Discourse Analysis (Midd Test) - Speech Act

Name : Nanang Mutasim Billah NIM : 07320110

Subject : Discourse Analysis Class : A

Please answer these questions well!

1. How do you know about Speech act? Explain more about it!

2. What is the difference between Locutionary, Illocutionary and Perlocutionary acts? Explain and give 3 the examples for each explanation!

3. How do you analysis the indirect speech act performances? Explain clearly!

4. What are the classifications of Illocutionary speech acts in speech act? Explain more about it!

5. In his theory, Searle introduces the notions of 'primary' and 'secondary' illocutionary acts. Explain about that by your Understanding!

Good Luck and Do Your BEST!!!

Answers:

1. Speech act is a technical term in linguistics and the philosophy of language. The contemporary use of the term goes back to John L. Austin's doctrine of locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary acts

2.

· A locutionary act, the performance of an utterance: the actual utterance and its ostensible meaning, comprising phonetic, phatic and rhetic acts corresponding to the verbal, syntactic and semantic aspects of any meaningful utterance;

· A illocutionary act: the semantic 'illocutionary force' of the utterance, thus its real, intended meaning (see below);

Example:

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

· In saying, "Vicky with me to that building over there!", Huda challenges Lian.

· A perlocutionary act: its actual effect, such as persuading, convincing, scaring, enlightening, inspiring, or otherwise getting someone to do or realize something, whether intended or not (Austin 1962).

3. According to searle’s explanation, the ways to analysis the indirect speech act performances are:

Step 1: Understand the facts of the conversation.

Step 2: Assume cooperation and relevance on behalf of the participants.

Step 3: Establish factual background information pertinent to the conversation.

Step 4: Make assumptions about the conversation based on steps 1–3.

Step 5: If steps 1–4 do not yield a consequential meaning, then infer that there are two illocutionary forces at work.

Step 6: Assume the hearer has the ability to perform the act the speaker suggests. The act that the speaker is asking be performed must be something that would make sense for one to ask. For example, the hearer might have the ability to pass the salt when asked to do so by a speaker who is at the same table, but not have the ability to pass the salt to a speaker who is asking the hearer to pass the salt during a telephone conversation.

Step 7: Make inferences from steps 1–6 regarding possible primary illocutions.

Step 8: Use background information to establish the primary illocution (Searle 184).

With this process, Searle concludes that he has found a method that will satisfactorily reconstruct what happens when an indirect speech act is performed.

4. According to John Searle (1975) also, he has set up the following classification of illocutionary speech acts:

• assertives = speech acts that commit a speaker to the truth of the expressed proposition, e.g. reciting a creed
• commissives = speech acts that commit a speaker to some future action, e.g. promises and oaths
• declarations = speech acts that change the reality in accord with the proposition of the declaration, e.g. baptisms, pronouncing someone guilty or pronouncing someone husband and wife
• directives = speech acts that are to cause the hearer to take a particular action, e.g. requests, commands and advice
• expressives = speech acts that express the speaker's attitudes and emotions towards the proposition, e.g. congratulations, excuses and thanks

5. The primary illocutionary act is the indirect one, which is not literally performed. The secondary illocutionary act is the direct one, performed in the literal utterance of the sentence (Searle 178). In the example:

(1) Speaker A: "We should leave for the show or else we’ll be late."

(2) Speaker B: "I am not ready yet."

Here the primary illocutionary act is B's rejection of A's suggestion, and the secondary illocutionary act is B's statement that she is not ready to leave. By dividing the illocutionary act into two subparts, Searle is able to explain that we can understand two meanings from the same utterance all the while knowing which the correct meaning to respond to is.