The Types of Searle’s Speech Acts in Terms of Illocutionary Acts and

B. Discussion

1. The Types of Searle’s Speech Acts in Terms of Illocutionary Acts and

Illocutionary Forces Performed by the Teacher during the English Teaching and Learning Process at SMA N 1 Purworejo Based on the findings, there were four kinds of speech acts performed by the teacher of SMA N 1 Purworejo during four meetings of the English teaching and learning process. They were representatives, directives, expressives and commisives. These types of speech acts are proposed by Searle who puts emphasis on the illocutionary acts. Directives became the most dominant speech acts utilized by the teacher because during the process of English teaching and learning, the teacher often asked the students to do something. It is in line with the notion of directive speech acts which are concerned with getting hearers to undertake some actions for speakers. On the other hand, commisives were the least frequently used speech acts performed by the teacher throughout the research. Meanwhile, declaratives were not performed at all by the teacher.

a. Representatives

Representatives are those types of speech acts that represent what the speaker believes and does not believe. The production of representatives was revealed as the second highest significance performed by the teacher during the teaching and learning process. They appeared in 180 acts from the total acts of 701. For these types of speech acts, the illocutionary forces performed by the teacher were confirming, agreeing, correcting, explaining, disagreeing, informing, stating and predicting. 1 Stating Stating is one type of representative illocutionary acts that asserts what the speaker believes to be the case or not. It is usually concerned with delivering the fact or opinion. Stating appeared in 31 utterances. Below is one example of stating performed by the teacher: In the datum exemplified above, the teacher said that utterance because she believed that there was no English equivalent for the Indonesian peminatan when one of her students asked her about the English word for peminatan. She believed that there were some special forms of English in Indonesia but she did not know the equivalent word for peminatan in English. The teacher delivered her utterances in a convincing way. She was adamant when one of her students suggested the English word for peminatan. She still held her belief that in English speaking country, the people only use English to describe peminatan. She also made her voice as clear as possible to make sure that her opinion was stated well. She repeated the words “I don’t know” twice in asserting her belief that according to her knowledge she did not know the English of peminatan. In this case, the teacher used the illocutionary act of representatives which functions to state an opinion. The example shows that the teacher attempted S: Ma’am, how about special English? T: I don’t know because in outside there is no peminatan. They only have English. I don’t know. There are some special forms of English in Indonesia especially in 2013 curriculum. M-16923:17-23:40 to assert her belief about the truth of proposition. Moreover, the utterances were expressed in declarative forms which were typically suited to the functions of stating opinion. Another act of stating is performed in the following utterance: The teacher said the utterance above because she believed that her student named Dwi got trapped; thus he could not correctly catch the words said by the speaker. In producing the act of stating, the teacher asserted her belief about the truth of expressed proposition in which the direction of fit was words to world. The declarative mood was also utilized that usually marked the representative act. The following utterance also illustrates the act of stating: The teacher uttered the utterance above because she did not know what picture it was. The utterance was delivered in the form of declarative which typically marked the act of representative. The force carried by the teacher was stating because in this case she tried to state her opinion. T: OK. Just listen to it. playing the recording Ss: Aaw. T: You get trapped. M-216224:10-24:11 T: D. What is it? Ss: London Bridge. T: This one? I also don’t know. M228342:34-42:36 2 Explaining The purpose of explaining is to give the explanation, the details or the reasons to make something clear or easy to understand. During the English teaching and learning process, explaining was expressed by the teacher in 38 utterances. The example is presented in the bold forms below: : The utterances show that the teacher was trying to explain the plot of a story or play to her students. She explained that there were three parts of plot which were the beginning, the middle and the end. She, then, added that short story usually had one plot so that it could be read in one sitting. It was different from novel which could not be read in one sitting because it had a lot of plot. The teacher explained it in English but she also translated it into Indonesian to help the students easily process the explanation. She tried to make her explanation as clear as possible. The choice of words she utilized was simple and understandable. She did not employ the long and complicated sentences to make the students understand the explanation easily. She was aware of her students’ English mastery. In this case, the teacherproduced representatives with the illocutionary force of explaining. T: Play means drama. T: Drama. Ss: Oh. S: Permainan. Game.

T: Permainan. Permainan lagi. Cerita atau drama. Game. Game

again. Story or drama. It has a beginning, middle and end. Awal, tengah dan akhir. Short story usually has one plot. So, it can be read in one sitting. Nah, satu kali duduk membaca cerita pendek itu selesai beda dengan kalau kita membaca novel. M-463215:20-15:43 Explaining is included as representatives because it shows one’s belief about the truth of proposition. In this case, the teacher asserted what she believed by explaining the plot of story or play. Another example of illocutionary force of explaining is shown below: Based on the example above, the teacher employed explaining as the illocutionary force of representatives. The utterance above is included into representative illocutionary act of explaining because it commits the speaker to the truth of the expressed proposition. In this case, the teacher attempted to explain to her students about the notion of theme in a story. The teacher used her background knowledge in explaining the notion of theme to her students. The teacher delivered her explanation about theme in a distinct voice and structured way from the general to the specific one. Her choice of words was also understandable. However, she still provided translation of her explanation to her students. She was concerned if there were students who did not understand her explanation. Furthermore, the teacher also performed explaining in the following utterances: T: And then tema. Theme. The theme as a piece of fiction is its controlling idea or its central insight. Yang namanya tema adalah setunggal fiksi yang mengontrol idea tau sudut pandang di dalamnya. It is the author’s underlying meaning or idea that he is trying to convey. Yang namanya tema itu sesuatu yang ada di pikiran penulis yang akan diceritakan atau dikembangkan ke dalam sebuah cerita. M-460311:33-11:35 The teacher’s utterances above illustrate an act of explaining in which the teacher tried to enlighten the students about two types omniscience as part of point of view of narrative, namely omniscient limited and omniscient objective. When performing the utterances, the teacher expressed the truth of proposition which she believed to be the case. Thus, her utterances fall into the category of representatives which carry the illocutionary force of explaining. Just like the two preceding examples, there was no performative verb mentioned. However, her utterances can be identified by its mood which was in the form of declarative. 3 Agreeing Agreeing means having the same opinion or accepting the suggestion. The illocutionary force of agreeing was delivered by teacher as shown in the following example: T: And then omniscience. Omniscience. I don’t know what it is in Indonesian. S: Serba tahu. Knowing everything. T: Oh, serba tahu artinya. OK. Tapi dalam bahasa Indonesia mungkin tidak masuk sudut pandang. Oh, it means knowing everything. OK. But perhaps it is not included into point of view in Indonesian. Ss: Masuk. It is. T: There are two main types of omniscient point of view. Omniscient limited, yang terbatas, and omniscient objective. Omniscient limited, we know only what the character knows and what the author allows him or her to tell us. M-465525:03-26:00