Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  perlocution
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
Language aptitude and perlocutionary acts and effects have been subjects of extensive research since their true beginnings in the 1950’s and 1960’s, respectively. On the one hand, Carroll and Sapon (1959), Pimsleur (1966), or Biedroń (2012) aimed at revealing the factors responsible for a learner’s sixth sense for languages. On the other hand, almost simultaneously, Austin (1962) introduced the tripartite division of a speech act, with locutions, illocutions, and perlocutions as the integral components, later developed by Searle (1969), who shed new light on the Speech Act Theory (SAT). At that time, however, the role of the perlocutionary component was significantly diminished, since the primary goal of pragmatics was to investigate the speaker’s intentions. Gradually, the role of perlocutionary acts and effects changed and more attention was drawn to the perlocutionary aspect. In 1979, Cohen, Davis and Gaines highlighted the fact that perlocutionary acts have perlocutionary goals, which might be observed by the subsequent effects utterance have on the listener. In 2013, Post offered a new insight into the SAT and suggested that the role of perlocution ought not to be diminished, but enhanced and intensified. In 2015, Świątek suggested a contrasting approach to both concepts and combined them to investigate the role of individual differences responsible for one’s verbal perlocutionary giftedness. The research revealed that the aspects like verbal aptitude, anxiety, willingness to communicate, or personality type had considerable impact on perlocutionary skills and the desired perlocutionary effects. Świątek’s approach shed new light on the research on pragmatic aspects of glottodidactics and opened a new chapter in that field of science. The aim of the presentation is to concentrate on yet another fundamental factor of perlocutionary giftedness, i.e. non-verbal aspects in its manifestation. The research, based on experiential and comparative methods as well as individual case analysis, aimed at revealing a strong link between verbal perlocutionary giftedness and the accompanying non-verbal aspects of communication, such as kinesics, proxemics, vocalics, or posture, which affect the listener’s decisions, who then complies with the speaker’s will.
EN
The description of speech acts and linguistic cooperation rules in sports transmissions demonstrates that pragmalinguistic theories and tools do not allow to unequivocally describe the communication between journalist and viewer, listener or Internet user, because of the differences between interpersonal communication and media communication. The pragmalinguistics of direct communication is one-act pragmatics and relations pragmatics. However, the pragmalinguistics of media, society and public is two- or multi-act pragmatics. This way, in its intention bundle it includes constative/assertive/representative illocution, but also acts as an evaluative assertive, media assertive declarative, deliberative and modal act, comissive, expressive and directive. Nevertheless, depending on the kind of discipline, the participation of Polish sportsmen, the rank of competition and many different factors, their self-agency and conventionality of audience’s expectations or reactions happens to be, on the one hand, predictable and effective, but on the other hand it might be suspended, parenthetical or postponed, it might also end with communicational failure. That is why it is so hard for the senders of transmission to make the decision whether to be baroque in the broadcast or to be trite in a pragmatic and communicational sense. In the fear of losing even a fraction of this varied audience, journalists, editors and producers of programs try to find a communicational and pragmatic compromise, which translates into commentator duos. In each of them one sender is responsible for seducing with eloquence, being over-the-top and using excessively original metaphors; the other one carries the burden of the realization of the rite routine, giving the recipients a feel of security, verbalizing all the parts of the media skeleton anticipated by the audience. And that is what the pragmalinguistic recipe for a successful sport broadcast looks like for now.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.