Šnekos akto dalyvių strategija, socialiniai vaidmenys ir tipai lietuvių kalboje

ACTA LINGUISTICA LITHUANICA XLVI (2002), 145-172 Strategy, social roles and types of speech act participants in Lithuanian language EGIDIJUS ZAIKAUSKAS Vilniaus universitetas The article deals with the theory of speech act participants. It is based mainly on Austin's theory of performatives and on Grice's maxims of communication. The theoretical claims are illustrated mainly with Lithuanian examples of performative speech act types. Three aspects of the study of speech act participants are singled out: (a) communicative strategies, (b) social roles and (c) types of speaker's and hearer's roles as defined with respect to illocutionary acts. Both participants may choose either a constructive or a destructive communicative strategy. Performatives reduce to a minimum the possibility of selecting a destructive strategy but do not eliminate it altogether. A correct assessment of the speaker's and the hearer's social roles determines the way in which the speaker makes explicit his illocutionary intention and the way in which the hearer interprets it. Types of speakers and hearers (addressees) are defined not only with respect to illocutionary force, but also with respect to the circumstances of the speech act and the way in which it is performed (institutional or in everyday life, orally or in writing etc.). The theory of speech acts (together with the theory of performatives) is one of the most important parts of linguistic pragmatics. As noted by the creator of the term pragmatism, Ch. Morris, having divided semiotics into three parts—syntax, semantics, and pragmatics, “pragmatics is the science of the relationship between signs and THOSE WHO INTERPRET THEM” (Morris 1938: 30). There are two interpreters of any sign or set of signs (in our case, an act of speech) in a particular situation: the sender of the act of speech, the speaker, hereinafter referred to as the addressee, and the recipient of the act of speech, the listener, hereinafter referred to as the addressee- ’. The addressee and the recipient are among the most important factors of the speech act. The addressee is the initiator of the speech act and its creator. He uses the act of talking to realize his communicational intentions. However, in order to achieve the desired goal, the addressee must also take into account the addressee: his social role, the pragmatic presumption — what the addressee knows about the situation of the act of speech, and finally the addressee- ’s ability to properly perceive that act of speech — his elocution and proposition. This article examines the following aspects of the participants in the act of speech: —the linguistic strategy of the speakers, —the social roles of the addressee and the recipient, in Different authors also refer to the recipient as the locutor, expedient, subject, author, and the recipient as the percipient, recipient, decoder, etc. (see Vilkienė 1998: 154). 146 | EGIDIJUS ZAIKAUSKAS —Relationship of speech acts with various types of addressees and recipients. 1. LANGUAGE STRATEGY OF THE INTERPRETERS Both the addressee and the recipient of the speech act have their own communicative goals. These goals depend not only on the addressee’s choice of lexical and grammatical means of expression, style, manner of performing the speech act, but also on the interpretation of the elocution and proposition of a specific act. J. Hintikka argues that the participants in the conversation choose a certain strategy for performing the act of speech (the addressee) and for accepting the act of speech (the recipient), which can lead to the interpretation of the act of speech, including the understanding of the elocutional power (Hintikka 1979: 36). 1.1. The language strategy of the recipient The strategy of the recipient can be twofold: —constructive —to communicate your intentions precisely; —destructive —to disguise their true intentions in a statement or, more correctly, to leave gaps in their interpretation so that later, if necessary, they can present a different interpretation that is more favorable to them in that situation. The illusionary power in the act of speech is conveyed by various means, and if the addressee- ’s goal is to interpret the addressee- ’s act of speech as the addressee seeks (constructive strategy), they are usually perceived adequately. Nevertheless, in order that the elocution of the act of speech is not interpreted incorrectly (consciously or due to some unfavorable circumstances), the addressee can choose explicit means of indicating the elocutional power – performative. It is particularly important for the addressee to precisely specify the elocutive power in institutional (legal, administrative) speech acts, therefore the most common field of use of performative is the official language. Anot Ch. Peirce (1976: 249-250) states that "by affirming a certain proposition, the speaker assumes responsibility for its truth and is in some way punishable if the proposition proves to be false". Therefore, the speaker is concerned that his proposition is interpreted in such a way that it does not become false. The listener, on the other hand, is concerned to find out whether the speaker has made a false proposition, and he seeks an interpretation that would reveal this (Hilpinen 1986: 304). What is different is when the recipient himself wants the recipient not to understand his real purpose. Then he chooses the most destructive strategy. In a destructive strategy, the recipient attempts to deceive the recipient in one way or another. This by no means means that the addressee’s act of speech must be false (Grice’s maxim of the quality of speech — do not tell the truth (Grice 1975: 46)), but the act of speech is always unsincere: it violates one of the six conditions for the success of the act of speech, namely sincerity (Austin 1962: 39-40). For the recipient who has chosen the destructive strategy, indirect acts of speech are more suitable, leaving freedom of interpretation, for example: Hedgehog clings to fishermen and asks: —Guys, are you going to eat black caviar? "Let's eat!" —the fishermen muttered with joy. STRATEGY AND ROLE OF THE SPEAKERS | 147 —That’s good. When you eat, invite me. (LLA 34) The addressee asks a question, which the addressee interprets as an indirect proposal. The chosen means of expression do not explain the elocutive power, and the situation, which is confirmed by the addressee’s reply, implies the elocutive power of the proposal. However, this implicitacy does not bind the addressee of the offer. Therefore, in his next act of speech, he simply mocks the addressee, interpreting his first act of speech as a special question (cf. Labutis 1998: 113). Thus, the recipient chooses a destructive communication strategy, creates the prerequisites for a dual interpretation of the act of speech and chooses the option that is beneficial to him (successful mockery — moral victory) and harmful to the recipient. Although performative forms seem to leave the least gaps in interpretation, there are also those whose use gives the addressee the opportunity to change the interpretation of the performed act of speech later. This is especially true of assertives*, which can neutralize the lie of propositional content and even become a legal case. In the legal literature, there is a case from a U.S. senator's case where the senator did not lie in court by saying I deny that I committed this crime, although it was later proven that he did. Here the denial is the creation of a fact, and only that fact can be legally assessed as truth or lie (though pragmatically speaking — from the point of view of ordinary people — the senator obviously lied). However, performative works of other types also leave “gaps” for interpretation. Unlike the assertive strategy, the destructive strategy is based on proposition rather than elocution. For example, in the tale of the sailor Sinbad, the main character promises to marry the daughter of the lord of the island where his ship was brought back by a storm: "I promise to do everything I can to marry your daughter." Sinbad is forced to the wall by the ruler and says that he has done everything he can, but he cannot marry the ruler's daughter. After all, he didn't promise to marry his daughters. When the addressee performed the act of speech, he kept a backup version and later used it. In fact, formally speaking, the act of speech was not a promise to marry. However, in everyday speech, such acts of speech are evaluated according to the pragmatic situation—without the possibility of changing the interpretation. There are performatives that are inappropriate for the destructive addressee strategy. This is the majority of the directives, especially the humble ones, intended for the addressee of a higher social role, such as the performative verbs I pray, I beg, I ask. The purpose of most directives is to get the addressee to do something useful for the addressee. In this way, the target would first harm their own interests. Assertives (affirmations of the addressee’s position) express the speaker’s position in relation to the propositional content of the speech act he performs, e.g.: confirm, doubt, deny, report, etc. A directive is an act of speech with an elocutional purpose of direction. The audience is asked to choose what they want to hear. Directives can be modest, e.g., beg, pray, neutral, e.g., advise, suggest, and aggressive, e.g., order, demand. 3 148 | EGIDIJUS ZAIKAUSKAS Also, expressive* – etiquette actions are not very suitable for this strategy, because the communicative expectation of the addressee (the expectation – what the addressee can expect from the performer of a certain social role, cf. It is true that the irony of the addressee is a suitable means to transform the expressive into expressions of destructive strategy. For example, the coach "congratulates" the best player of the team who has been eliminated in a decisive game of the season: Congratulations. You just ruined our whole season. (RESP. SP.) Irony turns a congratulatory act into a reproach. By the way, when describing such an act in writing, the elocutive force is indicated in quotation marks, for example, "congratulates". Writing in quotation marks signals that the addressee's strategy was destructive or that the act was unsuccessful. 1.2. The language strategy of the recipient The strategy of the recipient can also be twofold: —constructive —the recipient tries to identify the addressee- ’s intention, i.e. he seeks the speaker’s meaning; —destructive —the recipient tries to discover a meaningful “gap” in the sentence in order to interpret it in his own way (then he must understand the speaker’s meaning). The constructive strategy meets the general requirements of communication, for example, the basic postulate of communication, co-operation, as described by Grice (Grice 1975: 45). If the addressee follows the principle of co-operation, the act of speaking may be unsuccessful due to the addressee- ’s strategy (seeking to disguise the elocutive power), due to inappropriate circumstances, the use of a different language code (interpreting the statement of one language according to the rules of another language), external disturbances, for example, external noise, impaired hearing of the addressee, etc., for example: "Where are you going?" - No, fishing. "Oh, I thought you were fishing. (Folk joke) Because of the different code: A local man met two Russian friends. The Russians did not understand him, and he was unable to speak. It was Friday night. He threw in a few rubles. Vodka and snacks appeared. At first everyone drank a hundred grams. She began to cry. "After so much. What a strong vodka! I can cool down. "If only we could," agreed the friends. They poured in two hundred grams each. Everyone drank to the bottom again. "Oh, yeah," he said. "I can do it now. "Maybe three hundred- ," laughed the friends. (LLA 253) 4 Expressive—an etiquette language action aimed at maintaining, e.g., saying goodbye, greeting, wishing, or restoring, e.g., apologizing, an “atmosphere of courtesy”—good social relations with the addressee. STRATEGY AND ROLES OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE ACT OF SPEECH | 149 In the latter example, the addressee, based on the one word padvėti = after two and pratrysti = after three hundred, according to the pragmatic situation (drank a hundred, then — two hundred) perceives the elocution of the addressee’s acts of speech incorrectly — serving as a proposal. When the addressee’s strategy is destructive, he/she undoubtedly understands the speaker- ’s meaning, but it is not useful for him/her to interpret the act of speech according to it. If the recipient leaves the slightest possibility for the recipient to misunderstand the act of speech he has performed, he may do so. “The point is not that the listener does not understand the real elocutional power of the statement, but that he does not have to understand it” (Austin 1962: 33-34). The target chooses the destructive strategy to protect their interests and to put them above the target's interests. It is possible to interpret the elocutive power of the statement or the propositional content in its own way when the act of speech is indirect or ambiguous, for example: Once Peter, having met Casimir, asks: "Shouldn't you lend me at least ten litas?" Kazimieras answers: "It's a pity I don't have it with me. “What about home?” “Thank God, everyone is well. Sudiev. (ALL 188) The question O domu?, which is semantically connected to the previous discourse and means Do you have no money to borrow at home?, the addressee pretends to understand as a polite inquiry about his household, thus avoiding borrowing. Most often, the recipient chooses the destructive strategy by interpreting directives, especially modest ones (as opposed to the recipient) and declarative ones®. It is useful for the addressee to interpret directives in his own way when he is unwilling or unable to do what the addressee wants. When interpreting aggressive directives — command, injunction, requirement — the addressee usually has no possibility to choose a destructive strategy because of the strict regulation of the use of these directives. The declarative addressee interprets in his own way when they establish an unfavorable situation of things. When the recipient performs an assertive, expressive, or commissionive®, the recipient has little option to choose the destructive strategy. And if a performative act of speech is performed, a specific interpretation of the addressee is actually impossible. However, neither the addressee nor the recipient usually need to look for a “backup” option, because the general principle of cooperation is followed. The act of speaking is often interwoven in a sequence of other verbal and non-verbal actions, is part of a certain language game. The language rules of the game require that players know the rules of the game and follow them. The relationship between the addressee's and the addressee's linguistic strategies and communication success is shown in the table: š Declaratives (decrees) are a means of creating a certain situation of things, i.e. they create new (for example, legal) facts, e.g.: appoint (deputy), dismiss (from office), declare war, etc. ® Commissions (addressee- 's commitments) the addressee undertakes to do in the future what is expressed by the propositional content of the speech act, e.g.: promise, commit, swear, etc. 150 | EGIDIJUS ZAKAUSKAS Table 1. Addressee Addressee’s linguistic strategy Addressee constructive destructive constructive cooperation: cooperation: speech act successful speech act successful, Addressee’s but unacceptable language to the addressee, therefore ineffective strategy | a Co destructive non-cooperation: non-cooperation: speech act successful, speech act unsuccessful but unresultful Thus, the addressee’s chosen linguistic strategy determines the locution of the speech act, i.e. the specific expression, and the ilocution, 0 the addressee’s linguistic strategy determines the perlocutional effect of the speech act. However, the individual act of speech often does not reveal the strategies of the interlocutors, which requires a broader discourse. The general principles of communication, especially cooperation, oblige the interlocutors to choose a constructive strategy. The destructive strategy is usually chosen by the recipient to avoid responsibility for his unsincere act of speech or to ridicule or even humiliate the recipient. The addressee’s linguistic strategy is destructive when he deliberately misrepresents the act of speech, especially its elocution. This is usually done in order to avoid unnecessary problems. The addressee’s ability to choose a destructive strategy is greatly limited by performative acts of speech, and the addressee’s ability to choose a destructive strategy is usually limited by his positional social role, especially when the addressee is institutional. 2. SOCIAL SITUATION AND SOCIAL ACTORS When choosing communication strategies, the recipient and the addressee cannot limit themselves to their own communication goals. In order to achieve the goal, the interlocutor factor must be taken into account — the addressee to the addressee, the addressee to the addressee. Grice, emphasizing the special connection of the content of the linguistic expression with the speaker, indicates that there is not only the meaning of the statement, but also the meaning of the speaker (Grice 1969: 147). This is also supported by one of the founders of the theory of speech acts, J. Searle: "It is not always possible to judge by the meaning of a sentence what the speaker meant when he said it" (Searle 1975: 68). The listener can understand the speaker's meaning by interpreting the meaning of the statement in the context of the communication situation. In other words, the true meaning of the act of speech (the meaning of the speaker) is perceived as the course of a language game (a term of L. Wittgenstein) (Wittgenstein 1995: 22 $). Without knowing what language game is being played, it is impossible to interpret the act of speech correctly. Therefore, it is necessary to know the context, the situation. The act of conversation is an intentional and interpersonal action, the space of its manifestation is the socium. So one of the most important factors in recognizing the speaker’s meaning is the social situation. Social situation- —the totality of external circumstances that shape the behaviour of the individual in society. The broadly understood situations correspond to Wittgenstein’s concept of forms of life, for example: negotiation, marriage, war, etc. The forms of life consist of language games, i.e. even narrower situations: proposal, marriage oath, declaration of war, etc. Such language games are realized in specific speech acts. The performer of the act of speech, the addressee (and in turn the addressee), is not regarded as a specific person with a set of certain individual characteristics (this aspect concerns psychology), but as the performer of a certain social role, which is represented by the act of speech performed by him (Arutiunova 1981: 357). In a linguistic society, there are certain patterns of behaviour (and language) for each social role performer: “these are established ways of behaving and acting in a given situation” (Karaliūnas 1997: 87). These templates can be very loose in informal settings, for domestic communication, and very strict in formal — legal, administrative, religious, etc. Domestic communication is based on unwritten rules of etiquette, and in a formal environment the actions of a specific social role performer are regulated by laws, regulations. “The more specific and strict the demands of society for a particular role — cf. the roles of judge, president of a meeting, commentator of a sporting event — the stricter the stylistic requirements for speech” (Krysin 1976: 52). There are even templates for specific speech acts intended to perform a certain social role. For example, the following text of the oath of the President of the Republic of Lithuania is a speech that has actually been performed by two Presidents of the Republic of Lithuania —p. A. Brazauskas and Mr. V. Adamkus, template. I, (name, surname), swear to the People to be faithful to the Republic of Lithuania and the Constitution, to respect and carry out the statutes, to protect the integrity of the lands of Lithuania; I swear to carry out my duties with integrity and to be equally fair to all; I swear to strengthen the independence of Lithuania, to serve the Fatherland, democracy and the well-being of the Lithuanian people. May God help me! (dok: http://www.lrp.lt/institutiontoday.phtml44HD NM 20) The addressee of this act of oath is not concerned with the addressee as a specific person, but as a social institution — the President of the Republic of Lithuania. In interpreting this act of speech, the individual characteristics of the addressee as a person are completely irrelevant, as are other communicative roles that the same natural person performs in other acts of speech. The interpretation of the act of conversation depends on how clearly the recipient perceives the social roles of the recipient and himself as a recipient and their relationship. Social relations of participants in communication can be: —symmetric —equal social roles; —asymmetrical —unequal social roles, which in turn may result from: 152 | EGIDIJUS ZAIKAUSKAS —anthropological differences, —sociocultural differences, —different degrees of conversational objectiveness (Henne, Rehbock 1995). Social relations are in fact nothing more than the confrontation of the social roles of two participants in communication – the recipient and the addressee. The social roles played by the participants in the conversation act, regardless of the relationships they represent – symmetrical or asymmetrical – are always perceived as a pair, for example: boss – subordinate, father – son, buyer – seller, colleague – colleague. The social role of the addressee of the speech act, therefore, determines the social role of the addressee. And vice versa: having identified his social role, the addressee easily determines the social role of the addressee, which helps to identify the elocutive power of the addressee’s speech act. If the recipient does not properly understand his or her social role, it is likely that he will choose an inappropriate act of speech of the elocutive power, for example: “No, I’m not.” —Julius raised his voice. “Order your grandmother,” [Rima] knocked on the door and left. (PB 464) In this situation, the social role of the addressee is ignored, while the addressee unreasonably occupies a higher social role in relation to the addressee. In fact, the social roles of the addressee and the recipient are equal — Julius and Rima are friends. The addressee's choice of aggressive directive is suitable for use with a higher-ranking addressee, and this is usually only when the act of speech is addressed to a direct subordinate. Because of the inappropriately chosen performative – I order instead of neutral I ask or humble I beg – the speech act is unsuccessful: Rima knocked on the door and left. Therefore, due to the inappropriately chosen social role of the addressee, there is a communication failure. Sometimes the speaker explicitly indicates his social role in the act of speaking, for example: SIMKUNAS. [...] as I understand it, Mr. Klemas should continue his treatment in the camp hospital. DOCTOR. As a doctor, I agree that his health is not improving. (NDB 2, 74) In this example, the second interlocutor emphasizes his positional social role (as a physician) in response to the act of speaking—- the stimulus: the encouragement to express his professional opinion. It is also common to indicate one’s social role by “switching” from a higher social role to an equivalent one, for example: ANDREAS. Not as your master, but as a knight I ask the knights, did you really not know that Mindaugas [...] serves Christ the Lord? (KR 2, 597) The addressee emphasizes his equal social role in the expectation that the addressee’s language strategy will be constructive — that the knights will tell the truth without evading. SNAILS ACT PARTICIPANTS STRATEGY IR ROLES | 153 In the performative acts of speech, it is customary for some ilocutional forces to explicitly indicate their social role. For example, I assume: R. OZOLAS press conference on lost elections: po — He will bear all the už responsibility for the fact that the party did not get the required number of votes in the mu elections, as the party’s president. (TV News). J. KAZLAUSKAS po “Eurobasket 2001“ failure: — I, as the coach of the team, of course, take all the responsibility for the failure, I confirm: yes, I už resign from ir coaching. aš iš (TV News) However, much more often the social role of the addressee is indicated in the act ne of speech, a unique marker, 0 jo usually a name surname — ir (also often indicates position, sometimes ir scientific title, place of residence, kinship) ir t. t.). This is the case for most of the laws. Most of them are jų performative statements. For example, the powers: Me, John Petraitis, <...> I authorize Antanú Petraitis <... > to manage ir the passenger car belonging to me, <... > take care of the technical condition of the car, be my representative in the traffic police, insurance agencies, customs, į leave abroad, reauthorize another person, write statements on my už behalf, sign me to ir perform all other actions related to this su assignment. (DOK.) When performing some institutional acts of speech, it is customary, o sometimes ir mandatory, to indicate ir your social role, unique markers, ir for example: <..> Based on Article of the Constitutional Court Act, 32 authorizing Offices of the Seimas Audronė Ožiūvienė, consultant of the Legal Department Under consideration by the Seimas Constitutional Theism Request of a Group of Members of the Seimas to Investigate [the laws are not contradictory]. <...> Lietuvos Republics President of the Seimas Vytautas Landsbergis (DOK.) In general, all legal acts of speech are characterized by expliciting the elocutive power of the addressee of the speech act as members of a certain ir community. ir In everyday speech, the addressee's identification is usually not so important due to the relatively small amount of undefined speech ir ir jo the link between the consequences. It may be more important to explain your social role. By the way, as noted Arutiunova, the recipient usually explains his role when he takes a iš role that does not belong to him (Arutiunova 1981: 357). The social role is also prone to explanation when, communicating with the same addressee, the social role su register is switched to an equivalent higher one, — iš į t. y. emphasizes authority, usually in a conversation aiming at the top, or vice versa, for example: 160 | EGIDIJUS ZAIKAUSKAS One of the characteristics of the performative is its self-righteousness — the performative cannot be wrong, it can only be unsuccessful. Thirdly, the expression of many performative works is extremely simple and clear, and therefore easily understandable to the recipient. Finally, a number of performatives are necessary in certain legal, ritual and social situations, and their non-use can lead to social or even legal conflict. This is especially true of the label performative – expressive. On the other hand, the recipient is usually concerned that the recipient interprets his statement correctly. For this purpose, the addressee must choose the appropriate expression for the addressee and adequate in the present situation. The illustrative power of the narrative is most accurately and usually unequivocally conveyed by the performative. In relation to the addressee, performative acts, like other acts of speech, can perform two functions: —the action performed by the addressee involves the addressee (changes his social position, obliges him to do something, etc.); the more pronounced performative function of such speech acts (declaratives, directives); —the action performed by the addressee does not involve the recipient, the performative is relevant to the recipient only as information. According to these functions and other factors, several types of addressees can be distinguished in relation to the act of speech. 4.1. Types of recipients The addressee of a performative speech act may be: 1) the real addressee (direct addressee- ); 2) quasi-addressee (indirect addressee- ); 3) the addressee witness; 4) the addressee intermediary; 5) the addressee executor. There may also be performative acts of speech that are not intended for any addressee, but are rather expressions of internal language. They are bedressed performative. In addition, there are performatives of one elocutional force, the condition of which is the joint participation of both interlocutors in the act of speaking. It is a bi-directional performative. 4.1.1. REAL ADRESSEE (DIRECT ADRESSEE- ). The real addressee is the person (or persons or institutions) who, in the speaker's opinion, can understand the act of speech in the way the addressee wants it. In rare cases, more often in the spiritual field, in artistic creation, the real addressee can be an inanimate object, for example: MESSAGE. By the power of the Lithuanian gods, I command the water to cross and open the lake hells. (FG 611) The real addressee is usually somehow related to the fact of reality, which is expressed by the propositional content of the speech act: the addressee wants the addressee to do something (directives), the addressee commits to do something that the addressee wants (commissions), the addressee performs an etiquette action related to the addressee's position (expressives), etc. STRATEGY AND ROLES OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE ACT OF SPEECH |161 In order for the act of speech to be received and interpreted by the right addressee, it can, and sometimes it is necessary, to be indicated in the act of speech itself. In everyday speech, the addressee is explicitly indicated in the performative act of speech rather rarely, because such an act is usually performed in a situation of direct communication and the addressee is clear from the situation. Often this is the second participant in the dialogue, the author of the stimulus of the replica, which is answered by a performative act of speech. When communicating with more than one interlocutor at the same time, the true addressee can be indicated either by linguistic means, usually by addressing, or by extralinguistic means, for example by turning to the real addressee, touching his hand, etc.’ In performative sentences, the addressee is usually expressed by a verb, but can also be expressed by an adverb, for example: DARĖJAS. I am very sorry gentlemen... you know — war... (NDB, 74) The addressee’s identification, social role, and social distance can be explained by the addressee’s suffix. The identifier is used more often when communicating with several interlocutors and it is necessary to distinguish one. TEACHER IN THE CLASSROOM. Jonaiti, I invite you to the board. The name can be used to address someone without necessarily identifying the real addressee, for example: VYTURYS. I forbid you, Aušra, to talk about Birutė Vidugirytė. (RV 538) I wish you happiness, Mirta. (Page 221) The social role of the addressee is usually indicated in the case of asymmetric relations, when communicating formally, for example: Eilini Jonaiti! You are standing at a post and notice that a man is crawling towards you. What are you going to do? (TEXT: SPEC. PERIODIKA) Peter humbly asks: "Director, I'm drunk. It won't happen again. Excuse me... (TEXT: VIETNAMESE LAIKR) In official verbal language, performative verbs are rarely used when the social role of the addressee is indicated. English text was not found nė The addressee of the speech act can be determined by the test of the addressee: who can actually be addressed in the speech act. For example: Plg. [Ladies and gentlemen ir witnesses, all here assembled, I ] declare Antanú ir She's a husbandir 's wife. Antanai ir Ana, I declare you husband ir and wife. [Head of Personnel Departmeir nt, Head of Departme- ] nt, Jonas Petraitis is į accepted for work. Jonai Petraitis, you're hired. į Dear guests, I name the šį ship ‘Vincu Kudirka". (Impossible to refer to į the ship.) 162 | EGIDIJUS ZAIKAUSKAS one performative, in which the following clearly institutional addressees would be addressed together: conscript, corporal, sergeant, lieutenant, captain, chief, deputy, secretary. This is because in the formal environment the interrelationships of different social roles are regulated, including linguistic behavior. For example, an officer may address a regular soldier with an order, but not with a request, promise, recommendation, etc. Otherwise, the communicative expectation of the addressee would not be satisfied. The following example shows the communicational expectation of the lower social role: Will you order coffee, captain? (TEXT: BEAUTIFUL LITERATION) Since the usual elocution of the captain’s speech acts to the soldier is an order, the soldier expects such an act. Even if the elocutive power of an order is not explained by linguistic means, the soldier will perceive all the directives given to him by the captain as orders based on his and the addressee- ’s social roles. The addressee is an essential element of any document (see Laurinavičienė and Rancova 2002: 4, 6). In the written official language, performatives are also used to indicate acts in which the social role of the addressee is indicated, although not as an address, for example: Vilnius University RECTOR APPLICATION to the lecturer of the Department of Lithuanian Language Vilnius A.S. 2001 05 15 I would like to ask you to allow me to participate in the competition for the position of Lithuanian language lecturer. A. S.'s signature (DOK.) Addresses reveal a closer or further social distance in the relationship with the addressee. For this purpose, lexical and functional tools are used: —lexical: kitty, my love, dear, respected, gentlemen- ... —verbal: the deminutive form of the address usually indicates a closer distance. For example: Arvydas, I beg you very much, be kind, dear, save her. (Text: GROŽ. LITER.) PETKEVIČIUS. Gentlemen! I offer a drink for the successful conclusion of all our long-standing work. (KS, 640) SKURVYDAS (to Eugenijai). Please, don't insult me, shit. 542) (in French). Mommy! I beg you, especially, don't be frowned upon. (KS, 568) And the social distance of the interlocutors is determined by grammatical means: the addressee of the closer social role is addressed in the singular — you, the addressee of the further social role is addressed in the plural — you. The higher social status of the addressee is also indicated by the use of the “polite” communicative form instead of the imperative in some dialects, especially when addressing older people, for example: STRATEGY AND ROLES OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE CONVERSATION ACT | 163 Mociut, ait eat. (LIV.) These forms usually correspond to neutral directives, such as I ask, I propose, I invite. 4.1.2. QUASIADRESSAT (INDIRECT ADRESSAT). Sometimes the addressee seeks to convey his intentions to the real addressee in a softer form, therefore only the implicit act of speech is chosen, but the real addressee is addressed, but the ne quasi-addressee, but in such a way that the real addressee experiences the ir act of speech and ne į interprets it properly. For example, an į elderly woman parked on a bus addresses another elderly ir woman standing next to her: ir į — Na ir youth now, never leaves room for old! (LIV.) Who is the real addressee of the speech act is shown by the situation of the speech act’s elocution: the outrage (assertive) over the ir current rude youth, expressed to the quasi-addressee, implies a request, a demand (directive) to the real addressee to give way to the ar young man sitting next to him. — — G. G. Clarkas ir T. B. Carlson claims that these types of speech acts are bilingual: they have addressees with du each ir allocated a corresponding elocutive power, thus one act of speech performs elocutive du acts (Clark, Carlson 1986: 274). The quasi-addressee receives information (e.g., about his dissatisfaction) act (assertive), directives o assigned to the real addressee. the addressee informs demands the quasi-true addressee the addressee The quasi-addressee can be an animal, unable to perceive the true meaning of the act of ir speech, even an inanimate object, for example: the grandmother opens the door, so that the cold can enter, the ir real addressee is dead, not closing the door; parents scold child o "hurt" object, although actually iš indirectly comforts the child. G. G. Počepcov calls such addressing a dead object an į extreme case of addressing a quasi-addressee and believes that it is almost equal to addressing a ir direct addressee, since the pragmatic situation unequivocally indicates the real addressee į (Počepcov 2005: 10). 1985: 12). There are quasi-addresses, the presence of which is the main condition to for the performance of the act of speech, for example: weeping when addressing the į deceased, oath of revenge at the grave of a killed friend, etc. ir Quasi-addressees can be considered ir spiritual beings mentioned in oaths as addressees, for example: All Buddha, Bodhisattva ir In the presence aš of the teachers, I swear to work for Enlightenment. (TEXT: GRAPE LITER.) 164 | EGIDIJUS ZAKAUSKAS In fact, such oaths are either addressed to other persons, the witnesses of the act, or are moral commitments to oneself. 4.1.3. ADDRESSED TO THE WITNESS. The majority of speech acts have a specific addressee, which is indicated by linguistic or extralinguistic means or is clear from the context of the speech act. However, the specific addressee is often not the only one experiencing and therefore able to interpret the act. First of all, the outside listener, to whom the addressee does not assign the act of speech, but whom he sometimes takes into account when choosing a specific expression of the act of speech, for example, does not use vulgarisms, curses. The external listener can be very important even when choosing a direct or indirect act of speech, especially when the addressee seeks to mask the propositional content of the act of speech and, often, the elocution, to make it understandable only to a specific addressee. Some legal performative acts of speech would be considered invalid if performed without witnesses, such as marriage, inheritance by will, power of attorney (mainly declarative acts and some directives). In relation to the addressee's witness, these verbal acts have an informative function. Such a recipient is called an institutional witness (Clark, Carlson 1986: 280). It is necessary for the act of speaking to be considered successful. The institutional witness is a kind of guarantor that the act of speech (together with the entire legal act) will be performed correctly and that it will be lawful. Such a guarantee is particularly important if any uncertainty subsequently arises as to the legality of the act. More often, an institutional witness is required for oral acts of speech. The legality of legal acts made in writing is guaranteed by the document in which the oral act is recorded. Therefore, it must be confirmed in some form, by seals, signatures or the like. On the other hand, practically all legal verbal acts are also recorded in writing, and the witness must confirm his presence by signing. Such a witness is provided for in the rules for performing certain acts of speech. There is even a legal authority of a witness – a notary, who has the right and duty to certify that the act (act of speech) was carried out lawfully. There are also acts of speech that do not have a real addressee, but are performed in the presence of witnesses, for example, the solemn oath (of a president, a soldier, Hippocrates), the naming of a ship, the declaration of war (the latter, i.e. declaratives, also have an addressee and executor). For example, the oath of officers of the Police of the Republic of Lithuania: I,..., in your presence: I swear, without sparing my strength and life, to defend the State of Lithuania and its independence; I swear to honestly comply with the laws of the Republic of Lithuania and the orders of my superiors; I swear to perform my duties holyly, to serve the people of Lithuania and the State; I swear to refrain from any action that could damage the good name of the police. May God help me. (P 19) The addressee of this act of speech does not name the direct addressee (for example, I swear to you, service friends), but addresses the oath to witnesses. Everyone who listens to this oath is a kind of guarantor that the official will take the oath. However, the witness is not entitled to take any sanctions against the offender in the event of lack of oath. From this fact it becomes clear that the role of the witness of the addressee is more ritual than legal. STRATEGY AND ROLES OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE SPEECH ACT |165 dis. Perhaps this is why P. Čiočys, after examining Lithuanian oaths and distinguishing eight characteristics of promissory oath, did not mention the witness factor among them (Čiočys 1996: 35). In some performative acts of speech, the witness is also the real addressee, he must be connected with the performed act of speech, he is included in it, for example: Dear Ladies, Dear Gentlemen, I declare the meeting open. (LIV.) This act of speech is addressed to all who hear it. On the one hand, all the listeners are witnesses of the performative opening act of the meeting. On the other hand, in the same act, the audience is informed that the meeting is beginning, so they must act according to the established order, for example, stop talking, applaud and begin listening to the speakers. The informational function of such an act is thus emphasized. 4.1.4. The addressee is the intermediary. The recipient intermediary (retransmitter) is a person through whom information is transmitted to another person - the real recipient. For example, by telephone, transmitting a message through another person. Often the sentence has two parts: one for the addressee, the other for the addressee to the mediator with instructions what (how) to do, for example: Mother says to the child on the phone: "Tell Dad I'm waiting for him." Warn him not to be late. And remind them to get their tools. (LIV.) In this act of speech, which has the elocutive power of instruction, the parts addressed to the real addressee — the father — and the intermediate addressee — the child — are structurally separated: MAMA Ta VAIKUI TECIUI pasakyk téciui = aš jo laukiu (—as tavęs laukiu) perspėk ji » nevėluotų (—nevéluok) primink +» pasiimtų įrankius (—pasiimk įrankius) Adresatui tarpininkui skirtosios dalys pateikiamos kaip nurodymas, kokia ilokucine jėga turėtų būti perduotas pranešimas tikrajam adresatui, o pastarajam skirtoji informacija pateikiama kaip kiekvieno pasakymo propozicija. The acts of speech transmitted through a mediator are usually not performative, or rather not performed as classical performative. Nevertheless, performative reference to the actual addressee of the act of speech is not uncommon in such an act of speech. If the addressee believes that the elocution of his speech must be explicitly conveyed to the real addressee, he indicates the indicator of the elocution power in the propositional content of that speech, usually expressed by a connective sentence- ." Example0" The performative itself cannot be in a subjunctive sentence. 166 | Egidijus Zakauskas jiu-jitsu (the part of the sentence highlighted in bold is intended for the intermediary as a reference to what he has to do with the second part of the sentence, small capital letters — information intended for the real addressee): a) be RETURN MONEY PO WEEKS. b) su ilokucine nuoroda: Tell Anton that Aš PAJADU RETURN MONEY PO WEEKS. The part of the message intended for the real addressee is formulated as a performative promise. The intermediary, transmitting the content of the act of speech entrusted to him to the real be addressee, the propositions themselves (here: grąžinti pinigus po savaitės), often informs about the ir elocution to of the speech act, for example (the reference to the elocution of the first addressee is highlighted in bold): Antanai, Jonas pažadėjo tau po grąžinti pinigus savaitės. or Antanai, John said: "I promise to return the money a week." po or Antanai, John asked to tell you that he promises to return po the money in a week. Even if the recipient does not specify the elocution of the message to be conveyed in his or her speech, the mediator sometimes identifies it himself. The mediator can be considered as the addressee in relation to the real addressee, especially when he formalizes his part of the speech act as a performative, ir for example (the performative of the mediator’s addressee is highlighted in bold): I, the captain of Bagynų manor, announce to you the lord's order: tomorrow, at sunrise, whoever owns ar half the boat, come to į the manor <...>. I also proclaim the lord's order: on Monday, at sunrise, the same men to come į Zabalų galulaukes. (PS 84) In fact, all media representatives who transmit speech acts of politicians and famous people to the general public could be considered as intermediaries. Media representatives play a positional social mediator role for the target audience. The addressee mediator can be provided institutionalir ly, for example, a spokesperson, a news presenter (annunciator), a chief secretary. It may also be ir ne an individual, even an organization, 0 like that ELTA In Lithuania. STRATEGY AND ROLES OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE ACT OF CONVERSATION |167 There are also domestic acts of conversation in which the participation of the addressee’s mediator is necessary. For example, greetings require an intermediary. With such statements as Give greetings to Lina or Greetings to Lina (which can also be considered performative), the elocutive act of SENDING WISHES is actually carried out, which is precisely intended to be transmitted through the mediator. Since, as in the case of any other acts of speech, the recipient is concerned not with the specific content of such an act of speech, but with the fact of its performance, the intermediary is usually entrusted with creating both a specific linguistic expression — the proposition of the acts of speech of wishes, and the form of the whole act of speech. The instructions for the proposition are usually limited to the intensity of the greetings sent: convey sincere | sincerest | warmest greetings. Instructions for a specific language expression can be added as the next requested act of speech, usually by adding the phrase "and say that [p]" to your request to convey greetings. Instruction on the specific expression of greetings can also indicate a special elocution of greetings. For example: And you give them [your friends] such greetings from me, well, you know, with curses, with everything. (M1 radio DJ speaking on the air to a telephone interlocutor) In this speech act, additional instructions for sending greetings for a specific expression indicate that this speech act is not a greeting, but a cursing elocution. The addressee mediator is characteristic only of the speech acts of the directive ilocutional forces. 4.1.5. DIRECTED TO THE PERFORMER. There are two types of addressee in legal speech acts: 1) the addressee who experiences the act, 2) the addressee who performs the act. The addressee is the person to whom (but not necessarily to whom) the act of speech is addressed or whose legal position is changed by the act of speech. For example: I declare Antanas Petraitis and Ona Kazlauskaitė husband and wife. This verbal act of the marriage office officer is carried out for Antanas Petraitis and Ona Kazlauskaitė. It also changes the legal status of the couple: from single they become a family. The subject of the action is indicated in the proposition of such an act of speech. However, in order for the act of declaration of marriage to take effect, certain other actions must be carried out: the marriage certificate must be drawn up, the necessary entries must be made in the marriage register, etc. This is usually done by the person (persons) or institution (-s) that ENSURES the FUNCTIONALITY of that act of speech, its establishment, and thus its success (in the perlocutional context). Such persons or bodies may be referred to as addressee executors. They are not explicited in the act of speech because they are regulated by other acts of speech (laws, regulations- ). The two types of declarative clauses are declarative clauses and directive clauses. In addition, the two types of functions can be distinguished by the relationship with the different recipient. 1. For the person experiencing the act, the declarative function is relevant – the performance of the act itself, the creation of the legal fact. Even if the perpetrator is an inanimate object, for example, 168 | EGIDIJUS ZAIKAUSKAS in the speech act I call this ship in the name of Vincas Kudirka the addressee of the experiencer of the action is the ship, or alive, but incapable of perceiving the act, for example, in the speech act I baptize this baby in the name of Peter the addressee of the experiencer of the action is still an unconscious baby, but he is the one for whom that speech act is performed and therefore is comparable to the real addressee. 2. For the actors, the declaratory act has indeed the function of a directive – it is an INSTRUCTION that the actions provided for in the regulation must be carried out in order for the declaratory act to take effect. For example: ORDER A. S. is appointed to the position of Assistant Professor of Lithuanian Language from 01.09.2000 to 31.08.2001. (DOK.) This declaration of the rector of the university is at the same time an instruction to the personnel directorate to arrange the necessary documents to allocate a certain salary, and to the head of the department or the affairs manager, who must take care of assigning A. S. the necessary workload, possibly a workplace, a cabinet. This function is evidenced by the name of the declarative as a document: ORDER, a formal sign of the elocutive power of the directive. addressee informs indicates, orders expert = performer ensures perlokucinj effect 4.2. Non-addressable performatives Although one of the most important functions of language is communication, not all statements are addressed to a specific recipient. One of the forms of speech is monologue—non-address-oriented speech, for example, in a diary. Often, monologue acts of speech are addressed to an imaginary or truly existing, but unable to experience the act of speech addressee - an object, a deceased, a person not participating in the communication situation. Such acts of speech are indeed not intended for the addressee of the statement. Sometimes the recipient becomes the recipient himself: when there is a dialogue with himself. Arutiunova adds to this kind of bedreatious speech acts of speech addressed to higher powers, to God (Arutiunova 1981: 363). All cases of monologue can be considered as manifestations of internal language (Wittgenstein's term). Of the performative, only acts of moral commitment are used in the internal language, for example, the oath at a friend’s coffin to avenge a murderer, frequent smokers’ promises to quit smoking, etc. Internal language is not an object of speech acts theory primarily because it is not directed to the addressee, so it is not examined in detail in this work. STRATEGY AND ROLE OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE SPEECH ACT |169 4.3. Divergent performances Most of the time, communication is two-way: the interlocutors exchange speech acts. This is dialogue. With each act of speech, the addressee and the recipient change places — from the recipient to the recipient — in response to the interlocutor’s act of speech as a stimulus: "Where is he, John?" (1) "To the market, gentlemen." (2) "What are you going to buy, John?" (3) Mr. John "A grandmother, gentlemen. (4) "Help me, John. (5) "I can't, gentlemen. (6) In the theory of speech acts, the unit under consideration is a separate act of speech in specific circumstances. So, the addressee of speech acts 1, 3 and 5 is Mr. and the addressee is John, the addressee of speech acts 2, 4 and 6 is John and the addressee is Mr. A typical example of this is the phrase "I'm going to be a rapper" which is used in many of the video games. However, there are performatives with a different model. It is a bi-directional performative. Their model is: address(- n)that ————adresa- (n)that These are acts of a common contract, for example: I, John Petraitis, and I, Antanas Kazlauskas, agree:... Its true purpose is to testify (be proof) that the contract has been concluded. Thus, such acts are usually made in the presence of institutional witnesses or in writing and are legal documents.'" Most often, but not always: it can be both one-way, e.g. radio and television broadcast, and multi-way, e.g. a group discussion.