SPEECH ACT THEORY IN ARTHUR MILLER’S DRAMA “THE CRUCIBLE”
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26618/exposure.v8i1.2061Keywords:
Speech Act, Drama, The CrucibleAbstract
The research intends not only to describe the functions of the speech acts used by the main characters in Arthur Miller’s drama,The Crucible but also to identify the illocutionary of the speech actsand to identify the illocutionary and functions of the speech acts dominant in Arthur Miller’s drama, The Crucible. Based on the research findings, it is found that The first scene occurs at the beginning of Act II in John Proctor's house. The second scene occurs in Act IV in John Proctor's prison cell near the end of the play before he chooses to be hanged with honor rather than live with shame. Both scenes include an act of request, to confess in the first instance or to approve of an act of confession in the second. In both scenes, the hearer declines the request.
References
Alter, I. (1989). Betrayal and Blessedness: Exploration of Feminine Power in The Crucible, A View From the Bridge and After the Fall.
In June Schlueter (Ed.), Feminist Readings of of North American Drama (pp. 11645).
Rutherford, N. J.: Farleigh Dickinson Process, 116-45. Print.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to Do Things With Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Print.
Bennison, Neil (1998). Accessing character through conversation: Tom Stoppard’s Professional Foul. In J. Culpeper M. Short & P. Verdonk (Eds.), Exploring the Language of Drama: From Text to Context (pp. 67- 82). London and New York: Routledge. Print.
Bonnet, J. M. (1982). Society Versus Individual in Arthur Miller's The Crucible. English Studies, 63(1), 32-360. EBSCO. Web. 18 Jun 2013.
Cooper, M. (1998). Implicature, Convention and The Taming of the Shrew. In J. Culpeper M. Short & P. Verdonk (Eds.), Exploring the Language of Drama: From Text to Context (pp. 54-66). London and New York: Routledge. Print.
Crystal, D. (1971). Linguistics. England: Penguin Books. Print.
Culpeper, J. (1998). Introduction. In J. Culpeper M. Short & P. Verdonk (Eds.), Exploring the Language of Drama: : From Text to Context (pp. 1-5). London and New York: Routledge. Print.
Dario. L. A. (2001). Conversational Implicature and Cultural Conventions in Ola Rotmi's Our Husband Has Gone Mad Again.
Journal of Cultural Studies, 3 (2), 586-94. ProQuest. Web. 18 Jul. 2014.
Dawson. S. W. (1970). Drama and the Dramatic. London: Methuen. Print.
Desta. M. T. (2012). Pragmatics as Applied to Character Relationships: Focus on Wole Soyinka's Play "The Lion and the Jewel." Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(6), 74-85. Retrieved from http://www.iiste.org/ Journals/index.php/ RHSS/ article/ view/2382
Miller, A. (1965). The Crucible. Cairo, Egypt: Anglo-Egyptian Press.
Print. Moss, L. (1972). A Social Play. In John Ferres (Ed.), Twentieth Century Interpretations of The Crucible (pp. 37- 45), Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Print.
Newton, K. M. (1997). Twentieth Century Literary Theory. Second edition. Macmillan Press. Print.
Popkin, H. (1964). Arthur Miller's The Crucible. College English, 26(2), 139-146. JOSTOR. Web. 18 Jun 2013.
Walker, P. (1956). Arthur Miller's The Crucible Tragedy or Allegory? Western Speech, 20(4), 222-24. EBSCO. Web. 18 Jun 2013.
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Print.
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
In order to assure the highest standards for published articles, a peer review policy is applied. In pursue of the compliance with academic standards, all parties involved in the publishing process (the authors, the editors and the editorial board and the reviewers) agree to meet the responsibilities stated below in accordance to the Journal publication ethics and malpractice statement.
Duties of Authors:
- The author(s) warrant that the submitted article is an original work, which has not been previously published, and that they have obtained an agreement from any co-author(s) prior to the manuscript’s submission;
- The author(s) should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal;
- The authors(s) make certain that the manuscript meets the terms of the Manuscript Submission Guideline regarding appropriate academic citation and that no copyright infringement occurs;
- The authors(s) should inform the editors about any conflict of interests and report any errors they subsequently, discover in their manuscript.
Duties of Editors and the Editorial Board:
- The editors, together with the editorial board, are responsible for deciding upon the publication or rejection of the submitted manuscripts based only on their originality, significance, and relevance to the domains of the journal;
- The editors evaluate the manuscripts compliance with academic criteria, the domains of the journal and the guidelines;
- The editors must at all times respect the confidentiality of any information pertaining to the submitted manuscripts;
- The editors assign the review of each manuscript to two reviewers chosen according to their domains of expertise. The editors must take into account any conflict of interest reported by the authors and the reviewers.
- The editors must ensure that the comments and recommendations of the reviewers are sent to the author(s) in due time and that the manuscripts are returned to the editors, who take the final decision to publish them or not.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites 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). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
