CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 An Overview of Pragmatics
Pragmatics studies the ability of natural language speakers to communicate more than that which is explicitly stated. Another perspective is that pragmatics deals with the ways we reach our goal in communication. Pragmatics explains language use in context. It seeks to explain aspects of meaning which cannot be found in the plain sense of words or structures, as explained by semantics. Pragmatics is regarded as one of the most challenging aspects for language learners to grasp, and can only truly be learned with experience.
Pragmaticsis concerned with theuse of these tools in meaningful communication. Pragmatics is about theinteraction of semantic knowledge with our knowledge of the world, taking into account contexts of use (Griffiths, 2006:1).
For example, the sentence (3) “You get a green light” is an ambiguous sentence. Without understanding the context, it would difficult to identify the meaning of the sentence, such as:
a. It could mean that you are getting a green bulb.
b. It could mean that you are getting a green light in the traffic light to drive
your car.
From these interpretations, we may see that the meaning of the sentence is depending on the context and the intention of the speaker.
According to Yule (1996:3), there are four areas that pragmatics are concern with, namely:
1. Pragmatics is concerned with the study of meaning as communicated by a speaker (or writer) and interpreted by a listener (or reader). It has, consequently, more to do with the analysis of what people mean by their utterances than what the words or phrases in those utterances might mean by themselves. Pragmatics is the study of speaker meaning.
2. This type of study necessarily involves the interpretation of what people mean in a particular context and how the context influences what is said. It requires the consideration of how speaker organize what they want to say in accordance with who they are talking to, where, when, and under what circumstances. Pragmatic is the study of contextual meaning.
3. This approach also necessarily explores how listeners can make inferences about what is said in order to arrive at an interpretation of the speaker’s intended meaning. This type of study explores how a great deal of what is unsaid is recognized as part of what is communicated. We might say that it is the investigation of invisible meaning. Pragmatic is the study of how more meaning gets communicated than it said.
shared experience. On the assumption of how close or distant the listener is, speakers determine how much needs to be said. Pragmatics is the study of the expression of relative distance.
Pragmatics is a systematic way of explaining language use in context. It seeks to explain aspects of meaning which cannot be found in the plain sense of words or structures, as explained by semantics. Pragmatics is a way of investigating how sense can be made of certain texts even when, from a semantic viewpoint, the text seems to be either incomplete or to have a different meaning to what is really intended. Consider a sign seen in a children's wear shop window:
(4) “Baby Sale - lots of bargains”.
From this sign, we know without asking that there are no babies are for sale. We will know the things that sold there are items used for babies. Pragmatics allows us to investigate how this “meaning beyond the words” can be understood without ambiguity.
2.2 Speech Acts
that his or her communicative intention will be recognized by the hearer. Both speaker and hearer are usually helped by this process by the circumstances surrounding the utterance. These circumstances, including other utterances, are called the speech events.
For instance, if we work in a situation where a boss has a great deal of power, then the boss utterance of the utterance bellow is more than just statement:
(5) “You’re fired”
The utterance above can be used to perform the act of ending your employment. Sspeech act is characterized as an act which characteristically consistsin the issuance of words in sentences, characteristically succeeds only if the circumstancesare in some way appropriate, and characteristically comes into being only if theperson issuing the linguistic token has certain intentions.
According to Yule (1996:48), on any occasion, the action performed by producing an utterance will consist of three related actsnamely:
1. Locutionary act, which is the basic act of utterance, or producing a
meaningful linguistic expression.
2. Illocutionary acts is an act that performed via communicative force of an
utterance.
Akmajian (2001:394) states that speech acts are defined as the acts performed in uttering expressions. According to the theory they have developed,there are four important categories of speech acts namely:
1. Utterance acts are simply acts of uttering sounds, syllables, words,
phrases, and sentences from a language.
2. Illocutionaryact is an act performed in uttering something.
3. Perlocutionary act is anact performed by uttering something, an act that
produces an effect on the hearer.
4. Prepositional acts is an act that used for referring and predicating.
According to Leech (1983:199), the language provides us with verbs like order, request, beg, plead, just as it provides us with nouns like puddle, pond, lake, sea, ocean. In speech acts, Leech categorized into three types namely:
1. Locutionary act is performing the act of saying something.
2. Illocutionary act is performing an act in saying something.
3. Perlocutionary act is performing an act by saying something.
For example:
1. Locution: s says to h that X
3. Perlocution: By saying X, s convinces h that P
Note: (X being certain words spoken with a certain sense and reference)
Austin (1962:108) distinguished a group of things we do in saying something, namely:
1. Locutionary act, which is roughlyequivalent to uttering a certain sentence
with a certainsense and reference, which again is roughly equivalent to 'meaning' in the traditional sense.
2. Illocutionary acts such as informing,ordering, warning, undertaking, and
so on, for instance, utterances whichhave a certain (conventional) force.
3. perlocutionary acts: what we bring about orachieve by saying something,
such as convincing, persuading,deterring, and even, say, surprising or misleading.
2.3 Types of Speech Acts
2.3.1 Locutionary acts
locutionary act, which is the basic act of utterance, or producing a meaningful linguistic expression.For Example:
(6) Mike Uttered the words “Hand some money over to me”, with referring
to Mike.
2.3.2 Illocutionary Acts.
Austin (1962:108) states that Illocutionary acts such as informing,ordering, warning, undertaking, and so on, for instance, utterances whichhave a certain (conventional) force. Leech (1983:199) says that Illocutionary act is performing an act in saying something. According to Yule (1996:48) Illocutionary acts is an act that performed via communicative force of an utterance.
Austin in Akmajian (1980:395) characterized the illocutionary act as an act performed insaying something. For instance, in saying:
(7) “Sampras can beat Agassi”,
Someother examples of illocutionary acts are given bellow:
promising threatening
reporting requesting
stating suggesting
asking ordering
telling proposing
2.3.3 Perlocutionary acts
According to Akmajian (1980:396), perlocutionary act is the act performed by sayingsomething. For instance, suppose John believes everything a certainsportscaster says; then by saying:
“Sampras can beat Agassi”,
the sportscastercould convince John that Sampras can beat Agassi. Some typicalexamples of perlocutionary acts are bellow:
inspiring embarrassing
persuading misleading
impressing intimidating
deceiving irritating
These are some important characteristics of perlocutionary acts:
1. Perlocutionary acts (unlike illocutionary acts) are not performedby uttering explicit performative sentences. We do not perform the perlocutionaryact of convincing someone that Sampras can beat Agassi by uttering “Sampras can beat Agassi”.
2. Perlocutionary acts seem to involve the effects of utterance actsand illocutionary acts on the thoughts, feelings, and actions of the hearer,whereas illocutionary acts do not. Thus, perlocutionary acts can be representedas an illocutionary act of the speaker (S) plus its effects on thehearer (H):
a. S tells + H believes . . . = S persuades H that . . .
2.4 The Understanding of Illocutionary Acts
2.4.1 The Definition of Illocutionary Act
Leech (1983:199) says that Illocutionary act is performing an act in saying something. According to Yule (1996:48) Illocutionary acts is an act that performed via communicative force of an utterance.
For example:
(8) I’ve just made some coffee.
We might utter the example above to make a statement, an offer, an explanation, or for some other communicative purpose. This is also generally known as the illocutionary force of the utterance.
There are three important characteristics of illocutionary according to Akmajian (1980:395), namely:
1. Illocutionary acts can often besuccessfully performed simply by uttering the right
explicit performativesentence, with the right intentions and beliefs, and under the right circumstances.
3. The most important, unlike perlocutionary acts, most illocutionaryacts used to communicate have the feature that one performs themsuccessfully simply by getting one’s illocutionary intentions recognized.
2.4.2 The Categories of illocutionary Act
Leech (1983:205) classifies illocutionary acts into four corresponding verbs namely:
1. Assertive Verbs normally occur in the construction ‘S verb (…) that X’ , where S is the subject (referring to the speaker), and where X refers to a proposition, example: affirm, allege, assert, forecast, predict, announce, insist.
2. Directive Verbs normally occur in the construction ‘S verb (O) that X’ or S’ verb O to Y’, where S and O are subject and object (referring to s2 and h2
respectively), where that X’ is a non-indicative that-clause, and where to Y’ is an infinitive clause, such as: ask, beg, bid, command, demand, forbid, recommend, request. Unlike the that-clauses following assertive verbs, these non-indicative that-clauses contain a subjunctive or modal like should, since they refer to a mand rather than to a proposition; for example: We requested that the ban (should) be lifted.
than that of the main verb). There is therefore a case for merging the directive and commisive verbs into one ‘superclass’.
4. Expressive verbs normally occur in the construction ‘S verb (prep) (O) (prep) Xn’, where ‘(prep)’ is an optimal preposition, and where Xn is an abstract noun phrase or a gerundive phrase; for example: apologize, commiserate, congratulate, pardon, thank.
Yule (1996:48) states that one general categories system list five types of general function performed by speech acts: declaration, representatives, expressive, directives, and commisives.
Declarations are those kinds of speech acts that change the world via their utterance. As example in illustrate below, the speaker has to have a special institutional role, in a specific context, in order to perform a declaration appropriately.
(9) Priest : I now pronounce you husband and wife.
(10) Referee : You’re out!
(11) Jury Foreman : We find the defendant guilty.
In using a declaration, the speaker changes the world via words.
(12) The earth is flat.
(13) Chomsky didn’t write about peanuts.
(14) It was warm sunny day.
In using a representative, the speaker makes world fit the world (of belief).
Expressives are those kinds of speech acts that state what the speaker feels. They express psychological state and can be statement of pleasure, pain, likes, dislike, joy, or sorrow. As illustrated below, they can be caused by something the speaker does or the hearer does, but they are about the speaker’s experience.
(15) I’m really sorry!
(16) Congratulation.!
(17) Oh, yes, great, mmmm, ssah!
In using an expressive, the speaker makes words fit the world (of feeling).
Directives are those kinds of speech acts that speakers use to get someone else to do something. They express what the speaker wants. They are commands, order, request, suggestion, and as illustrated below, they can be positive or negative.
(18) Give me a cup of coffee. Make it black.
(19) Could you lend me a pen, please?
In using the directive, the speaker attempts to make the world fit the words (via the hearer).
Commissives are those kinds of speech acts that speaker use to commit themselves to some future action. They express what the speaker intends. They are promises, threats, refusals, pledges, and, as shown below, they can be performed by the speaker alone, or by the speaker as a member of a group.
(21) I will be back.
(22) I’m going to get it right next time.
(23) We will not do that.
In using a commissive, the speaker undertakes to make the world fit the words ( via the speaker).
Searle (1979:13-23) categorizes them into five main categories, they are:assertive, directives, commissives, expressive, and declarations.
For Example:
(24) I inform you that our lecturer makes wrong decision.
(25) It’s raining.
Directives is the illocutionary point that consists in the fact that they are attempts (of varying degrees, and hence, more precisely, they are determinates of the determinable which includes attempting) by the speaker to get the hearer to do something. They may be very modest "attempts" as when I invite you to do it or suggest that you do it, or they may be very fierce attempts as when I insist that you do it. Verbs denoting members of this class are ask, order, command, request, beg, plead, pray, entreat, and also invite, permit, advise,dare, defy and challenge.
For example:
(26) Don’t eat that!
(27) Can you reach the salt for me?
Commissives then are those illocutionary acts whose point is to committ the speaker (again in varying degrees) to some future course of action. The direction of fit is world-to-word and the sinceritycondition is Intention. The propositional content is always that the speakerdoes some future action.
For example:
(28) We will complete the task.
Expressives are the illocutionary point to express the psychological state specified in the sincerity condition about a state of affairs specified in the propositional content. The paradigms of expressive verbs are thank, congratulate, apologize, condole, deplore, and welcome. Notice that in expressive types, there is no direction of fit. In performing an expressive, the speaker is neither trying to get the world to match the words nor the words to match the world, rather the truth of the expressed proposition is presupposed.
For example:
(30) I congratulate you on winning the race.
(31) I thank you for paying me the money.
Declarationshas special characteristic of this class that the successful performance of one of its members brings about the correspondence between the propositional content and reality, successful performance guarantees that the propositional content corresponds to the world.
For Example:
(32) I declare that your employment is terminated.
Cruse (2000:342-343) classifies illocutionary acts into five categories such as:
Assertives commit the speaker to the truth of the expressed proposition: state, suggest, boast, complain, claim, report, warn (that). Notice that boast and complain also express an attitude to the proposition expressed other than a belief in its truth.
Directives have the intention of eliciting some sort of action on the part of the hearer: order, command, request, beg, beseech, advise (to), warn (to), recommend, ask, ask (to).
Commissives commit the speaker to some future action: promise, vow, offer, undertake, contract, threaten.
Expressives make known the speaker's psychological attitude to a presupposed state of affairs: thank, congratulate, condole, praise, blame, forgive, pardon.
2.4.3 Illocutionary Force Indicating Device (IFID)
The most obvious device for indicating the illocutionary force (the Illocutionary Force Indicating Device, or IFID) is an expression of the type of
shown below where here is a slot for a verb that explicitly names the illocutionary act being performed. Such a verb can be called a performative verb (Vp).
(34) I promise you that…
(35) I warn you that….
In the preceding examples, 34,35 ‘promise’, and ‘warn’ “I am that doctor.’would be the performative verb and, if stated, would be very clear IFIDs. Speakers do not always ‘perform’ their speech acts so explicitly, but they sometimes describe the speech act being performed. Imagine the telephone conversation in (36), between a man trying to contact Mary, and Mary’s friend.
(36) Him : Can I talk to Mary?
Her : No, she is not here.
Him : I’m asking you—can I talk to her?
Her : And I’m telling you—she’s not here!
In this scenario, each speaker has described, and drawn attention to, the illocutionary force (‘ask’ and ‘tell’) of their utterances.
(37) You’re going! (I tell you “You are going”)
(38) You’re going? (I request confirmation about “You are going”)
(39) Are you going? (I ask you if “You are going”)
While other devices, such as a lowered voice quality for a warning or a threat, might be used to indicate illocutionary force, the utterance also has to be produced under certain conventional conditions to count as having the intended illocutionary force.
2.4.4 Performative Utterance
One way to think about the speech acts being performed via utterance is to assume that underlying every utterance (U) there is a clause, similar to (34,35) presented earlier, containing a performative verb (Vp) which makes theillocutionary force explicit. This is known as the performative utterance and the basic format of the underlying clause is shown in (37,38,39 ).
I (hereby) Vp (that) I (U)
(40) Clean up this mess!
(41) I hereby order
(42) The work was done by Elaine and myself. you that you clean up this mess.
(43) I hereby tell
Examples like (41) and (43) (normally without ‘hereby’), are used by speakers asexplicit performatives. Examples like (40) and (42) are implicit performatives, sometimes called primary performatives.
you that the work was done by Elaine and myself.
The advantage of this type of analysis is that it makes clear just what elements are involved in the production and interpretation of utterances. In syntax, a reflexive pronoun like ‘myself’ in (42, 43) requires the occurrence of an antecedent (in this case ‘I’) within the same sentence structure.
The explicit performative in (42) provides the ‘I’ element. Similarly when the speaker says to someone, ‘Do it yourself!’, the reflexive in ‘yourself’ is made possible by the antecedent ‘you’ in the explicit version (‘I order you that you do it yourself’). Another advantage is to show that some adverbs such as ‘honestly’, or adverbial clauses such as ‘because I may be late’, as shown in (44, 45), naturally attach to the explicit performative clause rather than the implicit version.
(44) Honestly, he’s a scoundrel.
(45) What time is it, because I may be late?
There are some technical disadvantages to the performative hypothesis. For example, uttering the explicit performative version of a command (41) has a much more seriouos impact than uttering the implicit version (40). The two versions are consequently not equivalent. It is also difficult to know exactly what the performative verb (or verbs) might be for some utterances. Although the speaker and hearer might recognize the utterance in (46) as an insult, it would be very strange to have (47) as an explicit version.
(46) You’re dumber than a rock.
(47) I hereby insult you that you’re dumber than a rock.
The really practical problem with any analysis based on identifying explicit performatives is that, in principle, we simply do not know how many performative verbs there are in any language. Instead of trying to list all the possible explicit performatives, and then distinguish among all of them, some more general categories of types of speech acts are usually used.
