Pragmatic is the study of how context contributes to meaning. It is a subfield of linguistics and related fields such as cognitive psychology, philosophy, and education. The field of pragmatics is distinct from semantics, which studies the grammatical structure of words and sentences. Linguists who specialize in pragmatics are called pragmaticians.
In addition to studying the way that people use language in real life, pragmatics also explores how the meaning of a sentence changes from one context to another. For example, if you ask someone for help, you might get different responses based on the relationship you have with them or how much you value their advice. In this way, pragmatics is a crucial part of the human experience.
The word “pragmatic” is derived from the Latin pragma, meaning “to do or act as if.” As a philosophical movement, pragmatics offers a view of truth and knowledge that is grounded in doing. Its founders, including John Dewey and Alfred North Whitehead, argued that all true knowledge has practical application. This view of truth combines anti-skepticism with fallibilism, or the belief that no truth is absolute.
Pragmatism is a key philosophical influence on many other fields, including social science and psycholinguistics. A pragmatic approach to problems is often more effective than idealistic approaches, which can become bogged down in ideological debates and can even have counterproductive effects. For example, the pragmatic approach to saving wildlife has been more successful than the idealistic goal of protecting all animals.
A pragmatic approach to a problem often involves looking at the pros and cons of various solutions and choosing the most practical option. It also requires weighing the costs and benefits of different courses of action. The pragmatic approach to a problem is especially important for individuals who are in a position to make decisions about resource allocation.
Research in linguistic pragmatics has expanded tremendously since its beginnings in the 1960s. However, there are still some significant challenges for researchers. First, scholars need to recognize the specific people they study and the explicit tasks that are given in experimental settings. These factors may affect the results of a study, and they are rarely acknowledged in linguistic pragmatic theory.
Second, the research methods that have been used in linguistic pragmatics are limited. For example, some experimental techniques examine the time it takes for people to read a phrase or sentence that conveys a particular kind of pragmatic meaning. Other experiments investigate the lexical processing of individual words that convey different pragmatic meanings. Some techniques, such as moving-window and eye-movement experiments, investigate the local processing of word meanings, while others measure overall cognitive effort.
Despite these limitations, pragmatic research remains an important area of study. As the field expands, it is important that researchers continue to explore the diverse facets of pragmatics and the ways they change in different contexts. This will allow us to understand better the nature of the complex meanings that we interpret in everyday communication.
