COMMISSIVE SPEECH ACTS FOUND IN “ONWARD” MOVIE BY DAN SCANLON

This research aimed to find out the types of commissive acts found in the movie entitled Onward as the data source. The utterances uttered by the characters in the movie were taken as the data of the research and classified them by using the theory of commissive acts proposed by Searle. This research is a descriptive qualitative research, as to describe the data in words and sentences. To collect the data, researchers conducted observational method and non-participatory technique. The researchers used the method of pragmatic identity to analyse the data and pragmatic competence – in equalizing technique to equalized the data based on the theory used. The research result showed that there were 17 utterances of commissive acts found in Onward movie. They were 2 data of promising, 4 data of threatening, 2 data of accepting, 6 data of refusing, and 2 data of offering. The act of refusal was the frequently used type of commissive acts since the character had the habit of not wanting to bother other people


A. INTRODUCTION
In the world filled with people, communication is required in daily life because humans are social creatures who cannot live alone.As social beings, humans need a way to communicate with each other, which is language.People use language to reveal what they want to say, what they want to share to other people.Language is used to express human's feelings, thoughts and ideas, whenever they have the chance to communicate with other people.For sure, in the middle of conversation, people tend to talk and state something that is related to a future action.There is a phenomenon as stated below.
Speaker 1: "Should we all go to Starbucks on Saturday evening?"Speaker 2: "I don't have car." The conversation stated above is found in one of messenger apps used nowadays, WhatsApp.From what we can see above, we know that the first speaker suggested the members from the group chat to gather in a place on specific time.The statement of the second speaker may not be understood to other people, other than the group chat's members.The statement by the second speaker literary means he does not own a car.However, what they understood is not so, but they understood his statement as he does not have his car with him, either it was borrowed or broken.Thus, the purpose of the second speaker stating that statement in the group chat is to tell them that he cannot fetch each of them from their house as he usually did.This is a dialogue example that we can usually found in our daily life.
Well communication must be understandable by all related parties.A wellcommunicated conversation occurs between speakers and it requires them to analyse and understand the context when the conversations go on.It is done so to lead a conversation between two parties.A study which analyses the context and finding out the meaning of communicative intentions is known as pragmatics.According to Yule (2014), pragmatics is a study of speakers' meaning of words in an utterance.It declared that communication is not just depending on the literal meaning of words, but also recognize the context and the words' meaning uttered by the speakers.
In conveying a message through utterances, we have to be able to interpret the meaning of the utterances.In daily conversations, we usually can recognize the type of the utterances, which refers to an action.An action which performed by the speaker through utterances can defined as speech act (Yule, 2014).Speech act is classified into five types, they are declarative, representative, expressive, directive, and commissive (Yule, 1996).In this journal, researcher decided to analyse commissive speech act.In a conversation, speakers apply commissive speech act when they commit themselves from the utterances for the action in the future.As mentioned by Yule (1996), speech act is used to express what the speakers intend to do, which can be promising, refusing, threatening, accepting, and offering.Commissive speech act not only can be found in society, but also medias such as The essential elements of a movie can be used as the object analysis.As the analysis on speech act is related with action through utterances, then the element of the movie and the object of this journal's analysis is the utterances or dialogues of the characters in movie.In the movie of 'Onward', there is a phenomenon depicted through the utterances between Laurel and Ian in the beginning scene of the movie.
Laurel: "I know you're a little scared to drive sweetie-pie, but -." Ian: "I am not scared, mom.I'm gonna move Barley's game." (00:04:13 -00:04:20) The dialogue above shows refusal by the answer of Ian.Ian here is just having his sixteenth birthday, which general known that in US, teenagers in their sixteenth can hold driving license.However, as he is a timid high school student and has struggle in self-confidence, he refused to sign up in his school's driving practice.Therefore, Ian's answer to Laurel's statement is a refusal speech act which is his effort in shifting the topic he did not want to talk about.
The researchers took two researches to be compared and to be references.Gea (2020) conducted an analysis of commissive speech act types that are uttered by Donald Trump in speech campaign.The research used descriptive qualitative method with Fox Business' video through Youtube as the data source.The result of the analysis showed the speech act of promising is the most frequently used in the data source.
Then, Devi and Degaf (2021) analysed commissive speech act types and functions uttered by the characters in the movie entitled Knives Out.The method used to conduct the analysis is qualitative descriptive method, which the utterances found are classified based on the theory of Searle onto the types of commissive speech act.The analysis resulted the refusing commissive speech act is mainly uttered by the characters from the movie.
The researchers analysed the types of commissive speech act proposed by Searle (1979) which is the same theory as the previous researches explained.However, present research conducted the analysis on different data source as to compare with two previous researches.This research will analyse the types of commissive speech act, which are promising, refusing, threatening, accepting, and offering.From the explanation above, the aim of this journal is to analyse and investigate the commissive speech acts performed by the characters in 'Onward' movie.

B. LITERATURE REVIEW 1. Commissive Speech Acts
As stated by Searle (1979), commissive acts are those acts which are used by speakers to commit themselves to certain future course of actions.The actions can be performed by the speaker to self or acted as a part of a social group.Searle and Vanderveken (1985) also declared that commissive acts are essentially hearerdirected, which a speech act must be aimed to specific hearer, and it can be addressed to anyone or no one.However, hearer-directed acts where the hearer is not identical with speaker are required to performed to acts for overt public, which means the intention of those acts is directed to anyone.

Types of Commissive Acts a) Promising
Promising is a type of commissive speech acts which has uncommon features to other types.The act of promising is especially performed for hearer to do something for the hearer's benefit, and involves obligation, which increases the strength of commitment of speaker (Searle & Vanderveken, 1985).Obama: "You'll hear the deep patriotism in the voice of a military spouse who's working the phones late at night to make sure that no one who fights for this country."(Kristiina & Ambalegin, 2019)

b) Threatening
This type of commissive acts differ from previous act, as it is not done for the hearer's benefit, but rather to loss or detriment (Searle & Vanderveken, 1985).The absence of obligation is detected in this act, so it is counted as independent.Other than performed in speech act, threatening has hybrid meaning thus it can be performed only using threatening gestures at someone.Prabowo: "If there is a member of Gerindra who corrupts, I will put him in prison by myself."(Husain, Hamamah, & Nurhayani, 2020)

c) Accepting
An act of acceptance is determined as a response of what have the speaker said or committed to do.The context of commissive in accepting is considered simply as the acceptor lets the speaker do what he commits himself to doing so (Searle & Vanderveken, 1985).In term of commissive acceptance, it is supposed to be not good for the speaker, since the speaker offered to do and its responsibilities and obligations is to accepted by the acceptor.

d) Refusing
The negative contrast of acceptance is refusal or rejection.According to Searle and Vanderveken (1985), the act of refusing is an illocutionary contradiction which is found in utterance of supposed acceptance performed in that context and the speaker presupposed it into refusal.Thus, the illocutionary contradiction of an acceptance is refusal, which then has the additional preparatory when is given an option of either acceptance or refusal.John Wick: "Find someone else." (Juniartha, 2020)

e) Offering
The act of offering is distinctive to other commissive speech acts, which is considered as conditional illocution of commissive acts.An offer is defined as a promise that is conditional only when accepted by the hearer (Searle & Vanderveken, 1985).It is then the form of an offer is bind only when it is accepted and one can accept an act of offer if it is made and has not withdrawn.Ransom: "Calm down, are you hungry?Do you want to eat?" (Devi & Degaf, 2021)

C. RESEARCH METHOD
This research is a descriptive qualitative research, as proposed by Creswell (2014), which the data was analysed by describing in sentences.The researchers focused on finding the utterances of commissive speech acts found in the movie "Onward" by Scanlon (2020).To collect the data, researchers conducted observational method which is done by observing the language used between the characters in the movie (Sudaryanto, 2015).The research conducted a nonparticipatory technique as the researchers are not involved in the data source.In order to collect the data from the source, several steps are done in order.First, the researchers downloaded the movie and the movie script.Then, the researchers watched the movie while highlighting the utterances which related to the object of the analysis.
To analyse the data, the researchers used the method of pragmatic identity by Sudaryanto (2015).The utterances found from the movie then were analysed and used pragmatic competence -in equalizing technique by Sudaryanto (2015), to equalized the data based on types of commissive speech acts by Searle (1979).First, the researchers started to analyse with reviewing the collected utterances.Next, researchers classified them into the theory suggested.Finally, the analysed data of utterances were drawn into a conclusion.

D. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This research showed that there were 17 utterances of commissive acts found in the movie.There are the acts of promising, threatening, accepting, refusing, and offering showed by the characters.They were 2 data of promising, 4 data of threatening, 2 data of accepting, 6 data of refusing, and 2 data of offering.The total of the data is shown in Table 1.The utterance produced by the hearer, who is Ian is considered as an act of refusing.The hearer is just having his sixteenth birthday, which general known that in US, teenagers in their sixteenth can hold driving license.However, as he is a timid high school student and has struggle in self-confidence, he refused to sign up in his school's driving practice.Therefore, the hearer's answer to Laurel's statement, who acted as a speaker, is a refusal speech act which is his effort in shifting the topic he did not want to talk about.

DATA 2
Laurel: "Let him go." (00:04:39 -00:04:41) Barley: "Okay, but I know you're stronger than that.There's a mighty warrior inside you.You just have to let him out.Right, Mom?" The statement uttered by the siblings' mother, the speaker, is considered as the act of threatening, intended for the hearer, Barley.The situation showed Ian was grabbed by hearer tightly when he was about to have breakfast.As she knows that Ian has a small body, the speaker obligated hearer to let him go.The speaker here also was known to be strong as she exercised every morning.The utterance by the speaker was intended to threaten hearer before she did anything to him.