Топик: Косвенные речевые акты в современном английском языке

3. These sentences are conventionally used to make requests. They often have "please " at end or preceding the verb.

4. These sentences are not idioms, but are idiomatically used as requests.

5. These sentences can have literal interpretations.

6. The literal meanings are maintained when they question the physical ability:Can you pass the salt? - No , it’s too far from me . I can’t reach it.

7. Both the literal and the non-literal illocutionary acts are made when making a report on the utterance:

The speaker: Can you come to my party tonight?

The hearer: I have to get up early tomorrow .

Report: H e said he couldn't come. OR : H e said he had to get up early next morning .

A problem of the inference theory is that syntactic forms with a similar meaning often show differences in the ease in whichthey trigger indirect speech acts:

a)Can you reach the salt?

b ) Are you able to reach the salt?

c ) Is it the case that you at present have the ability to reach the salt?

While (a) is most likely to be used as a request, (b) is less likely, and (c) is highly unlikely, although they seem to expressthe same proposition.

Another drawback of the inference theory is the complexity of the algorithm it offers for recognizing and deciphering the true meaning of indirect speech acts. If the hearer had to pass all the three stages every time he faced an indirect speech act, identifying the intended meaning would be time-consuming whereas normally we recognize each other’s communicative intentions quickly and easily.

3.2. Indirect s peech a cts as i dioms?

Another line of explanation of indirect speech acts was brought forward by Jerrold Sadock [42, 197]. According to his theory,indirect speech acts are expressions based on an idiomatic meaning added to their literal meaning (just like the expression “to p ush up daisies ” has two meanings: “to increase the distance of specimens of Bellis perennis from the center of theearth by employing force” and “to bedead”). Of course, we donot have specific idioms here, but rather general idiom schemes. For example, the scheme “Can you + verb ?” is idiomatic for commands and requests.

However, the idiomatic hypothesis is questionable as a general strategy. One problem is that a reactionto an indirect speech act can be composite to both the direct and the indirect speech act, e.g.

The speaker:Can you tell me the time?

The hearer:Yes, it’s three o’clock.

We never find this type of reaction to the literal and the idiomatic intepretation of an idiom:

The speaker:Is he pushing the daisies by now?

Hearer 1: Yes / no (the idiomatic meaning is taken into account).

Hearer 2: Depends what you mean . As a gardener, yes (the literal meaning is taken into account).

Another problem is that there is a multitude of different (and seemingly semanticallyrelated) forms that behave in a similar way:

a ) Can you pass me the salt?

b ) Could you pass me the salt?

c) May I have the salt?

d ) May I ask you to pass the salt?

e ) Would you be so kind to pass the salt?

f ) Would you mind passing the salt?