Types of Speech Styles
Types of Speech Styles
Types of Speech Styles
1. FROZEN STYLE
Used generally in very formal setting.
Most formal communicative style for respectful situation
Does not require any feedback from the audience
Usually uses long sentences with good grammar and vocabulary
The use of language is fixed and relatively static
Examples:
national pledge, anthem, school creeds,
marriage ceremonies, speech for a state ceremony
2. FORMAL STYLE
Examples:
meetings, speeches, school lessons, court, a corporate meeting, at a
swearing in ceremony, in an interview or in a classroom
3. CONSULTATIVE STYLE
Used in semi-formal communication
Happens in two-way participation
Most operational among other styles
4. CASUAL STYLE
Language used between friends
Often very relaxed and focused on just getting the information out
Examples:
5. INTIMATE STYLE
Nomination
Turn-taking
Topic Control
Topic Shifting
Repair
Termination
locutionary act which is the basic production of meaningful utterance. This act is much
related to the hearer, if the hearer fails to understand what the speaker is saying then
the speaker has failed to do a locutionary act. For example, when a person from
Indonesia (he's in America for instance) talks to an American in bahasa 'apa kabar pak?'
in English this utterance will not produce what is called as a meaningful linguistic
expression. On the contrary when the speaker said 'how are you sir?' then the American
would understand and it is a form of locutionary act.
Illocutionary acts[edit]
The concept of an illocutionary act is central to the concept of a speech act.
Although there are several scholarly opinions regarding how to define
'illocutionary acts', there are some kinds of acts which are widely accepted as
illocutionary. Examples of these widely accepted acts are commands or
promises.
The first of these opinions is the one held by the man who coined the term
"speech act" in his book How to Do Things with Words (published posthumously
in 1962),[1] John L. Austin. According to Austin's preliminary informal description,
the idea of an "illocutionary act" can be captured by emphasizing that "by saying
something, we do something", as when someone issues an order to someone to
go by saying "Go!", or when a minister joins two people in marriage saying, "I
now pronounce you husband and wife." (Austin would eventually define the
"illocutionary act" in a more exact manner.)
An alternative to Austin's explanation of the illocutionary act is that given by John
R. Searle. According to Searle, a "speech act" is often meant to refer to exactly
the same thing as the term illocutionary act. Searle's work on speech acts is
understood to further refine Austin's conception. However, some philosophers
have pointed out a significant difference between the two conceptions: whereas
Austin emphasized the conventional interpretation of speech acts, Searle
emphasized a psychological interpretation (based on beliefs, intentions, etc.). [14]
Perlocutionary acts[edit]
While illocutionary acts relate more to the speaker, perlocutionary acts are
centered around the listener. Perlocutionary acts always have a 'perlocutionary
effect' which is the effect a speech act has on a listener. This could affect the
listener's thoughts, emotions or even their physical actions.[15] An example of this
could be if someone uttered the sentence "I'm hungry." The perlocutionary effect
on the listener could be the effect of being persuaded by the utterance. For
example, after hearing the utterance, the listener could be persuaded to make a
sandwich for the speaker.