Pragmatic restrictions
https://doi.org/10.28995/2686-7249-2024-8-205-218
Abstract
The paper deals with pragmatic restrictions treated as limits of normal communication within certain situations. Violations of such limits result in communicative failure or switch the communication into a sphere of jokes. Such restrictions correlate with formal and semantic linguistic norms, they have a gradual nature and vary from absolute prohibitions to admissible, but not recommendable communicative actions. Pragmatic restrictions are ethnoculturally bound. They change in time, as new norms emerge and previous rules function no longer. Several types of pragmatic restrictions may be singled out in communication: 1) etiquette rules which fix the canons of demonstrating good will and respect; 2) fundamental norms of behavior which keep the most important communicative formats, mainly concerning religious prescriptions and prohibitions; 3) common sense rules in everyday personal communication; 4) ritual automatic adherence to traditional beliefs; 5) politically correct, which is a reaction to violations of the rights of an oppressed or vulnerable part of the population; 6) discourse and style norms characterizing situationally defined norms of communicative behavior.
About the Author
Vladimir I. Karasik
Pushkin State Russian Language Institute
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Vladimir I. Karasik, Dr. of Sci. (Philology), professor,
bld. 6, Akademika Volgina Street, Moscow, 117485.
References
1. Bulygina, T.V. and Shmelev, A.D. (1990), “Anomalies in the text. Issues of interpretation”, Logicheskii analiz yazyka: Protivorechivost’ i anomal’nost’ teksta [Logical analysis of language. Contradictions and anomalies of text], Nauka, Moscow, Russia, pp. 94–106.
2. Grice, H.P. (1985), “Logic and Conversation”, Lingvisticheskaya pragmatika: Novoe v zarubezhnoi lingvistike [Linguistic Pragmatics. New trends in foreign Linguistics], Progress, Moscow, Russia, iss. 16, pp. 217–237.
3. Graudina, L.K. (1996), “Challenges of norms in the Russian language. Reality and prognosis”, Kul’tura russkoi rechi i effektivnost’ obshcheniya [Russian speech culture and communication efficiency], Nauka, Moscow, Russia, pp. 177–199.
4. Dement’ev, V.V. (2016), Rechezhanrovye kommunikativnye tsennosti v novykh i noveishikh sferakh russkoi rechi: monografiya [Speech genre communicative values in new and newest spheres of Russian speech. A monograph], Izd-vo Sarat. un-ta, Saratov, Russia.
5. Il’in, D.Yu. and Sidorova, E.G. (2021), “Variability of the language norm in the functioning of toponyms: problems and contradictions”, Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University Language and Literature, no. 17 (4), pp. 615–632.
6. Karasik, V.I. (2019), Yazykovaya spiral’: tsennosti, znaki, motivy [Linguistic spiral. Values, signs, motifs], Gnozis, Moscow, Russia.
7. Krongauz, M. (2008), Russkii yazyk na grani nervnogo sryva [The Russian language on the verge of nervous breakdown], Znak: Yazyki slavyanskikh kul’tur, Moscow, Russia.
8. Krysin, L.P. (2008), “Codification of norm and language traditions”, Russian Language at School, no. 7, pp. 77–82.
9. Lakoff, R. (1973), “The Logic of Politeness, or, Minding Your P’s and Q’s”, Papers from the 9th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, USA, pp. 292–305.
10. Lapteva, O.A. (1999), Zhivaya russkaya rech’ s teleekrana: Razgovornyj plast televizionnoi rechi v normativnom aspekte [A living Russian speech from TV screen. A colloquial layer of TV speech in the normative aspect], URSS, Moscow, Russia.
11. Larina, T.V. (2009), Kategoriya vezhlivosti i stil’ kommunikatsii: Sopostavlenie angliiskikh i russkikh lingvokul’turnykh traditsii [A category of politeness and communication style. A comparison of English and Russian linguistic and cultural traditions], Yazyki slavyanskih kul’tur, Moscow, Russia.
12. Leech, G.N. (1983), Principles of pragmatics, Longman, London, UK.
13. Leontovich, O.A. (2005), Russkie i amerikantsy: paradoksy mezhkul’turnogo obshcheniya: monografiya [Russians and Americans. Paradoxes of intercultural communication. A monograph], Gnozis, Moscow, Russia.
14. Murzin, L.N. (1989), “Norm, speech technique and error from a dynamic point of view”, Rechevye priemy i oshibki: tipologiya, derivaciya, funkcionirovanie: Sb. nauch. trudov. [Speech technique and errors. Typology, derivation, functioning, A collection of articles], In-t yazykoznaniya, Moscow, Russia, pp. 5–13.
15. Norman, B.Yu. (1989), “On a typology of speech errors (on the syntactic material)”, Rechevye priemy i oshibki: tipologiya, derivatsiya, funktsionirovanie: Sb. nauch. trudov [Speech technique and errors. Typology, derivation, functioning, A collection of articles], In-t yazykoznaniya, Moscow, Russia, pp. 14–22.
16. Palazhchenko, M.Yu. (2004), Political correctness in linguistic and cultural tradition (on the English and Russian material), Abstract of the PhD dissertation, Moscow, Russia.
17. Panin, V.V. (2004), Political correctness as a cultural, behavioral and linguistic category, Abstract of the PhD dissertation, Tyumen’, Russia.
18. Razinkina, N.M. (1982), “On the notion of linguistic norm relating to a functional style”, Osnovnye ponyatiya i kategorii lingvostilistiki: Mezhvuz. sb. nauch. tr. [Basic concepts and categories of linguistic stylistics. Interuniversity collection of articles], Perm, Russia, pp. 98–102.
19. Sirotinina, O.B. (2000), “The Russian language in various types of speech cultures”, Krysin, L.P. (ed.), Russkii yazyk segodnya. Vyp.1: Sb. statei [The Russian language today, iss. 1, A collection of articles], Azbukovnik, Moscow, Russia, pp. 240–248.
20. Skvortsov, L.I. (1980), Teoreticheskie osnovy kul’tury rechi [Theoretical foundations of speech culture], Nauka, Moscow, Russia.
21. Sternin, I.A. (1998), “American communicative taboo”, Yazyk i natsional’noe soznanie. [Language and national consciousness], Istoki, Voronezh, Russia, pp. 65–66.
22. Ter-Minasova, S.G. (2000), Yazyk i mezhkul‘turnaya kommunikatsiya [Language and intercultural communication], Slovo / Slovo, Moscow, Russia.
23. Vorkachev, S.G. (2014), Voploshchenie smysla: conceptualia selecta: monografiya. [Implementation of meaning. Conceptualia selecta. A monograph], Paradigma, Volgograd, Russia.
Review
For citations:
Karasik V.I. Pragmatic restrictions. RSUH/RGGU Bulletin: “Literary Teory. Linguistics. Cultural Studies”, Series. 2024;(8):205-218. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.28995/2686-7249-2024-8-205-218
Views:
54
Email this article 