The Communication Process. The Functions of Language. Language in Use.

Negotiation of
Meaning.

1. Introduction

When we use language to affect others we make use of Pragmatics, which

is a set of sociolinguistic rules related to language use within the communicative context. That is,

pragmatics is concerned with the way language is used to communicate rather than with the way

language is structured.

Traditionally, linguists have viewed five aspects of language-syntax, morphology, phonology,

semantics and pragmatics-as of equal importance. Little by little more importance has been given to

pragmatics reasoning that language is heavily influenced by context and that a need to communicate

exists prior to the selection of content and form. Linguists that have been working on that theory are

called Functionalists, and they see pragmatics as the overall organizing principle of language. It is

only when a child desires a toy that he or she employs the rules of syntax, morphology, phonology and

semantics in order to form his request.

2. The Communication Process

2.1. Elements of the Communication Process

Language has mainly be considered as the ability to communicate through a

system of signs. Semiotics is the science which studies the different types of signs,

as well as the rules governing their generation and production, transmission and exchange, reception

and interpretation, language is part of the field of semiotics. Language is one of the many systems of

signs human beings use, though the most complex and important of all.

According to Shannon and Weaver, in any communicative act we find the emitter and the

recipient. Both need to share a code, made up of a series of signs. These signs are made of

something material which is associated to a meaning (one example would be a finger on a mouth

indicating silence). One meaning is assigned to such a sign because that is part of a convention

shared by the participants in the process of communication. The emitter codes a message when he /

she chooses an element of the code and emits it, and the recipient decodes the message when he /

she understands it and responds accordingly. The context is the situation where the communicative

act is produced. Finally, we call the channel the medium through which the message is transmitted.

Here we can distinguish three parts: the mechanism which produces the message, the physical

means which allows it to be transmitted and the mechanism which perceives the message.
 Another concept to bear in mind is that of noise. We call noise any disturbance that may

appear in the channel of communication. Its presence is the reason for the quantity of redundancy we

find in the messages. We will call “redundant elements” to those elements selected in the process of

encoding the message which do not transmit any new information.

2.2. The Stages in the Communication Process

The communication process is the set of consecutive stages communication goes through.

Those stages are the following:

1st The emitter selects the content he / she wants to transmit

2nd The message is encoded, that is, the right units and structures are selected in order to

express the content

3rd The message is transmitted through the appropriate channel. This includes the mechanism

of production

4th The recipient decodes the message

5th Apprehension of the transmitted content on the part of the recipient

In this definition content is used to refer to that part of the context the emitter wants to share

with the recipient.

3. The Functions of Language

The function of language is intimately bound up with the speaker´s

intentions, the ideas the speakers want to convey, and the listener´s current knowledge. First,

speakers intend to have some effect on their listeners, and must get them to recognize these

intentions. Second, speakers want to convey certain ideas, and to do this the sentences must also

reflect the listeners´ ways of thinking about objects, states, events and facts. And third, speakers must

have some conception of what is on their listeners´ minds at the moment and of where they want

the communication to lead.

3.1. Jakobson´s Classification

According to Malinowsky (1923), cited by Halliday (1970), the functions of

language were two, namely, pragmatic and magical. To Bühler they were three, namely, the

expressive, the conative, and the representational functions. To Jakobson there were three more,

namely assertive, poetic and metalinguistic, let´s consider Jakobson´s model:

1. Representational function: This function defines the relationship between the message and

the idea or object it refers to.

 2. Emotive function: It defines the relationship between the emitter and the message, his /

her attitude towards the object of communication.

3. Conative function: It defines the relationship between the message and the recipient, since

any communication tries to get a reaction from the recipient.

4. Poetic function: Defined as the relationship of the message with itself.

5. Assertive function: Its purpose is to consolidate, finish or keep the communication going on.

A typical example would be the constant use of pet expressions or tags by some speakers.

6. Metalinguistic function: We speak of vocabulary to make the meaning of words clear in a

particular language. We use language to talk about language.

All these functions appear simultaneously, mixed in different proportion and, depending on

the type of communication, one or some will predominate over the others.

3.2. Pragmatic Classification

A division is made into two broad pragmatic functions of language, the

intrapersonal or transactional function, and the interpersonal or

interactional function. The first one, is called ideational by Halliday, is found in the internal language

used for memory, problem solving, and concept development. Language serves for the expression of

content, that is, of the speaker’s experience of the real world, including the inner world of his

own consciousness.

The interpersonal function of the language is used for communication, for establishing and

maintaining social relations: for the expression of social roles, which include the communication

roles created by language itself-for example, the roles of questioner or respondent, which we take on

by asking or answering a question.

Pragmatic functions of language are very interesting for FL teachers; according to Bernstein´s

studies a child must know how to use the language as a means of learning, and how to use it in

personal interaction. These suggestions can be adopted by first and second language acquisition.

Halliday (1970) mentions a third function of the language. Language has to provide for making

links with itself and with features of the situation in which it is used. We may call this the textual

function, since this is what enables the speaker or writer to construct the texts, or connected passages

of discourse that are situationally relevant.

4. Language in Use
4.1. Speech Acts as Examples of Language in Use

Each sentence is designed to serve a specific function. It may be to inform listeners, warn

them, order them to do something, question them about a fact, or thank them for a gift or act of

kindness. Speakers expect listeners to recognize the functions of the sentences they speak and to act

accordingly. Austin (1962) and Searle (1965) in their theory of speech acts studied how each

sentence conveyed any specific function. They say that every time speakers utter a sentence, they are

attempting to accomplish something with the words. Speakers are performing a speech act

(Austin called it an illocutionary act).

One unit for analysis of the interpersonal, interactional or communicative function is called a

speech act. In speech act theory it is assumed that the minimal unit of communication is not a word

or a sentence, but the performance of an act such as asking a question, giving a command,

thanking, and so on. The speech act is a larger conceptual unit than the syntactic and semantic units.

The idea that led to the concept of speech act was introduced by Wittgenstein, who

suggested that speakers can play the following “games” with language: giving orders and obeying

them; describing the appearance of an object; constructing an object from a description or drawing;

reporting an event etc…

The concept of speech act was first introduced by John Austin. He theorized that discourse is

composed not of words or sentences, but of speech acts. Searle (1965) strengthened this point by

stating that they were speech acts which constituted the basic unit of communication. According to

Austin, each speech act can be analyzed into three parts: locutions, or propositions; illocutions, or

intentions; and perlocutions, or the listener interpretations. He proposed speech act categories:

1) Representatives: Statements that convey a belief or disbelief in some proposition

2) Directives: Attempts to influence the listener to do something, such as a demand or

command, by means of not only clear imperatives, but also of embedded imperatives

3) Commisives: Commitments of self to some future course of action, such as a vow,

promise, or swear

4) Expressives: Expressions of a psychological state, such as thanking, apologizing,

complimenting.

5) Declaratives: Statements of fact that presume to alter a state of affairs, i.e. I declare

you man and wife.

 The propositional force of a speech act consists of the conceptual content of the utterance, or

its meaning. The speaker´s attitude toward the preposition is found in the illocutionary force, that is,

the speaker´s intention rather than his / her actual words. An utterance with fixed form and semantic

content can fulfil several intentions. For example, the one-word proposition candy can be altered in

several ways with gestures and intonation. A rising intonation and quizzical look might convey a

question, whereas whining it might be considered a demand or request for the item.

The reverse is also possible; several different forms or propositions can fulfil a single intention,

for example:

Please, pass the salt

May I have the salt, please?

Salt, please

Does this dish taste like it needs more salt?

This leads to the notion of indirect speech acts, illustrated by the following example:

Direct command: Open the door

Indirect command: Can you open the door?

The door should be opened

I would prefer the door opened

It’s hot here

Speakers expect listeners to recognize the functions of the sentences they speak, and to act

accordingly. If the listeners fail to appreciate this intention, they are judged as having misunderstood,

even though they may have taken in everything else about the utterance. Speech act theorists attempt

to go beyond the literal meaning of words and sentences by classifying utterances according to their

implicit, rather than explicit functions.

4.2. Different Dimensions of Language Use

Language use is more than language structures in motion. To understand language use, we

must look beyond the structure of language to the activity itself. The essence of these activities can

be organized around four dimensions. These dimensions let us represent the main factors that go

into a speaker´s choice of what to utter, and a listener´s understanding of what the speaker meant.

1) The bipersonal dimension

The bipersonal dimension of language consists of a purposive relation between a speaker and

a listener. These two base many of their dealings on their cultural common ground-their mutual

knowledge, beliefs, and suppositions. When two people engage in a social process in which the actions
of one depend in part on the actions of the other, they must choose their actions in part based on

what they take to be their common ground.

Paul Grice in 1957 speaker´s meaning and listener´s understanding recognized that in

sentences produced by the speaker, both speaker and listener may decide on the speech act and on

thematic structure, what to put as subject, as given and new information, according to the speaker´s

judgements and the listener´s current mental states. Speakers must also decide how they want to

convey their message: directly, or indirectly.

2) The audience dimension

Different listeners may be assigned different roles at any point in a conversation. Five basic

types of listeners are shown below.

-Self (monitor)

-Others: Participants: Addressee – Side Participant

Overhearers: Bystander - Eavesdropper

The speaker listens to his / her own utterances for bad phrasing and outright errors and

corrects them as she goes along. This was he / she assumes the role of self-monitor. Other listeners

divide into those who are truly participating in the conversation at that moment, and those who are

not, participants versus overhearers. Overhearers come in two main kinds: Bystanders are openly

present during the conversation even though they do not take part in it, whereas eavesdroppers listen

in without the speaker´s awareness.

There are two types of participants: addresses (those, an utterance is addressed to and who are

supposed to respond to it) and side participants (participating although that utterance was not

addressed to them).

3) The layered dimension

Language is also used in settings where there is layer upon layer of participants and

communication. Each layer is constructed around several parameters: a principal, a respondent, a

setting, a time frame, and a social process the principal and the respondent are engaged in.

With layering we can make sense of a diversity of language uses. Conversation, personal

letters, and certain other uses are normally managed in one or two layers. For example, if we dictate a

letter for a manager of a company to our secretary, we are at one layer with the manager and,

simultaneously, at a deeper layer with the secretary.

Layering is also needed, then, to account for what we produce and understand especially in

complicated settings.
 4) The temporal dimension

Human activities take place in time, and language is not an exception. Speech is evanescent

and the speaker and listener must synchronize their listener with their speaking, or communication will

fail.

One consequence is turn taking. They must arrange for only one of them to speak at a time,

and for the other to listen. Another consequence is sentential structure. Indeed, languages have

evolved constituents and agreement that appear to provide precisely these “packages of

information” the listener is able to grasp in precisely the time it takes the speaker to produce them. A

third consequence is discourse structure. Speaker and listener must coordinate their entry into talk

about a topic, their path through the topic, and their exit from it. Each conversation as a whole has

opening and closing sections. Such entry-body-exit structure is ubiquitous in conversation.

Much language use, of course, occurs when speaker and listener are at a distance in place or

time or both. For example, letters, novels, newspaper reports, etc…. In these, synchrony requirement

is still present but in an altered form.

Coordination of action

There is a common core that is central to language use: coordination of action. Coordination is

needed on the bipersonal dimension (Grice´s Cooperative Principle explains it), but it is also

needed on the audience dimension. The speaker may design different utterances depending on what

he / she wants the overhearers to understand, so it is only when the participants worry about the

audience dimension too that they see what the speaker really means.

Coordination on the layered dimension usually takes quite a different form. In the theatre we

expect the players on stage to act out parts written for them by a playwright, not to converse as

themselves. The parts they are acting are coordinating in a different manner that spontaneous

conversation could occur. The speech of the actors toward themselves will be in a different layer from

that of the audience.

These four dimensions then, define elements that the participants in a communion need to

coordinate. The fundamental problem is for the speaker and the listener to coordinate what he / she

means and what he / she understands. But to do so they must regard all four dimension at once.

5. Negotiation of meaning

5.1. Planning Speech as Problem Solving

In planning what to say speakers implicitly have a problem to solve, namely,

what linguistic devices should be selected to affect the listener in the way that the
speaker intends to. We can consider some considerations about it:

1) Knowledge of the listener: Depending on what speakers think listeners

know, they will refer to a third person as she, my next door neighbour, or the woman over

there.

2) The cooperative principle: Speakers expect their listeners to assume they are trying to be

cooperative – that they are trying to tell the truth, be informative, be relevant and be clear.

3) The reality principle: Speakers expect their listeners to assume that they are trying to be

cooperative, that they are trying to tell the truth, be informative, be relevant, and be clear.

4) The social context: Different social contexts lead to different vocabularies.

5) The linguistic devices available: Many things speakers may want to talk about have no

ready linguistic expression.

In the planning of what to say, too, the problem solving is usually accomplished so quickly and

easily that people are not aware of what they are doing.

5.2. Implied Meaning and the Cooperative Principle

Discourse is implied to be a cooperative effort; this has given rise to a

general principle of communication, the Cooperative principle. One of the most

important notions which have emerged in text studies in recent years is that of

implicature, the question of how is that we come to understand more than is

actually said. Grice (1975) uses the term implicature to what the speaker means or implies rather

than what he / she literally says. For example:

A: Shall we go for a walk?

B: Could I take a rain check on that?

the successful interpretation of B´s response depends on knowing the conventional meaning of

take a rain check in American English (“to decline to accept an offer or invitation immediately but

indicate willingness to accept it at a later date”). No conversational implicature is involved here, but

the mere use of an idiomatic expression. If we put it into comparison with the following example:

A: Shall we go for a walk?

B: It´s raining

The same utterance It´s raining can mean something totally different in a different context:

“No, it´s raining we may get wet” or “Yes, but we should better take an umbrella” or even “Yes, we

both like walking in the rain”.

 Implied meaning which is not signalled with textual resources derives from the Cooperative

principle and a number of maxims associated with it: quantity, quality, relevance and manner:

1) Quantity

a) Make your contribution as informative as required (for the current purpose of the

exchange)

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

2) Quality: Try to make your contribution one that is true, specifically:

a) Do not say what you believe to be false

b) Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence

3) Relevance: Make your contributions relevant to the current exchange.

4) Manner: Be perspicuous, specifically:

a) Avoid obscurity of expression

b) Avoid ambiguity

c) Be brief

d) Be orderly

The principles outlined above provide points of orientation rather than strict rules which have to

be followed by some languages users. What is still being investigated and not finally confirmed is

whether negotiation of meaning contributes to acquisition or not.

6. Conclusion

During the current topic we have seen how communication takes place. Being communication a

so common process in everyday life that do not requires any effort from us to be carried out most of us

become unconscious of the different processes which are performed when it takes place as well as the

different stages which are come through. Another important effect of communication is that we choose

the words that we are using according to what we want the listener to grasp from our words, and

sometimes we are implying more than what we are saying with our words.

All these concerns that have been mentioned can be applied to languages universally, but are of

especial importance when regarding a second language acquisition. We as teachers of English as a

foreign language are especially involved with the usage of English with communication purposes and

fluency in our students´ usage of English is one of our main goals. Letting the students to know how to

use language in special occasion, the most appropriate forms to be used according to what they want

to mean as well as how to make their listeners to be completely acquainted with the information they
want to transfer no more no less, is something that would improve their usage of English language to a

very elevated degree.

To sum up, a proper knowledge of the different processes and functions of language is a helpful

solution to improve communication competence in a foreign language, although it has been argued

frequently that communication is an spontaneous process that is performed over what we have

acquired and not through the succession of rules (Krashen) it is important to bear in mind that the

more we know about how communication works the more competent communicators we will be.