Speech Acts of Suggestion in Social Media Communication: A Pragmatic Analysis of Instagram Comments
Abstract
This study examines the use of suggestion speech acts in Instagram comments, with particular attention to how Saudi EFL users demonstrate pragmatic competence in digital communication. Drawing on Martínez Flor’s taxonomy of suggestion strategies, the study analyzes 103 suggestion-oriented comments selected from an initial dataset of 150 Instagram comments. A mixed-methods design was adopted: qualitative analysis was used to classify suggestion strategies into direct, conventionalized, and indirect forms, while quantitative frequency analysis was applied to identify their distribution across the dataset. The findings show that indirect strategies were the most frequently used, accounting for 40 instances, followed by conventionalized forms (33) and direct strategies (30). At the sub-strategy level, impersonal constructions were the most dominant form, indicating users’ preference for mitigating imposition and reducing face-threatening effects in online interaction. The qualitative analysis further reveals that Instagram users employ suggestions not only to advise or recommend actions but also to express critique, negotiate social distance, and maintain politeness in public digital discourse. The study contributes to research on interlanguage pragmatics and computer-mediated communication by showing how suggestion speech acts are shaped by platform-based interaction, sociocultural norms, and digital politeness practices. However, the findings should be interpreted within the limits of the selected dataset and the specific Instagram context examined.
- The study analyzed 103 suggestion-oriented Instagram comments by Saudi EFL users.
- Indirect suggestion strategies were the most frequent form in the dataset.
- Impersonal constructions emerged as the dominant suggestion sub-strategy.
- Users employed suggestions to advise, critique, and maintain online politeness.
- Instagram comments reflected pragmatic competence in digital communication contexts.
Article information
https://doi.org/10.36923/jicc.v26i2.1451
How to Cite
Funding data
-
Deanship of Scientific Research, King Khalid University
Grant numbers RGP1/56/46.
Full text article
References
Alcónd, E., & Safont, P. (2001). Occurrence of exhortative speech acts in ELT materials and natural speech data: A focus on request, suggestion, and advice realization strategies. Studies in English Language and Linguistics, 3, 5-22.
Alhaythami, R. A. A., & Shoaib, A. (2026). A multimodal critical discourse analysis of @VisitSaudi.ar's Arabic Instagram posts. International Journal of Linguistics and Translation Studies, 7(1), 111-135. https://doi.org/10.36892/ijlts.v7i1.687
Ali, A. (2025). Review of Tanaka (2025): Navigating language in parliamentary practice: Between courtesy and conflict in Japan. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 36(2), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1075/japc.25076.ali
Al-Seghayer, K. (2024). Pragmatic competence in Saudi EFL learners: Challenges, consequences, and strategies for overcoming barriers. Journal for the Study of English Linguistics, 12(1), 209. https://doi.org/10.5296/jsel.v12i1.22438
Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage (Vol. 4). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085
Barbulet, G. (2013). Social media-a pragmatic approach: contexts & implicatures. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 83, 422-426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.083
Creswell, J. W., Clark, V. L. P., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 209–240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506335193.n7
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.
Crystal, D. (2011). Internet linguistics: A student’s guide. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203830901
González-Lloret, M. (2019). Technology-mediated TBLT and L2 pragmatics. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pragmatics (pp. 352-367). Routledge.
Herring, S. C. (2007). A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse. Language@Internet, 4(1), 1-37.
Herring, S. C. (2013). Discourse in Web 2.0: Familiar, reconfigured, and emergent. In D. Tannen & A. Trester (Eds.), Discourse 2.0: Language and new media (pp. 1-25). Georgetown University Press.
Kasper, G., & Schmidt, R. (1996). Developmental issues in interlanguage pragmatics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(2), 149-169. https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.1.int4
Leech, G. N. (2014). The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001
Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813313
Lewiński, M., Cepollaro, B., Oswald, S., & Witek, M. (2023). Norms of public argument: A speech act perspective. Topoi, 42(2), 349-356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-023-09918-1
Mahzari, M. (2025). The speech act of requests in Arabic is used by Saudi Facebook users. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 16(4). https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1604.26
Martínez Flor, A. (2005). A theoretical review of the speech act of suggesting: Towards a taxonomy for its use in FLT. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, (18), 167-187. https://doi.org/10.14198/raei.2005.18.08
Mulyono, Laksono, K., Wuryaningrum, R., & Cahyo, A. A. R. (2025). The application of politeness principles in speech acts in the 2024 presidential election debate. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 12(1), 2495479. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2025.2495479
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Slate, J. R., Leech, N. L., & Collins, K. M. (2009). Mixed data analysis: Advanced integration techniques. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 3(1), 13-33. https://doi.org/10.5172/mra.455.3.1.13
Rahmani, F. A. (2025). A pragmatic case study of politeness in Instagram comments: Insights from Medy Renaldy's post. STAIRS: English Language Education Journal, 6(1), 44-52. https://doi.org/10.21009/stairs.6.1.5
Rintell, E. (1979). Getting your speech act together: The pragmatic ability of second language learners. Working Papers on Bilingualism, (17), 97-106.
Saleem, A., & Yasmin, M. (2024). Celebratory expressions and linguistic diversity: Investigating congratulatory patterns among Pakistani Facebook users commenting in English and Urdu. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 11(1), 2315799. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2024.2315799
Sampietro, A. (2020). Use and interpretation of emoji in electronic-mediated communication: A survey. Visual Communication Quarterly, 27(1), 27-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/15551393.2019.1707086
Schmidt, R. W., & Richards, J. C. (1980). Speech acts and second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 129-157. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/1.2.129
Seargeant, P., & Tagg, C. (2014). The language of social media: Identity and community on the internet. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137029317
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438
Searle, J. R. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In Speech Acts (pp. 59-82). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_004
Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 91-112. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/4.2.91
Trosborg, A. (1995). Requests, complaints, and apologies. Mouton de Gruyter.
Yule, G. (2022). Pragmatics. In The Study of Language (8th ed., pp. 155–174). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009233446
Authors
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Sami Saad Alghamdi, Dhaif Alzahrani, Muhammad Akbar Khan, Asad Ali
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This journal provides immediate and free open access to all its content and is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This means readers are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author, as long as proper attribution is given. This policy is consistent with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition of open access.