Published date:Sep 28 2020

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: Convention 2019 “Modernization and Multiple Modernities”

Pages:122–128

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v4i13.7705

Liu Chengcheng939531466@qq.comMaster of Beijing Normal university, Beijing, China

Rafael Forteza FernandezPhD, Associate Professor, Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg, Russia

This article provides a study of the definition and classification of the speech act of proposal in the Russian language. Speech acts, understood as the minimum unit of speech activity, is an elementary link of communication and the most important part of linguistic pragmatics. Scholars have already studied many different speech acts, such as speech act (SA) requests, complaints, and refusals. However, little attention is paid to the study of the Russian speech act of proposal. This belongs to the directive speech acts in relation to their realization, the cultural background against which  they are realized and their perception, for example, by Chinese speakers. The results of the paper suggest that proposals in Russian have to be studied in their cultural environment as a way to improve the teaching and learning and translation studies  of this language in China and avoid misunderstandings in the ongoing relations between the two countries, thus leading to help to achieve the goals of successful communicative contacts.

Keywords: speech act, proposal, linguo-pragmatics, intercultural communication, language teaching, language translation and interpretation

[1] Shatunovskiy, I. B. (2016). Speech Actions and Thought Actions in the Russian Language. Moscow: Publishing House YASK.

[2] Searle, J. R. (1986). Classification of Illocutionary Acts. New in Foreign Linguistics, vol. 17, pp. 170-194. [3] Formanovskaya, N. I. (2002). Speech Communication: Communicative-Pragmatic Approach. Moscow: Russian Language, p. 216.

[4] Sacks H., Schegloff, E. A. and Jefferson, G. (1974). A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking in Conversation. Language. Vol. 50, No. 4, Part 1 (Dec., 1974), pp. 696-735. Washington: Linguistic Society of America.

[5] Felix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2014). Speech act sequences. In K. P. Schneider and A. Barron (Eds.), Pragmatics of discourse. Gottingen: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 323- 352.

[6] Belyaeva, E. I. (1992). Grammar and Pragmatics of Motivation: English. Voronezh: VSU Publishing House, p. 168.

[7] Gauker, C. (2003). Words Without Meaning. Massachusets: MIT.

[8] Neale, S. (2005). Pragmatism and Binding. In Z. Gendler (Ed.), Semantics versus Pragmatics. Oxford: Clarendon, pp. 165-285.

[9] Wierzbicka, A. (2010). Cultural Scripts and International Communication. In A. Trosborg (Ed.), Pragmatics Across Language and Cultures. New York: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 43-78.

[10] Chen, R. (2010). Pragmatics between East and West: Similar or Different. In A. Trosborg (Ed.), Pragmatics Across Language and Cultures. New York: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 167-188.

[11] Sun, C. (2006). Chinese: A Linguistic Introduction. Cambridge: CUP.

[12] Goddard, C. (2005). The Languages of East and Southeast Asia. Oxford: OUP.