The question ”can you pass the salt

The question ”can you pass the salt ?”overtly draws attention to one of the felicity conditions of the act of requestion. It is as if the speaker goes about getting the salt passed to him by carefully ensuring that the necessary preconditions for having his request granted are fulfilled from this example we can state the following appropriate rule about direct and indirect illocutions.

Rule Where the direct illocution of an utterance is deliberately infelicitous ,the indirect illocution is an act to which the hearer’s attention is drawn by mentioning one of its felicity conditions.

The rule is merely a suggestive beginning. It is by no means the whole story. For the rest of this unit, we will investigate in greater detail in possible methods by which speakers recognize the indirect illocutions of utterances for this purpose, it has been found useful to classify all illocutionary acts into different categories, depending on the type of interaction between speaker and hearer that they bring about. Two classes of illocutionary acts that we shall mention are Directives and Commissives.
The Directive act is any illocutionary act which essentially involves the speaker trying to get the hearer to behave in some required way.

Example Ordering and suggesting are directive acts. Apologizing and promising are not.

A commissive act is any illocutionary act which essentially involves the speaker committing himself to behave in some required way.

Example promising and swearing (in one sense) are commissive acts, ordering and thanking are not.

There are other classes of illocution which we do not mention here. Thus thanking and apologizing, for example , do not belong to either of the groups that we have mentioned.
Do not confuse the terms ‘’ direct ‘’ and ‘’ directives’’, which mean quite different kinds of things. The term ‘’ direct’’ denotes how an illocution is carried out, i.e. getting ( directing ) someone to do something. Thus there can be direct directives ( e.g. ‘’ Pass the salt ) and indirect directive ( e .g .” pass the salt !”)and indirect directive (e. g. “can you pass the salt ?”) Naturally there can also both direct and indirect commissives .
Getting other people to do things oneself are two of the most important activities in maintaining the social fabric of our everyday lives .society as we know could not exist without the availability of a range of directive and commissive acts.
Asserting and questioning certain of the felicity conditions of a directive are (more or less polite and more or less reliable) ways of carrying out an indirect directives. we will look at the effects of asserting and questioning the general felicity condition on directives which concerns the hearer’s ability to carry out the requested action.
It must be said that there is something rather odd (perhaps excessively indirect ) about the assertions (though not about the questions) in these cases. we will not try to analyze this difficulty .
So far we have concentrated on indirect commssives . We will now look briefly at indirect commissive, seeing how they also can be achieved by various kinds of assertions and questions.
Asserting or questioning the speaker’s ability to perform some action can give rice to a commissive illocution but only some commissive illocution (e. g. offer ) can be conveyed in this indirect way. Promises, for instance, apparently cannot be so made. Presumably promises, being more solemn and binding then offer, require a more deliberate and explicit means of expression. Acts of volunteering seem of fall between offer and promises in the degree of directness they require.

Hasil (Vietnam) 1:

Câu hỏi "bạn có thể vượt qua muối?" công khai thu hút sự chú ý đến một trong các điều kiện felicity của các hành động của requestion. Nó là như nếu loa đi về nhận được muối được thông qua với anh ta bằng cách cẩn thận bảo đảm rằng các điều kiện tiên quyết cần thiết cho việc có yêu cầu của mình được cấp được thực hiện từ ví dụ này, chúng tôi có thể nhà nước các quy tắc thích hợp sau về trực tiếp và gián tiếp illocutions.Quy tắc illocution một câu phát biểu, trực tiếp đâu cố ý infelicitous illocution gián tiếp là một hành động mà sự chú ý của người nghe rút ra bằng cách đề cập một trong các điều kiện felicity.Các quy định là chỉ đơn thuần là một sự khởi đầu khêu gợi. Do không có nghĩa là toàn bộ câu chuyện. Đối với phần còn lại của đơn vị này, chúng tôi sẽ điều tra chi tiết hơn trong phương pháp có thể người mà nhận ra illocutions lời, gián tiếp cho mục đích này, nó đã được tìm thấy hữu ích để phân loại tất cả illocutionary hành động thành các loại khác nhau, tùy thuộc vào loại tương tác giữa người nói và người nghe mà họ mang lại. Các lớp học hai hành vi illocutionary chúng tôi sẽ đề cập đến là chỉ thị và Commissives. Hành động chỉ là bất kỳ hành động illocutionary mà chủ yếu liên quan đến người nói đang cố gắng để có được người nghe để hành xử theo một cách nào đó yêu cầu.Ví dụ Ordering và đề nghị là hành vi chỉ thị. Không phải xin lỗi và hứa hẹn. Một hành động commissive là bất kỳ hành động illocutionary mà chủ yếu liên quan đến loa cam kết chính mình để cư xử một cách nào đó yêu cầu. Example promising and swearing (in one sense) are commissive acts, ordering and thanking are not.There are other classes of illocution which we do not mention here. Thus thanking and apologizing, for example , do not belong to either of the groups that we have mentioned.Do not confuse the terms ‘’ direct ‘’ and ‘’ directives’’, which mean quite different kinds of things. The term ‘’ direct’’ denotes how an illocution is carried out, i.e. getting ( directing ) someone to do something. Thus there can be direct directives ( e.g. ‘’ Pass the salt ) and indirect directive ( e .g .” pass the salt !”)and indirect directive (e. g. “can you pass the salt ?”) Naturally there can also both direct and indirect commissives . Getting other people to do things oneself are two of the most important activities in maintaining the social fabric of our everyday lives .society as we know could not exist without the availability of a range of directive and commissive acts.Asserting and questioning certain of the felicity conditions of a directive are (more or less polite and more or less reliable) ways of carrying out an indirect directives. we will look at the effects of asserting and questioning the general felicity condition on directives which concerns the hearer’s ability to carry out the requested action.It must be said that there is something rather odd (perhaps excessively indirect ) about the assertions (though not about the questions) in these cases. we will not try to analyze this difficulty .So far we have concentrated on indirect commssives . We will now look briefly at indirect commissive, seeing how they also can be achieved by various kinds of assertions and questions. Asserting or questioning the speaker’s ability to perform some action can give rice to a commissive illocution but only some commissive illocution (e. g. offer ) can be conveyed in this indirect way. Promises, for instance, apparently cannot be so made. Presumably promises, being more solemn and binding then offer, require a more deliberate and explicit means of expression. Acts of volunteering seem of fall between offer and promises in the degree of directness they require.