THE IMPORTANCE OF PRAGMATICS FOR UNDERSTANDING METAPHORS

Our life is in constant communication. We communicate every day: primarily using vocal communication. Language is present in every detail of our life. Whatever we express and do is generally through verbal language rather than through sign language or body language.

Language is a cognitive activity that is done with symbols (symbols means a format of knowledge that is characteristics of human-beings that means a process through which the subject captures the aspects of reality through sensory organs in order to understand reality in other words the world where he/she lives. On the other hand, why is it important to take into account this concept about language? It shows and explains that our daily communication is based on how we have captured the aspects of reality in order to understand it. In fact , language cannot be reduced to a tool for

communicating or express ideas, nor as a system of signs , but as a way for Understanding the world , and it does through linguistic codes that translate reality and it makes real in speech.

Having a clearer definition about what language is , and not what its function is or how it is represented(as a system of signs )2 (with an opening parenthesis, there must be a space before the parenthesis) it is concluded

(by whom?) that the language is the abstraction of our reality that

is

expressed in words and these words take part in a real communicative act that shows (there is only one space between words) our communicative competence. In proper English, all paragraphs require at least two sentencesyou are not Jane Austen writing in the eighteenth century.

(This sentence must follow the previous sentence to create a clear understanding of this point; use a transitional qualifier.) This is important for defining what the process of communication is, because it is not only a transmission of information or a sequence of words without sense as it is thought, but messages structured according to grammatical rules. This depends on that language spoken or used in a communication process. The message also shows the intention of the speaker in order to explain that the language is embedded in the social cognition of people. This means that most of the time people use the language in a social context that causes that language to be a way for expressing how we experience the world and not only words individually. (This is a paraphrase from the Spanish edition of Wikipedia.)

If the language (language does not need an initial article) is inserted in a the social cognition of people this means that people use the language as a tool for communicating their ideas according how they have captured reality (this includes cultural aspects )and process is shown through the use of metaphors in our daily communication. This topic will developed in on the next pages. (I find a lot of this at these Spanish websites:

http://www.slideshare.net/raymarmx/abc-de-la-reforma-en-educacin-

primaria-estacin-2

and

here

http://aprendelenguaje.blogspot.com/2007/03/sugerencia-didctica-n-2.html and http://filosofia-del-lenguaje.blogspot.com/2010_03_01_archive.html; it comes from (it is lifted from) the Frenchman Jean Piaget

http://percyacunhavigil.blogspot.com/2011/11/teorias-del-lenguaje.html; psychological studies show conclusively that people write as they speak, and you do not speak like this.)

Language as an abstraction of our reality that is expressed in words (http://www.monografias.com/trabajos15/analogias/analogias.shtml) and

these words take part in a real communicative act that shows our communicative competence. This shows us that most of time we use language in a determine context and this context is involved in a specific culture, in other words how we have experience the world. This is uniquely similar to http://spanishwika.blogspot.com/2009/04/resena-sobre-el-textoextraido-de-el.html -- please write as you speak and do not paraphrase. I have written books on this subject and am familiar with the literature. Please see mevery soon.

The use of language which is studied by pragmatics has become an interesting issue for who are dedicated to the study of language. (I encourage you to stop using www.es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competencia_comunicativa) I am quite familiar with this source) This discipline involves the study of the language in a determined context, in other words pragmatics studies the language in use. 3While semantics deals with the literal meaning (what a word means), what a sentence says literally independent from context. (This

is a fragmented sentence.) Pragmatics deals with what you want to say with that word (the intention of the speaker).
4

Pragmatics also involves: psychological, biological and sociological phenomenon that take part in the use of signs. This means how users use the language what Chomsky calls communicative competence (This is not APA style and makes this an unqualified essay; Norman Chomsky actually calls it linguistic competence as communicative competence appears in Spanish only as communicative competence: http://asian-efljournal.com/sept_05_ac.pdf as the actual term is the creation of Hymes, D. H. (1971). On communicative competence. In J. Pride and J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics. Penguin, 1972; and is developed in the Canadian journal: LIU Ya/Canadian Social Science Vol.4 No.3 2008 80-86. It was taken from my book: Ide, A. F. (1970). Linguistic and communicative competence in the English language. Chicago: Seporo) how users use the language in a real communicative act. The pragmatics is characterized by studying the effects of context. Norman Chomsky is best know for: Chomsky, N. (1975b). Current issues in linguistic theory. The Hague: Mouton. Chomsky, N. (1975c). Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon. Chomsky, N. (2000d). The architecture of language. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Chomsky, N. (2000e). New horizons in the study of language and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. There are several studies about pragmatics. Charles Morris was the first (not true; it was actually first used by Charles Sanders Peirce (who defined it in his pragmatic maxim): Haack, S; Lane, R E (2006). Pragmatism, old & new: selected writings]. Prometheus Books. pp. 1867, and then was developed and used by William James and John Dewey (who gave us cataloging pragmatics for use in cataloging books in libraries): Biesta, G.J.J. & Burbules, N. (2003). Pragmatism and educational research. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield). contemporary philosopher who introduced this term, pragmatics (actually it is discussed by Aristotle (if you read Greek, you will find it at

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus, and should at least cite it) and it comes from the Greek (pragmatikos), that is incorporated in the works of Gilles Deleuze and Flix Guattari who discuss linguistic pragmatics in the fourth chapter of A Thousand Plateaus ("November 20, 1923--Postulates of Linguistics" University of Minnesota Press); APA requires you cite me as I gave you this information since you do not read Greek. Daejin Kim et al. (2002) "The Role of an Interactive Book Reading Program in the Development of Second Language Pragmatic Competence", the Modern Language Journal, Vol. 86, No. 3 (autumn, 2002), pp. 332-348). 5His studies were focused on the science of signs or semiotic. He divided the semiotic into three parts: the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic.

Pragmatics also has an important role for understanding our daily communicative. This means our conversational acts, in other words the communicative act. Moreover, pragmatics deals with the use of language. How people use language in our daily communication.
6

Moreover, Pragmatics is important not only because it studies the language

in use, but also because the pragmatics focuses a part of its study in figurative meaning and how speaker can interpretive it. Moreover, figures are key elements for transmitting implicit information and they are important for theories that pretend to explain what the connection between semantics and pragmatics is (meaning and use) for establishing differences.

Since Aristotle wrote Metaphors have it has been defined as a the use of a

word (metaphors are words and they popularize more academic phrases into simple jargonthey do not designate another realitythat is a bad Spanish translation from the original language) in order to designate another reality that doesnt represent its conventional meaning (what a word means )in other words is the use of a sign instead of another.
8

Moreover, most of people think that metaphors are rhetoric resources used

in poetry as simple comparisons. For example the expression Rose is like a rose or Juan is like lion in part these examples show that there is a connection with the conventional meaning (semantics) however this doesnt happen in all cases, for example expressions as: 9love is a work of art or life is a mirror . These examples show us that most of time metaphors arent rhetoric resources in poetry or have to have connection with its conventional meaning, but a way how people have captured reality and how they experience and do things. Moreover, metaphors structure our conceptual system which is fundamentally metaphorical and nature and also define our reality. The reason for which people use a metaphor in their daily communication is because of metaphors is innate, they reflect how we experience and define our reality.

[that

is

only

true

in

semiotics,

read

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/symbols?s=t and then it is the last definition, not the first) NOTATIONS

1- Eugenio coseriu , introduccin a la lingstica(1993).p.71 2- Eugenio coseriu , introduccin a la lingstica(1993).p.71 3- Graciela reyes, El Abec de la pragmtica (Madrid, 2003).p. 4- Stephen levinson, pragmtica (Cambridge university press, 1983) .p. 5- Stephen levinson , pragmtica ( Cambridge university press , 1983) .p.1 6- Elisa Baena , Graciela reyes , Eduardo urios , ejercicios de pragmtica ii (Madrid , 2000).p.145 7- Mara Escandell, introduccin a la pragmtica (Barcelona, 2002) p.188. 8- George Lakoff , mark Johnson (university of Chicago , 1980).p.39 9- Zoltn Kvecses, introduction to metaphors (Oxford University, 2010). BIBLIOGRAPHY

KVECSES, zoltn.2010.INTRODUCTION TO METAPHORS, Oxford.396 pp. LAKOFF, George and JOHNSEN Mark .2003. METAPHORS WE LIVE BY, London. 193 pp. ESCANDEL-VIDAL, Mara. 1996. INTRODUCCIN A LA PRAGMTICA, Espaa.250pp. MIRANDA, Luis. 1993. LINGSTICA GENERAL, lima

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES TRANSLATION AND INTERPRETATION TITLE

THE IMPORTANCE OF PRAGMATICS FOR UNDERSTANDING METAPHORS

AUTHOR
ANGEL TIMOTEO GOMEZ URIARTE

ADVISORY
ARTHUR FREDERICK IDE

TYPE OF RESEARCH
METAPHORS

AREA OF RESEARCH
LINGUISTCS

2013