Application of cognitive pragmatics: Relevance theory and ......2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.6 Cognitive Effects and Relevance Case A – contextual

Application of cognitive pragmatics: Relevance theory and multi-modality

Ryoko Sasamoto (Dublin City University)

Outline

•  Overview of pragmatics

•  Intentions in multi-modal contents •  Implication for relevance theory •  Application of relevance theory

1. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 1.1 Communication – Code or Inference?

1. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 1.2 Problems with the code model

(1)  The football team gathered round their coach.

(2)  a. Peter: Is George a good sailor? b. Mary: ALL the English are good sailors.

(3) Their friendship blossomed. (4) You are not my mother.

(Examples from S & W. 1987) (5) Alfie is too young. (6) a. John can’t play the guitar but he can sing. b. John can’t play the guitar so he can sing. c. John can’t play the guitar. After all, he can sing.

1. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 1.3 Inferential model

Communication = evidence based inference

a. Peter: How’s your cold? b. Mary: (points at her red nose)

1. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 1.3 Grice and Inference

Co-operative principle: Make your contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged.

(Grice 1989:26)

1. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 1.4 Grice and Inference: Maxims of conversation

Quality: Try to make your contribution one that is true. (a) Do not say what you believe to be false. (b) Do not say that for which you lack adequate

evidence. Quantity:

(a) Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes of the exchange).

(b) Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.

(Grice 1989: 26-27)

1. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 1.5 Grice and Inference: Maxims of conversation ctn’d

Relation:

Be relevant Manner: Be perspicuous.

(a) Avoid obscurity of expression. (b) Avoid ambiguity. (c) Be brief. (d) Be orderly.

(Grice 1989: 26-27)

1. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 1.6 What is said and what is implicated

(7) Peter: Can I borrow your car today?

Mary: I have to take Alfie to the GP. What is said: Mary has to take Alfie to the GP. What is implicated: Peter cannot borrow Mary’s car.

1. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 1.7 Some problems with Grice

•  Definitions are not provided

•  Rationales for maxims and principle

•  No statement is made on inference necessary for the recovery of what is said

2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.1 Relevance theory and communication

How human beings communicate with one another? They use two quite different modes of communication: coded communication and ostensive-inferential communication

(Sperber & Wilson 1995:63)

2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.2 Ostensive-Inferential communication

Ostensive-inferential communication: the communicator produces a stimulus which makes it mutually manifest to communicator and audience that the communicator intends, by means of this stimulus, to make manifest or more manifest to the audience a set of assumptions {I}

Sperber & Wilson (1995:63)

2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.3 Principles of relevance

Cognitive Principle of Relevance Human cognition tends to be geared to the maximisation of relevance.

(Sperber & Wilson 1995, 260) Communicative Principle of Relevance

Every act of ostensive communication communicates a presumption of its own optimal relevance

(Sperber and Wilson, 1995:260)

2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.3 Principles of relevance

The Presumption of Optimal Relevance

a.  The ostensive stimulus is relevant enough for it to be worth the addressee’s effort to process it.

b. The ostensive stimulus is the most relevant one compatible with the communicator’s abilities and preferences.

(Sperber & Wilson 1995, 270)

2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.4 What is relevance?

Information is relevant to you if it interacts in a certain way with your existing assumptions about the world

(S & W. 1987: 41-42)

2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.5 Defining relevance

Relevance is defined in terms of processing effort and contextual effects

(a) Other things being equal, the greater the

contextual effects, the greater the relevance.

(b) Other things being equal, the smaller the processing effort, the greater the relevance.

2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.6 Cognitive Effects and Relevance

Case A – contextual implication You wake up with the following thought: (8) a. If it’s raining, we’ll stay at home and watch Toy Story. You look out of the window and discover: (8)b. It’s raining. Case B – contextual strengthening You wake up, hearing a pattering on the roof, and form the

hypothesis that: (9) a. It’s raining. You open your eyes, look out of the window, and discover that: (9)b. It IS raining.

2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.6 Cognitive Effects and Relevance ctn’d

Case C – contextual contradiction and elimination You wake up, as in case B, hearing a pattering on the roof, and

form the hypothesis that: (10) a. It’s raining. This time, when you open your eyes and look out of the window,

you discover that the sound was made by leaves falling on the roof and that actually: (10)b. It’s not raining.

2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.7 Relevance theory and the speaker’s intention

Intentions and Ostensive communication a. The informative intention: The intention to inform an audience of

something. b. The communicative intention: The intention to inform the audience of one’s

informative intention. Sperber & Wilson (1995:29)

2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.8 Relevance-theoretic comprehension procedure

a.  Follow a path of least effort in computing cognitive effects: Test interpretive hypotheses (disambiguations, reference resolutions, implicatures, etc.) in order of accessibility.

b.  Stop when your expectations of relevance are satisfied.

(Sperber & Wilson. 2002:260)


Sub-tasks in the overall comprehension process

a.  Constructing an appropriate hypothesis about explicit content (in relevance - theoretic terms, EXPLICATURES) via decoding, disambiguation, reference resolution, and other pragmatic enrichment processes.

b.  Constructing an appropriate hypothesis about the intended contextual assumptions.

c.  Constructing an appropriate hypothesis about the intended contextual implications



Explicit and implicit distinction Explicature:

an ostensively communicated assumption which is inferentially developed from one of the incomplete conceptual representations (logical forms) encoded by the utterance.

Implicature:

an ostensively communicated assumption which is not an explicature; that is, a communicated assumption which derived solely via process of pragmatic inference.

(Carston. 2002:377)


a.  Peter: Did John pay back the money he

owed you? b.  Mary: No. He forgot to go to the bank.



(a) Mary has said to Peter, “Hex forgot to go to the BANK1 / BANK2.” [Hex = uninterpreted pronoun] [BANK1 = financial institution] [BANK2 = river bank]

Embedding of the decoded (incomplete) logical form of Mary’s utterance into a description of Mary’s ostensive behaviour.

(b) Mary’s utterance will be optimally relevant to Peter.

Expectation raised by recognition of Mary's ostensive behaviour and acceptance of the presumption of relevance it conveys.

(c) Mary's utterance will achieve relevance by explaining why John has not repaid the money he owed her.

Expectation raised by (b), together with the fact that such an explanation would be most relevant to Peter at this point.

(d) Forgetting to go to the BANK1 may make one unable to repay the money one owes.

First assumption to occur to Peter which, together with other appropriate premises, might satisfy expectation (c). Accepted as an implicit premise of Mary's utterance.



(e) John forgot to go to the BANK1.

First enrichment of the logical form of Mary's utterance to occur to Peter which might combine with (d) to lead to the satisfaction of (c). Accepted as an explicature of Mary’s utterance.

(f) John was unable to repay Mary the money he owes because he forgot to go to the BANK1.

Inferred from (d) and (e), satisfying (c) and accepted as an implicit conclusion of Mary’s utterance.

(g) John may repay Mary the money he owes when he next goes to the BANK1.

From (f) plus background knowledge. One of several possible weak implicatures of Mary’s utterance which, together with (f), satisfy expectation (b).


2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.9 Intentions revisited

1.  How about cases where there are more than one ‘intentions’?

2.  How about the gap between the ‘contents’ of the stimulus and the ‘extra’ intentions?

3.  How are these intentions realised? 4.  How does the hearer access these

intentions?

3. Multi-intention in Multi-modal content 3.1 Advertising

Advertisement is ・・・　　　　　 1. Announcement = to give certain information 2. Persuasive message = to persuade targeted people to recognize (Attention) to like (Interest) to want (Desire) to memorize (Memory) to buy (Action) AIDMA

Brand

Products

(American Marketing Association (1995). Diagram Adapted from Arai & Sasamoto (2012)

3. Multi-intention in multi- modal contents 3.2 TV Commercials

1. A certain duration (30 seconds, or longer) 2. Repetition 3. Multi Modality (perception) ① images (photographs , films, pictures, animations) ② sounds (music and narratives) 　 ③ letters (words, phrases, sentences)

Toyota “Human Touch”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCJLVC3Zy6M

When advertisers’ intention is not represented in the content

3. Multi-intention in multi- modal contents 3.2 TV Commercials

•  What is the purpose of this commercial? •  How is it done? •  How do viewers interpret this commercial?

3. Multi-intention in multi-modal contents3.3. weak vs strong communication

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　 An Utterance The Hearer’s Cognitive Environment Perception Encyclopaedic knowledge Inference

31

　　＝Revised contextual 　　　　　assumptions ＝ Contextual 　　　 implications

Arai & Sasamoto (2012)

3. Multi-intentions in multi-modal contents 3.3 Weak vs strong communication

A proposition may be more or less strongly implicated by an utterance. It is STRONGLY IMPLICATED (or is a STRONG IMPLICATURE) if its recovery is essential in order to arrive at an interpretation that satisfies the expectations of relevance raised by the utterance itself. It is WEAKLY IMPLICATED if its recovery helps with the construction of an interpretation that is relevant in the expected way, but is not itself essential because the utterance suggests a range of similar possible implicatures, any one of which would do

(Wilson & Sperber (2002: 269))

Brand-image building Input Input Input

Cognitive Environment

33

Arai & Sasamoto (2012)

3. Multi-intention in multi- modal contents 3.4 Weak implicature and TV Commercials

Cases where there is a gap between explicit content and the persuasive intentions

Marks & Spencer’s Christmas campaign 2006

3. Multi-intention in multi- modal contents 3.4 Weak implicature and TV Commercials

3. Multi-intention in multi-modal content 3.5. Advertising and multiple intentions

ADVETISEMENT As a Persuasive Message

Level 1 Standard Ostensive Inference Process

to recognize (Attention) to like (Interest) to want (Desire) to memorise (Memory) to buy (Action)

Level 2 Recognise Persuasive Intention

[How advertisement as a persuasive message is interpreted]

strong communication

weak communication

Adapted from Arai & Sasamoto (2012)

3. Multi-intention in multi-modal content 3.6. Open Caption telop and multiple intentions

•  Visually-oriented presentations in Japan •  Use of Open Caption Telop (OCT) in

entertainment programmes to create humorous effect

•  OCT to manipulate viewers’ interpretation process •  “Framing Humour” (O’Hagan 2010)


TV producers’ attempt at viewer manipulation

(Sekai Marumie DX Tokubetsuban, Nihon TV, Broadcast on 27th May 2012)


Highlighting the honest (unscripted?) utterance by the performer in her local accent

(Sekai Marumie DX Tokubetsuban, Nihon TV, Broadcast on 27th May 2012)


•  In case of TV programmes

TV programme


To make the viewers react e.g. Laugh Cry ……….

Level 2 Producer’s intention to manipulate

Use of OCT as a highlighter to manipulate viewers’ interpretation process


3. OCT and the viewer manipulation 3.7 Mechanism of the viewer manipulation

•  OCT = the case which takes advantage of ‘secondary communication situation’ (c.f. translation)

•  The mediator uses OCT as a highlighting device to draw viewers’ attention to chosen elements

•  Purpose = to manipulate the viewers •  Mediator’s manipulation is done by hijacking the

process of secondary communication situation

4. Implications for relevance theory 4.1. Different ‘higher’ intention and manipulation

•  ‘covert’ manipulation Advertising –may have no ‘direct’ intervention in the base content

•  ‘overt’ manipulation OCT ---- intervention is done by using representations of base contents ---- explains the cognitive load for the viewers

4 Implications for relevance theory 4.2. Higher intention

Ostensitve communicative stimulus = contents


to recognize (Attention) to like (Interest) to want (Desire) to memorise (Memory) to buy (Action) to react (run, laugh, cry…)

Level 2 Recognition of higher-order intention

[Communication of communicative ‘contents’ ]

strong communication

weak communication

← can be covert or overt


CONTENTS Not

Targeted Hearers

Intentions Persuasion, Suggestion, Recommendation Order, etc.

Targeted Hearers

Presumption of

Optimal relevance

Relevance judgment

How a communicative contents are interpreted by the hearers

INPUT

Start Listening

Stop Listening

Start Listening

Stop Listening

YES

NO

Interpreting by relevance

Informative intention & Communicative intention

Attention

No Attention

Hearers’ utterance interpretation: SUB CONSIOUS level

Intervener’s hearer manipulation: CONSIOUS level

Noticed by hearers

Sasamoto et.al. 2012

5. Application of relevance theory 5.1 Towards effective emergency communication

For effective communication in emergency





21/02/2013 10:51ＮＨＫ:津波警報のアナウンス　表現は当面変えず－毎日ｊｐ(毎日新聞)

Page 1 of 2http://mainichi.jp/select/news/20130221k0000m040075000c.html

天気交通株式写真速報

大中小文字サイズ記事を印刷

ＮＨＫの新しい津波到達予想画面のイメージ

中古パソコンタブレットPC デジタル一眼レフ英会話 FX比較 BTO パソコンホームページ作成二世帯住宅高性能デジカメ麻雀相続税相談 100円PC 住宅リフォーム定年後再就職釣り具

[PR] 今度こそFXで勝ちたいならひまわり証券の《選べるＦＸ》がおすすめ

ＮＨＫ:津波警報のアナウンス　表現は当面変えず毎日新聞　2013年02月20日　21時02分（最終更新　02月20日　21時37分）

　津波警報を受けて避難を呼びかけるＮＨＫのアナウンスが、不安をあおるとの指摘を受けていた問題で、ＮＨＫは当面は表現を変えないことを決めた。石田研一放送総局長が２０日、記者会見で明らかにした。

　視聴者から指摘があったのは「東日本大震災を思い出してください」という表現。石田総局長は「専門家の意見を聞いた上で、強い呼びかけは安全、安心を守る公共放送の役割を果たす上で効果があると判断した」と説明。「命を守るために早く逃げてください」と避難を促す表現と合わせて使うことを徹底するという。

　また、気象庁が津波警報の発表方法を変更するのに伴い、３月７日から、画面表示を分かりやすくする。子どもにも理解できるようにひらがなにし、「すぐ来る」といった平易な表現を用いる。携帯電話のワンセグで読めるように文字も大きくする。【土屋渓】

PR情報住友林業のスマートハウス！年間光熱費がとってもお得！→いくら節約できる夫婦で温泉に行こう！１泊２食５００円～　箱根・京都・軽井沢英語が早口で聞こえない人達に今「バカ売れ」の英語教材とは？【急募】年収2000万円～2500万円の求人増加中！年収UPを狙う方は必見！

スポンサーサイト検索

関連記事京の人今日の人：「バイバイ原発３・９きょうと」実行委よびかけ人、原強さん　／京都この人に聞く：尼崎市の社会福祉法人阪神共同福祉会理事長・中村大蔵さん　／兵庫減災連携協定：多賀城市、東北大と　技術開発など取り組み　／宮城東日本大震災：希望持てる「居場所」を　阪神大震災で後遺症障害者ら、県に相談窓口の設置など要請　／宮城東日本大震災：宮古・出崎ふ頭の岸壁、崩壊の恐れ　河口部の海底えぐられ、防止工事再開　／岩手

広告5200LMプロジェクタ貸出 web.kyoto-inet.or.jp/people/

トップ > ニュース > 記事

ニューストップ社会政治経済国際サイエンス購読試読毎日動画昭和毎日センバツ

おすすめ情報

社内で評判の５２歳！５０代とは思えない私の上司。みんな頼りにしてます。サントリー

瞳の写真から有名人の名前を正解＆抽選で体験ギフトがあたる！

Asahi Shimbun 21st February 2013


Emergency Warnings at 11.3.2011 Repetition of same message / monotonous tone ----- the higher intention wasn’t communicated

•  Kamaishi, Iwate •  Exception: Oarai machi

References

•  Arai, K & R. Sasamoto (2012) Advertising, brand image building and weak communication. Paper delivered at Interpreting for Relevance: Discourse and Translation. Warsaw (Poland), September

•  Grice, P. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press •  Sasamoto, R. (2012) Humour and Irritation: Attempts at Viewer Manipulation on TV.,

Manchester and Salford New Researchers Forum in Linguistics, 02-NOV-12 - 03-NOV-12, Manchester, UK

•  Sasamoto, R., Kyoko, A., and Doherty, S, Multi-media, multi-modal, multi-intentions, The Multimodality and Cyberpsychology Conference, 24-NOV-12 - 24-NOV-12, Dublin

•  Shannon, C. & Weaver, W. The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

•  Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. 1986 / 1995. Relevance : communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.

•  Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1987a) Précis of Relevance. Behavioral & Brain Sciences 10.4. 697-710.

•  Wilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber. 2002. Relevance Theory. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 14, 249-290. Reprinted . in L. Horn & G. Ward (eds) 2004. Blackwell’s Handbook of Pragmatics: 607-632

Documents

Application of cognitive pragmatics: Relevance theory and ......2. Pragmatics – theory of human communication and cognition 2.6 Cognitive Effects and Relevance Case A – contextual