INTRODUCTION TO PRAGMATICS:

THEORY AND ITS PRACTICES

Noor Eka Chandra

Devy A Rahim
Jessica R. Effendi
Lola Fatimah
Noor Ayatussyifa
Yukita Haura Anisa

PENERBIT CV. EUREKA MEDIA AKSARA

i
 INTRODUCTION TO PRAGMATICS:
THEORY AND ITS PRACTICES

Penulis : Noor Eka Chandra

Devy A Rahim
Jessica R. Effendi
Lola Fatimah
Noor Ayatussyifa
Yukita Haura Anisa
Editor : Yusuf Al Arief
Desain Sampul : Eri Setiawan
Tata Letak : Meuthia Rahmi Ramadani
ISBN : 978-623-151-374-8
No. HKI : EC00202389073

Diterbitkan oleh : EUREKA MEDIA AKSARA, JULI 2023

ANGGOTA IKAPI JAWA TENGAH
NO. 225/JTE/2021

Redaksi:
Jalan Banjaran, Desa Banjaran RT 20 RW 10 Kecamatan Bojongsari
Kabupaten Purbalingga Telp. 0858-5343-1992

Surel : [email protected]

Cetakan Pertama : 2023

All right reserved

Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang

Dilarang memperbanyak atau memindahkan sebagian atau
seluruh isi buku ini dalam bentuk apapun dan dengan cara
apapun, termasuk memfotokopi, merekam, atau dengan teknik
perekaman lainnya tanpa seizin tertulis dari penerbit.

ii
 FOREWORDS

We proudly present this book titled "Introduction to

Pragmatics: Theory and Its Practices" to you. This book is the result
of collaboration among experienced linguists and English
educators, aiming to provide a comprehensive understanding of
pragmatics and its application in English language learning.
The book consists of ten units that focus on various
important aspects of pragmatics. The first unit discusses the
definition of pragmatics, providing a brief overview, examples of
pragmatic usage, and highlighting the significance of pragmatics in
English language learning. The next unit, Unit 2, delves into the
context in pragmatics, including the concept of pragmatic context
and various relevant types of context. Unit 3 explores deixis,
including its definition and types. You will also find examples of
deixis analysis in this unit. Unit 4 covers speech acts, including
their definition, types, and analysis. Unit 5 tackles presupposition,
including its definition and types. Unit 6 addresses the
Cooperative Principles, which are crucial principles in effective
conversation. Unit 7 discusses Gricean Conversational Principles,
as proposed by Paul Grice, and how these principles influence
communication. Unit 8 explores implicatures, which are meanings
that can be inferred through the context of conversation. Unit 9
explores politeness, including its definition, types of politeness
face, politeness strategies, and the maxims of politeness. You will
find examples of politeness maxim analysis in this unit. Lastly,
Unit 10 examines the concept of face, including its definition and
types. You will also find examples of analysis on face-threatening
acts in this unit.
Each unit in this book is well-designed and systematically
organized, facilitating readers in comprehending the concepts of
pragmatics and applying them in the context of English language
learning. Each subsection within each unit is supplemented with
relevant examples and in-depth analysis to aid readers in
deepening their understanding.

iii
 We hope that this book will serve as a valuable reference for
students, English language instructors, and anyone interested in
pragmatics and language teaching. We extend our gratitude to the
authors who have contributed to the writing of this book, as well
as the editorial team who has worked diligently to ensure the
quality and usefulness of this book.

Enjoy your exploration into the world of pragmatics!

Sincerely,

Editor

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORDS ................................................................................... iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................... v
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................. vii
UNIT 1 WHAT IS PRAGMATICS? ............................................... 1
A. Definition of Pragmatics ................................................ 1
B. A Brief Overview of Pragmatics ................................... 3
C. Examples of Pragmatics Use ......................................... 5
D. The Importance of Pragmatics in ELT .......................... 6
UNIT 2 THE CONTEXT OF PRAGMATICS ................................ 8
A. Definition and The Roles of Contexts in Pragmatics... 8
B. Types of Contexts ........................................................... 9
C. The Contexts Analysis in Classroom Interaction ...... 12
UNIT 3 DEIXIS ............................................................................... 14
A. Definition of Deixis ...................................................... 14
B. Types of Deixis ............................................................. 16
C. The Sample of Deixis Analysis .................................... 19
UNIT 4 SPEECH ACT .................................................................... 25
A. Definition of Speech Act .............................................. 25
B. Types of Speech Act ..................................................... 25
C. The Sample of Speech Act Analysis............................ 30
UNIT 5 PRESUPPOSITION .......................................................... 37
A. Definition of Presupposition ....................................... 37
B. Types Of Presupposition ............................................. 38
C. The Sample of Presupposition Analysis..................... 42
UNIT 6 COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLES ....................................... 58
A. Definition of Cooperative Principles .......................... 58
B. The Sample of Cooperative Analysis ......................... 60
UNIT 7 GRICEAN MAXIM .......................................................... 67
A. Definition of Maxim ..................................................... 67
B. Types of Maxim ............................................................ 67
C. Non-Observance of Maxims........................................ 70
D. The Sample of Maxim Analysis .................................. 72
UNIT 8 IMPLICATURES............................................................... 78
A. Definition of Implicatures ........................................... 78
B. Types of Implicatures .................................................. 78

v
 C. The Sample of Implicatures Analysis ......................... 82
UNIT 9 POLITENESS ..................................................................... 94
A. Definition of Politeness ................................................ 94
B. Types of Politeness Face ............................................... 95
C. Politeness Strategies ..................................................... 97
D. Maxims of Politeness .................................................. 110
E. The Sample of Politeness Maxim Analysis ............... 113
UNIT 10 FACE ................................................................................. 126
A. Definition of Face ........................................................ 126
B. Types of Face ............................................................... 126
C. Face Threatening Acts ................................................ 127
D. Face Saving Acts ......................................................... 134
E. The Sample of Face Threatening Acts Analysis ....... 139
REFERENCES .................................................................................. 151
APPENDIXES................................................................................... 154

vi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 Locutionary Speech Act.................................................. 31

Table 4.2 Illocutionary Speech Act ................................................ 31
Table 4.3 Perlocutionary Speech Act ............................................. 34
Table 5.1 Data Result ...................................................................... 44
Table 5.2 Table of Data Presentation of Existential
Presupposition ................................................................ 45
Table 5.3 Table of Data Presentation of Factive
Presupposition ................................................................ 46
Table 5.4 Table of Data Presentation of Lexical
Presupposition ................................................................ 47
Table 5.5 Table of Data Presentation of Structural
Presupposition ................................................................ 47
Table 5.6 Table of Data Presentation of Non-factive
Presupposition ................................................................ 48
Table 5.7 Table of Data Presentation of Counterfactual
Presupposition ................................................................ 48
Table 7.1 Flouting Maxim Occurred in Short Movie
´'XD 'HWLNµ ...................................................................... 73
Table 8.1 Results of Implicatures Analysis in Abbott Elementary
[S1:E1] .............................................................................. 84
Table 9.1 Data Result .................................................................... 114
Table 9.2 Table of Data Presentation of Tact Maxim .................. 115
Table 9.3 Table of Data Presentation of Generosity Maxim ...... 116
Table 9.4 Table of Data Presentation of Approbation Maxim ... 117
Table 9.5 Table of Data Presentation of Modesty Maxim .......... 117
Table 9.6 Table of Data Presentation of Agreement Maxim ...... 118
Table 9.7 Table of Data Presentation of Sympathy Maxim ....... 119
Table 10.1 Table of Data Result ...................................................... 140
Table 10.2 Table of Data Presentation of FTA that Threaten the
+HDUHU·V 1HJDWLYH )DFH ................................................. 142
Table 10.3 Table of Data Presentation of FTA that Threaten the
+HDUHU·V 3RVLWLYH )DFH................................................... 142
Table 10.4 Table of Data Presentation of FTA that Threaten the
6SHDNHU·V 1HJDWLYH )DFH ............................................... 143

vii
Table 10.5 Table of Data Presentation of FTA that Threaten the
6SHDNHU·V 3RVLWLYH )DFH ................................................. 144

viii
 UNIT
WHAT IS

1 PRAGMATICS?

A. Definition of Pragmatics
In linguistics (the study of language), pragmatics is a
specialized branch of study, focusing on the relationship
between natural language and users of that language.
Pragmatics focuses on conversational implicatures³or that
which a speaker implies and which a listener infers. To define
pragmatics, experts sometimes compare and contrast it with
linguistic semantics (the meaning of a sentence) or compare it to
syntax (word order) or semiotics (the study of symbols), all of
which are distinct terms.
People often associate pragmatics with other areas of
linguistic study, such as semantics, syntax and semiotics, but
these terms have different definitions. Semantics is the study of
rule systems that determine the literal linguistic meanings of
expressions; syntax describes how we combine words to form
sentences with specific meaning; and semiotics is concerned
with the use and interpretation of signs and symbols. In
contrast to semantics, syntax, and semiotics, the study of
pragmatics revolves around both the literal and nonliteral
aspects of language and how physical or social contexts
determine the use of those linguistic expressions.

1
 UNIT
THE CONTEXT OF

2 PRAGMATICS

A. Definition and The Roles of Contexts in Pragmatics

In general, contexts might take the shape of actual
physical settings, prior knowledge, and sociopsychological
elements that the participants in a communication³in spoken
and written form³own. Cutting (2002: 2) defines contexts as
the parts of meaning that can be explained by knowledge of the
physical and social world, and sociopsychological factors
influencing communication, as well as the knowledge of the
time and place in which the words are uttered or written.
In the past, linguists analysed sentences regardless their
context, nowadays, however, linguists consider context in
comprehending the meaning of the sentence. In refer to context
as an important aspect to interpret, Fillmore states that the aim
is to ascertain what we can learn about the significance and
context of an utterance from only knowing that it has occurred.
Every time I read a line out of context, I find myself wondering
what would have happened if the speaker's intentions,
audience, purpose, delivery style, timing, and location had been
somewhat different (Fillmore 1977:119). The statement indicates
that context affects meaning and that meaning may vary when
a context does. Depending on the context, the question "What
time is it?" may have a variety of distinct interpretations. First,
the speaker says a statement that begs the listener for their time.
Speaking parties or interlocutors are most likely friends who
begin departing for campus; Second, the speaker complains to a

8
 UNIT

3 DEIXIS

A. Definition of Deixis
Levinson stated that "pragmatics is the links between
language and situation that are crucial to the comprehension of
language understanding" (1983:21). The term "language
understanding" is used in this context to emphasize the point
that understanding an expression requires much more than
merely knowing the meanings of the words used and how they
relate to one another in a sentence. Making inferences that link
what is stated to what is assumed or what has been said before
is the most important part of understanding a speech.
Pragmatics, then, is the study of how language is employed in
situations where the recipient of that language must have some
degree of intelligence in order to understand the speaker's
meaning. In this case, there is a shared understanding between
the speaker and the audience or reader.

Deixis The ancient Greeks used the word deixis, which

means "pointing" or "indicating," to describe their method of
communication. Pointing in language, or making an assertion
through language, is a branch of pragmatics. An expression in
language that serves this purpose is known as a deictic
expression. Expressions that are deictic are frequently referred
to as indexical as well. The usage of demonstrative and
personal pronouns, time and place adverbs like "now" and
"here," and other grammatical elements are collectively referred

14
 UNIT

4 SPEECH ACT

A. Definition of Speech Act

One of the Pragmatics aspects, the speech act, involves a
speaker and a listener or a writer and a reader discussing a
topic. Speech and act are the two words from which speech acts
are derived. According to Austin (1962), speech acts are
activities that are taken when stating anything. When someone
says a sentence, he does something in addition to what he says.
According to Searle (1965), speech acts involve the speaker's
context, the listener's context, and the speaker's own utterances.
Speech can be considered a form of exercise because it
frequently has a purpose. Everyday interactions with other
people include stating or expressing something. According to
Austin (1962), when someone speaks a sentence, he/she not
only does something verbally but also physically.
Language allows us to communicate our intentions,
make requests, issue warnings, and offer suggestions when
we're carrying out an action. The power of words is as real as
the power of action in the hands of a human. Austin (1962)
classified speech acts into three categories.

B. Types of Speech Act

These three types of speech are locutionary, illocutionary,
and perlocutionary.
1. Locutionary Act
Locutionary acts include uttered words or other
fundamental speech acts. According to Austin (1962), the act

25
 UNIT

5 PRESUPPOSITION

A. Definition of Presupposition
Yule (1996) defines presupposition as something the
speaker assumes to be the case prior to making an utterance. In
addition, Hudson (2000:321) states that a presupposition is
something assumed (presupposed) to be true in a sentence
which asserts other information. Furthermore, Griffiths (2006,
p. 143) states that presuppositions are shared background
assumptions that are taken to be true when people
communicate. Moreover, Perl (2020) states that presupposition
is a common ground element that is embedded in utterances
that are assumed by the writer and reader or speaker and
listener.
From all the definitions above, it can be concluded that
presupposition is something that is assumed to be true by the
speaker before making an utterance as the case prior in a
conversation between the writer and reader or speaker and
listener. Presupposition can also be interpreted as a belief,
conjecture, or opinion about something that is owned by the
speaker or writer. Presupposition is denoted by (>>) which
PHDQV ¶SUHVXSSRVHV· /RRN DW WKH H[DPSOHV EHORZ
· 0DULD VDLG ´, OHIW P\ FDVWOH \HVWHUGD\ µ
>> Maria has a castle.

· ´(YHU\RQH NQRZV WKDW /LDQ LV WKH most beautiful woman in the

NLQJGRP µ
>> Lian is the most beautiful woman in the kingdom.

37
 UNIT
COOPERATIVE

6 PRINCIPLES

A. Definition of Cooperative Principles

According to Mey (1993:212), pragmatics is the study of
the connections between language and circumstance. It is
concerned with the context-specific meaning. A few language
usage theories are used to analyze the meaning. The word
meaning analysis takes into account the context in which the
words were pronounced as well as their literal meaning. When
we communicate to one another, one of the fundamental
presumptions we make is that we are attempting to work
together to build meaningful discussions. According to
American linguist Grice, one of the key tenets that underpins
how individuals communicate is the cooperation principle. As
stated in "Logic and Conversation" by H. P. Grice (1975):
´0DNH \RXU FRQYHUVDWLRQDO FRQWULEXWLRQ VXFK DV Ls
required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted
purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are
engaged.µ
In other words, we as speakers try to contribute
meaningful, productive utterances to further the conversation.
It then follows that, as listeners, we assume that our
conversational partners are doing the same. You can think of
reasons why someone might be uncooperative in conversation
PD\EH WKH\·UH EHLQJ LQWHUURJDWHG IRU LQIRUPDWLRQ WKH\ GRQ·W
want to give up; maybe they hate tKH SHUVRQ WKH\·UH WDONLQJ WR
PD\EH WKH\·UH MXVW FUD]\ EXW LQ WKH YDVW PDMRULW\ RI

58
 UNIT

7 GRICEAN MAXIM

A. Definition of Maxim
Maxims are guidelines that communicators (speakers
and listeners) must follow in textual or personal encounters in
order for the communication process to go properly. Grice
divides the cooperative principle into four maxims based on the
cooperative principle: quantity, quality, relevance, and manner.

B. Types of Maxim
In general, there are four types of Conversational Maxim
proposed by Grice: Maxim of Quantity, Maxim of Quality,
Maxim of Relation, and Maxim of Manner.
1. Maxim of Quantity
According to the quantity maxim, we ought to try to
make our contribution as instructive as possible and
nothing more. Intuitively, it appears logical to suppose that
communicators aim to convey sufficient but not excessive
information. Consider statements that appear to give more
or less information than we may expect. Grice (1975) states
make the information you provide as informative as possible
(for the purposes of the current exchange) and make what
you have to say no more informative than necessary, as
example:

[1] $ 'R \RX NQRZ ZKHUH H[DFWO\ 'LWD·V KRXVH"

B: Yes, you just need to go straight in Melati street,

67
 UNIT

8 IMPLICATURES

A. Definition of Implicatures
In conducting conversation, we cannot always literally
rely on the said utterances to infer the message being delivered
by the speakers because what the speakers say does not always
represent what they implicate (Grice, 1989). Clark (2021) stated
that there is a distinction on what the speakers communicate
directly versus what they communicate indirect. In order to
successfully comprehend the message (whether it is direct or
indirect), we need to decode both the linguistic and contextual
hints and make inferences based on those hints (Taguchi, 2013).
Thus, for the speaker and the listener to have the same
background knowledge is a crucial thing. Furthermore, when
the listener hears an utterance, they should assume that the
speaker is following the cooperative principles of
communication and is intending in communicating something
´PRUH WKDQ MXVW ZKDW WKH ZRUGV PHDQµ <XOH

B. Types of Implicatures
In general, implicatures are categorized into two:
conventional and conversational implicatures.
1. Conventional Implicatures
Grice (1975) suggested that the conventional (lexical)
meaning of the utterances alone is enough to help us
knowing the context being implicated. By that means, even
without a knowledge on the circumstances, we can already
make a conclusion on what the speaker means through our

78
 UNIT

9 POLITENESS

A. Definition of Politeness

According to Yule (1996), politeness is an interpersonal

system that is formed to give opportunities for people to interact
and reduce the potential for conflict and confrontation in social
interaction. Furthermore, Cruse (2006) points out that politeness is
a concern to minimize the negative effects and maximize positive
HIIHFWV RI ZKDW RQH VD\V RQ RWKHUV· IHHOLQJV

In addition, Brown and Levinson (1987) state politeness is

a form of language behaviour that allows the continuation of
communication that transpires among people. Furthermore, they
DOVR PHQWLRQ WKDW SROLWHQHVV LV ´D JUHDW GHDO RI ZKDW LV VDLG DQG
what is implicated can be contributed to politeness, so that concern
with the representational function of a language should be
VXSSOHPHQWHG ZLWK DWWHQWLRQ WR WKH VRFLDO IXQFWLRQV RI ODQJXDJH µ
(pp. 2-3). Moreover, Chapman (2011) points out that the term
politeness is used to represent behaviour that exhibits respect and
consideration towards other people, and also ways of interacting
to avoid rudeness.

Furthermore, Leech (1980 as cited in Watts, 2003) claims

that politeness as a strategic way to avoid conflict; this can be
measured from the degree of effort that people put in order to
avoid conflict, and the establishment of courtesy toward others. To

94
 UNIT

10 FACE

A. Definition of Face
Face theory was first introduced by the sociologist Erving
Goffman. Goffman (1955 as cited in Adistana et al., 2021)
explains that face is a self-image that a person wants to build
when interacting socially with others. Furthermore, according
to Brown and Levinson (1987), the face is a self-image that
every individual in society wants to claim. Moreover, Yule
(2010) states that the face is a public self-image that
encompasses the emotions and social sense of an individual.
Therefore, it leads a person to hope that society recognizes their
face. In addition, Watts (2003) points out that face is a process of
conceptualizing one's self-image through the understanding of
others during social interactions.
From the explanations of several experts above, it can be
concluded that the face is a self-image that everyone has. It is
closely related to the emotions and social environment of these
people. By having a self-image, a person expects other people to
be able to recognize the self-image they want to show when
interacting with that person. In addition, everyone also has
expectations that their faces will be appreciated by society.

B. Types of Face
Yule (1996) notes that there are two types of face
consisted of positive face and negative face.
1. Positive Face
Positive face is a desire to be accepted in society or
certain groups and to be connected with it so that a

126
258