1.

Nord’s Factors of Textual (Source-Text) Analysis

. Let us restate, then, that communicative function is the decisive criterion for textuality, to which the
semantic and syntactic features of the text are subordinate. Utterances lacking semantic coherence as
well as utterances without the necessary formal and syntactic properties of cohesion are considered
“texts” by their recipients as soon as they fulfil a communicative function.

. Thus the communicative function of the source text, which is represented by the factors of the
communicative situation in which the source text fulfils its function, is of decisive importance for text
analysis. I call these factors “extratextual” or “external” factors. (As opposed to the “intratextual” or
“internal” factors relating to the text itself, its non-verbal elements.)

Extratextual Factors

1-Who transmits 2- What for 3-By which medium 4- Where 5- When 6- Why 7-To whom

All these answers to the last question “with what function?”

Intratextual Factors

1-What(what not) 2-In what order 3-Using which non-verbal elements 4-In which words 5-In what
kind of sentences 6-In which tone 7-To what effect

2. Defining Discourse by HUGH TRAPPES-LOMAX

.Discourse analysis may, broadly speaking, be defined as the study of language viewed
communicatively and/or of communication viewed linguistically. Any more detailed spelling
out of such a definition typically involves reference to concepts of language in use, language
above or beyond the sentence, language as meaning in interaction, and language in situational
and cultural context.
. Depending on their particular convictions and affiliations – functionalism, structuralism,
social interactionism, etc. – linguists will tend to emphasize one, or some, rather than others in
this list.
A: You THREW it so you GET it
B: MOI↓ra+ I’ll call my MUM

Linguist 1 sees a text – the verbal record of a speech event, something visible, palpable and
portable, consisting of various bits of linguistic meaning (words, clauses, prosodic features,
etc.). This linguist is mainly interested in the way the parts of the text relate to each other to
constitute a unit of meaning.

Linguist 2 sees beyond the text to the event of which it is the verbal record. Linguist 2 is most
likely the person who collected the data; and who made the following note describing some
features of the situation in which the Exchange took place:

[sunny Sunday afternoon, Edinburgh Botanic Garden, two girls, both aged 7or 8, on a path;
one of them has kicked the ball they are playing within to the bushes]

This linguist is mainly interested in the relationships between the various factors in the event:
the participants, their cultural backgrounds, their relationship to each other, the setting, what
is going on, the various linguistic choices made, etc.
Linguist 3 sees the text and the event but then beyond both to the performance being enacted,
the drama being played out between the two girls: what has happened, who is responsible,
how the girls evaluate these facts (relate them to some existing framework of beliefs and
attitudes about how the world – their world – works), how they respond to them, what each is
trying to achieve, their strategies for attempting to achieve these objectives, etc. This linguist
is mainly interested in the dynamics of the process that makes the event happen.

Linguist 4 sees the text, the event, and the drama; but beyond these, and focally, the
framework of knowledge and power which, if properly understood, will explain how it is
possible for the two children, individually and jointly, to enact and interpret their drama in the
way they do.

We may, not unreasonably, imagine that our four linguists are colleagues in the same
university department. Each recognizes the validity of the perspective of each of the others,
and the fact that, far from there being any necessary conflictor “incommensurability” between
them, the perspectives are complementary: all are needed for a full understanding of what
discourse is and how it works.

As implied by the above, I do not think there is much to be gained from attempts to achieve a
single definition of discourse that is both comprehensive and succinct. Here instead is a set of
definitions in the style of a dictionary entry for “discourse”:

discourse

1 the linguistic, cognitive and social processes where by meanings are expressed and
intentions interpreted in human interaction (linguist 3);
2 the historically and culturally embedded sets of conventions which constitute and regulate
such processes (linguist 4);
3 a particular event in which such processes are instantiated (represented by a concrete
instance) (linguist 2);
4 the product of such an event, especially in the form of visible text, whether originally
spoken and subsequently transcribed or originally written (linguist 1).

3. Imagery as a figure of speech

.The linguistic characteristics of a poem that poet gave and the intentional meaning of the poem given
by the poet creates the imagery of it, while reading.
.Let’s say in a love poem, firstly the poet presents us with a specific situation f.e. the lover goes to
meet his sweetheart and secondly he describes the journey with the lovers emotions in order to create
anticipation and excitement to the reader.
.Every line in the poem contains some image, some appeal to the senses. The gray sea, the long black
land f.e. for further examples it may give to the reader a specific smell about some specific place
giving in the poem or a specific sound about a specific thing.
4. “Speech Acts” by Basil Hatim: locutionary act (düz söz), illocutionary act (edim söz),
perlocutionary act (etki söz)
. Speech acts are the acts we perform when, for example, we make a complaint or a request, apologize
or pay someone a compliment.
.The pragmatic analysis of speech acts sees all utterances in terms of the dual function of ‘stating’ and
‘doing things’, of having a meaning and a force. An utterance, in this view has;

a-) a sense or reference to specific events, persons or objects

b-) a force which may override literal sense and thus relay added effects such as those associated with,
say, a request or admonition (a firm warning or reprimand – ihtar yada öğüt)
c-) an overall effect or consequence which may or may not be of the kind conventionally associated
with the linguistic expression or the functional force involved.

.For example, shut the door is in a sense an imperative that could conceivably carry the force of a
request, which in turn could be used simply to annoy the hearer. To these three aspects of message
construction, Austin assigned the labels locution, illocution and perlocution respectively.

.There is a huge difference between acts such as ‘promising’ or ‘threatening’ on the one hand, and
more diffuse acts such as ‘stating’ or ‘describing’ on the other. Yet both lists are merged under the
single heading of ‘illocutionary force’.

5. Paraphrase and asking questions about the text in poetic-text analysis

.Someone has defined poetry as “the expression of elevated thought in elevated language.”
Comment on the adequacy of this definition in the light of Hardy’s poem.
.One starting point for misunderstanding, is to paraphrase its content or clearing up misunderstanding,
is to paraphrase its content or part of its content. To paraphrase a poem means to restate it in different
language, so as to make its prose sense as plain as possible. The paraphrase may be longer or shorter
than the poem, but it should contain all the ideas in the poem in such a way as to make them clear a
puzzled reader, and to make the central idea, or theme, of the poem more accessible.
.Notice that in a paraphrase, figurative language gives way to literal language;similes replace
metaphors and normal word order supplants inverted syntax. But a paraphrase retains the speaker’s
use of first, second, and third person, and the tenses of verbs. Though it is neither necessary nor
possible to avoid using some of the words found in the original, a paraphrase should strive for plain,
direct diction. And since a paraphrase is prose, it does not maintain the length and position of poetic
lines.
.A paraphrase is useful only if you understand that it is the barest, most inadequate approximation of
what the poem really “says” and is no more equivalent to the poem than a corpse is to a person.

.To aid us in the understanding of a poem, we may ask ourselves a number of questions about it.
Two of the most important are “Who is the speaker?” and “What is the occasion?”
.A cardinal error of some readers is to assume that a speaker who uses the first person pronouns is
always the poet. A less risky course would be to assume always that the speaker is someone other than
the poet.
.We must be very careful, therefore, about identifying anything in a poem with the biography of the
poet.
.A third important question that we should ask ourselves upon reading any poem is “What is the
central purpose of the poem”. The purpose may be to tell a story, to reveal human character, to
impart a vivid impression of a scene, to express a mood or an emotion, or to convey vividly some idea
or attitude. Whatever the purpose is, we must determine it for ourselves and define in the poem to the
central purpose or theme can we fully understand their function and meaning.

6. Austin’s account of speech acts: “How to Do Things with Words” (Lecture III): locutionary act (düz
söz), illocutionary act (edim söz), perlocutionary act (etki söz)
.But though these matters are of much interest, they do not so far throw any light at all on our problem
of constative as opposed to the performative utterance. For example, it might be perfectly possible,
with regard to an utterance, say “It is going to charge”, to make entirely plain “ what we were saying”
in issuing the utterance I have cleared up whether or not in issuing the utterance I was performing the
act of warning or not. It may be perfectly clear what I mean by “ It is going to charge” or “Shut the
door”, but not clear where it is meant as a statement or warning.
.To perform a locutionary act is in general, we may say, also and ‘eo ipso’ to perform an illocutionary
act, as I propose to call it. To determine what illocutionary act is so performed we must determine in
what way we are using the locution:
a- asking or answering a question,
b- giving some information or an assurance or a warning,
c- announcing a verdict or an intention
d-pronouncing sentence,
e- making an appointment or an appeal or a criticism,
f- making an identification or giving a description,
.True, we are now getting out of this; for some years we have been realizing more and more clearly
that the occasion of an utterance matters seriously, and that the words used are to some extent to be
‘explained’ by the ‘context’ in which they are designed to be or have actually been spoken in a
linguistic interchange.
.Admittedly we can use ‘meaning’ also with reference to illocutionary force – ‘He meant it is an
order’, but I want to distinguish force and meaning in the sense in which meaning is equivalent to
sense and reference, just as it has become essential to distinguish sense and reference within meaning.
.We may entirely clear up the ‘use of a sentence’ on a particular occasion, in the sense of the
locutionary act, without yet touching upon its use in the sense of an illocutionary act.
.There is yet a further sense in which to perform a locutionary act, and therein an illocutionary act,
may also be to perform an act of another kind. Saying something will often, or even normally, produce
certain consequential effects upon the feelings, thoughts, or actions of the audience, or of the speaker,
or of other persons: and it may be done with the design, intention, or purpose of producing them.
.We shall call the performance of an act of this kind the performance of a perlocutionary act of this
kind the performance of a perlocutionary act or perlocution.
Examples :

Locution:
- A-)He said to me ‘Shoot her!’ meaning by ‘shoot’ shoot and referring by ‘her’ to her
- B- He said to me, ‘ You can’t do that’
Illocution
- A-)He urged (or advised, ordered exc.) me to shoot her
- B-)He protested against my doing it
Perlocution
- A-) 1-He persuaded me to shoot her.
- 2-He got me to (or made me) shoot her
- B-) 1-He pulled me up, checked me.
- 2-He stopped me, he brought me to my senses, He annoyed me.

.We can similarly distinguish the locutionary act ‘ he said that’ from the illocutionary act ‘he argued
that’ and the perlocutionary act ‘ he convinced me that’.
7. Austin's classification of performative/illocutionary acts: verdictives, exercitives, commissives,
behabitives, expositives.

1-Verdictives: are typified by the giving of a verdict, as the name implies, by a jury, arbitrator, or
umpire. But they need not be final ; they may be, for example, an estimate, reckoning, or appraisal. It
is essentially giving a funding as to something –fact or value— which is for different reasons hard to
be certain about.
2-Exercitives: are the exercising of powers, rights or influence. Examples are appointing, voting,
ordering, urging, advising, warning.
3-Commissives: are typified by promising or otherwise undertaking; they commit you to doing
something, but include also declarations or announcements of intention, which are not promises, and
also rather vague things which we may call espousals, as for example, siding with. They have obvious
connexions with verdictives and exercitives.

4-Behabitives: are a very miscellaneous group, and have to do with attitudes and social behaviour.
Examples are apologizing, congratulating, commending, condoling, cursing and challenging.

5- Expositives: are difficult to define. They make plain how our utterances fit into the course of an
argument or conversation, how we are using words, or in general, are expository. Examples are ‘I
reply’, ‘I argue’, ‘I concede’, ‘I illustrate’, ‘I assume’, ‘I postulate’. We should be clear from the start
that there are still wide possibilities of marginal or awkward cases, or of overlaps.

. To, sum up, we may say that the verdictive is an exercise of judgement, the exercitive is an assertion
of influence or exercising of power, the commissive is an assuming of an obligation or declaring of an
intention, the behabitive is the adopting of an attitude, and the expositive is the clarifying of reasons,
arguments, and communications.
8. John Searl's classification of performative/illocutionary acts by Christina Schaffner

.John R. Searle’s five types of illocutionary acts ;

a-): representatives (describing how the world is)
b-) directives (making a request, giving an order or advice or permission, etc.),
c-) expressives (expressing the speaker’s state of mind or attitude about some prior action; thanking,
regreting, making a complaint or apology, deploring, admiring, etc. and verdictives such as assessing,
estimating),
d-) commissives (making an offer or a promise)
e-) declarations (christening or naming a baby or a ship, sentencing a defendant, or declaring
“husband and wife”.)

The criteria used are:

a) the illocutionary purpose of the act
b) direction of fit (the relation between words and the world)
c) the psychological state of the mind expressed by the speaker (the sincerity condition)

Communicative functions: Language can be regarded as a form of verbal acting.

. Searle’s in his article ‘A Classification of Illocutionary Acts’, makes a consistent classification of

functions of language usage by dividing illocutionary acts into a limited number of major categories.

(BİR) Representatives: The speaker’s purpose in performing representatives is to commit him/herself

to the belief that the propositional content of the utterance is true. In attempt to describe the world, the
speaker says how something is, or tries to make ‘the words match the world’
(İKİ) Directives: In performing directives, the speaker tries to get the hearer commit him/herself to
some future course of action.

EHE EHE DİYE DİYE BUNLARIN DEVAMINI GONDERMEMIS HERALDE KISALTMALARI

VAR ORDAN ARTIK
9. Jakobson’s functions of language: phatic function, informatives, expressives, directives,
metalinguistic function, poetic function.

. The phatic function is employed to open the channel of communication, to catch the reader’s
attention, etc.
. The metalinguistic function addresses the code as such commenting on specific language aspects.
In my approach, the metalinguistic function is included in the category of representatives, as
metalinguistic utterances are statements, statements about language phenomena.
.The poetic function, which serves the function of ‘decorating’ and making the language more
interesting to read, is included in the ideational function as a rhetorical device.

Expressives ve directives 8. Madde ile aynı ama informatives yok

10. Levels of formality/style: frozen style, formal, consultative, casual, the final style/intimate style by
Joos and Strevens.

Examples:
.Frozen – Visitors should make their way at once to the upper floor by way of the staircase.
Without any emotion – used in legal documents, various other official texts

Formal – Visitors should go up the stairs at once.

Resmi demek bu zaten – predominates in academic texts, including lectures and speeches.

Consultative – Would you mind going upstairs right away, please?

-Predominates in interpersonal oral exchanges between of unequal social rank, such as between a
subordinate, student or client, and a boss, supervisor, teacher, lawyer, doctor, priest or counsellor.
Consultative may be also referred to as ‘neutral’.

Casual – Time you all went up upstairs now.

Günlük konuşma dili – Predominates in interpersonal oral exchanges between peers, members of in-
group friends and good acquaintances. It is characterized by the use of slang and by short.

Intimate – Up you go, chops!

Samimi dil -Predominate in non-public situations as between members of a family, close intimate
friends or lovers.