linguistic communication plays a really of import function in human lives. It is a societal phenomenon. One of the chief ends of linguistic communication is to pass on with people and to understand them. When person speaks, he intends a specific intent. He wants to convey a message through that linguistic communication. A individual uses his linguistic communication to many different intents for illustration, to show his feelings, to inquire for aid and to apologise.
In fact, we use linguistic communication in many different ways, some of these are, the informational, the expressive, the directive, the phatic, the aesthetic. We use linguistic communication and that linguistic communication is a portion of society. Actually, any linguistic communication varies harmonizing to, the nature of the society, what sort of people, and their attitudes. Peoples use linguistic communication harmonizing to their state of affairs. The societal background of any individual can play an of import function in the sort of linguistic communication he has.
I am traveling to discourse these maps and take some illustrations of each one. I will explicate the relationship between linguistic communication and societal organisation.
Language is really of import factor of communicating among society. Using linguistic communication has some maps. We need to utilize linguistic communication to carry through our demands. It is a important portion in our life. If a individual uses his linguistic communication, he chooses words that matches his demands.
Peoples use some maps to state a sentence, to inquire, to answer, to recognize and etc. In fact, signifiers are of import portion of our treatment because they are related to maps. A individual who says, What is your name? he is demoing a signifier of a inquiry. Let us take another illustration, I want to play football, maps as a statement.
Five maps of linguistic communication:
Actually, Geoffery Leech ( 1974 ) . Mentioned that linguistic communication has five maps. They are:
Informational 2- Expressive 3- Directive 4- phatic 5- Aesthetic
I am traveling to discourse every map. “ Informational map which every one tends to presume is most of import ” Geoffery Leech ( 1974 ) . In fact, this map concentrates on the message. It is used to give new information. It depends on truth and value. Let us look at this illustration, the auto is large, the coach is crowded.
“ linguistic communication can hold an expressive map: that is, it can be used to show its conceiver ‘s feelings and attitudes – swear words and exclaimings are the most obvious case of this ” . Geoffery Leech ( 1974 ) . The talker or author of this map tries to show his feelings. He or she reflexes his or her feeling. This map could give a clear image for the personality of the talker or author. The best illustration of this sort is Poetry and literature. In fact, this map evoke certain feelings and express feelings. Examples of this sort are, I am really happy or I spent a fantastic holiday. We can see from the old illustrations that they reflex the feelings of the talker or the author.
“ The 3rd map of linguistic communication is the directing map whereby we aim to act upon the behaviour or attitudes of others. The most straightforward cases of the directing map are bids and petitions. This map of societal control topographic points accent on the receiving system ‘s terminal, instead than the conceiver ‘s terminal of the message: but it resembles the expressive map in giving less importance, on the whole, to conceptual significance than to other types of significance, peculiarly affectional and connotative significance ” Geoffery Leech ( 1974 ) .
Examples of this sort are, I want a cup of tea or shut the door. It is clear hear that, we use the linguistic communication in a direct manner. We ask person to make something. Some times we can utilize a sentence to show two maps. For illustration, I am thirsty. The old illustration could be used to demo the status of the talker or author or to show the feeling. In a manner that a individual asks person to give him H2O.
The 4th map is the aesthetic map, which is “ the usage of linguistic communication for the interest of the lingual artefact itself, and for no intent. This aesthetic map can hold at least every bit much to make with conceptual as with affectional significance ” Geoffery Leech ( 1974 ) . “ The map associated with the message-the vehicle-is the poetic or aesthetic map: the mark taken as an terminal in itself. All art understood as art is taken to incarnate this map, and any object valued for its beauty instead than for its ideological value or usefulness-whether a gorgeous auto, an elegant teapot, or some land area of untasted existent estate-takes on this map. Although Jakobson, possibly more exactly than anyone who preceded him, showed how the aesthetic map could hinge on construction, he argues that cultural norms finally determine the laterality of this map. As a dramatic presentation, he notes that the aesthetic position that one coevals accorded merely to the verse forms of Karel Macha, a subsequent coevals agreements merely to his journals. Jakobson, R. ( 1933 ) ” .
Harmonizing to Leech, the 5th map is the phatic function. “ the map of maintaining communicating lines unfastened, and maintaining societal relationships in good fix ( in Britain civilization, speaking about the conditions is a well-known illustration of this ) ” . Geoffery Leech ( 1974 ) . We can state about this map that it is used for normal negotiations. An illustration of this, when two people meet each other accidently in a topographic point. They start speaking about something unimportant for the interest of communicating like, how are you? How is your kids? And so on. We can state that it is a sort of day-to-day speaking. It is non intending but is good.
Actually has another categorization from what we have discussed. H. Douglas Brown has classified map of linguistic communication into seven types. “ This categorization is non much different from that of Leech. The functional attack to depicting linguistic communication is one that has its roots in the traditions of British linguists J, R Firth, who reviewed linguistic communication as synergistic and interpersonal, off of behaving and doing others act ” Berns, ( 1984 ) .