Scribd
Upload
584 views

A Three-Dimensional Model of Grammar.

The document discusses a three-dimensional model of grammar consisting of form, meaning, and use (pragmatics). It provides examples of how grammatical choices can impact meaning and appropriateness depending on the context. Specifically, it notes that choosing passive voice or tense can subtly influence how the message is received without being semantically wrong. Mastering grammar requires understanding how forms relate to meaning and pragmatic use in communication.

Uploaded by

Nata Vladi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
584 views

A Three-Dimensional Model of Grammar.

The document discusses a three-dimensional model of grammar consisting of form, meaning, and use (pragmatics). It provides examples of how grammatical choices can impact meaning and appropriateness depending on the context. Specifically, it notes that choosing passive voice or tense can subtly influence how the message is received without being semantically wrong. Mastering grammar requires understanding how forms relate to meaning and pragmatic use in communication.

Uploaded by

Nata Vladi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

A three-dimensional model of grammar. Form.

Meaning. Use. Pragmatics.

Most analyses of language arrange the subsystems of language in an


acscending hierarchy: phonemes, morphemes, words, syntax, and so forth.
Such an arrangement is understandable, because phonemes are constituitive
of morphems, which are constituitive of words, and so on.

Nevertheless, some linguists have decided to present the parts in a non-


hierarchical fashion because they want to emphasise the dynamic interplay
of the subsystems.

They treat the morphological and syntactic subsystems as a resourse for


making meaning in a context-sensitive manner.

The first dimension. Form.


The first dimention, the forms of language, consist of the visible or audible
units: the sounds ( or signs in sign language), written symbols, inflectional
morphemes, function words and syntactic structures.

The second dimension. Meaning. Semantics.


The second dimension is meaning. Semantics is the study of meaning encoded
in language; we may think of it here as the essential denotation of a
decontextualised form, what we will learn about a particular form if we were to
consult a dictionary.

Although the expression of meaning is distributed across all three dimensions,


its prototipical units are words ( lexemes), derivational morphemes such as
non-, and multy-word lexicogrammatical units – multiword strings that are
semantically complete but have fused into a single form, such as “and so forth”
Some language teaching syllabus developers might want to include general
categories of meaning, called “notions', in this dimension as well. Notions deal
with, for example, space ( location, distance, motion, size) and time
( indications of time, duration, sequence).
It may be more helpful also to think of semantics as the study of meaning
potential, because we are well aware that the meaning of a word or
lexicogrammatical string that is actually realised in communication may be
quite different from its dictionary definition. For instance “Good Morning” is
typically a pleasant and appropriate greeting in the morning. If you were to
use “Good morning” to greet someone in the afternoon, someone might think
you committed a semantic error, because you shoud have said “Good
afternoon”. However, the meaning in a word or lexicogrammatical string is only
a potential meaning. We could have deliberately used the same greeting of
“Good morning” in the afternoon, fully aware of the time, but using it
nonetheless to teasingly greet a person who has just got up.
Using the greeting as mild sarcasm illustrates the third dimension of language,
pragmatics.
Pragmatics is not the meaning encoded in the language, but what people
mean by the language they use. The units in this dimension are social
functions ( such as promising, inviting, agreeing, disagreeing, and apologising)
and discourse patterns ( such as those that contribute to the cohesion of texts)

Thus, being able to use grammar structures does not only mean using the
forms accurately; it means using them meaningfully (semantics) and
appropriately (pragmatics) as well. Knowledge that there are three dimensions
enriches our understanding of language in communication.

Linguists now make a convincing argument for grammar to be seen as a skill


rather than, purely, a competence. They call this skill – grammaring -
exploiting the grammatical resource to match the meaning, the dynamic
process of relating form and structure to meaningful units. The selection of
one construction over another is informed pragmatically.

In situations of contrast between native and non-native speakers of a


language, pragmatic errors are insidious in that they often lead proficient
speakers of a language to misjudge the intentions of less proficient speakers.
Particularly if the speakers are fluent and accurate, listeners do not realise that
a pragmatic error has been committed, instead misconstruing what was
intended by the speaker and sometimes judging the speaker as a result,
making false inferences about the intentions of others.

Some examples of pragmatic effect of grammatical choice:

Consider the following short dialogue:

Anne: Jane has just bought a Volvo


John: Maureen has one.
Anne: John, you've got to stop talking about Maureen as if you were stil going
together. You broke up three months ago!

One pragmatic effect of grammatical choice is that we convey a particular


attitude depending on the grammatical forms ( among other things) that we
choose to use. Johb could have stated the same propositional content using
the past tense, even though the case may be that Maureen still owns the
Volvo. If he had done so, he might have avoided the rebuke from ann because
his use of past tense would have made the relationship with Maureen appear
psycologically distant. Either the past tense or the present tense is “correct”
here, but deciding which to use, while not necessarily a conscious choice, can
clearly have an impact on one's listener.

Take, for example, the passive voice. The form and the meaning of the passive
should not be difficult to learn. Many languages haveways to shift the focus in
an utterance, and the passive exists just to do the same in English, shifting the
focus from the agent of the action to the receiver. This leaves us with the use
dimension. The greatest challenge is learning to use the passive voice
appropriately. The passive can sound more impersonal that the active which
can be a good or a bad thing, depending on your intentions. Compare the two
sentences:

You told us there would be a bigger discount.


We were told there would be a bigger discount.

They are both “correct”, but the second one sounds less confrontational.

One more example – english existential ”there”. The name of the structure
gives us a clue about its meaning. It is used to introduce new information.
Knowing this explaines why, if you asked someone for a writing implement
while you were on the pnone, you would be pleased to hear

There is a pencil on the table

because you would have received the information you needed in an


appropriate form, but you wouldn't be pleased to be told

A pencil is on the table

because with this form comes the pragmatic inplication that this is not new
information and that you shouldnot have had to be told. It would be as much
irritating as helpful, although both sentences are grammatically “correct”

You might also like