<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#333333">
If I (as one of the two founding editors of the
Journal of Pragmatics) may comment on Gabriella's contribution:<br>
<br>
The Journal of Pragmatics always considered its
own view on pragmatics <i>very</i> broad. <br>
<br>
Let me quote from the original Editorial of 1977:<br>
<br>
"From the “outside”, one could define linguistic pragmatics from the
perspective of<br>
the concrete practice of <i>language</i> (i.e. with regard to the
actual use, and users, of<br>
language), as well as from the point of view of the concrete practice
of <i>linguistics</i><br>
(use and users again).- From the "inside”, the science of the use of
language can be<br>
viewed essentially as the study of the conditions that govern the use
of language."<br>
<br>
<br>
"A broad definition of linguistic pragmatics, such as the one presented
above,<br>
bases itself on the study of 'natural’ language, and by that fact, as
we have seen, is<br>
bound to focus on the twofold aspects of (a) the uses (end users) of
language, and<br>
(b) the uses (and users) of linguistics. It should be clear that a
broad scope of this<br>
kind, with its focus on pragmatic linguistics both as an object of
linguistic actitivity<br>
(the uses and users of language) and as a way of doing linguistics (the
uses and users<br>
of linguistics) will entail a similar broad scope, as well as a similar
focus, in describing<br>
a periodical such as our Journal of Pragmatics." (Haberland & Mey
1977)<br>
<br>
I understand that Stephen Levinson agreed with this characterization of
the <i>Journal</i>,<br>
when he some 15 years later, referred to "our" broad kind of pragmatics
as "Continental" pragmatics.<br>
I have, in turn, taken the liberty of referring to his kind of
pragmatics as "Insular", as a purely<br>
geographical term (in my Guangzhou lectures on Pragmatics of 2006). (I
hope he won't mind.)<br>
<br>
Of course, as Jacob Mey and I remarked in a later Editorial, one thing
is the scope that the Founders<br>
and Editors had in mind, another what the contributors make of it.<br>
<br>
So let me repeat: the Journal of Pragmatics considers as its scope the
study of human language as an<br>
activity in its broadest sense, and we hope that our potential
contributors will do the same.<br>
<br>
Hartmut Haberland<br>
Founding Editor<br>
<br>
<br>
GABRIELLA MODAN wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:fc83e96652cb.47eaf2e6@osu.edu" type="cite">From: "galey
modan" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:gmodan@gmail.com"><gmodan@gmail.com></a><br>
To: "Tahir Wood" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:twood@uwc.ac.za"><twood@uwc.ac.za></a><br>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:56:43 +0100<br>
Subject: Re: Pragmatics and Discourse Studies<br>
Tahir,<br>
<br>
I think the issue here is that there are broader and narrower
definitions of pragmatics, and the Journal of Pragmatics adheres to the
narrower defnition. While in Europe and maybe Latin America (though I'm
not sure of that) pragmatics covers 'language in use' along the lines
that Teun outlined, in the US pragmatics is more narrowly defined as a
study of language meaning in use (so pragmatic meaning as opposed to
semantic meaning), and generally has a more formal orientation. It's
focused more on the mechanics of such phenomena as speech acts, scalar
implicature, signalling of given and new information, presupposition,
etc. In this perspective, interactional processes such as turn-taking
or footing, or other discourse phenomena such as discourse markers,
reported speech, pronoun use, tense variation, or framing would fall
under discourse analysis but not under pragmatics. Although the
_Journal of Pragmatics_ is not an American journal, its take on
pragmatics is more narrow and more formalist than, for example, the
journal _Pragmatics_. From the brief description you've given, it
sounds like a journal like _Discourse Processes_ or _Text_ might be a
good venue for your work.<br>
<br>
best regards,<br>
<br>
Galey<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>