ACTING AND CONVERSING IN SOCIOLINGUISTICS

CHAPTER I

Introduction

Background

         In speaking  to one another, we make use of sentences, or to be more precise, utterances.we can attempt to classify these utterances in any one of a variety of ways. We can try to classify them by length such as : By counting the number of words in each utterance, but that appears to be of little interest except to those who believe that shorter utterances are more easily understood than longer ones.

       In recent years a number of philosophers have pointed out importand things about what utterances do and how at times their use is quite independent of their form.

       And because of that this paper will discussions about the acting and conversing about some experts. Such as : Austin and Searle and then about cooperation and face about Grice and Goffman.

Problems

1.    What  the understanding of acting and conversing ?

2.    What the meaning of acting and conversing about Austin and Searle ?

3.    What the meaning of cooperation and face about  Grice and Goffman ?

Purpose

       The purpose of this paper is to inform for the reader about what is the meaning of acting and conversing about some experts, the meaning of cooperation and face about Grice and Goffman.and the rules from each experts.

Limited of problem

        The limited of problem in this paper only about the opinions or statements of some experts  about the acting and conversing and cooperation and face.

CHAPTER II

Discussions

Acting and Conversing

      As soon as we look closely at conversation in general , we see that it involves much more than using language to state propositions or convey facts. Through conversation we establish relationships with others, achieve a measure of cooperation, keep chnnels open for futher relationship and so on. The utterances we use in conversation enable us to do these kinds of things because, conversation itself has certain properties which ar well worth examining.

Our concern in this term is there are two fold :

1.    We will be concerned both with what utterance do and how they can be used.

2.    Specifically, with how we use them in conversation.

Speech Acts ; Austin and Searle

        One thing that many utterances do is make propositions : They do this mainly in the form of either statements or questions, but other grammatical forms are also possible. Such as :

         [‘ I had busy today]’, ‘[ have you called your mother?’], and [‘ your dinner ‘s ready’]. These utterances connected in some way with events or happening in a possible in world.one that can be experienced or imaginated.

        A different kind of propositions is the ‘ Ethical’ proposition. e.g [ God is love,]     [ beethoven is better than brahms]. Just like ordinary proposition , the ethical   proposition may be true or false, although not in the same sense.but, truth and falsity are not the real purpose of ethical propositions.this real purpose is to serve as guides to behavior in some world or other.

Another kind of utterance is the ‘phatic’ type. for example ;

[ ‘nice day’,] [ ‘how do you do ]‘, ‘[ you are looking smart today’.]

       We employ such utterances not for their propositional content but, rather for their affective value as indicators that one person is willing to talk to another and that a channel of communication is either being opened or being kept open.

       The philosopher, J.l.L Austin [1962 ], distinguished still another kind of utterance from these , the performative utterance, a person is not just saying something but is actually doing something if certain real-world condition are met.

For example ;

a)    To say ‘ I name this ship ‘,’’ liberty bell’’, in certain circumstances is to name a ship.

b)    To say ,’’I do’’, in other  circumstances is to  find oneself is husband or a wife or a bigamist.

       Such utterances perform acts  : The naming of ship, and marrying.a speech acts changes in some way the conditions that exist in the world.it does something, and it is not something that in itself is either true or false. Truth and falsity may be claims made about its having been done , but they cannot be made about the actual doing.

       Austin pointed out that the ’circumtances’ mentioned above can be prescribed.he mention certain felicity conditions that performative must meet to be successful.

1)    A conventional procedure must exist for doing whatever is to be done and that procedure must specify who must say and do what and in what circumstances.

2)    All participants must properly execute this procedure and carry it through to completion.

3)    The necessary thoughts, feelings and intentions must be present in all parties.

       In general , the spoken part of the total act , the actual speech  act.

       Austin also acknowledges that there are less explicit performatives. Declaration like  ‘ I promise’, ‘ I apologize’, and ‘I warn you’. Have many of the same characteristics as  the previously mentioned utterance but lack any associated conventional procedure; for anyone can  promise, apologize, and warn.

Austin [ 1962 ], pp. 150-63] divides performatives into five categories ;

1)    Verdictives, typified by the giving of a verdict , estimate, grade, or appraisal    [ we find the accused guilty ]

2)    Exercitives , the exercising of powers, rights, or influences as in appointing , ordering, warning, or advising  [ I pronounce you husband and wife ].

3)    Commissives , typified by promising or undertaking and committing one to do something by , for example : announcing an intention or espousing a cause   [ I hereby bequeath ]

4)    Behabitives , having to do with such matters as apologizing, congratulating, blessing, cursing, or challenging [ I apologize ].

5)    Expositives , a term  used  to refer to how one make utterances fit into an argument or exposition [ I argue, I reply, or I assume ].

       We can now return to expressions like ‘’ nice day’’, ‘’how do you do’’, and ‘’you are looking smart today’’. A specific kind of speech is the kind we have referred to as phatic communion. According to Malinowski [ 1923, p 315 ] phatic communion is a type of speech in which ties of union are created by a mere exchange of words. Malinouwski himself uses the word ‘act’ in this explanation.in phatic communion , therefore, we have still another instance of language being used to do something , not just to say something.

       According to Searle [ 1969,pp.23-24 ] we can perform at least three different kinds of act when we speak. There are ; Utterances acts, propositional acts, and illocutionary  acts.

a)    Utterances acts refer to the fact that we must use words and sentences if we are to say anything at all.

b)    Propositional acts are those matter having to do with referring and predicting.: We use language to refer to matters in the world and to make predictions about such matters.

c)    Illucionary acts : Have to do with the intents of the speakers, such as : Stating, questioning, promising or commanding.

       An utterance acts may have no propositional content, as in an expression like ‘ ‘damn’ however, an illucionary act must be both a propositional act and an utterance act.it is also possible that different propositional acts may be used for the same illucionary act.

For example :

May have the same illucionary force, since it is quite possible to ask someone to close a door wih different words. Such as :

      ‘[ it’s cold in here]’, ‘[ the door ‘s open]’, ‘ and ‘ [could someone see to the door]’.Utterances can also cause heares to do things.

        If we look at how we perform acts we can as Searle [ 1975 ] has indicated , categorize which we can make requests or give orders even indirectly.there are utterances types that focus on the hearer’s ability to do something.

       Searle has concentrated his work on speech acts on how a hearer perceives a particular  utterance to have the force it has , what he calls the ‘ uptake’ of an particular utterance in particular , what makes a promise a promise ? for Searle there are five rules  that govern promise-making.

1)    The propositional content rule , is that the words must predicate a future action of the speaker.

2)    And 3 ] the prepatory rules , require that both the person promising believes he or she can do what is promised.

4 ] the sincerely rule, requires the promise to  intend to perform the act, that is, to be placed under some kind of obligation .

5 ] the essential rule , says that the uttering of the words counts as undertaking an obligation to perform the action.

        In contrast to Austin , who focused his attention on how speakers realize their intentions in speaking, Searle focused  on how listeners respond to utterances, that is, how one person tries to figure out how another is using a request or something else.

CHAPTER III

Closed

Conclusion

       In this paper explain about the meaning of acting and conversing, some understanding about some experts such as : Austin and Searle. And the meaning of cooperation and face about Grice and Goffman.

Suggestion

       This paper not perfect , the writer feel that her paper still much the weakness, so because of that the writer hope some suggestions and  develop critics of the readers.