Submitted as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Getting Bachelor Degree of Education in English Department
Proposed By
NIKEN WARDIANI SUWANDI
A320090155
SCHOOL OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION
MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY OF SURAKARTA
ii
Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta
Ken.ace91@gmail.com ABSTRACT
NIKEN WARDIANI SUWANDI. A 320 090 155.
PRAGMALINGUISTICS FORM of PROMISE in
BARACK
OBAMA SPEECHES
.
RESEARCH PAPER.
MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY OF SURAKARTA. 2013.
The study aims to describe the pragmalinguistics forms of promising utterances in Barack Obama speeches. The object of this study is promising utterance in five speeches of Barack Obama. This research belongs to qualitative research. In analyzing the promising utterance, the researcher described the pragmalinguistics forms of promising utterance; identified and discussed illocutionary acts of promising utterance and drawing conclusion and suggestion based on the analysis. Based on the pragmalinguistics form of promising utterances, the writer finds 36 data of constantive form (the percentage is 92%) and 3 data of pervormative form of promising utterance the percentage is 8% ).1 A. Introduction
Pragmalinguistics is a branch of pragmatics in linguistics study. Leech
(1983:11) states that “Pragmalinguistics is the study of "particular resources which a given language provides for conveying illocutions”. According to
Cenzo (2007) “Pragmalinguistics refers to the ability use linguistic elements to
perform speech acts”.
There are many functions of language in daily life such as to give speech, announces, speak, tell, etc. Presidents usually use speech to explain their argument, ideas and point of view relating to occurrences in their country. Barack Husein Obama is one of president that delivers his idea by using speech. The writer is interested to study of promising utterances made by Barack Obama in his speech. Promising utterance is a statement for somebody to do an action in the future.
United States, Obama still given promise to his citizen or public. So the writer conducted this research.
There are some researchers that conducted study about pragmatics analysis about speech and promising utterance. They are as follows:
Rahayu (2009) also conducted a study about speech that entitled A Socio-Pragmatics analysis of Promising Utterance in Barack Obama
Campaign Speechs. The method of this research is qualitative research. The result of the analysis shows that one form of utterance occurred in
Barack Obama’s Speeches that is declarative sentence, the intentions of promising utterance are giving response, stating purpose, assuring, persuading, describing, inviting and requesting and the reasons of employing promising utterances are showing attention, regret, cooperative, responsibility, relationship, mercy, affection, and prestige.
Pudjilestari (2012) conducted a study entitled A Socio- Pragmatics Analysis on Promising Utterance in Some Movie Manuscripts. The results of this research are there are three kinds of sentence (declarative sentence, imperative sentence and interrogative sentence), there are five intentions of the speaker (to assure, to command, to request, to affirm and to describe), and there are eight reason of the speaker (showing responsibility, showing angry, showing relationship, showing affection, showing hope, showing teasing, showing misunderstanding and showing attention.
The other researchers are Bernicot and Laval (2004) conducted research about Speech Acts in Children : the Examples of Promises. The importance of the promise fulfillment preparatory condition is in the comprehension of promises. Preparatory condition is satisfied facilitate the comprehension of promise utterances for the three-year-olds and the six-year-olds. For promise comprehension tested by means of non-verbal behavior, it was shown here that in addition to considering the sincerity condition, mastered from the age of 5. we had to consider the preparatory condition mastered about the age 9 or 10. Speaker’s beliefs and listener’s
desires are two important elements for the children’s comprehension of
Astington (1987) conducted a study entitled Children's understanding of the speech act of promising. This study is for 5 - 13 years olds of children and adults. The result of this study is 9 years of age children could distinguish between promising and predicting in terms of the speaker's responsibility for the outcome. 11 and 13 year olds of children correctly said the speaker did not promise in cases of predicting, but only a few of them were correct for asserting. Even older children said the speaker did not promise when the promise was unfulfilled. Children do not think of promising as simply a speech act.
The other researchers are Delaney and Gibbs (2009) conducted a research about Pragmatic factors in making and understanding promises. The results from this study showed that the first two of Searle's conditions are extremely important to maintain if a promise is to be made or understood. However, it appears that people can make promises about actions that would be performed in the normal course of events. As such, these studies support the idea that promises do not by themselves obligate a speaker, but are used to reaffirm previously existing, and often unstated, obligations.
the utterances whenever the immediate future tense was used and promise specific contextual information was lacking and the nine years olds always based their interpretation of the promises on temporal cues in the utterance.
From the previous study above, All of previous studies have similarity to this study. The similarity is all of previous studies and this research analyze promising utterance. But there is also difference between
each research. From Rahayu’s study, the difference is her research using socio-pragmatics to analyze the data. The data source of Rahayu’s research is only in Barack Obama Campaign speech. But this research, the data source are five speeches of Barack Obama after he is elected in 2009. So it makes this research difference. Yulianti’s research is using translation analysis to analyze the data. Pudjilestari have conducted research about promising utterance in some movie manuscripts using socio-pragmatics. It makes different to the other previous study. The other researchers are Bernicot and Laval conducted research about promising but the data is children and adults using speech act theory. Asington also conducted research that the data is children to understand promises using speech acts theory. Delaney and Gibbs conducted research about promising utterance but the data source is people in institution. The similarity to this research is using pragmatic approach. The last previous study is Laval and Bernicot
B. Literary Review
Pragmalinguistics is a branch of pragmatics in linguistics study.
Leech (1983:11) states that “Pragmalinguistics is the study of "particular resources which a given language provides for conveying illocutions”.
According to Cenzo (2007) “Pragmalinguistics refers to the ability use
linguistic elements to perform speech acts”.
Kiseleva (in Prucha, 1983:44) states that pragmalinguistics investigates
some of the following:
“ (a) the pragmatics properties of speech expressions (i.e. , the use of words, constructions, utterances) as well as units of the language system at various levels (morphemes, words, word combinations, sentences), (b) the rules and regularities of the pragmatic functioning of language units in speech and above all, (c) in typical extralinguistic situations, (d) with respect to typical social aims and tasks, (e) with respect to typical social and physical types of subject (speakers)and receivers”.
“Promising utterance is a statement to tell somebody that we will definitely do or not to do something. Promising something is committing
someone to do it” (Egner, 2002:3). According to Mey (1993:116) “promises
are actually given without the verb to promise ever coming to play”. Promising utterance include to the speech act and classify to the comissives
utterance. Searle (in Mey, 1993:116) states that “promise is something count
as something only in within a specified set of rules”. So it has specific
condition to call it is promise. The condition that can be called as promise are: Condition 1 : The condition must obtain for input and output. It means that the
Condition 2 : The promise must have content. So the speaker knows what they must do after speaking the promise and the hearer knows the intention of the promise.
Condition 3 : The content must have to do in the future. It means there is action from the speaker in the future because promise cannot happen in the past.
Condition 4 : What being to be promise must have the advantage from the promise.
Condition5 : The content of the promise must not be something which clearly is going to happen anyway.
Condition6 : the promise has to do with the honesty of the promise in performing the act of promising.
Condition7 : A promise intends to put him/her under the obligation of performing the act of promising.
Condition8 : The language must apply condition where the promisee understands the situation of promising utterance. the promise have effect to the promise.
Condition9 : The sentence uttered must have semantical rules of the language to make promise.
According to Austin, promise can be stated either though performative or constantive:
Performative is utterances that are used to do things or perform acts.
perform speech act but also describe the speech act itself”. Speakers have to use pervormative verb to produce explicit performative. Pervormative verbs is such as promise, swear, pledge,etc.
For examples of performative: I pomise I will be there tomorrow. I swear that she will come.
I pledge I will visit you in the hospital.
According to Levinson (1983:244) “the structure in English: “I
(hereby) V per you (that) S” where V per is a performative verb and S’ is a
complement sentence”.
Constative is utterances that can be verified as true or false. These utterances were typically in the form of assertions or statements. According to Peccei (1999:47) “Constative can be used to perform illocution but it is not
similar with performative”. Speakers did not use pervormative verbs to
perform constative. For examples:
I will be there tomorrow. I will bring your book.
I will visit you in the hospital. C. Research Method
researcher uses descriptive which is conducted by collecting the data, classifying the data and analyzing them without making general conclusion.
The object of this study is promising utterance in five speeches of Barack Obama. They are Obama speech on the Deficit (April 13rd 2011), Remarks by the President on Ending the War in Iraq (October 21st 2011) ,
Obama speech to Congress on Jobs (September 8th 2011), President Obama’s
Election Night Speech (November 7th 2012), President Barack Obama's 2012
election night victory speech in Chicago (November 7th 2012) and President
Obama’s Speech on Gun Control and Reform (Desember 19th 2012). The
researcher focuses in the promising utterances that found in Barack Obama speeches.
The data will be analyzed in this research are promising utterances, which can be found in the five speeches of Barack Obama. The Source of the data in this research are speeches of Barack Obama. They are Obama speech on the Deficit (April 13rd 2011), Remarks by the President on Ending the War
in Iraq (October 21st 2011) , Obama speech to Congress on Jobs (September
8th 2011), President Obama’s Election Night Speech (November 7th 2012),
President Barack Obama's 2012 election night victory speech in Chicago
(November 7th 2012) and President Obama’s Speech on Gun Control and
Reform (Desember 19th 2012).
look for the data in the nature of documentation. In other words, it is to get the
data relating to and supporting Obama’s speeches. The steps of collecting data
are as follows:
1. Browsing in the Internet.
2. Reading the Obama’s speeches.
3. Selecting the materials.
4. Sorting the related materials purposively.
From the collected data, the writer analyses the data. The data in this research are analyzed by using descriptive method, and the writer uses non-statistic analysis to analyze the data. The writer conducts the data analysis with the following procedures:
1. Describing the pragmalinguistics forms of promising utterances in Barack Obama speeches.
2. Identifying and discussing locutionary acts and illocutionary acts of promising utterances in Barack Obama speeches.
3. Drawing conclusion and suggestion based on the data analysis.
D. Research Findings and Discussion
Based on the data analysis about promising utterance in five speeches of Barack Obama, the writer can find, as follows:
a. The Pragmalinguistics form of promising utterance
speech to Congress on Jobs (September 8th 2011), President Obama’s
Election Night Speech (November 7th 2012), President Barack Obama's
2012 election night victory speech in Chicago (November 7th 2012) and
President Obama’s Speech on Gun Control and Reform (Desember 19th
2012). From the analysis above, the writer can show that most of his
utterance in his speeches used the word “we. We refer to Obama,
American people and Obama’s office. It means that in his government he
always involve American people as citizen in America to work together for solving problem in America. He is not individualistic person. Obama also involve both Democrat and Republic party to cover problem and to run governance in United States of America. Obama wanted to close to his citizen. So there is no gap between government and citizen. He believed a good government will be run well because the team works between government and citizen.
Based on Austin, there are two kinds’ form of pragmalinguistics of
promising utterance, they are performative form and constantive form. The detailed information of the analysis can be seen from the table below: Pragmalinguistics
Form
Data Number Percentage
Pervormative 1, 12 and 36 8%
Constantive
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29,
30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 38 and 39
From 39 data numbers analysis, the researcher found 3 numbers of performative forms of promising utterance. 36 numbers of data analyses are constantive form of promising utterances. It can be concluded that Obama only used few word of prerformative verb. In the other, Obama used constantive form of promising utterance. It means that as a number one person in Uniten States of America, Obama did not need to say that, he promised, he pledged or he swear to show his promise to his citizen. His citizen would understand by using constantive form of promising utterance that Obama uttered a promise to his citizen. It is the same powerful because he is a president in America.
Speaker can use auxiliary verb such as will. If speakers use contantive form of promising, their promise would not powerful. Therefore, performative form is more powerful than constantive form to produce promising utterance. The hearer would feel convinced, if the speaker uses performative form of promising utterance.
Based on the research findings, the writer can shown that the mostly form of promising utterance in five speeches of Barack Obama are constantive form. Contantive form is majority form in Obama speeches. There are 36 data that the forms are constantive form. It means that Barack Obama did not deliver powerful promise to the public. It can be concluded that Obama would fulfill his promise or not to the public because constantive form of promising utterance is not powerful to show promise. It can be shown in his speech when he elected twice in 2012. His speeches in that election have the same promise when he still became president of America period 2009- 2012. Obama stated that he would reduce deficit in America by using his plan and program. Until two decades of his governance, his promise is still the same. It shows that deficit as a big
problem was faced by American people. Most of Barack Obama’s promise
can be verified as true or false statement. Therefore, his promise can or not to be fulfilled.
promise. As president of United States of America, Barack Obama had charismatic when he delivered his speech in front of American people especially and public generally. Whether he used performative or constantive form, his promise still had power to show his idea to public because he is president of America, the number one person in America. Although, his peformative form of promising utterance is only 3 utterances, he still had power to assure and affirm with his promise to his citizen because he elected again in 2012 general election.
E. Conclusion
There is two form of promising utterance in five speeches of Barack Obama, which are constantive form and performative form. Five speeches of Barack Obama here are Obama speech on the Deficit (April 13rd 2011), Remarks by the President on Ending the War in Iraq (October 21st 2011) , Obama speech
to Congress on Jobs (September 8th 2011), President Barack Obama's 2012
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Akhimien. 2006. The Speech Act Theory. Vol. 3: 748-756
Astington, Janet W.1987. Children's understanding of the speech act of promising. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bernicot, Josie and Laval, Virgine. 2004. Speech Acts in Children : the Examples of Promises.UK: Palgrave.
DelaneSy, Suzanne M and Gibbs, Raymond W. 2009. Pragmatic factors in making and understanding promise. California: Routledge.
Egner, Inge. 2002. The Speech act of Promising in an Intercultural Perspective. SIL International.
Finch, Geofrrey. 2000. Linguistics Term and Concepts. UK: Palgrave.
Fromkin, Victoria, et al. 1999. An Introduction to Language. Australia. Harcourt. Huford, James R., and Heasley, Brendan. 1990. Semantics: A Coursebook.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Laval, Virgine and Bernicot, Josie. 1999. How French Speaking Children Understand Promises: the Role of Future Tense. UK: Palgrave.
Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Levinson, Sephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambrigde : Cambridge University Perss. Mey, Jacob L. 1993. Pragmatics an Introduction.Cambridge : Blackwell.
Peccei, Jean Stilwell. 1999. Pragmaticcs. London and New York: Routledge. Pudjilestari, Herdini. 2012. A Socio- Pragmatics Analysis on Promising Utterance
in Some Movie Manuscripts. Unpublished Research Paper. Surakarta: Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta.
Purcha, Jan. 1983. Pragmlinguistics: East European Approaches. USA: John Benjamins B.V.
Rahayu, Siti. 2009. A Socio-Pragmatics analysis of Promising Utterance in
Barack Obama Campaign Speechs. Unpublished Research Paper.
Surakarta: Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta.
Trosborg, Anna. Interlanguage Pragmatics: Requestd, Complaints and Apologies. Berlin: Mounton de Gruyter.
Yule, George. 2006. The Study of Language. Cambrigde: Cambrigde University Perss.
VIRTUAL REFERENCE
Chomsky, Naom. 1980. Chomsky's Universal Grammar: An Introduction.
http://grammar.about.com/od/pq/g/pragmatics.htm. Accessed: March 22th, 2012 at 3.00 P.M
Cenzo. 2007. The Acquisition of Pragmatic Competence and Multilingualism in Foreign Language contexts.
http://nchuir.lib.nchu.edu.tw/retrieve/108194/3-1-4-10-1.
Accessed: November 19th, 2012 at 12.19 P.M Thomas, J. 1983. Cross-Cultural Pragmatic Failure.
http://www.educ.utas.edu.au/users/tle/journal/articles/2006/19-2 Accessed: November 19th, 2012 at 13.00 P.M
http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/political/Transcript-video-of-President-Barack-Obamas-2012-victory-speech-in-Chicago-after-re-election.
Accessed: November 20th, 2012 at 11.40 A.M
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/07/us/politics/transcript-of-president-obamas-election-night-speech.html?pagewanted=all
Accessed: November 20th, 2012 at 11.55 A.M
