Atsiprašymo pragmatika (situacija Kontrolinis darbas)
Pragmatics of Apology (the Situation of a Test Work)

Summary/Abstract: The present article analyses respondents’ texts that were proposed as linguistic response to the apology situation when a teacher does not return corrected tests, i.e. an addresser does not perform activity, which was undertaken as obligation by himself/herself. Damage is immaterial, insignificant. Members’ relations are vertical, one-sided: they are different by their social distance (age, education) and situational status. Action takes place in public space. 738 answers are being analyzed (145 variants of linguistic behavior). 441 answer shows that situation is understood as apology. These are the following texts: 1) apology due to existing/current situation; 2) mistake is recognized; 3) stand on defensive; 4) promise is made. 297 respondents do not treat this situation as requiring of apology. These are the following texts: 1) the situation is simply named and it is indicate that obligation is postponed; 2) the situation is ignored; 3) the fault is transferred to the addressee. Here, the texts with explicated and implicated apology are the most important ones. Explicit expression in different verb atsiprašau (describe) forms was evident in 281 answer (39 texts). Implicit description is expressed via verbs atleiskit (excuse me) (31 answer; 12 texts), nepykit (don’t be mad on me) (13 answers, 6 texts), dovanokit (forgive me) (3 answers, 2 texts). In 5 texts confession of guilt is expressed, 57 answers indicate standing on the defense (15 texts). Promises dominate in texts ignoring apology (55 answers, 13 texts), ignore of the situation (18 answers, 4 texts), the fault transfer to pupils (12 answers, 7 texts)

• Details
• Contents