• Home
  • Other
  • Take home assignment (30%): This assignment will be given out one week before it is due. It includes a series of short answer questions that cover content from the first four weeks of the semester. Students are required to demonstrate an understanding of

Take home assignment (30%): This assignment will be given out one week before it is due. It includes a series of short answer questions that cover content from the first four weeks of the semester. Students are required to demonstrate an understanding of Essay Example

  • Category:
    Other
  • Document type:
    Assignment
  • Level:
    Undergraduate
  • Page:
    2
  • Words:
    1022

Home assignment on speech acts theory 5

Homework assignment on speech act theory

Insert ID no

20th September 2011

Take home assignment on speech acts theory

1(a). It is a directive speech act which is uttered indirectly. This is because the speaker is informing the hearer to perform the action of getting for him or her cup of coffee. It is also a constative that is performed indirectly. This is because the speaker is ordering and the speaker expects the hearer to perform the action of getting the cup of coffee.

(b). It is a directive speech act which is performed indirectly. This is due to the fact that the speaker is asking/requesting for a cup of coffee and the speaker expects the hearer to perform the action of getting the cup of coffee. It is an indirect speech act because the speaker is not asking for the ability of the speaker but rather asking or requesting.

(c). It is a constative speech act. This is because the speaker is informing/requesting the hearer about his or her intentions of wanting a cup of coffee.

Statement (b) is more polite. This is because it is more of a request than (c) and (a) which are constative speech acts (Searle, 1969).

2. (a). Asking-This is because the speaker is asking the hearer a question.

(b). suggesting- it’s a directive speech act this is because the speaker is communicating to the hearer to have a nice day.

(c). Warning or informing-it’s a directive because it is performing the act of warning the hearer. It is also a constative speech act because it is informing the hearer.

3. (a) Speaker B has not flouted the maxim of quality because his response is polite and orderly. In addition the response is relevance to the question asked and speakers tells what he believes to be the truth. Thus, the speaker has not flouted the maxim of relevance and quality respectively. Lastly, speaker B has not flouted the maxim of quantity. This is because the information he gives is sufficient and is not either more or less (Blum-Kulkaet al., 1989).

(b). Speaker B observes all the four maxims that is the maxim of quality, quantity, relevance and manner. The response the speaker gives is not only informative and relevant to the question but also polite, orderly and truthful.

(4). According to Grice (1989) maxims are aimed at explaining the relation that exist between the speaker’s utterance and what the hearer understands from the utterance made by, the teacher does not flout the maxim of quality and manner respectively. However, the information that the teacher gives does not answer the question directly and thus it cannot be considered insufficient or more than what has been asked. Therefore, the maxim of quantity is flouted. Additionally, the teacher has flouted the maxim of relevance. This is because he does not directly answer the question but applying implicatures.

(b) According to Bach (1994) implicatures refers to what a speaker suggests in his or her utterance but does not say the same directly. Therefore, in the utterance, the speaker is implying that X has good writing skills by simply complementing on X’S other skills which are related to writing skills.

(c). The teacher wanted to give all the skills that X have and not only his writing skills. It can be also be argued that he did not want to flout the maxim of quality by giving information about X’s writing skills yet he was not sure of the same as he may not be his writing skills teacher.

5 (a). The hearer’s face is not threatened by the statement. This is because the speaker wants to make the hearer to believe that he/ she will appreciate if the hearer will drop the requested thing as soon as he or she can. It’s a polite request that is illocutionary in nature. It is also a directive because the speaker is ordering the hearer.

(b). There is an element of indirect politeness and the speaker wants the hearer to perform the action of reducing the volume of his music system even though the speech act is in imperative statement. The statement has the illocutionary effect of politely requesting the hearer to reduce the volume of his or her music system (Austine, 1975).

6. The Australian culture is both deference oriented and solidarity oriented in nature. This is evident in the use of English language. In English statements the aspect of deference is present in the verb base and verb ending and the involved deference is subject to the hearer taking a particular action. For example: bring for me a cup of coffee. The verb bring is difference oriented. This is because verbs indicate the element of politeness and formality. But on the basis of face concept, the verb or the statement can only be used while addressing close friends, family members.

On the other hand, the Australian culture is solidarity oriented. This is because Australian speakers employ elements of face strategies while addressing others. These concepts are evident in the existing distance between the speakers and the hearer, the power of the speaker or the person being addressed and the degree of the imposition. The solidarity of Australian culture is therefore evident in the address terms. For instance there are different English address terms that indicate the solidity of Australian culture. For instance address terms such as sir, Mr., mother, father and teacher among others illustrates that Australia n culture is solidarity oriented and its is moving away from deference oriented to solidarity oriented on the basis of face concept (Boxer, 1993).

References

Oxford: University press.How to do things in words. Austine, J.L. (1975).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Conversational implicatures’, Mind & Language.Bach, K. (1994).

. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologiesBlum-Kulka, F. et al. (1989).

, 103-125.Journal of Pragmatics, 19Boxer, D. (1993). Social distance and speech behavior: The case of indirect complaints.

Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Studies in the Way of Words.Grice, H. P. (1989).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language.Searle, J. (1969).