Apakah yang dimaksud dengan SPEECH ACT THEORY ?

SPEECH ACT THEORY

I.      INTRODUCTION

A. Background or Rational

In this term paper, I want to point out the basic issues of Speech Act Theory. After giving a general explanation of what Speech Act and Speech Act Theory is and trying to mention and explain three kinds the meaning of speech acts, I will give an example of these kinds. Afterwards, I will present the classification of speech acts. Then explain and give it example. Finally, I will move on the more explanation about illocutionary act and Direct and Indirect Speech Acts and show two common examples.

B. Purpose

The reasons of us to make this paper are:

·         Giving the readers explanation about the speech act theory.

·         The speech act has use and effect in our everyday life.

·         In everyday communication, a variety of different Speech Acts are used.

Guest Lecture

 

II.   ANALYSIS

A.    Definition of Speech Act

A speech act is a minimal functional unit in human communication. Just as a word  (refusal) is the smallest free form found in language and a morpheme is the smallest unit of language that carries information about meaning (-al in refuse-al makes it a noun), the basic unit of communication is a speech act (the speech act of refusal).

A speech act theory is a theory where the effect of an utterance is analyzed in relationship to the speaker and listener’s behavior.

B.     The Meaning of Speech Acts

According to Austin's theory (1962), what we say has three kinds of meaning:

1.            locutionary meaning

The literal meaning of what is said (communicative act)

It's hot in here.

2.            illocutionary meaning

The social function of what is said (speaker intention)      

'It's hot in here'   could be:

- an indirect request for someone to open the window.

- an indirect refusal to close the window because someone is cold.

- a complaint implying that someone should know better than to keep the windows closed (expressed emphatically).

3.      perlocutionary meaning

The effect of what is said.

         'It's hot in here' could result in someone opening the windows.

C.    The Classification of Speech Acts

Searle concentrated on Illocutionary Acts and his main aim was to categorize them as detailed as possible. He invented three major criteria to classify Illocutionary Acts:

a.       The first criterion is the Illocutionary Point, which is the main purpose of a Speech Act.

While a description has the function to represent something, a promise has the role of obligating the speaker to some action to be done in the future.

b.      The Direction of Fit describes the intersection between the words and the world. Are the words describing some items of the world, this is called ‛word to world direction’.

The other way round, the world is supposed to follow the words, for example in a promise or an order. According to Searle, the Direction of Fit is always a consequence of the Illocutionary Point.

c.       The circumstances of a certain utterance are also a significant criterion.

Here, the psychological state of the speaker is relevant. Does he believe that his words are true? This is what Searle calls Sincerity Conditions.

Searle claims that he has invented a taxonomy that reflects what happens when a speech act is performed sufficiently. He has set up the following five categories of Illocutionary Speech Acts. To find out, what category a single utterance belongs to, we can form an indirect sentence and look at the verb (Speech Act Verb) that is used.

1.      Representatives or Assertives

Speaker asserts a proposition to be true using verbs such as affirm, believe, conclude, deny, report.

Example: “The sun is shining”

è Amy affirms that the sun is shining.

2.      Directives

Speaker tries to make the hearer do something, ask, beg, challenge, command, dare, invite, insist, request.

Example: “Could you pass me the salt, please?”

è Amy asks Peter to pass her the salt.

3.      Commissives

Speaker commits themselves to a future course of action, promise, pledge, swear, vow, guarantee.

Example: “I will come to your party”

è Amy promises Peter to come to his party.

4.      Expressives

Speaker expresses an attitude to or about a state of affairs apologizes, appreciate, congratulate, deplore, detest, regret, thank, welcome.

Example: “You are always late!”

è Amy complains that Peter is always late.

5.      Declaratives

Speech Acts that create a change in reality.

Example: “Hereby the meeting is closed”

è Amy declares the meeting as closed.

Having mentioned these five different types of utterances, it is possible to combine these two classifications (a-c and 1 – 5).

Amy says: “The sun is shining”

This sentence belongs to the category of Representatives/Assertive (1) as Amy describes the world. To go into more detail, I will examine this utterance on the basis of the three classifications of Speech Acts.

A)  Amy’s purpose is to describe the world. (Illocutionary Point: DESCRIBE)

B)  The words follow the world. (Direction of Fit: WORD TO WORLD)

C)  Amy believes what she sees. (Sincerity: BELIEVE)

 

Amy says: “Open the window, please!”

This utterance belongs to the category of Directives (2) as we could form the indirect sentence: Amy wants Peter to open the window.

A) Amy wants Peter to do something. (Illocutionary Point: EFFECT AN ACTION)

B) She wants that the world (in this example Peter) follows her words. (Direction of Fit: WORLD TO WORD)

C)  Amy has the will that something happens. (Sincerity: WILL)

Austin stated that these classifications are unique for all possible Illocutionary Acts. No matter what Representative or Assertive sentence is uttered, the criteria A) to C) are unique for all of them. This structured taxonomy was the biggest difference in comparison to Austin.

D.    Illocutionary Acts

The concept of an illocutionary act is central to the concept of a speech act. Although there are numerous opinions as to what 'illocutionary acts' actually are, there are some kinds of acts which are widely accepted as illocutionary, as for example promising, ordering someone, and bequeathing.

Following the usage of, for example, John R. Searle, "speech act" is often meant to refer just to the same thing as the term illocutionary act, which John L. Austin had originally introduced in How to Do Things with Words (published posthumously in 1962).

According to Austin's preliminary informal description, the idea of an "illocutionary act" can be captured by emphasizing that "by saying something, we do something", as when someone orders someone else to go by saying "Go!", or when a minister joins two people in marriage saying, "I now pronounce you husband and wife." (Austin would eventually define the "illocutionary act" in a more exact manner.)

An interesting type of illocutionary speech act is that performed in the utterance of what Austin calls performatives, typical instances of which are "I nominate John to be President", "I sentence you to ten years' imprisonment", or "I promise to pay you back." In these typical, rather explicit cases of performative sentences, the action that the sentence describes (nominating, sentencing, promising) is performed by the utterance of the sentence itself.

Examples

·         Greeting (in saying, "Hi John!", for instance), apologizing ("Sorry for that!"), describing something ("It is snowing"), asking a question ("Is it snowing?"), making a request and giving an order ("Could you pass the salt?" and "Drop your weapon or I'll shoot you!"), or making a promise ("I promise I'll give it back") are typical examples of "speech acts" or "illocutionary acts".

·         In saying, "Watch out, the ground is slippery", Mary performs the speech act of warning Peter to be careful.

·         In saying, "I will try my best to be at home for dinner", Peter performs the speech act of promising to be at home in time.

·         In saying, "Ladies and gentlemen, please give me your attention", Mary requests the audience to be quiet.

·         In saying, "Don't go into the water" (a locutionary act with distinct phonetic, syntactic and semantic features) counts as warning you not to go into the water (an illocutionary act), and if you heed my warning I have thereby succeeded in persuading you not to go into the water (a perlocutionary act).

E.     Direct and Indirect Speech Acts

In everyday communication, a variety of different Speech Acts are used. Without being linguists, usually people are able understand what the speaker wants to say. Direct and Indirect Speech Acts are interchanged unconsciously as the following examples will show:

“What time is it?” vs. “Could you tell me what time it is?”

Both utterances are interrogative sentences which have the same function. They are questions that request the listener to tell the speaker the time. But as we examine this utterances in more detail, is becomes clear that they are different on the level of Speech Act.

While the first utterance is a direct question, the second one is structured as a question that should usually be answered with “Yes” or “No”. The term “Could you” in general refers to the ability of the listener to tell the time. Still, nobody would answer “Yes” and go away.

“Turn on the heating!” vs. “I’m freezing to death!”

We would usually understand both sentences as directives. But again they vary in terms of directness. Obviously, the first utterance is an imperative sentence. Somebody is commanded to turn on the heating.

III.     CONCLUSION

A.    Conclusion

1.      There are three meaning of speech acts. They are locutionary meaning, illocutionary meaning and perlocutionary meaning.

2.      The categories of speech acts are representatives or assertive, directives, commissives, expressives and declaratives.

3.      The concept of an illocutionary act is central to the concept of a speech act.

4.      In everyday communication, a variety of different Speech Acts are used. Without being linguists, usually people are able understand what the speaker wants to say.

Reference

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.

Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In A. Jaworski, & N. Coupland (Eds.), The discourse reader (pp. 76-87). New York: Routledge. 

Gumperz, J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Kasper, G. (1990). Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of Pragmatics, 14,193-218.

Searle, J. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics,vol. 3: Speech Acts (pp. 59–82). New York. 

Bernd. (2005). English Linguistic Essentials. Berlin: Cornelsen.

Lanigan, Richard L. (1977). Speech Act Phenomenology. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

Saeed, John I. (2003). Semantics – Second Edition. Malden, USA: Blackwell Publishing.

Http://www.google.com/books-speech act theory/2011/July/06/07