International Journal of Language and Linguistics
Volume 7, Issue 5, September 2019, Pages: 202-209
Received: Jun. 20, 2019;
Accepted: Aug. 4, 2019;
Published: Aug. 19, 2019
Views 49 Downloads 28
Zhou Honghui, School of Foreign Studies, Lingnan Normal University, Zhanjiang, China
Chen Dongchun, School of Foreign Studies, Guangdong University of Finance and Economics, Guangzhou, China
Misunderstanding is an old and open question especially in the linguistic domain, but few concerns have put on this important topic recently. To reconsider this problem and offer instructive views, the new theoretical perspective and approaches are needed. A new theory “socio-cognitive approach to pragmatics” (SCA) dubbed by Istvan Kecskes offers a fresh angle for understanding misunderstandings. Other than traditional pragmatics and cognitive pragmatics, SCA standing in the middle point tries to integrate them and explain linguistic phenomenon with both social and cognitive factors. This study tries to examine misunderstandings under SCA, especially its view of Common Ground Co-construction. First, it is assumed that the root cause of misunderstanding lies in egocentrism, which are both an intrinsic property of verbal communication and a mechanism of individual thinking. Then, with a detailed analysis of CG co-construction deficiency and misunderstandings from the perspective of CG co-constructionism of SCA, it is illustrated how egocentrism causes different misunderstandings. In so doing, this study digs out the root cause of misunderstanding by taking speaker and hearer as a whole, and considering both the social factors and cognitive factors, which is a fresh practice on the “speaker-hearer pragmatic model” of SCA.
Understanding Misunderstandings from Socio-cognitive Approach to Pragmatics, International Journal of Language and Linguistics.
Vol. 7, No. 5,
2019, pp. 202-209.
Kecskes, I. The paradox of communication: Socio-cognitive approach to pragmatics [J]. Pragmatics & Society, 2010a. (1): 50-73.
Verdler, Z. Understanding misunderstanding [A]. In Dale Jamieson (ed.). Language, Mind and Art [C]. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994: 9-21.
Schegloff, E. A. Some sources of misunderstanding in talk-in-interaction [J]. Linguistics, 1987 (25): 201-218.
Richard, L. A. The Philosophy of Rhetoric [M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1964.
Taylor, T. J. Mutual Misunderstanding: Scepticism and the Theorizing of Language and Interpretation [M]. Duke University Press, 1992.
Sperber, D. & D. Wilson. Relevance: Communication and Cognition [M]. Oxford: Blackwell, 1995.
Keysar, B. Communication and miscommunication: The role of egocentric processes [J]. Intercultural Pragmatics, 2007 (4-1): 71-84.
Keysar, B. Egocentric processes in communication and miscommunication [A]. In Istvan Kecskes and Jacob Mey (eds.). Intention, Common Ground and the Egocentric Speaker-Hearer [C]. Mouton de Gruyter, 2008: 277-296.
Zong Shihai. On the Social Psychological Roots of Misunderstanding [J]. Modern Foreign Languages, 2003 (3): 266-274.
Zong Shihai. On the Formation Mechanism of Misunderstanding [J]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2005 (2): 124-131.
Gumperze, J. J. Discourse Strategies [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982a.
Tannen, D. You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation [M]. New York: Ballantine Books, 1990.
Grice, P. Logic and conversation [A]. In P. Grice (ed.). Studies in the Way of Words [C]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989: 22-40.
Wu Yaxin. Interference of Psychological Tendency in Pragmatic Inference: Cognitive Roots of Misunderstanding [J]. Foreign Language Teaching, 2011 (1): 24-28.
Wu Yaxin. The Potentiality of Speech Misunderstanding: Philosophical Thinking [J]. Studies in Philosophy of Science and Technology, 2012 (6): 17-21.
Kecskes, I. Intercultural Impoliteness [J]. Journal of Pragmatics, 2015 (86): 43-47.
Kecskes, I. Situation-Bound Utterances in Chinese [J]. East Asian Pragmatics, 2015 (1): 107-126.
Kecskes, I. Context-sensitivity and impoliteness in intercultural communication [J]. Journal of Politeness Research, 2017 (13-1): 7-31.
Zhou Honghui, Ran Yongping. A New Perspective of Social-Cognitive Pragmatics [J]. Foreign Language and Foreign Language Teaching, 2012 (4): 6-10.
Keysar, B. & B. Bly. Making sense of how we make sense: The paradox of egocentrism in language use [A]. In H. L. Colston & A. N. Katz (eds.). Figurative Language Comprehension：Social and Cultural Influences [C]. London：Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2005: 131-151.
Barr, D. & B．Keysar．Mindreading in an exotic case: The normal adult human [A]. In B．Malle & S. Hodges (eds.). Other Minds: How Humans Bridge the Divide Between Self and Other [C]. New York: Guilford Press, 2005.
Giora, R. On Our Mind: Salience, Context, and Figurative Language [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Clark, H. Using Language [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Stalnaker, R. Assertion [J]. Syntax and Semantics, 1978 (9): 315-332.
Clark, H. & S. Brennan. Grounding in communication [A]. In L. Resnick, J. Levine & S. Teasley (eds.). Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition [C]. Washington: American Psychological Association, 1991.
Kecskes, I. & F. Zhang. Activating，seeking and creating common ground: A socio-cognitive approach [J]．Pragmatics and Cognition, 2009 (2): 331-355.
Zhou Honghui. Cognitive Study of Egocentric Discourse and Its Roots [J]. Modern Foreign Languages, 2013 (1): 40-46.
Piaget Ingeld. Wu Fuyuan Translated. Child Psychology [M]. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 1980.
Lyons, J. Semantics [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University press, 1997.
Shen Jiaxuan. Subjectivity of Chinese and Teaching of Chinese Grammar [J]. Chinese Learning, 2009 (1): 3-12.
Kecskes, I. Dueling context: a dynamic model of meaning [J]. Journal of Pragmatics, 2008 (40): 385-406.