ABSTRACT
In this final chapter, we return again to the notion of defining pragmatics (see Chapter 1). We do so because understanding what pragmatics is is important if we are to explore how to teach it. Traditional areas of language teaching have clear-cut taxonomies: we can talk about word classes, grammatical structures and competencies and so on. How does all of this translate to the area of pragmatics? According to Yule (1996), within language analysis there is a traditional contrast drawn between pragmatics and semantics and syntax. Semantics is the study of how meaning is encoded in these linguistic forms. Syntax, on the other hand, is the study of how linguistic forms are arranged in a sequence that can be deemed grammatically ‘acceptable’ or not. In terms of the language classroom, semantics is primarily concerned with vocabulary teaching whereas syntax can be broadly equated with the grammatical rules taught. Both vocabulary and grammar can be taught in a relatively formal and structured way at word and sentence level, isolated from any reference to the speaker (or writer) or indeed listener (or reader). However, it is this reference to language users such as the speaker and listener that separates pragmatics from syntax or semantics. When any definition of pragmatics is examined, the interpersonal nature of pragmatics is readily apparent. Take for example Yule’s assertion that ‘pragmatics is the study of the relationship between linguistic forms and the users of these forms. In this three-part distinction [syntax-semantics-pragmatics], only pragmatics allows humans into the analysis’ (1996: 4; emphasis added).
