You are on page 1of 61

A Pragmatic Study of Euphemisms in American Presidents Inaugural Addresses

Posted on February 5, 2011 by China Papers 0

Abstract: Euphemism, a universal cultural and linguistic phenomenon, is a natural and indispensable part of English language. It is a form of language created in the early stage of human civilization to achieve ideal communication. It attracts great interests of many linguists and scholars who have studied it from the perspectives like semantics, rhetoric, culture or pragmatics etc. But most of their researches mainly study euphemisms from a broad perspective. This thesis is intended to do an empirical study and it analyzes euphemisms used in a specific field-Inaugural Addresses of American Presidents. H. P. Grice s Cooperative Principle (CP) and G. N. Leech s Politeness Principle (PP) function as the theoretical foundations of the present study. By doing so, this thesis hopes to enlarge the scope of euphemisms study from pragmatic perspective.Making addresses is important for human beings especially to those presidents because they deal with the relations between countries or regions etc, so the words that they use are more sensitive. Their addresses may even affect the relations between countries or the government images in its people, so the presidents, to meet a certain need, often use euphemisms as an effective instrument to violate some maxims of CP for observing the maxims of PP. In this thesis the writer tries to discover how maxims of CP are violated to observe PP in the Inaugural Addresses of American Presidents.This thesis consists of four chapters. Chapter One introduces the general information of euphemisms, including the definitions, classifications, functions and its formations. Chapter Two introduces the theoretical foundations of euphemisms. CP, the cornerstone theory of pragmatics, is brought forward in the 1960s by Paul Grice, an American linguistic philosopher, who concludes that natural language has its own logic. According to his theory, in making a conversation, the participants must be willing to cooperate; otherwise, it will not be possible for them to carry on the talk. Specifically, there are four maxims under this general principle: Quantity Maxim, Quality Maxim, Relevance Maxim and Manner Maxim. PP is proposed in 1980s by Geoffrey Leech, an English linguist, who regards politeness as a further development of the Face Theory and a supplement to CP. It is an important approach to minimize the expression of impolite beliefs and maximize the expression of polite ones. The maxims of PP include Tact Maxim, Generosity Maxim, Approbation Maxim, Modesty Maxim, Agreement Maxim and Sympathy Maxim. Chapter Three analyses euphemisms used in the four transcripts of the American Presidents Inaugural Addresses from the perspective of CP and PP. We find that euphemisms are frequently used and they violate the Quality, Quantity, or Manner Maxim of CP, but basically they observe the maxims of PP. Chapter four explains the significance of this study, which may shed some light on the translation of euphemisms in the inter-cultural communication.This thesis is primarily concerned with the study of the usage of euphemisms in American Presidents Inaugural Addresses from the theoretical perspective of

CP and PP. The main purpose is to discover how euphemistic effects are achieved in the use of English euphemisms with the hope to improve the interpretation or translation practice in .the political field Key words: Euphemism; American Presidents Inaugural Addresses; Pragmatic study; ;Cooperative Principle; Politeness Principle

Dear Visitor: Welcome to China Papers! We can provide you with the full text of this master's thesis in PDF format (Document No. M-2-248069), and you will need to pay only 19.99USD for our document delivery service. You can click here to complete online payment via PayPal. Your documents will be delivered to you via Paypal email within 2-36 hours from .the time we receive your order


An Essay Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Award of the Degree of the Bachelor of Arts (Hons.) in English

To ,The Department of English, Faculty of Arts, University of Ilorin .Ilorin, Nigeria

.May, 2011

CERTIFICATION This essay has been read and approved as meeting part of the requirements for the award of a Bachelor of Arts Degree (Hons.) in the Department of English of the .Faculty of Arts, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria


_______________ Supervisor Date Dr. T. A. Alabi


_______________ Date

Head of Department

Dr. S. T. Babatunde


_______________ Date

External Supervisor

DEDICATION ,To Him, who taught me what I knew not ,He guides me when all paths seem dark .My Lord, My Robb, Allah :And to them this day and all days ,She did rock me and hold me closely to her breast ,Looking into my pupils with great zest ,And he who toils everyday in sweat .Doing everything to give me the best

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Al-hamdulilahi Rabbi-l-alamin. All praises belong to the Almighty Allah for the completion of my first degree. May He continue to shower His blessings upon the soul of the noble Prophet Muhammad (S. A. W.), his household, companions, and to the Muslim ummah till the day of recompense. I acknowledge the effort of my supervisor, Dr. T. A. Alabi, for his support and guidance towards the completion of .this work My parents, Alhaji and Alhaja Adekunle, deserve great acknowledgement. All I could say is Robbi irhauma kama Robayani sogeera as Allah taught me. I also appreciate my ,brothers and sisters, Abu AbdulWaarith, Umm Hammed, Umm AbdulFawaz, Abu Islamiyah Adekunle Ibrahim Kola, Umm AbdulAfeez. They have been pivotal to my success as the ,lastborn of the house. Ajao Odunola Risqot, Abdullah Adesokan, Alfa Nurudeen, Bro Ashim .Abu Rodya are all worthy of my appreciation My gratitude to my room-mate, Onakunle Olayemi. I hope the wind of time will not blow away the dreams we shared, the moments we studied together, our E5s, B halfs, our coloured rice. They form a story that make us smile. I will not .forget my younger brothers, Abdullah Babatunde and Rosheed Kolapo ,My course-mates and friends, my imam and well-wishers at Sanrab Mosque Imam Abu AbdRahman, Alfa Ismail, Alfa Musa, Alfa Sheriffdeen, Alfa Taofeek and .others who are numerous to mention are all appreciated. Jazakumlah khaeran Companions at the Ogidi Villa, Falode Wole (Proff.), Mr Taiwo, Toheebat, Pa

.Ajayi, Dr. Tolu. I say with awe thank you

ABSTRACT Given the fact that communication is chiefly achieved through language, it is therefore important to study and account for how speakers encode their utterances and how meanings are decoded from the utterances during communication. This has made ,us to attempt a pragmatic analysis of President Goodluck Jonathans inaugural speech Nigeria: Our Nation in Mourning, because of its socio-political importance with a view to accounting for how the president has encoded his utterances and how meanings are generated from the utterances in the speech. All the eight utterances in ,the transcribed text were analysed using pragmatic tools, which are speech acts context, indexicals, implicature and relevance. This study has revealed to us the effects of cognition, social principles and context on the presidents utterances and showed the president as a careful user of words and a performer of many actions with few utterances. Therefore to succeed as a communicator, and indeed a politician, rests greatly on the way one is able to choose and arrange his words as well as considering .other non-linguistic factors

TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page Certification Dedication Acknowledgements Abstract Table of Contents i ii iii iv v vi

CHAPTER ONE GENERAL INTRODUCTION Background to the Study and Statement of the Research Problem 1 5.0 Research Questions Aims and Objectives of the Study Scope of the Study Justification of the Study Research Method Data Description Conclusion 2 5.5 2 5.2 3 5.3 3 5.4 4 5.5 4 5.6 5 5.7

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction History of Pragmatics 6 2.0 6 2.5

Definitions of Pragmatics Theories of Pragmatics

7 2.2 8 2.3

Speech Acts Theory

8 2.3.5

J.L. Austins Contributions 9 Searles Contributions 11 13 2.3.2 15 2.4 15 2.4.5 18 2.4.2 20 2.4.3 24 2.5

Relevance Theory Elements of Pragmatics Implicature Indexicals Context Conclusion

CHAPTER THREE DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION Introduction Data Analysis Data Discussion Conclusion 25 3.0 25 3.5 39 3.2 43 3.3

CHAPTER FOUR SUMMARY, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION Summary Summary of Findings 44 4.0 45 4.5


46 4.2



APPENDICES Appendix I Appendix II 51 54

CHAPTER ONE GENERAL INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY AND STATEMENT OF THE 5.0 RESEARCH PROBLEM .There is no gainsaying the fact that the essence of language is communication Many attempts have been made to describe what an effective communication is. One issue that runs through all the attempts is the area of meaning generation as a pivotal factor for an effective communication. Over the years, meaning generation has remained problematic because most of the approaches developed to explain how meaning is generated rely on the linguistic knowledge of the language users without looking at the extralinguistic factors, therefore making those approaches to be inadequate. It was against this backdrop that pragmatics emerged in order to account for how meaning is generated in a communicative act by considering both the .linguistic and the non-linguistic factors The role of communication in governance cannot be overemphasised. This assertion supports the importance of delivering an inaugural speech on assumption of duty as an administrator. A presidential inaugural speech gives the president the first chance to use the official voice, which should indicate the direction of the new

.administration. Every utterance in such a speech communicates meaning It is therefore important to embark on a pragmatic analysis of PresidentGoodluck Jonathans inaugural speech, titled, Nigeria: Our Nation in

Mourning, looking at the tokens of utterances in the speech with a view to accounting .for how meaning is generated from the speech RESEARCH QUESTIONS 5.5 In order to account for how meaning is generated from PresidentGoodluck :Jonathans inaugural speech, some questions have emerged and they are

In what waycan context contribute to generating meanings from this .5 ?speech What is the role of cognition in the way the president encoded .2 ?hisutterances Does cognition play any role in decoding meanings from the presidents .3 ?inaugural speech ?Howdo social principles affect the utterances made by the president .4 ?Howdoes the president performs actionswith his utterances .5 AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 5.2 This studyaimsto account for how meanings are generated from ,PresidentGoodluck Jonathans inaugural speech, Nigeria: Our Nation in Mourning :and study the ways he has encoded his utterances. The objectives of the study are to .Examine the impactsof context in the speech .5 Evaluate the effects of social principles on howthe president has .2 .communicated .Examine the role of cognition in the way utterances are interpreted .3


Assess how people calculate what is not linguistically expressed from what.4 .is expressed linguistically

Examine the way the president performs actions with the utterances in the .5 .speech SCOPE OF THE STUDY 5.3 This research report, a pragmatic analysis of PresidentGoodluck Jonathans inaugural speech, will be studied using some selectedtheories of pragmatics which are ,speech acts theory, relevance theory; and pragmatic elements which are implicature -indexicals and context. The theories and elements chosen are from the social .psychological and cognitive-psychological approaches to pragmatics These theories and elements will be deployed in the analysis of President .Goodluck Jonathans inaugural speech, titled, Nigeria: Our Nation in Mourning JUSTIFICATION 5.4 Generating meanings from utterances requires more than just the linguistic knowledge. Non-linguistic factors are also needed to be considered so that a good account of how communications take place can be achieved, especially in a speech .like this A lot of researches have been done on speeches, using pragmatic tools.For instance, Pragma-Rhetorical Strategies in Selected Speeches of Nigerian President OlusegunObasanjo by Babatunde and Odepidan(2009). The researcher notes that most of the works are products of only the social-psychological approach to .pragmatics without employing the cognitive-psychological approach


This work is distinct because the researcher draws eclectically,theories from the social-psychological approach(speech acts theory, implicature, indexicalsand context) and the cognitive-psychological approach(relevance theory) to analyse the inaugural speech. Also, the socio-political importance of the speech as one made at the ascension of the vice president after the death of ademocratic president in office .makes this research worthwhile This work will be of help to upcoming researchers, linguists and Nigerians .who are politically conscious RESEARCH METHOD 5.5 This study applies the case study research design by applying some selected ,pragmatic theories and elements on President Goodluck Jonathans inaugural speech .titled, Nigeria: Our Nation in Mourning The transcribed text is divided into eight utterances based on paragraphs (each paragraph discusses a subject matter).All the utterances in the speech will be analysed with pragmatic theories and elements, which are speech acts theory, relevance theory,implicature, indexicals and context. This is because the researcher intends to .achieve a fairly high level of investigation on each utterance DATA DESCRIPTION 5.6 Nigeria: Our Nation in Mourningis the title of the Presidents inaugural speechdelivered by President Goodluck Jonathan on his assumption of office on May as the 14thPresident of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. His ascension to the 2050 ,6


,office of the president was as a result of the death of President Umar Musa Yaradua .who died after a protracted illness at the Presidential Villa in Abuja on May 5, 2010

.Following the Nigerian constitution, the vice president became the president This necessitates that President Goodluck Jonathan delivers an inaugural speech as the new president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The speech was delivered after he was sworn in on May 6, 2010 at the Presidential Palace, Abuja and it was .broadcast to the whole nation through the media As an inaugural speech, he discussed different issues like the death of the .president, electoral reform, the Niger-Delta crisis and some other pertinent issues The utterances that make up the speech are numbered and presented at the appendix section. This is done so that we can realize a good presentation and clear .analysis CONCLUSION 5.7 In this chapter, we have presented a general introduction to the study by looking at the background to the study as well as the statement of the research problem, the research questions have been raised, the aims and objectives of the study have been made known. Also, the scope of the study, justification, the research .method and the data description haveall been presented We will therefore proceed to the next chapter where we shall trace the history of pragmatics, review some of its definitions, and finally review our selected theories .)and elements(as expressed in our scope of the study




This chapter shall trace the history of pragmatics, look at its different definitions, review some selected theories and elements in the field as well as their .contributors HISTORY OF PRAGMATICS 2.5 A diplomat who says yes means maybe; a diplomat who says maybe means no;and a diplomat who says no is no diplomat (Korta& Perry, 2006).This quotation which is credited to Charles M. de Talleyrand(1754-1838) vividly shows that communication involves more than what we literally say. This shows that .adequate meaning cannot be found in the plain sense of a word Efforts at establishing a pragmatic approach is said to be dated back to the s and the late 1970s when several attempts were made to fill the vacuum created5960 ,by syntax and semantics in meaning generation(Mey 2001, p.4). At this period philosophers who were also interested in language discovered that linguistic factors only cannot guarantee good interpretation and so, non-linguistic factors shouldalso be considered in meaning generation. They believe that the aim of pragmatics is to construct explicit rules which take semantic representation, description of context and background assumptions as input and yield pragmatic interpretations as output Wilson 1985, p. 639).Ayodabo(1997, p.134) quotes Lawal(1995) that pragmatics(


evolved as a result of the limitations of structural semantics to capture satisfactorily .the sociological and other non-linguistic dimensions of verbal communication

The acclaimed father of pragmatics is Charles Morris(1938) who defines pragmatics in terms of three correlates: signs, the objects to which the signs are applicable and sign users or interpreters. He says pragmatics studies whatever relations there are between signs and the sign users or interpreters (cited from

Verschueren 2003, p.6). Since then, there have been a lot of developments in the field of pragmatics traceable to Austin, Searle, Grice etc. who have developed theories for .doing pragmatics DEFINITIONS OF PRAGMATICS 2.2 :There are many views on what pragmatics is. Crystal (1985, p. 240) says Pragmatics is the study of language from the point of view of users, especially of the choices they make, constraints they encounter in using language in social interaction and the effects their use of the language has on other participants .in the act of communication This definition emphasises the study of participants personalities in utterances, the factors that govern their choices and the effects of their utterances .after they have been made. This definition is in line with Watson and Hills (1993, p view (cited from Osisanwo 2008, p. 54-55) that pragmatics is the study of )46 language from the view point of the user, especially the choices, the constraints he


meets with in employing then use of the language and the effects the use has on the .communication situation For Yule (2003, p.3), pragmatics is concerned with the study of meaning as .)communicated by the speaker (or writer) and interpreted by a listener (or reader Spencer-Oatey and Zegarac (2002, p. 74) describes pragmatics as concerned with the interrelationship between language form, (communicated) messages and language users. These two definitions concentrate on utterances meanings as .affected by the users From all the views presented above, we can deduce that pragmatics studies

and gives account of meaning in context, the factors that affect the making of .utterances by users and the effects of the utterances THEORIES OF PRAGMATICS 2.3 Theories of pragmatics are principles which are laid down for doing pragmatics. The theories which will be reviewed are the speech acts theory and .relevance theory SPEECH ACTS THEORY 2.3.5 Linguists observe that humans use their utterances to perform actions. In a view to study the actions performed with utterances, speech acts theory was introduced. Austin, the exponent of speech acts theory, used this term to refer to an .)utterance and the total situation in which the utterance is issued (Thomas 1995, p.51 Mey (2001, p.95) says that speech acts are verbal actions happening in the world. He further added that by uttering a speech act, one does something with his


words (p.95).Yule (2002) corroborates this by describing speech acts as actions that .)are performed with utterances (p.47

With these, we can say that speech acts are communicative acts performed with the use of oral or written language in order to bring about a change of affairs in the world. The contributions of those that worked on speech acts theory are reviewed :below J.L. AUSTINS CONTRIBUTION The exponent of speech acts theory is J.L. Austin, a British philosopher who was intrigued by the way we use words to do different things. His posthumous publication, How to do Things with Words (1962), had an enormous impact on linguistics. In this publication, he made a distinction between constantives and

performatives. He classifies constantives as utterances that can be evaluated along a dimension of truth;performatives as utterances which cannot be said to be true or false .but can be evaluated by a dimension of felicity Korta and Perry (2006) assert that Austin realised some problems with his distinction which makes him therefore to replace the constantive-performative .elements with a threefold distinction which are locutions, illocutions and perlocutions i. Locutionary act: It is the actual words uttered (Thomas 1995, p.49). Yule p.48) says that to produce a meaningful linguistic expression is to ,2002( .perform a locutionaryact ii. Illocutionary act: This is the purpose behind making an utterance. It is the .function we want our utterances to perform


iii. Perlocutionary act: The effect that performing the locutionary act has on the .hearer is referred to as perlocutionary act In addition to these, Austin proposes the felicity conditions that a speech act :must meet before being considered appropriate and successful. They are A1. There must exist an accepted conventional procedure having a conventional effect, that procedure to include the uttering of certain words by certain persons in .certain circumstances A2. The particular person and circumstances in a given case must be appropriate for .the invocation of the particular procedure invoked B. The procedure must be executed by all participants both i. correctly and .ii.completely C. i. Where, as often, the procedure is designed for use by persons having certain thoughts or feelings, or for the inauguration of certain consequential conduct on the

part of any participant, then a person participating in and so invoking the procedure must in fact have those thoughts or feelings, and the participants must intend so to ;conduct themselves and further .ii. Must actually so conduct themselves subsequently

58 )Austin 1962, p.14-15( Also, Austin categorised illocutionary acts into five according to the functions :they perform. They are .i. Verdictives: They give a finding or verdict .ii. Exercitives: They exercise power or influence

.iii. Commissives: They promise or announce intentions .iv. Behabitives: They express attitude and social behaviour .v. Expositives: They fit utterances into arguments or conversations Despite all these contributions, his work has faced criticisms, especially by Searle. The criticisms are that his work is incomplete, that his illocutionary acts classification overlaps and have incompatible elements. Let us therefore look at .Searles contributions SEARLES CONTRIBUTIONS Searles contribution made speech acts to adopt a social view of linguistic meaning by making it a theory of constitutive rules for performing illocutionary acts Korta& Perry, 2006). He established himself as an authority in this field with several( publications (1969, 1975,etc.). While he adopts the threefold distinction of speech acts by Austin (1962), he focused more on the illocutionary acts classification. His :classifications of illocutionary acts are ,i. Assertives: These are used to express beliefs. They are statements of facts

.conclusions, etc .ii. Directives: These are used by speakers to get someone else to do something .They are commands, orders, requests, etc .iii. Commissives: They are used to commit the speaker to some future actions .They are promises, pledges, threats, etc


iv. Expressives: Feelings of speakers are stated with expressives i.e. the ,psychological states of speakers. They can be statements of displeasure, joy .sadness, etc v. Declaratives: They reflect the institutional role of a speaker. They change the .world via their utterances :Apart from these, he proposes new felicity conditions which are .i. Propositional Content Condition: Specification of a future state of affairs ii. Preparatory Condition: The speaker has adequate information to form a valid .opinion about the future state of affairs iii. Sincerity Condition: The speaker believes that the future state of affairs will .indeed be as described iv. Essential condition: The utterance counts as an act committing the speaker to .the likelihood of the future state of affairs to be as described

20 .)Verschueren 2003, p.23( Searle also contributes what is known as indirect speech act. Quoting from Thomas (1995, p. 93), Searle (1969) says that an indirect speech act is one performed by a means of another speech act. Searle views indirect speech act as a combination

of two acts, a primary illocutionary act and a secondary one, where the primary act .)operates through and in force the secondary one(Mey 2001, p.113 The study of these conventional conditions for illocutionary acts, together with the study of their correct taxonomy constitute the core of speech acts theory .)korta& Perry, 2006(

Going through all the contributions, this research report shall make do of only the illocutionary acts classification by Searle in our analysis because of its simplicity .and succinctness RELEVANCE THEORY 2.3.2 The relevance theory was developed by Sperber and Wilson(1986). This development was as a result of Grices (1975) implicature. Sperber and Wilson ;represent the cognitive-psychological school of pragmatics (Wilson 1985, p.639 :Spencer-Oatey&Zegarac 2002, p.83). In their major publication, Relevance Communication and Cognition, they show their dissatisfaction with Griceanimplicature because it is based on social principles in human communication i.e. the co-operative principle). Grundy(2001, p. 101) says that Sperber and Wilson( want a theory which goes beyond the probabilistic and enables addresses to be sure .that they have recovered the most relevant of a potentially infinite set of inferences Korta and Perry (2006) also added that the principle of relevance is much more explicit than Grices co-operative principle and maxims. This is because Sperber and Wilsons theory creates an empirical platform for working out inferences .from available contextual knowledge and cognitions recognition Sperber and Wilson believe that what people say is relevant and they recognise the mind in drawing inferences.Also, they assert thatan input is relevant to an individual when it connects with available contextual assumptions to yield positive :cognitive effects. This is captured in their theory that

i. Human cognition is geared towards the maximisation of relevance


ii. Every act of ostensive communication (i.e. an utterance) communicates a .presumption of its own optimal relevance

22 .)Cited from Korta and Perry, 2006( Grundy (2000,p.105-106) comes with six principles of relevance. These :principles emanate from Sperber and Wilsons (1986) theory on relevance. They are i. Every utterance comes with a guarantee of its own optimal relevance. An individuals particular cognitive goal at a given moment is always an instance of .a mere general goal, maximising the relevance of the information processed ii. Addresses cannot prove the relevance of the utterance they hear without the context consideration, the speaker must make some assumptions about the .hearers cognitive ability .iii. The determination of sense requires an inferential process iv. The combination of a propositional form of an utterance and .extralinguistic factors enable one to deduce the relevant understanding .v. The most accessible interpretation is the most relevant vi. Context is not treated as a given common ground, but rather as a set of more or less accessible items of information which are stored in short term .or manifest in the physical environment In summary, relevance theory postulates a balance between processing effort and determining the relevance of an utterance. Through this theory, we appreciate the

importance of context in explaining how inferences are generated from what is said and what is not linguistically expressed. This theory relies on human cognition as a guarantor of successful communication in contrast to the Griceansimplicature that is

based on social principles. An approach to pragmatics using relevance theory is in agreement with Kempsons(1986) definition of pragmatics, quoted from Osisanwo(2008, p.54),that pragmatics is the study of the general cognitive principles involved in the retrieval of information from an utterance. This theory is said to be .)one of the contemporary developments in pragmatics (Korta and Perry, 2006

ELEMENTS OF PRAGMATICS 2.4 IMPLICATURE 2.4.5 One of Yules (2002) definitions of pragmatics is that pragmatics studies how more gets communicated than is said (p. 3). One area that is concerned with this is implicature. The term implicature was coined by H.P. Grice in his influential publication, Logic and Conversation(1975). While Yule(2002, p.35) defines ,implicature as an additional conveyed meaning, Fromkin, Rodman and Hyams(2007 :p.206) defineimplicature as Deductions that are not made strictly on the basis of the

content expressed in the discourse, rather, they are made in accordance with the conversational maxims, taking into account both the linguistic meaning of the utterance as well .as the particular circumstances in which the utterance is made The two definitions given above indicate that when speakers mean more than what they linguistically express, such meaning that is not expressed linguistically is .called implicature


As the proponent, Grice identifies two types of implicature which are conventional and conversational implicature. Conventional implicature is related to semantics. According to Yule (2002, p. 45), conventional implicatureis not based on .the co-operative principle Conversational implicature on the other hand is concerned with pragmatics. It emerges from the co-operative principle. One may however question the use of conversational implicature as an element of pragmatics in a speech without :conversation. This question has been rightly answered by Wilson(1985, p.639) thus Grice argued that many aspects of utterance interpretationtraditionally regarded as conventional or semantic, couldbe more explanatory treated as conversational or .pragmatic This discovery by Wilson (1985) in Grices works supports our application of .conversational implicature in a speech without conversation To explain this implicature, Grice introduced the co-operative principle which is a social-psychological perspective of how communication takes place between or among people (Wilson 1985, p.639; Spencer-Oatey&Zegarac 2002, p.83). Grice states in the co-operative principle that make your contribution such as is required at the stageat which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or directionof the talk exchange in .)which you are engaged (Korta and Perry 2006 Wilson states furtherin his observation of Grices works that, according to Grice, the pragmatic content of an utterance should in some sense follow from a knowledge of thecontext of utteranceand general principles of


truthfulness,informativeness, relevance and clarity which speakers areexpected to .)follow (Wilson 1985, p. 639 The above quotation talks about the co-operative principle of Grice. Grice therefore developed four conversational maxims from his co-operative principle :which are

i. Maxim of Quantity: Make your contributions as informative as is required. Do .not say more than is required ii. Maxim of Quality: Make your contribution true. Do not say what you believe .to be false.Do not say for which you lack adequate knowledge iii. Maxim of Relation: Make your contribution relevant and appropriate to the .immediate need at each stage of the transaction iv. Maxim of Manner: Be perspicuous, avoid ambiguity, obscurity, and strive for brevity and order. This maxim deals with how the contribution to a discourse .is made ,When any of these maxims are not observed either by flouting, violating infringing, opting out of a maxim or suspending a maxim, this results to implicature .)Thomas 1995, p. 63-64( Grice also developed what he termed generalised and particularised implicature (Grundy 2000, p.81). Generalised conversational implicature arises irrespective of the context in which the utterance occur i.e. the utterance do not rely on context before the implicature in it can be known. On the other hand, particularised


conversational implicature requires that the context of the utterance should be known .before the implicature can be generated Levinson(1983) observes that Grices maxims clearly spell out the way

conversations can be carried out efficiently, rationally and cooperatively. While ,.Grices contributions has been praised and further developed by Levinson (1983),etc .Sperber and Wilson(1986, 1995) have been their major critic INDEXICALS 2.4.2 Indexicalsare context sensitive expressions. David(2007) defines indexicals -aslinguistic expressions whose reference shift from context to context. Spencer Oatey and Zegarac (2002 p. 78) says that indexicals are linguistic items that point to contextually salient referents without naming them explicitly. These definitions .indicate thatindexicals rely on context to get their meanings Indexicals are also referred to as deixis. The origin of deixis is traced by Yule (2002) to a Greek term that means pointing via language. That is why he .)defines it as a linguistic form used to accomplish pointing in language (p.9 Mey(2001,p. 54) says that the chief linguistic means of expressing an indexical relationship are called deictic elements. With this opinion from Mey .we arrive at the idea that deixisand indexicalscan be used interchangeably ,)2005( Various scholars of pragmatics have classified indexicals (or deixis) into three types(Grundy,2000; Mey, 2001; Yule, 2002 & David, 2007). The three types :identified are person, place and the time indexicals. Mey(2002, p. 54) expresses that


,Since all indexing or pointing is done by human beings andtherefore all pointing expressions have to be related to theuttering person, pointing in a particular place and at a particulartime involves the traditional philosophic

.and linguistic categoriesof person, place and time :The three types of indexicals are explained below i. Person Indexicals: This classification belongs to the category of linguistic expressions used for the speakers, addressees and others. They are used to .indicate people. Examples are I, you, we, they, he, his, she, her, etc ii. Place Indexicals: This is also called spatial deixis by Yule(2002, p. 9). They .are used to indicate the location of people and things being discussed .Examples of place indexicals are there, here, behind, above, up, etc iii. Time Indexicals:They can also be called temporal deixis. Time indexicals refer to events,persons or objects that are near or away from the speaker or the hearer in relation to time. They are reflected in adverbs of time and the tense .of the verb. Examples of time indexicals are later, now, then, etc From the above discussions on indexicals, their importance in pragmatics is made obvious because indexicals help the interlocutors to identify referents in terms of the three classifications given above. A listener needs to assign reference to the words that a speaker uses. When people know what they are talking about, decoding meaning will be easy. Thesubmission by Grundy (2000) on indexicals is germane. He Grundy) says that theproperty of linking what is referred to to a backgroundor(


context is what causes us to categorise deixis, andindexicality generally, as .)pragmatics(Grundy 2000, p. 43 CONTEXT 2.4.3

Many definitions of pragmatics place important value on the role of context Blakemore, 1992; Ayodabo, 1997,etc.). Infact, we can say that pragmatic analysis is( impossible withoutcontext. Spencer-Oatey and Zegarac(2002, p.83) defines it as the

set of assumptions that have a bearing on the production and the interpretation of .particular communicative acts ,Korta and Perry (2006), after evaluating Kaplan and Stalnakersschemes express their own view on context as anything in the indefinitely large surrounding of anutterance,from the intentions of the speaker to theprevious topics ofconversation .to the objectdiscernible in the environment We can observe that Spencer-Oatey and Zegaracs (2002, p. 83) definition draws insight from the cognitive-psychological approach to pragmatics by referring to context as relating to what exist as assumptions in the mind. That of Korta and Perrys definition draws eclectically from the social-psychological approach and the )2006( .cognitive-psychological approach to pragmatics What is referred to as context can be traced to Malinowski (1923),a term that he used to describe his findings at the Trobrian Islands (Verschueren 2003, p. 75). He :Malinowski) says(


Exactly as in the reality of spoken or written language,a word without linguistic context is a mere figment andstands ,for nothing itself, so in the reality of a spokenwritten tongue .the utterance has no meaning exceptinthe context ofsituation

29 .)Verschueren 2003, p. 75( Firth(1957) furthers Malinowskis concept of context and proposed three

:categories of context of situation (citedfrom Odebunmi 2006,p. 39), which are .A. The verbal features of participants, persons, and personalities .i. The verbal action of the participants .ii. The non-verbal action of the participants .B. The relevant objects .C. The effect of the verbal action The two above authorities(Malinowski and Firth) view context similarly as a social .phenomenon )Later developments on context feature contributors like Hymes(1964). Hymes (1964 ,sees context as having a number of features like participants, topic, setting, channel code, message form, key and purpose(cited from Osisanwo 2008,p.78). Another is .that of Hallidays (1978) context as comprising field, mode and tenor Apparently, the above identified contributions on context have been subsumed by a broader view of what context is (by Lawal1997; Cuttings 2002; Verschueren )Osisanwo 2008, etc.). The earlier contributions of Firth (1957), Hymes (1964 ;2003

and Halliday (1978) on context now fall under the situational context identified by .modern contributors on context Lawal (1997cited from Osisanwo 2008, p.117-118)develops the models of .the aspect of a pragmatic theory in which he identifies six contexts of an utterance .They are cosmological, sociological, social, psychological, situational and linguistic Cuttings (2002) categorised context into situational, background knowledge .and co-textual context Verschueren (2003) based his own classification on the mental world, social .world and the physical world ,Osisanwos (2008) classification of context includes the physical context .socio-cultural context, psychological context and linguistic context

)From the above contributions on context, we can subsume Lawals (1997 cosmological, sociological, and social context under Cuttings (2002) background -knowledge context. Verschuerens (2003) social world and Osisanwos (2008) socio cultural context canbe subsumed also under Cuttings (2002) background knowledge context. The rationale for this is to avoid repetition and because Cuttings explanation of background knowledge context captures social, sociological, cosmological, and .socio-cultural contexts With this, four types of contexts have been identified. They are situational orphysical context, background knowledge context, psychological context ormental world and co-textual context or linguistic context. However, co-textual context or linguistic context will not be considered in our analysis because another element that


has been earlier identified in this report, indexicals, will take care of most part of what ,linguistic context entails in pragmatics. This decision is supported by Grundys (2000 p.43) expression that indexicality provides clear evidence that language is not just an autonomous or self-contained phenomenon but that aspect of context is organised as grammatical and Spencer-Oatey and Zegaracs (2002 p. 77) definition of indexicals as linguistic items that point to contextually salient referents without naming them .explicitly From all these, we now arrive at three types of contexts which are situational context, psychological context, and background knowledge context and they shall be :explained below

.i. Situational Context: This is the immediate physical co-presence ,Osisanwo (2008) calls it physical context. It includes the time, place .participants, channel, etc. of the speech situation ii. Background Knowledge Context: It includes the cultural context, general knowledge that most people have about areas of life and interpersonal ,knowledge. Also, as we have earlier mentioned, it includes the social .sociological, cosmological, and socio-cultural knowledge .iii. Psychological Context:Verschueren (2003) also calls it the mental world .It is the state of mind or the emotional status of the participants .These three identified contexts will be deployed in our analysis


CONCLUSION 2.5 In this chapter, we have been able to trace the history of pragmatics, reviewed different definitions of pragmatics, some theories and elements used in pragmatics as well as their contributors. We have also spelt out the elements that we will use in our analysis so that our research questions can be answered. We will therefore apply the .theories and elements in the next chapter


CHAPTER THREE DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION INTRODUCTION 3.0 This chapter shall contain two sections. The first section shall be the section where our data will be analysed using our selected elements and the second section shall be the section where we shall discuss the observations that emanate from our .analysis DATA ANALYSIS 3.5 UTTERANCE 1 SPEECH ACTS .)Direct Illocution: Assertive (stating .)Indirect Illocution: Expressive (lamenting Perlocution:It has the effect of catching the attention of Nigerians and to make them .become sober CONTEXT Situational Context: President Goodluck Jonathan is the speaker while Nigerians are the primary audience. The activity is a televised delivery of inaugural speech. The place of delivery is the Presidential Palace in Abuja on May 6, 2010. The speaker was the acting president since February 9, 2010, when the senate through a resolution

.empowered him to serve as the acting president due to the illness of the late president .Mental Context: The feeling of sorrow at the death of President Umar Yaradua


Background Knowledge Context: A close relationship exists between the speaker and the listeners. The speaker believes that Nigerians understand idioms and the society expects that euphemism should be used to convey unpleasant news. The late .president was sick before his death INDEXICALS Person Indexicals: My and I. The referent of these indexicals is President Goodluck .Jonathan Time Indexicals: Is refers to the present state of the speaker. Received indicates that the speaker has heard the news of President Yaraduas death before the time of .his speech IMPLICATURE The use of the idiom passing on flouts the maxim of manner. The idiom implies that the former president has died. The speaker implies that he is not happy with the death .of the former president RELEVANCE )The utterance is relevant. The speaker has used an idiomatic expression (euphemism to encode his utterance because he assumes that Nigerians have knowledge about the meaning of idioms and about the pleasant way that death news is to be conveyed. The presence of procedural encoding expressions which are deep sense of loss and profound sorrow help us in drawing these inferences: the former president, Umar .Yaradua is dead and the new PresidentGoodluck Jonathan is sad about it


UTTERANCE 2 SPEECH ACTS .)Direct Illocution:Assertive(reporting and stating .)Indirect Illocution:Expressive (lamenting Perlocution:It is said to have an effect of creating a mental picture of how the late .president died so that Nigerians can become sombre CONTEXT Situational Context:President Jonathan and other Nigerians are the Participants. The activity is the delivery of the presidential inaugural speech at the Presidential Palace in Abuja on May 6, 2010. There is a close relationship between the speaker and Nigerians. As the acting president, the speaker is believed to be knowledgeable about .the situation that surrounded the death of the president Mental Context: The speaker feels sorrowful at the death of President Yaradua and .expects that Nigerians also will be in the same mood Background Knowledge Context: The late President was ill and he had sought for medical treatment outside the country before he finally died. There has been anxiety in the country before his death and so, several stories have emerged about his death and the situation that surrounded it. The listeners also need to know that Nigerians are .religious, and it is expected that death news should be taken as the will of God INDEXICALS Person Indexicals: Our and We. They refer collectively to the speaker, President .Jonathan and other Nigerians


Time Indexicals: Passed away indicates that President Yaradua had died before .the time of the speakers speech. Submit shows the present state of the participants Has placed shows the effect of the death news before the time of the speech .delivery. Yesterday evening refers to the late part of the 5th day of May, 2010 .This refers to the death of the late President at the moment while he was in office IMPLICATURE The speaker flouts the maxim of manner by using the idiom passed away which implies died. Other implicatures arising from this utterance are that the former president died peacefully and not painfully as most Nigerians were thinking because of his protracted illness; that his death occurred in Nigeria and not elsewhere; and that .Nigerians are religious RELEVANCE The speaker assumes that Nigerians are familiar with the use of idioms as he had done in the first utterance. He is also aware of the anxiety Nigerians had when the late president was ill. Nigerians are also willing to know about when and where the late president died. The speaker recognises the intentions of Nigerians and that is why he has fully explicated his utterance by using the adverb peacefully and provided information on the date, time and place of the presidents death. We can therefore infer that the president died peacefully and it is humane to mourn, regardless of .religion



SPEECH ACTS .)Direct Illocution: Assertive (stating .)Indirect Illocution:Commissive (pledging) and expressive (sympathising Perlocution: It has the effect of assuring the family of the late president of the .support of the speaker and other Nigerians CONTEXT Situational Context:President Jonathan is the speaker and other Nigerians are the audience. The primary audience is the family of the late president. The activity is a broadcast speech delivery of inaugural speech by the president on his assumption of office at the Presidential Palace in Abuja on May 6, 2010. As the new first citizen of Nigeria, the speaker pledges on behalf of other Nigerians to support the late .presidents family, hence, makes the family of the late president the primary audience .Mental Context: The speaker feels sympathetic towards the late presidents family Background Knowledge Context: The speaker believes that his audience understands idioms and that the family of the late president is mourning. The listeners .are expected to know that the late president has a political pedigree INDEXICALS Person Indexicals: Our is used to refer collectively to the speaker and other .Nigerians. I is referring to only the speaker, President Jonathan .Time Indexicals: Stand by and offer indicates the present action of the speaker


IMPLICATURE .The use of the idiom stand by flouts the maxim of manner. It implies a promise .The speaker implies that the family of the late president will be supported

RELEVANCE The speaker knew that the family of the late president will be mourning. Nigerians also expect that the speaker say something about the bereaved family.The bereaved family also await the response of the new president. The speaker still uses an idiom stand by to convey his intention because he still relies on the assumption that Nigerians have the knowledge about idioms. The recognition of these intentions by the participants makes the utterance relevant. We can infer that the speaker is .promising the bereaved family his support and other Nigerians support UTTERANCE 4 SPEECH ACTS .)Direct Illocution:Assertive (stating and praising .)Indirect Illocution: Expressive (lamenting Perlocution:It has the effect of making Nigerians to recall and appreciate the .contributions of the late president towards the growth and development of Nigeria CONTEXT Situational Context: The activity is the delivery of President Jonathans inaugural .speech. Nigerians are the audience. The speech is broadcast on May 6, 2010 ,Mental Context: The speaker is recalling the contributions of the late president .therefore lamenting


Background Knowledge Context:The death of President Yaradua and the .assumptions that Nigerians understand euphemisms are the background knowledge The listeners also need to know that the dead president was the boss of the speaker and he has a great political profile. There was an intimate relationship between the .speaker and the late president: President- Vice President relationship

INDEXICALS Person Indexicals: He and His are referring to the late President, Umar .Yaradua.Our refers to President Jonathan and other Nigerians ,Time Indexicals: Would and will refer to future actions. Was, displayed left, created and lost indicate the actions of the dead president in the past (when .)he was alive IMPLICATURE The implicatures that the first sentence would have resulted to has been cancelled in the sentences that follow. However, the speaker still flouts the maxim of manner with the use of euphemisms exit and lost which results to an implicature. These euphemisms imply death. In the utterance, the speaker implies that the late .presidents contribution should be appreciated RELEVANCE The speaker has fully explicated his utterance. The speaker intends to share the achievement of the late president with Nigerians. Nigerians also expect that the new president says something about his predecessor. In addition, the background knowledge that the late president was dead helps us to decode the meaning of the


words exit and loss to mean death. From therecognition of these intentions and the context, we can infer that the former president is dead and that he contributed .immensely to the Nigerian society when he was alive UTTERANCE 5 SPEECH ACTS Direct Illocution:Assertive (stating), Directive (urging) and Commissive .)commanding(

.Indirect Illocution:No indirect illocution. The illocution is direct Perlocution: The utterance is made with the effect of persuading Nigerians towards .upholding the good values and aspirations of Nigeria CONTEXT Situational Context: The activity is the delivery of President Jonathans inaugural .speech. Nigerians are the audience. The speech is broadcast on May 6, 2010 Mental Context: The mood is still mournful, however, the speaker is now addressing .the issues of national interest Background Knowledge Context:The listeners are expected to know the ,constitutional provision backing the speaker to become the president (i.e. chapter 6 section 146, subsection 1 of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria that states that the vice president shall hold the office of president if the office of the president becomes vacant by reason of death.). In addition, President Yaradua isthe only democratic president that died while in office and that his death is the only .sad event that occurred at the moment the speaker becomes the president


INDEXICALS Person Indexicals: I and me refer to the speaker, President Goodluck .Jonathan.We and ours refer to President Jonathan and other Nigerians Time Indexicals: Having taken indicates that the action of oath taking is in the .past. Urge indicates the speakers action at the present IMPLICATURE There are several implicatures in this utterance. Firstly, the speaker has flouted the maxim of quantity when he said these sad and unusual circumstances. There is no adequate information about what the speaker mean. He possibly implies the death of a

democratic president in Nigeria while in office. Secondly, he has cancelled the implicatures that his use of while this is a major burden on me might result to by .adding and indeed the entire nation. This is one of the features of implicature Lastly, the use of euphemism departed flouts the maxim of manner. The speaker .implies the death of his predecessor RELEVANCE The speaker assumes that Nigerians are not ignorant about the history of Nigeria and the present situation. That is why he has referred to a plural context. Nigerians, as the audience, are only knowledgeable that the late Yaradua is the only democratic president that died in office and that his death was the only sad event that has happened at that moment. Processing the meaning of the utterance is difficult because the whole intentions of the speaker are not recognised. However,from the little background knowledge and the utterance uttered, we infer that the speaker has


assumed the president in a sad atmosphere; he is also calling on Nigerians to .cooperate with him as a collective effort to achieve success UTTERANCE 6 SPEECH ACTS .)Illocution: Commissive (promising) and directive (commanding .Indirect Illocution:No indirect illocution. The illocution is direct Perlocution: The utterance is made with the effect of equipping Nigerians on the .information about the direction of the speakers administration CONTEXT Situational Context: The activity is the delivery of President Jonathans inaugural .speech. The primary audience moves from the ordinary Nigerians to the executives

.The speaker is President Goodluck Jonathan Mental Context: The speaker is optimistic. He hopes that the issues that he has raised .will be addressed Background Knowledge Context: Knowledge that good governance, electoral reform, corruption, 2011 general elections, etc. are important issues in Nigeria is needed in this utterance. In addition, the speaker is in the right position to address the .issues as the new president INDEXICALS Person Indexicals: The first use of our refers to president Jonathan and the ruling council. I refers to President Goodluck Jonathan as the speaker. We and the .second use of our refer to President Jonathan and other Nigerians collectively


.Time Indexicals: This refers to the present administration of President Jonathan .Would, must enshrine refer to actions that will be done in the future IMPLICATURE This utterance falls under the generalised scalar implicature. It implies that the government will not be less committed to the issues raised and that there will be free .and fair election in 2011 RELEVANCE The speaker is aware of some issues in Nigeria that need to be addressed like good governance, electoral reform, anti-graft, the Niger-Delta crisis, etc. Nigerians also expects that the new president (Goodluck Jonathan) will indicate the direction of his administration. The speaker also assumes this. The intentions recognition makes the utterance to require less processing cost because we can easily infer that the utterance .is a statement of the speakers promises

UTTERANCE 7 SPEECH ACTS .)Direct Illocution: Assertive (stating) and commissive (promising .)Indirect Illocution:Commissive (promising Perlocution:This utterance is made with the effect of reminding Nigerians about the governments promises on May 29, 2007 and to make them know that the government .is caring and has not forgotten her promises


CONTEXT Situational Context: President Jonathan and other Nigerians are the participants. The activity is the delivery of President Jonathans inaugural speech at the Presidential .Palace. The speech is broadcast on May 6, 2010 Mental Context: The speaker is also optimistic that the promises made at the .beginning of the tenure that started in May 29, 2007 will be fulfilled Background Knowledge Context: It was the duo of late President Yaradua and Goodluck Jonathan that assumed office on May 29, 2007 in which they promised Nigerians about what they will do. Also, Nigerians are facing various challenges like .unemployment, labour- government crisis, etc. which need to be addressed INDEXICALS Person Indexicals: I refers to President Jonathan. The first use of we refers to the government that was headed by the late PresidentYaradua. Our and the second use ,of we refer to the new government administration now headed by the speaker .President Jonathan

.Time Indexicals:Want and reassure indicate the present action of the speaker .Had made indicates the speakers action in the past IMPLICATURE The speaker implies that the new administration will be a continuity of the last .administration of the late president


RELEVANCE The speaker assumes that Nigerians have not forgotten the promises they (the late .President and Goodluck Jonathan) made on May 29,2007 when they were sworn in Nigerians are also inquisitive about the agenda of the new administration. The speaker made this utterance an answer to Nigerians questions. We can infer from the utterance that the new administration is caring; has not forgotten Nigerians and that .theadministration will make sure that all promises made are fulfilled UTTERANCE 8 SPEECH ACTS .)Direct Illocution: Directive (commanding and praying .Indirect Illocution: No indirect illocution. The illocution is direct Perlocution: This utterance is made with the effect of achieving a sad reflection .about the death of the former president on Nigerians and to pray for him CONTEXT Situational Context: President Jonathan is the speaker. The primary audience are ,Nigerians. The activity is the delivery of inaugural speech by the President of Nigeria .at the Presidential Palace in Abuja on May 6, 2010. The speech was broadcast

Mental Context: The speaker returned to the sombre mood, being the apparent .mental context that surrounds the speech Background Knowledge Context: President Yaradua has died. Knowledge that the society of the speaker and the listeners believes that the dead can be prayed for, is also .needed in this utterance


INDEXICALS Person Indexicals: My and I refer to President Jonathan as the speaker.Our refers to President Goodluck Jonathan and other Nigerians.His refers to God.Him .refers to the late President Yaradua Time Indexicals:Call, pray and grant indicate what the speaker want at the .time of delivering the speech IMPLICATURE The euphemistic word departed implies dead. With this utterance, the speaker implicates the death of President Yaradua as a causal factor for his assumption of office; a remembrance of Yaradua; a request of prayer for the dead president and a .conclusion of his speech RELEVANCE The speaker still respects the late president and that is why he has used a euphemism ,here again to express the presidents death and prayed for him. As a religious country the speaker and other Nigerians believe in praying for the dead. We can infer that the utterance shows the great love and respect that President Goodluck Jonathan has for .the late president


DATA DISCUSSION3.2 The analysis done above has been represented in the table presented at the appendix 2 (Figure A). Where signs are used, the positive sign indicates that the element above it is present and the negative sign indicates the corresponding element .above it is absent Speech acts, which are analysed using the illocutionary acts and the perlocutionary acts of the utterances, show what the speaker used his utterances to perform; the way he has used the utterances and the effects that the utterances are expected to have on the listeners. We can observe that in all the eight utterances, there .are eighteen illocutionary acts: twelve direct illocutions and six indirect illocutions )This indicates that the speaker is direct in some utterances (utterances 5, 6, 8 and indirect in some utterances (utterances 1, 2, 3, 4, 7). This observation contradicts .Ayodabos(1997) finding that all utterances contain direct and indirect illocutions Therefore, not all utterances contain direct and indirect illocutions

Also, the use of an idiom can result to performing an indirect speech act. This .is evident in the third utterance of the speech We can also observe that the speaker predominantly uses assertivesand expressives in the speech (6assertives and 4 expressives) to describe the state of affairs of the nation; to show his rich knowledge about the sad event and to show his personal and emotional concern. They are therefore used to create a feeling of trust

for him(Jonathan) by Nigerians and to prepare their (Nigerians) minds towards achieving the illocutionary forces of other utterances that he later uttered, which are


commissives (to make them belief in his promises) and directives (to make them .)perform the actions that he wants them to perform Another observation is that the speaker combines two illocutionary acts together in an utterance (utterances 5, 6 and 7). In addition, we observed that an utterance (utterance 3) has more than an illocutionary force. This shows that an utterance can contain more than one illocutionary acts and more than one .illocutionary force We can therefore say that President Jonathan carefully strings his words .together to perform many actions with few utterances Implicature, as another element deployed, is present in all the utterances. This ,is calculated with the social principles that govern conversations. As we can observe most implicatures that arise from the utterances are because of using euphemistic ,expressions. This is because the news of the presidents death is, by social convention expected to be conveyed pleasantly and honourably. Theseimplicaturesrepresent thesocial-psychological approach to pragmatics in which the utterances of the speaker .are embedded in and constrained by social, cultural and other contextual factors Another observation is that the speaker makes his propositions explicit in some utterances and provides procedural encodings in some utterances which will restrict or cancel many implicatures that might arise from the utterances.This is done because of the socio-political nature of the speech. A case study is in utterance 5 where the speaker added and indeed the entire nation to the utterance so as to cancel the implicatures in while this is a major burden on me


The relevance of each utterance has been accounted for, using the relevance theory. With this theory, we have also provided the inferences obtained from each utterance. The recognition of the speaker and the hearers intention made this possible. As it has been earlier said, relevance theory provides explanation for inference and gives reasons for inadequate inference(s). In a case of inadequate inference, relevance theory provides reason(s) for it. This is what occurred in utterance 5 where there is inadequate inference and the reason for this has been explained by using relevance theory. This theory shows the importance of participants cognition in encoding utterances and decoding meanings from .utterances With the application of indexicals as an element, we can observe the presence of person and time indexicalsthroughout.Place indexicals are absent. The time indexicals are used to reflect the time of occurrence of actions mentioned by the speaker, showing them as part of context.The person indexicals (used to refer to himself only) are used to acknowledge his unique position as the new President of )Nigeria. Other person indexicals (used collectively for other Nigerians and himself e.g. our, we, are used to show his intimacy with Nigerians to achieve a rhetorical effect.The reason for the absence of place indexicals is that the speaker prefers to use .a proper noun for the locations mentioned in his utterances Not only these, we can observe that the speaker used a form of indexical to refer to different persons. This occurred in utterances 6 and 7 (for instance, in utterance 6 where the first use of our refers to President Jonathan and the ruling


.)council; and the second use of our refers to President Jonathan and other Nigerians This indicates that a single indexical used more than once in an utterance can have .different referents The presence of context in all the utterances indicates the pivotal role of context in generating meaning from utterances. Other elements of pragmatics rely on context. This supports our assertion that pragmatic analysis is impossible without the .context In our analysis, the speaker, the place, time and channel are the same throughout the speech. Also, the primary audience of the speaker shifts as he addresses the nation. The reasons for these are respectively given thus: firstly, the speech is a written speech that allows for no conversation throughout; secondly, the need for the new President to address various groups of people, individuals or the .whole nation because he is delivering an inaugural speech as a President The application of relevance theory, implicature and context show that cognition, social principles and context are the determiners of the utterances made by the speaker, the way he has encoded his utterances and the tools for us to decode the relevant meanings from what is linguistically expressed and what is not linguistically .expressed



In this chapter, we have analysed President Goodluck Jonathans inaugural speech using speech acts theory (Searles illocutionary act classification was adopted), implicatures, relevance theory, indexicals and context. This has also been presented in a table (Figure A at the appendix section), the observations arising from the analysis have been discussed and the answers to our research questions have been provided as well as achieving the aims and objectives set out at the beginning of this report. The next chapter will therefore be a summary of the research report, a .summary of our findings and conclusion


CHAPTER FOUR SUMMARY, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION SUMMARY 4.0 This research report, a pragmatic analysis of President Goodluck Jonathans inaugural speech, contains four chapters. In chapter one, the general introduction to

the study was presented. It is made up of an introduction to the study, the statement of the research problem, the research questions, aims and objectives of the study, the scope of the study, the justification, the methodology applied in the study as well as a ,description of our data, which isPresident Goodluck Jonathans inaugural speech .titled Nigeria: Our Nation in Mourning Chapter two contains the literature review. We started by tracing the history of pragmatics, we reviewed some of its definitions, we also reviewed some theories and elements of pragmatics as well as looking at the efforts of their contributors. Speech acts theory, relevance theory, implicature, indexicals and contexts are the pragmatic .tools that we reviewed In the third chapter, the reviewed theories and elements in the second chapter of this work were deployed on our data for analysis. The summary of the analysis was later presented in a table (figure A at the appendix 2) and the observations that arose from it were discussed. It was in this chapter that our research questions were .answered In the light of these, we shall proceed to present a summary of our findings .and conclusion



Going by the analysis done so far and the data discussion presented in the third :chapter of this report, the salient findings are summarised below Firstly, context is an important element in the interpretation of utterances. It serves as a conversational undertone for speeches where there is no immediate .linguistic feedback It is also through context that implicatures can be calculated. What forms a

.social principle (which its flouting results to implicature) is based on context .Therefore, implicature is calculated using context In addition, context helps us to recognise the intention of participants in a communicative act. It is through this intentions (cognition) recognition that adequate .inferences can be gotten Furthermore, assertives and expressives are necessary for achieving .persuasion and creating a strong co-operation between the hearer and the speaker These illocutionary acts provide the felicity conditions that will guarantee the success of other illocutionary acts. From these, it is obvious that the way a speaker arranges .his utterances affects the success of a communicative act Another finding is that more than one illocutionary act can be embedded in an .utterance. This shows that a speaker can perform many actions with few utterances .Person indexicals are essential for achieving a rhetorical effect by a speaker Apart from these, a single indexical can be used more than once in an .utterance to refer to different referents


Not only these, speakers can use their utterances to refer to the whole population of listeners, specific group of people or an individual among the whole population. In a situation where the utterance shifts from addressing the whole population to a specific group of people or an individual, such group of people or the .individual forms the primary audience .Euphemisms can be used to express respect and honour Finally, when a speaker understands that his audience can calculate a negative implicature from his utterance, he makes the implicit meaning to be explicit; cancel .the implicature; or provide procedural encodings that will restrict the implicature

CONCLUSION 4.2 President Goodluck Jonathans inaugural speech, titled Nigeria: Our Nation inMourninghas been looked into using some theories and elements of pragmatics. As it is already known, the aim of pragmatics is to investigate how meanings are generated from utterances beyond the reliance on only the linguistic properties of .utterances made It is, by general observation, known that language is the means of communication and there is the great need for leaders to communicate with the governed. It therefore behoves one to properly account for the meanings contained in the utterances of leaders. That is why we have chosen the inaugural speech of .President Goodluck Jonathan for analysis In this research report, it has been proven that President Goodluck Jonathans inaugural speech, titled Nigeria: Our Nation inMourningis embedded in and


constrained by cognition, social principles of communication and the context that surrounds it.This report also shows the president as a careful user of words and a .performer of many actions with few utterances


BIBLIOGRAPHY Adeniji, A. (2009).Speech Acts in the Second Inaugural Addresses of Nigerias .President OlusegunObasanjo and Americas President George Bush. In A Odebunmi, E.A. Arua& S. Arimi (Eds.). Language Gender and Politics: A .Festchriftfor YisaKehinde Yusuf (pp. 275-296). Lagos: Concept Publications

Akmajian, A., Demers, R., Farmer, A.,Harnish R. (2008). Linguistics: An Introduction to Language and Communication (5th ed.). New Delhi: Asoke .Pretice Hall of India Private Limited

Austin, J. L. (1962).How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University .Press

Ayodabo, J. O. (1997). A Pragma-Stylistic Study of Abiolas Historic Speech of June .)In A. Lawal (Ed.). Stylistics in Theory and Practice(pp. 132-149 .5993 ,24 .Ilorin: Paragon Books

Babatunde, S.T. &Odepidan, O. (2009). Pragma-Rhetorical Strategies in Selected .Speeches of President OlusegunObasanjo. In A. Odebunmi, E. A. Arua& S Arimi (Eds.). Language Gender and Politics: A Festchrift for YisaKehinde .Yusuf (pp. 297-312). Lagos: Concept Publications

.Blakemore, D. (1992). Understanding Utterances. Oxford: Blackwell

.Cuttings, J. (2002). Pragmatics and Discourse.New York: Routledge

:Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge Cambridge University Press

David, B. (2007). Indexicals (StamfordEncyclopedia of Philosophy). Retrieved July .from entries/pragmatics/indexicals 2050 ,50

Dr Goodluck Jonathan Sworn in as Nigerias President on May 6, 2010. Retrieved .July 10, 2010 from http://www.news2onlinenigeria. com

Fromkin, V., Rodman, R. &Hyams, N. (2002). An Introduction to Language (8th .ed.). USA: Thomson Wordsworth

Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole &J. Morgan (Eds.) Syntax and .Semantics 3: Speech Acts(pp.41-58). New York: Academic Press

.Grundy, P. (2000). Doing Pragmatics (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold


.)Korta, K. & Perry, J. (2006). Pragmatics (Stamford Encyclopedia of Philosophy .Retrieved July 10, 2010 from

Lawal, A. (1997). Pragmatics in Stylistics: A Speech-Act Analysis of Soyinkas Telephone Conversation. In A. Lawal (Ed). Stylistics in Theory and Practice .pp. 150-173). Ilorin: Paragon Books(

.Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman

.Levinson, S. (1983) Pragmatics. New York: CambridgeUniversity Press

:McGregor, W.B. (2009). Linguistics: An Introduction. London & New York .Continuum International Publishing Company

.Mey, J. (2001). Pragmatics: An Introduction.Oxford: Blackwell

Odebunmi, A. (2006). Meaning in English: An Introduction.Ogbomoso: Critical .Sphere

.).Osisanwo, W. (2008). Introduction to Discourse Analysis and Pragmatics(2nd ed .Lagos: Femolus-Fetop

President of Nigeria- GoodluckEbele Jonathan. Retrieved March 18, 2011 from .

:Searle, J. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge .CambridgeUniversity Press

.Searle, J. (1975). Expression and Meaning. Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts .Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press

Spencer-Oatey, H. &Zegarac, V. (2002). Pragmatics. In N. Schmmit(ed.). An .Introduction to Applied Linguistics(pp. 74-92). London: Hodder Arnold

Sperber, D &Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and Cognition(2nd .ed.).Oxford: Blackwell

:Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. London .Longman

.Verschueren, J. (2003). Understanding Pragmatics.London: Hodder Arnold

Webster, J.J. (2009). The Essential Halliday: M.A.K. Halliday. London &New .York: Continuum International Publishing Group


Wilson, D. (1985). Pragmatics. In K. Adam & K. Jessica (Eds.). The Social Science

Encyclopedia(pp. 639-640). London, Boston & Henley: Routledge&Kegan .Plc

.Winkler, E.G. (2007). Understanding Language. New York: Continuum

.Yule, G. (2002). Pragmatics(6th Impression). Oxford: Oxford University Press



NIGERIA: OUR NATION IN MOURNING Address by President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, GCON, to the Nation on assumption of office as President, Commander-in-Chief of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, today .th May, 20106 UTTERANCE 1 My dear brothers and sisters, it is with deep sense of loss and profound sorrow that I received the news of the passing on of His Excellency, President Umaru Musa .YarAdua, and Grand Commander of the Federal Republic of Nigeria UTTERANCE 2 Our President passed away peacefully in the Presidential villa in Abuja yesterday evening, the 5th day of May 2010. While we submit to the will of God as a people of .faith, this sad event has placed our nation in deep mourning UTTERANCE 3 ,On behalf of the good people of our great Country Nigeria, I stand by our First Lady Her Excellency HajiaTuraiYarAdua, the Children, our Mother, HajiaHabiba Musa YarAdua, and the entire YarAdua family and offer our heartfelt condolences on the .demise of our amiable leader


UTTERANCE 4 President YarAduas contribution to political development and good governance would never be forgotten. He will therefore always occupy a pride of place in the political history of our dear Nation. He was a man of great personal integrity, deep devotion to God and outstanding humility. In all his public service, he displayed uncommon commitment to the peace, progress and unity of our country. He has left for us a profound legacy that provides a firm foundation for Nigerias future. His exit

has therefore created a huge vacuum in his personal contributions to the political growth and development of our nation. I have lost not just a boss but a good friend .and brother UTTERANCE 5 Having taken the oath of office in line with the Nigerian Constitution, under these very sad and unusual circumstances, I urge all fellow citizens to remain steadfast and committed to the values and aspirations of our nation. While this is a major burden on me and indeed the entire nation, we must in the midst of such great adversity continue to garner our collective efforts towards upholding the values which our departed .leader represented UTTERANCE 6 In this regard our total commitment to Good Governance, Electoral Reform and the fight against Corruption would be pursued with greater vigour. As I had stated time


and again, we must enshrine the best standards in our democratic practice. One of the true tests would be to ensure that all votes count and are counted in the upcoming General Elections. Similarly the effort at ensuring the sustenance of peace and development in the Niger Delta as well as the security of life and property around the entire country would be of top most priority in the remaining period of this .administration UTTERANCE 7 I want to reassure all Nigerians that the pledges which we had made to improve the ,socio-economic situation which we face through improved access to electricity, water education, health facilities and other social amenities would continue to be given the needed emphasis. The welfare of our teeming workers and the unemployed youths

.would also be accorded a new impetus UTTERANCE 8 My brothers and sisters, I call on all Nigerians to pray for the repose of the soul of our departed President. May God, in his infinite mercy, and compassion grant him eternal .peace.God bless Nigeria




Utterance 1 Assertive Expressive Utterance 2 Assertive Expressive Utterance 3 Assertive Commissive and Expressive Utterance 4 Assertive Expressive Utterance 5 Assertive, Directive and Commissive Utterance 6 Commissive and Directive Utterance 7 Assertive and Commissive Utterance 8 Directive Nil Nil Nil Commissive ++++_++++ ++++_++++ ++++_++++ ++++_++++ ++++_++++

++++_++++ ++++_++++ ++++_++++ FIGURE A The above table shows the description of the analysis done at the third chapter from the .first utterance to the eighth utterance