From Speech to Deed

There is something we often consider trivial in daily life: words. We utter them in seconds, write them in minutes, then forget them. Yet for others, those words may linger far longer. A compliment can strengthen someone. Advice can alter a decision. Criticism can become material for improvement. Conversely, a single sentence delivered without consideration can wound a person’s heart for years.

In pragmatics, language is not viewed merely as a string of words and sentences. Pragmatics studies how language is used in context and how meaning is understood by those involved in communication (Revita, 2026). Yule (1996) explains pragmatics as the study of meaning conveyed by speakers and interpreted by listeners. Thus, meaning resides not only in the words themselves, but also in the context, intention, relationship between participants, and the situation in which communication takes place.

From this we can understand that speaking is not simply producing words. Speaking is action (Austin, 1962; Revita, 2008). When someone says, ‘I apologise,’ they are not merely uttering a sentence. They are performing the act of apologising. When someone says, ‘I promise,’ they are making a commitment. When a lecturer says to a student, ‘I believe you can do it,’ that utterance can become a source of motivation.

This is what is known in pragmatics through the concept of speech acts. Austin (1962) and Searle (1969) demonstrated that language possesses the power of action. In other words, humans can do things through language. If language can be an action, does not every utterance also carry consequences?

This question becomes even more interesting when placed in a religious perspective. Islam pays great attention to how humans use their tongues. One highly relevant principle is found in Surah Al-Ahzab, verse 70, which means: ‘O you who believe! Fear Allah and speak words that are right.’

The verse is striking because the command to be pious is followed by the command to speak rightly. In the context of social life, this message shows that the quality of one’s religiosity is reflected not only in personal rituals, but also in the way one communicates.

Here pragmatics and Islamic values can meet. In communication, something that is true is not necessarily delivered in the right way. A person may possess correct information but deliver it in an inappropriate setting. A person may offer valid criticism but choose words that humiliate others. In terms of content, they may be correct. However, pragmatically, their communicative goal may fail because communication is not only about what is said, but also to whom, in what context, for what purpose, and with what impact.

Imagine someone saying to a friend, ‘How wonderful that you arrived on time.’ If the friend indeed arrived on time, the sentence is a compliment. But if they arrived two hours late, the same sentence could become sarcasm. The words have not changed. What has changed is the context and the intention.

This is the uniqueness of human language. We do not always say what we actually want to convey directly. Sometimes we use sarcasm, metaphor, questions, humour, or even silence. The listener then uses context to interpret that intention.

Therefore, misunderstandings often occur not because a person does not understand the words, but because they understand the words without understanding the context. This phenomenon is increasingly evident in the era of social media.

We live in a culture of very rapid communication. The thumb often moves faster than the mind. A comment is written when emotions are running high. News is shared before its truth is verified. A video clip is interpreted without seeing the whole context.

As a result, the digital space becomes fertile ground for misinterpretation. A single sentence can be read by thousands of people with different backgrounds, experiences and emotions. The writer may intend to joke, but the reader considers it an insult. The writer may intend to criticise a policy, but the reader considers it a personal attack. The writer may intend to provide information, but the reader perceives it as provocation.

In such situations, we need not only language skills but also the ability to understand language pragmatically. Pragmatics teaches us not to rush to conclude someone’s intention. Context needs to be examined. The situation needs to be understood. The relationship between speaker and interlocutor needs to be considered.

This principle is actually very close to the value of tabayyun in Islam. However, tabayyun need not always be understood in the context of major news or political issues. In daily life, tabayyun can begin with something simple: not rushing to conclude someone’s intention from a single sentence.

If a friend says, ‘Up to you,’ does it truly mean they surrender the entire decision to us? Not necessarily. If a mother says to her child, ‘Your room is wonderful,’ is that a compliment? Also not necessarily.

If a supervisor says to a subordinate, ‘Once you are finished, please come in,’ is that merely granting permission? It could be. But there could also be another intention that can only be understood through context.

Words often carry a broader meaning than their literal form.

Therefore, a person with pragmatic competence becomes not only a good listener, but also a responsible speaker.