Slide 1

Utterances can be classified into three categories.

1. Length
We can analyze the length of utterances by counting the numbers of the words in each utterance.
2. Grammatical structure
We can analyze the grammatical structure of utterances by the grammar structure of the
utterances, for example analyze the tenses, or active-passive statement, question and answer,
exclamatory, etc.
3. What sentences do
We can analyze what utterances do, what the functional approach the utterances have for example
like stating, questioning, requesting, and exclaiming. And the topic of todays presentation is the
third category, which is about what sentences do or we can say it as Speech Acts.

Slide 2

So, speech acts means utterances that have performative functions in language and communication.

For example as listed in the table here.

a. Ahok and Anis utterances in their debate of their program. Their utterances have performative
functions which is to persuade people to elect them.
b. How do you do? greeting
c. I think you should go to the nearest police station right now. advising

Slide 3

Many utterances that we say is making propositions. Proposition is the part of the meaning of a clause or
sentence.

In speech acts, there are several kinds of proposition.

1. Constative utterances
So, this kind of proposition must contain meaning which is really happening in the world and it
must make sense. In a simple understanding, constative utterances can be experienced or
imagined in a real world.
For example: your dinner is ready, have you called your mother?
In real life, we can imagine or experience that kind of situation.
For example, when my other prepares the dinner for the family and when she finished, she can
say, the dinner is ready.
2. Ethical Propositions
The difference of ethical proposition and constative utterances is that in their sense. While
constative deals with meanings which are possible to happen in a real world, ethical propositions
deal with meanings which are more abstract and they can be true or false.
Example:
Big boys dont cry however, actually in a real world, big boys also cry in certain circumstances.
Slide 4

3. Phatic
Phatic utterances are said not for propositional content but for affective value, actually phatic
utterances do not really communicate anything, they do not convey meaning. However, they have
social values, which is to maintain someone relationship. By uttering phatic utterances, it indicates
that someone is still willing to talk to you.
Example: Nice day, how do you do
4. Performative utterances
In using performative utterances, a person is not just saying something, but is actually doing
something if certain real-world condition are met.
For example in the circumstances of a holy matrimony in a church, the father say, I now pronounce
you husband and wife. Instead of only saying that sentence, actually the father is really doing
something, which is initiating a marriage.
I sentence you to five years in a jail in court, the judge is not merely saying that for no purpose,
however he or she is punishing the suspect to be put in a jail for certain years.

Slide 5

There are some indicators or criteria which can make sentences categorized as performative utterances.
The indicators is called as felicity condition.

1. Conventional procedure must exist for doing whatever is to be done

The participants both the speaker and the listener must be suitable with the situations
The father does not say I now pronounce you husband and wife in any situation, for example
in daily conversation, although the father says the same utterance, it cannot be categorized as
performative, because it does not suitable with the situations.

2. All participants must properly execute this procedure

The action have to be done completely, sincerely and seriously, and appropriately by all the
participants, the speaker and the listener
The father saying I now pronounce you husband and wife not seriously. Or in a holy
matrimony he says it with other sentences.

3. Feelings and intentions must be presents in all parties

The speaker has to do it with appropriate purpose.
For example when we have sweeping of STNK, we may know there are some fake cops or
policeman who just want to earn money. The real purpose is not to fine the riders and make
them wary and willing to obey the rules but their intentions is to fool and cheat people for the
sake of money.

Slide 6
There are 5 categories of performative proposed by Austin.

1. Verdicitives
This utterances were typified by the giving of a verdict, estimate, grade or appraisal.
This kind of utterances are usually uttered by a judge, referee. This type is related to deciding
something true or false.
a. Membebaskan (Aquit)
b. Membebaskan (Acquit)
c. Menghukum (Convict)
d. Memutuskan (find as a matter of fact)
e. Menyangka (hold as a matter of fact)
f. Menafsirkan (interpret as)
g. Memahami (Understand)
h. Mengirakan (Read it as)
i. Memerintahkan (Rule)
j. Menghitung (Calculate)
k. Memperhitungkan (Reckon)
l. Memperkirakan (estimate)
m. Menempatkan (Locate)
n. Menetapkan tempat (Place)
o. Menentukan tanggal (Date)
p. Mengukur (Measure)
q. Menilai (Value)
r. Melukiskan (describe)

2. Exercitives
Deals with the exercising of powers, rights, or influences as in appointing, ordering, warning or
advising.
Menunjuk (Appointing)
Memilih (Choose)
Memerintahkan (Ordering)
Memberi suara (Voting)
Memaksa (Urging)
Menasehati (Advising)
Memperingatkan (Warning)
Menamai (Name)
Memproklamirkan (Proclaim)
Mengarahkan (Direct)

3. Commisives
Typified with promising or undertaking, and committing one to do something, for example
announcing an intention or espousing a cause, dealing with promising.
Berjanji (Promise)
Melakukan (Undertake)
Kontrak (Contract)
 Bersumpah (Swear)
Menyetujui (Agree)
Mengumumkan (Declaretor)
Melawan (Appose)
Bertaruh (to bet on)
Mendukung ( espouse)

4. Behabitives
Having to do with such matters as apologizing, congratulating, blessing, cursing, or challenging
which commonly happen in social contexts. People who do behabitives utterances have a purpose
to cheer someone up, being happy if someone else is happy.
Pemberian selamat (Congratulating)
Tantangan (Challanging)
Pemberian maaf (Apologizing)
Kutukan (Cursing)
Ikut berduka cita (Condoling)
Menasehati (Advising)
Memperingatkan (Warning)
Menamai (Name)
Memproklamirkan (Proclaim)
Mengarahkan (Direct)

5. Expositives
Utterances referring to how one makes utterances fit into an argument or exposition. People do
this kind of perfomative when they want to tell their opinion about something, or provide
explanations.

Slide 7

Kinds of Acts by Searle

1. Locutions the literal meaning

2. Illocutionary may cause listeners do to things
3. Perlocutionary the effects on uttering the sentence

Slide 8

What makes a promise a promise? Rules that govern promise making.

There are several things which have to be met

 Rules that govern promise-making

1. Propositional Content Rule the words must predicate a future action of the speaker

The speakers must sincerely intend to do what it is being promised.

2. Preparatory rules both the person promising and the person to whom the promise is
made must want the act done and that it would not otherwise be done

The speakers must believe that the listener believe that the action/ promise is the best thing
for the listener.
3.
The speakers must believe that they are able to do their actions (promise)

4. Sincerity rule requires the promiser to intend to perform the act

The speaker should declare in the future

5. Essential rule the uttering of the words counts as undertaking an obligation to perform
the action

The speakers/promisers must state their own promises/actions by their own.

Slide 9

Cooperation

To make your utterances or the conversation can be understood by all parties, Grice proposed some
principles of the talk exchange at which it occurs.

1. Maxim of quantity
The speaker is expected to be able to provide contribution as informative as required. The speakers
must provide the information as informative as needed and do not exceed your contribution.
Example:
Have you finished your homework? Not Yet.
Have you finished your homework? Not Yet. Yesterday, I visited my grandmas house.
Unfortunately, I got flat tired when I was going home. So I came home very late. I was very tired
and I did not have time to do my homework.

2. Maxim of quality
 The speakers must say something which is real and factual. Do not say something that you already
know that it is not true. Do not say something which you are not sure whether it is true or not.
Example:
A: How many principles of cooperation proposed by Grice?
B: Four
A: What are they?
B: maxim of quantity, quality, relation and manner

3. Maxim of relation
This maxim deals with the parties of the conversation have to provide relevant contribution
towards the topic of the conversation.
Example:
Where have you been? I just came from the library.
Where have you been? Im so hungry, I want to eat something.

4. Maxim of manner
The speaker needs to utter directly and clearly. The speakers have to avoid unclear statements.
They have to make it brief and clear, not bertele tele and make you utterances in order.
For example:
A college students originally from Wonosari who studies in Sanata Dharma and lives in a boarding
house in the downtown.
A: Mom, I am going back to the downtown this afternoon.
B: Okay, I already prepared on my shelf.

By saying I am going back to the downtown, the child does not merely inform the mother that
he/she will be go back to the boardinghouse. However, he wants something more, which is money.
So, it can be inferred that the childs statements is unclear.
However, at certain stages, it commonly happens to fulfill the practice of politeness.

a) Pelanggaran maksim kuantitas

Seperti yang sudah dijelaskan sebelumnya, dalam maksim kuantitas menghendaki tiap peserta tuturan
memberi kontribusi yang cukup dan sebanyak yang dibutuhkan oleh lawan bicaranya. Tetapi tidak selalu
tuturan tersebut sesuai dengan maksud dan tujuan dari maksim kuantitas, seperti dalam tuturan:

A: Does your dog bite?

B: No
A: [Bends down to stroke it and gets bitten] ow! You said your dog doesnt bite
B: That isnt my dog

Dalam tuturan di atas, bisa dijelaskan seperti ini, ketika A berkunjung ke rumah B, di situ ada anjing tetangga
B yang sering berada di teras rumah A. A bertanya apakah anjing B biasa menggigit, dan B menjawab tidak.
A tidak tahu kalau anjing yang berada di depannya itu bukan anjing B. Maka ketika A mencoba bermain-
main dengan anjing itu, ternyata anjing itu menggigit, kemudian dia berteriak bahwa kata B anjingnya tidak
suka menggigit, tetapi ternyata anjing itu menggigitnya. B menjawab bahwa anjing yang menggigitnya itu
bukan anjingnya. Di sini peserta tuturan baik A dan B tidak memberikan informasi sebanyak yang
dibutuhkan oleh kedua belah pihak, sehingga terjadi kesalahpahaman di antara keduanya.

b) Pelanggaran maksim kualitas

Terjadi pelanggaran terhadap maksim kualitas jika pembicara tidak mengatakan yang sebenarnya dan
memberikan informasi yang keliru. Contoh:

Husband: How much did that the new dress cost, honey?

Wife : Thirty-five pounds (wrong information)

Di dalam percakapan di atas, si istri tidak ini mengatakan hal yang sebenarnya ketika suaminya bertanya
berapa harga baju baru yang dia beli. Si istri menjawab pertanyaan suaminya itu dengan menyebutkan
harga yang lebih rendah daripada harga yang sebenarnya. Si Istri berusaha untuk tidak mengatakan hal
yang sebenarnya, karena dia khawatir kalau suaminya akan marah kepadanya kalau dia tahu bahwa harga
baju barunya itu sangat mahal.

c) Pelanggaran maksim relevansi

Terjadi pelanggaran terhadap maksim relevansi jika pembicara tidak memberikan kontribusi yang relevan
dengan masalah pembicaraan.

Husband: How much did the new dress cost, honey?

Wife: I know. Lets go out tonight

Pada contoh dialog (11), ketika suami bertanya kepada istrinya tentang berapa harga baju baru yang dia
beli itu, istrinya menjawab dengan jawaban yang tidak relevan dengan apa yang ditanyakan oleh suaminya
tersebut

d) Pelanggaran maksim pelaksanaan

Terjadi pelanggaran terhadap maksim pelaksanaan jika pembicara tidak berbicara secara langsung.
Tuturannya kabur, taksa (ambigu) berlebihan dan tidak runtut.
Husband: How much did the new dress cost, darling?

Wife : A tiny fraction of my salary, though probably a bigger fraction of the salary of the woman that
sold it to me

Pada contoh dialog (12), ketika suami bertanya kepada istrinya tentang harga baju baru yang dia beli,
istrinya memberikan jawaban yang tidak jelas. Jawabannya kabur dan ambigu.

QUESTION LIST

1. In your opinion do you think phatic communion really important in developing the topic in conversation?

_Answer: First of all, that depends on context where the conversation takes place. If you are talking to a
stranger it is really important because phatic utterance, even though not communicates anything, but
certainly, it allows the communication to occur should there be anything of consequence to say. In simple
word, it opens to possibility for a conversation to begin. We can find the example of phatic communion in
out daily lives such as when we talk to our neighbor even tough there is no topic to discuss however it will
sometimes lead to longer conversation. Another context which we think the phatic communion does not
really important for developing the topic in conversation is the classroom context. Teacher usually has the
topic and s/he and actually at it should be focus on it. It does not mean that there is no conversation
happens since it is still consider as conversation between the teacher and students but in abnormal manner
(p. 305)

2. Lets take the speech act into a wider context since you have explained about locution, illocution and
perlocution. Politicians use speech to influence the hearer in order for them to do what they want. Okay,
now we are talking about current context regarding the general election, especially in the central of
Indonesia, the Jakartas Governor Election. There are only two candidates left. The question is what kind of
candidate not who that is likely to influence to hearers (in this case the voters) to vote for them and later
win the election?

Answer: According to what we have explained regarding locution, illocution, and perlocution, it is likely
someone that has more illocutionary and perlocution force is likely to influence the voters. For Jakarta
context, the voters there mostly are rational voters. Therefore someone with the just only good in illocution
is not enough. In fact, they will prefer the perlocution force. This is in accordance with what Searle proposed
regarding uptake of an utterance. There are five rules that govern the promise making:

1. The propositional content rule

2 and 3. Preparatory rules

4. Sincerity rules

5. Essential rule

We can read that on page 288. Thus, someone that has the ability to keep the promise (perlocution force)
is likely to win the election
3. As I read in the book, there is a theory mention there which is implicature theory on page 292. In simple
this theory talks about what is left unsaid may be just important as what is said. We study also this theory
last semester in CDA course. Now lets go to the application of this theory. For example, if a couple go for
lunch. Sometimes the boy will ask the girl where you want take lunch. Then girl usually will reply Up to
you or Terserah in Bahasa Indonesia. The problem is when they are going to place that the girl dont like,
they will have fight. The question what maxim being break in this conversation and how to anticipate this
problem?

Answer: Implicature theory actually explains about the deliberate exploitation of a maxim. In your question,
it is obvious that the maxim being break is maxim of manner. The girl did not state clearly where she wants
to go, what kind of food she likes, and so on. How to anticipate this kind of problem? We think there is no
exact answer for that but we can give some suggestions. First the boy should remember what his girlfriend
like most because they are been dating, at least he should know something about his girlfriend favorite.
Second, he suggests some places and asks for feedback from his girlfriend. Again, it is not applicable in all
circumstances. The thing is, as implicature theory state, what is unsaid may just as important as what is
said; it is very important for the hearer to interpret coherently with what the speaker means and again, we
dont have the exact answer for this matter.

4. Conversation form consists of greetings, establish topics, and closing. Regarding the cooperative
principle, in which part this principle most crucially plays it roles in conversation?

Answer: Since we are talking about conversation and one particular important principle in conversation is
the adjacency pair, the type of certain kinds are found to occur, for example a greeting leads to a return
greeting, questions lead to answer and so on, cooperative principle plays crucial important in every form
conversation. Can we imagine when we start to greet people and they are not responding? No conversation
will happen. What about when they are also replying our greeting but we dont have topic to talk to? If
there is likely interesting topic we are converse, then suddenly one of us just walk away, without closing,
something isnt right, right? Therefore, cooperative principle is really important in all those parts.

5. Should the content in conversation unpredictable in order to become interesting?

If we are referring to Brown and Yule (p. 301), yes, the content should be unpredictable since the topics
are negotiated during the conversation. What does it mean by negotiated here is the topics that we are
going to discuss is not at all clear. So if there is no clear topic, why does it become a longer conversation,
maybe it is due to the unpredictable content. Throughout the conversation, one topic leads to another
topic. We experience that in daily lives when we are having conversation with friends, we usually do not
have certain topics to talk to at very beginning but we can converse for hours.