宇都宮大学国際学部研究論集　2011　第31号,　67−76 67

Speech Acts in Foreign Language Acquisition

Andrew REIMANN

Introduction situations and ultimately acquire the knowledge, skills

A major challenge of foreign language teaching and experience required to process and use unfamiliar
deals with understanding cultural differences in speech acts in order to communicate more effectively.
communication. There are limited ways to teach
cultural information objectively. One of the few “…the social situation is the most powerful determent
observable examples of cultural differences surfacing of verbal behaviour…”
in communication, discourse analysis of Speech William Labov
Acts. Much of Comparative Culture Studies or
Socio Linguistics focuses on analyzing Speech Acts “The shaping of deeply felt values into meaningful,
to discover how different people use language to apposite form, is present in all communities, and will
communicate various meanings and social nuances in find some means of expressions among all.”
culture specific contexts. Speech Acts are the social - Dell Hymes
parameters of communication and are essentially
chunks of language associated with specific situations,
tasks or events. Most Speech Acts reflect basic human One of the fundamental challenges of foreign
needs and uses for language and are universal or exist language teaching or learning, deals with resolving
across different cultures. This language is easy to the cultural difficulties that arise through intercultural
translate and is usually in the form of simple greetings exchange, communication and translation. There
and requests or salutations (good morning, please, are of course many levels and sub levels of cultural
thank you, good-bye). However there are many cases integration and interference in language acquisition.
where situations are culturally unique and do not For example; pragmatics, how language is used in
exist in other cultures therefore the language nuances certain situations, types of greetings or salutations,
cannot be translated or transferred easily. As a result, morphological or phonological variations at the word
awareness of the cultural interference at this level is level including slang, jargon or dialectal differences,
essential for successful communication. This paper as well as socio-semantic variance in nuances and
will describe problems which arise in attempting interpretations of utterances based on a groups
to teach, explain or translate Speech Acts out of shared expectations and experiences. However
context or without the veil of culture. Hymes (1972) considering that language and culture are virtually
proposed a taxonomy of language performance and inseparable (Sapir/Whorf 1949), there is no easy way
usage focusing on the acceptability of an utterance. to navigate these differences and there are no clear
This report will reflect on Hymes’ communicative rules or guidelines to follow in order to communicate
competency methodology and model for the purpose of effectively or avoid cultural misunderstanding, conflict
understanding and describing how learners of English or culture shock. There has been much research
as a foreign language in Japan develop awareness exploring this recently, nevertheless the cultural
of speech act discrepancies between communicative aspects of foreign language learning remain one
68 Reimann Andrew

of the more ambiguous and problematic endeavors in any given situation. How language is received and
of TEFL (Byram 1997, Kramsch 1993). One of interpreted is given importance over structural lin-
the few relatively concrete and overt examples of guistic accuracy such as pronunciation or grammar
cultural elements and perspectives surfacing in particularly in intercultural communication. Whether
communication, in the sense that they can be observed, one subscribes to a native speaker model of English, a
analyzed, compared and learned from, involves a form model of English as a global or local language, com-
of discourse analysis of the socio-linguistic notion of munication necessitates context which in turn creates
speech acts. Speech Acts are the social parameters of unique situations and scenarios that call into play
communication and are essentially chunks of language ambiguous and unpredictable elements of culture. The
associated with specific situations, tasks or events. variables surrounding any communication situation
Searle (1975) for the purpose of understanding the are critically determined or controlled by individual,
philosophical characteristics of Speech Acts, set up the social, personal, gender, regional, ethnic, ideological
following classification highlighting the illocutionary or national variables which can be arbitrarily referred
force of speech acts: to as culture. The notion of speech situations was
assertives = Commit a speaker to the truth of the originally described by Dell Hymes (1972) as part of
expressed idea (beliefs, values, opinions) his proposal for the concept of Communicative Com-
directives = Influence the hearer to take action, petence. Hymes’ original idea was that speakers of a
(requests, commands and advice) language have to have more than grammatical compe-
commissives = Commit a speaker to some future tence in order to be able to communicate effectively
action, (promises, oaths, vows) in a language; they also need to know how language
expressives = Convey attitudes and emotions is used by members of a speech community to accom-
towards the idea, (congratulations, excuses and plish their purposes.
thanks) As an alternative to initial models of competence
declarations = Change reality based on speakers which only addressed the linguistic or grammatical
power or influence. (verdicts, marriages, judg- aspects of communication, Hymes (1972) added a
ments) social component claiming that Chomsky’s (1965)
Applying these considerations to practical examples of model of Linguistic Competence failed to account for
language usage, Elwood (2004) provides the follow- the complete range of skills and knowledge required
ing; in communication, focusing only on correctness
Speech ethnographers talk of “speech events,” of language while failing to consider appropriate
which are composed of one or more “speech usage. Understanding the rules of grammar,
acts” and are characterized by having specific Grammatical or Linguistic Competence is only one
rules governing the use of speech. Speech events aspect of Communicative Competence and is of little
include almost anything that is viewed as a cus- consequence without considering the requirements
tomary procedure that involves language, like for appropriateness which are Sociolinguistic
opening a bank account, making a toast at a wed- Competence. He defined this as the knowledge and
ding, testifying in court, or giving a business ability that individuals need to understand and use
spiel. Some speech events exist in some cultures, linguistic resources in ways that are structurally well
but not in others, or if they do exist, the form they formed, socially and contextually appropriate and
take may be rather different. (Elwood, 2004) culturally feasible in communicative contexts. (Hymes,
1972). His model of Communicative Competence
Speech act theory therefore focuses on the prob- included four dimensions which he referred to as
ability, possibility and appropriateness of an utterance systemic potential, appropriateness, occurrence
 Speech Acts in Foreign Language Acquisition 69

and feasibility. These were all considered essential form and interpretation which will vary regionally, by
factors in determining the accuracy and success of gender, age, social position or relationship. Although
communication in a given context. This distinction many learners are aware of these dialectal differences,
between skills and knowledge, sparked a debate standard Kanto centered Japanese is often preferred
concerning differences of competence and performance as a default and most learners do not consider the
and the subsequent transferring of the necessary possible variables consciously or apply them to foreign
knowledge or skills as part of language teaching language learning, often assuming that there must be a
(Lee, 2006). One of the first viable pedagogies to standard variety in English as well. This is reinforced
emerge from Hymes’ model and address these issues, in most language texts which overly focus on center
was proposed by Canale and Swain (1980). Their varieties of English, from either North America or the
framework for Communicative Competence elaborated U.K. while neglecting the more common and diverse
on Hymes’ dimensions and related them to language peripheral varieties of English spread around the
teaching curricula as a Communicative Approach. globe (Canagarajah, 2002). It is here that the crossing
Byram (1997) further developed these notions into a over of speech acts raises difficulties. As speech acts
battery of ethnographic skills which could be applied originate in the realm of cultural common sense and
to difficulties in intercultural communication settings. are not usually overtly taught, they are often assumed
to be universal. Language learners as a result try to
Learning and Understanding Speech Acts insert certain speech acts into a foreign language
This report will reflect on Hymes’ (1972) com- through crude translation or by manipulating the target
municative competency methodology and model for language in a way that simulates their own cultural
the purpose of understanding and describing how norms. In the case of English and Japanese this
learners of English as a foreign language in Japan de- frequently occurs in transferring politeness strategies,
velop awareness of speech act discrepancies between greetings, compliments, complaints, requests or more
communicative situations and ultimately acquire the general relationship building scenarios. Given that
knowledge, skills and experience required to process Japanese is a high context and hierarchical language,
and use unfamiliar speech acts in order to communi- (Hall, 1976) as is evident in social structures and
cate more effectively. Before exploring cross-cultural protocols such as formal language, (Keigo), seniority
differences however, it is important, particularly with honorifics and indirect or ambiguous communication
regard to English as a Global Language spoken by styles (Takanashi, 2004), attempts to transfer culture
peoples of diverse multicultural backgrounds, to con- specific communication strategies can cause critical
sider the following questions: failure in negotiating meaning as well as total
・Does an ideal speaker-hearer exist? communication breakdown. Much of Japanese speech
・Is there a homogeneous speech community? acts concern aspects of relationship building, either
・Does language serve any function other than maintaining, reaffirming or forming through specific
communication? phrases, nuances or social cues. Japanese also has both
・Should language exist if it has no function at overt and covert levels of these speech acts which can
all? be seen in the following examples.
・Is there any linguistic structure that is not as- Ganbate, 頑張って
sociated with language use? The literal or translated meaning for this could be
interpreted as try your best, good luck or fight,
In the case of Japan the range of nonstandard however the utterance is case sensitive and the
variation in language usage is of course narrower nuances are quite vague and open to interpretation
than English however there are marked differences in possible variations might include you should
70 Reimann Andrew

work harder or you should do it on your own. in Japanese. As a result, awareness of the cultural
Shoganai しょうがない interference at this level is essential for successful
Simply defined as It can’t be helped however, communication. This paper will describe problems
can be interpreted as we should give up or we which arise in attempting to teach, explain or
should be patient. translate speech acts out of context or without the
Otskare sama お疲れさま veil of culture. Hymes proposed a theory of language
Generally means Thank you for your efforts performance and usage with the main criteria being
but requires a preexisting camaraderie, acceptability of a given utterance. This theory of
collaboration or membership in a work group communicative competence deals with the rules
and the connotation implies a strengthening of and protocols of a person’s linguistic performance.
relationships interpreted as we made and effort As a framework for the acceptability of a linguistic
working together. performance which he refers to as competence, Hymes
Yoroshiku onegaishimasu 宜しくお願いします proposed four guidelines:
Literally meaning please but represents a deeper ・Is an utterance possible? (syntactically,
sense of obligation in that a mutual relationship semantically, or pragmatically)
or bond is formed at least until the request is ・Is an utterance feasible through the tools and
completed. channels available? (logically, physically)
Chotto… ちょっと・・・ ・Is an utterance appropriate in relation to
Literally referring to a small amount or a bit participants and context?
however very ambiguous depending on context ・Is an utterance, actually performed, and how
and can vary in meaning to include discomfort, is it received or interpreted?
difficulty or inconvenience as well as referring to
quantity. In order to investigate and understand how this
In contrast, English tends to be an egalitarian, competence relates to regular communication, Hymes
democratic and direct language. Polite or formal added the SPEAKING model of speech analysis
language in English is quite limited. Proper (1974). According to Hymes, in order to speak a
introductory communication in for example the language correctly, one does not only need to learn
context of a business meeting might take the form of its vocabulary and grammar, but also the context in
indirect wording or using the passive voice. which words are used. In the speaking model aspects
・Your order has been shipped and should arrive of the linguistic situation are considered and applied
shortly. to various components of a discourse sample or a
・ I shipped your order and it will arrive communicated message. These are outlines in the
tomorrow. taxonomy below and include: message form, message
・ The manager was wondering if it was content, setting, scene, speaker/sender, addressor,
convenient for you to join us for dinner. hearer/receiver/audience, addressee, purposes
・Will you join us for dinner? outcomes, purposes goals, key, channels, forms of
Similarly, social distance is usually quickly speech, norms of interaction, norms of interpretation
broken down with a direct dispensing of formalities and genres.
and titles.
・Please call me Bob, do you mind if I call you SPEAKING model of speech analysis (Hymes, 1974).
Taro? S - Setting and Scene - The setting refers to the time
As such, there are no subtle relationship building or and place while scene describes the environment of
negotiating speech acts in the form that they exist the situation or type of activity. (classroom, bar, coffee
 Speech Acts in Foreign Language Acquisition 71

shop, morning, friendly conversation) to Mehrabian’s (1971) taxonomy of meaning which

P - Participants - This refers to who is involved in the entails that 7% of interpreted meaning is verbal coming
speech including the speaker and the audience, inter- from the words spoken, 38% is tonal coming from the
viewer, caller, performer. way the words are said and 55% is nonverbal coming
E - Ends - The purpose and goals of the speech along from facial expressions and other body language.
with any outcomes, functions or effects of the speech. Although this taxonomy is based on English, students
A - Act Sequence - The order of events that took place were asked to consider if and to what degree it applies
during the speech including form and content. to Japanese and if or how it might be amended to better
K - Key - The overall key, tone, mood or manner of account for Japanese communication styles. Some
the speech. (serious, sarcastic, formal) reflections on this proposed that verbal communication
I - Instrumentalities - The form and style of the in Japanese contains less than 7% of the message
speech being given. Channel (verbal, nonverbal, face which is transferred to tonal or nonverbal means
to face, telephone, SMS,) Code (emoticons, dialect or and perhaps the formation of a new category which
language variety) would consider meaning in regards to the relationship
N - Norms - Defines what is socially acceptable at the between interlocutors. By carrying out these simple
event, the rules that govern interaction and interpreta- analysis and observation tasks, students are able to
tion. raise their awareness on the appropriateness and usage
G - Genre - The type of speech that is being given. of language, especially the realization that common
(greeting, joke, apology, lecture) sense or common beliefs, values and communication
styles are nit universal and often do not transfer
(Hymes, Dell. Foundations of Sociolinguistics: across cultures. Students reach the conclusion that the
An Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: U of majority of speech acts reflect basic human needs and
Pennsylvania P, 1974.) uses for language and are universal or exist across
different cultures.
Thank you = Arigato　ありがとう
Procedure: Language Situation and Speech Act Good morning = Ohayo　おはよう
Analysis Good Bye = Sayonara　さよなら
Using examples of language as well as a context Give me… = …chodai　ちょうだい
analysis based on the Speaking model proposed by
Hymes (1974), students research and describe an This language is easy to translate and therefore
example of native or target language which they does not propose any serious difficulty. However they
can later compare and contrast (See Appendix A). soon realize that there are in fact many cases where
Students use ethnographic methods to observe, situations are culturally unique and do not exist in
isolate and describe specific examples of language other cultures therefore the language nuances cannot
in order to understand precisely how they occur, in be translated or transferred easily.
which situations they are acceptable and whether or
not these can be transferred cross-culturally. In this Ganbate, 頑張って Shoganai しょうがない
regard, students are also required to consider where Otskare sama お疲れさま
meaning comes from, how intentions are interpreted Yoroshiku onegaishimasu 宜しくお願いします
and how other aspects of expression are negotiated in Chotto… ちょっと・・・
communicative situations. In order to do this, students Itadakimasu 頂きます
consider examples of nonverbal communication Gochisosama ごちそうさま
including cues and strategies. These are then related Motainai もったいない
72 Reimann Andrew

Sapari さっぱり ironically this is precisely the situation in which most

Natsukashi 懐かしい speakers of English would not use theses phrases.
Amaeru 甘える In Japanese this unique speech act is referred to as
Suki desu… 好きです… (Kokuhaku　告白) (Kokuhaku 告白) a confession.

It is here that negotiating levels of meaning becomes Understanding the Art of Confession
problematic. The misunderstanding of culturally The phrase “Suki desu…” ( 好きです ) might
specific speech acts and their intentions and literally mean I like you, but the interpreted meaning
connotations represents the essence of intercultural is quite different. In Japanese this phrase signifies the
communication. Much of Comparative Culture Studies initiation of a romantic relationship and is referred
or Socio Linguistics focuses on analyzing such speech to as (Kokuhaku告白) or Confession. All though this
acts to discover how different people use language to type of relationship exists in all cultures, as it is a
communicate various meanings and social nuances basic requirement for human existence, the manner
in culture specific contexts. By understanding these in which it is communicated is quite different. For
situations and context/culture specific utterances, it example, English does not have a word which can
is possible to unveil the deep structure of culture, be accurately translated as kokuhaku. The closest
usually inaccessible to non-members, in order to gain word is confession except this is generally only
insight into the values, expectations, perspectives and used for negative meanings like hakujo白状. This
communication styles of the target language group. is because the act of kokuhaku or “confessing love”
The following will describe one such example. does not typically happen in western culture. (Elwood
2004). In fact, using any words to express kokuhaku
Overt and Covert Expressions of Love and Liking feelings would be considered strange and unnatural.
For a cross cultural or comparative linguistic Instead any kokuhaku type love event is started by
analysis of communication styles and speech acts, the using common sense, body language or non-verbal
act of communicating emotions of love either overtly “I communication. It is not usual to use any words to
love/like you” or covertly by initiating a relationship, confirm a relationship or feelings until much later and
provides an interesting and robust example of cross even this is case by case. To say “I like you…” would
cultural differences in speech acts. Communication be very strange instead you would have to sense the
regarding love or liking, for example does not easily others feelings and pursue an indirect course which is
cross over because the linguistic representation and exemplified as follows.
therefore the intention or connotation in Japanese does A: (Nervous) Ummm… Do you want to go to
not match the common uses in English. In Japanese, Starbucks after class?
love exists as a state between people and therefore B: (Big smile) Sure that would be great! or B:
communication of this state is redundant as the (Big smile) Sorry I have to meet my boyfriend
relationship is generally understood to exist. In English after.
on the other hand love exists more commonly as an B:(Big smile) Sure that would be great but only
action and is therefore communicated more frequently for a short time I have to meet my boyfriend this
and easily. To say ‘I love pizza is as plausible as evening…
saying ‘I love Lucy.’ however the former would be Although the above speech act can be considered the
nonsensical in Japanese as you cannot have a logical equivalent of the Japanese kokuhaku (confession), the
reciprocated relationship with a pizza. In fact the method and communication style is totally different.
only time that such emotions are generally expressed The message of liking is implied but the method is
in Japanese is when a relationship is initiated and completely indirect and purposefully ambiguous. This
 Speech Acts in Foreign Language Acquisition 73

is also evident in the reply in that to know whether the time, place and occasion for speech acts is of
B shares mutual feelings is not automatically clear, critical importance to functioning as an intercultural
however by mentioning a boyfriend in her reply, the communicator.
negotiation for further developing their relationship
becomes unequivocally limited. This is a unique References
and interesting example in that it also highlights Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing
some inconsistencies in Japanese and English intercultural communicative competence.
communication styles which may have their origin Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
in deep cultural values, beliefs and perspectives. The Canagarajah, A. S. (2002). Globalization, methods and
Kokuhaku situation appears to be stressful, uncertain practice in periphery classrooms. In D. Block, &
in its outcome, direct, frank and prone to causing D. Cameron (Eds). Globalization and language
conflict or difficult feelings. As such it goes against teaching. Routledge: London.
Japanese communication style norms which according Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of
to (Takanashi, 2004) are carefully governed by values communicative approaches to second language
of tatemae/hone and uchi/soto. These consequently teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, Vol.1,
produce the following tendencies; pp. 1-47.
Japanese do not like risk or uncertainty. Egner, I. (2006). Intercultural aspects of the speech
Japanese prefer to communicate indirectly. act of promising: Western and African practices.
Japanese often hide emotions or personal feelings. Intercultural Pragmatics 3-4 (2006), 443-464
Japanese tend to avoid situations which might Elwood, K. (2004). Romantic true confessions, The
result in conflict or difficult feelings Daily Yomiuri, The Language Connection,
In contrast North American communication styles, Cultural Conundrums. May 25, 2004.
tend to result in exchanges which are direct, frank and Elwood, K. (2009). The fundamentals of “Aisatsu”,
do not necessarily protect personal feelings or avoid The Daily Yomiuri, The Language Connection,
risk or uncertainty. (Elwood 2004) Cultural Conundrums. June 23, 2009.
Elwood, K. (2004). Language lessons, life lessons,
Conclusion The Daily Yomiuri, The Language Connection,
By simply knowing certain expressions such as Cultural Conundrums. June 08, 2004.
yoroshiku onegai shimasu, please, sumimasen, excuse Garner, T. (1985) ‘Instrumental interactions: Speech
me or chotto, a little, it is not possible to communicate acts in daily life’, Communication Studies, 36: 4,
appropriately or effectively. In order to understand, 229-238.
learners attempt to find parallel examples in their Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond Culture. Garden City, N.Y.:
language, culture and experience, but these translations Anchor Press,
are usually either inaccurate or incorrect. Translating Hymes, D. (1972). Models of the Interaction
aisatsu as “greetings” and providing some common of Language and Social Life in Directions
sample phrase may seem simple, however the nuances in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of
and representations of these phrases is often not Communication, edited by J. Gumperz and D.
translatable. Speech acts such as greetings, salutations Hymes, 35-71 (New York: Holt, Rinehart and
and requests are often the introduction to any course of Winston).
foreign languages. However memorizing expressions Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations of Sociolinguistics:
and interpreting or using them well are quite different An Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: U of
matters. In foreign language learning understanding Pennsylvania P.
the appropriateness of an utterance and knowing Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language
74 Reimann Andrew

teaching. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press. Styles in Japanese Culture. Language, Culture
Lee, Yo-An. (2006). Towards Respecification of and Curriculum 17, (1), 1-14.
Communicative Competence: Condition of L2 Torikai, K. (2005) ‘The challenge of language and
Instruction or its Objective? Applied Linguistics communication in twenty-first century Japan’,
27/3: 349–376. Oxford University Press Japanese Studies, 25: 3, 249-256.
Lu, D. (2001). Cultural Features in Speech Acts: A Whorf, B.L. (1940/1956). Science and linguistics. In
Sino-American Comparison Language, Culture J.K. Carroll (ed.), Language, thought and reality.
and Curriulum, Vol. 14, No. 3. Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. (pp.
Mehrabian, A. (1981). Silent Messages: Implicit Com- 207-19). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
munication of Emotions and Attitudes (2nd ed.).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Widdowson, H. G. (1988). Aspects of the relationship
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the phi- between language and culture. In M. Kochling
losophy of language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge et al. (Eds.), Communication interculturelle
University Press. et apprentissage des langues. Triangle 7 (pp.
Searle, J. R. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In P. Cole & J. 13-22). Paris: Didier Erudition.
Morgan (Eds). Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3 (pp. Yamauchi, S. (2009). Japanese in Depth. What I like
59-82). New York: Academic Press. about ‘suki’. Daily Yomiuri, May 05, 2009
Takanashi, Y. (2004). TEFL and Communication

Appendix A: Speech Situation/Language Analysis Worksheet

Speech Situation/Language Survey Assignment

•　Identify and observe and example of language.

•　Analyze and describe how it is used, by whom and in what context.
•　Is it used traditionally or in a new way?
•　Compare any differences in terms of Syntax (Grammar), Semantics (Meaning), Phonetics (Sound/
Pronunciation),

Carefully describe and record all elements of the situation using the SPEAKING model.

S - Setting and Scene – Time, place, environment, situation classroom, bar, coffee shop, morning,
P - Participants - Speaker and the audience, interviewer, caller, performer, customer
E - Ends - Purpose goals outcomes, functions or effects entertain, teach, persuade, compliment
A - Act Sequence - Order of events, form and content. initiation, reaction, conclusion, feedback
K - Key - Tone, mood, manner serious, sarcastic, formal
I - Instrumentalities – Form, style, channel and code verbal, nonverbal, face to face, telephone, SMS text
N - Norms - Social acceptability, rules and protocols manners, customs, silence, turn taking
G - Genre – Type or category greeting, joke, apology, lecture

(Hymes, Dell. Foundations of Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 1974.)

 Speech Acts in Foreign Language Acquisition 75

Pay special attention to the following:

•　Participants including roles, gender, social status,
•　Context, time, place, environment, conditions
•　Function, purpose result of speech greeting, request, comment, reaction
•　Frequency is this a usual or unusual example of language usage

Provide the following:

•　A transcript of the observed language (what was said or exchanged)
•　A detailed description of the situation and participants
•　An analysis of the speech situation, including your opinion or insight into why the language is
used in this way.

Example of Language (Sample):

Genre: Type of speech act: (request, greeting, command, apology)

Description: Participants (role, gender, social status) Context

(Situation, environment, location) Method (face to face, email,
telephone, chat)

Communicative Goal/Purpose: (message, entertainment,

relationship)

Format: (Standard, Slang, Casual, Formal, Unusual, Dialectal)

Result: (success, failure, confusion)

Research Method: (Field work, comparative analysis, observation,

interview)

Comments/Summary/Analysis/Interpretation/Conclusion
76 Reimann Andrew

外国語習得におけるスピーチ・アクト

ライマン・アンドリュー

要約
　外国語教育において、コミュニケーションにおける文化的差異を理解させることが重要である。その
方法の１つとして、スピーチ・アクトの談話分析がある。比較文化研究や社会言語学の領域では、特定
の文化状況において人々がニュアンスを伝えるときにどのように言語を使用しているか明らかにするた
め、スピーチ・アクトを分析する研究が多い。スピーチ・アクトは普遍的な側面もあるが、ある文化に
固有のものがあり、別の文化でその意味合いを翻訳することが難しい場合がある。本論文は、ハイムス
(1972) の方法論とモデルを使用し、日本の英語学習者がより効果的にコミュニケーションできるようにな
るためには、どのように異文化のスピーチ・アクトを認識し、経験とスキルを習得すればよいかを考察
するものである。
（2010 年 11 月 8 日受理）