SPECIFIC NATURE OF EVALUATIVE SPEECH ACTS

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.128232

Keywords:

evaluation, speech act, locution, illocution, perlocution

Abstract

 The article discusses the issues connected with the analysis of appearance of the evaluation in the utterance. Particular attention is paid to the illocutionary and perlocutionary effect of evaluative speech acts. The speech act is viewed in the paper as the minimum unit of communication. The structure of the speech act includes four levels: locution, proposition, illocution and perlocution. In the evaluative speech acts semantic basis serves as the category of evaluation. Considering semantic and pragmatic properties of the object of our study, the author proposes to distinguish the following types of evaluative speech acts: 1) focus on the subject; 2) focus on the object. Among evaluative speech acts, oriented on the object, the author singles out proper evaluative speech acts (praise, condemnation) and emotional evaluation speech acts (admiration, anger, respect). This approach is based on the fact that evaluative verbs are direct representatives of illocutionary intention of evaluative speech acts. The author comes to the conclusion that the classification of evaluative speech acts can rely on semantic and pragmatic features of evaluative verbs.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Ganna Prihodko, Zaporizhzhia National University

Doctor of Philological Sciences, Professor, Professor of the Chair of English Phillology

References

  1. Arutyunova, N. (2012). Logicheskij analiz yazyka. Adresatsiya diskursa [Logical analysis of the language. Discourse addressing]. Moscow, Russia: Indrik.
  2. Austin, J. (1975). How to do things with words (2nd ed.). Cambridge, USA: Harvard University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001
  3. Bezugla, L. & Romanchenko, O. (2013). Lingvpragmatuka duskriminatsii u publitsistuchnomu diskursi [Linguopragmatics of discrimination in publicistic discourse]. Kharkiv, Ukraine: FOP Lusenko I. B.
  4. Bulygina, T. & Shmelev, A. (1997). Yazykovaya kontseptualizatsiya mira (na materiale russky grammatiki) [Language conceptualization of the world (on the basis of Russian grammar)]. Moscow, Russia: Yazyki russky kulturu.
  5. Dijk, T. (1989). Yazyk. Poznaniye. Kommunikatsiya. [Language. Cognition. Communication]. Moscow, Russia: Progress.
  6. Grice, H. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Speech Acts (pp. 41-58). New York, USA: Academic Press.
  7. Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. (2014). Halliday's introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). London, England and New York, USA: Routledge.
  8. Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London, England: Longman.
  9. Lulu, L. (2017). Application of Cooperative Principle and Politeness Principle in Class Question-answer Process. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7 (7), 563-569. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0707.10
  10. Myroniuk, T. (2017). Evaluative responses in modern English fiction. Advanced Education, 8, 103-108. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.108021
  11. Paducheva, E. (1985). Vuskazyvaniye I ego sootnesenost' s deystvitel'nostyu [Utterance and its correlation with reality]. Moscow, Russia: Nauka.
  12. Pocheptsov, G. (2009). Izbrannye trudy po lingvistike [Selected works in linguistics]. Kharkiv, Ukraine: V.N. Karazin Kharkiv national university.
  13. Prihodko, A. (2016). Cognitive-communicative organisation of the evaluative frame. Lege Artis, 1(1), 275-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/lart-2016-0006
  14. Prihodko, A. (2016). Katehoriia otsinky v konteksti zminy linhvistychnykh paradyhm [The category of evaluation in the context of the change of linguistic paradigms]. Zaporizhzhia, Ukraine: Kruhozir.
  15. Searle, J. (1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in society, 5(1), 1-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0047404500006837
    |
  16. Searle, J. (1990). Metafora [Metaphor]. Moscow, Russia: Progress.
  17. Teliya, V. (1986). Konnotativnuy aspekt semantiki nminativnuh edenits. [Connotative aspect of semantics of nominative units]. Moscow, Russia: Nauka.
  18. Vol'f, E. (2009). Funktsional'naya semantika otsenki [Functional semantics of evaluation] (3d ed.). Moscow, Russia: Editorial URSS.
  19. Wang, Y., & Xu, J. (2013). The interrelation between evaluative categories and evaluated items. Linguistics and the Human sciences, 8(1), 29-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/lhs.v8i1.29
  20. Zhulmanova, I. (1999). Kommunikativno-semanticheskiye gruppu v raznostrukturnuh yazykah [Communicative-semantic groups in the difference-structured languages]. PhD thesis, Almaty.

Downloads

Published

2018-06-29

How to Cite

Prihodko, G. (2018). SPECIFIC NATURE OF EVALUATIVE SPEECH ACTS. Advanced Education, 5, 201–205. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.128232

Issue

2018: Issue 9

Section

Linguistics

License

Copyright (c) 2018 Ganna Prihodko

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).