International journal

Speech Genres

ISSN 2311-0759 (Online)
ISSN 2311-0740 (Print)


For citation:

Bezugla L. R. Insincere speech acts and insincere speech genres. Speech Genres, 2015, no. 1(11), pp. 30-37. DOI: 10.18500/2311-0740-2015-1-11-30-37

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0).
Full text:
(downloads: 134)
Language: 
Russian
Article type: 
Article
UDC: 
81’23’38

Insincere speech acts and insincere speech genres

Autors: 
Bezugla Liliia Rostyslavivna, Kharkov National University n. a. V.N. Karazin
Abstract: 

This article is devoted to justification of insincere speech genres. Speech genre is understood to be a form of utterance through which a speech act is being realized. Based on the type of falsified intention (assertive, volitive and emotive), three types of insincere speech acts are distinguished – lie (insincere assertives), manipulation (insincere directives) and hypocrisy - pretending, flattery and slander (insincere expressives).  Therewith, the speaker has a hidden perlocutionary goal of deceiving the recipient displaying itself in his intention to set the utterance in a form that isn't different from a sincere one. The conclusion is drawn that only speech acts can be insincere, not genres.

Reference: 
  1. Arutyunova N.D. Sentence and its meaning. [Predlozheniye i yego smysl]. Moscow, 2005, 384 p.
  2. Austin J. Pretending. [Pritvorstvo]. Austin J. Tri sposoba prolit’ chernila: filosofskiye raboty – Three ways of spilling ink: Philosophical papers, 2006, pp. 282-301, Sankt Petersburg
  3. Babych E.N. Speech acts with violation of the sincerity condition in modern German discourse. [Rechevyye akty s narusheniyem usloviya iskrennosti v sovremennom nemetskoyazychnom diskurse: Avtoref. dis. … kand. filol. nauk]. Kharkov, 2010, 20 p.
  4. Bakhtin M.M. The Problem of speech genres. [Problema rechevykh zhanrov]. Bachtin M.M.  Sobranie sochinenij v 7 tomakh – Collected works in 7 volumes. – Vol. 5, 1996, pp.159-206, Мoscow
  5. Boldyrev N.N. Conceptualization and categorization processes in language and the role of abstract semantics names in them. [Protsessy kontseptualizatsii i kategorizatsii v yazyke i rol’ v nikh imen abstraktnoj semantiki]. Gorizonty sovremennoj lingvistiki: traditsii I novatorstvo – Horizons of modern linguistics: traditions and innovations, 2009, pp. 38-50, Moscow.
  6. Chisholm R.M., Feehan T.D. The Intent to DeceiveThe Journal of Philosophy, 1977, no. 74, pp. 143-159.
  7. Dementyev V.V. Researches in speech genres in Russia: XXI str. [Issledovaniya po rechevym zhanram v Rossii: XXI vek]. Lingvistika teksta i diskursivnyj analiz: Traditsii i perpektivy – Text linguistics and discourse analysis: traditions and prospects, 2007, pp. 162-196, Sankt Petersburg
  8. Dementyev V.V., Sedov K.F. Social and pragmatic aspect of speech genre theory. [Sotsiopragmaticheskij aspekt teorii rechevykh zhanrov]. Saratov, 1998, 107 p.
  9. Dönninghaus S. M.M. Bakhtin's theory of speech genres in the shadow of linguistic pragmatics. [Teoria rechevykh zhanrov M.M. Bakhtina v teni pragmalingvistiki]. Zhanry rechi – Speech genres, 2002, no. 3, pp. 104-117, Saratov.
  10. Dönninghaus S. Under the guise of sincerity: hypocrisy and flattery as specific phenomena of the speech genre “pretending”. [Pod flagom iskrennosti: litsemeriye i lest’ kak spetsificheskiye yavleniya rechevogo zhanra “pritvorstvo”]. Zhanry rechi – Speech genres, 1999, no. 2, pp. 213-227, Saratov.
  11. Falkenberg G. Unaufrichtigkeit und Unredlichkeit. Trier, 1984, 7 S.
  12. Habermas J. Erfolgs- und Verständigungsorientierter Sprachgebrauch. Der Stellenwert perlokutionärer Effekte.  Habermas J. Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Handlungsrationalität und gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung, Fr./M., 1987, Bd. 1., S. 385-397.
  13. Lapp E. Linguistik der Ironie. Tübingen, 1992, 189 S.
  14. Lyons J. Linguistic semantics: introduction. [Lingvisticheskaya semantika: Vvedenie]. Мoscow, 2003, 400 p. 
  15. Morozova E.I. Lie as a discourse phenomenon: linguistic and cognitive aspect. [Lozh kak diskursivnoye obrazovaniye: lingvokognitivnyj aspekt]. Kharkov, 2005, 299 p.
  16. Ortony A., Clore G., Collins A. Cognitive structure of emotions. [Kognitivnaya struktura emotsij]. Yazyk i intellekt. – Language and intellect, 1996, pp. 314-384, Moscow.
  17. Polenz P.v. Deutsche Satzsemantik: Grundbegriffe des Zwischen-den-Zeilen-Lesens. Berlin, 1988, 389 S.
  18. Searle J. Classification of illocutionary acts [Klassifikatsiya illokutivnykh aktov]. Novoe v zarubezhnoy lingvistike – New in foreign linguistics, Moscow, 1986, no. XVII, pp. 170-194.
  19. Searle J.R. Intentionalität und der Gebrauch der Sprache. Sprechakttheorie und Semantik, Fr./M., 1979, S. 149-174.
  20. Searle J.R. Speech Acts, 27th printing, Cambridge, 2005, 203 p.
  21. Shakhovsky V.I. Lie (lying) as a speech genre (To the theory of genre genesis features). [Lozh (vranyo) kak rechevoj zhanr (k teorii zhanroobrazuyuschikh priznakov)]. Zhanry rechi – Speech genres, 2005, no. 4, pp. 218-241, Saratov.
  22. Shatunovskij I.B. “Truth”, “ verity ”, “sincerity”, “rightness” and “lie” as indicators of correspondence /   incorrespondence between sentence, thought and reality. [“Pravda”, “istina”, “iskrennost”, “pravilnost’” i “lozh” kak pokazateli sootvetstviya / nesootvetstviya soderzhaniya predlozheniya, mysli i deistvitelnosti]. Logicheskij analiz yazyka: Kulturnyje kontsepty – Logical analysis of language: Cultural concepts, 1991, pp. 31-38, Moscow.
  23. Wunderlich D. Zur Konventionalität von Sprechhandlungen. Linguistische Pragmatik, Fr./M., 1972, S. 11-59.
Received: 
26.01.2015
Accepted: 
15.03.2015
Published: 
08.06.2015