LEADER 02941nam 2200625 a 450 001 9910456576903321 005 20200520144314.0 010 $a1-283-28051-5 010 $a9786613280510 010 $a90-272-8503-9 035 $a(CKB)2550000000047264 035 $a(EBL)765848 035 $a(OCoLC)752308815 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000540284 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)12216131 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000540284 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10585698 035 $a(PQKB)11144648 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC765848 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL765848 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10495901 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL328051 035 $a(EXLCZ)992550000000047264 100 $a20110601d2011 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur|n|---||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 14$aThe pragmatics of requests and apologies$b[electronic resource] $edevelopmental patterns of Mexican students /$fElizabeth Flores Salgado 210 $aAmsterdam ;$aPhiladelphia $cJohn Benjamins Pub. Co.$d2011 215 $a1 online resource (276 p.) 225 1 $aPragmatics & beyond new series (P&BNS),$x0922-842X ;$vv. 212 300 $aDescription based upon print version of record. 311 $a90-272-5618-7 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and indexes. 327 $aThe Pragmatics of Requests and Apologies; Editorial page; Title page; LCC data; Table of contents; List of tables; Acknowledgments; 1. Introduction; 2. Acquisitional issues in pragmatics; 3. Methodology; 4. Analysis of results; 5. Summary of findings; 6. Conclusions; References; Appendix 1; Appendix 2; Appendix 3; Appendix 4; Name index; Subject index 330 $aThe purpose of this research is to analyse the pragmatic development of language groups at different proficiency levels and to investigate the relationship between interlanguage pragmatics and grammatical competence. For this study, 36 native Spanish speaking EFL learners at different proficiency levels were asked to respond in English to 24 different situations that called for the speech acts of request and apology. Results showed three important aspects. The first finding suggested that basic adult learners possess a pragmatic knowledge in their L1 that allows them to focus on the intended m 410 0$aPragmatics & beyond ;$vv. 212. 606 $aSpanish language$xDialects$zMexico 606 $aSpanish language$xDiscourse analysis 606 $aDialogue analysis 608 $aElectronic books. 615 0$aSpanish language$xDialects 615 0$aSpanish language$xDiscourse analysis. 615 0$aDialogue analysis. 676 $a460.1/45 700 $aFlores Salgado$b Elizabeth$0924121 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910456576903321 996 $aThe pragmatics of requests and apologies$92073950 997 $aUNINA LEADER 03419nam 22006372 450 001 9910779345203321 005 20151005020621.0 010 $a1-139-79429-9 010 $a1-316-09017-5 010 $a1-139-77993-1 010 $a1-139-77689-4 010 $a1-139-78292-4 010 $a1-107-25473-6 010 $a1-139-22569-3 010 $a1-283-71602-X 010 $a1-139-77841-2 035 $a(CKB)2550000000708276 035 $a(EBL)1042524 035 $a(OCoLC)833769634 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000755349 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)11468642 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000755349 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10730460 035 $a(PQKB)10985110 035 $a(UkCbUP)CR9781139225694 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC1042524 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL1042524 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10618614 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL402852 035 $a(EXLCZ)992550000000708276 100 $a20111216d2012|||| uy| 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur||||||||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aConstructing international security $ealliances, deterrence, and moral hazard /$fBrett V. Benson, Vanderbilt University$b[electronic resource] 210 1$aCambridge :$cCambridge University Press,$d2012. 215 $a1 online resource (xiii, 207 pages) $cdigital, PDF file(s) 300 $aTitle from publisher's bibliographic system (viewed on 05 Oct 2015). 311 $a1-107-02724-1 311 $a1-107-65819-5 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $aMachine generated contents note: 1. Understanding the design of security commitments; 2. A typology of third-party commitments; 3. Time consistency and entrapment; 4. Evidence of moral hazard in military alliances; 5. A theory of commitment design; 6. Testing the implications for alliance design; 7. Deterrent commitments in East Asia; 8. Constructing security in today's world. 330 $aConstructing International Security helps policy makers and students recognize effective third-party strategies for balancing deterrence and restraint in security relationships. Brett V. Benson shows that there are systematic differences among types of security commitments. Understanding these commitments is key, because commitments, such as formal military alliances and extended deterrence threats, form the basis of international security order. Benson argues that sometimes the optimal commitment conditions military assistance on specific hostile actions the adversary might take. At other times, he finds, it is best to be ambiguous by leaving an ally and adversary uncertain about whether the third party will intervene. Such uncertainty transfers risk to the ally, thereby reducing the ally's motivation to behave too aggressively. The choice of security commitment depends on how well defenders can observe hostilities leading to war and on their evaluations of dispute settlements, their ally's security and the relative strength of the defender. 606 $aSecurity, International 615 0$aSecurity, International. 676 $a355/.031 686 $aPOL011000$2bisacsh 700 $aBenson$b Brett V.$f1973-$01499803 801 0$bUkCbUP 801 1$bUkCbUP 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910779345203321 996 $aConstructing international security$93726200 997 $aUNINA