A PRAGMATICS ANALYSIS OF DIRECTIVE UTTERANCES OF THE ENGLISH TEACHERS AT SMA ASSALAFI KENTENG SUSUKAN SEMARANG A GRADUATING PAPER Submitted to the Board of Examiners as a partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan Islam (S
A PRAGMATICS ANALYSIS OF DIRECTIVE UTTERANCES OF THE
ENGLISH TEACHERS AT SMA ASSALAFI KENTENG SUSUKAN
SEMARANG
A GRADUATING PAPER
Submitted to the Board of Examiners as a partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan Islam (S.Pd.I)
English Education Department of Teacher Training and Education Faculty
State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Salatiga
By:
Nurul Amarotiz Zahroh
NIM: 113 09 073
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY
STATE INSTITUTE FOR ISLAMIC STUDIES (IAIN) SALATIGA
2015
MINISTRY OF RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS STATE INSTITUTE FOR ISLAMIC STUDIES (IAIN) SALATIGA
Jl. TentaraPelajar 02 Telp (0298) 323433 Fax 323433 Salatiga 50721 Webs
DECLARATION
ن لارحيم بسم الله لارحم
“In The Name of Allah, The Most Gracious and the Most Merciful.”
Hereby the researcher declares that this graduating paper is made by the researcher and it is not containing materials written or has been published by other people except the information from references. The researcher is capable of accounting for this graduating paper if in future this is can be proved of containing other‘s ideas, or in fact, the researcher imitates the others‘ graduating paper. In addition, the researcher really hopes that this declaration can be understood by readers.
th
Salatiga, September 15 2015 Researcher
NURUL AMAROTIZ ZAHROH NIM. 113 09 073
MINISTRY OF RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS STATE INSTITUTE FOR ISLAMIC STUDIES (IAIN) SALATIGA
Jl. TentaraPelajar 02 Telp (0298) 323433 Fax 323433 Salatiga 50721 Webs Hanung Triyoko, S.S, M.Hum, M.Ed The Lecturer of English Education Department of Teacher Trining and Education Faculty State Institute for Islamic Studies Salatiga ATTENTIVE COUNSELOR’S NOTE
Case : Nurul Amarotiz Zahroh‘s Graduating Paper
th
Salatiga, September16 2015 Dear The Rector of State Institute for Islamic Studies Salatiga Assalamu’alaikumWr. Wb.
After reading and correcting Nurul Amarotiz Zahroh ‘s graduating paper entitled “ A
PRAGMATICS ANALYSIS OF DIRECTIVE UTTERANCES OF THE ENGLISH
TEACHERS AT SMA ASSALAFI KENTENG SUSUKAN SEMARANG ”, I have decidedand would like to propose that if it could be accepted by the education faculty, i hope it would be examined as soon as possible.
Wassalamu’alaikumWr. Wb.
Counselor Hanung Triyoko, S.S, M.Hum, M.Ed 19730815 199903 1003
MINISTRY OF RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS STATE INSTITUTE FOR ISLAMIC STUDIES (IAIN) SALATIGA
Jl. TentaraPelajar 02 Telp (0298) 323433 Fax 323433 Salatiga 50721 Webs GRADUATING PAPER A PRAGMATICS ANALYSIS OF DIRECTIVE UTTERANCES OF THE ENGLISH TEACHERS AT SMA ASSALAFI KENTENG SUSUKAN SEMARANG BY: Nurul Amarotiz Zahroh 113 09 073
Has been brought to the board of examiners of State Institute for Islamic Studies Salatiga
in September 15, 2015, and hereby considered to completely fulfill the requirements of the Degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan Islam (S.PdI.) in English and Education Department.Board of examiners, Head : Setia Rini, M.Pd ____________ Secretary :Hanung Triyoko, S.S, M. Hum, M.Ed ____________ 1st Examiner :Ari Setiawan, S. Pd , M. M ____________ 2nd Examiner :Faizal Risdiyanto, S. S, M. Hum ____________
Salatiga, August 29, 2015 Dekan
FTIK IAIN Salatiga,
Suwardi, M.Pd NIP. 19670121 199903 1 002
MOTTO
Do the Best,
Then Let God Do the Rest
DEDICATION
This graduation paper is wholeheartedly dedicated to: To God Allah SWT To Prophet Muhammad SAW
To my father and my mother (Sutar and Siti Munawiroh), who always give me support both in spirit and finance, always care to me, support and pray for me, my litlle sister (Micun, Ainul, Dablah).Love you all.
To my little family; Ayah and Opal, you are my powerful spirit, thank for your love, your advice and your patient to hold my hand whenever i feel happy or sad, I love you more.
Mr. Hanung Triyoko, M.hum, M.Ed, who guided me until my graduating paper finished, thank you so much.
My beloved friends (mama Anah, Ibug Tutik, Linda Cancik) our togetherness means a lot to me, love and peace gengs.
GENDUT you are everything, I hope our friendship is never end.
My spirit (Maghfiroh, Susi, Nunik) thank for helping me finish my graduating paper. My big family of Himpunan Mahasiswa Islam (HMI), thanks for the guidance. All my friends especially to TBI C class and generally to IAIN Salatiga 2009. Everyone has a special thing for me.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
In the name of Allah, the most gracious and merciful, the lord of universe. Because of Him, the writer could finish this thesis as one of the requirement for Sarjana Pendidikan in English Department of Educational Faculty of State Institute of Islamic Studies (STAIN) Salatiga in 2011.
Secondly, peace and salutation always be given to our prophet Muhammad SAW who has guided us from the darkness to the lightness.
However, this success would not be achieved without those supports, guidance, advice, help, and encouragement from individual and institution, and I somehow realize that an appropriate moment for me to deepest gratitude for:
1. Mr. Dr. Rahmat Hariyadi, M.Pd., the Rector of State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) of Salatiga.
2. Mr. Suwardi, M.Pd., the Dean of Teacher Training and Educational Faculty of State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) of Salatiga.
3. Mrs. Noor Malihah, Ph.D., the Head of English Education Department of Teacher Training and Education State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) of Salatiga.
4. Mr.Hanung Triyoko S.S, M.Hum, M.Ed the consultant of this graduating paper. Thanks for suggestion and recommendation for this graduating paper from beginning until the end.
5. All the lecturers of State Institute for Islamic Studies Salatiga
6. All the staff that have helped the writer in processing of thesis administration 7. My beloved father and mother, thank for all kindness.
8. All of my friends that helped me finishing this thesis.
Finally, it has to be admitted that nothing in the world is perfect, which is certainly true of this small piece of writing. The writer is fully aware of this, she hopes that this graduating paper will be useful especially for herself and for the reader in general.
th
Salatiga, September 15 2015 The Researcher
Nurul Amarotiz Zahroh NIM. 113 09 073
ABSTRACT
Nurul, Amarotiz Zahroh. 2015. A Pragmatics Analysis of Directive Utterances
of The English Teachers of SMA Assalafi Kenteng Susukan Semarang In
the Academic Year of 2014/2015. A Graduating Paper. Educational Faculty.
English Department, State Institute of Islamic Studies (STAIN) Salatiga. Counsellor: Hanung Triyoko, S.S., M. Hum, M. Ed.
Directive speech acts is an utterance of the speaker to make the hearer do
something for the speaker. A t same point, teachers‘ directive to be an interestingitem to discuss since it can be elaborated into command, order, request and advice
with different forms. This study was carried to know the kinds of directive
utterances that are made by the English teachers of SMA Assalafi and their reasons
of those utterances. The design of the research is descriptive qualitative study by
applying the opinion of Holmes. After being analized, it is known that the kind of
directive uttered by the teacher are imperative, interogative, and declarative
sentence where imperative to be the most dominnat. Furthermore the teachers‘
reasons of producing them are 1. To introduce context directly, 2. To better
students‘ appreciation in learning, 3. To inform and declare, and 4. To get request.
Key Words: Teachers‘ Directive Utterances, Kinds of Directives, Reasons of Using Directive Utterances.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE .............................................................................................................. i DECLARATION ............................................................................................. ii ATTENTIVE COUNSELOR NOTES ............................................................ iii STATEMENT OF CERTIFICATION ............................................................ iv MOTTO ........................................................................................................... v DEDICATION ................................................................................................. vi ACKNOWLEDGMENT .................................................................................. vii ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................... ix TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................. x LIST OF TABLE ............................................................................................. xii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background of The Research .............................................................. 1 B. Problem of The Research .................................................................... 2 C. Objective of The Research ................................................................... 3 D. The Significance of The Research ....................................................... 3 E. Scope of the Research .......................................................................... 4 F. Definition of Key Term ...................................................................... 4 G. Method of the Research ......................................................................... 5 H. Review of the Literature........................................................................... 9 I. Organization of the Research.................................................................... 13
CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK A. ..................................................................................... 14 . Pragmatics B. ...................................................................................... 15 . Speech Act C. ......................................................................... 16 . Types of Speech Acts D. . Types of Illocutionary Acts....................................................................... 18 E. .. The Function of Illocutionary Acts............................................................ 20 F. .. Directive..................................................................................................... 21 G. . Classroom Language.................................................................................. 25 H. . Avoid Using the L1 in the Clasroom Language...................................... 26 I. ... Teaching Methods that Deliberately Involve the L1.............................. 31 J. .. Ways of Using the L1 Positively in Teaching.......................................... 35 K. . Strategies To Make A Successful Classroom Language........................ 36 CHAPTER III DATA PRESENTATION A. . General Overview of SMA Assalafi ...................... 39 B. . Data Presentation of Directive Utterances Made by The Teachers......... 44 CHAPTER IV DATA ANALYSIS A. Findings ........................................................................................... 49 B. Analysis ........................................................................................... 53 CHAPTER V CLOSURE A. Conclusion .............................................................................................. 58 B. Suggestion ................................................................................................. 59 BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDIX
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 The Subject Matter of SMA Assalafi ...................................... ...................... 43Table 3.2 Data Presentation of Directive Utterance Made by the Teacher.................... 44Table 4.1 Structure of Teacher‘s Directive ...................................................................... 48
Table 4.2 Kinds of Directive Utterances Made by The Teachers .................................... 49CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This chapter focuses on giving an introductory explanation of the research. It presents
background of the research and reasons why the writer intends to conduct a research dealing with A Pragmatics Analysis of Directive Utterances of The English Teachers of SMA Assalafi Kenteng Susukan Semarang In the Academic Year of 2014/2015 A.
Background of the Research
In speech act theory, directives are defined as the speaker‘s act which attempt to make the addressee do, or sometimes not do, something, Charles W Kreidler(1998:189). Despite different forms which they may take, directives are typically expressed by imperatives. And the speaker generally expects compliance on the part of the hearer. In classrooms, too, teachers do use directives and prospect students‘ compliance. In this connection, Tapper (1994) discusses the possible undesirable consequence of students not following Teachers directives sentences. He points out that in school settings, students would be punished in case they don‘t follow directives whereas, in colleges, they understand that following directives would help them to accomplish the task properly.
Although directives, in essence, expect a non-verbal behavior from the hearer, it is of fundamental importance for the speaker to choose among different forms of directives, the one which suits the circumstance best and furthermore, poses the least possibility of offense to the hearer(s), or to use Brown and Levin son‘s (1987) term, not to pose a face that is threatening act. In other words, the speaker has to express his intention appropriately with regards to the hearer‘s age, rank, and sex, among others. Hence, directives, like other types of speech acts, may be expressed in various forms. They may be expressed, for example, in the forms of imperative, interrogative, and declarative. Furthermore, they may be phrased in the forms of command, condition, and even wish as mentioned by Bolinger (1967, cited in Tapper, 1994).
Based on the explanation earlier, examining the kinds of directive utterances, their frequency and functions in classrooms significantly contribute to make the students get involvement more in classrooms. Therefore, the researcher intents critically to analyze the case more deeply by conducting a research entitled: A Pragmatics Analysis of Directive Utterances of The English Teachers of SMA Assalafi Kenteng Susukan Semarang In the Academic Year of 2014/2015.
B. Problem Statements of the Research
A research problem is one that a researcher would like to research (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2007:27). The research problems of the study are formulated as follows: 1. What kinds of directive utterances that are used by the English teachers of SMA
Assalafi? 2. What reasons did the teachers mostly produce the most dominant kind of directive utterances??
C. Objectives of the Research
In line with the problem stated above, the research intended to define and classify kinds of directive utterance used by the English teachers of SMA Assalafi and to determine their relative frequencies, into which this kind of directive utterances fits and the reasons why the teachers like to procude the dominant kind of directive utterances in the classroom settings.
D. The Significances of the Research
The results of the study tend to significance in the following ways: 1. Practically, for the observed high school, to be able to gain real information about the characteristics of directive uttearance used by the English teachers. This way, is hoped to give contributions on finding advantages and disadvantages of directive utterances in learning processes. In addition to the teachers, this research to be able to analyze and find a comprehension portrait about their utterances and functions in order to give benfits to students.
2. Theoretically, this finding of the research will provide the overview of the directive utterances and their common functions in classrooms. In addition to other researchers who are interested in conducting a research on the notion of speech act, it is hoped to be understood about the kinds, forms of directive utterances and their funtions in speech act theories that expected to be able to students‘ involvement in classrooms.
E. Scope of the Research
The research focuses on the kinds of directive utterances used by the English teachers of SMA Assalafi in teaching learning process, their frequencies and their reasons to make directive utterances applied in classrooms of X and XI SMA Assalafi in the academic year of 2014/ 2015.
F. Definition of the Key Terms
To prevent misunderstanding, some key terms are explained as listed below: 1. Directives are those in which the speaker tries to get the Kreidler (1998:189).
Thus a directive utterance has the pronoun you as actor, wether that word is actually present in the utterance or not. A directive utterance is prospective; one cannot tell other people to do something in the past. Like other kinds of utterances, a directive utterance presupposes certain conditions in the adresssee and in the context of situation. The utterance ― Lift this 500- pound weight‖ is not felicitous if spoken to a person incapable of lifting 500 pounds, and ― Close the door‖ is vapid if the only door in the vicinity is already closed. When the utterance can be carried out, the utterance is felicitous, and if not, it is infelicitous
2. Utterances : I
It is a continuous piece of speech beginning and ending with a clear pause. In the case of it is generally but not always bounded by silence.
Utterances do not exist in written language, only their representations do. It can be represented and delineaany ways (Wikipedia).
3. English Classroom Based on Nunan & Bailey (2009: 15), a classroom is a place in which teachers and learners are gathered together for instructional purpose. It means that
English classroom can be defined as the gathering, for given period of time, of two or more persons (one of whom generally assumes the role of instructor) for the purpose of English language learning cited in Nunan & Bailey, 2009: 15). This definition encompasses everything tutorial session between teacher and learner in the English lesson.
G. Method of the Research 1.
Research Design The design of the research is descriptive qualitative. Regarding Issac (1984:46), descriptive research is the kind of research that describes systematically the situations and facts of a given population factually and accurately. Moreover, Arikunto (1996: 244) states that the final conclusion of descriptive study should be in words or sentences, not in a number. Therefore, the description in qualitative descriptive studies entails the presentation of the facts of the case in everyday language.
2. Respondent of the Research The respondent‘ pool of this study consists of the English Teachers of SMA Assalafi in the academic year of 2014/2015.
3. Data Sources In a descriptive qualitative research, data source can be taken from archival documents, written and oral expressions of people or their behavior, etc. ( Moelong,
2010: 157). According to Sugiyono (2006:329) data source is a record of events in the past in the form of handwriting, pictures, or even literature works and it can be classified to be primary and secondary data source. Most importantly, in this research, the data sources can be explained below: a. Primary Data
Primary data sources is the data that directly given for researcher. In this study, the writer gains the data from the utterances made by English teachers of SMA Assalafi through learning process observations
b. Secondary Data Sugiyono (2009:308) states that secondary data sources is the data indirectly given for researcher like by supportive documents. In this study, the writer takes sources such as taken from:
1) Rr. Dewi Wahyu Mustika. 2011. The Structure of Teacher‘s Directive of the English Lecturers of Muhammadiyah University Semarang. Salatiga: English Department of Educational Faculty.
2) Yule, George. (1996). Pragmatics. London : Oxford University Press. 3) Kreidler, Charles W. ( 1998). Introducing English Semantics. London : Library Congress Catalouging.
4. The Method of Collecting Data The writer uses observations and documents ( result teachers‘ interview) for collecting data. According to Arikunto (2006:231), documentation is a number of data that presents the verbal data such as correspondence, journal, memory, report and others‘ written text that can be mutually responsible. In this research, this kind of observation and documentation are expected to know the kinds of directives uttered by the teachers and their reasons producing them in class, to evaluate them, and to obtain another data relating to the profile of the institution (SMA Assalafi) which is used as the object of the research. Meanwhile, for collecting the data to this research, the writer has to make an appointment with the two English teachers and has to ask her for permission to make interview.
Technique of data analysis of this research is based on Sugiyono‘s qualitative data analysis theory (2006: 335). According to him, a qualitative data analysis is a process of searching and arranging systematically the obtained data from interviews, field notes, and documentation by organizing data into categories, explaining into units, synthesizing, arranging into patterns, sorting the important ones, and drawing conclusions in order to be comprehended by the researcher or the readers. In this research, to analyze the data, the writer applies some techniques or procedures as explained follows: a. Collecting data
Collecting data starts from searching needed data in multiple forms such by documents. Trough this step, the writer observes two classes where English was being taught.
b. Identification After observing the class, the writer writes the kinds of directives made by the teachers using the theory.
c. Classification In this step, the writer classifies or selects which kinds of directives committed in every utterance. It has been collected to continue the next analysis process.
d. Data Analysis The present study is an attempt to investigate the kinds and the reasons of using the directives in SMA Assalafi by teachers in the university classrooms. To do this, the English teachers of SMA Assalafi each of two hours duration, in which tape recording will be possible without distracting the teacher, are chosen.
The data will be all the instances of directives, derived from four classrooms, each lasting about 2 hours. Directives derived from the classes are utterances which make students follow them verbally or non-verbally. As all the utterances are those used in the classrooms, it is expected to face verbal responses more often than non-verbal ones. For the purposes of this analysis, the data will be first examined for the variety of directive forms followed by their functions. Then, the distribution of directive forms and functions were to be tabulated and discussed accordingly using the opinion of Holmes (1993: 98-107
) where she claims that the structure of teacher‘s directives can be classified into three kinds: imperative, interrogative, and declarative.
H. Review of the Literature
The major feature of a directive as defined in the speech act theory is to elicit non- verbal behaviors from the hearer. Such behaviors, with regards to the options given to the addressee, are divided by Tsui (1995) into two classes; in one, the addressee has the option of compliance, while in the other, s/he does not. They are referred to as requests and directives, respectively. Fraser (1975b, cited in Tripp, 1976), however, places both requests and directives under the category of requesting, in terms of the speaker‘s expectation from the hearer to perform the action expressed by the statement.
Making a distinction between an order and a request, in terms of their ―preparatory condition,‖ Searle (1969) purports that the speaker giving direction must be in a position of authority over the addressee. Moreover, while a request is typically expressed in the interrogative form, an order, generally, is in the form of imperative, or a declarative, stating the speaker‘s desire.
Directives, as argued by Tsui (1995) can be divided into two main subclasses, namely advisives and mandatives. She defines advisives as directives which make the hearer do the action expressed for his/her own benefit, whereas mandatives are those performed for the benefit of the speaker. In addition, one may respond advisives, but not mandatives, by thanking. He again makes a distinction between positive and negative advisives in terms of benefits they offer to the addressee. The former, the positive advisives, is referred to as advice and the latter, negative one, as warning. Warning is a kind of directive, stating or implying that it is preferable for the addressee to follow the directive; otherwise, some undesirable consequences may arise. It is uncommon for the warning to state the action along with a reason. In contrast, an advice advocates the desirable consequences of the stated action on the part of the hearer. Furthermore, he defines a mandative as a directive advocating a course of action or avoiding an action for the benefit of the speaker. They comprise two subclasses: instructions and threats. The former is produced due to t he speaker‘s desire or want.
Directives Used In University Classrooms is mostly to the benefit of the speaker; the latter, i.e. threat, while sharing the above feature in the case of the hearer‘s non- compliance will put some undesirable consequences into the action. In contrast, since in instructions, unlike threats, the person has the right or authority to make the addressee to perform the action, there is no need to resort to the stating of the unwelcome results of non- compliance.
Regarding different forms which directives may take, it is argued that although the primitive form of a directive is known to be imperative, they, similar to other types of speech act, can be expressed via various other forms. In this respect, Holms (1983, cited in Tapper, 1994), has identified five variations in addition to imperative. They are as follows:
imperative, present participle; verb ellipsis; imperative + modifier; and let + us . She also
adds interrogatives and declaratives as possible forms of expressing directives.Similarly, Tripp (1976) has found five types of directives, namely, needs statement, imperatives, embedded imperatives, permission directives, and question directives. What determines the use of these variants instead of imperative seems to be derived from different sources? Ervin_Tripp claimsthat one factor can be the amount of tact or knowledge the speaker tends to put forward. Moreover, Goatly (1995) argues that social factors are crucial in determining different forms of directives. He asse rts that ―the first feature Leech identifies is the cost/benefit to the hearer. The most direct form of directives are usually considered as impolite if the action is costly to the hearer, but are perfectly polite if the action is to the hearer‘s benefit‖ (p.269). Thus, depending upon the age, sex, rank and distance of the interlocutors as well as the context of situation the speaker may choose either of the forms cited above.
Furthermore, he identifies two types of social factor influencing the forms of a directive; vertical and horizontal social distance. The former, vertical, deals with ―status difference‖ in which the higher the rank, age or status of the interlocutor, the more indirect the utterance is expected. The horizontal social distance, or ―the degree of familiarity or solidarity‖, has to do with the point that the direct form of a directive is acceptable when there is familiarity and solidarity among the members of the group. An appropriate directive, according to Sinclair & Coulthard (1974) Comp rises ―Modals + you + feasible action.‖ They argue that if the pattern fulfills these three features, it is directive. By incorporating modals in their formula, they mean the modals can, could, will, would and going to; by you, they emphasize that the subject of the directive and addressee must be identical and finally, by feasible action, they mean the possibility of the action to be performed at the time of directing.
The forms of a directive make a continuum ranging from the most forceful ones i.e. imperatives to the least i.e. hints. Although, this might be true in certain conditions, it might fail to determine the forcefulness of an utterance, based on the syntactic form alone.
Jones (1992) introduces the context and paralinguistic factors such as intonation, laughter and gestures as devices used to intensify, or, on the contrary, mitigate the force of a directive. He also provides a list of devices for reducing the forceful effects of direct directives, such as the use of inclusive pronoun (we), please, modals, quantifiers, or providing a reason for the directive.
In classrooms, as a distinct context, the forms of a directive can even reveal the attitude of the instructor towards the learners. In this connection, White (1988, cited in Goatly, 1995) points out that there might be a connection between the directive forms used in the classroom and the teacher‘s attitude towards his students. White postulates that ―one might distinguish three kinds of attitudes to students and their activities and to teacher roles. In the first, the educational process emphasizes doing things to students, in the second with students, and in the third for students‖ (p.271). It is argued that in the first process, i.e. to students, the distance between the teacher and students is greater than the other two and the teacher is in authority. In the second one, i.e. with students, there seems to be cooperation as well as solidarity between the instructor and his students. In the third one, i.e. for students, the students act as customers; they might be equal in status with the instructor, or even higher. This postulated classification seems to require further research to be substantiated. This implies the limited choices, teachers have at their disposal with regard to the relationship they wish to establish with their students.
I. Organization of the Research
This study will contain five chapters that arranged as follows: chapter I contains the basic description of the research, then in chapter II is about the theoretical foundation that covers frameworks of directive utterance, chapter III describes the data presentation of the study, chapter IV presents discussion of the research, chapter V or the last chapter is closure containing of conclusions and suggestions.
CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK In this chapter the writer wants to explain what theory that is used to accomplish this
study. The main data in this analysis is the directive utterances that can be supported by some resources. The theory of discourse analysis by Ge orge Yule‘s Discourse Analysis, An
Introduction to Discourse Analysis by Malcolm Coulthard will help the writer to analyze this
study and the theory of illocutionary acts by Searle will also support this analysis. Some books with other theories will be also used by the writer to finish this thesis.
A. Pragmatics
Pragmatics is the study of how to use language in communication. Pragmatics is also one of the fields in linguistics that studies about meaning. The meaning studied in pragmatics is influenced by contexts. This is in line with Brown and Yule (1983:2) who state that pragmatics is the discussion of linguistics that involves the considerations of contexts.
In other words, it can be said that, in pragmatics, the meaning of a particular expression is various depending on its context. Pragmatic is concerned with the study of meaning as communicated by speaker (or writer) and interpret by a listener (or reader). It has consequently, mean by their utterances that what the words by them selves. pragmatics is study of speaker meaning. Brown and yule (1996:3).
Different theorists have focused on different properties of utterances. To discuss them it will be helpful to make a distinction between ‗near side pragmatics and ‗far side pragmatics‘. The utterances philosophers usually take as paradigmatic are assertive uses of declarative sentences, where the speaker says something. Near-side pragmatics is concerned with the nature of certain facts that are relevant to determining what is said. Far-side pragmatics is focused on what happens beyond saying: what speech acts are performed in or by saying what is said, or what implicatures are generated by saying what is said.
Pragmatics in this study is included into facts about speaker‘s intention in uttering a speech act. Speech act is an actions performed via utterances. There will be theories which will be discussed about it.
B. Speech Act
Speech act theory states that the action performed when an utterance is produced can be analyzed in three levels; they are locutionary act, illocutionary force, and perlocutionary effect (Cutting, 2002:30). It is different with Austin‘s opinion which says that there are kinds of speech act, they are locutionary act, illocutionary act, and perlocutionary act. Actually their theory has the same meaning but they mention it in the different terms. Yule, (1996:47) also gives the definition about speech act which says that it is the actions performed via utterances. His theory has the same meaning with the theories which are stated before but he adds that in English, speech act given more specific labels such as apology, compliment, and etc.
C. Types of Speech Acts
Austin suggests that when people are saying something they perform three kinds of acts which are locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary act (Levinson 1983: 236)
1. Locutionary Act Locutionary act is semantic or literal meaning of asentence. Austin said that the interpretation of locutionary act is concerned with meaning. In other words, a locutionary act is an act of producing a meaningful linguistic expression. Briefly, locutionary act is the meaning of what a speaker says. For example: if someone s ays ‗Switch on the lamp!‘ the locutionary act is the speaker wants someone to switch the lamp on 2. Perlocutionary Act
Perlocutionary act is the expected effect on the hearer by uttering the sentence. In uttering a sentence or an utterance the speaker expects that the heare will achieve an effect. For example: If someone says ―Where‘s your necklace?‖ it may causes you touch your neck quickly or you might respond ‗Oh, I put it in the drawer‘.
3. Illocutionary Act Illocutionary act is the act of saying, which is committed with the intends of speaker by uttering a sentence such as asking, stating, questioning, promising, ordering, apologizing, threatening, and requesting. According to Austin's preliminary informal description, the idea of an "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." (Austin would eventually define the "illocutionary act" in a more exact manner.) Illocutionary act is a technical term introduced by John L. Austin in investigations concerning what he calls 'performative' and 'constative utterances.
According to Austin's original exposition in How to Do Things With Words, an illocutionary act is an act (1) for the performance of which I must make it clear to some other person that the act is performed (Austin speaks of the 'securing of uptake'), and (2) the performance of which involves the production of what Austin calls 'conventional consequences' as, e.g., rights, commitments, or obligations. For example, in order to successfully perform a promise I must make clear to my audience that the promise occurs, and undertake an obligation to do the promised thing: hence promising is an illocutionary act in the present sense. However, for certain reasons, among them insufficient knowledge of Austin's original exposition, the term illocutionary act is nowadays understood in a number of other ways. Many define the term with reference to examples, saying such things as that any speech act like stating, asking, commanding, promising, and so on is an illocutionary act; they then often fail to give anysense of the expression illocutionary act capable of making clear what being an illocutionary act essentially consists in. It is also often emphasized that Austin introduced the illocutionary act by means of a contrast with other kinds of acts: the illocutionary act, he says, is an act performed in saying something, as contrasted with a locutionary act, the act of saying something, and also contrasted with a perlocutionary act, an act performed by saying something. But it may be misleading to distinguish between kinds of acts, for these are not separate categories of speech, but instead describe different levels on which speech might work. Any one particular speech event may have any combination of locutionary, illocutionary or perlocutionary effects. Still another conception of an illocutionary act goes backto Schiffer's famous book 'Meaning' (1972, 103), in which the illocutionary act is represented as just the act of meaning something.
According to the conception Bach and Harnish adopt in 'Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts' (1979: 89), an illocutionary act is an attempt to communicate, which they again analyze as the expressing of an attitude. According to Searle (1969:34),the illocutionary act is an act performed in saying something. On other words, illocutionary act can be defined as using a sentence to perform a function. When a speaker says something, he or she may perform some functions of act through the utterances such as request,complain, etc.
D. Types of Illocutionary Acts
According to Austin and Searle. Austin differs the kind of speech act in three kinds, while Searle differs it into five kinds of speech act. Austin divides the kinds of speech act into locutionary act, illocutionary act, and perlocutionary act. In other sides, Searle divides the kind of speech acts into comissives, directives, assertive, expressives, and declarations (Searle, 1979).
1. Comissives are those illocutionary acts whose point is to commit the speaker (again in varying degrees) to some future course of action. It seems like assertives class. Verbs denoting members of this class are asking, ordering, commanding, requesting, begging, pleading, praying, entreating, and also inviting, permitting, and advising (Searle, 1979: 13).
2. Directives refer to the attempts made by the speaker to get the addressee to do something.
Verbs denoting members of this classare ask, order, command, request, beg, plead, pray, entreat, andalso invite, permit, and advise (Searle, 1979: 14).
3. The point or purpose of the members of the assertive class is to commit the speaker (in varying degrees) to something's being the case, to the truth of the expressed proposition (Searle, 1979: 13). In other words, assertives is the utterance by the speaker to commit in doing something. The examples of assertives are concluding, deducing, and complaining.
4. Expressives is the next class of illocutionary acts proposed by Searle. The illocutionary point of this class is to express the psychological state specified in the sincerity condition about a state of affairs specified in the propositional content (Searle, 1979: 15). In short, expressives is the acts which reveal expression in the utterances. Thanking, congratulating, apologizing, condoling, deploring, and welcoming are the examples of expressives.
5. Declarations are the acts containing utterances that are intended to alter the world.
Including in this group are ‗defining‘, ‗abbreviating‘, ‗naming‘ ‗calling‘ or ‗christening‘.
E. The Function of Illocutionary Acts
In speech acts investigation, the illocutionary act is the main focus of the discussion because illocutionary act is the intended meaning of utterance. Therefore, the illocutionary act always has function of speech acts. Leech (1991:104) states that at most general level; illocutionary functions may be classified into the following four functions as follow:
1. Competitive: This illocutionary act aims to the social goal. For instance: ordering, asking, and demanding. In this function, the negative politeness is used to reduce the unpleasant way between what the speakers want to the politeness should say.
2. Convivial: This illocutionary act aims incompliant with the social purposes, such as offering, inviting, greeting, thanking, and congratulating. In this context, the politeness is utilized positively to make a pleasure relationship to the society.
3. Collaborative: This illocutionary act aims at ignoring the social purposes, such as asserting, reporting, and instructing. This function does not contain politeness.
4. Conflictive: This illocutionary act aims against the social purposes, for instance threatening, accusing, refusing, and reprimanding. It against politeness that is not at all since it is purposed the anger except in the irony sentence.
We can conclude that assertives belong to collaborative category, directives belong to the competitive category, commissives tend to be convivial or competitive, and expressives also tend to be convivial. All of them depend on the context.