2.4 Discourse, Pragmatics and Meaning
In this sub point, I see the definition of pragmatics from the point of views of Cook 1989 and Yule 1996.
In the book entitled Discourse, Cook firstly defines pragmatics before presenting what discourse is. But this sub point tries to present it vice versa. Looking
to the definition of pragmatics we cannot derive too far from the definition of discourse. As mentioned before, discourse is the totality of the interaction between
the elements in physical, social and psychological world over long periods Cook, 1989. It covers the whole elements of time, the world social and physical,
language, and thought knowledge. it is somehow like a moving film, revealing itself in time and sometimes over a long period of time. Pragmatics is slightly different
with discourse, it is “a means of relating stretches of language to the physical, social, and psychological world in which they take place” Cook, 1989. Pragmatics covers
narrower area than discourse, it examines how meaning develops at a given point, thus it is more specific than discourse in the elements of time, the world, language
and thought. Yule 1996:3 concerns with the definition of Pragmatics in four areas. The first,
Pragmatics is the study of speaker meaning. It is concerned with the study of meaning communicated by the speaker or the writer and interpreted by the listener or
the reader. Consequently, it has more to do with the analysis of what people mean by their utterances, than what the words or phrases in those utterances might mean by
themselves. The second, Pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning. This study involves of the interpretation and the influence of what people say in certain context.
The speakers must considerate the organization of what they want to say in accordance with who they are talking to, where, when and under what circumstances.
The third, Pragmatics is the study of how more gets communicated than is said. This approach explores of how the listener can make inference before he makes
interpretation of what the speaker‟s intended meaning. The fourth, Pragmatics is the
study of the expression of relative distance. It deals with the closeness, whether it is physical, social, or conceptual, between the speaker and the listener. Then the speaker
determines from this distant, how much needs to be said. After looking at the definition of pragmatics and discourse above, I can see the
similarity between these two subjects that they happen in certain context. While discourse covers quite large context, pragmatics covers smaller context. And they are
related each other. Meaning always does exist in context and these two things connect each other as
Christiansen Dahl 2005 state “The meaning of a sentence depends on context and at the same time affects that context representing the knowledge about the world
collected from a discourse. ” From this statement I learn that pragmatics, discourse
and meaning are connected each other. When I learn pragmatics and discourse, I learn about meaning in context.
To create the bridge between discourse, pragmatics and the meaning in context, pragmatic approach was suggested to use. Pragmatic approach helped to identify and
to analyze the context from various and complete way as Hymes 1964 proposed features of context like addressor speaker or writer who produces the utterance,
addressee hearer or reader who is the recipient of the utterance, audienceoverhearer, topic what‟s talked about, setting where the event is situated
in place and time, channel by speech or writing, signing, smoke signal, code what language or dialect, message form chat, debate, sermon, fairy tale, sonnet, love
letter, etc, event a sermon or prayer may be part of a church service, key involves evaluation: was it a good sermon a pathetic explanation, purpose what did
the participants intend should come about as a result of the communicative event At last, using pragmatic approach fully helped to cover the meaning behind the
context in the infringement of the cooperative principle on the movie The Negotiator.
2.5 Gricean Cooperative Principle and the Infringement