Chapter 10
Thematic silence as a speech act
This chapter will discuss the speech act status of thematic silence, one of the four types of silence presented in Kurzon (2007). This type of silence is not strictly silence in the sense that someone is not talking where talk is expected. It refers to the non-mention of a topic by the speaker (“s/he is silent about” in contrast to “s/he is silent”). Despite its non-mention, the topic is often implicit and identifiable, since it is salient in one way or another. For example, in a speech or in a press interview, a politician does not mention, or refuses to refer to, a topic which may embarrass him/her, and this topic has recently been in the news. Assuming that intentional silence is as communicative as the linguistic ways of conveying implicit meaning, and has therefore some illocutionary force, the question asked is what kind of speech act the omitted discourse (utterance / sentence) may be. It will be argued that in discourses such as speeches, interviews, or narratives in general, the silence usually replaces an assertive speech act, though there may be instances in which the omitted speech act may be a directive or commissive, etc. speech act.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Intentional and unintentional silence
- 3.Implicit speech acts
- 3.1Promise
- 3.2Gratitude
- 3.3Silent about
- 3.4Refusals
- 4.Thematic silence in a political speech
- 4.1Election pledges
- 4.2Miliband’s party conference speech 2014
- 4.3Thematic silence in Miliband’s speech
- 5.Conclusion
-
Notes
-
References
References (18)
References
Aliakbari, Mohammad, and Mahsa Changizi. 2012. “On the Realization of Refusal Strategies by Persian and Kurdish Speakers”. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36: 659–668. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Austin, John L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bara, Judith. 2005. “A Question of Trust: Implementing Party Manifestos.” Parliamentary Affairs 58: 585–599. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berger, Charles R. 2004. “Speechlessness: Causal Attributions, Emotional Features and Social Consequences.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 23: 147–179. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Campbell, Kim. 1990. “Explanations in Negative Messages. More Insight from Speech Act Theory.” Journal of Business Communication 27: 357–375. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chen, Hongyin J. 1996. “Cross-cultural Comparison of English and Chinese Metapragmatics in refusal.” Indiana University Manuscript, ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 408 860.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goffman, Erving, 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kurzon, Dennis. 2007. “Towards a Typology of Silence.” Journal of Pragmatics 39: 1673–1688. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kurzon, Dennis. 2011. “Moment of Silence: Constitutional Transparency and Judicial Control.” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 29: 195–209. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. “Pursuing a Response.” In Structure of Social Action, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 152–163. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rallings, Colin. 1987. “The Influence of Election Programmes: Britain and Canada 1956-1979.” In Ideology, Strategy and Party Changes: Spatial Analyses of Post-War Election Programmes in 19 Democracies, ed. by Ian Budge, David Robertson, and David Hearl, 1–14. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson. 1974. “A Simplest Systematic for the Organization of Turn-taking for Conversation.” Language, 50: 696–735. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Searle, John R. 1975. “Indirect Speech Acts.” In Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, ed. by Peter Cole, and Jerry L. Morgan, 59–82. New York: Academic Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Searle, John R. 1976. “A Classification of Illocutionary Acts.” Language in Society, 5: 1–23. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Stone, Charles B., Alin Coman, Adam D. Brown, Jonathan Koppel, and William Hirst. 2012. “Toward a Science of Silence: The Consequences of Leaving a Memory Unsaid.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 7: 39–53. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tanck, Sharyl. 2002. “Speech Acts Sets of Refusal and Complaints: A Comparison of Native and Non-native English Speakers’ Production.” TESOL Working Papers ([URL] accessed September 1, 2015)![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Dijk, Teun. 1977. Text and Context. London: Longman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Kurzon, Dennis
2024.
Changes in the Status and Nature of a Family Court Case.
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique ![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Bączkowska, Anna
2023.
Implicit offensiveness from linguistic and computational perspectives: A study of irony and sarcasm.
Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 19:2
► pp. 353 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Siyech, Mohammed Sinan & Akanksha Narain
2018.
Beef-related Violence in India: An Expression of Islamophobia.
Islamophobia Studies Journal 4:2
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.