speech acts theory
Pragmatic equivalence in the English translation of a selected literary work
Sara Muhammad Abdul El Mohsen Hefnawy
Al-Alsun Faculty _ Ain Shams University
Department of English
Dr. Zeinab instructor
February 23, 2015
I. Introduction
One of the prominent obstacles that face translators mostly in literary translation is the quandary of detection the differences in utterances, including figurative devices such as irony, satire, implicature, or word play. Speech acts by Austin (1962), Searle (1969), and Grice (1975) are considered a kind of pragmatic meaning to clarify the ambiguity of meaning of a sentence within its context. Speech act theory must reckon with the fact that the relationship between the words being used and the force of their utterance is often oblique (Back, 18). Indeed, Austin’s How to Do Things with Words (1962) sheds light on the use aspect of language since he has established the groundwork for speech act theory and its pragmatic relation with translation. Austin calls that any utterance can have indirect message within its statement and as a result, he classifies performatives into locution and illocution as well as distinguishing between constative and performative acts in an attempt to resolve the ambiguity of utterances. Subsequently, the philosopher Searle (1969) has developed Austin’s critique for the ancient theory in his book Speech Acts in which he gives his account of the taxonomy of illocutionary act, and of indirect speech act. With Austin's and Searle's conditions implemented through speech act, with the former focusing on social context and the act of uttering and the latter focusing on the uttering itself, the linguist Paul Grice (1975) established the cooperative principles in order to link between speech acts theory and pragmatics. Grice argues that many problems in communication arise because there are many implicatures in
Sara Muhammad Abdul El Mohsen Hefnawy
Al-Alsun Faculty _ Ain Shams University
Department of English
Dr. Zeinab instructor
February 23, 2015
I. Introduction
One of the prominent obstacles that face translators mostly in literary translation is the quandary of detection the differences in utterances, including figurative devices such as irony, satire, implicature, or word play. Speech acts by Austin (1962), Searle (1969), and Grice (1975) are considered a kind of pragmatic meaning to clarify the ambiguity of meaning of a sentence within its context. Speech act theory must reckon with the fact that the relationship between the words being used and the force of their utterance is often oblique (Back, 18). Indeed, Austin’s How to Do Things with Words (1962) sheds light on the use aspect of language since he has established the groundwork for speech act theory and its pragmatic relation with translation. Austin calls that any utterance can have indirect message within its statement and as a result, he classifies performatives into locution and illocution as well as distinguishing between constative and performative acts in an attempt to resolve the ambiguity of utterances. Subsequently, the philosopher Searle (1969) has developed Austin’s critique for the ancient theory in his book Speech Acts in which he gives his account of the taxonomy of illocutionary act, and of indirect speech act. With Austin's and Searle's conditions implemented through speech act, with the former focusing on social context and the act of uttering and the latter focusing on the uttering itself, the linguist Paul Grice (1975) established the cooperative principles in order to link between speech acts theory and pragmatics. Grice argues that many problems in communication arise because there are many implicatures in