Analysis of Illocutionary Acts in the First Round of the 2024 Presidential Debate: A Pragmatic Study Based on Kreidler's Theory

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the types and functions of illocutionary speech acts used in the first round of the 2024 Indonesian presidential debate. The analysis employs a pragmatic approach based on Charles W. Kreidler’s theory and is compared with John Searle’s classification of speech acts. The data were obtained from the official transcript of the debate and analyzed qualitatively using discourse analysis techniques. The findings indicate that the presidential candidates strategically used various types of illocutionary acts to convey political messages, build their public image, and influence the audience. The dominant types of illocutionary acts include asserting beliefs, making commitments, giving directives, expressing emotions, and asking questions. Each candidate demonstrates a distinctive communication style: Anies Baswedan emphasizes moral and critical perspectives through assertive and expressive acts; Prabowo Subianto uses expressive and commissive acts to project loyalty and patriotism; while Ganjar Pranowo relies on commissive and directive acts to offer concrete policies. The comparison between Kreidler and Searle’s theories reveals that Kreidler’s functional classification offers more flexibility and contextual depth in analyzing political discourse, especially for detecting implicit criticism, rhetorical questions, and emotionally charged statements. Therefore, Kreidler’s framework is considered more effective for examining complex communicative strategies in political debates. This study contributes to the field of political pragmatics by demonstrating how language functions not only as a tool of expression but also as a strategic act in political communication. The findings also encourage the development of political literacy and critical discourse awareness among the public.