Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 45 no. 5 (2025)

A Pragmatic Analysis of Senator Risa Hontiveros Speeches in Senate Hearing

Mara Eva Mae Balicuat | Jandy Daga-as

Discipline: Politics

 

Abstract:

The purpose of this study was to examine the standard linguistic features and speech acts present in the speeches of Senator Risa Hontiveros in senate hearings. The framework utilized in this study is the Analysis of Finegan (2008), and the classified illocutionary acts of Searle (1979), which are categorized into five: assertive, directive, commissive, expressive, and declarative. Furthermore, this study employed a qualitative research methodology, specifically utilizing a discourse analysis approach. As a corpus-based investigation, the research material comprised the speeches delivered by Senator Risa Hontiveros during senate hearings. Moreover, the findings of this study revealed that Senator Risa Hontiveros in senate hearing utilized a morphological process, namely: affixation, compounding, and initialism. Also, it presented only the three types of sentences according to their function, which are the declarative, interrogative, and imperative sentences. Additionally, there are four types of discourse analysis: narration, description, exposition, and argument. At last, the study revealed that Senator Risa Hontiveros, in a senate hearing, utilized the five illocutionary acts of Searle. In connection to this study, analyzing the linguistic features and speech acts in Senator Hontiveros’ senate hearing speeches is crucial as it uncovers the deliberate use of language to shape opinions, convey messages, and achieve impactful communication within the realm of politics. Therefore, this analysis provides a deeper understanding of how her speeches are crafted to communicate with the people during the senate hearing effectively



References:

  1. Agafonova, O., Iriskhanova, O., Kiose, M., Leonteva, A. (2023). Vague reference in expository discourse: Multimodal regularities of speech and gesture. Proceedings of the International Conference “Dialogue 2023, 2023.
  2. Agagon, M. D., Nodalo, J., Suarez, A. P. A., & Naparan, G. (2024). Illocutionary speech acts used by President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. during the 2022 and 2023 State of the Nation Address. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 20(1), 8-19. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11216984
  3. Al-Gamal, A. A. M., & Ali, E. A. M. (2019) Corpus-based Method in Language Learning and Teaching. IJRAR- International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews, 6(2), 473i-476i.
  4. Balog, P. (2019). Transitivity analysis of selected privilege speeches of Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago. Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 7, 43-65.
  5. Beauchamp T. L. (1990). The promise of the beneficence model for medical ethics. J Contemp Health Law Policy. Spring;6:145-55.
  6. Catoto, J. S. (2023). Illocutionary acts in courtroom proceedings: The contexts of local courts in the Philippines. Rajabhat Chiang Mai Research Journal, 24(2), May–August. https://doi.org/10.57260/rcmrj.2023.262935
  7. Congressional Hearing. (2024). Govinfo.  https://www.govinfo.gov/help/chrg
  8. Ekasani, K. A., Lestari, D.,  Praminatih, G. A., Supartini, N. L., & Sulasmini, N. M. A., (2022). Touching anger: Investigation on speech style used by an Indonesian female politician. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6(2), 1724–1737.
  9. Finegan, E. (2008). Language: Its Structures and Use (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
  10. Fontamillas, K. I., & Corcuera, J. K. B. (2023). The privilege speeches of Sen. Grace Poe: A critical stylistic analysis. Asian Journal of English Language Studies (AJELS), 53.
  11. Guggisberg, S.,  Söllner, M., & Wambsganss, T. 2021. ArgueBot: A Conversational Agent for Adaptive Argumentation Feedback. In: Ahlemann, F., Schütte, R., Stieglitz, S. (Eds.). Innovation through Information Systems. Springer International Publishing. Volume 47, pp. 267–282. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86797-3_18    
  12. Hagström, L., & Gustafsson, K. (2021). The limitations of strategic narratives: The Sino-American struggle over the meaning of COVID-19. Contemporary Security Policy, 42(4), 415–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2021.1984725
  13. Herman, H.,  Purba, R., & Sianipar, E. O. (2022). A contrastive analysis study between English and Batak Toba in request sentence. Edu-Ling: Journal of English Education and Linguistics, 5(2), 176–180. https://doi.org/10.31503/edu-ling.v5i2.2022
  14. Hinojosa, M., & Kittilson, M. C. (2020). Seeing women, strengthening democracy: How women in politics foster connected citizens. Oxford University Press.
  15. Hidayat, K. N., & Jumanto, J. (2022). The morphological analysis of English blended words. UNCLLE (Undergraduate Conference on Language, Literature, and Culture), 2(01), 640-653.
  16. Hidayatullah, M. F., & Nur, D. R. (2019). An Analysis of Imperative Sentence in “Uang Panai” Movie. IJOLTL:  Indonesian Journal of Language Teaching and Linguistics, 4(3), 180–192. https://doi.org/10.30957/ijoltl.v4i3.609Miles
  17. Iftinan, N., & Putra, D. K. S. (2021). Peran Perempuan Sebagai Pemimpin Dalam Aktivitas Komunikasi Politik (studi  Tokoh  Pada  Ketua Dprd  Provinsi  Nusa Tenggara Barat). Proceedings of Management, 8(5), 7215–7221.
  18. Irgy, M., Al Asri, P. Z., Azzahra, N. F., Salsabila, & Aniza, M. (2023). Pragmatics in linguistics. Retrieved from https://pbi.ftk.uin-alauddin.ac.id/artikel-3531-pragmatics-in-linguistics
  19. Jain, N. (2023). What is qualitative research design? Definition, types, methods, and best practices. Ideascale. https://ideascale.com/blog/qualitative-research-design/
  20. J.E. Dodgson. Reflexivity in qualitative research. J. Hum. Lact, 35 (2019), pp. 220-222, 10.1177/0890334419830990
  21. Johansen M.V., Aagaard-Hansen J., Riis P. (2008). Benefit—a neglected aspect of health research ethics. Dan Med Bull. Nov;55(4):216-8.
  22. Johnson, D., & Zia, A. (2024). Morphological Study of Standard Arabic. Advance Social Science Archive Journal. Retrieved from https://www.assajournal.com/index.php/36/article/view/25/44
  23. Jumanto, J. & Nuatica, A. (2022). A Morphological Analysis of English Blended Words. Undergraduate Conference on Language, Literature, and Culture (UNCLLE), 2(1). Universitas Dian Nuswantoro Semarang. e-ISSN: 2798-7302.
  24. Kabirun, S. S. Z. (2024). Investigating the rhetoric of a president: A rhetorical discourse analysis. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 9(2), 456–474.  https://doi.org/10.33369/joall.v9i2.343482
  25. Kanade, V. (2022). What is semantic analysis? Definition, examples, and applications in 2022.
  26. Košir, S. (2024). Empowering women’s political participation: Historical contexts, contemporary trends, and challenges. ToKnowPress. https://toknowpress.net.
  27. Lesnichkova, L. D. (2020). Dinamicheskie protsessy v obshchestvenno-politicheskoi leksike sovremennogo vengerskogo i bolgarskogo yazykov [Dynamic processes in public political lexis of contemporary Hungarian and Bulgarian languages]. In Proceedings of Politika i Kul’tura: Prostranstvo Igry International Research Conference (pp. 201-210). Budapest, Hungary: Dialogorum.
  28. Licudo, J. A., Estigoy, M. A. S., Hail, P. N., & Vargas, D. S. (2022). Women taking the lead: An analysis of the mainstream media coverage of Filipino women leaders during the COVID-19 pandemic. Central Luzon State University.
  29. Limaj, E. (2023). Female political discourse in the Albanian parliament in democracy and communism. Theoria et Historia Scientiarum, 22(1), 324-338. https://doi.org/10.12775/ths.2023.008
  30. Lincoln Y. S., Guba E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
  31. Mengliyev, B., Shahabitdinova, S., Khamroeva, S., Gulyamova, S., Botirova, A. (2021). The morphological analysis and synthesis of wordforms in the linguistic analyzer. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(1), 558-564. Doi: 10.52462/jlls.37
  32. McCallion, E. (2024). Partisanship, independence, and the constitutive representation of women in the Canadian Senate. Politics & Gender, 1-25.
  33. Monita, L., Anisah, N., & SI, M. (2019). Komunikasi Politik Dan Gender: Analisis Persepsi Masyarakat Terhadap Pemilihan Calon Wali Kota Banda Aceh Tahun 2017. Fakultas Ilmu Sosial & Ilmu Politik, 1(1)
  34. Mujiyanto, J., Nabila, Z., & Rukmini, D. (2020). The Comparison of Commisive Speech Acts by Trump and Warren Presidential Candidate Viewed from Gender Differences. English Education Journal, 11(1), 114-122. https://doi.org/10.15294/eej.v11i1.41899
  35. Nur Alam, O. S. (2023). Illocutionary speech acts in the presidential speech regarding the relocation of the national capital city. Celtic: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics, 10(2), 156–171. https://doi.org/10.22219/celtic.v10i2.28172
  36. Ocampo, D. M. (2022). Disempowering the powerful: A critical pragmatic analysis of political discourse using Brown and Levinson’s Face Theory. Rajasthali Journal, 2(1), 55-62.
  37. Paltridge, B. (2021). Discourse Analysis. In: Mohebbi, H., Coombe, C. (eds) Research Questions in Language Education and Applied Linguistics. Springer Texts in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79143-8_7
  38. Parwati, T., & Istiningdiah, K. (2021). Partisipasi Dan Komunikasi Politik Perempuan Di Legislatif Menurut Kacamata Politisi Perempuan Di Indonesia. Interaksi: Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi, 9(2), 119-129. https://doi.org/10.14710/interaksi.9.2
  39. Perrez, J., Randour, F., & Reuchamps, M. (2024). Twenty years of research on political discourse: A systematic review and directions for future research. Discourse & Society, 31(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926520903526
  40. Putra, I. P. W. A., & Sedeng, I. N. (2022). Directive illocutionary acts found in the movies 21 and 22 Jump Street. Humanis: Journal of Arts and Humanities, 26(2), 180–187. 10.5281/zenodo.10210828
  41. Qaiwer, S. N. (2024). Retelling stories in political discourse: The recurrence of self-narratives in Obama’s speeches. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2024.2433828  
  42. Rahmani, H. R., & Saeed, A. R. (2024). The power of language: Exploring the role of language in politics. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), 8(8), 2063–2073.
  43. Roberts, C. W. (1997). Semantic text analysis: On the structure of linguistic ambiguity in ordinary discourse. In C. W. Roberts (Ed.), Text analysis for the social sciences (pp. 24). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003064060
  44. Russell, A. (2021). Tweeting is leading: How senators communicate and represent in the age of Twitter. Oxford University Press.
  45. Rustamova, S. O., & Tuliboyeva, L. R. (2024). Types of sentences in modern English. International Scientific E-Conference “Innovative Trends in Science, Practice and Education” – Ankara, Turkey, 2, 52–62. http://researchparks.net/index.php/itspe/article/view/130
  46. Salloum, S. A., Khan, R., & Shaalan, K. (2020). A survey of semantic analysis approaches. Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Computer Vision (AICV2020), 61-70.
  47. Searle, J. R., Kiefer, F., & Bierwisch, M. (1980). Speech act theory and pragmatics. D. Reidel.
  48. Siagian, S. (2022). The Linguistic Features in the Conversation of Grade Ten Students of SMA Negeri 2 Pematangsiantar. Universitas HKBP Nommensen, 8(3).
  49. Sims J.M. (2010). A brief review of the Belmont report. Dimens Crit Care Nurs. Jul-Aug;29(4):173-4.
  50. Shkvorchenko, N. (2020). Linguistic and gender peculiarities of English political discourse. Analele Universităţii din Craiova. Seria Ştiinţe Filologice. Lingvistică, 398-416.
  51. Turakhonova, B. O. (2024). Pragmatic functions of interrogative sentences. Oriental Renaissance: Innovative, Educational, Natural and Social Sciences, 4(11), 151-153.
  52. Turner, D. (2020). Introducing Analysis for Qualitative Research. Quirkos.

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic