Method:Speech Act Analysis

From Psalms: Layer by Layer
Jump to: navigation, search


Introduction

A speech act is an act that a speaker performs when making an utterance (SIL Glossary of Linguistic Terms). Speech Act Theory assumes that language does something, and it builds on the recognition that there is more to communication than the exchange of propositions. Take, for example, the statement, “I’m tired.” The speaker of this sentence likely intends to convey more than an assertion (i.e. a truth claim). Depending on the situation, the speaker may be doing something else with their words. For example, the speaker may be declining an offer (perhaps to go for a bike ride), complaining (perhaps because the bike ride has gone on too long), or agreeing (when a fellow biker comments on post-ride fatigue). See Appendix 1 below for more on J.L. Austin's pioneering work in speech act theory.

Speech act analysis is particularly important when communicating cross-culturally, since “speech acts are realized from culture to culture in different ways [which] may result in communication difficulties that range from the humorous to the serious.”[1] What to one culture, for instance, is a polite yet succinct turndown of an offer, might be a blunt, rude dismissal to another culture.[2] Because understanding and translating the Bible is a cross-cultural endeavor, it is important to consider both how biblical language “acts” and how the target language performs the same action.[3] The goal when translating is to accurately represent the speech act of the biblical text, regardless of the "surface-level" sentence type.

Steps

1. Speech Act Table

Copy, paste, and complete this speech act table.

Templates - Speech Act Table.jpg

Verse refers to the MT versification numbers. Use the form "1a" and "1b" for verses with two lines ("1c" for third line, etc.)

Hebrew refers to the full Hebrew text. Please use OSHB.

Close-but-clear refers to the Layer by Layer English translation written to provide a window into the Hebrew text (syntax as well as word- and phrase-level semantics) for non-Hebrew readers of the Psalms: Layer by Layer materials. It is intended as a supplement to these materials rather than a stand-alone translation.

Sentence type refers to the sentence mood: declarative, imperative, or interrogative. There should be only one sentence type per sentence.

Illocution type (general) refers to five different sentence “actions.” The categories are from J. R. Searle, who proposed five different types of illocutionary speech act:

  • Assertive - represents facts (e.g. stating, explaining, or reporting).[4]
  • Commissive - commits the speaker to doing something (e.g. promising, vowing, swearing, threatening, offering, or refusing).
  • Directive - tries to persuade the addressee to do something (e.g. commanding, decreeing, requesting, or begging).
  • Declaratory - does something simply by saying it; changes reality in the act of speaking (hereby. . .) (e.g. pronouncing a couple married; “We the jury find the defendant guilty”).[5]
  • Expressive - expresses emotion or attitude about the proposition (e.g. thanking, congratulating, apologising, consoling, lamenting, praising, or greeting).

As with sentence type, provide only one illocution type. You may be able to think of additional, secondary, illocutions, but try to identify the main one.

Speech acts can be direct or indirect. Direct speech acts require less inference on the part of the addressee, because the illocution matches its expected ("normal") sentence type. For example, the sentence, “Pass me the salt” is a direct speech act, since its sentence type (imperative) matches its expected illocution type (directive).

On the other hand, the utterance, “Can you pass me the salt?” is an indirect speech act (sometimes called an "indirect illocution"), since its sentence type (interrogative) does not match its expected illocution type (directive). Indirect speech acts can take many forms (e.g. rhetorical questions) and can function in many different ways (e.g. increase politeness), and require careful attention in interpretation and translation. Because indirect speech acts can be difficult to translate, highlight the table (the sentence type and illocution type) when you see a speech act "mismatch."

Indirect speech act (Ps 6:4b–5)

Illocution type (specific) refers to a second, more precise, illocution that paraphrases the biblical text and makes its illocutionary force explicit. These categories are not limited to only five, so you may supply your own illocutionary terms.

2. Speech Act Summary

Summarise the main speech act sections of the psalm. Use the Speech Act Summary template. Here's an example from Psalm 6.

Psalm 6 - Speech Act Summary.jpg

The speaker and addressee bars are taken from the Participant Analysis layer. You can leave these blank for now if there is any uncertainty about the identity either speaker or addressee.

Sections by speech act refers to the main sections of the psalm as indicated by speech act shifts. These sections will usually align with the sections shown in the macrostructure and "at-a-glance" visualisations, but not always. For each section, provide a speech act heading and verse reference, as well as a brief summary of the content of that section.

Appendix 1: Austin’s Categories

J. L. Austin (1950’s) (How to Do Things with Words) is considered the pioneer of speech act analysis, and he believed that language is fundamentally performative. According to Austin, there are three parts of the whole speech act:

  1. Locutionary act – “is roughly equivalent to ‘meaning’ in the traditional sense.” This is what the sentence means at the propositional level.
  2. Illocutionary act – “what we do in saying something.” This is what the sentence accomplishes. This accomplishment––what the speaker does with their words––is contextual.[6]
  3. Perlocutionary act – “what we bring about or achieve by saying something, such as convincing, persuading.” This is the intended result of the speech on the addressee.


For Austin, most utterances have all three dimensions. For example, a restaurant patron tells the server, “My soup is cold.” The locutionary act of the speaker is to communicate a locution, i.e. the propositional content that the soup has a low temperature. However, the speech act does more than state a proposition, since the illocutionary act of the speaker is to complain that the soup is cold. The corresponding (intended) perlocutionary act is to request the addressee [i.e. the restaurant server] to do something, namely, to bring a new bowl of hot soup.

Bibliography

Exegeticaltools.com--Annoted bibliography on discourse analysis.

Austin, J. L. How to Do Things with Words. Edited by J. O. Urmson and Marina Sbisa. 2nd ed. Oxford: OUP, 1975. Read the 1st edition on archive.org.

Beekman, John, John Callow, and Michael Kopesec. The Semantic Structure of Written Communication. 5th rev. Dallas: SIL, 1981.

Brown, Jeannine. Scripture as Communication: Introducing Biblical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007. See esp. "Introduction: Scripture as Communicative Act."

Crim, Keith R. “Hebrew Direct Discourse as a Translation Problem.” The Bible Translator 24.3 (1973): 311–16. (DOI)

Gass, Susan M. Speech Acts Across Cultures: Challenges to Communication in a Second Language. Studies on Language Acquisition 11. Edited by Peter Jordens. New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1996.

Searle, J. R. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: CUP, 1969.

___. Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: CUP, 1979.

Vanderveken, Daniel. Meaning and Speech Acts. Vol 1: Principles of Language Use. Cambridge: CUP, 1990. Pp. 166–219.

Vanhoozer, Kevin. “The Semantics of Biblical Literature: Truth and Scripture’s Diverse Literary Forms.” Chapter 2 in Hermeneutics, Authority, and Canon. Edited by D.A. Carson and John D. Woodbridge. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2005.

References

  1. ↑ Susan M. Gass, “Introduction,” Speech Acts Across Cultures: Challenges to Communication in a Second Language, Studies on Language Acquisition 11, ed. Peter Jordens (New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1996), 1.
  2. ↑ Ibid.
  3. ↑ The Bible itself speaks of the active nature of God’s word (cf. Heb 4:12–13; Gen 1:3).
  4. ↑ According to Searle, proposition is not the same thing as assertion. An assertion is an illocutionary act, i.e. the act of claiming something to be (un)true about the world. A proposition, on the other hand, is not an illocutionary act (although expressing a proposition is). Instead, propositional content is the common denominator amongst various types of utterances, for example:
    • Will John leave the room?
    • John will leave the room.
    • John, leave the room.
    The illocution type is different for each sentence (a) directive, b) assertive, and c) directive), but all three share the same propositional content: a person named John leaves the room. This relationship can be expressed as F(x), if F is the illocutionary force and (x) is the propositional content.
  5. ↑ Austin called these performatives.
  6. ↑ The term “contextual" is important for understanding illocution. This is because a single locution may have many different illocutions depending on contextual factors (e.g. situation, tone of voice, or cultural assumptions).