On Speech Acts by I Dewa Putu Wijana

 ON SPEECH ACTS

I Dewa Putu Wijana

Universitas Gadjah Mada

Abstract

This paper is intended to give insights to the readers about the development of speech act theories which include categories, characteristics, validities, and strategies. The research begins with the classification of speech acts done by some experts and continues with the description of characteristics and validities carried out especially by Austin and Searle, and ends with speech act strategies developed by Parker and Riley, using examples taken from Indonesian, Javanese, Balinese, and English, four languages that the writer masters relatively well. Most Indonesian, Balinese, and Javanese data together with their context are created intuitively as a native or nearly-native speaker while some English utterances are created and the others extracted from pragmatic textbooks used as references in this study. Research findings show that there are various types of speech acts, and each speech act has its own validity conditions. Among them, illocutionary acts constitute the focal point of pragmatics’ studies. The description shows that every expert of pragmatics uses different categories in classifying illocutionary acts, and the kinds of strategies used to express them.

Pragmatics is a Matter of Probabilities in Language Use

Jumanto Jumanto PhD in Linguistics (Pragmatics), Universitas Indonesia, 2006. Dosen Fakultas Ilmu Budaya, Universitas Dian Nuswantoro Semarang.

Linguistics is deterministic within more of etic perspectives. Pragmatics is probabilistic within more of emic perspectives, researching how politeness happens (harmony/FSA-FTA management); how impoliteness happens (disharmony/face-threat/agression); or how im/politeness does not happen, as meaning interaction is sociopragmatically allowable or strategic or politic (interaction-based face-threat). Language use is indeed a matter of probabilities (Jumanto, 2014; 2017; Leech, 1983). In most recent development of pragmatics, the so-called emic perspectives may be elaborated into the so-called emic-concepts and emic practices (Haugh, 2011).

Salam Pragmatik!

Periodisasi Perkembangan Studi Pragmatik

Norwanto,Ph D

IAIN Salatiga

Saya ingin berbagi mengenai Periodisasi perkembangan studi pragmatik. Ibu/bapak mungkin sudah paham betul tentang periodisasi ini, jadi ini hanya penyegaran saja.

Secara umum ada empat periode dalam pragmatik:

(1) teori klasik (mis. speech acts, cooperative principles, dsb.),

(2) first-wave politeness approaches (mis. Leech’s politeness principles, Brown & Levinson’s Politeness Strategies, Lakoff, dsb),

(3) Second-wave politeness approaches (atau discursive approaches atau post-modern approach),

(4) dan third-wave politeness theories. Culpeper yang membagi periodisasi studi pragmatik di awal tahun 2000 ke dalam first and second-wave politeness studies.

Mills mengkritik kelompok first wave dan menawarkan discursive approach.

Marina Terkourafi mengkritik kelompok first dan second-waves dan menawarkan frame analysis untuk memahami ‘norms’.

First wave mengedepankan analisis makro berbasis prinsip atau aturan, atau maksim yang berbasis pada speech acts dan cooperative principles.