Exploring the Communicative Functions of Pragmatic Vagueness as a Discursive Strategy

Yu Shi

Southwest University, Chongqing, China.

DOI: 10.4236/ojml.2015.53018                

Abstract

The acts of human beings are usually guided by our purposes. To meet our purposes, we deliberately take different strategies. It is the same case in verbal communication. In communication, vague language has been widely applied as a discursive strategy to achieve speaker’s communicative purpose. We usually adopt different vague languages in order to achieve different communicative purposes. We call this discursive strategy pragmatic vagueness, which is different from the vagueness of language. The latter is an intrinsic feature of some languages themselves while the former is used as a strategy in communication and heavily influenced by our communicative purposes, therefore, to some degree, indicating the language using ability of the speaker. Thus it is necessary to explore the communicative functions of pragmatic vagueness for achieving communicative purpose. By examining the examples mainly in daily usage, this thesis intends to explore what communicative functions pragmatic vagueness has, how its functions are achieved and why people tend to do it in this way, and to analyze how speakers’ goals are accomplished by making use of vague languages.

Keywords

Pragmatic Vagueness, Communicative Purpose, Discursive Strategy, Communicative Function

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Gu, Y. G. (1989). An Outline of Conversational Rhetoric. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2, 8-15.
[2]	He, Z. R. (1990) Analysis of Pragmatic Vagueness. Journal of Foreign Languages, 3, 28-32.
[3]	Hu, F. Z. (2005) A Study of Legal Language Based on the Theory of “Speech Act”. Journal of East China Normal University, 1, 91-92.
[4]	Leech, G. N. (1983). Principle of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
[5]	Levinson, S. C. (2001). Pragmatics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[6]	Liao, M. Z. (2003) A Study of Forensic Question—Response and Its Interaction. Beijing: Law Press.
[7]	Liao, M. Z. (2005) “Skopos Rule” and Skopos Analysis—New Ways to Explore Pragmatic Study. Rhetoric Learning, 3, 2-3.
[8]	Tao, Y. (1993) The Purpose of Communication and the Function of Discourse. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, 2, 6-7.
[9]	Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. London: Longman.
[10]	Xia, Y. (1994) Analysis of Language Culture. Foreign Language Research, 6, 7-8
[11]	Zhang, Q. (1999) Fuzzy Semantics. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press.