Speech Act
Speech acts
first proposed by J.L. Austin, a professor at harvard university in 1956. The
theory is derived from the course material was later recorded by Jo ormshon
under the title How to Do Thing with Words? J.L. Austin (cited in Louise
Cummings. p.8-9) reveals the idea that language can be used to perform actions
through differences constative speech and speech perfomatif. Constative
utterances describe or reports describing an event that has occurred.
Performative utterance is that utterance implicates the actions the speaker
difficult to know even one-point, can not be determined were hurt by the fact
that because of this speech is more related to the behavior or actions of the
speakers. Later this theory was developed by Searle 1969 (Cited in Citra Sparina, 2012) to publish a book Speech Acts: An Essay in the
Philosophy of Language. He
argues that the communication is not just symbols, words or sentences, but it
would be more appropriate if called product or result of the symbol, word or
phrase in the form of speech act behavior .
Speech act
is an entity that is characteristic of
central in pragmatics. Speech acts Speech acts are the basis for the analysis
of other pragmatic topics as presupposition, cooperative principle and
politeness principle. Speech acts have varying forms to express a purpose, Searle also (in Abd. Syukur Ibrahim, 1995) say that
used a language is to carry out acts of speech acts and acts according to the
rules generally follow the specific rules in the use elements of linguistic.
So the writer can concluded that the speech act is An action performed in saying something
/ an utterance that contains acts as a function in communication that takes into account aspects of the
situation said. We perform speech acts
when we offer an apology, greeting, request, complaint, invitation, compliment, or
refusal. A speech act might contain just one word, or several words or sentence.
Kinds of speech
act
Austin
divides the speech into three types there are : Locutions, illocutionary and perlocutionary.
a.
Speech act locutions
Speech act locutions is a speech act
to express something; follow say something to the meaning of words and
sentences in accordance with the meaning of that word in the dictionary and the
meaning of the sentence according to the rules of syntax (Gunarwan in Rustono,
1999: 37 cited in Citra Sparina, 2012). Focus locution is the meaning
of spoken utterances, not questioning the purpose or function of the speech.
Examples
of speech acts locution is when someone says "my body tired".
Speakers of speech does not refer to a specific purpose to the hearer. This
speech means that the speaker is in a state of extreme fatigue, without
intending to ask for attention by way of example massaged by the hearer. This
sentence is spoken solely to inform something without a tendency to do anything
let alone to influence the opponent he said.
b.
Speech Act Illocutionary
In
the opinion of J.L. Austin (Rustono, 1999: 37 cited in Citra Sparina, 2012) are
illocutionary speech acts that had the purpose and function or power of speech.
Questions raised regarding the illocutionary acts is "to what speech is
done" and was no longer at the level of "what the meaning of the
speech?". Searle (as cited in Frans H. Van Eemeren Rob Grootendorst, 1983,
p.21), said that perfoming illocutionary acts means perfoming an activity which
is subject to a set of rules in rather the same way as is the playing of a game
like soccer. Just as the rules of the soccer make it possible for the players
to ‘be off-side’ or score a goal’, so the rules governing illocutionary acts
make it possible for language useres to ‘give a promise’, ‘express their
approval’ or citicize a statement’. J.L Austin (as cited in J.D. Parera, p.268)
also argues that the illocutionary power is one that acts in the speech from
the point of view of the system meet the language community interaction.
Illocutionary acts of the language is limited by social conventions, for
example : accosting, accusing, admitting, apologizing, challenging,
complayning, condoling, congratulating, declining, deplorning, giving
permission, giving way, greeting, leavetaking, mocking, naming, offering,
praising, promising, protesting, recommending, surrending, thanking, and toasting.
Thus, the authors can concluded
the illocutionary act is the utterances which have a certain power, in this
case the speakers not only produce sentences that have a certain sense or
specific reference, but also speech illocutionary aims to produce sentences
with a view to contribute to the specific interaction of communication.
Leech (in Prof. Dr. Henry Guntur Tarigan, 1990
p.44) illocutionary act have a diverse functions in daily life, the illocutionarry functions can be classified
into five :
1.
Competitive : illocutionary
purpose compete with the social goal Used to commanding, requesting, demanding,
begging and so on.
2.
Convivial : illocutionary purpose coincided with a
social purpose, used to offering, inviting, greeting, thanking etc.
3.
Collaborative : illocutionary
purpose ignored or just plain ordinary to social objectives. Example demanding,
imposing, reporting, announced, intructed, and ordered
4.
Conflictive : illocutionary purpose conflict with purposes of social. For example
is threatening, accusing, cursing, reprove, revile, and scold.
Among the four
types of illocutionary involving manners are the first type (competitive) and
the second type (convivial). In a functioning competitive illocutionary,
manners have a negative nature and the aim is to reduce disharmony competition
implicit in what is to be achieved by the speaker and what is required by
manners. Here, etiquette distinguished with manners. Etiquette refers to the
destination, while manners refer to linguistic behavior or other behaviors to
achieve that purpose. Therefore, the principle of manners needed to soften the
impolite nature is intrinsically contained in that goal.
In contrast, the
second type of illocutionary function, namely the function convivial basically
manners. In this position, the manners more positive shape and aims to seek
opportunities hospitable. So, in positive manners, means obeying the principle
of manners, such that if there is an opportunity to say happy birthday, we
should do it. The third type of function, namely illocutionary functions
collaborative (work together), not involving manners because manners in this
function is irrelevant. Most of the discourse writings fall into this category. In the fourth type of
illocutionary functions, that is functions opposed, there is no element of
manners at all because this function is intended to cause anger.
Associated
with the explanation above Searle (1983 cited in Dr. R. Kunjana Rahardi, M.
Hum. p.36) classifies Illocutionary speech acts into five types namely Assertives,
directives, expressives, commissives, and declarations.
1.
Assertives
Assertives is a speech act, the purpose of
which is to convey information about some state of affairs of the world from
one agent, the speaker, to another, the hearer. Assertives are not constrained as far as their
propositional content is concerned’ they may express “any proposition p” searle
(1969, cited in Henk Havertake, p.18), which is equivalent to stating that
speakers uttering an assertive are in a position to assign properties not only
to themselves or to their heares, but also to any other person. Assertives includes, Stating,
suggesting, boasting, complaining, and
claiming.
In terms of
the illocutionary manners tend neutral, that is, including cooperating category.
However, there are some exceptions, such as making generally considered rude.
In terms of semantics are assertive illocutionary prosisional.
2.
Directive
Directive speech act, also known as speech act
impositif. Which belong to the speech acts include asking for, invite, insist,
suggest, urge, enjoin, charge, commanding, urging, pleading, challenging,
gesturing. Examples are "Help me to fix this task". The examples
included in the speech act type of directive because it is spoken utterances
that the speaker intended to perform the appropriate action described in the
speech help repair tasks.
This type is often put in a competitive category
because it also includes illocutionary categories that require negative
manners.
Soejono Darwijojo (2012, p.101) Directive speech
act can be devided into 3 small group:
a.
Question that need answers yes/no/is not/not yet.
b.
Question that need answers Where/who/why.
c.
Command to do something
3.
Expressive
This speech act also called evaluative speech acts.
Expressive speech act includes speech to say thank you, congratulate, pandon,
flatter, praise, blame, and criticize. For Examples "good question
once" (praise), "Because of your carelessness, our group was
disqualified from the competition" (blame), "Congratulations, ma'am,
your daughter" (congratulate). Expressive
illocutionary tend fun (convivial). Therefore, intrinsically, this
illocutionary polite, except for expressive illocutionary "blame”.
4.
Commissive
Commissive speech act is a speech act that binds
the speaker to carry out all the things mentioned in the utterance, for
example, swear, promise, threaten, stating ability, vow. An example is the
ability commissive speech act "I am able to carry out this mandate
well". That binds the speaker to carry out the mandate as well as
possible. Soejono Dardjowidjojo (2012, p.106) suggest
that commissive speech act do not ask
anything or command something it is no act that should be done. It means commissive
speech act only in the form of information delivery.
Commisive tend to be convivial than competitive
because its implementation is more meets the person's interest rather than the
speaker.
5.
Declaration
Declaration successful when its
performance will lead to a good correspondence between the content propoposional
and reality Soejono Darwijojo (2012, p.107). Which
belong to the type of speech this is an impressive speech with resigning, dismissing, naming, appoiting, escommunicating,
pronounce and sentencing. Declaration speech acts can be
seen from the example : I hereby pronounce you
husband and Wife, The hearers (in this moment can also both candidate husband
and Wife), it will have a purpose when the speaker, I, have authority to what
he said, if it does not have the authority, hence execution of pronounce is not
valid / legal.
In general it can be concluded that the
classification according to Searle, the main areas of positive politeness is in
the category of illocutionary commissive and expressive categories. The
relationship illocutionary classification according to Searle and leech can be
seen as follows :
·
Assertives and collaborative
·
Directives and competitif
·
Commisive and
convivial (with Competitif)
·
Competitif and convivial
c.
Speech act perlocutionary
Spoken utterances speakers often have
an effect or influence power (perlocutionary force). Speech acts intended to
influence the hearer is this an act of perlocutionary. Speech acts that have an effect on the feelings,
thoughts or actions of either the speaker or the listener
According to Leech (1983 cited in Citra Sparina, 2012) There are some verbs that can
mark perlocutionary follow.
Some verbs that include persuading, deceiving, pushing, annoy, frighten,
delight, embarrassment, attract attention, and so forth.
References :
Cummings, L. (2007). Pragmatik, Sebuah Perspektif
Multidisiplinere. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Sparina, C. (2012, April). Tindak Tutur Menurut Austin dan Searle .
Retrieved from citraindonesiaku: http://citraindonesiaku.blogspot.sg/2012/04/tindak-tutur-menurut-austin-dan-searle.html
Ibrahim, A. S. (1995). Sosiolinguistik, kajian, tujuan,
pendekatan dan probem. Surabaya: Usaha Offset.
Grootendorst, F. H. (1983). Speech act in Argumentative
Discussions: Pragmatic and Discourse Analysis. Canada: Foris Pubications.
Parera, J. (2004). Teori Semantik. Jakarta: Erlangga
Haverkate, H (1969). Speech Act, Speakers and Hearers. Publishing
Company.
Dr. R. Kunjana Rahardi, M. H. (1983 ). Pragmatik,
Kesatuan Imperatif Bahasa Indonesia.
Tarigan, P.D (1990). Pengajaran
Pragmatik. Bandung : Angkasa Bandung
Dardjowidjojo, S. (2012). Psikolinguisrik Pengantar
Pemahaman Bahasa. Jakarta: Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia.
Nazar, A. (2013, maret). Klasifikasi Tindak Tutur. Retrieved from :
http://asrulnazar.blogspot.sg/2013/03/klasifikasi-tindak-tutur.html