The Pragmatic Aspect Of Pn Contains Direct Questioning. We Stand On The Pn-Hierarchy Point Of View,

Also at the grammatical level, thirdly, we notice that the modal expression has the function of limiting the modal frame for the purpose of PN to bring ND the meaning of modal expression in the PN containing the cognitive system. In addition to the modal frame marked by the PTHs, we also notice a number of modal expressions using euphemisms and colloquial combinations: probably, probably, apparently, right, probably, probably, no maybe…

Fourth, besides giving some modal expressions that limit the modal frame for PN purposes at the sentence level, we also raise the issue of the compatibility between the explicit modal frame of PN and ND purposes. The question clause in the PNH contains the information system.

On the basis of this frame structure, we find that there is a close correlation on each of the basic elements between the PN containing the OS and the responding activity. The compatibility is most evident in the change of roles corresponding to the elements: when the questioner is the subject of the mood, the listener is the object of receiving and evaluating the mood; On the contrary, when the listener answers, the listener becomes the subject of the mood and the questioner at this time turns into the object of receiving and evaluating the mood.

The consistent compatibility with the modal element of the propositional ND is that both roles are directed towards a situation, a homogenous segment of objective reality, with identical relations, with a spatial and temporal frame of reference. space in the same coordinate system.

The facts given by the speaker are specified with a definite coordinate and the respondent also understands and answers within that specified coordinate relatively uniformly, in order to ensure that the information provided by the listener is correct. what the questioner needs, new information is replaced by the unknown. The situation “he said chicken, she said duck” rarely happens, except in two cases: either the listener is inadvertent, or the person is deaf; or the listener intentionally deviates from what is being asked to contain another YNH.

2.2.3. The pragmatic aspect of PN contains direct questioning. We stand on the PN-hierarchy point of view, considering the sentence in the relationship between the PN and the recipient of the sentence, on the issue: context; object projection; CEO; CTTB; CTLC.

2.2.3.1. The contextual context in the PN contains the operating system

Context is the external context of the PN or the extraneous information that contributes to the meaning of the PN. Components of context: dialogue, interactive role, interpersonal relationship, non-state reality have been presented [in section 1.3.2.8]. The context in the information system actually has a secondary role compared to the context in the information system.

Maybe you are interested!

2.2.3.2. Projection of PN’s object contains the act of asking directly (OS)

Projection, or the basis, is just the relationship between the PNH and the parts that make up its context. Thanks to the object projection, the new language is associated with the context. Projection of objects is not the work of the state itself but of people. Searle considered object projection as an activity in the activity that creates propositions as the semantic core for PN.

1. The role of the speaker (performer of the first object-projecting activity) in the object projection of the cognitive system: the questioner must aim at an extra-real situation, must place it in a frame of reference in space and time. determination… creates the definiteness, clarity, and clarity in the ND propositions. That reference helps the listener to locate and identify events related to the real-life situation that the questioner wants to mention.

Telling the questioner to perform the first object projection activity is because when creating the PNH, the questioner both identifies and locates himself explicitly, performs the operation, and assigns the entire system to the respondent. that specified coordinates. Therefore, the components that have the effect of determining the reference and positioning in the PNH are very important. When the reference instructions are not clear, the listener cannot answer, or the response is skewed, or there will be a period of re-correction of the PNH in order to clearly define the frame of reference. Example (10 ):

M: How much does this chicken cost per pound?

B: Which chicken do you ask?

M: I asked the chicken on the floor!

B: The chicken on the floor is 35, and the chicken on the floor is only 20, which one do you like?

2. The respondent’s role in the presentation of the information system is equally important as the speaker. Because we say, the speaker is the one who performs the contract of objectivity, which does not mean that the listener does not perform the contract of objectivity, or is completely innocent, passive, and has no role in the projection of objects. In the cognitive system, the listener is forced to accept the entire projection of clearly visible objects on the surface of the PN, to ensure that the information he provides matches the coordinates of the object projection of the situation given by the speaker.

3. The object projection of the PN containing the OST is for the respondent to know what the questioner is talking about, ask about something explicitly. To ask something is to establish a certain “theory” for the referenced thing. Except for the case where the theory is known in the foreword, the cases of single standing projection expressions are not informative and not yet made up of sentences. Like “where is the cat” if not a PN is just a floating expression.

2.2.3.3. Presupposition (CEO) of PN contains OSTT

The CEO in the PN containing the information system for both the questioner and the respondent must always be right about what is known. This known is often of the pre-announcement nature. The PN containing the information system is also sometimes built on the wrong CEO, but that must be the wrong thing unconsciously, not intentionally. This is different from the CEO in the PN containing the GT, which is often built on the wrong CEO intentionally.

The questioner, when presenting the PN, implicitly acknowledged that the CEOs were right about the known and only asked the unknown. When creating a PNH containing the information system, the CEO expresses the questioner’s confidence in the segment of reality reflected in the operating system and based on the CEO is considered true, real and reasonable because it is a necessary condition to create an explicit meaning.

On the other hand, the CEO of the unknown also has a relationship with the known and is not the CEO of the completely unknown. The CEO does not know, and at the same time, to a certain extent, is also partly known, and definitely has a relationship with the CEO about the known. If one is completely ignorant of the General Director of the known, then he cannot perform the PN containing the TT.

The respondent gives the information system the following conditions: firstly, he has completely accepted the CEOs as known contained in the operating system and when answering the unknown of PNH, it is considered that the listener has accepted that the CEO of PNH is correct. It is impossible to have a case that both opposes the CEO of PNH and responds to PNH at the same time, because it is logically contradictory. Like (11): How much does this cost? B: I’m not selling, and I’m selling for 5000! (-).

Second, he must determine what the questioner’s unknown is. If the unknown is unknown, undefined to some extent necessary, it also does not answer for that OS. Third, he clearly identifies the known to serve the questioner’s unknown in response to information, he has fulfilled his responsibility to the questioner.

If he doesn’t know, he will say he doesn’t know. So a person who is completely ignorant of the CEO of the known, will not perform the contract to answer the information system. So the CEO of the PN containing the information system has a very clear compatibility and agreement between the questioner and the respondent. The CEO of the known of the questioner is also the CEO of the known of the respondent. General Director about what is known is the coincidence of both question and answer roles in the information system. This is an important criterion to identify a PN containing an OS.

2.2.3.4. The message structure (CTTB) of the PN contains the OSTT

a/ The structure of information on the ND side or the information structure on the ND side of the PN containing the information system is the way to organize and distribute information, including old and new news respectively in the response operating system of the relationship between the state and the user. they are pragmatic. It often explicitly states that the missing piece of information, or the reason the questioner gives, is that there is something he doesn’t currently know, needs to know. As mentioned, in GT, people rarely pay attention to the CTNP of the PN, but we are only interested in the meaning and information of the PN. In terms of pragmatics, especially for GT purposes, the important factor is not the CTNP but the CTTB.

The old news in the PN contains the information system that coincides with the CEO. In GT, it has no value in terms of announcements, but only the premise of CTTB. Old news is the basis, a necessary condition for new news to exist in the OS. The new information in the PN containing the information system has the main message value, which is the main thing that exists explicitly in the information system. New news is the basis, which is a sufficient condition for the PN containing the information system to exist.

b. The basis for determining the CTTB of the PN containing the OST

We rely on three criteria: firstly, based on the semantic structure of the PN surface containing the cognitive system, which allows us to identify old and new news very easily, because they belong to the explicit meaning structure. Second, based on the respondents, it is based on the relationship between the respondents and the respondents in the information system.

They have a much more coherent and coherent relationship than the traffic system, they both clarify the same information (news). The decisive factor for a certain woman to become the answering woman in the information system is that the responding woman contains new information, responding to the “unknown, need-to-know” of the information system.

On the other hand, the PN’s response of the information system depends a lot on the model, both the thesis research as well as the structural system. In the information system, the question and answer shows the unity in terms of functions and purposes in the cognitive process: to clarify the same information.

The purpose of the question is to get the answer, to fill in the missing information, on the contrary, the purpose of the answer is to clarify the unknown, the contradiction between old and new information is usually resolved well. satisfactorily, thoroughly. As for the traffic management system, which has other purposes, PN responded with less dependence.

Third, context is an important basis for determining information about CTTB. In some cases, the structure of the surface meaning of PNH does not allow us to identify old and new news, so we have to rely on the specific GT context. Example (12), B: How about you?; M: Give me 3 pounds too! (If we don’t rely on context, we can’t tell what object this PNH is asking about in objective reality.

Context (12): the place where GT takes place is at the market; the GT object is two people buying and selling, this context allows us to understand there is also a third person, the second buyer; ND that B wants to ask M is how many pounds the buyer wants to buy… Thanks to the context, we can know the old news “how many pounds”; breaking news” the amount of 3 pounds is news. So ND coincides with CEO, with old news.

c. Factors determining the peritoneal malignancy of PN containing OST

Firstly, the part known is old news, is also the CEO of the known, at the same time is the fulcrum of the focus of the question, is the basis for placing PNH, is the premise of the CTTB. Because it is only the premise of the CTTB, the old news is implicitly recognized, of course, there is no need to be explicit anymore. So, in the information system, the old way of distributing information does not need to be explicitly stated, and PNH – PN answers.

Secondly, the part of unknown and new information is the focus of the question, the request posed to the respondent, and the main element in the formulary. Since it is the main factor, it must be brought up to be asked and it is expressed explicitly (telling the respondents what they want). Thus, in information systems, the distribution of new information must be explicitly stated, otherwise it must be context-based. The news in PN’s CTTB containing OSH is not entirely new. Because the CEO of the unknown is closely related and must be based on the CEO of the known to exist.

2.3.INDIRECT ASK ACT (INDIRECT ASK ACT)

In section (2.1.2.6, p.59, 60), we have classified the communication system: the act of asking through an indirect intermediary and the act of asking to indirectly express another action (the act of asking for it). Here, we only study mainly the second type of SCC.

2.3.1. The learning aspect of indirect questioning

We consider a PN containing an operating system with a dedicated PTH; no dedicated PTH.

2.3.1.1. Statements containing indirect questioning have specialized interrogation facilities