Speech acts in undergraduate thesis defenses: A pragmatic analysis of oral interaction in an EFL context

Imanuel Kamlasi, Hendi Pratama, Sri Wahyuni, Seful Bahri

Abstract


The study argues that institutional power dynamics influence speech acts in the EFL thesis defenses. The study identifies types of speech acts used by examiners and candidates and analyzes how these acts shape the dynamics of the defenses. The research utilized qualitative methods based on the Interaction Analysis Method. Eight EFL candidates and eleven examiners were involved in the research. The study used an observation guide and audio/video recorders to document oral interactions during thesis defense sessions. The oral interactions were transcribed for analyses. The utterances were coded and analyzed using Austin's and Searle's framework of speech acts. The findings indicate a clear power asymmetry between the examiner and the candidate. The examiners confirmed that directive speech acts are dominant with 53%, followed by assertive speech acts at 35%. Expressive speech acts account for 10%, while commissive and declarative speech acts are low, only 1%. The candidates showed that assertive speech acts are the most prevalent of 86%, expressive acts represent 10% while directive acts are significantly lower at 3%. Commissive acts make up 1%, and declaration acts are the least common. The study suggests targeted training to minimize misunderstanding in an academic discussion.


Keywords


Communication, power, speech acts, thesis defence

Full Text:

PDF

References


Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: University Press.

Bach, K., & Harnish, R. M. (1979). Linguistic communication and speech acts. MIT Press.

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.

Brandmo, C., & Gamlem, S. M. (2025). Students’ perceptions and outcome of teacher feedback: a systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1572950

Budianti, A., Pahamzah, J., & Baihaqi, A. (2020). Speech acts in teaching and learning process of English at lp3i Cilegon. CALR Linguistics Journal - Issue 1. https://doi.org/10.60149/imcc4439

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications, Incorporated.

Darong, H. C. (2024). Teaching speech acts in EFL context. Frontiers in Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1423498

Dawson, P., Henderson, M., Mahoney, P., Phillips, M., Ryan, T., Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2018). What makes for effective feedback: staff and student perspectives. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(1), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1467877

Heritage, J. (2012). Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.646684

Hidayat, D. N., Fadhilah, F., & Septiawan, Y. (2022). Speech acts in English classroom: A case at a junior high school in Indonesia. EduLite Journal of English Education Literature and Culture, 7(2), 251. https://doi.org/10.30659/e.7.2.251-265

Hl, N. I., Samsuddin, S., Yawan, H., & Yuliati, Y. (2023). Exploring Directive Speech Acts in Elementary School Communication in Kolaka: Language Pedagogy Implications. International Journal of Language Education, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v7i2.44948

Holmes, J. (2013). An introduction to sociolinguistics (4th ed.). Routledge.

Holmes, J. (1990). Hedges and boosters in women’s and men’s speech. Language & Communication, 10(3), 185–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/0271-5309(90)90002-s

Holmes, J., & Stubbe, M. (2015). Power and politeness in the workplace: A sociolinguistic analysis of talk at work. London: Routledge.

Holtgraves, T. (2021). Understanding Miscommunication: Speech Act recognition in Digital Contexts. Cognitive Science, 45(10). https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.13023

Ilić, B. M., & Radulović, M. (2015). Commissive and expressive illocutionary acts in political discourse. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/lpp-2015-0003

Keyton, J. (2018). Interaction Analysis: An Introduction. In Brauner, E., Boos, M., & Kolbe, M. (Eds.), (2018). The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316286302

Li, K., & Mao, Y. (2025). Exploring speech acts in peer feedback groups: Interactional dynamics among Chinese EFL learners. System, 133, 103780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103780

Li, K., & Liu, W. (2023). Delving into suggestion speech acts in Chinese authoritative academic discourse. Pragmatics Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA), 34(2), 161–189. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.22022.li

Liao, X., & Zhang, Y. (2023). Stylistic and linguistic variations in compliments: an empirical analysis of children’s gender schema development with machine learning algorithms. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01648-4

Mardiana, D., Rokhman, F., Rustono, N., & Mardikantoro, H. B. (2025). Speech act of political figures in the discourse of educational development: an interpersonal pragmatic approach. Cogent Arts and Humanities, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2025.2463728

Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (2007). Thesis and dissertation writing in a second language: A handbook for supervisors. Routledge.

Pratama, H., Nurkamto, J., Rustono, R., & Marmanto, S. (2017). Second language learners’ comprehension of conversational implicatures in English. 3L the Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 23(3), 50–66. https://doi.org/10.17576/3l-2017-2303-04

Prescilla, Y. F., & Amalia, R. (2018). A critical discourse analysis and illocutionary acts of john may’s speech in the duke of Edinburgh’s ceremony award. DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals). https://doaj.org/article/68d5ad48482248419eb25fd430c03979

Roberts, C. (2018). Speech acts in discourse context. In Oxford University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198738831.003.0012

Sari, P. D. N., Rahman, A., Mahsar, L., & Arbaiza, B. (2025). A pragmatic analysis of English teachers’ speech acts in language teaching: a case study at smart Mataram private course. Journal of Language and Literature Studies, 5(2), 483–492. https://doi.org/10.36312/jolls.v5i2.2813

Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: an essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139173438

Searle, J. R. (1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 5(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047404500006837

Stevanovic, M., & Peräkylä, A. (2012). Deontic authority in interaction: the right to announce, propose, and decide. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(3), 297–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.699260

Sulastri, F., & Saptiany, S. G. (2023). Speech Acts in EFL context: A Literature review. JELITA Journal of Education Language Innovation and Applied Linguistics, 2(2), 72–80. https://doi.org/10.37058/jelita.v2i2.6879

Topping, K. J., Gehringer, E., Khosravi, H., Gudipati, S., Jadhav, K., & Susarla, S. (2025). Enhancing peer assessment with artificial intelligence. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00501-1

Williams, A. (2024). Delivering Effective student feedback in Higher Education: An evaluation of the challenges and best practice. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 10(2), 473–501. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijres.3404

Xie, F., & Derakhshan, A. (2021). A Conceptual review of positive teacher interpersonal communication behaviors in the instructional context. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.708490

Yang, X., & Maarof, N. (2024). Effects of exposure to L2 input and language proficiency on pragmatic competence during study abroad. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 6(2), 1118-1135. https://doi.org/10.59400/fls.v6i2.1118




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30659/e.11.2.471-486

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) Imanuel Kamlasi, Hendi Pratama, Sri Wahyuni, Seful Bahri

License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/