Understanding Acceptability and Grammar in Text Linguistics

THE SEVEN STANDARDS OF TEXTUALITY THE SEVEN STANDARDS OF TEXTUALITY ACCEPTABILITY in de Introduction to Text Linguistics ACCEPTABILITY in de Beaugrande Introduction to Text Linguistics (1981) Beaugrande & Dressler s & Dressler s (1981) 1 3/21/2025

Acceptability communication that configuration capable extract utterance ) Acceptability is is the communication; ; acceptability that configuration as capable of extract operating utterance ). . the text acceptability in receivers as a a cohesive of utilization operating instructions receiver s attitude in the accept cohesive and utilization ( ( i i. .e e. ., , the instructions from text receiver s attitude in the sense language coherent text the ability from the in sense text text receivers accept a a language and coherent text to the ability to 2 3/21/2025

The emerged grammar in grammatical the stipulated acceptability communication) distinction actualization The emerged during grammar as in a a language, grammatical or the distinction stipulated acceptability (what communication). .This distinction actualization procedures importance during research as an language, i i. .e e. ., , sentences or ungrammatical distinction between by (what is is actually This between procedures. . importance acceptability on how of all sentences to ungrammatical . . This between grammaticality by of of gradually to verify allowed be judged This leads grammaticality (what abstract actually accepted can virtual acceptability gradually verify a a research on an account how to sentences allowed to be account of all sentences judged either leads to (what is is grammar) accepted in seen systems either to an an abstract grammar) and and in the and can virtual be be seen systems as as the and between 3 3/21/2025

One acceptability linguists sentences, themselves their prejudiced The when various the ones among One simple acceptability and linguists to sentences, i i. .e e. ., , to themselves. . This their judgments prejudiced. . The second when he various social the variable ones . .Text among alternative simple and and frequent and grammaticality to to become This orientation judgments and frequent practice grammaticality has invent become the orientation is is rejected and reactions for correlating has been judge their the informants rejected since reactions will practice for and judge correlating been for their own informants be inevitably for own since invent and will be inevitably second correlation he argues social groups variable rules Text producers alternative rules correlation is is suggested argues that groups can rules rather producers would rules or suggested by divergencies of can be rather than would be or sets by Labov of usage for by strict, infallible be able sets of Labov usage in infallible to choose rules. . that the the divergencies be accounted than strict, of rules in by accounted for able to choose 4 3/21/2025

The to probabilistic sentences sentences an contexts becomes interaction constructions acceptability The third to view probabilistic operations sentences would sentences are an informant contexts for becomes a a partial interaction with constructions. . This acceptability. . third correlation view the correlation is is more the production operations. . Well would be are regularly informant when for them partial determiner with other This is is the more promising, and reception Well- -formedness be located regularly judged when it it is is easy them. . In determiner of other factors the narrow promising, namely, reception of formedness of located on judged grammatical easy to In effect, of acceptability factors, , as narrow sense namely, of texts production and texts as as of on a a graded grammatical by to imagine effect, grammaticality acceptability in as in graded scale scale; ; by imagine possible grammaticality possible in in elliptical sense of elliptical of 5 3/21/2025

The correspondences between intentionality and acceptability are exceedingly intricate: The correspondences between intentionality and acceptability are exceedingly intricate: - - Under stress or time pressure, people often accept utterances from others which they would be more reluctant to produce. - - people may shift among styles of text production in order to project desired social roles in different settings. - - People often repair their utterances when deemed unsatisfactory, even though their knowledge of the language has not changed at that moment. Under stress or time pressure, people often accept utterances from others which they would be more reluctant to produce. people may shift among styles of text production in order to project desired social roles in different settings. People often repair their utterances when deemed unsatisfactory, even though their knowledge of the language has not changed at that moment. Therefore, language can scarcely be described or explained except in terms of texts in real settings. Therefore, language can scarcely be described or explained except in terms of texts in real settings. 6 3/21/2025

In would willingness share entering attendant is is conventionally signals In its would subsume willingness to share a a goal entering into attendant consequences conventionally accomplished signals: : its wider subsume acceptance to participate goal. . Acceptance into discourse consequences. . Refusing wider sense, sense, the acceptance as participate in Acceptance , , thus, discourse interaction, Refusing acceptance accomplished by the term term acceptability as the in a a discourse thus, entails interaction, with acceptance by explicit acceptability the active discourse and active and entails with all all explicit A A- - I m B B- - I I don t I m too don t care too busy care to busy for to talk for talking talk about talking just about it it. . just now now. . 7 3/21/2025

The arise successful the participants say anticipate supportive example, receivers The acceptance arise successful communication the participants goals say. . Text anticipate supportive of example, by receivers and acceptance of from communication clearly ability goals on Text producers the of or by building and their people goals diverse clearly demands detect on the producers must the or contrary building an their beliefs of other many other people many goals may motivations demands infer basis of must be receiver's contrary to an internal beliefs and may from diverse motivations; ; ability to to detect infer of what be able responses to a a plan, internal model and knowledge or or other they other the basis what they able to to as for the receiver's responses as plan, for model of knowledge. . of the 8 3/21/2025

[1] trains are all divided up into compartments.... On the way from Paris to Marseilles we had a funny experience. I was sitting next to a Frenchman who was getting off at Lyons...and he was dozing when we got in. So I [2] [3] to Marseilles. We got into a railway carriage [4] pictures of them, and they seem to he more like compartments of some sort. [5] describing to you. I sat next to a man [6] [7] [8] [9] his feet. So he woke up and said something in French which I couldn t understand ... [10] [11] summer? (Benchley 1954: 106) [1] T THWOMLY trains are all divided up into compartments.... On the way from Paris to Marseilles we had a funny experience. I was sitting next to a Frenchman who was getting off at Lyons...and he was dozing when we got in. So I [2] B BENCHLEY [3] T THWOMLY to Marseilles. We got into a railway carriage [4] B BENCHLEY pictures of them, and they seem to he more like compartments of some sort. [5] T THWOMLY describing to you. I sat next to a man [6] B BENCHLEY [7] T THWOMLY [8] B BENCHLEY [9] T THWOMLY his feet. So he woke up and said something in French which I couldn t understand ... [10] BENCHLEY [11] T THWOMLY summer? (Benchley 1954: 106) HWOMLY: We have been all summer in France, you know, and those French : We have been all summer in France, you know, and those French ENCHLEY: Did you get to France at all when you were away? HWOMLY: This was in France that I m telling you about. On the way from Paris : Did you get to France at all when you were away? : This was in France that I m telling you about. On the way from Paris ENCHLEY: The railway carriages there aren t like ours here, are they? I ve seen : The railway carriages there aren t like ours here, are they? I ve seen a little discouraged): That was a French railway carriage I was just ENCHLEY: A Frenchman? HWOMLY: Sure, a Frenchman. That s the ENCHLEY: Oh, I see. HWOMLY: Well, the Frenchman was asleep, and when we got in I stumbled over HWOMLY ( (a little discouraged ): That was a French railway carriage I was just : A Frenchman? : Sure, a Frenchman. That s the point : Oh, I see. : Well, the Frenchman was asleep, and when we got in I stumbled over point. . BENCHLEY: You were across the border into France, then? HWOMLY ( (giving the whole thing up as a bad job : You were across the border into France, then? giving the whole thing up as a bad job): And what did ): And what did you you do this do this 9 3/21/2025

This good up the the impaired could by Benchley adventures moving leave concepts This conversation, good illustration up a a plan the others the principle impaired. . It It follows could block by not Benchley prevents adventures abroad moving railway leave. . His concepts ( railway conversation, though illustration of plan and others deny principle of follows that block a a discourse not recovering prevents Thwomly abroad. . Since railway carriage, His tactic ( railwaycarriage , though somewhat of how and predicts deny acceptance of cooperation, that an discourse by recovering or Thwomly from Since the carriage, Benchley tactic is is to carriage , France , somewhat fantastic, how a a discourse predicts the acceptance of cooperation, textuality an unwilling by refusing or upholding from recounting the participants Benchley cannot to fail France , Frenchman ) fantastic, is is a a participant draws contributions of of the textuality can unwilling participant refusing acceptance, upholding coherence recounting boring participants are discourse participant the contributions the plan, draws others. . If If thus violating can be participant acceptance, e e. .g g. ., , coherence. . of others violating plan, thus be boring are in merely main Topic Frenchman ). . in a a cannot merely the main fail to to accept accept the Topic 10 3/21/2025

railway TOPICs greatest Unless processing because the Thus, his receiver upon questions dealt textual Benchley goal lack railwaycarriage , TOPICs to greatest density Unless processing of because there the main Thus, Mr his dull receiver audience upon which questions would dealt with textual world Benchley has goal and lack of carriage , France , to describe density of topic of the there are main ideas Mr Thwomly dull experience audience has which he would have with variable world . . has defeated and attained of acceptance France , and text- -world of linkage concepts the textual are no ideas. . Thwomly is is blocked experience by has not he is is trying have been variable or and Frenchman world concepts linkage to concepts textual world no CONTROL Frenchman are concepts with to other are world is is not CONTROL CENTRES are the the describe text topic with the concepts. . not feasible CENTRES to other concepts activated, are activated, the feasible to show show blocked from by the not grasped trying to been cooperative or unknown from recounting the impression grasped the to build cooperative if if they unknown aspects recounting that his the concepts build. . Benchley s aspects of impression that his concepts Benchley s of the they the defeated the attained his acceptance. . the other own (peace other participant s (peace and participant s and quiet) his own quiet) via via a a 11 3/21/2025

It It is is evident the intentionality We (a) conveyed (b) or (c) are evident now the context intentionality and We must (a) how conveyed among (b) how or manage (c) how are related now how of communication and acceptability must also how much among participants how the manage the how the related to how great communication with acceptability. . also consider much knowledge participants ( (informativity the participants the situation the texts to each great a a role role is is played with respect played by respect to by to context of like these shared or informativity) ); ; are trying situation ( (situationality texts composing each other consider factors knowledge is is shared factors like these: : or participants are trying to situationality) ); ; and composing the other ( (intertextuality to monitor and the discourse intertextuality) ). . monitor discourse 12 3/21/2025