texts but the history and context associated with these texts. How such texts can be unpacked and understood as “reality constructors” id the point and purpose of
this volume. Both are worthly, timely, and well served.
16
The connectiona between language form and social and cultural patterns. People detect these
indexical meanings because speakers provide verbal and nonverbal, behavioural ‘cues’ that suggest a fit between utterances and contextual spaces in which they
become meaningful.
17
B. Pragmatics
Pragmatics is the branch of the study of that language that deals with the contribution of the context to the production, structure and interpretation of
utterance. According to Dascal, everybody agrees that context cannot be neglected in the study of language that has to deal with the contribution of the context to the
production, structure and interpretation of utterance
18
. According to F.X. Nadar, pragmatics is a branch of linguistics that study
language to have a communication in certain situation. F. X. Nadar said that Morris 1938;, Crystal 1980: 178, also Yule gives four definitions about
pragmatics; first, pragmatic is the study of speaker meaning; second, pragmatic is the study of contextual meaning; third, pragmatic is the study of how more gets
communicated than is said; forth, pragmatic is the study of the expression of
16
Ibid p.iv
17
Jan Blommaert. Discourse A Critical Introduction. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. 2005 p. 41
18
Marcelo Dascal, Possibilities and limitations of pragmatics Amsterdam: John Benjamin B. V., 1981, p.1541.
relative distance.
19
Yule gives four definitions about pragmatics; first, pragmatic is the study of speaker meaning; second, pragmatic is the study of contextual meaning; third,
pragmatic is the study of how more gets communicated than is said; forth, pragmatic is the study of the expression of relative distance.
20
In other book, Yule said when we read or hear pieces of language, we normally try to understand not only what the words mean, but what the writer or
speaker of those words intended to convey. The study of ‘intended speaker
meaning’ is called pragmatics.
21
According to Levinson, pragmatics is the study of language usage
22
. Yan defined pragmatics as the systematic study of meaning by virtue of, or dependent
on, the use of language. The central topics of inquiry of pragmatics include implicature, presupposition, speech acts, and diexis
23
. However Soenjono Dardjowidjojo and Unika Atma Jaya in their book Psikolinguistik Pengantar
Pemahaman Bahasa Manusia said that pragmatics always looks other aspects in communication like word knowledge, relation between the speaker and the hearer
or the third speaker, and kinds of act utterance. So as a focus of pragmatic study is how word uttered or said, not what the meaning of the words. Because of that
study of pragmatic is always tight with speaker, hearer, and context of utterance.
24
According to Griffiths pragmatics is concerned with the use of these tools in
19
Loc Cit, p. 3
20
Ibid, p. 3
21
Yule, George, The Study of Language. 2006: Cambridge University Press. p. 127
22
Stepen C. Levinson, Pragmatics Cambrige: University Press, 1983, p. 5.
23
Yan Huang , Pragmatics, New York: Oxford University Press, 1996, pp. 3-4.
24
Soenjono Dardjowidjojo. Psikolinguistik, Pengantar Pemahaman Bahasa Manusia. Jakarta: yayasan obor Indonesia p. 26.
meaningful communication. Pragmatics is about the interaction of semantic knowledge with our knowledge of the world, taking into account contexts of
use.
25
The advantage of studying language via pragmatics is that one can talk about people’s intended meaning, theirs assumptions their purposes or goals and
the kinds of actions for example, requests that they are performing when they speak.
26
C. Implicature 1. Definition
