A Pragma-Stylistic Study of Soliloquy Scenes in Marlowe's Dr. Faustus

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

322

A Pragma-Stylistic Study of Soliloquy Scenes in Marlowe's Dr.

Faustus

By: Asst. Prof. Azhaar Hassan Saloomy

Abstract

The present study is a pragma –stylistic analysis of soliloquy scenes in Marlowe‟s

Dr.Faustus. It attempts to attest how the two prominent theories in pragmatics

namely : Speech Act (SA ) and Cooperative Principle(CP) are employed stylistically

to achieve the writer‟s goals and reflect his perception . The paper aims to specify the

speech acts used by Faustus to accomplish some stylistic effects , show the most

recurrent non- observed maxim in the selected data, explain how the non- observance

of Grice‟s conversational maxims along with figures of speech yield effect on the

speaker –listener interaction , and finally, illuminate the way the difference in the

purpose of the speech can affect the scattering of speech acts and following the

cooperative principle . Based on an eclectic model, the data which is limited to

Faustus‟s four soliloquies in the play is analyzed. It contains Searle‟s (1969) model of

the classification of SAs, Grice‟s (1975) CP model, Black (2006) model, and Niazi and

Gautam‟s (2010) . The paper reveals that the consistency of a specific speech act rather

than others in each soliloquy depends wholly on what the speaker plans to convey (i.e.

persuading, deceiving, agreeing about something, requesting, misleading ...etc.).This

explains why directive speech acts symbolised in Faustus‟s endless requests are

frequent in the first and last soliloquies where as commisive and assertive speech acts

are common in the second and third ones respectively. Additionally, flouting merely

occurs in Grice‟s quantity and quality maxims. This non-observance is mostly denoted

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

323

via irony, metaphor, rhetorical question, repetition, and lastly paradox which are all

have their own vital impact on the speaker-hearer interaction and generating

conversational implicature. (i.e. the implicit meaning). Hence, speech acts and the non-

observance of Grice's maxims are noteworthy tools for a more generous

conversational exchange.

Key Words : Soliloquy, Marlowe , Dr. Faustus , pragma-stylistics

1. Introduction

The study of language from the users‟ view is closely associated with the field of

pragmatics that tackles the choices the users make, the limits they encounter in using

language in social communication, and the impact their use of language has on the

other contributors in an act of communication (Crystal, 2003: 364). On reacting

towards a question like “ what is the function of pragmatics? '', Mey (2001 : 7) points

out that pragmatics helps to get a fuller, deeper, and mostly more sensible account of

human language behaviour. So, pragmatics concerns with the ''invisible meaning'' or

how we identify what is intended even when it is not really said (or written).The

operational definition of pragmatics adopted by the researcher in this study is Lazar‟s

In his view , speech, as in everyday life, is both content and action. It embodies

content as every discourse denotes a referent and fulfils certain rules of discourse

where as it represents action because it has to persuade, defend or accuse, give orders

or expose feelings …etc. (2013:443 ). Additionally, he (ibid) remarks that

conversation, itself, as a mutual act, preserves particular rules and principles. For the

most part, it includes topic nomination, turn-taking, negotiation of meaning …etc. A

better account of any dramatic work requires much support from the part of linguistics,

mainly pragmatics and discourse. Pragmatists have promptly denounced the notion of

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

324

competence as being too restrictive, and they have extended its field of study to

become “a complex system of skills where linguistic and socio-cultural knowledge are

inextricably linked.” Consequently, the inferential model improves the concept of

competence and provides more complexity to the grasping of the message, which they

find hard to lessen to a simple practice of interpretation (Kerbrat- Orecction, 1999:

30).

Generally speaking , understanding the speaker‟s message or meaning which is the

main concern of pragmatics is closely associated with the violations for the

regulations of conversation sometimes happen along with figures of speech such as

irony, paradox , metaphor , … etc. that all relate to notion of style .Hence, it is

interesting to investigate the stylistic impact of some pragmatic theories beside the

figures of speech in literary texts and show how they reflect the perceptions of the

literary writers . The present study tackles the field of pragma- stylistics in soliloquy

scenes of Marlowe‟s play “Dr. Faustus” where the speaker addresses the listener

directly. It is significant that certain scholarly works have been done in the field of

pragmatics and stylistics and in both written as well as spoken discourse such as

poems, presidential speeches, novels, and dramatic works. Dunya I‟jam & Zahra

Mamouri, in their paper entitled “ A Pragma-Stylistic Study of Some Selected Fantasy

Novels”(2019), tackle how the non –observance of Grice‟s maxims along with figures

of speech have a vital impact on interaction across the multiple discourse levels( the

character-character level and author –reader level ) in fantasy novels. As far as the

dramatic discourse is concerned, a similar pragma-stylistic analysis is achieved by

Ahmed Mubarak & Raad Abd-Aun. In their paper “A Pragma-stylistic Analysis of

E. E. Cummings‟ Play Him” (2019 ), they refer to the fact that patterns of speech acts

available in the dramatic work provide contextual details about the characters'

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

325

psychological state and the dimensions of their personalities. Further, they verify how

the non-observance of Grice‟s maxims help the characters in the play to convey ideas

and messages indirectly. However, the novelty of this study lies in showing the link

between the regularity of a particular speech act in this kind of speech, soliloquy, and

its basic motive .Additionally, it explores the contribution of following the

cooperative principle in the realization of the speaker‟s embedded meaning in spite of

deviation from Grice‟s maxims that occurs along with some noteworthy figures of

speech .The researcher seeks answers to the following general questions:

1. What are the stylistic effects of the two pragmatic theories namely: Speech Act and

Cooperative principle reflected along with figures of speech?

2- What is the connection between the distribution or the repetition of a particular

brand of speech acts and the speaker‟s intended meaning or the target of his speech?

3. Does the character (Faustus) flout all Grice‟s conversational maxims? Why?

4- How does flouting take place?

5- What effect does the flouting have on the plot of the play?

Along with the questions above, the study aims to achieve the following:

1- Identifying the most dominant sorts of speech acts used by Faustus to perform

some stylistic effects

2- Illustrating the link between the occurrence of a specific pattern of acts and the

speaker‟s intention.

3- Showing the frequent flouted maxims in the selected data

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

326

4- Exploring how that flouting along with figures of speech yield impact on the

speaker –listener interaction.

5-Illustrating the contribution of speech acts and flouting of Grice‟s conversational

maxims revealed together with figures of speech in illuminating the character‟s

psychology , accomplishing a fruitful interaction between the speaker and hearer

,developing the plot ,and finally enhancing a better comprehension of the text.

2. Theoretical Background

2.1 Pragma-Stylistics

For applying the findings and methodologies linked to the field of pragmatics and the

notion of style in language , pragma-stylistic approach is used . Pragma-stylistic aims

to link the writing and reading of literary texts that have taken place in the linguistic

and sociocultural contexts. In this sense , it is literary on one hand and linguistic on the

other with excessive emphasis on contextualization (Sell, 1991 : 99). To Hickey (1989,

p. 8, cited in D‟hondt et al., 2009: 23), pragma-stylistics is an attempt “ to show how

the different possible ways of saying „the same thing‟ (style) depend on factors which

compose the situation (pragmatic factors)”. Sell (1991:99) agrees with him and adds

that the field of pragma-stylistics relies on two altered areas that each is grounded on

certain principles. Consequently , intuitive analyses are the most work this approach

depends on . Henceforth, figures of speech which are related to stylistics will be

mentioned next in addition to the pragmatic theories: speech act theory and

cooperative principles.

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

327

2.2 Figures of Speech

To create a captivating and a remarkable influence or make the meaning of a sentence

easier to remember, writers tend to employ figures of speech through which words or

phrases go beyond their genuine meaning. Such figures succeed to turn any piece of

literary work to be more attractive or interesting (Stefoff, 2018: 5).

2.2.1 Irony

Irony is a device used to express the intentional meaning of an expression. The

ironic expression usually contrasts with the literal meaning. It is used to reflect the

words or assume views of someone else, and it is devoted to mock or ridicule, (Cruse,

2006: 90).To Learning (1997 :76), identifying irony in any literary work is not an

easy task as it relates to the tone and the writer‟s view towards the work.

2.2.2 Foreshadow

Foreshadow is a figure of speech that prepares the reader for an event that is to come

Consequently , it provides the readers with eagerness and expectation for the outcome

(Robb , 2017 :124) . It is achieved via a hint deliberately used by the writers earlier in

the literary work and this leads the reader to believe that something will happen later

on (Putnam, 2005: 20).

2.2.3 Rhetorical Question

One of the most extensively recycled figures of speech used for the persuasive impact

is the rhetorical question. It is syntactically and phonologically marked as a question.

Nevertheless, its answer is obvious to the extent that it gives the reader a complete

freedom to answer or not and at the same time leads the reader for a particular

conclusion (Ainsworth-Vaughn, 1998: 105). It is either so thoughtful that it is clearly

impossible to be answered, or it is apparent to the degree that it is impossibly obvious

(Black,1992: 2).

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

328

2.2.4 Repetition

Tannen (2007:2) points out that repetition is the “ recurrence of words and collocations

of words in the same discourse” . It is one of the rhetorical devices that is used as a

persuasive tool. To Gray (1984 : 172) , repetition accomplishes “a vital part of the

language of literature both in verse and prose”. On the other hand , Hawthorn (2000:

297) illustrates the fact that although language is appreciated in its practicality for

conveying information or meanings, repetition may carry no new information. Yet, it

has an aesthetic power and a great function, as Leech and Short (2007: 199) reveal, it

is used to emphasize or give rich enhancing to the repeated meaning.

2.2.5 Metaphor

Metaphor is a form of figurative language which refers to words, phrases or

expressions that mean something different from their literal definition. Thus, in this

traditional view metaphor is seen as merely a matter of an implicit comparison

where one concept is compared to another (Saeed, 1997: 302). The transition in the

view of metaphor appears specifically after the publication of Lakoff and Johnson

(1980)book Metaphors we live by where metaphor is seen as a significant mode of

thinking and talking about the world. Metaphor shows up not only in literature,

poetry and writing, but also in speech . Through metaphor , words come to life ,the

subject will be more relatable to the reader , and finally the complex concept will be

easier to understand Generally , metaphors can be a remarkable help when we want to

enhance our writing with imagery. As a mutual figure of speech, metaphors turn up

everywhere from novels and plays to political speeches and even common songs.

2.3 Speech Act Theory

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

329

One of the most significant theories in pragmatics is Speech Act Theory. It is

developed by the British philosopher John Langshow Austin in the 1930s and

expanded in a succession of lectures that he presented at Harvard University in 1955

(Finch, 2005: 171). It is worth mentioning that Austin, in his sixties, (1962) was the

first who gave consideration to utterances by which the speaker does not only say

something; but also achieve something. He has called such utterances “performatives”

since they do not describe something but they perform an action. For example:

1. I name my son John.

2. I advise you to stop smoking.

Later, the term Speech Act Theory has become to be mainly linked with one of its sub

constituents namely: illocutionary act. To Van Dijk (1977: 195) , the term Speech Act

denotes more specifically the illocutionary act when performing some explicit social

act, e.g. making a promise, giving advice …etc. Finch (2005: 171) clarifies that the

action performed by constructing an utterance comprises three interrelated acts: a

locutionary act, an illocutionary act, and perlocutionary act. The first act refers to the

act of saying something that makes sense in the language. It surveys the grammatical

rules of language. An illocutionary act is one that is accomplished via medium of the

language: stating, warning, wishing, promising, and so on. The third one is the effect

the illocutionary act has on the listener, such as persuasion , misleading, surprising,

and so forth. In speaking, one has no opportunity of acting one or other of these acts;

one usually performs the three acts all together, but it is beneficial for analytic

purposes to separate between them.

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

330

In the seventies, the American philosopher John Searle, cited in Scaruffi (1998: 4),

developed a formal theory in which he introduces a classification of speech acts

including “directive acts,” “assertive acts,” “permissive acts,” and “prohibitive acts.”

his categories are related to certain principles of a general theory of speech act (Mey,

1993: 162). Searle (1979: 12) states that five basic brands of actions can be performed

in speaking by means of the following five utterances:

A. Representatives/ assertives: They commit the speaker to the truth of the expressed

proposition, e.g. claiming, stating …etc. For instance

4. John will travel abroad.

B. Directives: They are planned to create some effect through action by the hearer.

They reflect what the speaker desires, e.g. ordering, commanding, requesting …etc.

For example:

5. Go out now, please.

C. Commisive: They commit the speaker to some further course of actions, e.g.

swearing, promising …etc. For example:

6. I promise to pass the next grammar exam.

D. Expressives: Their main function is expressing or making approved, the speaker‟s

psychological view towards a state of affairs which the illocution assumes, e.g.

thanking, apologizing …etc. For example:

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

331

7. I thank you for your help.

E. Declaratives: They are acts which in their uttering a state of affairs comes into

being, e.g. naming, declaring …etc. (ibid : 12-14). For example:

8. I name my baby “ Cathy ”

2.4 Grice’s Theory

Another central theory in pragmatics which exposes how human verbal

communication is a cooperative activity driven by the mutual expectation is Grice‟s

theory . Grice reinforces his observation that when we talk we try to be cooperative by

elevating this concept into what he calls the cooperative principle. He proposes the

cooperative principle and four maxims specifying how to be cooperative. For him,

people commonly follow these rules for competent communication (Wharton, 2009:

38) . These sub-maxims are grouped under four headings:

I. Maxim of Quantity: Give the right amount of information when you talk. If

someone at a party asks:

9. a. Who’s that person with Bob?

A cooperative reply will be

b. That’s his new girlfriend, Alison.

But an uncooperative reply will be an over-brief one, such as:

c. A girl,

or an over-long one, such as:

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

332

d. That’s Alison Margaret Jones, born in Kingston, Surrey on 4 July 1980,

daughter of Peter and May Jones …etc. (Aitchison, 1999: 98).

II. Maxim of Quality: “Try to make your contribution one that is true”. This can

be attained by eluding saying what we believe to be false or that for which we lack a

sufficient proof .

III. Maxim of Manner:

“ Be perspicuous (avoid obscurity, avoid ambiguity, be brief, be orderly)” (Aronoff

and Miller, 2003: 402).

IV. Maxim of relevance: Be related. Thus, when someone asks, with a Yes/no

question,

10 -Do you know what time it is?

We assume they want to know what time it is, not merely whether we know, and as an

alternative ,we offer a time .

Nevertheless, in reality, “no one actually speaks like that the whole time” (Levinson,

1983: 102 ).In fact, there are instances in which these maxims are either violated or

flouted and Grice‟s theory of implicature embraces such conditions. In his first

published paper on conversational cooperation, Grice (1975: 49) defines ''violation''

very specifically as the unostentatious non observance of a maxim. If a speaker

violates a maxim she/he ''will be liable to mislead.'' Flouting a maxim, on the other

hand, occurs when a speaker uses a language as a way which appears in an obvious

way, to violate a maxim, when a listener normally assumes that a speaker is following

these four conversational maxims, the speaker may break them (in lying, sarcasm,

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

333

political debates …etc.) but conversation proceeds on the assumption that they do not.

It is possible to deduce implications from what has been said conceiving what has not

been said (conversational implicatures), through the extent to which this can be done

consistently and generally is somewhat controversial (Fasold and Connor, 2006: 161).

Thomas (1995:69) adds that in flouting a maxim, the speaker blatantly fails to observe

the maxim, without any intention of deceiving or misleading, but because the speaker

wishes to prompt the hearer to look for a meaning which is different from, or in

addition to, the expressed meaning. This additional meaning is called ''Conversational

Implicature.'' Thomas (ibid : 76) mentions some situations in which speakers violate

the conversational maxims in one way or another and it gives growth to conversational

implicature . When a hearer is faced with a speaker's violation of a maxim, a hearer

may or may not apprehend the meaning, therefore he / she drives one of several

probable conclusions, according to each case:

A. “ The speaker is disinclined to cooperate and keenly opting out from the

CP ” . The violation of Quantity maxim occurs in this case .

B. “ The speaker is apt to misinform the hearer and therefore violating the

maxim of Quality. ”

C. “ The speaker flops to observe the CP due to nonattendance of linguistic

presentation which is called ineptitude.” For instance, he may accidentally

state words too mechanical for the audience. Doing so , he/she violates the

maxim of manner.

D. “ The speaker has no aspiration to mislead, but wants the hearer to attain

more than what accurate meaning affirms and yet he clearly is violating a

maxim.” Grice (ibid ) illuminates that the rhetorical device of irony establishes

a flouting of Quality maxim .Consider the following example:

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

334

3- “ A: Do you like my new haircut?”

B1: “ Yes, it looks great .”

VS:

B2: “ oh yes, my mother had such a haircut in the 1980s.”

While in B1 the maxim is observed , in B2 it is violated, given that the speaker does

not like the haircut and answers in an ironic way. (Harish , 1976: 313-392).Flouting of

quality maxim exposed with irony leads the hearer to generate a new meaning

,implicature. Cruse (2000: 85) defines implicatures as parts of the meanings of

utterances which although intended, are not strictly part of “what is said” in the act of

utterance, nor do they follow logically from what is said. To him, it is an additional

conveyed meaning. Implicatures, for Levinson (1983: 104) are not semantic

utterances, but rather inferences based on both the content of what has been said and

some specific assumptions about the cooperative nature of verbal interaction. Thus,

implicatures are partially derived from the conversational or literal meaning of an

utterance, produced in a specific context which is shared by the speaker and the hearer,

and depend on recognition, by both the speaker and the hearer, of the cooperative

principle and its maxims. For the analyst, as well as the hearer, conversational

implicatures must be treated as inherently in determinate since they are derived from a

supposition that the speaker has the intention of conveying meaning and of obeying the

cooperative principle . An example mentioned by Mey (2001: 45) illustrates that. If

one asks a question, a reply which on the face of it does not make ‘sense’ can very

well be a suitable one . For example, if a person asks” What time is it?”, It makes

perfectly good sense for someone to answer,” The bus just went by” in particular

context of conversation. This context should embrace the fact that there is only one bus

a day, that it passes by the house of the one who responds the question and at 7:47 a.m.

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

335

each morning, and moreover, that any speaker is attentive of this and takes the answer

in the essence in which it was given as a positively appropriate response. As Leech

(1983: 30-31) remarks that, “interpreting an utterance” is eventually a matter of

deduction or (to use a more distinguished term) “hypothesis formation.” To him, strict

semantic or reasonable norms will not help and neither will just predicting. But, the

latter has to be in connection with the particular circumstances of the question, the

individuals involved in the situation, their background and so on. The more we

recognize the context, the more competent our guess work is going to be.

3- Methodology

3.1 The Materials

The only tool used in this paper is the text of Marlowe ‟s play Dr. Faustus . It is

nominated as a sample for such study as it , the soliloquy scenes specifically, depends

entirely on self-deceiving where Faustus intentionally states deceptive statements and

offers incredible promises. Hence, it is predictable that such scenes involve altered

categories of speech acts devoted for achieving some tasks and reflect a good image

of Grice's maxims as well . On the basis of pragmatics and taking into account the

consideration of the context of the utterance and other pragmatic elements involved in

these speeches, Faustus‟s four soliloquies are examined cautiously to pinpoint the

figures of speech ,speech acts , and Grice‟s maxims employed by Marlowe ; they are

explained with reference to specific quotations of the soliloquies that highly echo the

psychology , emotions and thoughts of Faustus . Then, the four soliloquies are

compared in terms of the occurred speech acts as well as the non-observance of

Grice‟s conversational maxims. Finally, their circulation in the selected data is

provided in tables for discussing the results obtained through analysis.

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

336

3.2 The Model of the Study

Throughout the analysis of the present data, an eclectic model is followed . It

comprises Searle‟s (1969) model of the taxonomy of SAs Speech Act: An Essay in

the Philosophy of Language .Spontaneously , it embraces Grice‟s (1975) CP model

Logic and Conversation through the speaker –listener interaction, and Black (2006)

Stylistics Pragmatic to show to which point the character adheres to the maxims, or

flout them to generate implicature. In Black‟s (2006, : 25) view , the hearer is aware

of the co-operative principle and the maxims when flouting a maxim. Consequently ,

the listeners will contemplate about the reason behind such breaching. In doing so , the

conversation will not be broken down; yet, the speaker has used an indirect rather than

direct way to achieve the conversation. Niazi and Gautam‟s (2010) model is another

one used in this study. In their book , How to Study Literature : Stylistic and

Pragmatic Approaches, they employ the five major types of SA and the CP in their

analysis . They illustrate how probing the use of the figures of speech is supportive

and helpful in showing the contribution of both speech acts and cooperative principle

in making the writer‟s thoughts be vital for the readers .The figures of speech

transpired in Faustus soliloquies are : irony, metaphor, repetition , paradox (contrast

in themes ),and rhetorical question which are frequently used by Faustus in various

percentages relying on the situation and the theme of each soliloquy . The eclectic

model applied in this study is further illustrated in the figure below:

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

337

Pragma-Stylistic

Expressive Assertive

Directive Commisive Declarative

Figure (1) Pragma-Stylistic Model

4- An Analysis of Soliloquy Scenes in Marlowe’s Dr Faustus

4-1 Speech Act

Soliloquies involve different types of speech acts as Faustus intends to assert,

promise, warn, threaten, blame, regret,.....etc. just to persuade himself as well as

others in the motives behind his choice of that art of magic. His first soliloquy

witnesses the common occurrence of the direct speech acts represented in the

commands Faustus announces “directives”,

Cooperative

principle

Rhetorical

Question

Repetition

Irony

foreshadowing

Pragmatic theories Stylistic Devices

Speech

Acts

Direct Indirect

t

Non-observance

Flouting

paradox

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

338

1- “Settle thy studies, Faustus, and begin to sound the depth of that thou wilt

profess: Having commenced, a divine in show, yet level at the end of every art, and

live and die in Aristotle's works.”(Act I, Scene 1, lines1-5)

The lack of commisives and declaratives is noticed in this soliloquy. Directive speech

acts ,signified by Faustus' permanency to give orders and advice to himself , reveal

his target to affect the audience's attitude towards physics and make them accept its

limitation. In other words, he intends to use an indirect way for persuading himself

first and the audience about the reason behind his dissatisfaction in the knowledge he

owns and his preference for magic .The absence of both commisives and

declaratives indicates how Faustus in his first speech consciously avoids mentioning

his promises to accomplish positive actions for people in the future when he acquires

power through magic. Faustus‟s intelligence is reflected here via his awareness that

this is his first meeting with the audience where it is better to tell them merely about

his discontent with what he has although he is a very prominent man. The direct acts

of stating facts “assertive acts” are less noticed in this soliloquy,

2- “The end of physic is our body’s death” (Act I, Scene 1, lines17)

3-“And necromantic books are heavenly! Lines, circles, schemes, letters and

characters! ” (Act I, Scene 1, lines 48- 51)

Such fact shows how Faustus is conscious of asserting merely the misconceptions of

other fields of knowledge and this, of course, provides the audience with a vision

about the shortcomings these fields own .Similarly, Faustus does his best to be far

from revealing openly his emotions for choosing magic and he tends to express that

indirectly by showing his intention to leave physics. This explains why expressive

acts are rarely used here,

4- “Physics farewell! Where is Justinian?” (Act I, Scene 1, line 27).

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

339

Faustus in his second speech, in contrast to the first one, promises to fulfil countless

moral and vital things to people. He offers a list of his attainments when he will get

power over the world and this is exposed through the spreading of direct promises

“commisive acts” in this speech,

5-“I’ll have them fly to India for gold, Ransack the ocean for orient pearl,

Perform what desperate enterprise I will ?And search all corners of the new-found

world . For pleasant fruits and princely delicates” (Act I, Scene 2, lines 5-8 )

6- “I’ll have them read me strange philosophy and tell the secrets of all foreign

kings”

(Act I, Scene ii ,lines 9-10)

This soliloquy, specifically, is characterised by absence of expressive, assertive

and declarative acts as Faustus disregards claiming facts or reflecting his deep

passions and what he only concerns with is untrue aptitudes. Faustus‟s steadiness in

revealing his talents represented by the use of commisive speech acts aids in crafting

a kind of harmony in his speech and then appeals in a way or another the listeners'

mind. In doing so , Faustus flourishes to motivate and convince the audience in his

inner desire to be beyond his position in the universe which can be reached through

magic .Further, this soliloquy witnesses presence of “ directive acts” signified in his

direct commands for evil to help him in accomplishing all noble tasks and

impossible dreams ,

7- “Resolve me of all ambiguities; perform what desperate enterprise I

will?”(Act I, Scene ii, lines 3-4).

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

340

In the third short soliloquy, unlike the first and second, Faustus claims some illusory

matters that all belong to his fancy,

8- “Why wavers thou O something soundeth in mine ear. Abjure this magic, turn to

God again. The God thou serv'st is thine owe appetite wherein is fixed the love of

Beelzebub” (Act ii, scene I, lines 7-10)

This illuminates the aim behind the common occurrence of the direct assertive acts.

Through such assertive speech acts, Faustus succeeds to make the audience believe

that he really hears something which asks him to turn to God again. Thus, Faustus

contributes in giving the audience a good opportunity to think that he will in a

minute regret and leave magic forever. Likewise, he declares some of his

achievements such as building a church which indicate explicitly his desire to go

back to God again,

9- “To him, I'll build an altar and a church, and offer lukewarm blood, of new-

born babes” (Act ii, scene I, lines 11-12).

Such declarations achieve two significant tasks. First, they help in manipulating the

audience and making them believe in Faustus‟s desire of repentance which is far from

the truth. Second ,they give the audience a clear vision about the expected coming

actions in the play .This in turn shows how the speech acts have their own

contribution in the development of the plot and reflect the writer‟s skill in expressing

the nature of the character as well as the themes of the play .Moreover , this

soliloquy shows no existence of other three brands of acts( comissive, expressive

,and directive ) since Faustus‟s goal behind this soliloquy is persuading the audience

in the concept of repentance which can effectively be expressed via the repetition of

“ assertive” and “declarative” acts rather than others. This means that repetition of a

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

341

specific act can be regarded as an operative tool to dive deeper in the writer‟s mind,

catch his transferred views, and then grasp the target of the whole speech. Such an

indirect way of showing the speech‟s target (persuasion) actually reflects Marlowe‟s

cleverness in revealing the theme of the play implicitly rather than explicitly, and this

is accomplished via using particular patterns of acts . This certainly relates to his

creative style and confirms how the repeated use of certain act has noticeable stylistic

effects in the literary work. Hence, a close link exists between the speaker‟s

intention and the choice of particular forms of acts on one hand and the writer‟s

innovative style on the other hand.

Finally, Faustus‟s fourth longest soliloquy embraces the obvious repetition of

Faustus‟s requests for time to stop and give him a chance for repentance and going to

God again,

10- “Fair Nature's eye, rise, rise again, and make Perpetual day; or let this hour

be but a year, a month, a week, a natural day , that Faustus may repent and save

his soul!” (Act v, scene ii, lines 6-9).

This fact is exposed through Faustus‟s use of all types of acts and mainly the

directives,

11- “O soul, be chang'd into little water-drops, and fall into the ocean, ne'er be

found! Exclusively” (Act v, scene ii, lines 51-52)

Faustus either states something which echoes his deep struggle “ assertive act” (as

in 12 and 13 ) or asks time not to pass and this is denoted in his use of a direct act of

order ( as in 14) ,

12- “That time may cease, and midnight never come” (Act v, scene ii, line 4)

13- “That Faustus may repent and save his soul” (Act v, scene ii, line 8)

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

342

14- “Stand still, you ever-moving spheres of heaven’’ (Act v, scene ii, line 3)

Thus, Faustus‟s insistence to ask time to stop, symbolized by the circulation of

requests (directive acts) makes the audience swing in their dreamlike world and

believe in his longing for repentance. Finally, his feeling of fear is easily felt by the

audience though they are indirectly shown through Faustus‟s appeals for Christ .It is

true that Faustus says a statement but actually he demands Christ‟s help .This proves

why expressive acts ,compared with those appeared in previous soliloquies , are

indirect and mutual here ,

15- “ah, my Christ! One drop would save my soul, half a drop - Ah, rend not my

heart for naming of my Christ” (Act v, scene ii, lines 14-15)

4-2 Cooperative Principle

Instead of publicising openly his yearning to leave all his studies and selecting

the branch of art (magic) that pleases his ambition, Faustus describes in details

everything about philosophy, logic , medicine, and finally law ,

16- “Sweet Analytics, 'tis thou hast ravished me: Bene disserere est finis

logices. Is, to dispute well, logic's chiefest end? Affords this art no greater miracle

.Then read no more, thou hast attained the end; a greater subject fitteth Faustus'

wit”. (Act i, Scene 1, lines 6-11)

Through the use of some rhetorical questions in his first long speech ,

Faustus discusses the shortages of each branch of art and shows how he needs

something behind the capacity of man as he is a representative of Renaissance when

human beings are willing to attain the inaccessible ,

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

343

17- “Is, to dispute well, logic's chiefest end? Affords this art no greater

miracle? Then read no more, thou hast attained the end; Why Faustus, hast

thou not attained that end? Is not thy common talk found aphorisms?” (Act i,

Scene 1, lines 8-9, 17-19)

Additionally , repetition of the word “ end” enhanced with the notion of

magic is noticed in this quotation that offers us a clue about Faustus‟s decision to

leave all arts and elect specifically magic . On the other hand, the word “end‟‟ and

its connection with magic may be regarded as a hint “ foreshadowing” for Faustus‟s

end, like any sinner, signified by damnation and death. The support of two prominent

figures of speech like repetition and rhetorical question to the detailed account of arts

here fulfils tasks such as persuasion, emphasis, attracting the attention of listeners and

making Faustus‟s speech more memorable. As it is revealed by Yemenici( 2002: 20-

21) , repetition is the most distinctive stylistic device of the fluent style and

repeating a word ,a phrase, a clause, or a sentence can successfully highlight a vital

thought .Similarly , Walton (2007:24) states that rhetorical question is a remarkable

technique used for manipulating the listeners and this explains why such technique is

so current in each context of speech including poetry as well as prose . Through

uttering these un necessary details about arts with the help of figures of speech,

Faustus flouts the quantity maxim for positive purposes. That is, he wants to notify

the audience about his eminent studies and illuminate the notion of deity through his

determination to be like God who create people and bring back dead people to life

again. Moreover, through such fragments, Faustus aims to persuade himself that his

judgement to choose the art of magic is reliable and it is not wickedness. In Grice‟s

opinion, such speech would set in motion a process of informal cognition which

would guide the listeners to originate a supplementary piece of information (Thomas,

1995: 65). It is obvious then that Faustus has transparently given more information

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

344

than required (he could simply have said ''I have chosen the art of magic'') and

appears to have breached the maxim of Quantity. However, we have no reason to

believe that Faustus is being consciously uncooperative (i.e. that he is failing to

observe the Cooperative Principle CP ) and his failure to observe the maxim of

Quantity is due to his wish to observe the CP in some way. Faustus‟s speech leads the

listeners to infer (implicature) that whilst he strongly believes that magic is the only

way to achieve his unlimited ambitions, he does not have adequate proof to assert this

as a fact. He has signalled that his belief may not be correct.

The flouting of quantity maxim is also noticed in the fourth longest soliloquy.

Faustus asks time to stop and not pass so that midnight will not come as it is the hour

of giving up his soul to Lucifer. Then he begs the hour to expand to a year which is

something impossible and finally, he begs repeatedly the blood of Christ in the sky to

support him as it is known at that time that blood of Christ helps all people,

18- “O lente, lentecurrite, noctisequi! The stars move still, time runs, the clock will

strike, the devil will come, and Faustus must be damn'd.O, I'll leap up to my God!--

Who pulls me down?--See, see, where Christ's blood streams in the firmament!

One drop would save my soul, half a drop: ah, my Christ! - Ah, rend not my heart

for naming of my Christ! (Act v, scene ii, lines 10-16).

In uttering such long and thorough description of time and Christ, Faustus wants to

prove that he wishes to repent, and he needs assistance; however, time is over. The

contrast (paradox) in Faustus speech is obvious as he is actually afraid of Lucifer,

but at the same time he is just giving up his soul to Lucifer to fulfil his unlimited

ambition. Instead of stating such long speech to express his wish of repentance, he

can do that in stating merely a sentence or even a word as it is recognised how God is

merciful and forgiving. The concept of immortality, which is the opposite to the

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

345

notion of death current in the first soliloquy, is repeated in this soliloquy and it is

involved in rhetorical question technique,

19- “ Let Faustus live in hell a thousand years , A hundred thousand, and at

last be sav'd !O, no end is limited to damned souls! Why wert thou not a

creature wanting soul? Or why is this immortal that thou hast? ” (Act v, scene ii,

lines 37-41).

Such variance in these two themes obviously reflects the shift in Faustus‟s

philosophy towards such altered concepts , death and immortality, which entails

this quick transfer from being a believer in God to be finally just atheist . His long

speech verifies that Faustus intends to waste time and he is willing to give up his soul

to Lucifer as the world of magic is the only way by which Faustus can achieve his

boundless desires; Faustus, in this speech particularly, finds himself powerless to

observe Grice's maxim of Quantity, signalled his dilemma by flagrantly failing to

give the right amount of information and prompted his interlocutors (audience) to

look for an extra meaning (implicature).

The flouts that exploit the maxim of Quality occur when the speaker says something

which is blatantly untrue or for which he/she lacks adequate evidence. Faustus flouts

Grice's Quality Maxim in his first soliloquy through irony when he realizes that death

is the end of all human beings and only God can give them life again,

20- “Couldst thou make men to live eternally, or, being dead, raise them to life

again, then this profession were to be esteemed.” (Act I, scene 1, lines 25-27) .

Yet, he affirms that he wants to study magic in order to get the power of making

people live eternally. Paradox is the other way Faustus adopts to flout the quality

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

346

maxim; this is revealed when Faustus knows well that every sinner will be damned

and still he insists to be so. Through this flouting represented by the speaker‟s saying

something which is patently false, an implicature is generated. Since Faustus does

not appear to be trying to deceive the listeners (audience) in anyway, the audience are

forced to look for another plausible interpretation. That is, he will leave physics and

choose magic which is the lowest branch of arts as he regards the latter the best in the

world that will satisfy his unlimited ambition. Metaphor, is another figure of speech

that has its own striking part in accomplishing this practice of flouting successfully;

when Faustus speaks with himself and states,

21- "Oh, what a world of profit and delight, of power, of honour, of omnipotence,

Is promised to the studious artizan!"(Act 1, Scene 1, Lines 52-54: )

He compares himself with a "studious artizan". Flouting of quality maxim implied in

such comparison reflects how Faustus hopes to gain all worldly desires and properties

as the fruits of scholarly work. Nevertheless, he does not realize that scholars study

is for personal illumination, not material gain. Another instance of metaphor here lies

in his paralleling of sound magician with a demi-god,

22- "A sound magician is a demi-god .Here; tire my brains to get a deity."(Act 1,

Scene 1, Lines 61-62 :).

Once more, flouting denoted in this illogical comparison between god and magician

sound shows the extent of the absolute power Faustus will gain via performing the

dark arts and this actually represents the turning point in his switch from scholar to

sorcerer.

Faustus‟s second soliloquy, similar to the first one, reveals contradictory ideas

(paradox) and irony as well,

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

347

23- “ I’ll have them fill the public schools with silk, Where with the students shall

be bravely clad; I’ll levy soldiers with the coin they bring , and chase the Prince of

Parma from our land, and reign sole king of all the provinces ” ( Act I, scene 1,

lines 13-17 ) .

The irony is reflected when Faustus states that he will use his magic to do noteworthy

and noble deeds whereas the opposite will happen. The conflict, in addition to irony,

is revealed here via displaying how the limitation of man's knowledge is in contrast to

Faustus‟s desire to be beyond his position in the universe. Flouting Grice‟s Quality

maxim accomplished by providing untruthful information and opposing ideas leads

the audience to believe in Faustus‟s foolish and ironical character. In other words, he

intends deliberately to deceive the audience in his being a fool through showing the

clash between what he actually has in mind and what he utters. With presenting

how Faustus has a spiritual struggle between his love to God in nature and his

endless ambition , flouting of quality maxim is sensed in the third soliloquy which

starts with three successive rhetorical questions ,

24- “Now, Faustus, must thou needs be damned? Can’st thou not be saved? What

boots it then to think on God or heaven?” (Act ii, scene I, and lines1-3).

The great extent of Faustus‟s suffering further leads to the announcement of the

existence of sound in his mind which is clearly out of his imagination (hallucination),

25- “Why wavers thou? O something soundeth in mine ear .Abjure this magic, turn

to God again”. (Act ii, scene I, lines 7-8).

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

348

He hears the voice of consciousness (God) and even the sound speaks with echoes;

through the use of rhetorical question technique and stating such illusory thing,

Faustus flouts the quality maxim, perhaps, for the purpose of showing that he loves

God in nature and he wants to go back to God again; he is not entirely bad but he has

a flaw which is his desire. He tears up into two sides: good and bad; the good takes

him to forgiveness and repentance whereas the bad guides him to hell. As a result of

this flouting, the interlocutors (audience) generate the following implicature:

Faustus‟s wavering personality is a satisfactory sign of his inner struggle.

In the last fourth soliloquy , yet again , Faustus flouts Grice‟s quality maxim

along with quantity maxim, as mentioned earlier , since it is impossible for time to

stop and an hour cannot be extended to a year ,

26- “Fair Nature's eye, rise, rise again, and make Perpetual day; or let this

hour be but A year, a month, a week, a natural day, that Faustus may repent and

save his soul!” (Act v, scene ii, lines 6-9).

Furthermore, he states something that lacks evidence when he declares how the

blood of Christ in the sky is supportive to all people with no proof for that,

27- “ O God, If thou wilt not have mercy on my soul, Yet for Christ's sake,

whose blood hath ransom'd me, Impose some end to my incessant pain; Let

Faustus live in hell a thousand years, A hundred thousand, and at last be sav'd”

(Act v, scene ii ,lines 34-39)

The speaker here blatantly fails to observe the Quality maxim without any

intention of deceiving or misleading, but he actually prompts the hearers to look for

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

349

an additional or an implicit meaning which is completely different from the

articulated one ; what he says shows his willing of repentance where as he plans to

give his soul to Lucifer . Faustus‟s dilemma symbolised in flouting both quantity and

quality maxims in his last soliloquy makes the audience recognize the truth of his

evil nature and this will soon , like any sinner, lead to damnation and punishment .

It is obvious then that flouting Grice‟s conversational maxims has its own significant

impact in making the interaction between the speaker and hearer be successful and

productive no matter what that flouted maxim is Flouting any maxim can be grasped

and explained with reference to devices like irony, metaphor, and some other rich

stylistic devices which highly support that flouting and help in shaping the character

and illuminating the theme of the dramatic work. Moreover, the blend between such

rich devices and that an indirect way of generating the speaker‟s embedded meaning

(implicature) certainly reveals Marlowe‟s creativeness and his artistic power.

5- Results

5.1 Discussing the results of speech act in Faustus’s soliloquies

Table 1: The frequency and percentages of SA in Faustus’s soliloquies

Soliloquy Declarative Directive Commisive Expressive Assertive Totals

Fr.P r Fr.P r Fr.P r Fr.P r Fr. Pr

1 0 0% 10

55.55 %

0 0% 3 16.66

%

5

27.77%

18

29.50%

2 0 0% 4 28.57

%

10 71.42

%

0 0% 0 0% 14

%22.95

3 3

42.85%

0 % 0 % 0 % 4

57.14%

7

11.47%

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

350

4 5 22.72

%

6

27.27 %

4

18.18 %

4 18.18

%

3

13.63

22

36.06

%

Total : 8, 13.11% 20 , 32.78% 14,25.24 % 7 , 11.47% 12

,19.67% 61

Generally, the five major SAs: declarative, directive, commisive, assertive and

expressive appear in various Percentages in the selected data. Nevertheless, the most

dominant SA is the directive (20 ) with the ratio(32.78%) whereas the expressive SA

is the least (7) with the ratio ( 11.47 %) .This can be explained in terms of Faustus‟s

recurrent requests for time, Christ, Lucifer, etc. and his deliberate evading from

anything reflects his actual spirits and feelings represented via the use of expressive

SA . Though commisive SA is lacked in the first and third soliloquies (0) , it is

clearly noticed in the others(10 , 4 ) in the second and fourth ones with the ratio

(71.42%) and ( 18.18%) respectively . This, of course, shows the extent of Faustus‟s

yearning to justify for himself first and the audience as well the motives behind his

choice of magic. Offering fictional promises, which are actually justifications

signified through the repeated use of commisive SA, echo how Faustus in an effort

tends to manipulate the audience and then lead them to accept his perception of

magic. The Fourth Soliloquy displays the availability of more SAs (22) than those

occurred in others with a ratio of (36.06%), where as they are less current in the third

(11.47%). (See table 1). Such scattering confirms, as stated earlier, that Faustus is

aware that the first soliloquy is his first meeting with the audience and it is preferable

to convey purely his dissatisfaction with what he owns and be far from illuminating

potentials .In other words, Faustus in the first meeting prepares the audience for

something that will be publicised in the next soliloquies. It is obvious then that the

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

351

distribution or repetition of a specific brand of speech acts rather than others in each

soliloquy is highly allied with what the speaker actually intends to convey. That is ,

Faustus‟s soliloquies individually have their own targets or tasks such as persuading

, warning , showing struggle, misleading ,….etc. accomplished via Faustus‟s

repeated uttering of a particular speech act more than others . Hence , the link

between repetition , whose main function is emphasising and illustrating a concept ,

and Faustus‟s success to openly appeal the audience minds is clearly observed in

all soliloquies even though Faustus‟s intention varies from one soliloquy to

another(persuading, misleading ,preparing to expected event ,…etc.) . This result

proves the fact that the repetition of a specific pattern of acts is determined to a large

extent by Faustus‟s personal judgments and thoughts.

5.2 Discussing the Results of Flouting the Cooperative Principles in Faustus’s

Soliloquies

Table 2: The frequency and percentages of flouting Grice’s maxims in Faustus’s

soliloquies

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

352

Soliloquy Quantity Quality

Totals

Fr. Pr. Fr.Pr

1 2 28.57% 5 71% 7 43.75 %

2 1 100% 0 0% 1 6.52 %

3 1 100 % 0 0% 1 6.52%

4 3 42.85 4 57.14 % 7 43.75 %

Total : 7 9 16

the more we speak, the more flouts will occur and longer speech will be. Quality

maxim is distributed in the four soliloquies .Yet , it is more frequent in the last one (

3 ) with the ratio (42.85%) and this ,once more , proves the extent of Faustus

reliance on uttering fallacious matters for which no evidence exists and they are all

embodied in the details he states in his final long soliloquy. Thus, flouting, similar to

speech act, is closely interrelated with the speaker‟s meaning (Faustus‟s intention)

and the motives behind articulating the speech. However, it is different from speech

act in the sense that the listener in the former spends more effort and energy in the

interpretation of the speaker‟s invisible meaning and generates the novel meaning

(the implicature ) that really reflects the speaker‟s hidden message.

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

353

5.3 Discussing the Results of Figures of Speech in Faustus’s soliloquies

Table 3: The frequency and percentages of figures of speech in Faustus’s

soliloquies

Soliloquy Rhetorical

question

Metaphor Irony Paradox Repetition Totals

Fr.P r Fr.P r Fr.P r Fr.P r Fr. Pr

1 4 36.36% 2

18.18%

2

18.18%

2%

18.18

1 9.09 % 11 %

2 2 50% 0% 1

25 %

1

25%

0 0% 4 %

3 3 100 % 0 % 0 % 0 % 0% 3%

4 4 80 % 0% 0% 1 20

%

0 5 %

Total : 13,56.52 % 2,8.69% 3,13.04% 4,17.39 1,4.34% 23

Table (3) shows that the five stylistic devices are utilized in Faustus’s

soliloquies but with different scattering .Yet , rhetorical question device is

the most common one in the four soliloquies( 13 ; 56.52%)whereas metaphor

is the least in use (2;8.69%) as the latter is available merely in the first one

(2;18.18%). The over use of rhetorical question technique may be related to

its significance as a rhetorical and persuasive tool in any discourse

including this dramatic work .While the first soliloquy witnesses the

presence of all five figures of speech, the third contains just rhetorical

question device Concerning the second and fourth soliloquies, they also

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

354

embrace not all figures and this shows how their distribution have a link

with the speaker’s intention. Faustus, in an effort, has devoted all these

figures of speech in the first soliloquy for appealing the audience minds and

leading them to believe in magic. This certainly will help in accomplishing

positively that task of persuasion .In contrast , figures of speech are less in

others as Faustus intends merely to reveal his repentance or show his inner

struggle and, of course , such tasks need no much linguistic power denoted

in utilizing rich figures like those mentioned above.

Conclusion

The present paper is carried out to provide a pragma-stylistic analysis of Faustus‟s

soliloquies in Marlowe‟s play Dr. Faustus and attest the probability of utilizing

pragmatic theories such as speech act theory and cooperative principle for the benefit

of stylistic analysis. Hence, on the bases of the analysis shown in this paper, the

following conclusions can be drawn:

1- The most dominant speech acts implemented by Faustus are the directive

represented in Faustus‟s continuous asking or requests and the commisive speech acts

symbolized in Faustus‟s imaginary promises. Stylistically, such use is operative and

effective as it is highly connected with the writer‟s intention and more specifically

with the character‟s psychology. That is, Marlowe devotes these speech acts to show

the usual human conflict between the good and bad and this is revealed in Faustus‟s

appeals till the last moment in the play. Consequently, the directive speech act is

dominant in Faustus soliloquies (41.66%). Additionally, commisive speech act is a

noteworthy tool used by Marlowe to echo a lot about the actual nature of Faustus‟s

character. Thus, repetition of these patterns of acts relates to Marlowe‟s creativity in

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

355

selecting the appropriate acts that aid in achieving the aim of the play. This result

achieves the first aim which reads as Identifying the most dominant sorts of speech

acts used by Faustus to perform some stylistic effects and illustrating the link

between the occurrence of a specific pattern of acts and the speaker’s intention.

2- Faustus soliloquies witness the flouting of merely quantity and quality

conversational Grice‟s maxims. This flouting, specifically, of over-in formativeness,

which constitutes (57.14%) appears in situations Faustus talks about magic or his

desires. The maxim of quality is also exploited by Faustus, making (42. %).

3- The truth of Faustus is completely realised via employing prominent tools like

metaphor, paradox, repetition, rhetorical question, and irony along with flouting.

Such nice mixture affects the listeners' mind, fulfils processes like persuasion and

deceiving, and finally makes the interaction between Faustus and the listeners be

fruitful. This outcome shown in (2) and (3) accomplishes the second aim stating

Showing the frequent flouted maxims in the selected data and exploring how that

flouting along with figures of speech yield impact on the speaker –listener

interaction.

4- Grice‟s maxims of relation and manner are not exploited in Faustus‟ soliloquies as

Marlowe deliberately eludes from ambiguity or being unconnected and this actually

relates to his artistic nature of conveying his ideas or believes in rather un ambiguous

and direct way.

5- Comprehension of the character‟s nature as well as the play is perfectly enhanced

via that blend between flouting of Grice's conversational maxims displayed along

with figures of speech and the appropriate choice of specific patterns of acts. That

mixture is definitely and consciously done by the playwright to grasp certain

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

356

dramatic effects, make the speaker-hearer communication be productive, and

develop the plot. This product realizes the third aim that delivers as Illustrating the

contribution of speech acts and flouting of Grice’s conversational maxims revealed

together with figures of speech in illuminating the character’s psychology ,

accomplishing a fruitful interaction between the speaker and hearer ,developing

the plot ,and finally enhancing a better comprehension of the text.

References

Ahmed Mubarak & Raad Abd-Aun (2019 ) “A Pragma-stylistic Analysis of E. E.

Cummings‟ Play Him”. Journal of Human Sciences , College of Education for

Human Sciences ,Vol. 36 ,No.1 , March , 2019 .

Ainsworth-Vaughn, N. (1998). Claiming Power in Doctor-Patient Talk. Oxford :

Oxford University Press.

Aitchison, J. (1999). Linguistics.(Chicago): NTC/ CONTEMPORARY PUBLISHIN,

4255 West Touhy Avenue, Lincolnwood.

Arnoff, M. and Miller, J.,ed. (2003) . The Hand Book of Linguistics. Oxford:

Blackwell Publishing. Ltd.

Black, E. (1992). Rhetorical Questions: Studies of Public Discourse. Chicago: The

University of Chicago Press.

…………(2006 ) . Stylistics Pragmatic. Oxford: Blackwell Publisher.

Cruse, A. (2000).Meaning in Language :An Introduction to Semantics and

Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

…………….. (2006). A Glossary of Semantics and Pragmatics. Edinburgh:

Edinburgh University Press Ltd.

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

357

Crystal, D. (2003). Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Oxford: Blackwell

Publisher.

Dunya I‟jam1 & Zahraa Al-Mamouri (2019 ) . “A Pragma-Stylis.tic Study of Some

Selected Fantasy Novels”. International Journal of English Linguistics; Vol. 9, No. 1;

2019 ISSN 1923-869X E-ISSN 1923-8703 Published by Canadian Center of

Science and Education

D‟hondt, S., Östman J., & Jef, V. (2009). The Pragmatics of Interaction. Amsterdam:

John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/hoph.4

Fasold, R. and Connor,J.,ed. (2006). An Introduction to Language and Linguistics.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Finch, G. (2005). Key Concepts in Language and Linguistics . Wales:

Palgrave Macmillan

Gray, M. (1984). A Dictionary of Literary Terms. London: Longman Group Ltd.

Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In Cole P (ed). Syntax and Semantics 9.

Academic, New York, pp. 113-27.

Harish , M. (1975) " Logic From and Implictures " In :An integrated Theory of

Linguistics Abilit . New York : ( rowell, 1976. 313-392).

Hawthron, J. (2000). A Glossary of Contemporary Literary Theory. London: Edward

Arnold Press.

Hickey, L. (1992). Politeness apart, Why Choose Indirect Speech Acts? Linguae

Stile, 27 (March 1992).

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

358

Kerbrat- Orecchioni, Catherine. (1999)."Les Interactionsverbales " Paris:

Armand colin,coll. Linguistique (TomeI ), P:30-31

Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. (1980). Metaphor We Live By. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press.

Lazar,A. (2013).Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences. 76(441-445).

Leech , G. (1983) .Principles of Pragmatics . 9th

Edition. London: Longman group.

Leech, G., & Short, M. (2007). Style in Fiction. London: Longman

Learning, G. C. (1997). A Study Guide to Flannery O‟Conner‟s A Good Man Is Hard

to Find. New York: Gate Research.

Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mey, J. (1993) . An Introduction . USA: Blackwell publishing.

……… (2001). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Niazi, N., & Gautam, R. (2010). How to Study Literature: Stylistic and Pragmatic

Approaches . New Delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited.

Putnam, J. (2005). Test Prep Grade 7. Huntington Beach: Creative Teaching Press.

Robb, L. (2017). Read, Talk, Write: 35 Lessons That Teach Students to Analyze

Fiction and Nonfiction. New York: Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication

Data.

Saeed, John I. (1997). Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.

Scaruffi, P. (1998). Thinking About Thought. www.Google.com 1-6.

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

359

Searle, J. (1969). Speech Act: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press

……… (1979). Metaphor. In Ortony, (ed.) pp. 92-123.

Sell, R. D. (Ed.). (1991). Literary Pragmatics. London and New York: Routledge.

Stefoff, R. (2018). How Is a Simile Similar to a Metaphor? North Mankato: Capston

Press.

Tannen , D( 2007) Talking Voices. Cambridge and New York. Cambridge University

Press.

Thomas, J.(1996) .Meaning in Interaction :An Introduction to Pragmatics. Essex:

Longman Group Limited.

VanDijk ,T.,A. (1977). Text and Context: Exploration in the Semantics and

Pragmatics of Discourse. New York: Longman Inc.

Walton, D.(2007) Media Argumentation Dialect ,Persuasion, and Rhetoric. New

York :Cambridge university press.

Wharton, T. (2009). Pragmatics and non- verbal communication. Cambridge :

Cambridge university press.

Yemenici, Alev (2002). “. Categories and Functions of Repetition in Turkish Ora

Narratives”. Boğaziçi University Journal of Education.Vol.19, No.1, pp.13-35.

والثالثونالسابع العدد مجلة الباحث

360

Landtsheer, Christ‟l De. (2009). “Collecting Political Meaning from the Count of

Metaphor.” In