Pragmatic meaning of the word. The meaning of the word pragmatic Pragmatic meaning

Pragmatic meaning

specific perception of information contained in a linguistic utterance on the part of various recipients and groups of recipients. Pragmatic meaning is determined by pragmatic relations.

Explanatory translation dictionary. - 3rd edition, revised. - M.: Flinta: Science. L.L. Nelyubin. 2003.

See what “pragmatic meaning” is in other dictionaries:

The relationship between a sign and the person using the sign...

The same as the pragmatic meaning of the sign... Explanatory translation dictionary

PRAGMATICS- (ancient Greek pragmatos action) a section of semiotics that studies the relationship between signs and their users in a specific speech situation. We can say that P. is the semantics of language in action. Charles Sanders Peirce first wrote about P. in the 19th century, and its main... ... Encyclopedia of Cultural Studies

Rating category- – a set of multi-level linguistic units, united by evaluative semantics and expressing the author’s positive or negative attitude to the content of speech. In general linguistic terms, O. implies the value aspect of the meaning of linguistic expressions... ... Stylistic encyclopedic dictionary of the Russian language

Pragmatics- (from Greek πρᾶγμα, gen. p. πρᾶγματος matter, action) area of ​​research in semiotics and linguistics, which studies the functioning of linguistic signs in speech. The term “pragmatics” was introduced in the late 30s. 20th century C. W. Morris as a title... ... Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary

Kadare, Ismail- Ismail Kadare Ismail Kadare Date of birth ... Wikipedia

Ismail Kadare- Ismail Kadare Ismail Kadare (Albian: Ismail Kadare, spelling variant Ismail Kadare; born January 28, 1936, Albania) is the largest Albanian prose writer and poet, who has gained worldwide fame and has been translated into major world languages. Contents 1... ...Wikipedia

Referential meanings and translation

SEMANTIC CORRESPONDENCES

Type V equivalence

characterized by the maximum degree of similarity between the content of the original and the translation that can exist between texts in different languages.

I saw him at the theater. - I saw him in the theater.

The house was sold for 10 thousand dollars. - The house was sold for 10 thousand dollars.

The relationship between originals and translations of this type is characterized by:

1) high degree of parallelism in the structural organization of the text;

2) maximum correlation of the lexical composition: in the translation it is possible to indicate correspondence to all significant words of the original;

3) preservation in translation of all main parts of the original content.

However, often due to detailing or, conversely, generalization, the translator fails to fully preserve the meaning of one or another original translation unit.

I. Value Types

1. Referential meaning

2. Interlingual meaning

3. Pragmatic meaning

II. Degree of value retention

1. Full compliance

2. Partial match

3. Lack of compliance

In modern semiotics, it is customary to talk about three main types of meaning: referential, pragmatic and linguistic.

Objects, processes, qualities, phenomena of reality, denoted by signs, are usually called referents of the sign, and the relationship between the sign and its referent is the referential meaning of the sign.

Others used in scientific literature terms: “denotative”, “conceptual” or “subject-logical” meaning. In this case, the referent of a sign, as a rule, is not a separate, individual, single object, process, etc., but a whole set of homogeneous objects, processes, phenomena, etc. Referential meanings are the most translatable.

The main problem of transmitting referential meanings expressed in the source text is the discrepancy between the range of meanings inherent in the units of the foreign language and the TL.

The predominant role of referential meanings is typical for scientific and technical literature.

Pragmatic meaning– this is the relationship between the linguistic sign and the participants in the speech process, i.e. speaking or writing and listening or reading. (Other terms used are “connotative meaning”, “emotive meaning”, “stylistic” or “emotional” coloring.)

People who use the signs of language are by no means indifferent to them - they invest in them their subjective attitude towards these signs, and through them - towards the referents themselves, denoted by these signs. Thus, the Russian words are “eyes”, “eyes” and “peepers”; “to rest”, “to sleep” and “to sleep” have the same referential meanings, but they differ in the subjective relations that exist between these signs and the people using these signs. These subjective relations (emotional, expressive, stylistic, etc.), which are transferred through signs to referents, are called pragmatic relations.

As a rule, the pragmatic meanings of linguistic signs are the same for the entire group of people speaking a given language.

To a lesser extent than referential meanings, pragmatic meanings are transferable during translation. The fact is that the attitude of different human groups to these objects, concepts and situations may be different.

For fiction, especially for lyric poetry, pragmatic relationships are often leading and fundamental. This is explained by the fact that the translator is often forced to sacrifice the transfer of referential meanings in order to preserve the incomparably more essential for of this type texts, information contained in the pragmatic (emotional, etc.) meanings expressed in it.

pragmatic

Greek reliable; factually based and directly applied. Pragmatic history, presented in this order, is applied, applied directly to the case. Pragmatic sanction, especially important, government decree, e.g. m. about the expulsion of the Jesunts from Spain, Charles III.

Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. D.N. Ushakov

pragmatic

pragmatic, pragmatic; as a short forms of use pragmatic, pragmatic, pragmatic (book).

Adj. to pragmatism based on pragmatism. Pragmatic philosophy. Pragmatic presentation of history.

Being a practical instrument of something, having practical use. Pragmatic speech (as opposed to artistic speech). Pragmatic sanction (historical) - the name of certain

New explanatory dictionary of the Russian language, T. F. Efremova.

Encyclopedic Dictionary, 1998

Examples of the use of the word pragmatic in literature.

America, with its lack of spirituality, pragmatic division and inability to create genuine aesthetic values.

In particular, this applies to the position on the role of practice, a position that some modern distorters of Marxism are trying to interpret as supposedly expressing and justifying pragmatic point of view.

The Meiji restoration were orthodox Westerners, but their Westernism was not ideological, but purely pragmatic.

In other words, recognizing that transcendentalist philosophy has failed, if not theoretically, then as a basis for life orientations, as a justification for the historical existence of man, it is necessary to put it to the test pragmatic the possibilities offered by a pluralistic perspective.

I was naive pragmatically considering literary criticism only as the development of recipes for one’s own literary needs.

We advocated for the immediate election of the President at the congress rather according to pragmatic, than for reasons of principle, and the constitutional norm provided for popular elections.

Let me, ladies and gentlemen, make a thesis that suggests that it was not electricity that changed me, but there is no doubt that I have changed, for when I woke up in the hospital, with my burnt hands bandaged, my fingers red as tomatoes, and smeared with ointments, I am not at all was, as one might expect, overwhelmed with shame and remorse from what happened at the flea market, but rather showed excessive calm and pragmatic an assessment of both the event itself and my resulting injuries.

The subjects of any theory, feasible in a certain area, is a logical subject, and therefore, its goal and organizing link is the concept of some well-defined formalism, the results of the constructed pragmatic system, arranged in it and suits it itself due to the fact that thinking builds its syntax and grammar, moving along the canon of logic.

But along with pragmatic We also find another motivation, one that seeks to regain the ontological justification of humanity, towards which the old Humanism, rooted in the religious tradition, was oriented.

The priesthood of Muad'Dib, the so-called Quizarat, owns another five percent, pragmatic concession of the Great Houses, thanks to Dune's possession of priceless melange.

The advice to place definitions of only simple, but not compound, constants in the header file is fully explained pragmatic reason.

Carrying out his thoughts in a comparative historical light, the compiler of the code was not afraid to introduce into the chronicle presentation pragmatic disorder, united under one year different-time, but homogeneous phenomena.

These attempts, constructive or deconstructive, skeptical and dogmatic, symbolic and pragmatic, create a new, different from previous eras, iconography of eros.

The greatest gift of love, which is intimate intimacy between lovers, is spoken of routinely, one might say, pragmatically.

From modern pragmatic science Kabbalah differs in that it initially rejects material objects as such tools.

In this section we will consider the approaches of various researchers to the question of the pragmatic meaning of a word and its components, which, as we believe, are inherent not only in common nouns, but also proper names- the same direct participants in communicative activity, full-fledged elements of utterance, capable of acting as the basis, a key element of the message (communication), directing and organizing the communication process.

Connotations as part of the pragmatics of words

An analysis of the works shows that many researchers equate the pragmatic aspect of the meaning of a word with its connotations, therefore it seems justified to begin considering the components of the pragmatics of a word with connotations.

This term has acquired an undesirable ambiguity in linguistics, which creates confusion in the consideration of this phenomenon. Traditionally, connotation is understood as evaluative, emotional (emotive) or stylistic coloring linguistic unit of a usual or occasional nature. IN in a broad sense connotation is any component that complements the lexical (material) meaning of a linguistic unit and gives it an expressive function (Teliya 1997).

V.N. Telia considers the connotative aspect of meaning to be “the mediastinum of pragmatic information in linguistic entities” (Telia 1991: 27), which consists in the expression of the emotive-evaluative and stylistically marked attitude of the subject of speech to reality.

According to E.G. Belyaevskaya, the connotation can be briefly defined as emotional-evaluative component lexical meaning. In her understanding, the connotative aspect is socially fixed, common to all native speakers, rightfully occupies a place in the structure of meaning and is to a certain extent pragmatic (along with the connotative aspect, the author highlights the pragmatic aspect, see 1.6.Z.). It includes several components, among which the researcher includes (1) emotiveness 1; (2) evaluativeness and (3) intensity. In the semantics of lexical units, specific elements of connotation are combined in various ways, creating the originality of the connotative meaning of specific lexical units (Belyaevskaya 1987: 50-52).

This understanding of connotation raises objections among some researchers for two reasons. The first of them is that the breadth of the term, the historically arose ambiguity (six or more meanings are distinguished), explained by its birth in the depths of several disciplines at once, should not be preserved within one discipline - linguistics, which for almost all meanings of the term "connotation" has more detailed and logically clearer concepts (see Apresyan 1995a). Second

Wed. "<...>emotional components cannot appear in a word without evaluation, because any emotion is evaluative in nature, although not every evaluation is necessarily emotional" (Stermin 1985:71) the reason follows from the first and is related to the fact that connotation, according to a number of authors (Yu.D Apresyan, L.P. Krysin, I.A. Melchuk, A.A. Ufimtseva, etc.) is not directly included in the lexical meaning of the word. These authors understand connotation as an assessment of the object of reality, legalized in a given language, the name of which is this word . The connotations of a lexeme are insignificant, but stable signs of the concept it expresses, which embody the assessment of the corresponding object or fact of reality accepted in a given linguistic community. According to Yu. D. Apresyan, connotations are not directly included in the lexical meaning of the word and are not consequences or conclusions from him (Apresyan 1995a: 159).It is the insignificant, but stable, i.e., features that repeatedly manifest themselves in the language that form the connotations of a lexeme, which are recorded in the pragmatic zone of its dictionary entry (ibid.: 160).

The author provides a number of experimental tests to distinguish between connotations and evaluative elements of meaning. Yu.D. Apresyan admits that experimental criteria for connotation are unreliable and can give anti-intuitive results; intuitive assessments themselves can also diverge, but this does not mean that the very concept of connotation is meaningless (ibid.: 162).

A similar point of view on the nature of connotations is expressed by J. Yule (Yule 1994). Understanding connotations as semantic associations, he contrasts them with the conceptual meaning of a word, understood as the main, integral components of meaning, and gives the following example: the word needle has the meaning of “thin, sharp, metal instrument” (thin, sharp , steel instrument). In addition, the word "needle" may cause the speaker to associate or connotate "painful" every time he encounters the word. This connotation, however, is not part of the meaning of the word needle (ibid.: 92). An interesting interpretation of connotations is presented in the concept of A.A.

Ufimtseva (1986; 1988). The word is considered by the author as the main

a cognitive unit, which, in addition to grammatical (intrasystem) and lexical (material) meaning, also has a pragmatic meaning, “appearing in the form of various connotations (evaluative, cultural-historical, national-geographical and other knowledge) accumulated by native speakers as a result of their perception of different aspects outside world"(Ufimtseva 1988: 118). Of interest here is that the author introduces into the pragmatic meaning not only evaluative, but, most importantly, cultural-historical, national-geographical and some other types of connotations. Deriving connotations (pragmatic meaning) from composition of lexical meaning, A.A. Ufimtseva at the same time recognizes “two-part (neutral and stylistically (pragmatically) colored) information of many words that have a material meaning” (ibid.: 119).

Some researchers generally refuse to use the terms “connotation” and “connotative aspect”, replacing them with the term “implicational”. The concept of implical was developed in most detail by M.V. Nikitin (Nikitin 1974; 1988; 1996). In his concept (see 1.6.2.), the structure of lexical meaning can combine either both types of content - cognitive and pragmatic, or be limited to one of them. The structure of the cognitive component of lexical meaning is formed by subject-logical connections emanating from its intensional core and involving implicational features in the periphery of its content. There are strong implicational, free implicational and negative implicational (non-implicational). By implicational, the scientist understands the “force field” of the semantics of a name, noting at the same time that there is no hard boundary between the intension and the implication (Nikitin 1974: 35). 1 The author especially notes that the implication of signs may not necessarily be true, but also false or doubtful. Thus, all stereotypical associations (i.e., connotations), true or false, traditionally associated with some class are connected to the implical: the fox is cunning, the hare is cowardly, etc. (Nikitin 1988: 62).

If with regard to the basic, initial meanings of words, the understanding of connotation among different researchers fundamentally diverges, then with regard to secondary meanings there is a certain unanimity.

It is believed that connotations are materialized in figurative meanings, metaphors and comparisons, derived words, phraseological units, certain types of syntactic constructions, semantic areas of action of some units relative to others. Yu.D. Apresyan calls these processes “linguistic manifestation of connotations” (Apresyan 1995a), V.N. Telia defines such components of the meaning of a linguistic unit in its secondary function as “connotation in in the narrow sense"(Telia 1997). In connotations, therefore, an important creative aspect of language is manifested: they are one of the potential sources of its semantic and lexical renewal (Apresyan 1995a: 169).