¹Abdulrhman Saleh Alamoudi,¹Mariam Salim Batarfi, ¹Fatima Mohmmed Fadaq,¹ Maher Ali Bawafed ,
¹Safa Salah Almarfadi, ¹,²Rasha Saeed Badurais

¹English Language Department, College of Arts, Hadhramout University, Mukalla,Hadhramout, Yemen.

²English Language Studies, School of Humanities, USM, Penang, Malaysia.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v4-i12-03

Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT

Studying the implications of literary language is an interesting field of study as its focal analyses are the sophisticated linguistic features used consciously or unconsciously by the authors. Concerning the focus of this paper, the talent of Jane Austen is evident in the domain of literary linguistics. Reviewing the previous literature proves excessive scrutiny of the chief young couples, namely Elizabeth and Darcy. Given that, the present article sheds light on the conversations between the old couple in Pride and Prejudice; Mr. and Mrs. Bennet from a pragmatic perspective. The analysis focuses on the very first conversation between the couple as being representative of their relationship. This analysis employs two major pragmatic concepts: the various types of Austin's speech acts as defined by Cutting (2002) and Grice's maxims (1975). Of the thirty-one utterances analyzed in the targeted conversation, 20 are by Mrs. Bennet and 11 by Mr. Bennet. Mrs. Bennet's most frequent speech act is the representative whereas that of Mr. Bennet is the directive. Both violate the maxims, but Mrs. Bennet violates that of quantity as being talkative, unlike Mr. Bennet who violates quality and relation maxims. These analyses demonstrate the misunderstanding and deep psychological gap between Mr. and Mrs. Bennet inferred through their linguistic exchange.

KEYWORDS:

Conversational implicature, Grice's maxims, Jane Austen, Mr. and Mrs. Bennet, Pride and Prejudice, speech act theory

REFERENCES

1) P. Grundy, Doing Pragmatic. Hodder Education: London. University of Durham. 2008.

2) R. Sell, "Literary Pragmatics". In: Asher, .and Simpson, J.(eds.), The Encyclopedia of language and Linguistics, Vol,4, Oxford: Pergamum Press, pp. 2249-2260. 1995.

3) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Austen.

4) X. Ma, '' A case Study on Characters in Pride and Prejudice: From Perspective of Speech Act Theory and Conversational Implicature,'' International Journal of English Linguistic; Vol.6, No.4; 2016.ISSN 1923-869XE-ISSN 1923-8703. 2016.

5) L. R. M. Flayih, "A Pragmatic Study of Banter in Austen's Pride and Prejudice". University of Al-Qadisiyah, College of Education. 2013. From https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308632902_A_Pragmatic_Study_of_Banter_in_Austen's_Pride_and_Prejudice

6) J. Austen, Pride and Prejudice. Modern Library. New York. 1813/1985. From https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1342/old/pandp12p.pdf

7) S. Constantakis, Novels for students: Presenting Analysis, Context, and Criticism Commonly Studied Novels. Vol 35. 2011. From https://www.pdfdrive.com/novels-for-students-presenting-analysis-context-and-criticism-on-commonly studied-novels-volume-35-e156641395.html

8) D. R. Anggraini, I. Petrus, and R. Inderawati, “Theoretic Analysis of Implicatures in Pride and Prejudice and Its Pedagogical Implications,” Cript Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching, Vol. 4., No. 2, pp. 75-87, (2019). DOI: 10.24903/sj.v4i2.309.

9) Z. Y. Chang, “Pragmatic Analysis On Conversational Implicature In Pride And Prejudice,: Master Thesis. China. 2010. Abstract Retrieved from https://www.globethesis.com/?t=2155360302461784

10) A. P. Wibaw, “Implicature Used by the main Character in Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice” Pasundan University. 2017. From http://repository.unpas.ac.id/31683/

11) P. I. H. Fajrina, “An Analysis of Flouting Maxims Used by Elizabeth in Austen's Pride and Prejudice the Movie”. English Department Faculty of Humanities. University of Sunan Ampel Surabaya. 2014. From http://digilib.uinsby.ac.id/757/

12) Y. Li, “An Analysis of the Conversational Implicature in Bishop's Poetry”. International Journal of Languages, Literature, Vol. 3, No.1, March 2017.Doi:10.18178/ij111.2017.3.1.103.

13) J. J. Du, “A Study on the Conversational Implicature in Sons and Lovers from the Perspective of Cooperative Principle”. Studies in Literature and Language, Vol. 12, No. 5, pp. 85-90. 2016. from http://www.cscanada.net/index.php/s11/artical/view/8426DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/8426

14) J. Austin, How To Do Things with Words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Chicago. 1962

15) J. R. Searle, Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of Language. London, Cambridge University Press. 1969.

16) H. P. Grice, “Logic and conversation,” In P. Cole, & J. L. Morgan. (Eds), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3, Speech Acts, Academic press. New York. 1975.

17) J.Cutting, Pragmatics and Discourse: A Resource Book for Students. Routledge. Routledge English Language Introductions. 2002.

18) A. Hidayat, "Speech Acts: Force Behind Words," Journal Tadris Bahasa Inggris. Vol 9, No. 1, pp. 1-12, 2016.

19) J. Lyons, Linguistic Semantics: An introduction. Cambridge University Press: UK. 1995.

20) M. Burke (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Stylistics. Routledge: New York. 2014.

VOlUME 04 ISSUE 12 DECEMBER 2021