CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURES, CONCEPTS, AND THEORITICAL

FRAMEWORK

This chapter is divided into three section, those are review of literatures,

concepts, and theoretical framework. The first part is review of literature. It presents

the previous studies that related to this study in general. The next part is concepts. It

provides a description about the concepts related to the topic of this study. And the

last is theoretical framework. It explains some theories which used to answer this

study’s problems.

1.1 Review of Literature

There are three undergraduate theses and one international journal related to

this study based on the focus of the discussion in order to distinguish this study

from other studies and not discussed the same issues with previous studies. This

section reviews, investigates, and compares the analysis of the previous studies

and the current study.

The first review is from undergraduate thesis, entitled The Analysis of

Illocutionary Acts in American Sniper Movie by Munir (2015). The problems

discussed in this thesis are the types of illocutionary acts used by the main

protagonist (Chris Kyle) and the functions of each utterance were uttered by the

main protagonist in American Sniper movie. Descriptive qualitative approach is

8
 9

the most suitable approach since this study is intended to analyze the types of

illocutionary acts uttered by the main protagonist (Chris Kyle) in American Sniper

movie on the basis of Searle’s theory of illocutionary acts and their functions in

social purposes based on the Leech’s theory. This study shows that there were

four types of illocutionary act performed by the main protagonist (Chris Kyle).

They were assertives, directives, commissives, and expressives. Besides, this

study also aimed at analyzing the functions of each utterance included in the types

of illocutionary act expressed by Chris Kyle as the main protagonist. There were

four functions of illocutionary act expressed by main protagonist such as:

collaborative, convivial, competitive, and conflictive.

The thesis written by Saputro (2015) entitled The Analysis of Illocutionary

Acts of Jokowi’s Speeches. The aims of this research are to find out the types of

illocutionary acts found in Jokowi’s speeches, the reasons of performing such

illocutionary acts viewed from the context of situation underlying the speeches

and the possible perlocutionary effects of performing the dominant illocutionary

acts. This study utilized speech act theory of Austin (1962) and Searle (2005) to

analyze the types of illocutionary acts found in Jokowi’s speeches and theory of

context proposed by Nunan (1993). The data consisted of two selected speeches

delivered by Jokowi in APEC CEO summit 2014 forum held in November 10,

2014 and the speech delivered in World Economic Forum on East Asia held from

19 – 21 April 2015. The research approach used in this study is descriptive

qualitative research because the nature of the study is targeted to describe the
 10

types of illocutionary acts found in Jokowi’s speeches, the reasons of performing

such illocutionary acts viewed from the context of situation underlying the

speeches and the possible perlocutionary effects of performing the dominant

illocutionary acts. The research finding shows that the types of illocutionary acts

found in Jokowi’speeches consist of assertives, directives, commisives, and

expressives. Assertives have the highest frequency of occurence or 49 (52,1%). It

is followed by commisives, expressives and directives which occur 27 (28,7%),

10 (10,6%) and 8 (8,5%) respectively. The reasons of performing such

illocutionary acts viewed from the context of situation included socializing the

nation’s agenda, ensuring that the audiences are interested to collaborate with

Indonesian government, providing description about a sea toll program, making

his speech attractive, giving an emphasis on a certain issue, and so on. The

possible perlocutionary effect of performing the dominant act of informing as the

highest frequency of assertives was that the audience might jointly work with

Jokowi especially in the business sectors. Both studies focused on the types of

illocutionary acts but different in data source, this study used Jokowi’s speeches

as his data source meanwhile the current study uses a movie.

The thesis entitled An Analysis of Illocutionary Act in Prince of Persia : The

Sand of Time Movie which was written by Wardani (2011). This study focused on

identifying types of illocutionary acts used in Dastan’s utterances as the main

protagonist based on the contexts occurred in five scenes of Prince of Persia :

The Sand of Time movie by using theory of Austin and Searle. The writer used
 11

descriptive qualitative method. She collected the data from the script, then

described the types and their context of situation. From the analysis, the writer

found five types of illocutionary acts used by Dastan as the main protagonist in

Prince of Persia : The Sand of Time movie. They were representative (reporting,

stating and concluding), directive (asking, ordering, requesting, and command),

expressive (praising and apologizing), commissive (refusal and pledging) and

declarative (declaring).

From the three undergraduate theses which have been described above, in

general, they described the analysis descriptively but for the first undergraduate

theses, this study did not describe the analysis in a detail explanation. It can be

seen from the explanation that did not mention the types of the category of the

illocutionary act. Because each category of illocutionary acts has some types

which have different meaning. However, this study described the methodology to

analyze the acts which is support the current study. The weakness of the theses

written by Saputro is he used many theories, three theories exactly. Because of

this, he also explained the unrelated concepts with the topic. However, this study

supports the current study in describing the theory of Searle to differentiate the

types of illocutionary acts. And for the last theses, there is no a specific

explanation about the reason how to categorize the types. Although this study has

similarities to the three previous studies such as in using movie as data source but

they are different in the movie genre and the current study also uses illocutionary
 12

acts theory by Searle and Vanderveken and illocutionary force theory by

Vanderveken.

Besides those undergraduate theses, a journal article is also reviewed. The

article entitled Analysis of Speech Acts in Political Speeches which was written by

Dylgjeri (2017). This research focused on the meaning of utterances based on the

context of the speaker by examining a selected political speech as some piece of

discourse with specific goals, that is, the first Edi Rama`s victorious political

speech after the general elections held in Albania in June 2013 which used speech

acts theories by Austin (1962) and Searle (1969). The analysis of the victorious

Edi Rama speech reveals that his speech is characterized by the use of

commissive speech acts, especially after a long political campaign, which filled

the hearts and minds of the people with great expectations and hopes and

promises for a brighter future. The method that is used in analyzing data is

focused description. This category describes and categorizes various aspects of

the Edi Rama`s victorious political speech. As a result, the biggest percentage of

illocutionary acts performed is commissive acts, then assertive and expressive

acts. He did not describe the analysis clearly because he only mention the types of

speech acts without gives the brief description of his reasons. This article and this

current study are different in types of data source; this article used political

speeches whereas the current study used movie script as the data source.
 13

2.2 Concepts

This section explains about the general ideas of the definition of the concepts

that relate to the study. There are some concepts; those are pragmatics, discourse,

context of situation, speech acts, illocutionary acts, and the movie script.

2.2.1 Pragmatics

The term pragmatics was first coined by the philosopher, Morris in the 1930s

who describes pragmatics as the study of the relationship between the signs and

its interpreters (Schiffrin, 1994:191). There are a number of definitions of

pragmatics but, in general, many scholars set to agree that pragmatics is a study

of language meaning related to the users of language and the context.

Cruse (2006: 3) states that pragmatics is interested in investigating the

meaning of language which links closely to the context. Similarly, Griffiths

(2006: 1) proposes that pragmatics focuses on how language is used as a tool to

create meaningful communication taking into account the situations or contexts

of use. Thus, three consequences can be drawn from this. Firstly, the same

messages can be conveyed through various ways and the same set of utterances

can carry different meanings. Secondly, there is often left communicated with

just a little having been said. Lastly, it is possible to make mistakes in

interpreting the intended message. Pragmatics focuses on the study of meaning

and it is more deeply in the context of meaning or speaker’s actual meaning. We

have to know the pragmatics itself to understand the meaning of something

 14

according to the context of situation. Every utterances of someone or person may

have another meaning. We cannot decide what the speaker means literally

because what he or she says may be different with his or her intended meaning

of his or her utterances. We have to understand the context of the speaker’s

saying.

2.2.2 Discourse

The term discourse may be defined in different ways and its meaning will

vary according to the context where it is used. Van Dijk (1997) mentions that

discourse is usually identified as a form of spoken language, what is said in

public speeches for example, or it could also refer to the ideas of certain schools

of thoughts, for instance the discourse of contemporary philosophies.

The term discourse applies to both spoken and written language, in fact to any

sample of language used for any purpose. Any series of speech events or any

combination of sentences in written form wherein successive sentences or

utterances hang together is discourse. Discourse cannot be confined to sentential

boundaries. It is something that goes beyond the limits of sentence. In another

words discourse is 'any coherent succession of sentences, spoken or

written' (Matthews, 2005:100).

 15

2.2.3 Context of Situation

According to Cutting (2002: 3), context of situation refers the context

surrounds the speakers to which they can see it. It is the immediate physical co

presence, the situation where the interaction is taking place at the moment of

speaking. In addition, Hymes (1974) as cited in Wardhaugh (2006: 247)

emphasizes the importance of an ethnographic view of communicative events

within communities. He explicates that context of situation will limit the range of

possible of interpretation, and on the other hand, support the intended

interpretation. He, then, developed the SPEAKING model that is relevant to the

identification of speech event and speech acts, they are (S) Setting and Scene

refer to the time and place, i.e. the concrete physical circumstances in which

speech takes place. In other words, it is where the event is situated; (P)

Participants are the ones involved in the conversation. They include speaker-

listener, addressor-addressee, or sender-receiver; (E) Ends refer to the

conventionally recognized and expected outcomes or goals of an exchange as

well as to the personal goals that participants seek to accomplish on particular

occasions; (A) Act Sequence refers to the actual form and content of what is

said: the precise words used, how they are used, and the relationship of what is

said to the actual topic at hand; (K) Key refers to cues that establish the tone,

manner or spirit of the speech act. The message can be conveyed in light-hearted,

serious, precise, pedantic, mocking, sarcastic, or even pompous tone; (I)

Instrumentalities refer to the choice of channel and to the actual forms of

 16

speech employed, such as the language, dialect, code or register that are chosen.

The speech acts can be conveyed through oral, written or telegraphic form; (N)

Norms of Interaction and Interpretation refer to the specific behaviors and

properties that attach to speaking and also to how these may be viewed by

someone who does not share them; (G) Genre refers to particular types of

utterance; such as poems, proverbs, riddles, sermons, prayers, lecturers, and

editorials. These are all different from casual speech.

2.2.4 Speech Acts

Austin (1962: 109) conveys the distinction of speech acts into three types,

they are locutionary acts or locution, illocutionary acts or illocution, and the last

is perlocutionary acts or perlocution. In the other words, locutionary act is the act

of saying something, illocutionary act is the act in saying something, and

perlocutionary act is the act by saying something (Austin: 1962: 109).

The further explanation in order to get the understanding, here are the

examples of those three kinds of acts based on Austin:

The weather is so hot today.

According to Austin, the locution act of the utterance above is the saying of

the speaker, i.e. the words uttered by the speaker. Meanwhile for the illocution

act is it can be a request for the hearer to take a glass of water for the hearer. It is

also possible to use that sentence in order to make a statement, or a request to

turn on the air conditioner, to make an explanation, or the other communicative

 17

purposes that so called as the illocutionary force in general (Austin: 1962: 100-

103). While, the perlocution act is it can be the hearer take a glass of water for

the speaker, or turn on the air conditioner, or do not obey to the speaker’s say. It

is the act of the speaker to get the hearer to do something (Austin: 1962: 100-

103).

2.2.5 Illocutionary Act

Searle’s classification of speech acts is the modification of Austin’s general

theory of speech acts. His theory is based on the criterion what the speaker

intends to imply in his or her utterances. Searle segments utterances into an

utterance act, propositional act, illocutionary act, and perlocutionary act although

it is the illocutionary act which becomes the central subject to Searle’s

framework (Schiffrin, 1994: 55). This view allows Searle to explicitly associate

speech acts with the study of language and meaning. Searle as cited in Mey

(1993: 117) argues that Austin’s taxonomy does not maintain a clear distinction

between illocutionary verbs and acts. Thus, Searle established his own

classification of speech acts which includes representatives, directives,

commissives, expressive and declarations (Mey, 1993: 131).

Representatives are those kinds of speech acts used to represent a state of

affairs; which have a word-to-world fit. Statements of fact, assertions,

conclusions, and descriptions are such forms of representatives in which people

represent the world as they believe it is (Yule, 1996: 53). Cutting (2002: 17) adds
 18

that these acts can be used to perform some functions such as describing,

claiming, hypothesizing, insisting and predicting.

Directives deal with the acts that speakers use in the attempt of getting

someone else doing something. These types of speech acts express the speaker’s

wish in which the future act is carried out by the hearer. The direction of fit of

directives is world-to-word. According to Cutting, the illocutionary forces of

these acts encompass commanding, ordering, requesting, suggesting, inviting,

forbidding, and so on.

Commissives are those kinds of speech acts that speakers use to commit

themselves to some course of future actions. In performing commissives, an

intention is expressed by the speaker and the proposition in terms of future act

will be done by the speaker. Cutting (2002: 17) adds that promising, threatening,

refusing, and pledging, offering, vowing and volunteering are some examples of

illocutionary forces that fall under the category of commissives.

Expressive are those words and expressions that state what the speaker feels.

A wide range of psychological states can be expressed and the proposition

ascribes an act to the speaker or the hearer. In addition, Leech (1983: 56) states

that the illocutionary force of these acts can be in the forms of apologizing,

condoling, praising, congratulating, thanking and the like.

Declarations are those kinds of words and expressions that change the world

via their utterances such as betting, naming, baptizing, marrying and so on. A

special institutional role in a specific context is required in order to perform a

 19

declaration appropriately. If the speaker doesn’t have that role, her or his

utterance will be infelicitous or inappropriate.

2.2.6 Movie Script

Movie is a recording of moving images that tells a story and that people watch

on a screen or television (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/movie).

The movie engages our mind by offering us fiction. The movie tells us stories in

visual images instead of word on the page. We are quite aware that it is all

fiction, but fiction is what we crave, not quotidian reality. What moved us to the

movie is the power of the imagination.

An obvious first thought is that movies are uniquely realistic they recreate,

reproduce the very events that they record. The camera, in this view, is a device

for making available, for later consumption, the very same worldly events that

took place before it at some earlier time.

Movie script is a mean of communication for an artist or a script writer to

express their idea. It can be in the form of written language. In spoken language,

utterance makes the movie very clear. In addition, the utterance of speech act

also describes or tells the viewers what the actors do in the movie.

1.3 Theoretical Framework

There are some theories used in answer this study’s problems, which were

divide into two main theories. First, theory of directive illocutionary acts by
 20

Searle and Vanderveken was used to analyze the first problem. Second, theory of

directive illocutionary force by Vanderveken was used in order to answer the

second problem.

2.3.1. Directive Illocutionary Act’s by Searle and Vanderveken

Directive illocutionary act is an illocutionary act that makes the addressee

doing something. Directive Illocutionary act helps the addresser to change the

situation. When using directives, the speaker is trying to fit the world to the

words. It means that the speaker tries to make the hearer as what the words

he/she utters. Searle (1969) said that directives are intended to produce some

effect through action by the hearer: ordering, commanding, requesting, advising,

and recommending are examples. According to Vanderveken (1990:189) the

Directive Illocutionary Act contains: direct, request, ask, question, inquire,

interrogate, urge, encourage, discourage, solicit, appeal, petition, invite,

convene, convoke, beg, supplicate, beseech, implore, entreat, conjure, pray,

insist, tell, instruct, demand, require, claim, order, command, dictate, prescribe,

enjoin, adjure, exorcise, forbid, prohibit, interdict, proscribe, commission,

charge, suggest, propose, warn, advice, caution, alert, alarm, recommend,

permit, allow, authorize, consent, invoke, imprecate, and intercede.

The verb direct names the primitive directive illocutionary force. It is

generally used in the passive form as in you are hereby directed to... Direct in the

primitive use here will be taken to be natural and thus to have no special mode of

achievement. A request is a directive illocutionary act that allows the option of

 21

refusal. It differs from direct only in the rather polite mode of achievement which

is expressed in English by the modifier please. To solicit is to request in a way

that meets certain formalities. We solicit committee membership, financial

support, participation in one sort of venture or another. An appeal is generally an

earnest request for aid, mercy or support on grounds such as justice, common

sense, humanity, etc. To petition is to solicit by addtessing a written request,

formal prayer, formal “petition” or the like. A petition is generally to an

authority, while soliciting and appealing may very well not be.

To invite is to request someone to become party to something, perhaps a group

or a process, and this is a propositioanal content condition. There is an option of

refusal in this mode of achievement. To insist is to direct in a persistent way.

This mode of achievement increases the degree of strength. To tell someone to

do something is to direct him in a way that does not allow the option of refusal.

An act of telling someone to do something is more peremptory than a requesting.

To instruct someone, in the directive sense, is to tell him to do something while

presupposing that one has the knowledge or information required as to what

needs to be done in the context of utterance.

Demanding and requiring have a greater degree of strength than telling. To

demand something is to tell the hearer to do it, while expressing a strong will. To

require something is to demand it with the additional preparatory condition that

it needs to be done. To claim something is to demand it as a right or as a due. The

difference between ordering and telling is that the former is much stronger and
 22

this strength comes from the speaker’s being in a position of considerable power

over the hearer. Unlike an order, a command requires authority or at least

pretended institutionalized power. To dictate is to command with the highest

degree of strength so that there is an obligation of obedience to what is dictated.

To prescribe is to order explicitly, usually in written form, what one requires

from someone else. The position of authority invoked by the speaker can be

based on knowledge, as in a medical prescription, or on a claim or right. To

enjoin is to prescribe a course of action with emphasis or formality, as in the case

of a legal injunction. Adjure have two directive senses. In the first sense, to

adjure is to command solemnly, as under throat or as with threat of a course. In

the second sense, to adjure is just to entreat someone to do something. An

adjuration is always solemn command which precludes the option of refusal. To

exorcise is to make a special kind of adjuration: it is to adjure the devil or another

evil spirit to leave a certain person that one presupposes to be under its influence.

Forbidding is the propositional negation of ordering. Thus to forbid the hearer

to do something is just to order him not to do it. Prohibit differs from forbid in

that prohibitions are likely to forbid an action not only here and now but also

more generally at other places and over a longer period of time. Some

prohibitons are made by way of declarations. Thus to interdict something is just

to declare that it is prohibited. To proscribe is formally to interdict something

that is at the same time condemned or outlawed. Commissioning is commanding

that a person go forth on some kind of “mission” authorized by and on behalf of

 23

whoever does the commissioning. To charge is to commission by way of

invoking an effectively unquestioned authority.

In the directive sense, to suggest is just to make a weak attempt to get

someone to do something. A proposal differs from a suggestion in that it has a

special propositional content condition. Like an offer, a proposal can be accepted

or rejected. To warn someone to do something is to suggest that he does it, while

presupposing that it would be bad if he does not do it. On the other hand, to

advise a course of action is to suggest that someone perform that action while

presupposing that it would be good for him to do it. To caution is to warn or

advise the hearer to take care of something. An alert is a warning to prepare for

action against imminent potential danger. An alarm is a warning to act in the face

of immediate danger. To recommend, in the directive sense, is to advise while

presupposing that the future action recommended is good in general, and not only

for the hearer.

To permit someone to perform an action is to perform the illocutionary

denegation of an act of forbidding his doing it. In granting permission, the

speaker presupposes as a preparatory condition that he has the power to forbid

what he permits. Unlike permit, allow is a hybrid verb. There is a performative

use of allow in which that verb has approximately the same use as permit. To

authorize an action is to permit someone to perform that action while also

declaring his authority or official power to do it. To consent is to permit the

hearer to do something under the preparatory conditions that one need not do it,
 24

and that one in fact has reasons not to, but that the hearer has persuaded us to do

it. To invoke is to request God or some other authority, to be present and to lend

authority to a process or deliberation. To imprecate is to call upon this authority

to send condemnation or evil upon someone, while to intercede is to call upon

this authority to offer forgiveness or favors on behalf of someone.

2.3.2 Illocutionary Force by Vanderveken

Illocutionary act has the force to make the addressee do something or

understand the utterance; it is usually called illocutionary force. Each

illocutionary force is divided into six components, as Vanderveken says

(1999: 203-121), which determine the conditions of success and of

satisfaction of all speech act with that force. Illocutionary force will be

considered successful or felicitous if it fulfils all components are stated as

follows:

2.3.2.1 Illocutionary Point

Each type of illocution has a point or purpose which is internal to its

being an act of that type. The point of statements and descriptions is to tell

people how things are, the point of promises and vows is to commit the

speaker to doing something; the point of orders and commands is to try to get

people to do things, and so on. Each of these points or purposes we will call

the illocutionary point of the corresponding act. According to Vandervaken

 25

(1990: 105), there are five basic illocutionary points of utterances, those are:

The assertive is the condition that the propositional content represents as state

of affairs, they are assertions, conclusions, and descriptions; the commissive

is the condition where the propositional content is a future act of the speaker,

to express what the speaker intends, they are promise, threats, refusals and

pledges; the directive is the condition where the propositional content is the

future act of the hearer, to express what the speaker wants, they are command,

orders, request, and suggestions; the declarative it is the condition which is

brought into existence a state of affairs by representing oneself as performing

that action; and the expressive is the expression of the speaker about a state of

affairs. They express psychological states and can be statements of pleasure,

pain, likes, dislikes, joy, or sorrow.

From the logical point of view, there are four possible directions of fit

of utterances, and to these four directions of fit correspond naturally the five

illocutionary points. The four direction of fit are words-to-world direction of

fit, world-to-words direction of fit, double direction of fit, and null or empty

direction of fit.

Words-to-world direction of fit, when the illocutionary act is satisfied,

its propositional content fits a state of affairs existing in general independently

in the world. Speech acts with the assertive point such as, for example,

predictions, testimonies, conjectures, statements, and objections have the

 26

words-to-world direction of fit. Their point is to represent how things are in

the world

World-to-words direction of fit, when the illocutionary act is satisfied,

the world is transformed to fit the propositional content. Speech Acts with the

commisive or directive point such as, for example, promises, vows,

recommendation, supplication, and demands have the world-to-words

direction of fit. Their point is to get the world to be transformed by the future

course of action of the speaker (commissives) or of the hearer (directives) in

order to match the propositional content of the utterance. Speakers and hearer,

play such fundamental roles in the performance of speech act that language

distinguishes naturally two different Illocutionary points with the world-to-

words direction of fit: the commissive point, which has the speaker-based

world-to-words direction of fit. In the case of commissive utterances, the

responsibility for achieving the successes of fit is assigned to the speaker; in

the case of directive utterances, it is assigned to the hearer.

Double direction of fit, when the illocutionary act is satisfied, the

world is transformed by the present action of the speaker to fit the

propositional content by the fact that the speaker represents it as being so

transformed. Speech act with the declarative illocutionary point such as, for

example, acts of appointing, nominating, endorsing, and naming have the

double direction of fit. Their point is to get the world to match the

propositional content matches the world.

 27

Null or empty direction of fit, there is no question of success or failure

of fit, and their propositional content is in general presupposed to be true.

Speech act with expressive point such as, for example, apologies, thanks,

congratulations, and condolences have the null or empty direction of fit. Their

point is only to express a propositional attitude of the speaker about the state

of affairs represent that state of affairs as actual or to try to get it to be actual

in the world.

2.3.2.2 Mode of Achievement

The mode of achievement of the illocutionary point of an illocutionary

force is the component of that force which determines how its point must be

achieved on the propositional content in a successful performance of an act

with that force. For example, the mode of achievement of an act of begging,

which is to make a humble or polite attempt to get the hearer to do something,

is a special mode of achievement of the directive illocutionary point, since

there are many ways to achieve that point which are neither humble nor polite.

2.3.2.3 Propositional Content Conditions

Some illocutionary force impose the condition on the set of

prepositional that can be taken as propositional contents of act with that force

in context of utterance. Some propositional content conditions are determined

by their illocutionary point. Thus, for example, all directive illocutionary

 28

forces have the condition that their propositional content represents a future

course of action of the hearer at each context. Indeed a speaker cannot make a

linguistic attempt to get a hearer to do something unless he expresses the

proposition that the hearer will carry out a future action with the aim of

achieving a world-to words success of fit.

2.3.2.4 Preparatory Conditions

In his book, Vandervaken (1990: 114) said that the preparatory

condition determiner which proposition must presuppose when he performs

an illocutionary act with that force in a context of utterance. Many preparatory

conditions are determined by illocutionary point. For example, all acts whose

point is to get the hearer to do something – orders, requests, commands, etc. –

have as a preparatory condition that the hearer is able to do the act directed.

2.3.2.5 Sincerity Conditions

By performing an illocutionary act, the speaker also expresses

(feeling) mental states of certain psychological modes about the state of

affairs represented by the propositional content (Vandervaken, 1990: 117).

For example, a speaker who requests a hearer to do something expresses a

desire that he do it. Assertion expresses belief; apology expresses regret, a

promise expresses an intention, and so on.

 29

2.3.2.6 Degree of Strength

The mental states, which enter into the sincerity conditions of speech

acts, are expressed with different degrees of strength depending on the

illocutionary force. The speaker who makes a request expresses the desire that

the hearer do the act requested; but if he begs, beseeches, or implores, he

expresses a stronger desire than if he merely requests.

Based on the Vanderveken theory, the illocutionary force of directive

illocutionary act has the directive point, the neutral mode of achievement, the

degree of strength, the propositional content represents a future course of

action of the hearer, the preparatory condition that the hearer can carry out

that action, and the sincerity condition that the speaker desires or wants the

hearer to carry it out.