30 Speech Act and Discourse Analysis

Ms. Anshikha Adhikari

Introduction

Learning to communicate in a language involves more than acquiring the pronunciation and grammar. We need to learn how to ask question, make suggestion, greet and thank other speakers. In other words we need to learn the uses to which utterances are conventionally put in the new language community and how these uses are signaled. The terminology of such function of language is called speech acts (J.L. Austin, 1975).

Language is the most intrinsic and a complex semiotic system that human beings have developed to satiate their social need for communication. This eventually helps them to maintain the social and cultural relations. We all know that linguistic communication can not be achieved by individual sounds, words or sentences. These linguistic units are put together which are contextually defined.

Now let us look at the following examples:

1.  Congratulations!
2.  No War Yes Peace.
3. Devika was here.

All the above mentioned examples are secluded word, phrase or a sentence. But all of them give an idea to us as to when, where and who has spoken them.

For linguists, these are real instances of languages. The first example 1, may mean that somebody has applauded someone else’s success.

The example in 2, may state a line written on a placard which talks about peace on Earth. The example stated in 3 means that the above mentioned line may be scribbled on a stone wall on a fort or may be neatly typed in the script of a play.

In the similar fashion, these instances could be very well received by many different listeners

– a fellow soldier, a football stadium crowd, an airhostess, a doctor, or a bunch of jazz dance learners. The activity in which the participants are involved as well as the setting of communication would then also vary accordingly. As a consequence, in each case, not only the abstract linguistic units but the wholes of language, intentions and situations should also be considered. These wholes combine speech, writing, gesture, posture and so on and integrate linguistic organization. Provided that these conditions are fulfilled, 1, 2 and 3 can communicate effectively.

Speech Act

All Linguistic communication involves linguistic acts. The unit of linguistic communication is not, as has generally been supposed, the symbol, word or sentence, but rather the production or issuance of the symbol, word or sentences in the performance of the speech act.

The study of speech acts enables the understanding of the social, psychological, cultural, historical and similar other dimensions of communication. They are not mere artificial linguistic constructs as it may seem, their understanding together with the acquaintance of context in which they are performed are often essential for decoding the whole utterance and its proper meaning.

A speech act in linguistics and the philosophy of language is an utterance that has performative function in language and communication. According to Kent Bach, “almost any speech act is really the performance of several acts at once, distinguished by different aspects of the speaker’s intention: there is the act of saying something, what one does in saying it, such as requesting or promising, and how one is trying to affect one’s audience.” The contemporary use of the term goes back to J. L. Austin’s development of performative utterances and his theory of locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts. Speech acts are commonly taken to include such acts as promising, ordering, greeting, warning, inviting and congratulating.

The concept speech act was proposed by John Langshaw Austin, one of the founders of pragmatics, in the series of William James lectures which were delivered by him at Harvard in 1955. Eventually, his work was published in the book entitled How to Do Things with Words (1965). This concept was later developed by John Searle. Speech act theory believes in identifying utterances and turns as actual actions. This theory not only considers language used by the speaker but studies change in the state of behavior of the speaker as well as the listener at the time of communication.J. L. Austin for the first time studied language from a different point of view and brought into notice that apart from statements true and false, and truth conditions there are other possibilities in language, which are non-assertive categories that include questions, commands, exclamations etc. He studied language from non- conventional point-of-view which is a kind of reaction to the traditional view of language.

Besides Austin, John Searle contributed a lot to the speech act theory. Although a speech act is concerned with the ‘performative’ aspect of utterances, a speech act has many other dimensions. According to speech act, language is used to make things happen. Human beings have a wide choice of linguistic expressions and they try to make it as effective as possible. The choice of language depends upon a number of factors, like social customs, traditions, culture, relationship between speakers and the kind of situation.

Classifications

Speech Act theory classifies speech acts into three types:

• Locutionary Act
• Illocutionary Act
• Perlocutionary Act

Locutionary Act

The locutionary act is the act of saying something with a certain meaning and reference. Locutionary act in a larger sense refers to all communication media, both sent and received. From the receiver’s point of view, communication media is not important at the beginning of the communication. But, on the other hand, there are verbal and nonverbal communication acts within the locutionary acts. These acts are received as entity and are hence subjected to further interpretation.

For example,

• Don’t go to the jungle!
• Counts as a warning: The speaker is trying to persuade someone not to go to the jungle which is considered dangerous in that particular context.

You should studyharder.

• Counts as an encouragement: the speaker is trying to encourage the listener to burn midnight oil to achieve more success.

He said to me “Sing along!”

• Counts as motivation: the speaker is is trying to persuade the listener to get involved in the act of singing.

Illocutionary Act

Illocutionary Act is referred to as the act performed in saying something. Illocutionary force is the speaker’s intent. It is also considered as a true ‘speech act’.It relates to various kinds of psychological modes that make the basis of communication as its teleological base. Both acts, locutionary and illocutionary are invoked by the sender/speaker. According to the conception adopted by Bach and Harnish in ‘Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts’ (1979), an illocutionary act is an attempt to communicate, which they analyse as the expression of an attitude. Another conception of the illocutionary act goes back to Schiffer’s book ‘Meaning’ (1972, 103), in which the illocutionary act is represented as just the act of meaning something.

For example,

• He informed me about the corruption of the committee members.
• Counts as an information: the speaker’s intent is to transfer the information to the listener.
• Leave the room.
• Counts as an order:The speaker has ordered the listener/s to leave the room.
• I hereby declare you the knight of Gwinder Falls.
• Counts as a declaration: The speaker has declared the listener as the knight of Gwinder Falls.

Illocutionary act can be further divided into the following types:

• assertives = it represents state of affairs. E.g. stating, claiming, suggesting, telling, insisting, asserting or describing

For example

• I saw a beautiful flower which was plucked by a girl.
• Sunita went to Kanpur to protest against tanneries.

directives = speech acts that are to cause the hearer to take a particular action, e.g. requests, commands and advice

For example

•  Close the window!
• Get out my room!
•  Go to the playground!

commissives = speech acts that commit a speaker to some future action, e.g. promises and oaths

For example

• I will return this pen to you tomorrow.
• I will bring harmony to this city again.
•  I promise to be the harbinger of security in our house.

expressives = speech acts that express on the speaker’s attitudes and emotions towards the proposition, e.g. congratulations, excuses and thanks

For example

• Your speech was commendable.
• I am not well. Please excuse me from the meeting.
• I thank the citizens of Lesotho for supporting me during the elections.

declarations = 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.

For example:

• I now pronounce you man and wife!
• The owner of Tiru cabs is hereby sentenced to prison for five years.
• Mr Gandon will persecuted according to the law for theft and arsony.

Perlocutionary Act

Perlocutionary acts are the acts which are attributed to the effect of the utterances of a sentence. According to Austin, an utterance of a sentence of the speaker is the performance of an illocutionary act of having a certain force, which is different from the locutionary act of uttering the sentence, which is to have a meaning, and also from the perlocutionary act performed by uttering the sentence, which is to achieve certain effects. Perlocutionary act is a speech act that have an effect on the feelings, thoughts or actions of either the speaker or the listener. This includes persuading, convincing, scaring, enlightening, inspiring, or otherwise affecting the listener. It is to be noticed here that while examining perlocutionary acts, the effect on the hearer or reader is put on focus.

For example:

 I have an extra concert ticket for the Coldplay. Would you like to attend it?

○ Counts as an impressing someone: the speaker might be acting courteous by offering an extra ticket to the listener. But implicitly he/she is also trying to impress someone or encourage someone to a particular type of music.

You should join Persian classes. Don’t you think?

○ Counts as persuading someone: the speaker is trying to persuade the listener to join Persian classes.

By the way, there is a newly opened deli round the corner; care to join me?

○ Counts as offer but implicit effect might be to impress the listener: the speaker is trying to enlighten the listener to try out some new type of cuisine.

Propositions and Assertions

Look at the given sentences:

• Mary saw Kathy.
• It is snowing.

The first sentence indicates that Person 1 that is, Mary saw Person 2, Kathy. In the second sentence, there is a mention of a simple fact that is snowing. The above two sentences are the primary bearers of truth value. In other words, the above mentioned sentences are true if and only if the action implied in the sentences has happened or happening. Propositions, then, are the contents of indicative sentences, are what such sentences express.

Assertion is a speech act whereby the speaker puts forward a proposition as true or, secondarily, the proposition affirmed in such an act. The main tool for making assertions is the declarative sentence, spoken or written. Assertion is the default value of a declarative utterance or inscription.

For example:

Fareed will play in the park.

Zaheer is a good boy.

Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis (DA), or discourse studies, is a general term for study of the ways in which language is used in texts and contexts. It can be written as well as spoken. According to M Stubbs

The term discourse analysis is very ambiguous. I will use it in this book to refer mainly to the linguistic analysis of naturally occurring connected speech or written discourse. Roughly speaking, it refers to attempts to study the organisation of language above the sentence or above the clause, and therefore to study larger linguistic units, such as conversational exchanges or written texts. It follows that discourse analysis is also concerned with language use in social contexts, and in particular with interaction or dialogue between speakers.

–     Stubbs 1983:1) 

Moreover, it involves the use of language in a running discourse, continued over a number of sentences, and involving the interaction of speaker (or writer) and auditor (or reader) in a specific situational context, and within a framework of social and cultural conventions.

–   Abrams and Harpham , A Glossary of Literary Terms, 2005).

Discourse Analysis is actually more concerned with whole texts rather than sentences or clauses. As mentioned earlier it is divided into:

• Spoken Discourse Analysis: study of conversations, dialogues, spoken monologues, and so on.
• Written Discourse Analysis: study of written texts, such as essays, news, political speeches and so on.

Discourse Analysis is rather more concerned with naturally occurring data than in made up examples. Thus it can be said to have comprised of collection of techniques, rather than a single analysis. This contrasts with types of analysis more typical of modern linguistics, which are chiefly concerned with the study of grammar: it is the study of smaller chunks of language, such as sounds (phonetics and phonology), parts of words (morphology), meaning (semantics), and the order of words in sentences (syntax). Discourse analysts on the other hand, study larger chunks of language as they flow together as a text.

• As linguists discourse analysis always tries to find out how language works and tries to improve our understanding of an important kind of human activity
• As educators discourse analysis attempts to find out how good texts work, so that we can focus on teaching our students these writing/speaking strategies.
• As critical analysts discourse analysis tries to discover meanings in the text which are not obvious on the surface (e.g., analysing a politician’s speech to see their preconceptions).

Devices for Discourse Analysis

Discourse is essential in communicating thoughts and ideas. People around the world communicate their ideas through stretches of language. In order to understand any discourse, we must understand the devices used to analysis it.

Some of the common devices for Discourse analysis are:

1. Discourse and Frames
2. Turn Taking
3. Discourse Markers
4. Cohesion
5. Grice’s Maxims
6. Coherence

Let us now try to understand each device with elaboration.

Discourse and Frames

Reframing is a way to talk about going back and re-interpreting the meaning of the first sentence. Frame analysis is a type of discourse analysis that asks, What activity are speakers engaged in when they say this? What do they think they are doing by talking in this way at this time?

For example, one needs to know the type of text one is reading while one is reading a text in a newspaper. One must identify if the given text is a news or an editorial, or an advertisement to get a better grasp on the text. This also enables us to interpret the text much more easily.

Turn Taking

Turn-taking is a type of organization in conversation and discourse where participants speak one at a time in alternating turns. In many contexts, conversation turns are a valuable means to participate in social life and have been subjected to competition.

Turn taking usually involves processes for:

• constructing contributions
• responding to previous comments
• transitioning to a different speaker
• using a variety of linguistic and non-linguistic cues.

There are different ways of indicating that a turn will be changed:

Formal methods: for example, selecting the next speaker by name or raising a hand.

Adjacency pairs: for instance, a question requires an answer.

Intonation: for instance, a drop in pitch or in loudness.

Gesture: for instance, a change in sitting position or an expression of inquiry.

The most important device for indicating turn-taking is through a change in gaze direction.

Discourse Markers

A discourse marker is a word or phrase that plays a role in managing the flow and structure of a discourse. Discourse markers are more commonly referred to as ‘linking words’ and ‘linking phrases’, or ‘sentence connectors’. If a text lacks sufficient discourse markers, then a text would not seem logically constructed and the connections between the different sentences and paragraphs would not be intelligible to the readers.

Some of the commonly used discourse markers are:

However	nevertheless	Oh
Now	Well	you know
then	I mean	so
because	and	but
okay	or	By the way

Cohesion

Cohesion refers to the ties and connections which exist within texts that link different parts of sentences or larger unit of discourse.

Some of the cohesive devices which help in achieving Cohesion are:

Synonyms– is a word that means exactly or nearly the same as another word or phrase in the same language. Words that are synonyms are said to be synonymous, and the state of being a synonym is called synonymy.

For example:

■ Jump and leap

■ Big and huge

■ Beautiful and comely

Transitional words improve the connections and transitions between sentences and paragraphs.

 For example:

• Afterwards

• As a result

• Therefore

• On the other hand

• Next

• Accordingly

Exemplification: By exemplifying, we provide an instance, or several instances, of a certain phenomenon; by enumerating different instance of the same phenomenon. This aids in making the argument in the text convincing.

Examples include:

For instance

For example

Ellipsis: Ellipsis is a series of dots ‘…’ that usually indicates an intentional omission of  a word, sentence, or whole section by the author from a text without altering its original meaning. It is also a literary device. The essential characteristic of ellipsis is is something that is present in the selection of underlying (systematic) option that omitted in the structure. An omission may include an omission of noun, verb or a clause.

Anaphoric Relation

With the help of anaphoric relation interpretation of text happens from some previously expressed idea or an entity.

For example:

He did that there.

Cataphoric Relation

It means to refer something forward. In other words, it refers to the identity of what is being expressed and what is to be expressed.

For example:

Here is the actor, John Levitt.

As he ran, Mr Tandon was caught by the police.

For the sake of her sanity, Kavita was allowed to walk outside the asylum compound.

Coherence

Coherence refers to the degree to which a piece of text makes sense. Coherence is normally achieved through syntactical features such as the use of deictic, anaphoric and cataphoric elements or a logical tense structure, as well as presuppositions and implications connected to general world knowledge.

Grice’s Maxims

Grice (1975) set Four Maxims which say that in conversational exchanges the participants are in fact co-operating with each other.

 Maxim of Quantity

This maxim states that make your contribution as informative as is required but not more or less than is required.

Maxim of Quality

Maxim of quality states that one should not say that which one believes to be false or for which one lacks evidence.

Maxim of Relation

Maxim of relation tells us to be relevant.

Maxim of Manner

Maxim of manner suggests us to be clear, brief and orderly.

Conclusion

The undeniable merit of speech act theory lies in advancing a view of language use as action.

In Searle’s words

[A] theory of language is part of a theory of action, simply because speaking is a rule governed form of behaviour. Now, being rule-governed, it has formal features which admit of independent study. But a study purely of those formal features, without a study of their role in speech acts, would be like a formal study of the currency and credit systems of economies without a study of the role of currency and credit in economic transactions. A great deal can be said in the study of language without studying speech acts, but any such purely formal theory is necessarily incomplete. It would be as if baseball were studied only as a formal system of rules and not as a game.

– Searle 1969:17

Discourse analysis is a hybrid field of enquiry. However, this complexity and mutual influencing should not be mistaken for “compatibility” between the various traditions. Nor is compatibility necessarily a desirable aim, as much is to be gained from the exploration of problematical and critical edges and from making the most of theoretical tensions. Traditions and crossover phenomena are best understood historically – in antagonistic terms and as subject to internal developments.

Reference

• Austin, John L., 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Bourdieu,              Pierre, “The             economics         of                   linguistic   exchanges’,      Social               Science Information, 16:6, 645-668.
• Coulthard, Malcolm, 1985. An introduction to Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.
• Jaworski Adam & Coupland Nikolas, 1999. The Discourse Reader. London: Routledge.
• Searle, John, 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language.
• Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Searle John, 1983. Intentionality. An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Stubbs Michael, 1983. Discourse Analysis: The Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
• Thomas, Jenny, 1986. The Dynamics of Discourse. A Pragmatic Analysis of Confrontational Interaction. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Lancaster University.
• Torfing, Jacob, 1999. New Theories of Discourse. Laclau, Mouffe and Žižek. Oxford: Blackwell.