Pragmatic Forces in The Speech Acts of EFL Speakers at Kampung Inggris, Indonesia

Clicks: 314
ID: 5476
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #25 of 52 articles by views in journal of social studies education research

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
This study examines the kinds of speech acts and the reasons why they are performed by EFL learners at Kampung Inggris, Kediri, Indonesia. The Speech Act Theory put forward by Austin (1962) and Searle (1969) emphasizes locutionary acts, and five categories of speech acts (i.e., directive, expressive, declarative, assertive, and commissive) are used to analyze data. This study comprised 75 students and 12 teachers as its respondents. Advanced-level proficiency students were assigned to four classes for observation in four settings: a classroom, a café, the social environment, and an English base camp. The results show how pragmatic forces manifest in directives (e.g., questions, requests, suggestions, hopes, instructions, invitations, and orders) at 35.3%, expressives (e.g., greetings, thanks, and compliments) at 25.9%, declaratives (e.g., thanks, apologies, welcoming, congratulations) at 13.9%, assertives (e.g., informing, concluding, assuming, confirming, accepting) at 12.9%, and commissives (e.g., promises, suggestions, and agreements) at 12%. Students’ problems with speech acts included the modeling of speech acts, a lack of competence with performing various speech acts, poor strategies to select and use a certain speech act, and less exposure and awareness to using pragmatic competence.
Reference Key
muhamad2019pragmaticjournal Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Muhamad Mukhroji;Joko Nurkamto;H.D. Edi Subroto;Sri Samiati Tardjana and
Journal journal of social studies education research
Year 2019
DOI
DOI not found
URL URL not found
Keywords
pragmatic force speech act theory Kampung Inggris origin Searle

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.