Yemen Journal for Scientific Research, Volume (2), Issue

Literature Review
According to Leech (1983), Charles Morris (1974) introduced the first modern definition of pragmatics, and since then many other specialists have continued to conceptualize this branch of linguistics. Morris (1974) originally defined pragmatics as “…the discipline that studies the relations of signs to interpreters, while semantics studies the relations of signs to the objects to which the signs are applicable” (as cited in Leech, 1974, p. 172). Then, Crystal (1986: 240), defined pragmatics as "… the study of language from the point of view of the users, especially of the choices they make, the constraints they encounter in using language in social interaction, and the effects their use of language has on the other participants in an act of communication". This definition analyzes pragmatics from the perspective of its users. It takes into account the different choices that speakers are able to make when using the target language, depending on the social interaction of their communication. The notion of choice leads to using another aspect into consideration which is useful to language learners, namely, developing the ability to make the right choices among a variety of pragmatic elements. Later on, Kasper and Blum-Kulka (1993, p.3), defined pragmatics as “the study of people's comprehension and production of linguistic action in context”. Here, the words action and context are included, which are two crucial elements of speech acts in language. Kasper and Blum-Kulka (1993), used the term linguistic action to refer to the capacity of the learner to produce an utterance. They also put emphasis on comprehension as well as production, a distinction that is particularly relevant for second language learners’ daily lives.
Recently, pragmatics is considered as the study of the language used in communication, and the relationships between sentences and the contexts and situations in which they are used. Yule (2010), for example, defines pragmatics as “the study of what speakers mean, or “speakers' meaning” and the study of “invisible” meaning, or how we recognize what is meant even when it is actually not said or written". Earlier, in this regard, Fromkin and Rodman (1993), have referred to the “context” of a sentence or discourse, and the importance of context in interpreting language. According to them, the general study of how context influences the way sentences convey information is called pragmatics. Pragmatics is as a complex subject as syntax or semantics. The term pragmatics comes from the field of Semiotics, or the study of signs. Within semiotics, syntax means “the way signs are arranged”, semantics means “what signs mean or signify”, and pragmatics means “the relationship between signs and their users”. Pragmatics, then, has to do with people’s use of language in contexts, so it is a part of what have been calling “linguistic performance”. In this concern, Stalnaker’s definition is more explicit (as cited in Mason and Hatim 1997, p. 9), "Pragmatics is the study of the purposes for which sentences are used, of the real world conditions under which a sentence may be appropriately used as an utterance". Through pragmatics, contextual meaning is exploited and analyzed to discover the “real” meaning. It is important in pragmatics to talk about the implied and intended meaning, assumptions, purposes and goals of people in communication and various types of actions. The inability of semantics to satisfactorily explicate the sociolinguistic and other non-linguistic components of verbal communication gave birth to pragmatics. Thus, pragmatics is a fairly new field of study, which shares borders with sociolinguistics and semantics. Pragmatics is discourse in action, action determined by society or interlocutors. When the action is determined by society, it becomes more or less sociolinguistics, but when it is more of intended meaning, it tends or leans towards semantics.
As pragmatics is a relatively new branch of linguistics that provides a new way of looking at language, Verschueren (1999), characterized pragmatics as a general cognitive, social, and cultural perspective on linguistic phenomenon in relation to their usage in forms of behavior.
On the other hand, translation is the process of rendering a text that was produced in one language (the source language) into another (the target language). Skinner (1974), said that “translation can best be defined as a verbal stimulus that has the same effect as the original (or as much of the same effect as possible) on a different verbal community”. The Russian formalist, Roman Jakobson (1959), divided translation into three parts: intralingual, intersemiotic and interlingual. Intralingual translation is “rewording” which consists of the interpretation of linguistic signs within the same language. Intersemiotic translation has to do with the interpretation of linguistic signs by using non-linguistic signs. Interlingual translation is translation properly, and consists of interpretation of linguistic signs from one language to another. Against the background of Roman Jakobson’s standpoint on three-fold definition of translation, it can be asserted that translation is as old as man is. The primary purpose of translation is the successful transmission of the original message using the medium of different linguistic forms. In the process of reproducing a message and its resultant nuances from one linguistic form into another, the translator is often confronted with problems of contextual meanings. In this sense, sociolinguistics and semantics have links with translation. According to Newmark (1981), translation is a discipline that enjoys interesting links with a wide variety of disciplines such as linguistics, comparative study of cultures, comparative ethnology, computer science, comparative sociology, etc. Its relationship with Linguistics is particularly profound. Newmark (1981) and Kwofie (1999), had argued that translation is a sub-set of linguistics. Proponents of such views regarded translation as part of applied or comparative linguistics. Translation, by its interdisciplinary nature and character, draws immensely from many other disciplines without necessarily being part of them. One such discipline is pragmatics. The relationship may appear obscure, but a close examination of the two disciplines brings out striking areas of interest.