METADATA
Title: The use of commissive speech acts in English and Bulgarian and their politeness implication
Vol. 2, 2017, pp. 227-239.
DOI: 10.46687/SILC.2017.v02.019
Author: Deyana Peneva
About the author: Assistant Professor Deyana Peneva, PhD is a lecturer in the English Studies Department, Faculty of Humanities at Konstantin Preslavsky University of Shumen, Bulgaria. She holds lectures in Phonetics; Speech acts in English and Bulgarian; Linguistic models and strategies in spoken interaction with BA students in English studies and Applied Linguistics as well as seminars in Practical English (written practice, translation). Additionally, she takes lectures in Tour-guide practicing in MA programme English language for Business and Tourism. Her interests are in the area of Semantics; Cross-cultural Pragmatics; Speech acts; Discourse analysis; Spoken English and Phonetics.
e-mail: d.peneva@shu.bg
ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5321-0787
Citation (APA style): Peneva, D. (2017). The use of commissive speech acts in English and Bulgarian and their politeness implication. Studies in Linguistics, Culture, and FLT, 2, 227-239. doi: 10.46687/SILC.2017.v02.019
Link: https://silc.fhn-shu.com/images/issues/2017/SILC_2017_2_227_239_13_EN.pdf
Abstract: The paper focuses on one specific performative speech act and in particular on examining the grammatical, propositional and pragmatic meaning of a basic illocutionary act which belongs to the group of commissives in comparison with its Bulgarian equivalents and namely the verb agree. The article also presents a quantitative and qualitative analysis of a database taken from the Bulgarian media discourse and BNC /British National Corpus/ of spoken language which is also needed to identify the tendency in the use of commissive speech acts cross-culturally which can be useful to make further interpretation especially with respect to politeness implications.
Key words: commissive speech acts, proposition, pragmatic meaning, politeness, semantic content
References:
Austin J.L. 1962. How to do things with words. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Bach K. 2004. Pragmatics and the philosophy of language. The handbook of pragmatics. Basil Balckwell, Oxford.
Biber D., Conrad S. and Reppen R. 1998. Corpus linguistics. Investigating language structure and use. CUP, Cambridge.
Димитрова С. 2009. Лингвистична прагматика. Издателска къща Велес.
Downing A., Locke P. 2006. English grammar: A university course. Routledge, Abingdon and New York, 2nd Edn.
Herbst T., Heath D., Roe I. F. and Gotz D. 2004. A valency dictionary of English: a corpus-based analysis of the complementation patterns of English verbs, nouns and adjectives. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.
Herbst T. and Schüller S. 2008. Introduction to syntactic analysis. Narr, Tübingen.
Hristov B. 2008. Politeness in requests in English and Bulgarian. MA Student Thesis. University of Oxford.
Hymes D. 1972. On communicative competence. Sociolinguistics. Penguin, Harmondswortth.
Ivanova I. 2012. Enhancing students’ pragmatic awareness: explicit versus implicit instruction in textbooks. Episkop-Konstatinovi cheteniya, 18. Shumen University Publishing Press, Shumen.
Peneva D. 2015. The speech act of apology in Bulgarian learners of English. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Konstantin Preslavsky University of Shumen.
Searle J.1969. An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press.
Strawson P. 1964. Intention and convention in speech acts. The Philosophical Review.
Thomas J. 1986. The dynamics of discourse: a pragmatic analysis of confrontational interaction. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Lancaster University.
Tsvetkova M. 2014. The problem of equivalence in contrastive analysis. English Studies: translation and linguistics. Shumen University Press, Shumen.
Влахова Р. 2000. Монофонична на полифонична реч. Лингвистика, семиотика, филология. Издателска къща Сема.
Yule G. 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
