Former Muslims’ Socio-Religious Discourse on Social Media: A Speech Acts Analysis
Abstract
This study aims to provide insights into the speech acts in socio-religious discourse constructed by former Malaysian Muslims on social media. This study employs a blended analytical lens consisting of Searle’s (1999) taxonomy of speech acts and van Dijk’s (1992) perspective of micro and macro speech acts. The analysis reveals that all five conventional speech act categories are represented in the discourse. But these categories do not provide insights into the real performances in the construction of discourse unless they are combined with analysis of actual performances at utterance level and at discourse level. Using blended speech act analysis, this study provides deeper insights into how and what former Muslims accomplish through their use of language while constructing anti-religious discourse on social media. The analysis revealed that from van Dijk’s (1992) perspective of speech acts, at the utterance level; argument is the most used micro-speech act followed by denial, persuasion, suggestion, rejection, warning, and assertion. At the discourse level; argument is also the most common macro-speech act followed by rejection, denial, warning, assertion, persuasion, information, and direction. This study concludes that the social media affordances enabled the former Muslims living in Islamic countries to perform speech acts and construct derogatory discourse on Islam. Further the strategic speech acts identified demonstrate former Muslims’ tendency, capacity and intention of challenging religious, especially Islamic, authoritative discourse.
Keywords: social media; ex-Muslims; micro-speech acts; macro-speech acts; discourse
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Clarendon Press.
Benamara, F., Inkpen, D., & Taboada, M. (2018). Introduction to the special issue on language in social media: Exploiting discourse and other contextual information. Computational Linguistics, 44(4), 663–682.
Chang, L. (2019). Derogatory words and speech acts: An illocutionary force indicator theory of slurs. [Doctoral dissertation, The University of Western Ontario]. Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/6386
Hanoon, Z. R., & Faisal, W. M. (2021). A sociopragmatic study of taunt in trump’s political tweets. PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt / Egyptology, 18(5), 454-465.
Hashmi, U. M., Rashid, R. A., & Munir, R. (2021). On the psychology of argument: A structural analysis of former Muslims' postings within Malaysian social media. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(740558).
Herring, S.C., & Kapidzic, S. (2015). Teens, gender and self-presentation in social media. In J.-D.-Wright (Ed.), International encyclopaedia of social and behavioural sciences, (pp. 146-152). Elsevier.
Hisham, H. A., & Hashim F. (2022). Promoting political engagement among youth: Analysis of speech act ptterns in Syed Saddiq's speech. 3L: Language, Linguistics 28(3), 296-308.
Idris, H., & Ghani, R.A. (2012). Construction of Knowledge on Facebook. 3L: Language, Linguistics 18(3), 61-72.
Ilyas, S., & Khushi, Q. (2012). Facebook status updates: A speech act analysis. Academic Research International, 3(2), 500-507.
Khalaf, Y.M.R.A (2018). A Pragmatic Analysis of the Language of Facebook Posts and Status Updates [Master’s thesis, Ain Shams University]. Published by Egypts Presidential Specialized Council for Education and Scientific Research.
Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. Longman.
Mohamad, A., Rashid, R. A., Yunus, K., Rahman, S. B., Darus, S., Musa, R., & Teh, K. S. (2018). Speech acts in the Facebook status updates posted by an apostate. International Journal of English Linguistics, 8(4), 226.
Nastri, J., Peña, J., & Hancock, J.T. (2006). The Construction of Away Messages: A Speech Act Analysis. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(4), 1025-1045.
Nodoushan, S. M. A. (2014). Speech acts or language micro- and macro-games? International Journal of Language Studies, 8(4), 1-28.
Nordquist, R. (2019). Speech Act in linguistics. Retrieved December 7, 2021 from https://www.thoughtco.com/speech-act-linguistics-1692119
Oprea, D. (2019, June 20-21). Discourse analysis in social media. [Paper presentation]. In the proceedings of International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conference on the Dialogue between Sciences & Arts, Religion & Education, Targoviste, Romania.
Pebrianto, M., Daniarsa, H. L., & Awaliyah, D. (2018). Types of Speech Acts Used on Instagram Comments of EllenDegeneres’ Account. [Paper presentation]. In the proceedings of Seminar Nasional Struktural 2018, Semarang, Indonesia.
Pennington, R. (2018). Making space in social media: #Muslimwomensday in Twitter. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 42(3), 199-217.
Ritzer, G. (2015). The “New” world of prosumption: Evolution, “Return of the same,” or revolution?. Sociological Forum, 30(1), 1–17.
Roberts, C. (2018). Speech acts in discourse context. In D. Fogal, D. W. Harris, & M. Moss (Eds.), New work on speech acts (pp. 317-359). Oxford University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech Act: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1999). Expressions and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge University Press.
Sidiq, A. J., & Simatupang, E. (2019). Illocutionary Speech Acts on Tweets Posted by Public Figures: Pragmatics Study. English Journal Literacy Utama, 3(2), 132-141.
Simon, S. (2008). The Pragmatic Structure of Written Advertisements. In R. Superceanu & D. Dejica (Eds.), Professional Communication and Translation Studies. [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference of the Politehnica University of Timisoara (pp. 51-58). Timisoara, Romania.
Simon, S., & Dejica-Cartis, D. (2015). Speech Acts in Written Advertisements: Identification, Classification and Analysis. Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences, 192, 234–239.
van Dijk, T. A. (1992). Text and Context: Explorations in the semantics and pragmatics of discourse. Longman.
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17576/3L-2022-2804-14
Refbacks
eISSN : 2550-2247
ISSN : 0128-5157