LINGÜÍSTICA

Forum for on-line classes
 
HomeHome  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  Log in  

Share | 
 

 KEEPING UP WITH JOHN

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Admin
Admin


Posts : 56
Join date : 2008-05-26

PostSubject: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:43 pm

Visit this link to learn a bit about John L. Austin and his significance in the study of language.

Note:

Arrow How does Austin's work approximate Saussure's?
Arrow By following the links on the right, what would be his major contributions to linguistics?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://linguisticadeldiscurso.blogspot.com
VTrinidad



Posts : 5
Join date : 2008-05-27

PostSubject: Keeping Up...   Sun Aug 31, 2008 9:21 pm

I think that Austin's major contribution to Linguistics is his study of the relationship of individuals' speech acts with its literal meaning and degree of "truthfulness".


How does Austin's work approximate Saussure's?

Austin concentrated on the complex characteristics of individual's speech acts which coincides with Saussure's notion of Parole, being this term separated form Langue (the system of Language).


(I'm sorry if my responses are very "basic" Cool .. I know it is not an excuse but they were written on a Sunday afternoon! Embarassed )
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Adriana A



Posts : 13
Join date : 2008-05-27

PostSubject: Re: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:51 am

Like a Star @ heaven Austin's work approximates Saussure's by contrast since the latter studied the idealized speaker and language (i.e., in his term, langue) while the former analysed the concrete act of speaking (in Saussure's term: parole, in Austin's: ordinary language)

Like a Star @ heaven I would say that his major contributions to linguistics are the analysis of particular cases(i.e. language in real use) and the introduction of the concepts of: locution, perlocution and, maybe the most important one, illocution or perfomative utterance.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
MarinaP



Posts : 7
Join date : 2008-05-28

PostSubject: Re: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   Fri Sep 05, 2008 3:41 pm

What a Face I think that Austin's major contributions to Linguistics are the thorough study of the complexities of ordinary language and the distinctions he draw as regards language functions in ordinary speech acts.

What a Face While Austin analysed the complexities of ordinary language, which would clearly represent Parole in Saussurean terms, Saussure focused on the study of Language as a System, that is to say, on Langue.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
virginial



Posts : 12
Join date : 2008-05-28

PostSubject: Re: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   Sun Sep 07, 2008 4:44 pm

1) While Saussure was concerned with studying the sign system of language (Langue), Austin placed his emphasis on ordinary language, its individual realization (Parole). However, there was an approximation in their works, since both had to base them on the observation of linguistic behaviour.

2) In my opinion, his major contributions to Linguistics were his conclusions regarding the ways language functions in ordinary speech acts (illocutionary acts).
Back to top Go down
View user profile
javiers



Posts : 14
Join date : 2008-05-27

PostSubject: Re: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   Tue Sep 09, 2008 4:32 pm

1) Austin concentrates on ordinary language, particularly, on observable linguistic behaviour (practical matters - actual instances of speech) or, as Saussure puts it, "parole". So whereas Austin considers language in use (dynamic view) and what signs are for, Saussure is more concerned with language as an abstract system of signs and how the signs operate within the system (stative view - “langue”).
Also, Austin’s unit of analysis is the "speech act", where several signs are at work and the speaker plays a key role, while Saussure’s unit is the "sign" and the intention of the speaker is not considered.
Austin subordinates the structure to the function and Saussure does not account for the functions of language at all.
However, both experts make a synchronic analysis, as their work does not consider the passing of time, and they coincide in the interplay of elements in what Austin terms a "locutionary act", where signs are combined to produce meaningful expressions. Also, they both focus on speech more than on written language. Finally, the binary opposition constative – performative is crucial to state Austin's standpoint and so reminds us of Saussure’s pairing of concepts.

2) I believe the ground-breaking ideas produced by Austin are that of performatives and illocutionary acts.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
GustavoP



Posts : 5
Join date : 2008-05-28

PostSubject: Re: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:52 pm

Although Saussure is primarily concerned with studying the sign system itself apart from its use in concrete situations, some aspects of Saussure’s linguistics may, to some extent, be connected to Austin's speech act theory. For one thing, Saussure stresses the social character of language, and considers that semiology (semiology in a purely Saussurian's fashion) will study the life of signs in social interaction. Also, the individual concrete use of language (parole) could be related to will and intelligence, which seems to imply a link between language use and intentions which is found in Austin's emphasis on ordinary language and its individual realization.


I believe that his major contributions to linguistics were his conclusions about the ways language functions /works in ordinary speech by pointing out that utterances are actions (illocutionary acts). Austin’s notions that illocutionary (and perlocutionary) acts and performatives can be used to perform certain conventionalized actions such as naming a boat, apologizing, etc was a complete new observation. (at least I believe so Rolling Eyes )
Back to top Go down
View user profile
micaela g



Posts : 11
Join date : 2008-05-28

PostSubject: Re: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   Sat Sep 13, 2008 12:30 pm

I love you Austin's work approximates Saussure's in the sense that both authors make a synchronic analysis of language. Austin focused specially on ordinary language at the moment. He considered that it embodies all of the practical distinctions that will prove useful in human life.
On the other hand, Austin's studies differ from Saussure's since Austin directed his attention at a particular unit within the language system (PAROLE) by analysing speech acts while Saussure concentrated on language as a whole (LANGUE)
I love you One of Austin's major contributions to linguistics is concerned with the introduction of his SPEECH ACT theory. He distinguished between CONSTATIVES and PERFORMATIVES, and named four different conditions within the latter: a preparatory, an executive, a sincerity and a fulfilment condition. these were called FELICITY CONDITIONS. Another great contribution is ILLOCUTIONARY and PERLOCUTIONARY ACTS.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
MarianelaB



Posts : 12
Join date : 2008-05-28

PostSubject: Re: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:27 pm

Like a Star @ heaven While Austin analysed the subtleties of ordinary language or linguistic behavior ( in Saussurean terms, Parole), Saussure focused on the system of language (langue)

Like a Star @ heaven Austin believed that the very observation of linguistic behavior is itself a worthwhile activity, especially with regard to practical matters. His major contributions to linguistics were the analysis of the subtleties of ordinary language and the ways in which language functions in ordinary speech acts.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Belén I



Posts : 9
Join date : 2008-05-27

PostSubject: Re: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:43 pm

Wink Austin's work approximates to Saussure's because the former studied and concentrated on parole (the individual and executive part of the language) while the latter did it on langue ( the system of language). So, in that way, both "aspects " of language were taken into account to be studied.

Wink From my pint of view, Austin's major contributions were: the use of language in speech acts, involving locution, illocution (or "performative utterance"), and perlocution.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
ArianaR



Posts : 9
Join date : 2008-05-29

PostSubject: Re: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   Sun Sep 14, 2008 7:49 pm

1-Saussure concentrated on the study of the abstract system of signs(Langue) while Austin studied the ordinary language in its pracical use (Parole) and distinguished between the ways it functions.
2-Austin`s major contibution is the distinction between ways in which language functions in ordinary speech acts.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
elianaa



Posts : 10
Join date : 2008-05-28

PostSubject: Re: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   Fri Sep 19, 2008 11:36 pm

* Austin studied “ordinary language”, i.e. language in use, in its dynamic way (parole, in Saussure´s terms), since it was considered to “embody all of the practical distinctions that will prove useful in human life”. On the other hand, Saussure studied the abstract sign system of language (langue), in its static way.

** Austin´s main contribution was the analysis on the clear distinctions between ways in which language functions in ordinary speech acts.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
RCamila



Posts : 6
Join date : 2008-05-29

PostSubject: Re: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   Sat Sep 20, 2008 1:15 am

1) Austin’s work, like Saussure’s, was published posthumously by his students. Question
2) Austin’s pragmatic study of language threw some light on the analysis of the complex language system.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Admin
Admin


Posts : 56
Join date : 2008-05-26

PostSubject: FEEDBACK   Sun Sep 28, 2008 12:33 pm

vtrinidad: good points. In terms of the second question then, Austin chose what Saussure left out, right? Smile
adrianaa: good points. Very Happy
marinap: on the whole you make your point. However, you should have stated the question of "language functions" more clearly. Rolling Eyes
virginial: Your answer on Saussure is somewhat better than the previous ones as you tried to see how both authors actually approximate. Cool
javiers: Your comparison is really good and complete. Maybe you could have expanded your idea of contributions. cyclops
gustavop: Very good! pirat
micaelag: Your first answer seems OK, the only thing I'd object to is your decision to discuss "differences" (It was not in the rubric, was it?). As to the contributions, I feel you only state what he actually came up with instead of deciding what the actual contributions were. For instance, we may say that Grice also discusses the conditions for a speech act, right? Anyway, good attempt! bounce
marianelab: As you put it, you only found a diff. bet. Saussure and Austin. How do they approximate? The rest's is just fine to me. bom
beléni: Good points. flower
arianar: The approximation, if any, is not that clear. The contribution should have been explained further. Maybe you didn't want to re-state what your partners have done, did you? Probably you could have said something like: "I agree with such and such and I'd also add such and such", don't you think? Neutral
elianaa: Your answer on Saussure/Austin seems to mirror others, right? The contribution should have been expanded (similar comment as arianar's). Neutral
rcamila: Excellent Camila!! That's what I intended you all to see. The question was really simple and... tricky!! Anyway what your partners said was also really good! As to your answer 2, you could have expanded it a little, don't you think? cheers
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://linguisticadeldiscurso.blogspot.com
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: KEEPING UP WITH JOHN   

Back to top Go down
 
KEEPING UP WITH JOHN
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» John Green
» John Schilt
» Gerard Butler performs with John Mayer at birthday party
» John Williams 'Superman The Movie" Theme With LYRICS
» John O Groats to Lands End in a Likamobile. 2nd - 16th August

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
LINGÜÍSTICA :: SPEECH ACT THEORIES :: AUSTIN-
Jump to: