Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:10:03.181Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Pragmatics and the Third Wave: The Social Meaning of Definites

from Part I - Where Is (Social) Meaning?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 July 2021

By
Eric K. Acton
Edited by
Lauren Hall-Lew ,
Emma Moore  and
Robert J. Podesva
Lauren Hall-Lew
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Emma Moore
Affiliation:
University of Sheffield
Robert J. Podesva
Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
Get access

Summary

Propelled by the third wave of variationist sociolinguistics, the present work argues that pragmatic and variationist inquiry are mutually enriching and fundamentally united. Relying on both traditions, I develop a general principle of language use and interpretation – briefly: utterances are evaluated according to not only their own semiotic character but also what sets them apart from that of alternative utterances that appear to offer a favorable mix of costs and benefits in context. I demonstrate that these principles underlie a wide range of phenomena observed in third-wave and pragmatics literature, with particular focus on two cases of social meaning rooted in semantically based inferences: (i) John McCain’s reference to Barack Obama as ‘that one’ in a 2008 US presidential debate; and (ii) the tendency for phrases of the form the Xs (e.g. the Democrats) to depict the referents as a bloc separate from the speaker in a way that bare plurals (e.g Democrats) do not (Acton 2019). As I will show, the perspective developed in this work makes principled predictions and leads us to expect to find complex and varied interactions across and within multiple dimensions of meaning.

Keywords

social meaningthird wavevariationpragmaticssociopragmaticsdefinitesindexicalityrationalitylanguage and politics
Type
Chapter
Information
Social Meaning and Linguistic Variation
Theorizing the Third Wave
 , pp. 105 - 126
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, Barbara. 2008. Issues in the semantics and pragmatics of definite descriptions in English. In Gundel, J. and Hedberg, N. (eds.), Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acton, Eric K. 2014. Pragmatics and the social meaning of determiners. Ph.D. dissertation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Acton, Eric K. 2019. Pragmatics and the social life of the English definite article. Language 95(1), 37–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acton, Eric K., and Potts, Christopher. 2014. That straight talk: Sarah Palin and the sociolinguistics of demonstratives. Journal of Sociolinguistics 18, 3–31.Google Scholar
Babel, Anna (ed.). 2016. Awareness and Control in Sociolinguistic Research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bell, Allan. 1984. Language style as audience design. Language in Society 13(2), 145–204.Google Scholar
Beltrama, Andrea, and Staum Casasanto, Laura. 2017. Totally tall sounds totally younger: Intensification at the socio-semantics interface. Journal of Sociolinguistics 21(2), 154–82.Google Scholar
Benor, Sarah Bunin. 2001. Sounding learned: The gendered use of /t/ in Orthodox Jewish English. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 7(3), Article 2.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977. The economics of linguistic exchanges. Social Science Information 16(6), 645–68.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Levinson, Stephen C.. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burnett, Heather. 2017. Sociolinguistic interaction and identity construction: The view from game-theoretic pragmatics. Journal of Sociolinguistics 21(2), 238–71.Google Scholar
Cameron, Richard, and Schwenter, Scott. 2013. Pragmatics and variationist sociolinguistics. In Bayley, R., Cameron, R., and Lucas, C. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Sociolinguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 464–83.Google Scholar
Campbell-Kibler, Kathryn. 2007. Accent, (ing), and the social logic of listener perceptions. American Speech 82(1), 32–64.Google Scholar
Cheshire, Jenny. 2005. Syntactic variation and beyond: Gender and social class variation in the use of discourse-new markers. Journal of Sociolinguistics 9(4), 479–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro. 1998. Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6, 339–405.Google Scholar
Davis, Christopher, and Potts, Christopher. 2010. Affective demonstratives and the division of pragmatic labor. In Aloni, M., Bastiaanse, H., de Jager, T., and Schulz, K. (eds.), Logic, Language, and Meaning: 17th Amsterdam Colloquium Revised Selected Papers. Berlin, DE: Springer, 42–52.Google Scholar
Dayal, Vaneeta. 2004. Number marking and (in)definiteness in kind terms. Linguistics and Philosophy 27(4), 393–450.Google Scholar
Dayal, Vaneeta. 2013. On the existential force of bare plurals across languages. In Caponigro, I. and Cecchetto, C. (eds.), From Grammar to Meaning: The Spontaneous Logicality of Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 49–80.Google Scholar
Djalali, Alex J. 2013. House Proceedings Corpus. https://github.com/alexdjalali/hpc.Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 2008. Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics 12(4), 453–76.Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 2011. The Future of Variation Studies. Plenary talk given at New Ways of Analyzing Variation (NWAV) 40. Washington, DC: Georgetown University.Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 2012. Three waves of variation study: The emergence of meaning in the study of variation. Annual Review of Anthropology 41, 87–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 2016. Variation, meaning and social change. In Coupland, N. M. (ed.), Sociolinguistics: Theoretical Debates. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 66–85.Google Scholar
Glass, Lelia. 2015. Strong necessity modals: Four socio-pragmatic corpus studies. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 21(2), 77–88.Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. and Morgan, J. (eds.), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 43–58.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 1984. Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. In Schiffrin, D. (ed.), Meaning, Form, and Use in Context: Linguistic Applications. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 11–42.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 2004. Implicature. In Horn, L. R. and Ward, G. Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 3–28.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R., and Ward, Gregory (eds.). 2004. Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Jaeger, T. Florian, and Weatherholtz, Kodi. 2016. What the heck is salience? How predictive language processing contributes to sociolinguistic perception. Frontiers in Psychology 7, 1115.Google Scholar
Katzir, Roni. 2007. Structurally-defined alternatives. Linguistics and Philosophy 30(6), 669–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keenan, Elinor Ochs. 1976. The universality of conversational postulates. Language in Society 5(1), 67–80.Google Scholar
Keller, Rudi. 1994. On Language Change: The Invisible Hand in Language (translated by Nerlich, Brigitte). London, UK, and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kiesling, Scott F. 2004. Dude. American Speech 79(3), 281–305.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1963. The social motivation of a sound change. Word 19(3), 273–309.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin. 1973. The logic of politeness; Or, minding your P’s and Q’s. Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 9, 292–305.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, Emma, and Podesva, Robert J.. 2009. Style, indexicality, and the social meaning of tag questions. Language in Society 38(4), 447–85.Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1955. Logic as semiotic: The theory of signs. In Buchler, J. (ed.), Philosophical Writings of Peirce. New York: Dover Books, 98–119.Google Scholar
Podesva, Robert J. 2011. Salience and the social meaning of declarative contours: Three case studies of gay professionals. Journal of English Linguistics 39(3), 233–64.Google Scholar
Roberts, Craige. 2002. Demonstratives as definites. In van Deemter, K. and Kibble, R. (eds.), Information Sharing: Reference and Presupposition in Language Generation and Interpretation. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 89–136.Google Scholar
Sharvy, Richard. 1980. A more general theory of definite descriptions. Philosophical Review 89(4), 607–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Shifters, linguistic categories, and cultural description. In Basso, K. and Selby, H. A. (eds.), Meaning in Anthropology. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 11–55.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 2003. Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life. Language and Communication 23(3), 193–229.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Wilson, Deirdre. 2004. Relevance theory. In Horn, L. R. and Ward, G. (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing, 607–32.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 2008. Colonial dialect contact in the history of European languages: On the irrelevance of identity to new-dialect formation. Language in Society 37(2), 241–54.Google Scholar
Walls, Seth Colter. 2008. ‘That one’, McCain calls Obama in debate. Huffington Post. 7 October 2008. Last accessed 22 July 2014. www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/07/that-one-mccain-calls-oba_n_132802.html.Google Scholar
Zhang, Qing. 2005. A Chinese yuppie in Beijing: Phonological variation and the construction of a new professional identity. Language in Society 34(3), 431–66.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×