CHAPTER I
BACKGROUND OF STUDY
Semantics
is study of the meaning of words and other parts of language, or the systematic
study of meaning. The study of meaning can be undertaken in various ways.
Speakers of a language have an implicit knowledge about what is meaningful in
their language and it easy to show this. Three disciplines are concerned with
the systematic study of ‘meaning’ in itself: psychology, philosophy, and
linguistics. In semantics , we’ll find some confusion regarding types and
levels of speech acts.
A
speech act is an utterance that serves a function in communication. We perform
speech acts when we offer an apology, greeting, request, complaint, invitation,
compliment, or refusal. A speech act might contain just one word, as in
"Sorry!" to perform an apology, or several words or sentences:
"I’m sorry I forgot your birthday. I just let it slip my mind."
Speech acts include real-life interactions and require not only
knowledge of the language but also appropriate use of that language within a
given culture.
Speech
acts are interesting to me, because they are difficult to perform in language
because learners may not know the idiomatic expressions or cultural norms in various
language or they may transfer their first language rules and conventions into
the another language that has different purposes , assuming that such rules are
universal. Because the natural tendency for language learners is to fall back
on what they know to be appropriate in their language, it is important that
these learners understand exactly what they do in that language in order to be
able to recognize what is transferable to other languages..For levels of speech
acts, emphasis is on the different stages of interaction between the speaker
and the listener through the use of speech acts. Three distinct levels are
usually observed – locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary acts.
First,
Locutionary Acts – These are observed as the processes of producing grammatical
and meaningful utterances which can be recognised by the hearer.
Second,
Illocutionary Acts – Illocutionary acts are the force behind the utterances.
Indeed, the speaker performs these acts to achieve the purpose of communication
as a statement, a question, a command, an invitation, a threat, a request, an
apology etc. It is possible, for instance, to use a sentence that has the
structure of a statement for the purpose of a warning. Therefore, it is
possible to use identical utterance types for different tokens based on the
intentions of the speaker and the context.
And
the last, Perculationary Acts – These are the effects of the speaker’s
utterance on the behaviour of the hearer. They are the acts performed by the
hearer as a result of the effect of the speaker’s utterances. It is assumed,
for instance, that the hearer will respond to a question of the speaker in a
specific way, or behave in accordance with the demands of the context.It should
be noted that the illocutionary force is the intended effect of an utterance on
the hearer from the point of view of the speaker.
The
perlocutionary effect is the actual effect of the speaker’s utterance on the
action, behaviour, attitude or belief of the hearer. Maximum communication is
achieved when there is illocutionary uptake. This situation arises when the
listener understands the intended effect of the speaker. This demand is at the
core of semantics since meaning must be shared.
In
this paper the I’ll try to describe different approaches to the investigation
of meaning. Linguistic semantics is concerned with what knowledge individual
speakers of a language possess which makes it for them to communicate with one
another. More over, trough this paper I’ll try to describe more at the specific
features of communication, beginning with observations about non linguistic
signs and how we get meaning from them. We introduce a distinction between a
sentence, a language construction, and an utterance, a particular act of
speaking or writing. An utterance is typically part of a larger discourse. In
spoken discourse meanings are partly communicated by the emphases and melodies
that are called prosody. Vocal and gestural signs can also be the means of
transmitting meanings.In this research I
will examine a distinction made in Speech Act Theory between normal uses of
language and uses of language that are said to be parasitic on them. Fictional,
theatrical, comedic and metaphoric uses of language may be said to be parasitic
on normal language in so far as their intelligibility requires a rules or
conventions of normal language such as is used in everyday cases of asserting,
promising, ordering, greeting, warning, inviting and congratulating, etc.
CHAPTER II
THEORY AND METHODOLOGY
a. Theory
The
theory of speech acts has applications to philosophy in general, but these can
only be illustrated here. In ethics, for example, it has been supposed that
sentences containing words like 'good' and 'right' are used not to describe but
to commend, hence that such sentences are not used to make statements and that
questions of value and morals are not matters of fact. Cohen claims that the
fact that speech acts reflect somewhat routinized language behavior helps
learning in the sense that much of what is said is predictable (Cohen, 1996, p.
408).
A speech
act is a minimal functional unit in human communication. Just as
a word (refusal) is the smallest free form found in
language and a morpheme is the smallest unit of language that carries
information about meaning (-al in refuse-al makes it a noun), the
basic unit of communication is a speech act (the speech act of refusal).
According
to Austin's theory (1962), what we say has three kinds of meaning:
1. propositional
meaning - the literal meaning of what is
said
It's hot in here.
2. illocutionary
meaning - the social function of what is said
'It's
hot in here' could be:
- an
indirect request for someone to open the
window
- an
indirect refusal to close the window because someone is
cold
-
a complaint implying that someone should know better than to keep the
windows closed (expressed emphatically)
3. perlocutionary
meaning - the effect of what is said
'It's hot in
here' could result in someone opening the
windows
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 someone issues an
order to someone to go by saying "Go!", or 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.)
An
interesting type of illocutionary speech act is that performed in the utterance
of what Austin calls performatives,
typical instances of which are "I nominate John to be President",
"I sentence you to ten years' imprisonment", or "I promise to
pay you back." In these typical, rather explicit cases of performative
sentences, the action that the sentence describes (nominating, sentencing,
promising) is performed by the utterance of the sentence itself. Following the
usage of, for example, John
R. Searle, "speech act" is often meant to refer
just to the same thing as the term illocutionary
act.
Searle's work on speech acts is also commonly understood to refine Austin's
conception. However, some philosophers have pointed out a significant
difference between the two conceptions: whereas Austin emphasized the
conventional interpretation of speech acts, Searle emphasized a psychological
interpretation (based on beliefs, intentions, etc.)
According
to Kasper , When the nonnative speakers violate speech act realization patterns
typically used by native speakers of a target language, they often suffer the
perennial risk of inadvertently violating conversational (and politeness) norms
thereby forfeiting their claims to being treated by their interactants as
social equals (Kasper, 1990, p. 193).
For
philosophy of language in particular, the theory of speech acts underscores the
importance of the distinction between language use and linguistic meaning .
This distinction sharpens the formulation of questions about the nature of
linguistic knowledge , by separating questions about capacities exercised in
linguistic interaction from those specific to knowledge of language itself. A
parallel distinction, between speaker reference and linguistic reference ,
provokes the question of to what extent linguistic expressions refer
independently of speakers' use of them to refer.
b. Methodology
There are a wide variety
of methods that are common in qualitative measurement. In fact, the methods are
largely limited by the imagination of the researcher
.To measure the accurateness data of my
research ,I used observation. Observational research
is type of correlational research in which a researcher observes ongoing
behavior. There are a variety of types of observational research, each of which
has both strengths and weaknesses. These types are organized below by the extent
to which an experimenter intrudes upon or controls the environment. Scientifically, observation is the process of
analyzing, applying and learning, alternatively it can also be defined as the
act of attentive watching, perceiving, or noticing of a situation.
The observational method has both advantages
and disadvantages as a research design in psychology. Covert observations can
be problematic regards ethics and disclosure. Confounding variablesalso plague observations. These are infinite,
and include observer bias and the observer effect. If the researcher plans, structures, and
conducts their observation appropriately, the observational method can be seen
as a most valid and reliable form of non-experimental research in psychology
mainly due to the observational method's high ecological validity. the subject of this study is all of my
friends in my place at Jalan Legiun Veteran No.56 Laud Dendang , that amount 11
persons.
CHAPTER III
DATA AND ANALYSIS
a.
Data and Analysis
1. Bambang
: pait kalipun kurasa mulutku ni…..
(Locution)
Husin
: bukan bilang dari
tadi, nah ni rokok beng…. (Perlucution)
: an indirect request for someone to ask
the ciggarete.(Illocution)
Bambang
just say that his mouth is bitter but Husin knew the meaning is Bamabang want
to smoke at that moment and he give a cigarette to Bambang.
2. Fairuzi
: omak … bersih kali kamar ni bah… (Locution)
Zulfan
: tenanglah wak, awas biar ku sapu dulu.. (Perlucution)
: an indirect request for
Zulfan to clean the room . (Illocution)
Fairuzi
said that the room was so clean but Zulfan knew what is it mean,and suddenly he
asked Fairuzi to calm down then he took a sweep and cleaned their room.
3. Husin
:
udah tanggal berapa ni ? (Locution)
Sambas : o..iya boy… ni nah utangku .. 20
dulu ya boy.. (Perlocution)
: an indirect request for
Sambas to pay his debt. (Illocution)
Husin
just asked what’s date today, but Sambas knew the meaning of that question and
took his money from the pocket quickly and give it to husin.
4. Ali
: aissshhh.. pedas..pedas.. pedas kali bah.. sumpah…
(Locution)
Hendra : nah..nah… minum kau dulu….
(Perlocution)
Akbar : garam ini ja nah,sumpah
ilang pedas makan garam ni wak. (Perlocution)
: an
indirect request for someone to ask the water (Illocution)
Ali
said that he felt so spicy, Hendra knew if Ali wanted to drink and gave him a
glass of mineral water and Akbar suggested him to eat the salt.
5. Hendra
:
payah kali buka pintu ni… (Locution)
Akbar : nah pake obeng… (Perlocution)
: an indirect request for
someone to ask a screwdriver. (Illocution)
Hendra
just say if he felt so difficult to open the door, and suddenly akbar gave him
a screwdriver.
6. Bambang
: kelen ngekos berapa orang satu kamar??
(Locution)
Hendra :
go out from the room.. (Perlocution)
Ali :
go out from the room.. (Perlocution)
: an indirect request for
Hendra and Ali to leave his room (Illocution)
Bambang asked that basicly how many
people is staying in a room, Ali and Hendra understand the meaning of his
question and go out from the room directly .
7. Bambang : masuklah nyamuknya mbas…..
(Locution)
Sambas :
(close the door at that moment).. (Perlocution)
: an indirect request for Sambas to close
the door . (Illocution)
Bambang
just say that the mosquito will enter the room, but Sambas suddenly close the
door at that time, sambas knew what the meaning of Bambang’s words .
8. Fendi
: makan apa aku nanti
wak…?? (Locution)
Husin :
(he doesn’t take the food on the table) (Perlocution)
: an indirect warning for Husin (don’t eat
that food) . (Illocution)
Fendi said What will I eat, and Husin knew the meaning of
his statement for leaving the food on the table for him(Fendi).
9. Habib
: aduhh… ilang pulak
sabunku ni…(Locution)
Ali :
pake ja punyaku di kamar mandi tu boy.. (Perlocution)
: an indirect request for borrowing the
soap to Ali. (Illocution)
Habib said that he lost of his soap, and Ali knew what
the purpose of Habibs statement then Ali directly suggest Habib to take his
soap in tha bathroom.
10. Hendra :
tengok-tengok tangki bar….. (Locution)
Akbar :
iya .. nanti ku isi bensinnya…(Perlocution)
:
an indirect request from Hendra for filling the gas to Ali
(Illocution)
Hendra
suggested Akbar to see the gas box, and Akbar knew that was a sign for him to
fill the gas if he want to borrow the motorcycle.
CHAPTER IV
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSION
Speech acts can be analysed on three levels:
1.
A locutionary act, the performance of an utterance: the actual utterance and
its ostensible meaning, comprising phonetic, phatic and rhetic acts
corresponding to the verbal, syntactic and semantic aspects of any meaningful
utterance.
2.
An illocutionary act: the pragmatic 'illocutionary force' of the utterance, thus
its intended significance as a socially valid verbal action (see below).
3.
And
in certain cases a further perlocutionary act: its actual effect, such as
persuading, convincing, scaring, enlightening, inspiring, or otherwise getting
someone to do or realize something, whether intended or not.
Speech Act Theory gives us the tools to
analyze a wider range of functions of language than theories based on truth-conditional
content.
Significant
of my study :
-Theory
: To improve the problem in knowledge.
-Practice :
1. The Principal, to make an
insruction concept.
2.
The Teacher, to make a map concept in learning.
3.
The Student, to motivate their selves in learning.
4.
The other researcher, as a comparison to study the same topic.
REFERENCES
James R, Hurford, Michael
B.Smith (2007). Semantics a course
book. London: Cambridge University press.
Heasly, B. (2007). Semantic theory. London: Cambridge
University press.
Searl, J.R. (1969). Speech Acts. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press
http://www.odur.let.rug.nl/spenader/.
Accesed on 19th of oct 2013 at 10.13 pm.
http://www.cambridge.org/9780521671873.
Accesed on 29th of oct 2013 at 8.24 pm.
Wikipedia, the Free
Encyclopedia. 2013. Speech act. Accessed on 7th of
oct 2013
at 9.47 pm.
Dwi purnomo, Maslatif. (2013). Semantics book for 5 th semester English Education Departement of State
Institute for Islamic Studies.Medan.
