Publication: Request Speech Act of Indonesian English Learners and Australian English Speakers Through Cross-Cultural Pragmatic Perspectives
Submitted Date
Received Date
Accepted Date
Issued Date
2022
Copyright Date
Announcement No.
Application No.
Patent No.
Valid Date
Resource Type
Edition
Resource Version
Language
en
File Type
No. of Pages/File Size
ISBN
ISSN
2630-0672 (Print), 2672-9431 (Online)
eISSN
DOI
Scopus ID
WOS ID
Pubmed ID
arXiv ID
item.page.harrt.identifier.callno
Other identifier(s)
Journal Title
LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network
Volume
15
Issue
2
Edition
Start Page
498
End Page
520
Access Rights
Access Status
Rights
Rights Holder(s)
Physical Location
Bibliographic Citation
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Title
Request Speech Act of Indonesian English Learners and Australian English Speakers Through Cross-Cultural Pragmatic Perspectives
Alternative Title(s)
Author(s)
Author’s Affiliation
Author's E-mail
Editor(s)
Editor’s Affiliation
Corresponding person(s)
Creator(s)
Compiler
Advisor(s)
Illustrator(s)
Applicant(s)
Inventor(s)
Issuer
Assignee
Other Contributor(s)
Series
Has Part
Abstract
This study aims to investigate the differences in the realization of request speech act between the IEL (Indonesian English Learners) and the AES (Australian English-Native Speakers), as well as explain the factors influencing these distinctions. The descriptive-qualitative method and discourse completion task (DCT) were used to obtain data in various contexts. The results showed that the realization of request speech act of the IEL and AES were different based on the following, (1) Form of Speech, as observed in the use of the main and supporting actions. This indicated that the IEL and AES used indirect and direct speech acts, respectively, and (2) Different Speech Strategies, as observed in the mode of sentences and request strategies. This proved that the IEL often used interrogative sentences, with the AES using declarative sentences when seeking permission from work superiors, and (3) Differences in the use of semantic formulas, where the IEL used attracters and honorifics more than the AES. This revealed that the linguistic and non-linguistic factors influenced the occurrences of these differences.