|
HU Credits:
2
Degree/Cycle:
2nd degree (Master)
Responsible Department:
Communication & Journalism
Semester:
1st Semester
Teaching Languages:
Hebrew
Campus:
Mt. Scopus
Course/Module Coordinator:
Zohar Kampf
Coordinator Office Hours:
By appointment
Teaching Staff:
Prof. Zohar Kampf
Course/Module description:
The seminar introduces speech act theory and its impact on various disciplines in the humanities and the social sciences. We will discuss the treatment of the theory in discourse studies, communication, sociology, political sciences, international studies and cultural studies and analyze realizations, interpretations of speech acts and the struggles they evoke in the mediated public arena.
Course/Module aims:
The seminar’s aim is to understand the treatment of speech act theory in various disciplines and to pursue new research trajectories and agendas.
Learning outcomes - On successful completion of this module, students should be able to:
The students will be able to describe the applications of speech act theory in various disciplines. They will learn to classify speech acts, examine their realizations in mediated public discourse and to critically evaluate their performance and reception.
Attendance requirements(%):
100
Teaching arrangement and method of instruction:
Seminar
Course/Module Content:
Introduction: how to do things with words
To perform: three meanings
Speech act theory and politeness theory
Speech acts and social contexts
Mediated speech acts: realizations
Mediated speech acts: interpretations
Mediated speech acts: process and rituals
Mediated speech acts and the struggles they evoke in public discourse
Conclusions
Required Reading:
Kampf, Z. (2013) Mediated Performatives. In J. Verschueren, J. O Östman. Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Blum-Kulka, S., & Hamo, M. (2011). Discourse pragmatics. In: T. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction (Revised edition). London: Sage
Austin, J. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Searle. J.R. (1969). Speech Acts: an Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. London and New York: Longman. Pp. 28-54
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (Eds.) (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics:
Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Olshtain, E. and Weinbach, L. (1987). Complaints: A study of speech act behavior
among native and non-native speakers of Hebrew. In J. Verschueren and M.
Bertucelli-Papi (Eds.), The Pragmatic Perspective (pp. 195-208). Amsterdam:
John Benjamins.
Jucker A. (2009). Speech act research between armchair, field and laboratory: The case of compliments. Journal of Pragmatics. 41 1611-1635.
Deutschmann, M. (2003) Apologizing in British English. Umea: Umea University Press.
Sbisa, M (2002). Speech acts in context. Language & Communication 22: 421–436
Stubs, M (1983). Can I have that in writing, please? Some neglected topics in speech act theory. Journal of Pragmatics
Clark, H. H., and Carlson, T. B. (1982). Hearers and speech acts. Language. 58 (2): 332-373.
Kampf, Z. (2009). Public (non-)apologies: The discourse of minimizing responsibility. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 2257-2270.
Harris, S., Grainger, K. and Mullany, L. (2006). The Pragmatics of Political Apologies. Discourse & Society, 17 (6): 715-737.
Kampf, Z. and Katriel, T. (forthcoming). Political Condemnations: Public Speech Acts and the Construction of Moral Discourse. Handbook of Communication in Cross-cultural Perspective (International Communication Association Handbook Series), Routledge.
Hauser, G. A. (1999). Aristotle on epideictic: The formation of public morality. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 29(1): 5-23.
Wodak R (2006), Blaming and Denying: Pragmatics. In: Keith Brown, (Editor-in-Chief) Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics, Second Edition, volume 2, pp. 59-64. Oxford: Elsevier.
Duranti, A. (1997). Universal and Culture‐Specific Properties of Greetings. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 7(1), 63-97.
Young, I. M. (2000). Inclusion and democracy. Oxford University Press (pp. 52-80)
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (pp. 101-129).
Scollon, R., and Scollon, S. W. (2000). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach. John Wiley & Sons. (pp. 43-59).
Chilton, P. (1990). Politeness, politics and diplomacy. Discourse & Society, 1(2), 201-224.
Fraser, B. (2007). Threatening revisited. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 5(2): 159-173
Milburn, T. W. and Watman, K. H. (1981). On the nature of threat: A social psychological inquiry. New York: Praeger.
Smith, S. (2008). From violent words to violent deeds? Assessing risk from FBI threatening communication cases. In: Meloy et. al (eds.) Stalking, Threatening, and Attacking Public Figures: a psychological and behavioral analysis Oxford: Oxford University Press (pp. 435-455).
Kampf, Z. (2008). The pragmatics of forgiveness: Judgments of apologies in the Israeli political arena. Discourse & Society, 19, 577-598.
Kampf. Z. (2012). From “there are no Palestinian people” to “sorry for their
suffering”: Israeli discourse of recognition of the Palestinians. Journal of Language and
Politics
Kurzon, D. (1998). The speech act status of incitement: Perlocutionary acts revisited.
Journal of Pragmatics, 29, 571-596.
Kampf, Z. (2011). Journalists as actors in social dramas of apology. Journalism, 12, 71-87.
Kampf. Z. and Löwenheim N. (2012). Rituals of apology in the international arena. Security Dialogue, 43(1): 43-60
Wierzbicka, Anna, 1987. English speech act verbs: A semantic dictionary. Sydney: Academic Press.
Kampf, Z. and Katriel, T. (2016). Political Condemnations: Public Speech Acts and the Construction of Moral Discourse. Handbook of Communication in Cross-cultural Perspective (International Communication Association Handbook Series), Routledge.
Kampf, Z. (2016) All the best! Performing Solidarity in Political Discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 93(3), 47-60.
Duranti, A. (1997). Universal and Culture‐Specific Properties of Greetings. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 7(1), 63-97.
Kampf. Z. (2012). From “there are no Palestinian people” to “sorry for their suffering”: Israeli discourse of recognition of the Palestinians. Journal of Language and Politics 11(3), 427-447.
Additional Reading Material:
Olshtain E and Weinbach. L. (1993). "Interlanguage Features of the Speech Act Complaining.” In:. G. Kasper, S. Blum-Kulka (Eds). Interlanguage Pragmatics. (pp. 108-122) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Camilla Vásquez (2011). Complaints online: The case of TripAdvisor. Journal of Pragmatics 43 (2011) 1707–1717.
Kampf, Z & Blum-Kulka, S. (2007) ‘Do Children Apologize to Each Other? Apology
Events in Young Israeli Peer Discourse’, Journal of Politeness Research, 3 (1): 11
Coulmas, F. (1981). Poison to your soul: Thanks and apologies contrastively viewed. In: F. Coulmas (Ed.) Conversational Routine. (Pp. 69-92) The Hague: Mouton De Gruyter.
Holmes, J. (1988) Paying compliments: A sex-preferential politeness strategy. Journal of Pragmatics, 12 (4): 445-465.
Gu, Y. (1993). The impasse of perlocution. Journal of Pragmatics. 20 (5): 405-432.
Lakoff, R, B. (2000). The Language War. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.
Butler, J. and A. Athanasiou (2013). Dispossession: the performative
in the political. Cambridge, UK, Polity.
Grading Scheme :
Essay / Project / Final Assignment / Referat 70 %
Active Participation / Team Assignment 10 %
Personal Guide / Tutor / Team Evaluation 10 %
Presentation / Poster Presentation / Lecture 10 %
Additional information:
None
|
