Abstract

• This paper aims to explore speech acts through both discourse and pragmatic perspectives. In terms of the discourse-focused mode, turn-taking is one of the key components in speech analysis as it helps to understand the structure of a conversation and reveals how speech acts are used in context. From a pragmatic perspective, speech acts are crucial for understanding speakers’ intentions and desires, which are difficult to identify because they are embedded in context. Specifically, this paper attempts to analyse various types of speech acts found in the short story The Monkey’s Paw. The first part of the research is based on Bennison’s (1998) framework on discourse analysis, which includes turn allocation and turn-taking, topic shift/control, and turn length in order to investigate how the characters interact and manage their conversational roles. It also builds on Toolan’s (1998) “give and take” model, which analyses dialogue based on speech functions such as offers, requests, informs and questions. In the second part, Searle’s (1976) speech act theory is applied to examine how the use of illocutionary acts in characters’ utterances reflects their personalities in the horror story. It is found that the dominant pattern of turn-taking is “current speaker selects next”, which shows that speakers control the flow of conversation. In particular, Mr. White leads the conversation and allocates turns which indicate his dominance in the interaction. Moreover, most characters prefer discussing a particular topic rather than shifting to another; this reveals their strong interest in the mysterious power of the paw. Regarding turn length, Morris’s turns are the longest as he provides detailed explanations about the monkey’s paw and its effects. It is also found that the most frequent type of speech act is representatives followed by directives and expressives, while the least frequent type is commissives. No declaration is found in the horror story. The dominant use of representative speech acts in Mr. White’s utterances reveals that he is rational and disbelieves in supernatural power. In addition, more directive speech acts are found in Mrs. White’s utterances in Part III, where she commands her husband to make a second wish. This highlights the protective nature of a mother and her emotional instability. Moreover, the two main characters lead the conversation by taking more turns, and the majority of spoken exchanges occur among family members.