The aim of this work is split in three parts. The first aim is to give an overview of speech act theory and how the grammatical phenomenon of negation is situated in Austin’s and Searle’s speech act theory. Secondly, Tottie’s study on negation in spoken and written discourse will be extended by some findings on the frequency of illocutionary negations in spoken discourse and magazines. Finally, a functional analysis of propositional negation and illocutionary negation is carried out based on examples.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
1.1 Aims and Methodology
2 Theoretical Framework
2.1 Speech Act Theory
2.1.1 Constatives and Performatives
2.1.2 Locution, Illocution, Perlocution
2.2 Speech Act Theory and Negation
2.2.1 Illocutionary Negation
2.2.2 Propositional Negation
3 Analysis of Negation in Contemporary English Speech Acts
3.1 Negation in English Spoken and Written Discourse
3.1.1 Frequency of Negation in Speech and Magazines
3.1.2 Frequency of Illocutionary Negation in Speech and Magazines
3.1.3 Propositional Negation in Speech and Magazines
3.1.4 Classification and Function of Negation in Spoken and Written Discourse
4 Conclusion
5 Works Cited
Research Objective and Themes
This study investigates the frequency and function of illocutionary negation in spoken versus written English discourse, building upon the theoretical foundations of speech act theory established by Austin and Searle.
- Theoretical overview of speech act theory (locution, illocution, perlocution).
- Distinction between illocutionary and propositional negation.
- Empirical analysis of negation frequency using the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA).
- Comparison of negation usage in spoken language versus written magazine texts.
- Functional classification of negation within different communicative contexts.
Excerpt from the Book
2.2.2 Propositional Negation
As already mentioned, an illocutionary act consists of an illocutionary force F and a propositional content P. Expressing P is a propositional act (Searle 1969: 29). Illocutionary acts cannot exist without propositional content. For example, the statement “I hereby appoint you” misses the information about what the hearer is appointed. Likewise, the illocutionary act of promising (“I promise”) only works with a given propositional content P (“to be on time”). However, one could argue that “I promise” successfully performs an act of promising without P, but that only works if “I promise” is an answer to a question, in which P is already included. This could be, for example, the question “Do you promise to be on time?”. As mentioned, this question includes P (“to be on time”), to which the hearer can just respond with “I promise”. Another exception are expressions like “Yeah!”, “Ouch” or “Yippie!”. These expressions follow the form F without P. Aside from such exceptions, “all performances of illocutionary acts are performances of propositional acts” (Searle/Vanderveken 1989: 9).
While there are a few exceptions of illocutionary forces standing alone, this is not the case for propositions. To test this, the propositional content can be isolated from the illocutionary force by forming a that-clause (Searle 1969: 29). That-clauses on their own are not complete sentences. Further, propositional contents can exist with different illocutionary forces and illocutionary forces can occur with different propositional contents.
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: Provides an overview of speech act theory, defines the research scope, and outlines the methodology for comparing negation in spoken and written discourse.
2 Theoretical Framework: Explores the linguistic foundation of speech acts, focusing on Austin's and Searle's taxonomies and the specific distinction between illocutionary and propositional negation.
3 Analysis of Negation in Contemporary English Speech Acts: Presents the empirical findings from the COCA corpus, comparing frequency data and discussing the functional usage of negation markers in various contexts.
4 Conclusion: Synthesizes the results, confirming that negation is significantly more frequent in spoken language due to higher degrees of interactivity and the specific needs of conversational context.
5 Works Cited: Lists the academic literature and corpora used to support the theoretical and empirical arguments of the paper.
Keywords
Speech Act Theory, Illocutionary Negation, Propositional Negation, Corpus Linguistics, COCA, Spoken Discourse, Written Discourse, Pragmatics, Performative Verbs, Locution, Perlocution, Gricean Maxims, Linguistic Variation, Negation Frequency, Communicative Intent.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper examines the frequency and function of illocutionary negation in contemporary English, specifically comparing spoken discourse with written discourse found in magazines.
What are the primary themes discussed?
Key themes include speech act theory, the classification of illocutionary and propositional negation, empirical corpus analysis, and how situational context affects communicative strategies.
What is the main research question?
The study primarily seeks to determine if there is a measurable difference in the frequency of illocutionary negations when comparing spoken English to written English discourse.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The author uses a corpus-linguistic approach, analyzing data from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) and conducting a functional analysis of negated performative verbs.
What is covered in the main body of the work?
The main body details the theoretical definitions of speech acts, presents empirical data through graphs and examples, and analyzes how negation functions in different communicative scenarios.
Which keywords characterize this study?
The study is best characterized by terms such as Speech Act Theory, Illocutionary Negation, Pragmatics, and Corpus Linguistics.
Why are performative verbs significant to the study?
Performative verbs are essential because they initiate speech acts; negating these verbs changes the illocutionary force of an utterance, which is a central point of the linguistic analysis.
How does the context of interaction influence the use of negation?
The research concludes that spoken discourse contains more negations because it involves higher interactivity and spontaneity, whereas written discourse is more structured and often prioritizes conciseness.
- Quote paper
- Peter Altmannsdorfer (Author), 2023, Speech Act Theory and Negation, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1597898
