because they focus on cooperative intention and they neglect (or discard) egocentric attention.

This study explicates cognitive validity of task-based L2 pragmatic speaking assessment by examining reported strategy use of test takers at varying performance levels across different task types. Thirty university-level ESL learners completed four pragmatic speaking tasks that differ in the formality of pragmatic actions. Two trained raters scored the task-based pragmatic performances using analytical rating criteria and displayed a satisfactory level of consistency and accuracy in scoring the performances. The test-takers’ retrospective reports were transcribed and analyzed to develop a valid coding scheme that consists of cognitive, metacognitive, and pragmatic strategies. An association between the test-takers’ pragmatic performances scored by the trained raters and their reported strategy use was examined. The higher-ability test takers utilized diverse strategies more frequently, ranging from varied pragmatic strategies to strategies specifically related to managing task demands, compared to the lower-ability test takers. Further, the test takers utilized distinct types of strategies appropriate to handling unique pragmatic task situations and complexities involved in each pragmatic assessment task. These findings explain how the test takers cognitively interacted with the assessment tasks and what strategies potentially led to successful pragmatic performances. The implications of examining pragmatic strategy use were discussed in terms of advancing practices of teaching and assessing L2 pragmatics.

Does having a communicative role other than the speaker’s make a difference to the way pragmatic meaning is construed? Standard paradigms in interpersonal pragmatics have implicitly assumed a speaker-centric perspective over the years, however modern approaches have re-considered the role of listener evaluations. In the present study, I examine whether assuming different communicative roles (speaker, listener, observer) results in varying interpretations. A web-based experiment revealed that participants who took the perspective of different characters in short stories differed in the way they interpreted what the speaker meant. In most cases, participants in the role of the listener interpreted speaker meaning in more negative ways than participants in the other roles. The present study suggests that the directionality of the difference (negative inferences under the listener’s perspective) could be explained by taking into account affective factors.