Pragmatic is a subfield of linguistics that studies the way in which language is used by speakers. It is distinguished from semantics, which studies the meaning of words and sentences, by its focus on context-dependent interpretation of utterances. For example, the word “pragmatic” may mean “practical,” “realistic,” or “aware of practical consequences.” The term pragmatics may also refer to a philosophical position or theory.
Pragmatism is the idea that practical considerations should be taken into account when making decisions. It is contrasted with idealism, which focuses on abstract principles and ideals. Pragmatism is often used in the context of politics, where politicians try to find solutions that are realistic and can be implemented. Pragmatism is also used to describe the behavior of businesses, where a pragmatic approach is often more effective than a theoretical one.
The concept of pragmatism has been applied to a wide variety of fields, including business, politics, economics, science and philosophy. For example, a businessman may be more interested in the results of his actions than the details of how those actions are achieved. Similarly, politicians may be more interested in pragmatic factors like public opinion, political feasibility, and cost-effectiveness than ideological concerns. The philosophy has also been applied to other subjects, such as art and music. A work of art that is considered to be pragmatic may reflect the interests and values of its creator, rather than adhering to a preconceived notion of beauty.
There are several different approaches to pragmatics, which can be classified as formal, computational, theoretical or experimental. For instance, there is a strong tradition of pragmatics in computer science, with notable contributions by people such as Richard Firth and John Clifton. More recently, there has been a rise in probabilistic and Bayesian methods for modelling pragmatics. These techniques are particularly useful for the analysis of metaphor, hyperbole and politeness.
A key issue in pragmatics is the relationship between semantics and pragmatics. Some scholars have drawn a sharp distinction between the two, with semantics concerned solely with propositional content and pragmatics dealing with the illocutionary forces of speech acts and conversational implicatures. Others, however, have seen the distinction as more porous, with various aspects of pragmatics being linked to semantics by virtue of their context dependence.
For example, some philosophers of language have argued that the semantic component of an utterance corresponds to its literal truth conditional meaning. This is an aspect of semantics, but many pragmaticians would disagree with this. They see it as a necessary but not sufficient condition for an interpretation, and they believe that other elements are needed to explain how a sentence is understood in its context. These other elements include the speaker’s intentions, their beliefs and goals, and contextual facts. This is the view that has been characterized as minimalist pragmatics, and it has been influenced by the ideas of Grice and other communicative maxims. It is also reflected in contemporary relevance theory.