speech act theory powerpoint presentation

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

speech acts semantics.ppt.ppt

Related Papers

Muhamad arifin

This paper addresses John L. Austin’s theory of speech acts, originally introduced in How to Do Things with Words, as well as John R. Searle’s Speech Act. It begins with the description of the notion of speech acts particularly in terms of its definition considering the exact limits of the discussion. It follows with the history of speech act theory which focuses on how the pioneer of this theory, Austin, came up with his ideas which then were further explored by his most famous student at Oxford University, Searle. Regarding the history, this paper brings the distinction between performatives and constatives which were introduced by Austin and then moves to his most influential work, that is, locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts. It continues with surveying the direct and indirect speech acts. Another important concept certainly ought to be mentioned is Searle’s five classifications of speech acts. Finally, to complete the discussion, this paper switches to speech events and Dell Hymes SPEAKING model.

R. Dian D Muniroh

The study is aimed at investigating strategies of follow-up responses to refusals performed by Indonesians learning English as a foreign language. Having known that his/her desire or want is refused by his/her hearer, a speaker may provide a follow-up response to the refusal to maintain the flow of a talk exchange. This act may also mitigate the tension and is able to prevent the speaker from being considered impolite or non-cooperative. The study involves 20 students of the English Education Department of Indonesia University of Education. The data were collected through Discourse Completion Tests (DCTs). The collected data were then analyzed by using the framework proposed by Searle (1969), Blum-Kulka et al. (1989), and Aziz (2000). It is found that the respondents manifest the follow-up responses in a number of ways, which can be categorized as request, acceptance, apology, promise, refusal, and passive comment. These responses contain some strategies. While the category of request and refusal are manifested in six and two strategies respectively, the categories of acceptance, apology, promise, and passive comment are not further divided into finer categories because they only consist of illocutionary force indicating devices (IFIDs). This study concludes that an act of providing a follow-up response cannot be separated from the speaker’s attempt to maintain harmony in communication.

Bảo Ngọc Đỗ

Agustin Anggraeni

Key Words: speech acts, Ramayana comic, illocutionary act, perlocutionary act In this study the writer is interested in conducting an analysis of speech acts in Ramayana comic. There are two proposed problems: (1) what are the illocutionary forces in the utterances produced by Rahwana in the Ramayana comic the first series written by R. A. Kosasih and (2) how are the perlocutionary effects interconnected with the illocutionary forces in the utterances produced by Rahwana in the Ramayana comic the first series written by R. A. Kosasih. To answer the problems of study the writer employs a speech acts theory proposed by Austin (1962). Austin (1962) divided speech acts into three dimensions which are locutionary act, illocutionary forces, and perlocutionary effects. The types of illocutionary forces proposed by Austin are verdictives, excercitives, commissives, behavitives, and expositives. The perlocutionary effects can be intended or unintended. This study uses qualitative approach because the analysis of the data is explained in the form of description rather than numeral. Besides, the study is a document analysis because the data are Rahwana’s written utterances containing speech acts derived from a comic. The data source of this study is Ramayana comic the 1st series published by Ermar Press in 1981. Based on the result of the analysis, it is revealed that Rahwana employs all five types of illocutionary forces in uttering his utterances. They are verdictives, excercitives, commissive, behavitives, and expositives. All these illocutionary forces are uttered either explicitly or implicitly. Then, the perlocutionary effects of Rahwana’s utterances are intended and unintended. The most frequent illocutionary force Rahwana uses is excercitive which is uttered explicitly and the most frequent perlocutionary effect is intended. It is suggested to the next writers who want to conduct a study in the same field, especially speech acts, to analyze all the three dimensions of speech acts which are locutionary act, illocutionary act, and perlocutionary act. In analyzing the locutionary act the next writers can use syntactical structure to determine the formation of the sentence in a speaker’s utterance and explains performative verbs in analyzing the illocutionary and perlocutionary acts.

Rinaldo Fatra

DANIELA SOREA

Cakrawala Pedagogik

Akhmad Baihaqi

This paper is intended to understand how conversational pattern is occurred between conductor and passenger in public transportation. The research was conducted through case study. Data of the research were taken from the conversation transcriptions between conductor and passenger in public transportation. The result of the research shows that the most turn taking patterns in conversation are interruption, and the types of speech acts that mostly occurred are illocutionary act of directive, assertive, and expressive utterances. The research also finds the existing pattern of adjacency pairs, sequences, and implicature. Abstrak Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk memperoleh pemahaman tentang bagaimana pola percakapan terjadi antara kondektur dan penumpang di bus umum. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah studi kasus. Data penelitian diperoleh dari rekaman percakapan yang dibuat dalam transkripsi percakapan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pola giliran pembicaraan yang paling banyak muncul adalah interupsi, pada bentuk tindak tutur ilokusi direktif, asertif, dan ekspresif. Hasil penelitian juga menunjukkan munculnya pasangan berdampingan, rangkaian ujaran, dan penyiratan.

Rajendran Sankaravelayuthan

The aim of the subject of study is to give a brief introduction to semantics and pragmatics. Semantics is the study of meaning. More precisely it is the study of the relation between linguistic expressions and their meanings. Pragmatics is the study of context. More precisely it is the study of the way context can influence our understanding of linguistic utterances. The term semantics simply means the study of meanings. The study explores how meaning in language is produced or created. Semantics not only concentrates on how words express meaning but also on how words, phrases and sentences come together to make meaning in language. To start with, you will be motivated to focus on the nature and scope of semantics. Hence, here in this unit, you will be introduced to the concept and definition semantics, brief history of semantics, semantics and other disciplines, major concern of semantics, and the different approaches to the study of semantics. The symbols employed in language must be patterned in a systematic way. You have been already informed that language is organized at four principal levels – sounds (i.e. Phonetics/phonology), words (i.e. Morphology), sentences (i.e. syntax) and meaning (i.e. semantics). Phonology and syntax are concerned with the expressive power of language while semantics studies the meaning of what has been expressed. Knowledge of grammar is an aspect of the innate cognitive ability of human beings. The power of interpretation complements that innate ability. Interpretation is an aspect of semantics. Therefore, language acquisition or learning includes not only the knowledge of the organization of sounds and structures, but also how to associate meaning to the structures. Semantics can, therefore, be characterized as the scientific study of meaning in language. Semantics has been the subject of discourse for many years for philosophers and other scholars but later was introduced formally in literature in the late 1800’s. Hence, we have philosophical semantics and linguistic semantics among other varieties of semantics. Earlier scholars in philosophical semantics were interested in pointing out the relationship between linguistic expressions and identified phenomena in the external world. In the contemporary world, especially in the United States philosophical semantics has led to the development of semiotics. In some other parts of the world, and especially, France, the term semiology has been favoured. The reliance on logical calculations in issues of meaning has led to the development of logical semantics. However, for your purpose in this course, emphasis is on linguistic semantics, with our interest on the properties of natural languages. You shall see how this study relates to other disciplines. We shall also examine the real issues in linguistic semantics. Semantics has been identified as a component of linguistics. In its widest sense, linguistics is the scientific study of language. As a field of study, semantics is related to other disciplines. In semantics, we study the meaning of words and also how the meanings of words in a sentence are put together to form sentential meaning. Linguistic semantics studies meaning in a systematic and objective way. Since meaning as a concept is not static, a great deal of the idea of meaning still depends on the context and participants in the act of communication (discourse). There is a strong connection between meaning and pragmatics. The exchange or relay of information, message, attitude, feelings or values from one person to another contributes to the interpretation of meaning. This is done mainly by the use of language. It is often expressed that language is a system which uses a set of symbols agreed upon by a group to communicate their ideas or message or information. These symbols can be spoken or written, expressed as gestures or drawings. Depending upon the focus of study, semantics can be compartmentalized as lexical semantics, grammatical semantics, logical semantics and semantics in relation to pragmatics.

Rajendran S

RELATED PAPERS

Memory & Cognition

Thomas Holtgraves

aseel kmahmood

Florence O . Idowu

Hilma Suryani

Zhenya Abramchuk

International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning

Mohammad Ghazanfari

Anindita Wisesa

Mirjam Oomens

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Mitch Green

Touria Drid

Ramiro Lozano

François Cooren

BEST Journals

Vergine Simonyan

Tugce Gungormezler

Journal of Pragmatics

Mohammed Nasser

Bulletin of Adavanced English Studies (Refaad)

A K M Mazharul Islam

John Flowerdew

Language Learning

ramzi khedhiri

Michele Dalo

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• My presentations

Auth with social network:

Download presentation

We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video

Speech Acts: What is a Speech Act?

Published by Franklin Moore Modified over 8 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Speech Acts: What is a Speech Act?"— Presentation transcript:

DOING THINGS WITH LANGUAGE

Unit : 22 Perlocution and Illocution.

Conversational Implicature (Based on Paltridge, chapter 3)

Review Exercises 1) Do the COMPONENTIAL analysis (not the compositional one) of the following words: hen b) rooster Componential analysis 2) Does ‘A’

Lecture Six Pragmatics.

Pragmatics.

CAS LX 502 7a. Speech acts Ch. 8. How to do things with words Language as a social function. — I bet you $1 you can’t name the Super Tuesday states. —You’re.

Presentation on Formalising Speech Acts (Course: Formal Logic)

ETHNOGAPHY OF COMMUNICATION: SECOND PART

Speech acts and events. Ctions performed To express themselves, people do not only produce utterances, they perform actions via those Utterances, such.

Direct and indirect speech acts

Introduction to linguistics II

SPEECH ACT THEORY J. Austin & J.Searle

Advanced Spoken English Speech Act Theory What are Speech Acts? Speaking is performative Utterances are functional -Giving orders, instructions -Making.

Semantics 3rd class Chapter 5.

 We have been considering ways in which we interpret the meaning of an utterance in terms of what the speaker intended to convey.  However, we have.

6.3 Macropragmatics Speech act theory The cooperative principle The politeness principle.

Topic 9: perlocution and illocution

+ 1. Pragmatics. - What is pragmatics? - Context 2. Speech acts. - direct speech acts - indirect speech acts.

About project

© 2024 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.

Speech acts theory in semantics

Dec 20, 2019

310 likes | 723 Views

Speech acts theory in semantics. Contents. 1. Introduction. 2. Austin’s speech act theory. 3. Direct & indirect speech act. Politeness in speech act. 5. 4. Politeness in speech act. Introduction.

Share Presentation

Presentation Transcript

Contents 1 Introduction 2 Austin’s speech act theory 3 Direct & indirect speech act Politeness in speech act 5 4 Politeness in speech act

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). Communication function rely on the knowledge of social convention &specific knowledge of local context of utterance ( Saed, 2003:220). 0

Characteristics of speech acts • In discussing speech acts we are examining the union of linguistic and social behavior. • There are two important characteristics of speech acts:

Characteristics of speech acts • Whether there is a match between a grammar form of speech function we can identify a sentence type. Saed sets differences between the two as below:

Austin speech act theory • Austin’s work in many respects a reaction to some traditional and influential attitudes to language. The attitudes can be said to involve three related assumptions as follows:

Austin speech act theory • Although some of these assumptions are discernible in recent formal approaches to semantics, they are associated with the philosophers known as logicalpositivists, a term originally applied to the mathematicians and philosophersof the Vienna Circle; • in terms of how far the meaning of a sentence is reducible to its verifiability, i.e. the extent to which, and by which, it can be shown to be true or false. • Austin’s opposition to these views is:

Austin speech act theory • Performative utterances: are sentences that they were in themselves a kind ofaction, they perform the action named by the first verb rather than describing it in the sentence, and we can insert the adverb hereby to stress this function, • e.g. I hereby request that you leave my properly. • We can contrast performative and non-performative verbs by: • e.g. I cook this cake. • ?hereby cook this cake. They describe actions independent of the linguistic act. A speaker would not,expect the uttering a sentence to constitute the action

Evaluating performative utterances • It is not useful to ask if a perfromative utterance is true or false, just if they work or not. They have to be felicitous, felicity requires satisfying social conventions. Austin named these conditions as felicity conditions are either formal or informal. • Austin (1975:25-38). Wrote a general schema:

Explicit & implicit performatives

Statements as performatives • Austin’s original position was that performatives(stating) subject to felicity conditions, are to be contrasted with declarative sentences (constatives)which are potentially true or false descriptions of situations (Schiffrin,1994: 50—4). • In simple terms, Austin argued that there is no theoretically sound way to distinguish between performatives and constatives.E.g. The king of France is bald. • All utterances constitute speech acts of one kind or another. For some the type of act is explicitly marked by their containing a verb labeling an act. • Some speech acts are so universal and fundamental that their grammaticalization is the profound one of the distinction into sentence types.Sentence is a basic marker of primary performative types.This conclusion that all utterances have a speech act force has led to a widespread view that there are two basic parts to meaning: the conventional caning of the sentence (often described as a proposition) and the speaker’s tended speech act.(Sadock and Zwicky , l985: 160).

Three facets of speech act Kreidler (1998) concludes that what is said - the utterance, can be called the locution. What the speaker intends to communicate to the addressee is the illocution. The message that the addressee gets, his interpretation of what the speaker says, is the perlocution. If communication is successful, the illocution and the perlocution are alike or nearly alike.

Categorizing speech act • J. R. Searle (1976: 10—16) proposed that all acts fall into five maintypes: • REPRESENTATIVES, which commit the speaker to the truth of theexpressed proposition (paradigm cases: asserting, concluding); • DIRECTIVES, which are attempts by the speaker to get the addresssee to do something (paradigm cases: requesting, questioning); • COMMISSIVES, which commit the speaker to some future courseof action (paradigm cases: promising, threatening, offering); • EXPRESSIVES, which express a psychological state (paradigm cases:thanking, apologizing, welcoming, congratulating); • DECLARATIOIS, which effect immediate changes in the institutional state of affairs and which tend to rely on elaborate extra linguistic institutions (paradigm cases: excommunicating, declaring war, christening, marrying, firing from employment). • Searle uses a mix of criteria to establish these different typesincluding theact’s illocutionary point; ‘fit’ with the world the content of the act the psychological state of the speaker

Categorizing speech act The first step was to point out that in some cases the sameKreidler (1998:183) presents different categorization Assertive utterence: states that in the assertive function speakers and writers use language to tell what they know or believe; assertive language is concerned with facts. The purpose is to inform. It’s devided into two, there are direct and indirect assertive. Direct assertive utterance start with I or we and an assertive verb. Indirect  assertive utterances also include assertive verbs. Assertive verb include allege, announce, agree, report, remind, predict, protest. Performative utterance: Speech acts that bring about the state of affairs they name are called performative. Performative utterances are valid if spoken by someone whose right to make them is accepted and in circumstances which are accepted as appropriate. The verbs include bet, declare, baptize, name, nominate, pronounce. the subject of the sentence the verb must be in the present tense Speaker authority and circumstances

Categorizing speech act 3. Veridictive utterances: are speech acts in which the speaker makes an assessment or judgment about the acts of another, usually the addressee. These include ranking, assessing, appraising, condoning. 4. Expressive utterance: springs from the previous actions—or failure to act—of the speaker, or perhaps the present result of those actions or failures. Expressive utterances are thus retrospective and speaker-involved. The most common expressive verbs (in this sense of ‘expressive’) are: acknowledge, admit, confess, deny, apologize. 5. Directive Utterance:Directive utterances are those in which the speaker tries to get the addressee to perform some act or refrain from performing an act. Thus a directive utterance has the pronoun you as actor, whether that word is actually present in the utterance or not. one cannot tell other people to do something in the past. Like other kinds of utterances, a directive utterance presupposes certain conditions in the addressee and in the context of situation. Three kinds of directive utterances can be recognized: commands, requests and suggestions.

Categorizing speech act • 6. Commisive Utterance: Speech acts that commit a speaker to a course of action are called commissive utterances. These include promises, pledges, threats and vows. Commissive verbs are illustrated by agree, ask, offer, refuse, swear, all with following infinitives. They are prospective and concerned with the speaker’s commitment to future action. • A commissive predicate is one that can be used to commit oneself (or refuse to commit oneself) to some future action. The subject of the sentence is therefore most likely to be I or we. Further, the verb must be in the present tense and there is some addressee, whether the utterance shows it or not, since the speaker must be making a commitment to somebody. • 7. Phatic utterance: Phatic utterance is to establish rapport between members of the same society. Phatic language has a less obvious function than the six types discussed above but it is no less important. Phatic utterances include greetings, farewells, polite formulas such as “Thankyou,” “You’re welcome,” “Excuse me” when these are not really verdictive or expressive.

Felicity conditions Searl developed felicity conditions for an act which are Preparatory, Propositional, Sincerity& Essential:

Indirect speech act • The conventionally expected function is known as the direct speech act (interrogative )and the extra actual function is termed the indirect speech act (questioning). • According to Searl (1975) whether the hearers are only conscious of indirect or whether they have both available to choose the indirect as most contextually apt. He answers by saying that speaker have access to both literal (direct and nonliteral(non-direct)use of speech acts • E.g. can you pass the salt? • Please pass the salt. • When one of these sentences is uttered with primarylocutionarypoint of a directive, the literal illocutionary act is also formed (1975:70) • Searl relies on system of felicity conditions in working literal but not all non-literal acts. • Searl argues that other sentence can only work when they address the conditions for request. Indirect speech act work because they are systematically related to the structure of the associated direct act , they are tied to one or another of the act’s felicity conditions.

Understanding indirect speech act • Searl states that to understand indirect speech act we combine our knowledge of three elements to support a chain of inference • There is a certain degree of conventionality in using forms like can you, or conversational postulates :shortcuts employed by speakers,they are often used when the speaker is encouraged to search for an indirect speech act. • They reduce the amount of speech involved in tracing the indirect act. • The postulated can be seen as reflection of conventionally of some indirect actsIndirect speech act involve postulation,there is a view that they are idioms involving no inference. • This view is cut by common-sense that hearers decide to be uncooperative , there is also a psychological evidence that hearers have access to direct act in indirect requests which proves that direct speech acts are understood more quickly and that hearers seem to have access to the literal meaning of indirect acts. • They suggested that literal meaning of indirect act is important in politeness

The concept of politeness • Searl since conversational requirements of politeness normally make it awkward to issue flat impressive statement, we seek indirect act to illocutionary end. In indirective, politeness is main motivation for indirectness • Speaker conclude social power of politeness in framing speech acts . Indirect interrogative requests are useful because they permit participants to explicitly state some condition which make compliance impossible • Politeness is often associated with the concept of face. Goffman(1967) face concept is one’s social image an individual seek to projects. While brown &levin (1978:66) claim that face is the public face image every member want to claim • Positive face express individual desire to seem worthy and deserving for approval. While negative face represent an individual’s desire to be autonomous , unimpeded by others . • Mutual interest requires participants maintain their face (in this view many verbal interactions are potential threat to face).

The concept of politeness

Sentence type • Sentence type is a conversational matching between grammatical form and speech act, Some languages has a question contrast with declarative speech act. Saed (2003:237) introduce the idea of classifiers that marks the distinction between different verbal inflections for person etc. • The problem with marking by special words can be used for a variety of semantic distinctions. Sadock and Zwicky(1985:167) suggested some rule thumb for identifying sentences:

References: • Saeed, J. I. (2003). Semantics.2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers • Kreidler, C. W. (1998). Introducing English semantics. London: Routledge • Searle, J.R. (1969). Speech Acts: an essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: University Press. • Austin, J.L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. • Brown, P. and Levinson, s.( 1978/1987) politeness. Some universal in language usage. 2nd edition. Cambridge university press. • Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse. Oxford:Blackwell. • Sadock, Jerrold M., & Zwicky, Arnold M. (1985). Speech Acts Distinctions in Syntax. Cambridge University Press.  • D. WagimanAdisutrisno. (2008). MULTIPLE CHOICE ENGLISH GRAMMAR TEST ITEMS THAT AID ENGLISH GRAMMAR LEARNING FOR STUDENTS OF ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE. Institute of Research and Community Outreach - Petra Christian University. • Searl,J, R(1976) the classification of illocutionary acts. Language in society 5:1-23 reprinted in J,Rsearl, ecpression and meaning:studies in the theory of speech acts, 1979.Cambridge: Cambridge university press, 1-29. • Searl, J, R (1975): indirect speech acts: in peter cole and jerry morgan (eds) syntax and semnatics, vol.3 speech acts, 59-82. Newyork: Academic press. • Lyons, j (1995) Linguistic semantics: An introduction.Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. • Lyons, I (1977) sematics. Cambridge and newyork: cambridge university press. 

Thank you! Questions?

• More by User

SPEECH ACTS

SPEECH ACTS. by Don L. F. Nilsen. CONDITIONS ON PERFORMATIVES. Subject must be 1 st person. Verb must be active. Verb must be non-durative. Adverb must be “hereby.” Sentence must be positive, not negative. Sentence must be Imperative or Declarative. Verb must perform the act.

1.19k views • 27 slides

Speech Acts & Language Functions

Speech Acts & Language Functions. Pragmatics Not only language structure is rule governed – language use is, too Rules of language use are social : ”Is saying this ”possible?” / ”feasible?” / ”appropriate?” / ”done?” (Dell Hymes) Oxford 1930’s-1940’s:

1.34k views • 22 slides

Speech Acts II

Speech Acts II. Week 7 Language in Context. A: I don’t want to bother you, but could you please have a look at my dress? B: I have to finish this assignment right now. A: I’m not threatening you, but if you don’t look at me right now then I will ----.

717 views • 48 slides

The semantics of dialogue acts

The semantics of dialogue acts. Harry Bunt Oxford, IWCS 2011. The semantics of dialogue acts bridging the gap between computational semantics and pragmatics. Harry Bunt Oxford, IWCS 2011. Dialogue acts: Basics

153 views • 0 slides

Speech Acts: What is a Speech Act?

2.9k views • 12 slides

Speech Acts

Speech Acts. Week 9 language in context. Objectives. Definition Reason for using speech acts How it works in language use. Application in drama activities. Factors of promises in speech acts Application in drama activities Factors of verbs in speech acts

1.03k views • 29 slides

Speech Acts. How to do things with words. Verificationist Holdovers. According to verificationism, the meaning of a sentence is the set of experiences that verify it. (If we had those experiences, we would know the sentence was true).

1.2k views • 58 slides

Pragmatics Speech acts

1. Pragmatics. - What is pragmatics? - Context 2. Speech acts. - direct speech acts - indirect speech acts. Pragmatics Speech acts. What is pragmatics?. Pragmatics :. The study of ‘invisible’ meaning, or how we recognize what is meant even when it is not actually said or written.

1.36k views • 17 slides

Speech acts and events

Speech acts and events. Susan Ade Fitri Tika Kartika Alfiah Sitia Rahma. SPEECH ACT and EVENTS. SPEECH ACTS L ocutionary act: The basic act of uttering a meaningful linguistic form . My tired body. Sandy play guitar . I llocutionary ac t : The communicative force of an utterance.

3.49k views • 16 slides

Speech Acts. Direct and indirect speech acts. Speech Acts. Speech Events may also include Speech Acts . J.L Austin observed that ‘many utterances do not communicate information, but are equivalent to actions, e.g. I apologise…’ I promise….’ ‘I will….’ (at a wedding’

5.26k views • 15 slides

Speech Acts. Lecture 8. Introduction.

1.04k views • 25 slides

SPEECH ACTS. Adapted from by Don L. F. Nilsen and Language Files with added examples of conflict management strategies from Arabic TV broadcasts. Introduction.

720 views • 41 slides

SPEECH ACTS & EVENTS

pragmatics. SPEECH ACTS & EVENTS. SPEECH ACTS. Speech acts: Actions performed via utterances. Locutionary acts Illocutionary acts Perlocutionary acts. Locutionary acts. Performed via producing a meaning linguistic expression. Illocutionary acts.

1.55k views • 19 slides

Speech Acts. Svatava Heinlová UJP /ZCU Pl zeň 1.6. 2011. Speech Acts /2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND Prague May 23, 2011 lecture : J . Searle The Intentionality of Visual Perception; Speech Acts. PRACTICAL PART Learning / Teaching /Testing Speech Acts UJP

573 views • 13 slides

Indirect Speech Acts

Indirect Speech Acts. Lenny Shedletsky. Nofsinger. R., Everyday Conversation , Sage, 1991. Getting Meaning Out of A Conversation. I N T E R P R E T A T I O N.

434 views • 17 slides

Speech Acts and Speech Events

Speech Acts and Speech Events. Austin (1962) and Searle (1969)-it is possible to classify utterances into very small set of functions. We ought to assign functions to utterances Problem of assigning functions is that speaker’s intent and meaning may not be similar.

800 views • 11 slides

Speech Acts Definition of speech acts

Speech Acts Definition of speech acts. A speech act is a functional unit in communication (Cohen, A.D.) It’s an act that a speaker performs when making an utterance (def. from LinguaLink website). According to Austin’s theory of speech acts (1962), utterances have three kinds of meaning.

672 views • 24 slides

512 views • 27 slides

Speech Acts. Questions to Run On. What in the world do I do now?. Speech Acts. Assertions Assessments Declarations Requests Offers Commitments. Assertions. Based on Data- True or False Shape Thinking in Groups Powerful Descriptors. The Power of Assertions.

403 views • 24 slides

• Preferences

Speech Act Theory PowerPoint PPT Presentations