I'm thinking about looking at these posts:
Taxes! - adjacent pairs
Movie Reviews - performative verbs
Tautologies galore! - Place name tautologies
Trees - sense relations across languages
]]>Just wondering about when everyone could get together so that we could work on our group project. I suppose it's about time that we get to working on it!
]]>Without question, one of the cutest shows on TV these days. Also a very good example of many of the things we talk about in class:
There is a narrator that often comes in and explains the words of the characters, such as here:
Chuch: what's wrong?
Ned: nothing.
Narrator: He said nothing, meaning I accidentally killed your father and I want to tell you but I can't tell you.
This really sounds like the analyses we've been doing in class.
Also, there is maxim flauting for politeness:
Candy store owner: Do you like excitement?
Ned: I think excitement is better than a lot of things.
He avoids the truth in order to be polite here.
Just thought there were some really good examples here!
]]>I saw a commercial the other day about taxes and it really fit with what we've been talking about with adjacent pairs this week!
A guy walks up to a girl and asks: do you know what time it is?
she replies (yelling): yes, of course I know what time it is!!!!
this is of course not the expected response, but she is upset because she has yet to get her taxes finished. It was pretty funny actually.
]]>The 2nd part of the principle of relevance says, as Dr. Meyers put on the board, "Every communicative act carries with it the utterer's belief in its optimal relevance." What about when someone is trying to be as ambigous and obscure as possible. I don't have a good example, but sometimes people try to be just as confusing as possible and bring in statements and ideas out of left field. Does that constitute optimal relevance, even by the speaker's beliefs? Or is it relevant because they are trying to be confusing? Thoughts?
]]>Yesterday we talked a little about performative verbs again. One example we saw was "regret" and "I regretfully decline..." I think many times when we use this phrase regret is not necessarily a performative verb. For a performative verb to actually be that we have to mean it right. Often when we say/write "I regretfully decline..." we don't actually feel regret; it's just a polite way to excuse ourselves from doing something, which we may be thrilled not to have to do. Also, in this example "regret" is used as an adverb. Can an adverb be said to be a performative verb? Is there such a category of performative adverb?
]]>While watching a bit of tv, I saw a few previews for some movies. I quickly noticed that these frequently use performative verbs:
Rolling Stones declares this the best movie of the year
'someone else' raves that...
I was just astounded at how they stood out in these previews.
]]>When Dr. Myers was talking about the wedding she attended last week, she mentioned that a lot of people try to change their vows to make them their own and such. This got me thinking about church services and how, with many denominations, the same thing is repeated over and over each week - so much so that it has seemingly lost its meaning. I feel like the rise of alternative church services has followed the same tradition as alternative vows have in order to give back meaning to what is being said.
After so much repetition of language, it seems that more things that are signifigant in our society would have lost meaning just as these have seemingly. Why do you think that these stand out? Also, do any other instances come to mind of long phrases, or even speeches being stated so much that they loose their meaning?
]]>I find the agreement maxim interesting. This maxim is (at times) is basically just a lie. The agreement maxim says we should minimize disagreement and maximize agreement with the hearer. So let's pretend someone gives me an idea. I reply with "I think that's a good idea, but what do you think of this..." Basically what we often mean with a response like this is "I think your idea sucks and mine is better." I wonder how many friends we would keep if we just stopped following the politeness principle all together.
]]>So I've decided that flouting maxims is much more interesting than following them. I'm glad people flout them. If no one flouted these maxims we would have some very boring conversations. Simple sarcasm, irony, and joking often is the result of these maxims being flouted.
I like how the maxim of manner is violated (there is definitely ambiguity w/ the use of "paper" here- toilet paper vs. writing paper) in the below example found at: http://hkjtefl.tesolteachers.org/2005-Nunn-Humor.html.