How a compromise can be reached between theoretical pragmatics and practical lexicography and An empirical study towards the better treatment of pragmatics in EFL lexicography: comparing the appreciation of pragmatic failures in Japanese learners of English and English native speakers and Pragmatics and lexicography, with particular reference to politeness and Japanese learners of English

Kawamura, Akihiko (2014). How a compromise can be reached between theoretical pragmatics and practical lexicography and An empirical study towards the better treatment of pragmatics in EFL lexicography: comparing the appreciation of pragmatic failures in Japanese learners of English and English native speakers and Pragmatics and lexicography, with particular reference to politeness and Japanese learners of English. University of Birmingham. Ph.D.

Preview

Kawamura14PhD.pdf
PDF - Accepted Version
Download (2MB)

Abstract

The topic of my three-part thesis is pragmatic information in EFL dictionaries. The thesis started with literature review and theoretical explorations of pragmatic information for EFL dictionaries (Module 1). Based on the findings from this first Module, I approached pragmatics focusing on lexical items and their pragmatic behaviours in context, seeking to collect empirical data for describing pragmatics in EFL and lexicographical contexts (Module 2). However, it is important to raise the question of whether pragmatics and lexicography can ever be made compatible at all, since they have different goals, approaches and methods in dealing with different types of meaning. Their units of descriptions are also different; while dictionaries are in principle concerned with words and phrases, pragmatics deals with utterances and discourses. More importantly, dictionaries are basically concerned with decontextualised meanings, and are expected to set out relatively fixed meanings, perhaps prescriptively, in the form of a dictionary definition or explanation. In contrast, descriptive pragmatics treats meaning in context. In this third module, I will be working towards my conclusion that they are indeed compatible, with particular emphasis on politeness.

Type of Work:

Thesis (Doctorates > Ph.D.)

Award Type:

Doctorates > Ph.D.

Supervisor(s):