Pragmatics according to Woo (2010) is the study of origin, common use and the communicative effects of signs. The origin of visual pragmatics is based on the similar concept of linguistic pragmatics. It can be said that pragmatics can be multidisciplinary (Cummings, 2005). In terms of visual communication, pragmatics can be used to affect the response of viewers towards a visual image (Margolis and Pauwels, 2011). With this in mind, pragmatics has an important role in visual communications. An example of the use of visual pragmatics can be found in the following paragraph.
 |
| Davidoff advertisement |
In the image above, it can be seen that it is a cologne advertisement that is targeted for men. The positioning of the product within the image is done to allow the viewer to focus on the man in the image and as well as the streaks of water. This creates a sense of cooling which relates to the name of the the cologne which is "cool water". Other than that, the image also focuses on masculinity. This can be seen with the image of the man. The model in this case displays the feeling of adventure and manliness thus emphasizing on the name of the product.
Lastly, the usage of pragmatics in visual communication is important when examining visual communication because it can provide an analysis of effects of visual communication. It also provides an understanding about what to insert in an image.
References:
- Cummings, L. (2005). The multidisciplinary nature of pragmatics. In L. Cummings (Ed.) Pragmatics: A Multidisciplinary Perspective (pp. 1 -10). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
- Margolis, E. & Pauwels, M. (2011). Press photography and visual rhetoric. In E. Margolis & M. Pauwels (Eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Visual Research Models (pp. 309 - 315). London: SAGE Publications.
- Woo, C. W. H. (2010). Analyzing visual communication. Brunei Darussalam: Universiti Brunei Darussalam.
First, you must not quote me or the lectures. They are not peer-reviewed nor are they publications.
ReplyDeleteSecond, your understanding of pragmatics is not complete nor is it accurate. More research and reading in this area is necessary.
Nevertheless, I see the effort made and I see your attempts to understand the works of Cummings. But using his works and understanding his works are two different things. Make sure the understanding happens first.
Still, a some good effort made.