Opening Speech Functions Speech Function Analysis

56

4.1 Speech Function Analysis

The speech function analysis was carried out in order to capture the interactants’ interpersonal relations, and before coming to the more specific discussion on each type of speech functions, I would like to put forward here the result of the analysis of speech function choices found out in the e- mail business correspondence under study as Table 4.1 presents.

4.1.1 Opening Speech Functions

Table 4.1 shows that opening speech functions are not only used in the initiatory e-mails, but also used in a responsive e-mail, i.e a command is used in a responsive e-mail ‘please wait’ e-mail 2, pair 7. It means that there may be possibility to have shift in roles between interactants. Rather than retaining his role as a respondent, the writer of the responsive e-mail in pair 7 turns his role into an initiator by giving a command. Table 4.2 presents the opening speech functions used to initiate the interactions in e-mail business correspondence under study. From the table, it is evident that attending speech function is found in every pair of e-mails under study. There are two e-mails in each pair, one of them is an initiation and the other is the response. Thus, there are ten e-mails functioning as the initiations and all of them are opened with attending speech function. The use of attending speech function in every initiatory e-mail is due to the fact that most of them are what in correspondence called salutations. Salutation is typical in correspondence and it is usually used to open a letter. 57 Nevertheless, the use of first names in the attending speech functions in most initiatory e-mails, for example Dear Chris pair 3, is interesting to mention here since the typical salutation in business correspondence is Dear + title + surnames. In addition, I found out that some of the attending speech functions seem to be conversational in nature, e.g. Hi Kevin pair 4 and hello kenneth, good evening pair 8. With regard to the use of first names to address others, Thomas 1995:151 points out that first names or diminutives are used to show a friendly, non-deferential relationship. In addition, Poynton in Eggins 1994:66 states that where affective involvement is low, we use formal ‘given’ names. Thus, these findings suggest friendly, non-deferential and a lesser degree of formality in the interactants’ interpersonal relations. To provide a description of the attending speech functions’ realizations in the initiatory e-mails under study, I would like to present Table 4.3. Table 4.2 Distribution of Opening Speech Function Choices SPEECH FUNCTION TOTAL CHOICE OCCURRENCE IN PAIRS 1. Attending 2. Statement:fact 3. Statement:opinion 4. Question:open:fact 5. Question:closed: fact 6. Question:closed:opinion 7. Command 10 4 2 8 3 1 9 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 4, 5, 8, 10 2, 9 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 10 6, 7 5 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Table 4.2 also shows that questions are the second preferred speech functions used to initiate interactions in the e-mails under study. All the 58 interactions, except those in pair 8 and 9, are initiated using questions. Using questions to initiate the interactions, the initiators are constructing dependent relationship with the respondents. They are dependent on the respondents’ responses. This finding suggests that most initiators of the interactions in e-mail business correspondence under study favour enacting roles of information searchers and the very frequent use of questions may indicate that there is information imbalance between the interactants which then suggests a relatively low degree of involvement in their interpersonal relations since we hardly find information imbalance among those who are highly involved, e.g. among close friends or family members. The table further shows that all questions used in the initiatory e-mails under study, except the one in pair 5, are questions of fact. It means that most of the e-mail business correspondence under study are written for the purpose of getting factual information from the recipients rather than getting their opinion about something and this also suggests a relatively low degree of involvement in the interactants’ interpersonal relations since usually we can only ask for opinion to those we are deeply engaged or emotionally involved. Commands are also used to initiate the interactions in e-mail business correspondence under study. Out of the ten pairs under study, seven of them are initiated using commands pairs 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 and there are nine commands all together in those pairs. This finding suggests that the initiators of the interactions in those pairs of e-mails are taking on the roles 59 of superiors. Besides, this finding also suggests inequality in the interactants’ interpersonal relations since normally it is the superior who gives commands or orders to the subordinate. Table 4.3 Realizations of the Attending Speech Functions PAIR NO. REALIZATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Dear Elizabeth, Dear Eric, Dear Chris, Hi Kevin, Att Mr K Lee Dear Aris, Dear Mr. Carlos Puente, hello kenneth, good evening Dear Pak Dadang Mr.RaymondWulan In addition to the opening speech functions previously mentioned, I found statements. They are used to initiate interactions in six pairs of e- mails out of ten pairs under study, i.e. pairs 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, and 10. This finding suggests that the second preferred roles that the initiators are taking on are the roles of information suppliers. From Table 4.2, it is also evident that the initiators preferred giving statement of fact to statement of opinion. This is 60 consistent with their preference for questions of fact, and hence their preference for both requesting and giving factual information suggests a relatively low degree of involvement in their interpersonal relations since frequently we can discuss opinion freely only with those we are sufficiently intimate. To summarize the analysis of the opening speech functions, it seems that when initiating the interactions in the e-mail business correspondence under study, most initiators favour constructing interpersonal relations with a relatively low degree of involvement.

4.1.2 Continuing Speech Functions