Darmanto Darmanto (1), Anugrah Adi Muliawan (2), Eko Nur Cahyo (3), Salismi Zulfi Maulidita (4)
The present study aims at examining the use of declarative utterances for implying meaning. This study is qualitative research in which the data are gathered from the subtitle movie “Knight and Day and Day” consisting of declarative sentences. The findings reveal several examples in which declarative utterances are used to imply meaning, suggesting that language has more purpose than simple information exchange. Declarative sentences are not only employed as statements of fact but also as veiled requests or subtle commands. This highlights the dynamic nature of communication, where the intended meaning can differ significantly from the literal words spoken. Listeners cannot just assume that speakers always express themselves literally. Often, the meaning is layered and nuanced, thus requiring the listeners to consider not only the words themselves but also the surrounding contexts. This study suggests that individuals should be aware of the potential meaning implied in speech and seek to understand the speaker’s intended message.
Aitchison, J. (2003). LINGUISTICS: STUDY YOURSELF. London: Hodder Headline.
Alawad, A. M. (2018). AUTHENTIC VIDEOS IN A CONTEXT OF EXPLICITNESS IN TEACHING ENGLISH REQUESTS [Doctoral Dissertation, University of London]. http://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/40327/.
Anjarsari, S. (2011). POLITENESS STRATEGIES OF CRITICIZING A STUDY ON A MOVIE “THE UGLY TRUTH”. [Undergraduate Thesis, Sebelas Maret University]. https://digilib.uns.ac.id/dokumen/detail/21392.
Arundale, R. B. (2006). FACE AS RELATIONAL AND INTERACTIONAL: A COMMUNICATION FRAMEWORK FOR RESEARCH ON FACE, FACEWORK, AND POLITENESS. Journal of Politeness Research, 2(2), 193-216. https://doi.org/10.1515/PR.2006.011.
Austin, J. L. (1962). HOW TO DO THINGS WITH WORDS. New York. Oxford University Press.
Bendtz, K., Ericsson, S., Schneider, J., Borg, J., Bašnáková, J., & Uddén, J. (2022). INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN INDIRECT SPEECH ACT PROCESSING FOUND OUTSIDE THE LANGUAGE NETWORK. Neurobiology of Language, 3(2), 287–317. https://doi.org/10.1162/nol_a_00066.
Darmanto, D., Cahyo, E. N., Nengrum, Y. S., & Adefiannisa, F. J. (2025). LINGUISTIC DIPLOMACY: THE ROLE OF KOREAN LANGUAGE IN INDONESIA–SOUTH KOREA RELATIONS. Bharasumba: Jurnal Multidisipliner, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.62668/bharasumba.v4i03.1682.
Dewi, E. Z. P., Ngaisah, S., Hira, S., Muliawan, A. A., & Darmanto, D. (2025). GRAMMATICAL OMISSION IN ENGLISH DESCRIPTIVE TEXTS: INSIGHTS FROM SECOND SEMESTER EFL LEARNERS. KAPALAMADA: Jurnal Multidisipliner, 4(2), 268–282. https://doi.org/10.62668/kapalamada.v4i02.1672.
Dyah, A. D. (2009). THE SPEECH ACT AND COMMUNICATION STRATEGY IN CHILDREN OF 3-5 YEARS OLD: A CASE STUDY OF THE CHILDREN OF 3-5 YEARS OLD IN SEMARANG [Undergraduate Thesis, Diponegoro University]. Semarang: https://eprints.undip.ac.id/21926/.
Fedorenko, E., Piantadosi, S. T., & Gibson, E. A. (2024). LANGUAGE IS PRIMARILY A TOOL FOR COMMUNICATION RATHER THAN THOUGHT. Nature, 630(8017), 575-586. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07522-w.
Fitri, A. I., Masrul, M., & Asilestari, P. (2022). AN ANALYSIS ON STUDENTS’ ABILITY IN WRITING DESCRIPTIVE TEXT. Journal of English Language and Education, 7(2), 105–112. https://doi.org/10.31004/jele.v7i2.290.
Huang, A. (2020). THE DIALOGICAL NATURE OF LANGUAGE USE IN INTERACTIVE LISTENING: REVISITING MEANING IN CONTEXT. Language awareness, 29(1), 21-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2019.1686509.
Jassim, H. J., & Joshi, J. S. (2025). THE PRAGMATICS OF LANGUAGE USE: UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF CONTEXT AND INTENTIONS. Journal for Basic Sciences, 23(6), 763–780. DOI:10.37896/JBSV23.6/2362.
Katsos, N., & Kissine, M. (2025). NO ONE-TO-ONE MAPPING BETWEEN TYPOLOGIES OF PRAGMATIC RELATIONS AND MODELS OF PRAGMATIC PROCESSING: A CASE STUDY WITH MENTALIZING. Philosophical Transactions B, 380(1932), 20230501. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2023.0501.
Liaqat, S., Iqbal, I., & Riaz, T. (2025). INDIRECT SPEECH ACTS AND POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN POLITICAL DISCOURSE: A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF IMRAN KHAN SPEECHES. Journal of Applied Linguistics and TESOL (JALT), 8(2), 2102-2108. https://doi.org/10.63878/jalt833.
Mack, N., Woodsong, C., MacQueen, K. M., Guest, G., & Namey, E. (2005). QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS: A DATA COLLECTOR’S FIELD GUIDE. Family Health International.
Muliawan, A. A., Darmanto, D., Hakim, L., Dewi, E. Z. P., & Cahyo, E. N. (2025). SIGNS BEYOND: A SEMIOTIC READING OF TRANSCENDENCE IN “STUCK IN THE MIDDLE” BY BABYMONSTER. Bharasumba: Jurnal Multidisipliner, 4(3), 303–323. https://doi.org/10.62668/bharasumba.v4i03.1673.
Oktavia, D., Bátyi, S., Mukminin, A., Santos, M.?L., Astrero, E.?P.?T., Torress, J.?M., & Marzulina, L. (2023). THE MANIFESTATION OF INTERLANGUAGE PRAGMATICS IN DIRECT AND INDIRECT REQUEST STRATEGIES USED BY INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS. Studies in English Language and Education, 10(3), 1379–1401. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v10i3.27548.
Purwanto, E., Shahreza, M., Oktarina, S., El Yana, K., & Rahmah, A. (2023). DEVELOPING LIFE SKILLS THROUGH EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION. International Journal of Progressive Sciences and Technologies, 39(1), 467. DOI:10.52155/ijpsat.v39.1.5412.
Rahma, A. L. (2009). ILLOCUTIONARY ACTS EXPRESSED THROUGH SIGN LANGUAGE IN “SILENCE” MOVIE [Undergraduate thesis, State Islamic University Maulana malik Ibrahim]. http://etheses.uin-malang.ac.id/47089/.
Safdar, U., Iftikhar, A., & Junaid, M. (2025). SPEECH ACT ANALYSIS OF TARIQ RAHMAN’S SHORT STORY BINGO: A PRAGMATIC APPROACH. Journal of Arts and Linguistics Studies, 3(1), 627-643. DOI: https://doi.org/10.71281/jals.v3i1.242.
Sarathy, V., Tsuetaki, A., Roque, A., & Scheutz, M. (2020, December). REASONING REQUIREMENTS FOR INDIRECT SPEECH ACT INTERPRETATION. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (pp. 4937-4948). DOI: 10.18653/v1/2020.coling-main.433.
Susanti, R., Sumarlam, S., Djatmika, D., & Rohmadi, M. (2020). STUDY OF POLITENESS STRATEGY OF SPEECH ACT CARING UTTERANCES: DISCOURSE COMPLETION TEST (DCT) APPROACH. Utopía y praxis latinoamericana: revista internacional de filosofía iberoamericana y teoría social, (1), 282-290. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3774644.
Tomasello, R. (2023). LINGUISTIC SIGNS IN ACTION: THE NEUROPRAGMATICS OF SPEECH ACTS. Brain and Language, 236, 105203. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2022.105203.
Tomasello, R., Boux, I., & Pulvermüller, F. (2025). THEORY OF MIND AND THE BRAIN SUBSTRATES OF DIRECT AND INDIRECT COMMUNICATIVE ACTION UNDERSTANDING. Philosophical Transactions B, 380(1932), 20230497. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2023.0497.
Verschueren, J. (1999). UNDERSTANDING PRAGMATICS. Edward Arnold.
Vranjes, J., Brône, G., & Feyaerts, K. (2018). DUAL FEEDBACK IN INTERPRETER-MEDIATED INTERACTIONS: ON THE ROLE OF GAZE IN THE PRODUCTION OF LISTENER RESPONSES. Journal of Pragmatics, 134, 15-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.06.002.
Wardhaugh, R. (2006). INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLINGUISTICS. New York: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Yule, G. (2010). THE STUDY OF LANGUAGE. New York: Cambridge University Press.
20th Century Fox. (2010). Knight and Day [Film]. Directed by James Mangold. 20th Century Fox. https://www.primevideo.com/.