PRAGMATICS OF AUTHORITY
DIRECTIVE SPEECH ACTS IN POLITICAL AND HEALTHCARE COVID-19 DISCOURSE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56550/d.4.2.3Keywords:
speech acts; directives; crisis communication; COVID-19; pragmatics; authorityAbstract
The COVID-19 pandemic placed political leaders and healthcare experts at the center of crisis communication, requiring them to issue urgent instructions under conditions of uncertainty. This paper analyzes how authority was enacted through language, focusing on directive speech acts in political and scientific discourse in the United States and Croatia. Drawing on speech act theory, the study examines press conferences, official statements, and interviews to compare how politicians and scientists shaped public behavior through direct and indirect directives. Findings show that political leaders often preferred direct strategies, embedding directives in appeals to solidarity, unity, or political identity. Medical experts relied more on direct and explicit directives as well, framing them as scientific necessity. The study highlights the adaptability of directive speech acts as tools of authority in crisis contexts, demonstrating how they balance power and clarity.
References
Alston, W. P. (2000). Illocutionary acts and sentence meaning. Cornell University Press.
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.
Che Hassan, N. S. I., & Mohammad Nor, N. H. (2022). Analysis of speech acts in COVID-19-related Facebook comments. Proceedings, 82, 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2022082050.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In D. Davidson (Ed.), The logic of grammar (pp. 64–75). Dickinson Pub. Co.
Hanks, P. (2018). Types of speech acts. In D. Fogal, D. W. Harris, & M. Moss (Eds.), New work on speech acts (pp. 123–143). Oxford University Press.
Matić, D. (2011). Govorni čini neodobravanja u drami Look Back in Anger Johna Osbournea. Hum, 7, 203–220.
McGowan, M. K., Tam (Tan), S. S., & Hall, M. (2009). On indirect speech acts and linguistic communication: A response to Bertolet. Philosophy, 84(4), 495–513. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031819109990088.
Ogiermann, E., & Bella, S. (2021). On the dual role of expressive speech acts: Relational work on signs announcing closures during the Covid-19 pandemic. Journal of Pragmatics, 184, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.07.020.
Palašić, N. (2020). Pragmalingvistika – Lingvistički pravac ili petlja? Hrvatska sveučilišna naklada.
Pasternak, T. A. (2021). Speech acts analysis of Covid-based epideictic rhetoric. Writings in Romance-Germanic Philology, 46(1), 188–193. https://doi.org/10.18524/2307-4604.2021.1(46).226603.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R., & Vanderveken, D. (1985). Foundations of illocutionary logic. Cambridge University Press.
Smith, S., & Kabele, J. (2021). The spring “stay at home” coronavirus campaign communicated by pending accounts. Journal of Pragmatics, 177, 170–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.02.025.
Tsoumou, J. M. (2021). A brief review of expressive speech acts and their correlations with (im)politeness in COVID-19 era. Academia Letters, Article 1715, 1–6.
Vendler, Z. (1972). Res cogitans: An essay in rational psychology. Cornell University Press.
