Implicit/Explicit Speech and Relationships between Girls/Boys Students in Team Sport Learning (Case of Tunisian Basketball)
Rim Mekni, Hajer Sahli, Chamseddine Guinoubi, Wissam Ben Khalifa, Makrem Zghibi
The intervention of the context, which represents the situation where the speech is delivered, upsets the logic so that the semiotic meaning produced by the situation of enunciation takes precedence over that of departure. This difference in meaning between "what is said" and "what is covered" was taken by the "pragmatic discourse" which focuses on the elements of language in context and in co-text. Austin (1970) distinguishes three speech acts: the elocutionary act, the illocutionary act and
... rlocutionary act that will be studied in the context of school and classroom of EPS basketball. An analysis of various acts of implicit and explicit language will allow studying the reports of site (Kerbrat-Orecchioni, 2001) between girls and boys. All statements are of assertive type referred to with the order constituting instructions to remedy the failure. Most are accompanied by a brief argument that explains the cause or the consequence of the performed act. Although girls seem to take part in the discussion, their actions remain less important. If language is a form of action, if any statement is already pragmatically loaded, this charge is its propensity to act on others and to produce effects. Keywords Speeches, Implicit, Explicit, Balance of Power and Basketball R. Mekni et al. 688 on external requirements but also to his own perception of these conditions. Any statement carries a definite meaning, obtained by the combination of different word's semantics that constitute it. The words are organized according to a strict well-determined group of syntax rules. What about context? The intervention of the context, situation in which the speech is delivered, disrupts the logic of things so that the meaning produced by the situation of enunciation takes precedence over that of departure. This difference in meaning between what is said and what is referred was taken over by the "pragmatic" as an object of study. As a result, the discipline of linguistics focuses on language elements whose meaning can be understood by grasping the context. To better structure the study, Austin (1970) distinguishes at the eighth conference, that when saying is doing, three speeches act, which are: The elocutionary act: the act of saying something. It is the combination of different speech sounds, mentioned and linked by syntax rules. In other words, the act provides a statement. The illocutionary act: the act performed by saying something. The sentence production is an act in itself and it transforms the relationship between the stakeholders. Thus, any forward product engages the listener. Such acts can be distinguished: act of promising, questioning, informing, act to order, act to insinuate, act of offending, etc. Finally, note that this act is a conventional act, which implies a social agreement. The perlocutionary act: Instead of stating a simple act, each statement refers to a well-determined one. Thus, interviewing someone can be designed to accommodate him, to embarrass him, to make him believe that we agree with his views, etc... Unlike the illocutionary act, this is an act that can remain hidden: to embarrass someone, there is no need to let him know we are trying to do so (Zghibi, 2009). To get a clear idea of these three acts, the following examples set by Katherin Kerbrat-Orcchioni (2008) , will make it clear: 1) John smokes a lot. 2) Does John smoke a lot? 3) Smoke a lot, John! Prepositional phrases with the same content perform the same illocutionary act as ascribes to the same subject the same attribution, the "smoke a lot". However, they do not convey the same illocutionary, which are respectively: assertion, question and order. Likewise their pure perlocutionary act, insofar as the first statement aims to inform, the second request information, while the latter is rather a reproach (Zghibi, 2009).