An Analysis Of Speech Acts In Charles Dickens’ A Tale Of Two Cities: A Pragmatic Analysis

AN ANALYSIS OF SPEECH ACTS IN CHARLES DICKENS’ A TALE OF TWO CITIES: A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS

A THESIS

BY:

JUITA SARI PANGGABEAN REG. NO 070705030

ENGLISH DEPARTMENT FACULTY OF LETTERS

UNIVERSITY OF SUMATERA UTARA MEDAN

AUTHOR’S DECLARATION

I, Juita sari Panggabean, declare that I am the sole writer of this thesis except where reference is made in the text of this thesis. This thesis contains no material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which I have qualified for or awarded another degree.

No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgments in the main text of this thesis. This thesis has not been submitted for the award of another degree in any tertiary education.

Signed :

COPYRIGHT DECLARATION

Name : Juita Sari Panggabean

Title of Thesis : An Analysis of Speech Acts in Charles Dickens’ A Tale of

Two Cities: A Pragmatics Analysis

Qualification : S-1/ Sarjana Department : English Literature

I am willing that my thesis should be available for reproduction at the discretion of the Librarian of University of Sumatra Utara, Faculty of Letters, English Literature Department on the understanding that users are made aware for their obligation under law of the Republic of Indonesia.

Signed :

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First of all I would like to give all majesty and praise to the Almighty God who is always give me strength, patients, blessing and guidance in completing this thesis.

First and foremost, I would like to thank to my supervisor and my co- supervisor, Dr. Hj. Masdiana Lubis, M. Hum and Drs. Umar Mono, Dipl. Tran, M. Hum for their guidance, support, advice and constructive comments during the writing of this thesis.

My sincere gratitude also goes to the Dean of Faculty of Letters, University of Sumatera Utara, Dr. Syahron Lubis, M.A, the Head and the Secretary of English Literature Department, Dr. Hj. Muhizar Muchtar, M.S and Dr. Nurlela, M. Hum and all of the lecturers and the staffs of English Literature Department for the facilities and opportunities given to me during my study in this university.

My special appreciation and thanks too are expressed to my beloved parents, A. Panggabean and M. br Hutagalung, who never stop praying for me, for their love, comport, care attention, encouragement, loyalty and moral and financial support. You are the biggest inspiration for me. My beloved brother Rikson Panggabean and my beloved sister-in-law Lena Maria Manik and also my beloved sisters Raisinta Panggabean, S. Pd and Rosadi Panggabean, who always become my motivation in making everything better, thank you for giving me a great love, support, attention and kindness.

Special thanks are also addressed to my friends Romauli Manurung, Ayaki Enda Manik, Herlina Bancin, Noni Sinaga, Anna Saragih and Yulietha Purba,

who always spent many times in many places with me. Thanks for our friendship, our togetherness and your support.

Special thanks are addressed to my beloved boyfriend, Pudan Martoba Simanjuntak for giving me praying, support and attention. I do really appreciate every moment that I have spent with you.

Other special thanks go to all my friends in English Literature Department, especially class year 2007, whose names cannot be mentioned one by one, thanks for having great times together in finishing this thesis, for their support and prayer. May we always be great friends forever. Finally, I hope this thesis will always be useful for the readers.

May God bless us. Amin

Medan, March 2011 The writer,

Juita Sari Panggabean Reg. No 070705030

TABLE OF CONTENTS

AUTHOR’S DECLARATION ... ii

COPYRIGHT DECLARATION... iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ... iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... vi

ABSTRACT ... ix

LIST OF ABREVIATIONS ... x

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study ... 1

1.2 Problems of the Study ... 6

1.3 Objectives of the Study ... 7

1.4 Scope of the Study ... 7

1.5 Significance of the Study ... 7

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 2.1 An Overview of Pragmatic Theory ... 8

2.1.1 The Understanding of Pragmatic Theory ... 10

2.1.2 The Goals of Pragmatic Theory ... 11

2.1.3 Theoretical Framework ... 13

2.2 Speech Act ... 15

2.2.1 Locutionary Act... 17

2.2.2 Illocutionary Act ... 18

2.2.2.1 The Categories of Illocutionary Act ... 20

2.2.2.3 Performative Utterance ... 24

2.2.2.4 Direct and Indirect Illocutionary Acts ... 26

2.2.3 Perlocutionary Act ... 28

2.3 Previous Study ... 30

CHAPTER III METHOD OF THE RESEARCH 3.1 Research Method ... 32

3.2 Data and Data Source ... 32

3.3 Data Collecting Method ... 33

3.4 Data Analyzing Method ... 34

CHAPTER IV THE DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 4.1 Category of Illocutionary ... 36

4.1.1 Representative ... 36

4.1.2 Directive... 56

4.1.3 Commissive ... 64

4.1.4 Expressive ... 67

4.2 Performative Verb ... 69

4.2.1 Explicit Performative ... 69

4.2.2 Implicit Performative ... 71

4.3 Illocutionary Acts Performance ... 96

4.3.1 Direct Illocutionary ... 96

4.3.2 Indirect Illocutionary ... 121

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusions ... 138 5.2 Suggestion ... 139

BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDICES

ABSTRAK

Skripsi yang berjudul “An Analysis of Speech Acts in Charles Dickens’ A

Tale of Two Cities: A Pragmatics Analysis” ini merupakan suatu kajian linguistik

tentang penggunaan Speech Acts yang terdiri dari locutionary acts, illocutionary

acts berdasarkan kategorinya masing-masing, yakni representative, directive, commissive, expressive dan declarative dan juga perlocutionary acts yang

tercermin dalam novel A Tale of Two Cities yang ditulis oleh Charles Dickens. Data dikumpulkan melalui studi kepustakaan dan dianalisis dengan menggunakan metode deskriptif. Analisis penggunaan speech acts di dalam skripsi ini menerapkan teori speech acts yang dipelopori oleh John L. Austin (1975). Speech

acts dapat diidentifikasi dari ujaran yang terdapat dalam teks. Dari analisis data

ditemukan bahwa terdapat 107 ujaran yang merupakan tindak tutur dari 4 (empat) kategori illocutionary acts. Dalam satu ujaran dimungkinkan terdapat lebih dari satu kategori illocutionary acts. Kategori-kategori itu adalah representative,

directive, commissive, expressive dan tidak ditemukan ujaran yang termasuk ke

dalam kategori illocutionary acts declarative. Representative merupakan kategori illocutionary acts yang paling dominan diujarkan oleh dua karakter utama, yaitu Miss Lucie Manette dan Charles Darnay. Sub kategori representative yang ditemukan adalah stating (menyebutkan), telling (memberi tahu), explaining (menjelaskan), denying (menyangkal), affirming (menegaskan), believing (meyakini), asserting (menyatakan), describing (menggambarkan), rejecting (penolakan), convincing (meyakinkan) dan accusing (menuduh). Performative

verb illocutionary yang ditemukan adalah explicit performative dan implicit performative. Performing of Illocutionary Act yang digunakan adalah direct illocutionary dan indirect illocutionary. Perlocutionary acts dari pendengar

sebagai akibat dari lokusi si pembicara adalah tindakan yang berupa action,

confessing, happiness, refusing, stating, accepting, asserting, promising, asking, ordering, interrupting, telling, explaining, inspiring, denying, agreeing, surprising, persuading, thanking, greeting, believing, worrying, forbidding, inviting, crying, wishing, accusing, declaring, predicting, angriness, regretting, dejecting, assuring, honouring, dan requesting.

LIST OF ABREVIATIONS

CIA : Category of Illocutionary Acts PV : Performative Verb

EPV : Explicit Performative Verb IPV : Implicit Performative Verb IAP : Illocutionary Acts Performance DIA : Direct Illocutionary Acts IIA : Indirect Illocutionary Acts PA : Perlocutionary Acts MM : Miss Manette CD : Charles Darnay Mr. L : Mr. Lorry Mr. C : Mr. Carton Dr. M : Doctor Manette TTM : The Two Men TL : The lawyer TU : The Uncle MV : Many Voices TM : The Man TI : The Innkeeper TO : The Officer D : Defarge

MD : Madame Defarge TG : The Gentlemen TP : The President

ABSTRAK

Skripsi yang berjudul “An Analysis of Speech Acts in Charles Dickens’ A

Tale of Two Cities: A Pragmatics Analysis” ini merupakan suatu kajian linguistik

tentang penggunaan Speech Acts yang terdiri dari locutionary acts, illocutionary

acts berdasarkan kategorinya masing-masing, yakni representative, directive, commissive, expressive dan declarative dan juga perlocutionary acts yang

tercermin dalam novel A Tale of Two Cities yang ditulis oleh Charles Dickens. Data dikumpulkan melalui studi kepustakaan dan dianalisis dengan menggunakan metode deskriptif. Analisis penggunaan speech acts di dalam skripsi ini menerapkan teori speech acts yang dipelopori oleh John L. Austin (1975). Speech

acts dapat diidentifikasi dari ujaran yang terdapat dalam teks. Dari analisis data

ditemukan bahwa terdapat 107 ujaran yang merupakan tindak tutur dari 4 (empat) kategori illocutionary acts. Dalam satu ujaran dimungkinkan terdapat lebih dari satu kategori illocutionary acts. Kategori-kategori itu adalah representative,

directive, commissive, expressive dan tidak ditemukan ujaran yang termasuk ke

dalam kategori illocutionary acts declarative. Representative merupakan kategori illocutionary acts yang paling dominan diujarkan oleh dua karakter utama, yaitu Miss Lucie Manette dan Charles Darnay. Sub kategori representative yang ditemukan adalah stating (menyebutkan), telling (memberi tahu), explaining (menjelaskan), denying (menyangkal), affirming (menegaskan), believing (meyakini), asserting (menyatakan), describing (menggambarkan), rejecting (penolakan), convincing (meyakinkan) dan accusing (menuduh). Performative

verb illocutionary yang ditemukan adalah explicit performative dan implicit performative. Performing of Illocutionary Act yang digunakan adalah direct illocutionary dan indirect illocutionary. Perlocutionary acts dari pendengar

sebagai akibat dari lokusi si pembicara adalah tindakan yang berupa action,

confessing, happiness, refusing, stating, accepting, asserting, promising, asking, ordering, interrupting, telling, explaining, inspiring, denying, agreeing, surprising, persuading, thanking, greeting, believing, worrying, forbidding, inviting, crying, wishing, accusing, declaring, predicting, angriness, regretting, dejecting, assuring, honouring, dan requesting.

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Illocutionary "performative" just in case it is issued in the course of the "doing of an action". Furthermore he said that illocutionary act is an act (1) for the performance of which the speaker must make it clear to some other person that the act is performed, and (2) the performance of which involves the production of what he calls 'conventional consequences' such as rights, commitments, and obligations. Thus, for example, in order to successfully perform a promise the speaker must make clear to speaker’s audience that the act of the speaker is performing a promise and in the performance of the act, speaker will be undertaking an obligation to do the promised thing; therefore promising is an illocutionary act in the present sense. For example, “I promise to attend your party tonight”. Without using the word “promise”, actually the speaker has made a promise to the hearer that speaker will do future action that is the speaker attends hearer’s party.

Bach and Harnish in Devitt & Hanley, (2003:http://www.google.co.id.speechacttheory&source) stated that an illocutionary act is an attempt to communicate, which they again analyze as the expressing of an attitude. It means that to show the illocutionary act, the speaker should make a communication to the hearer by language. As we know that language is a means of communication that cannot be separated from human’s life since it is used to interact each other. As Hartley (1982:11) emphasizes that language is a means of communication. To communicate by speaking is not a

gratuitous act; it is purposeful, and thus language has an instrument aspect. Communication can take place successfully if the means of language in communication is agreed by it users, and thus language has a conventional aspect.

A conventional meaning which leads to an understanding in communication, the speakers and hearers must mutually catch the meaning of speech, so that the communication runs cooperatively and there is no misunderstanding. In communication, cooperative communication not only requires the linguistic knowledge of the speakers and hearers, but also the contextual knowledge whose role is very significant to fully understand the meaning of the speech that being uttered.

An illocutionary act is a complete speech act, made in a typical that consists of the delivery of the propositional content of the utterance (including whereby the speaker asserts, suggests, demands, promises, or vows.

The concept of an act. In every speech act (Austin in Saeed (1997:212)), we can distinguish three things. They are (1) what is said, the utterance, can be called the locution, (2) what the speaker intends to communicate to the addressee is the illocution, and (3) the message that the addressee gets, his/her interpretation of what the speaker says, is the perlocution. If communication is successful, the illocution and the perlocution are alike or nearly alike.

and its ostensible meaning, comprising phonetic, phatic and rhetic acts

corresponding to the verbal, syntactic and semantic aspects of any meaningful utterance.

Illocutionary act as a part of speech acts are an analysis of Pragmatic study. In this field, Pragmatics plays its role as a branch of linguistics to concentrate on the meaning of language and its relation to the context in which it is uttered. Pragmatics not only concerns on the meaning of language lexically, but also the meaning which is related to the contextual meaning. Jannedy (1994:227) says,

“To fully understand the meaning of a sentence, we must understand the context in which it is uttered. Pragmatics concerns itself with how people use language within a context and why they use language in particular ways. This unit examines how speaker and hearer affect the ways language is used to perform various functions.”

Perlocutionary act is speech act that has an effect on the feelings, thoughts or actions of either the speaker or the listener. In other words, they seek to change minds. Unlike locutionary acts, perlocutionary acts are external to the performance. For example, inspiring, persuading or deterring.

We use language for many purposes. We tell others what we know or think we know, we express our feelings, make requests, protest, criticize, insult, apologize, promise, thank, say hello, and say goodbye. Language seems to have as many different functions since there are goals for using language, but for of all the apparent diversity the basic uses of language are rather limited.

Some linguists have attempted to classify illocutionary acts into a number of categories or types. Searle (1976:10-16) in Saeed (1997:212) categorizes them into five main categories, they are: representatives, directives, commissives,

Sometimes, an utterance can potentially have quite different illocutionary forces. How can speakers assume that intended illocutionary force will be recognized by the hearer? Illocutionary force can be found through the verb that is used in utterance to show the illocutionary act. Illocutionary Force Indicating Devices (IFID) is indication in the speaker’s utterance of the communicative force of that utterance. It is an expression of the type where there is a slot for a verb that explicitly names the illocutionary acts being performed. Such a verb can be called a performative verb (Vp) (Yule, 1996:51).

Performative verb which is intended as indicating devise of illocutionary force is a verb that explicitly names the speech act. Commonly, speakers do not always ‘perform’ their speech acts so explicitly, but they sometimes describe the speech act being performed.

Austin in Saeed (1997:209-210) continued that performative utterance can be classified into (1) explicit performative and (2) implicit performative. Moreover, in an utterance, illocutionary acts can be performed by two ways: (1) direct illocution is the illocution most directly indicated by a literal reading of the grammatical form and vocabulary of the sentence uttered, and (2) indirect illocution is any further illocution the utterance may have (Hurford & Heasley, 1983:259). For example, direct illocutionary of ‘May I ask what you are knitting?’ (Dickens 1979:53) is an asking permission for getting information about what the hearer is knitting. The indirect illocutionary act of that utterance is asking the hearer to tell what the hearer is knitting to the speaker.

Illocutionary acts are often found in our daily conversation, whether spoken or written. Illocutionary act is used for certain purpose and it can be found

in every utterance which the speaker and hearer do in conversation. It becomes interesting to analyze conversational utterance because it deals with how we classify all utterances into categories of illocutionary acts and the context in which the utterance spoken, so we can determine the real meaning of those utterances by paying attention to the indicating device that is used such as performative verb, and that is why Pragmatics concentrates on the spoken language rather than written language.

Illocutionary acts also can be found in literary works such as play, novel, film, and short story. The source of data of this research is taken from a novel by Charles Dickens entiled A Tale of Two Cities. Illocutionary acts found in that novel is unique, an utterance may have more than one non-literal meaning as the result of using performative verb implicitly, and an utterance may be included into more than one category. For examples: (1) direct illocutionary act of “I ask you to do not come closer” is an explicit performative directive of warning to do not come closer, while ‘Please, gentlemen,’ she said, ‘do not come near us, do not speak, do not move!’ (Dickens, 1979:16) is an implicit performative verb utterance of indirect illocutionary act. The utterance performs directive illocutionary act of warning or begging, (2) ‘Do not believe, ‘he said, ‘that I would separate you from her. If Lucie became my wife one happy day, I would never separate you from her. It would be a bad thing to do, and it would be hopeless.’ (Dickens, 1979:44) is an explicit performative utterance of direct illocutionary act. The utterance performs representative illocutionary act of believing and commissive illocutionary act of promising non-literally.

Based on the above explanation, this research is meant to analyze the speech acts in a Charles Dickens’ novel (simplify) entitled A Tale of Two Cities. The purposes of this research are discussing speech acts among the two main characters’ utterances, named Miss Lucie Manette and Charles Darnay and finding out how the theory of speech act can be applied in this novel such as in our daily utterances.

1.2 Problems of the Study

After determining the scope of the analysis, it is important to make the systemic step by arising the problems to be solved, since without problems, a researcher will get lost in what topic that should be discussed. Based on the background stated previously that illocutionary act occurs in conversation or utterance something. The problems that appear in this research are:

1. What category of illocutionary act is used by the two main characters in A

Tale of Two Cities?

2. How is the performative verb used in each utterances uttered by the two main characters in A Tale of Two Cities?

3. How is the illocutionary act performed by the two main characters in A

Tale of Two Cities?

4. How is the perlocutionary act performed by the hearer toward the utterances uttered by the two main characters in A Tale of Two Cities?

1.3 Objectives of the Study

As stated at the problems above, the writer will achieve some objectives to answer the problems of the analysis, they are:

1. To find out the category of illocutionary act used by the two main characters found in A Tale of Two Cities.

2. To describe the use of performative verb in each utterance uttered by the two main characters found in A Tale of Two Cities.

3. To describe the way of performing of illocutionary act of the two main characters found in A Tale of Two Cities.

4. To describe the perlocutionary act done by the hearer toward the utterances uttered by the two main characters found in A Tale of Two

Cities.

1.4 Scope of the Study

The analysis of this research is limited only on locutionary act, illocutionary act which consists of declarative, representative, expressive, directive, and commissive, determining the meaning of each utterance by performative verb used explicitly or implicitly, and the direct or indirect illocutionary act in utterances and perlocutionary act of the two main characters’ utterance, named Miss Lucie Manette and Charles Darnay in the novel.

1.5 Significances of the Study

Theoretically, this thesis is made in order to enrich the study of pragmatics. Practically, this thesis can be used as a reference for the students who want to discuss the related topic on speech acts.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 An Overview of Pragmatic Theory

Pragmatics theory explains the reason or opinion of the speaker and listener in arranging the correlation between the contexts of a sentence and a proposition (planning or problem). In this case pragmatic theory represents a part of performance. Morris (1938:6) in Tarigan (1990:33) states that pragmatics is an analysis about “the relation between signs and interpreters”.

Pragmatics is an analysis about the relation between language and context which is encoded in a structure of language. It is also analyzing the relation between language and contexts which is representing foundation for a record or report of understanding language, equally a study about language user’s ability to connect and make compatible sentences and contexts precisely.

Pragmatics analyzes the certain utterance in certain situation. It focuses on the various ways particularly. Those way represent a place of various social contexts of language performs which can influence the explanation or interpretation. Pragmatics not only analyzes the supra segmental influences,

dialect and register, but also looks into the performance of utterance, for the first as social activity that is arranged by various social convention.

Pragmatics analyzes entirety mankind’s behavioural, especially in its relation with signs and devices. Pragmatics focuses on the way of mankind behave giving and taking sign in entirety situation.

Yule (1996:3) states that there are four areas that pragmatics are concerned with. To understand how it got to be that way, we have to briefly review its relationship with other area of linguistic analysis.

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. Pragmatic 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 a 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.

4. This perspective than raises the question of what determines the choice between the said and the unsaid. The basic answer is tried to the notion of distance. Closeness, whether it is physical, social, or conceptual, implies shared experience. On the assumption of how close or distant the listener is,

speakers determine how much needs to be said. Pragmatic is the study of the

expression of relative distance.

2.1.1 The Understanding of Pragmatic Theory

Pragmatics is a subfield of context contributes to meaning. Pragmatics encompasses conversational behaviour i transmission of meaning depends not only on the linguistic knowledge (e.g. utterance, knowledge about the status of those involved, the inferr speaker, and so on. In this respect, pragmatics explains how language users are able to overcome apparent and time of an utterance.

The sentence "You have a green light" is ambiguous. Without knowing the context, the identity of the speaker, and their intent, it is not possible to infer the meaning with confidence. For examples:

• It could mean you are holding a green light bulb.

• Or that you have a green light to drive your car.

• Or it could be indicating that you can go ahead with the project.

• Or that your body has a green glow.

Similarly, the sentence "Sherlock saw the man with binoculars" could mean that Sherlock observed the man by using binoculars; or it could mean that

Sherlock observed a man who was holding binoculars. The meaning of the sentence depends on an understanding of the context and the speaker's intent.

Crystal (1987:120) in Peccei (1999:7) states, “Pragmatics studies the factors that govern our choice of language in social interaction and the effects of our choice on others.”

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 an important area of study for a course. A simplified way of thinking about pragmatics is to recognise, for example, that language needs to be kept interesting - a speaker or writer does not want to bore a listener or reader, for example, by being over-long or tedious. So, humans strive to find linguistic means to make a text, perhaps, shorter, more interesting, more relevant, more purposeful or more personal. Pragmatics allows this.

2.1.2 The Goals of Pragmatic Theory

Pragmatics is the study of the aspects of meaning and language use that are dependent on th 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: “Baby Sale - lots of bargains”. We know without asking that there are no babies are for sale - that what is for sale are items used for babies. Pragmatics allows us to investigate how this “meaning beyond the words” can be understood without ambiguity. The extra meaning is there, not because of the semantic aspects of the words

themselves, but because we share certain contextual knowledge with the writer or speaker of the text.

What does pragmatics have to offer that cannot be found in good old-fashioned linguistics? What do pragmatic methods give us in the way of greater understanding of how the human mind works, how humans communicate, how they manipulate one another, and in general, how they use language?

The general answer is pragmatics is needed if we want a fuller, deeper, and generally more reasonable account of human language behaviour.

A more practical answer would be: outside of pragmatics, no understanding; sometimes, a pragmatic account is the only one that makes sense, as in the following examples, borrowed from David Lodge's Paradise News (1992:65) in Smith (2006:16):

'I just met the old Irishman and his son, coming out of the toilet.' 'I wouldn't have thought there was room for the two of them.'

'No silly, I mean I was coming out of the toilet. They were waiting.'

How do we know what the first speaker meant? Linguists usually say that the first sentence is word, phrase, or sentence that can mean either one or the other of two (or even several) things.

For a pragmatician, this is of course, glorious nonsense. In real life, that is, among real language users, there is no such thing as ambiguity—excepting certain, rather special occasions, on which one tries to deceive one's partner or 'keep a door open.'

2.1.3 Theoretical Framework

In completing this thesis, the writer uses some theories which are relevant to the basic principle of this analysis.

Austin (1975:123) introduced the illocutionary act by means of a contrast with other kinds of acts, or aspects of acting: the illocutionary act is an act performed in saying something, as contrasted with saying something, and also contrasted with a

by saying something.

Further Austin (1975:125) said "illocutionary act" can be captured by emphasizing that "by saying something, we do something", as when a minister joins two people in marriage saying, "I now pronounce you husband and wife." It means a minister declares that now the two people are husband and wife.

Searle (1997:10-16) in Saeed (1997:212) categorizes illocutionary acts into five main categories, they are: representatives, directives, commissives,

expressives, and declarations.

• Representatives: here the speaker asserts a proposition to be true, using such verbs as affirm, believe, conclude, deny, and report.

• Directives: here the speaker tries to make the hearer do something, with such words as ask, beg, challenge, command, dare, invite, insist, and

request.

• Commissives: here the speaker commits himself/herself to a (future) course of action, with verbs such as guarantee, pledge, promise, swear,

• Expressives: the speaker expresses an attitude to or about a state of affairs, using such verbs as apologize, appreciates, congratulate, deplore,

detest, regret, thank, and welcome.

• Declarations: the speaker alters the external status or condition of an object or situation, solely by making the utterance, with verbs such as

pronounce, declare, and baptism.

An utterance may have more than one illocutionary act. So, to make it be clearer, it is essential to insert the performative verb that shows the intention of an utterance. Austin in Saeed (1997:209-210), stated performative verb is a verb that explicitly names the speech act. He continued that performative utterance can be classified into: (1) explicit performative is a speech act containing a performative verb, and (2) implicit performative is a speech act without a performative verb. For example, “I declare that King Charles II was a coward” is an explicit performative utterance of declaring.

In an utterance, illocutionary acts can be performed in two ways, direct and indirect illocutionary act (Hurford & Heasley, 1983:259). Direct illocutionary

act is an illocutionary act in which only the

content literally expressed by the lexical items and syntactic form of the are communicated.

While, Indirect illocutionary act is an illocutionary act in which the the conversation such as the

pass the salt, please?” is an enquiry about the hearer’s ability to pass the salt. The indirect illocutionary is a request to the hearer to pass the salt.

2.2 Speech Act

Speech act is a technical term i 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; an semantic 'illocutionary force' of the utterance, thus its real, intended meaning ; and in certain cases a further convincing, scaring, enlightening, inspiring, or otherwise getting someone to do or realize something, whether intended or not (Austin, 1975:3).

Many scholars identify 'speech acts' wit

locutionary or perlocutionary acts. As with the notion of illocutionary acts, there are different opinions on the nature of speech acts.

We perform speech acts when we offer an apology, greeting, request, complaint, invitation, compliment, or refusal. A speech act is an utterance that serves a function in communication. A speech act might contain just one word, as in "Sorry!" to perform an apology, or several words or sentences: ‘I’m very sorry that I caused her to faint, ‘said Charles Darnay (Dickens, 1979:26). Speech acts include real-life interactions and require not only knowledge of the language but also appropriate use of that language within a given culture.

We use language all the time to make things happen. We ask someone to

pass the salt or marry us - not usually at the same time. We order a pizza or make

a dental appointment. Speech acts include asking for a glass of beer, promising to drink the beer, threatening to drink more beer, ordering someone else to drink some beer, and so on. Some special people can do extraordinary things with words, like baptizing a baby, declaring war, awarding a penalty kick to Arsenal

FC or sentencing a convict.

Linguists have called these things “speech acts” and developed a theory (called, unsurprisingly, “speech act theory”) to explain how they work.

Speech act theory broadly explains these utterances as having three parts

or aspects: locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts.

Austin in Saeed (1997:211) proposed that communicating a speech act consists of three elements: the speaker says something, the speaker signals an associated speech act, and the speech act causes an effect on her listeners or the participants.

1. Locutionary act, by which meant as the act of saying something that makes sense in a language, i.e. follows the rules of pronunciation and grammar.

2. Illocutionary act, the action intended by the speaker, or the uses to which language can be put in society.

3. Perlocutionary act concerned with what follows an utterance: the effect or ‘take-up’ of an illocutionary act.

According to Yule (1996:48), on any occasion, the action performed by producing an utterance will consist of three related acts.

1. Locutionary act, as the basic act of utterance, or producing a meaningful linguistic expression.

2. Illocutionary act, an act is performed via the communicative force of an utterance.

3. Perlocutionary act, as a simply create an utterance with a function without intending it to have an effect.

2.2.1 Locutionary Act

Locutionary act is an act of saying something (the locution) with a certain

meaning in traditional sense. This may not constitute a speech act.

Two types of locutionary act are utterance acts, where something is said (or a sound is made) and which may not have any meaning, and propositional

acts, where a particular reference is made. (Note: acts are sometimes also called

utterances - thus a locutionary act is the same a locutionary utterance).

Examples:

1. Oh! - is an utterance (note that communication is not intended - it

is just a sound caused by surprise).

2. The black cat - is a propositional act (something is referenced, but

no communication may be intended).

Communication is successful not when hearers recognize the linguistic meaning of the utterance, but when they infer the speaker's "meaning" from it (Sperber & Wilson, 1986:23).

Making a normal utterance involves a hierarchy of acts. To begin with, there is the act of utterance. We recognize utterance acts, even in a language that is completely unknown to us, in which we cannot distinguish the sentences used, and what speaker's message is. We do this on the basis of brute perception: by

hearing the utterance spoken, seeing it signed or written, or feeling it impressed in Braille. Linguistics is concerned with utterances in which speaker uses a language expression and thereby performs a locutionary act (and more).

Austin (1975:109), whose How to Do Things with Words first awakened wide interest in speech acts, included the act of referring as part of the locutionary act, and they were first separated by Searle in Speech Acts (1969:81). Whereas locutions are defined on a particular language, reference is defined on particular worlds.

Obviously, under normal conditions of use, speaker makes an utterance, uses a locution, and refers with it, all at one and the same moment.

2.2.2 Illocutionary Act

An illocutionary act is a complete speech act, made in a typical that consists of the delivery of the propositional content of the utterance (including whereby the speaker asserts, suggests, demands, promises, or vows as has stated before.

Illocutionary act is the performance of an act in saying something (vs. the

general act of saying something). The illocutionary force is the speaker's intent, e.g. informing, ordering, warning, and undertaking. The illocutionary act carried out by a speaker making an utterance is the act viewed in terms of the utterance’s significance within a conventional system of social interaction, e.g. saying: ‘I am much better now,’ answered Darnay. ‘I’m not sure what time it is, or where I am, but I feel as if I am in the world.’ That utterance performs the illocutionary act of thanking.

The most significant act in the hierarchy of speaking is the illocutionary act. Austin (1975:110) alerted us to the fact that speaker does something in uttering to hearer in context C, e.g. states a fact or an opinion ‘I think I do feel

faint,’ said Darnay (p. 28), confirms or denies something ‘No,’ answered Miss Manette (p. 69), apologizing ‘Gentlemen,’ I said, ‘pardon me, but I usually ask who needs my help’ (p. 89), a promise …,’ he said…. I promise this, and I want you to remember it. …’ (p. 48), a request ‘Doesn’t any of your dream remain?’ asked Miss Manette (p. 47), an asking or commanding ‘I asked you to believed that you could be better, Mr. Carton,’ said Miss Manette (p. 47).

In utterance, speaker performs an illocutionary act in using a particular locution to refer, such that utterance has the illocutionary force of a statement, a confirmation, a denial, a prediction, a promise, a request, and so forth.

We shall see later that an utterance has more than one illocutionary force; but many utterances have only one message to convey, and this particular illocutionary force is the illocutionary point. In (1), the locution can see in the following example.

1. I'll make the tea.

The person who utters it and the context of utterance will determine the reference. One illocutionary force is that of a statement about a future act. In a given utterance of (1), it may be used with a second illocutionary force: to make a promise. If this is the recognized intention of speaker, then that promise is the illocutionary point of the utterance. (There is a more detailed account of this process later.)

The illocutionary point of (2) would typically be to have hearer recognize that speaker is offering a bet; the acceptance or refusal of the challenge is the

perlocutionary effect of the utterance.

2. I bet you a dollar you can jump that puddle.

An elementary illocutionary act is an illocutionary act that:

• does not have a negat

• is not performed conditionally and

• is not conjoined to another illocutionary act.

2.2.2.1 The Categories of Illocutionary Act

Searle (1969:68-70) has set up the following classification of illocutionary speech acts:

• Representatives are speech acts that commit a speaker to the truth of the

express

• Directives are speech acts that are to cause the hearer to take a particular

action, e.g. requests, commands, and advice.

• Commissives are speech acts that commit a speaker to some future action,

e.g. promises and oaths.

• Expressives are speech acts that express the speaker's attitudes and

emotions towards the proposition, e.g. congratulations, excuses and thanks.

• Declarations are 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.

One general categories system list five types of general functions performed by speech acts: declaration, representatives, expressive, directives, and commissives.

Declarations are those kinds of speech acts that change the world via their

utterance. As the examples in (1) illustrate, the speaker has to have a special institutional role, in a specific context, in order to perform a declaration appropriately.

1. a. Priest : I now pronounce you husband and wife. b. Referee : You’re out!

c. Jury Foreman : we find the defendant guilty. In using a declaration, the speaker changes the world via words.

Representatives are those kinds of speech acts that state what the speaker

believes to be the case or not. Statements of fact, assertions, conclusions, and descriptions, as illustrated in (2), are all examples of the speaker representing the world as he or she believes it is.

2. a. The earth is flat.

b. Chomsky didn’t write about peanuts. c. It was a warm sunny day.

In using a representative, the speaker makes words fit the world (of belief).

Expressive are those kinds of speech acts that state what the speaker feels.

They express psychological states and can be statements of pleasure, pain, likes, dislikes, joy, or sorrow. As illustrated in (3), they can be caused by something the speaker does or the hearer does, but they are about the speaker’s experience.

3. a. I’m really sorry! b. Congratulation!

c. Oh, yes, great, mmmm, ssahh!

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, orders, requests, suggestions, and as illustrated in (4), they can be positive or negative.

4. a. Give me a cup of coffee. Make it black. b. Could you lend me a pen, please? c. Do not touch that.

In using a directive, the speaker attempts to make the world fit the words (via the hearer).

Commissives are those kinds of speech acts that speakers use to commit

themselves to some future action. They express what the speaker intends. They are promises, threats, refusals, pledges, and, as shown in (5), they can be performed by the speaker alone, or by the speaker as a member of a group.

5. a. I will be back.

b. I’m going to get it right next time. c. We will not do that.

In using a commissive, the speaker undertakes to make the world fit the words (via the speaker).

These five general functions of speech acts, with their key features, are summarized in Table 1.1

Speech act type Direction of fit S= speaker; X= situation

Declarations Words change the world S causes X Representatives Make words fit the world S believes X Expressive Make words fit the world S feels X Directives Make the world fit words S wants X Commissives Make the world fit words S intends X

2.2.2.2 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 in (1) 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).

1. … ,‘ said Lucie. ‘…. I am asking

2. shouted Mr. Lorry. ‘…. I

you to use your power to help my husband and not to use it against him.’ (p. 77)

promise

3. ‘”Gentlement,” I

that I have not heard anything about Charles.’ (p. 74)

answered

In the (1, 2, and 3), ‘asking’, ‘promise’ and ‘answered’ 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 (4), between a man trying to contact Mary, and Mary’s friend.

“I am that doctor.’ (p. 88)

4. 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.

Most of the time, however, there is no performative verb mentioned. Other IFIDs which can be identified are word order, stress, and intonation, as shown in the different version of the same basic elements (You are going) in (5).

5. a. You’re going! (I tell you “You are going”)

b. You’re going? (I request confirmation about “You are

going”)

c. 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.

Searle (1969:98) often speaks about what they call 'illocutionary force indicating devices' (IFIDs). These are supposed to be elements, or aspects of linguistic devices which indicate either (dependent on which conceptions of "illocutionary force" and "illocutionary act" are adopted) that the utterance is made with certain illocutionary force, or else that it constitutes the performance of a certain illocutionary act. In English, for example, the interrogative mood is supposed to indicate that the utterance is (intended as) a question; the directive mood indicates that the utterance is (intended as) a directive illocutionary act (an order, a request, etc.); the words "I promise" are supposed to indicate that the utterance is (intended as) a promise. Possible IFIDs in English include: word order, stress, intonation contour, punctuation, the mood of the verb, and performative verbs.

2.2.2.3 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 (2) presented earlier, containing a performative verb (Vp) which makes the

illocutionary force explicit. This is known as the performative utterance and the basic format of the underlying clause is shown in (7).

7. I (hereby) Vp (that) I (U)

In this clause, the subject must be first person singular (‘I’), followed by the adverb ‘hereby’, indicating that the utterance “counts as” an action by being uttered. There is also a performative verb (Vp) in the present tense and an indirect object in first person singular (‘I’). This underlying clause will always make explicit, as in (8b.) and (9b.), what in utterances such as (8a.) and (9a.) are implicit.

8. a. Clean up this mess! b. I hereby order

9. a. The work was done by Elaine and myself. you that you clean up this mess.

b. I hereby tell you that the work was done by Elaine and myself. Examples like (8b.) and (9b.) (normally without ‘hereby’), are used by speakers as

explicit performatives. Examples like (8a.) and (9a.) are implicit performatives,

sometimes called primary perpormatives.

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 (9) requires the occurrence of an antecedent (in this case ‘I’) within the same sentence structure. The explicit performative in (9b.) 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 (10), naturally attach to the explicit performative clause rather than the implicit version.

10. a. Honestly, he’s a scoundrel.

b. What time is it, because I may be late?

In (10a.) it is the telling part (the performative verb) that is being done ‘honestly’ and in (10b.), it is the act of asking (the performative again) that is being justified by the ‘because I may be late’ clause.

There are some technical disadvantages to the performative hypothesis. For example, uttering the explicit performative version of a command (8b.) has a much more seriouos impact than uttering the implicit version (8a.). 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 (11a.) as an insult, it would be very strange to have (11b.) as an explicit version.

11. a. You’re dumber than a rock.

b. 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 as presented earlier.

2.2.2.4 Direct and Indirect Illocutionary Acts

Now that we have seen that an utterance can have more than one illocutionary, it is useful to introduce the distinction between direct and indirect illocutionary act.

Hurford & Heasley (1983:259) distinguished the illocutionary act which becomes direct illocutionary act and indirect illocutionary act. Direct illocutionary

as the illocutionary most directly indicated by a literal reading of the grammatical form and vocabulary of the sentence uttered and indirect illocutionary as any further illocutionary the utterance may have.

Direct illocutionary act is an illocutionary act in which only the

items and syntactic form of the illocutionary act of an utterance is the illocutionary most directly indicated by a literal reading of the grammatical form and vocabulary of the sentence uttered.

Indirect illocutionary act is an illocutionary act in which the

expresses another conversation, such as the further illocution the utterance may have. Let see some examples of direct and indirect illocutionary act bellow.

1. The direct illocutionary of, “Can you pass the salt, please?” is an enquiry about the hearer’s ability to pass the salt. The indirect illocutionary is a request that the hearer pass the salt.

2. “Why don’t we go to Portugal this summer?”

The direct illocutionary of that statement is asking why speaker and hearer do not go to Portugal this summer. The indirect illocutionary is a suggesting that the speaker and the hearer go to Portugal this summer. 3. The direct illocutionary of, “Let me say immediately that I endorse the

he/she endorses the chairman’s ruling. The indirect illocutionary is an endorsing chairman’s ruling.

4. “I believe you may have been looking for me.” The direct illocutionary is asserting that speaker believes hearer may have been looking for speaker, and the indirect illocutionary is asking whether hearer has been looking for speaker.

The direct illocution of, “I must ask you to leave” is an asserting that speaker is obliged to ask hearer to leave, and the indirect illocution is asking hearer to leave.

2.2.3 Perlocutionary Act

The perlocutionary acts are speech acts that carried out by a speaker making an utterance as the act of causing a certain effect on the hearer and others.

Perlocutionary acts are speech acts that have an effect on the feelings, thoughts or actions of either the speaker or the listener. In other words, they seek to change minds!

If A says, “There’s a hornet in your left ear”, it may well cause B to panic, scream and scratch wildly at your ear. Causing these emotions and actions of B is the perlocutionary act of A’s utterance.

The perlocutionary act of an utterance is the causing of a change to be brought about, perhaps unintentionally, through, or by means of the utterance. The point of carefully distinguishing the perlocutionary act aspect of the speech act from others is that perlocutions can often be accidental, and thus bear a relatively unsystematic relationship to any classification of sentence types.

Unlike locutionary acts, perlocutionary acts are external to the performance. For example, inspiring, persuading, and deterring. Speaker's

perlocutionary act is an act of achieving a particular perlocutionary effect on

hearer as a result of hearer recognizing (what he/she takes to be) the locution and illocutionary forces in utterance.

So, a perlocutionary is hearer's behavioural response to the meaning of utterance—not necessarily a physical or verbal response, perhaps merely a mental or emotional response of some kinds. Other perlocutionary acts are such things as: alerting hearer by warning hearer of danger; persuading hearer to an opinion by stating supporting facts; intimidating hearer by threatening; getting hearer to do something by means of a suggestion, a hint, a request, or a command; and so forth. An effect of utterance which does not result from hearer recognizing the locution and illocutionary point of utterance is not a perlocutionary effect, but some kinds of gestural effect (e.g. responding to a raised voice or an angry look). Perlocutionary acts are extremely significant within a theory of communication because the normal reason for speaking is to cause an effect in hearer, and speaker typically strives to achieve this by any means he/she can. However, perlocutionary effects fall beyond the boundary of linguistics because they are not part of language but behavioural and/or cognitive and/or emotional responses to the illocutions in utterances. What linguists can properly look at, however, are the intentions of speakers to bring about certain perlocutionary effects:

Speaker's intention to cause a perlocutionary effect on hearer by having hearer recognize the illocutionary forces in speaker's utterance is variously referred to as

speaker's perlocutionary intention (Bach & Harnish in Devitt & Hanley, 2003:http://www.google.co.id.speechacttheory&source).

2.3 Previous Study

Previous of study is put in this research because this analysis needs input of the related study as considerations in order to enrich the writer’s analysis.

Wahyuni (2008:68) in her thesis Expressive Illocutionary Acts in Jane

Austen’s Mansfield Park, says that expressive illocutionary acts which express the

psychological state of the speaker through the utterances are applied in this novel

(Mansfield Park) and the categories of expressive illocutionary acts are thanking,

apologizing, congratulating, wishing, and criticizing/complaining.

Sitorus (2004:48) in her thesis Commissive Illocutionary Acts on Charles

Dickens’ novel “Hard Time’ concludes that indirect commissive illocutionary acts

found in Charles Dickens’ novel entitled Hard Time, but they are not identified through volitional verb as paradigmatic of commissive. It can be identified through modal which can express future course of action by using will, shall, be

going to, and future conditional as would have. There are some paradigmatics of

commissive as promise, offer, commit, threaten, envisage, agree, volunteer, and

guarantee.

Rahmawati (2004:40) in her thesis An Analysis of Illocutionary Acts on

Elizabeth Bergs’novel Talk before Sleep found that the way of performing

illocutionary acts is dominated by the literal direct act, followed by literal direct act associated with non-literal indirect act, and then non-literal direct act, followed by literal direct act associated with literal indirect act. The dominant types of

illocutionary act are representatives and directives, and then followed by rogative, expressive, commissve, and declaratives.

Siregar (2010:96) in his thesis Illocutionary Act in the Movie A walk to

Remember that discussed about illocutionary act found out categories of

illocutionary act, representative (41.56%), rogative (24.75%), directive (18.43%), expressive (12.5%), commissive (3.15%), and no declarative.

Based on the some previous studies described above, it can be concluded that the common categories of expressive illocutionary acts that happened are thanking, apologizing, congratulating, wishing, and criticizing/complaining. The common categories of commissive illocutionary acts are promising, offering, committing, threatening, envisaging, agreeing, volunteering, and guarantying.

CHAPTER III

METHOD OF THE RESEARCH

3.1 Research Method

In completing this thesis, some theories, opinion and documentation are applied. Research method which is used in this research is Library research. Library research is a research conducted by learning books of brochure literature, magazine and various articles which have relevance with the problems in this research as Nawawi (1991:30) says,

“Penelitian kepustakaan (Library research) yaitu suatu penelitian yang dilakukan dengan menghimpun data dari berbagai literatur, baik di perpustakaan maupun di tempat-tempat lain. Literatur yang dipergunakan tidak terbatas hanya pada buku-buku, tetapi dapat juga berupa bahan-bahan dokumentasi, majalah-majalah, koran-koran dll. berupa bahan tertulis. Dari literatur tersebut dapat ditemukan berbagai teori, hukum, dalil, prinsip-prinsip, pendapat, gagasan-gagasan dll. yang dapat dipergunakan untuk menganalisa dan memecahkan masalah yang diselidiki.” (Library

research is a research done by collecting data from many kinds of literature, whether in the library or any other places. Literature used is not only limited on books but also on the magazines, newspaper, and another written documentation. Relevant studies are also used to support the analysis. From that literature, there are theories, principles, opinion, ideas, etc. found within it which can be used to analyze and solve problems investigated.)

3.2 Data and Data Source

Data in this study are all utterances uttered by the two main characters, Miss Lucie Manette and Charles Darnay. All of the data in this research are called population. Population means the total object in the novel. The population in this research is all the utterances found in each part (three parts of the novel), 112 pages which contain speech acts.

The source of data in this research is taken from Charles Dickens’ novel entitled A Tale of Two Cities (simplified) that is published at 1979 in Oxford. There are many utterances contained speech acts uttered by Miss Manette and Charles Darnay. The total numbers of their utterances become the data to be analyzed are 107 utterances. Since the population is too big that is why the writer applies purposive sampling technique in taking the data to be analyzed. This kind of sampling is done by taking the unit of sample that is appropriate and suitable to the purpose of analysis as Nawawi (1991:157) states,

“Purposive sampling adalah teknik pengambilan sample yang disesuaikan dengan tujuan penelitian. Ukuran sample tidak dipersoalkan sebagaimana di dalam accidental sampling…. pembatasan sample hanya mengambil unit sampling yang sesuai dengan tujuan penelitian.” (Purposive sampling is a technique of

taking the sample which is suitable to the purpose of research. The count of the sample is not problem as in accidental sampling….the scope of the sample only take the unit of sample that is appropriate to the purpose of research.)

3.3 Data Collecting Method

Documentation method is applied in collecting the data. This method is used because the source of the data in this research is written source. This method is a kind of technique of collecting the data through written document, especially archives and also books about opinion, theory, argument, etc. which are related to the research problem. As Nawawi (1991:133) says, “Metode dokumentasi ialah

cara mengumpulkan data yang dilakukan dengan kategorisasi dan klasifikasi bahan-bahan tertulis yang berhubungan dengan masalah penelitian, baik dari sumber dokumen maupun buku-buku, koran, majalah, dan lain-lain.”

(Documentation method is a kind of technique of collecting the data by categorizing and classifying the written document that has relation with the problem discussed, whether from document or books, newspaper, magazine, etc.) In this method, the underlying is done to write down the variable has been obtained. If there is any variable found, it has to be marked with a check mark.

3.4 Data Analyzing Method

Descriptive method is applied in the data analysis, it tries to reveal the aspect investigated completely by describing the object condition as the way they are (fact finding) as Nawawi (1991:68) says,

“Metode deskriptif adalah cara memecahkan masalah penelitian dengan memaparkan keadaan objek yang diselidiki sebagaimana adanya berdasarkan fakta-fakta yang aktual pada saat sekarang. Dengan demikian metode ini memusatkan perhatian pada masalah-masalah atau fenomena-fenomena yang ada pada saat penelitian dilakukan atau masalah yang bersifat aktual, kemudian menggambarkan fakta-fakta tentang masalah yang diselidiki diiringi dengan interpretasi rasional yang akurat. Dimana penelitian ini menggambarkan fakta-fakta dan menjelaskan keadaan dari objek penelitian berdasarkan fakta-fakta sebagaimana adanya, dan mencoba menganalisis untuk memberi kebenarannya berdasarkan data yang diperoleh.” (Descriptive

method is the way of solving the research problem by describing the situation and condition of the investigated object as the way they are (fact finding) that actual in the present. Thereby, this method focuses on the problems or phenomenon that is present while the research is done or the actual problem, and then describing the facts about the investigated problem with the accurate rational interpretation. This method describes the facts and explains the object condition of the research based on the facts as the way they are and tries to analyze to give the truth based on the data.)

The systematic procedures in conducting the analysis are as follows: 1. Reading the chosen novel and understanding the stories.

3. Categorizing the illocutionary acts into each category.

4. Identifying the performative verb of each utterances based on the expression of the type shown in the utterance where there is or not a slot for a verb that names the illocutionary act being performed.

5. Identifying the way of performing illocutionary acts by paying attention to the compatibility between illocutionary acts and the meaning of the utterance.

6. Determining the perlocutionary acts based on the hearer’s performing toward the speaker’s utterance.

CHAPTER IV

THE DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Data in this study are all utterances uttered by the two main characters, Miss Lucie Manette and Charles Darnay. The data are included written utterances and unwritten utterances (actions). Total numbers of the data are 107 utterances.

4.1 Category of Illocutionary Acts (CIA)

Analysis about how we do something by exploiting sentence is an analysis about speech acts. In doing analysis of speech act, we must really realize how important the contextual utterance is. Speech act theory means phrasing us, if we ask someone though it means order or if we say something in certain intonation (sarcastic) though it means exactly on the contrary.

As mentioned in the previous chapter, category of illocutionary acts can be divided into five categories. They are representative, directive, commissive,

expressive and declarative (Searle, 1997:10-16 in Saeed, 1997:212). Below are

the analyses of speech acts based on the data in Charles Dickens’ novel entitled A

Tale of Two Cities from page 1-112 with its illocutionary acts category in each

context.

4.1.1 Representative

Representative is speech acts that commit a speaker to the truth of the express

a. Believing

1. Charles Darnay : ‘Actually sir, I believe it’s only your bad luck that has kept me out of prison in France.’

The uncle : ‘I don’t quite understand. Would you explain?’ (page 41)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of believing. Charles believes that it was only his uncle’s bad luck that has kept him out of prison in France.

2. Charles Darnay : ‘The King has not liked you for many years. I believe that, if you could, you would sign a form which would send me to prison for many years.’

The uncle : ‘It is possible. I might do that for the honour of the family. But unfortunately it is difficult to obtain those useful forms….’ (page 41)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of believing. Charles believes that the king has not liked his uncle for many years. If his uncle could, he would sign a form which would send him to prison for many years.

3. Mr. Carton : ‘Of all the people on earth, did you expect to see me?’ Charles Darnay : ‘I could not believe it was you. I can hardly believe it

now.’

Mr. Carton : ‘No! By chance I have some power over one of the officers here. That is how I got in. I have come from Darnay’s wife. I bring you a request from her.’ (page 100)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of believing. Charles believes that the king has not liked his uncle for many years. If his uncle could, he would sign a form which would send him to prison for many years.

b. Denying

1. Dr. Manette : ‘Why are you here? Are you the prison-guard’s daughter?’

The utterance of Miss Manette performs representative of denying. Miss Manette denies that she is the prison-guard’s daughter.

2. Many voices shouted : ‘Down with the emigrant!’

Charles Darnay : ‘Emigrant, my friends? Don’t you see that it was my own decision to come back to France?’ (page 67)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of denying. Charles Darnay denies the many voices that shouted he is an emigrant. 3. The other man : ‘Yes, judged and prosecuted. He is a traitor.’

Charles Darnay : ‘Friends, you are making a mistake. I am not a traitor.’ (page 67)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of denying. Charles Darnay denies the other man who said that he is a traitor.

4. The officer : ‘You are going to the prison of La Force.’

Charles Darnay : ‘No! Why do you send me there? What law is this?’ (page 69)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of denying. Charles Darnay denies that he is going to the prison of La Force.

5. Charles Darnay : ‘But I have never sent anyone to prison, Citizen Defarge.’

Defarge : (Did not reply. He looked at Darnay angrily. Then he walked on silently and steadily). (page 71)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of denying. Charles Darnay denies that he ever sent anyone to prison.

c. Asserting

1. Defarge : ‘It is a bad truth for you.’

Charles Darnay : ‘You are right. Everything here has changed. It is so sudden and unfair. I am completely lost. Will you help me a little?’

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of asserting. Charles Darnay asserts that Defarge is right. Everything there has changed. It is so sudden and unfair. He is completely lost.

2. The President : ‘Aren’t you an emigrant?’

Charles Darnay : ‘I do not consider myself an emigrant in the way that the law thinks of an emigrant. I decided to give up my title because I didn’t want to be a noble. I left this country before the new law about emigrants was passed. I left to earn my own living in England. I did not want to live on the money that the poor people earned for me.’

The President : ‘Can you prove this?’ (page 81)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of asserting. Charles Darnay asserts that he does not consider himself an emigrant in the way that the law thinks of an emigrant. He decided to give up his title because he didn’t want to be a noble. He left Paris before the new law about emigrants was passed. He left to earn his own living in England. He did not want to live on the money that the poor people earned for him.

d. Describing

1. The lawyer : ‘Tell us about it.’

Ms. Manette : ‘When the prisoner came on the ship, he noticed how tired and weak my father was. My father was very sick. I was afraid to take him downstairs out of the fresh air. I made him a bed on the deck. It was next to the steps which went down to our room. I sat beside him on the deck to take care of him. There were no other passengers that night. I didn’t know which way the wind would be blowing after we left the harbour. The prisoner did. He moved my father’s bed so that it would be sheltered from the wind. He was very worried about my father’s health. That was how we began to talk together.’

The lawyer : ‘Let me interrupt you for a moment. Did the prisoner come on to the ship alone?’ (page 22)

The utterance of Miss Manette performs representative of describing. Miss Manette describes to them the story five years ago that is Miss Manette saw the prisoner on a ship when she was crossing the Channel.

e. Stating

1. The lawyer : ‘Miss Manette, have you seen the prisoner before?’ Miss Manette : ‘Yes, sir.’ (page 21)

The utterance of Miss Manette performs representative of stating. Miss Manette states that she has seen the prisoner before.

2. The lawyer : ‘Did you see him five years ago on a ship when you were crossing the Channel?’

Miss Manette : ‘Yes, sir.’ (page 22)

The utterance of Miss Manette performs representative of stating. Miss Manette states that she saw the prisoner five years ago on a ship when she was crossing the Channel.

3. Charles Darnay : ‘I can hardly believe I belong to the world again.’ Mr. Carton : ‘I am not surprised. Not long ago you might have been

on your way to death. You speak as if you are feeling sick.’ (page 27)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of stating. Charles Darnay states that he can hardly believe himself belong to the world again.

4. Charles Darnay : ‘I think I do feel faint.’

Mr. Carton : ‘Then why don’t you go and get something to eat? I had dinner while the jury were making their decision. Let me take you to the nearest hotel where there is good food.’ (page 28)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of stating. Charles Darnay states that he thinks he does feel faint.

5. Charles Darnay : ‘I am much better now. I’m not sure what time it is or where I am, but I feel as if I am in the world.’

Carton : ‘That must give you great satisfaction.’ (page 28)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of stating. Charles Darnay states that he is much better now. He is not sure what time it is or where he is, but he feels as if he is in the world.

6. Mr. Carton : ‘… Mr. Darnay, let me ask you a question.’ Charles Darnay : ‘Of course you may.’

Mr. Carton : ‘Do you think I particularly like you?’ (page 28)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of stating. Darnay lets Mr. Carton to ask him a question.

7. Mr. Carton : ‘Do you think I particularly like you?’

Charles Darnay : ‘Really, Mr. Carton. I have not asked my self the question.’

Mr. Carton : ‘Then ask yourself the question now.’ (page 28)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of stating. Charles Darnay states that he has not asked himself about the question whether Mr. Carton particularly like him.

8. Mr. Carton : ‘Then ask yourself the question now.’

Charles Darnay : ‘You have acted as if you did like me but I don’t think you do.’

Mr. Carton : ‘I don’t think I do.’ (page 28)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of stating. Darnay states that Mr. Carton has acted as if he did like him. But he does not think Mr. Carton does.

9. Charles Darnay : ‘However, there is nothing to prevent me from paying the bill. We will leave each other with no bad feelings.’ Mr. Carton : ‘Nothing at all!’ (page 28)

The utterance of Charles Darnay performs representative of stating. Darnay states that there is nothing to prevent him from paying the bill. They will leave each other with no bad feelings.

39 CD : ‘I remember.’

TU : ‘Thank you for remembering.’ (page 41)

40 CD : ‘Actually, sir, I believe it’s only your bad luck that has kept me out of prison in France.’

TU : ‘I don’t quite understand. Would you explain?’ (page 41)

41 CD : ‘The King has not liked you for many years. I believe that, if you could, you would sign a form which would send me to prison for many years.’ TU : ‘It is possible. I might do that for the honour of the

family. But unfortunately it is difficult to obtain those useful forms….’ (page 41)

42 CD : ‘We have been the cruellest noblemen. Our family name is the most hated in France.’

TU : ‘Let us hope so. If the poor people hate us, it means that they are afraid of us.’ (page 42)

43 CD : ‘They only obey us because they are so afraid. TU : ‘Fear and lack of wealth are the only things that

keep the poor people in their place.’ (page 42) 44 CD : ‘Sir, we have done wrong. We have done a great

deal of wrong. We have only cared about our own pleasure. I hate your system. I shall continue to try and carry out my mother’s last wish. She asked me to fight against these evils. At present I can’t do very much. But if this land becomes mine, I shall try and help the poor people who work for me.’

TD : (Says nothing) (page 42)

45 TU : ‘And meanwhile, how do you intend to live?’ CD : ‘I shall work.’ (page 42)

46 TU : ‘In England?’

CD : ‘Yes, you needn’t worry about our family name. I have another name in England.’ (page 42)

47 CD : ‘Dear Doctor Manette, I have watched you with her. I know how much you love each other. I have waited and waited as long as a man could. I did not want to come between you and your daughter. But I love her. I do love her.’

Dr. M : ‘I believe it. I have thought about this before. I believe it.’ (page 44)

48 CD : ‘Do no believe that I would separate you from her. If Lucie became my wife one happy day, I would never separate you from her. It would be a bad thing to do, and it would be hopeless.’

Dr. M : (Says nothing.) (page 44)

49 CD : ‘No, dear Doctor Manette. I left France like you did. I left because it is such an unhappy place, and the people there have no hope. I came here like you did, to work hard and hope for a happy future. I want to share your happiness, to share your life and your home. I will be faithful to you until I die. Lucie is your child, your companion and your

friend. I would not take her away. I want to help you, and bring her closer to you, if that is possible.’

Dr. M : ‘You speak like a man, Charles Darnay, I believe your feelings and I thank you for them….’ (page 44)

50 CD : ‘You have told me so much. I want to tell you the truth about myself. You know that I am not using my own name. My name at the moment is my mother’s name. I have changed it a little.’

Dr. M : ‘Stop!’ (page 44)

51 CD : ‘I want to tell you this. I do not want to keep any secret from you.’

Dr. M : ‘Stop!’ Tell me when I ask you, not now….’ (page 45)

52 Dr. M : ‘... If Lucie loves you, you will tell me on the morning of your wedding day. Do you promise?’

CD : ‘Certainly.’ (page 45)

53 MM : ‘Are you feeling well, Mr. Carton?’

Mr. C : ‘No. You know how I live. How could I be well?’ (page 45)

54 MM : ‘Isn’t it a pity that you don’t live a better life?’ Mr. C : ‘It is a pity.’ (page 45)

55 MM : ‘Then why don’t you change it?’

Mr. C : ‘Please, forgive me, Miss Manette. I am sad because I know what I am going to ay to you….’ (page 46)

56 Mr. C : ‘…Will you listen to me?’

MM : ‘I will listen to you. I will be glad to, if it makes you happier.’ (page 46)

57 Mr. C : ‘Don’t be afraid to hear me. Don’t worry about anything I say. I am not worth it.’

MM : ‘No, Mr. Carton. I am sure that you are worth far more than you think.’ (page 46)

58 MM : ‘Mr. Carton, can’t I help you? Can’t I try to help you live a better life? I know you would never tell your feelings to anyone else. Your feelings are good feelings. I am sure that you could be a good man.’

Mr. C : ‘No, Miss Manette. All you can do for me is to listen to what I must tell you….’ (page 46) 59 MM : ‘Doesn’t any of your dream remain? Oh, Mr.

Carton, think again! Try again!’

Mr. C : ‘No, Miss Manette. I know it is hopeless. Yes, I am weak enough to want you to know about it….’ (page 47)

60 MM : ‘I am sad to have made you more unhappy than you were before you knew me, Mr. Carton.’ Mr. C : ‘Don’t say that, Miss Manette. If anyone could

have helped me, it would have been you. You will not be the cause for my becoming worse.’

(page 47)

61 MM : ‘You have described your thoughts to me, and told me how I have influenced you. Can I use my influence to serve you? Can I use my power to help you to become a good man?’

Mr. C : ‘I know the best thing that I can do now, Miss Manette. Let me always remember this conversation with you….’ (page 47)

62 MM : ‘I asked you to believed that you could be better, Mr. Carton.’

Mr. C : ‘Don’t ask me to believe it any more, Miss Manette….’ (page 47)

63 Mr. C : ‘…Will you promise never to tell anyone about our conversation?....’

MM : ‘Yes, I promise, if that will help you.’ (page 47) 64 Mr. C : ‘Will you promise not to tell person, even if you

love them?’

MM : ‘Mr. Carton, this is your secret, not mine. I promise never to speak about it.’ (page 47) 65 Mr. C : ‘Thank you.’

MM : ‘I will, Mr. Carton.’ (page 48) 66 MV : ‘Down with the emigrant!’

CD : ‘Emigrant, my friends? Don’t you see that it was my own decision to come back to France?’ (page 67)

67 TOM : ‘Yes, judged and prosecuted. He is a traitor.’ CD : ‘Friends, you are making a mistake. I am not a

traitor.’ (page 67)

68 CD : ‘What is the new law that the man mentioned?’ TI : ‘It is a law for selling the property of the emigrants.’

(page 67)

69 CD : ‘When was it passed?’ TI : ‘On the fourteenth.’ (page 67) 70 CD : ‘That was the day I left England.’

TI : ‘Everybody says that there will be more laws dealing with emigrants.’ (page 67)

71 CD : ‘Has that law been passed yet?’

TI : ‘I don’t know. It may have been passed. It will be. It doesn’t make any difference now. What would you like to eat?’ (page 68)

72 TO : ‘How old are you, Evremonde?’ CD : ‘Thirty-seven.’ (page 69) 73 TO : ‘Are you married?’

CD : ‘Yes.’ (page 69)

74 TO : ‘Where were you married?’ CD : ‘In England.’ (page 69)

75 TO : ‘Where is your wife, Evremonde?’ CD :‘She’s in England.’ (page 69)

76 TO : ‘You are going to the prison of La Force.’ CD : ‘No! Why do you send me there? What law is

this?’ (page 69)

crimes since you were here.’

CD : ‘Surely you realize that I came here of my own free will. I came here to help the man who wrote that letter on your desk. Isn’t that my right?’ (page 69)

hard smile and went on writing).

78 D : ‘It is you who married Dr. Manette’s daughter?’

CD : ‘Yes.’ (page 70) CD : (is looking at

Defarge with surprise). 79 D : ‘My name is Defarge. I keep a wine-shop in Saint

Antoine. Possibly you have heard of me.’

CD : ‘Yes, I have. My wife came to your house to get her father back.’ (page 70)

80 D : ‘Why did you come to France?’

CD : ‘You heard me say why I came here, a minute ago. Don’t you believe that it was the truth?’ (page 70) 81 D : ‘It is a bad truth for you.’

CD : ‘You are right. Everything here has changed. It is so sudden and unfair. I am completely lost. Will you help me a little?’ (page 71)

82 CD : ‘Will I be able to see anyone or write letters when I am in prison?’

D : ‘You will see.’ (page 71)

83 CD : ‘Will I be allowed to have a trial and defend myself? Surely they won’t just leave me there.’ D : ‘You will see. The people have been sent to worse

prisons without a trial. They have been left there for many years.’ (page 71)

84 CD : ‘But I have never sent anyone to prison, Citizen Defarge.’

D : (Defarge did not reply. He looked at Darnay angrily. Then he walked on silently and steadily) (page 71) 85 TG : ‘But I hope you are not in secret.’

CD : ‘Yes, they said I was in secret. But I don’t understand what it means.’ (page 72)

86 Mr. L : ‘What has happened? What is the matter? Why are you here?’

MM : ‘My husband is in Paris!’ (page 73)

87 MM : ‘He has been here for three or four days. I’m not sure how many. He came here to help someone. He was stopped at the gate and taken to prison.’ Mr. L : ‘Oh no!’ (page 73)

88 Mr. L : ‘…What prison is he in?’ MM : ‘La Force.’ (page 74)

89 CD : ‘Dearest, be brave. I am well. Your father has influence here. You cannot answer this.’

MM : (Miss Manette was so happy to get it that she

turned to Madame Defarge and kissed her hand). (page 76) 90 MM : ‘Will you be a good to my poor husband? Please

don’t do him any harm.’

MD : ‘I did not come here to think about your husband.’

MD : (Looked at Miss Manette calmly) (page 76)

91 MD : ‘… I came here to see you.’

MM : ‘Then for my sake be kind to him. For my child’s sake be kind to him.’ (page 77)

92 MD : ‘What does your husband say in his letter? Doesn’t he say something about influence?’ MM : ‘It says that my father has a lot of influence at the

prison.’ (page 77)

93 MM : ‘You are a wife and mother. You must understand. I beg you to pity me. I am asking you to use your power to help my husband and not to use it against him.’

MD : (Looked coldly at Miss Manette. Then she turned and spoke to her friend, The Vengeance). (page 77) 94 TP : ‘Was it true that you had lived for years in

England?’

CD : ‘Certainly it is true.’ (page 81) 95 TP : ‘Aren’t you an emigrant?’

CD : ‘I do not consider myself an emigrant in the way that the law thinks of an emigrant. I decided to give up my title because I didn’t want to be a noble. I left this country before the new law about emigrants was passed. I left to earn my own living in England. I did not want to live on the money that the poor people earned for me.’ (page 81) 96 TD : ‘Can you prove this?’

CD : ‘That is true. But I did not marry an Englishwoman.’ (page 82)

97 TP : ‘Is your wife a citizen of France?’ CD : ‘Yes, she was born here.’ (page 82)

98 TP : ‘What is her name, and where is her family?’ CD : ‘Lucie Manette, the only daughter of Doctor

Manette, the good doctor who is sitting there.’ (page 82)

99 TP : ‘Why had not you come back to France sooner?’ CD : ‘I did not return sooner because I knew I couldn’t

get a job here. In England, I was teaching French. I returned when I did because I received a letter. The

letter was from a French citizen. He wanted me to come back and be his witness. He was in danger of dying, and I was the only one who could help him. Is that against the laws of the Republic?’ (page 82) 100 TP : ‘Who is this citizen?’

CD : ‘He is my first witness. You will see his name on the letter they took away from me at the gate into Paris.’ (page 82)

101 CD : ‘Tell me why I am a prisoner again.’ TM : ‘You will know when you are called to trial

tomorrow.’ (page 84)

102 MM : ‘My husband, my father and my brother! Hush!’

TM : (Keeps silent) (page 91) 103 Mr. C : ‘Of all the people on earth, did you expect to see

me?’

CD : ‘I could not believe it was you. I can hardly believe it now.’ (page 100)

104 Mr. C : ‘No. By chance I have some power over one of the officers here. That is how I got in. I have come from your wife. I bring you a request from her.

CD : ‘What is it?’ (page 100)

105 CD : ‘Carton, we cannot escape from this place. It cannot be done. You will only die with me. It is madness to try.’

Mr. C : ‘I haven’t asked you to escape, have I?’ (page 100)

106 CD : ‘Carton! Dear carton! It is madness. People had tried to escape before. They have always failed!’ Mr. C : ‘I have not yet suggested that you can escape.’

(page 100)

107 CD : ‘What is that smell?’

Mr. C : ‘I can’t smell anything. There is nothing here. Pick up your pen and finish. Hurry, hurry!’ (page 101)