Email this article 
The Phenomenon of Communicative Failure: Communicative and Pragmatic Aspect
- Authors: Bykova O.A.1
-
Affiliations:
- Moscow State Linguistic University
- Issue: No 13(881) (2023)
- Pages: 9-14
- Section: Linguistics
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/2542-2197/article/view/320078
- ID: 320078
Cite item
Abstract
This article attempts to summarize points of view on the phenomenon of communication failure in communication theory and pragmatics. The author establishes a typology of communication failures based on two types of criteria: procedural (i. e. at what stage of constructing the interaction the failure occurred) and structural (i. e. with which component of the communication scheme it is associated). The pragmatic approach considers failure as a phenomenon depending on some universal laws.
About the authors
Olga Alekseyevna Bykova
Moscow State Linguistic University
Author for correspondence.
Email: bykoolya@yandex.ru
PhD (Philology), Acting Head of the Department of Lexicology and Stylistics of the French Language Faculty of the French Language Moscow State Linguistic University
Russian FederationReferences
- Austin, J. L. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2005). Le discours en interaction. Paris: Armand Colin.
- Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (1980). L’énonciation. De la subjectivité dans le langage. Paris: Armand Colin.
- Vinogradov, S. I. (2006). Kul’tura russkoj rechi. Moscow: Norma: INFRA-M. (In. Russ.)
- Gorodeckij, B. Yu. (1985). K tipologii kommunikativnyh neudach = To the typology of communicative failures. Dialogovoe vzaimodejstvie i predstavlenie znanij (pp. 64–78): digest of articles. Novosibirsk: SO AN SSSR. (In Russ.)
- Shlyahov, V. I. (2013). Rechevaya deyatel’nost’: Fenomen scenarnosti v obshchenii = Speech activity. The phenomenon of scenarity in communication. Moscow: KRASAND. (In. Russ.).
- Maingueneau, D. (1996). Les termes clés de l’analyse du discours. Paris: Seuil.
- Bugrova, S. E. (2013). Kommunikativnye neudachi i sposoby ih preodoleniya v neoficial’nom angloyazychnom obshchenii) = Communicative failures and ways to overcome them in informal English-speaking communication): PhD in Philology. Nizhnij Novgorod. (In Russ.)
- Hérédia de, C. (1986). Incompréhension et malentendus. Étude d’interaction entre étrangers et autochtones. Langue française, 71, 48–69.
- Kostyushkina, G. M. (2005). Sovremennye napravleniya vo francuzskoj lingvistike = Modern trends in French linguistics. Irkutsk: Baykalsky State University of Economics and Law. (In Russ.)
- Kudryavceva, N. B. (2009). Diskurs i sistema sochinitel’nyh soyuzov sovremennogo francuzskogo yazyka = Discourse and the system of compositional unions of the modern French language: SeniorDoctorate in Philology. Moscow. (In Russ.)
- Grice, G. P. (1985). Logika i rechevoe obshchenie = Logic and speech communication. Novoye v zarubezhnoy lingvistike (vol. 16, pp. 217–237). Moscow: Progress. (In Russ.)
- Sperber, D., Wilson, D. (1989). La pertinence. Paris: Minuit, 1989.
- Susov, I. P. (2006). Lingvisticheskaya pragmatika = Linguistic pragmatics. Moscow: Vostok – Zapad. (In Russ.)
- K”neva, N. K. (1999). Integral’nyj podhod k probleme kommunikativnyh neudach = Integral approach to the problem of communicative failures: abstract of PhD in Philology. Tver’. (In Russ.)
- Karyagina, N. F. (2002). Perlokutivnaya semantika otvetnyh replik: na materiale dramaturgicheskih proizvedenij sovremennyh francuzskih avtorov = Perlocutive semantics of retaliatory remarks: based on the material of dramaturgical works of modern French authors: PhD in Philology. Moscow. (In Russ.)
Supplementary files
