27
Based on this function, it can derived that a speaker performs a communicative action using an utterance, hence, this utterance is a speech act. Going in the same
way, Allan and Jaszczolt 2012:5 mention that: Speech acts have basic intentionality as externalizations of mental
states, and also derived intentionally as linguistic objects, thus the same condition of satisfaction pertain to the mental intention and to
linguistic intention. In addition, Cutting 2002:16 implies speech act as the performance of a
certain act through words e.g. requesting something, refusing, thanking, greeting someone, complimenting, complaining. In other word, simply, it can be understood
that speech acts are verbal actions performed by the acts of saying. Thus, it can be concluded that speech acts are not only linguistic expressions, but also as linguistic
actions that carry out communicative purposes Salgado, 2011:8. Out of the definition of speech acts, Gass and Neu 1996:1 suggest speech
acts realization from culture to culture can be different and that these differences may result communication difficulties that range from the humorous to the serious.
Native speaker of English use of speech acts practically different from English learners. This case may happen because there is certain distinction between these
two different cultural backgrounds which influence the choice of the acts used. By considering some factors such as the power, social distance, and situational
contexts, it is not only the linguistic realization of the same speech act differ, but also the force of a speech act might differ 3. Thus, Medical and Law students are
potential to produce different speech acts realization and force in making requests at different situations.
28
b. Speech Acts Typologies
Austin 1962 distinguishes three kinds of speech acts, namely: 1 Locutionary Act: this is the actual utterances itself, i.e. the physical act of producing
an utterance and its apparent meaning; 2 Illocutionary Act: this is the intended meaning of the utterance. The illocutionary acts tend to be the focus of analysis in
Speech Act Theory and often referred to as the ‘illocutionary force’ of an utterance; and 3 Perlocutionary Act: the effect that is achieved through the locution and
illocution. Examples include persuading, requesting, inspiring, convincing, and so forth.
Speech acts, in real interactions, sometimes are used differently with different force to the hearer. Austin, furthermore, gives three special conditions that
are necessary to perform a successful speech act called ‘felicity conditions’. Even
they are considerably not the essential elements for the successful performance of the act, however, their failure can create miscommunication. Austin 1962:23
classifies three felicity conditions, they are: 1 There must be a conventional procedure having a conventional effects and the circumstances and people must be
appropriate, as specified by the procedure; 2 The procedure must be executed correctly and completely; and 3 Often, the person must have the requisite
thoughts, feelings and intentions, as specified in the procedure, and if consequent conduct is specified, then the relevant parties must carry it out.
As has been stated previously, speech act is often termed as illocutionary acts where it has conventional force called ‘illocutionary force’. Cutting 2002:16
construes that “Illocutionary force is what is done in uttering the words, the function
29
of the words, the specific purpose that the speakers have in mind ”. Respectively,
Austin 1962:150 classifies illocutionary forces into five categories: 1 Verdictives which function to give verdict like estimating, reckoning, and
appraising, besides, it is essential to give a finding to something, both fact or qualities, which is for different reason hard to be certain about and usually done by
jury, arbitrator or umpire; 2 Exercitives or the exercise of the power, right or influence like appointing, voting, ordering, urging, advising, etc.; 3 Commisives
or typified by promising or otherwise undertaking which commit the hearer to do something, but also covers the declaration or the announcement that cost for
attention; 4 Behabitives which are very miscellaneous and have something to do with attitudes and social behavior like apologizing, congratulating, cursing, etc.; 5
Expositives that quite hard to define literally and describe how the utterances fit the course of an argument or conversation, or expository in general, like I reply, I
conclude, I assume, I postulate, etc. Furthermore, following Austin theory on Speech Acts, Searle in Levinson 1983:240 develops the theories and proposes
new theory on five taxonomies of speech acts, they are: representatives, directives, commissives, expressives, and declarations.
The first type of speech acts are representative. These speech acts are assertions about a state of affairs in the world hence they are also called
‘assertives’ Leech, 1983:128. Thus, these kind of speech acts carry the values of ‘true’ and ‘false’ where their ‘point’ as to ‘fit’ and should match the world in order
to be true Mey, 2001:120. Further, Cutting 2002:17 argues that representative acts are the acts in which the words state what the speaker believes to be the case.
