Classism Hate Speech in Katherine Mansfield's Short Story ‘ The Doll’s House ’: A Pragmatic Study

Hate speech (henceforth HS) has recently spread and become an important issue. This type of speech in children's writings has a particular formulation and specific objectives that the authors intend to convey. Thus, the study aims at examining qualitatively and quantitatively the classism HS and its pragmatic functions via identifying the speech acts used to express classism HS, the implicature instigated as well as impoliteness. Since pragmatics is the study of language in context, which is greatly related to the situations and speaker’s intention, this study depends on pragmatic theories (speech acts, impoliteness and conversational implicature) to analyze the data which are taken from Katherine Mansfield's short story (The Doll’s House). The data has been analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. It is qualitative, as it is dedicated to describe HS phenomenon that is found in the selected short story, depending on an eclectic model. Regarding the quantitative analysis, the researchers have used SPSS 23 program to determine the frequencies and percentages of the strategies that are intended to be measured. The study has concluded that HS has multiple dimensions that are difficult to interpret outside the context of speech. It can be conveyed by many strategies, both explicit and covert. Further, the simplest form of HS involves an insult in addition to other functions, such as disapproval and humiliation.


‫لكاثرين‬ ‫قصيرة‬ ‫قصة‬ ‫في‬ ‫الطبقي‬ ‫الكراهية‬ ‫خطاب‬ ‫تداولية‬ ‫دراسة‬ ‫الدمى):‬ ‫(بيت‬ ‫مانسفيلد‬
It is hoped that the current study will be of value to the researchers of linguistics in general and pragmatists in particular. It contributes to the field of pragmatics, especially in the application of pragmatic theories to HS. It may raise awareness of the forms of language used in HS contexts, leading to a better understanding of HS's contextualization.

Hate Speech
The concept of 'HS' was first introduced in the 1980s and spread through discussion on campus in the United States to mean a kind of content-based constraint to racist discourse (Matsuda,1988).The term HS is a collective noun; semantically, its meaning is not taken from the literal meanings of the words hate and speech, but from the two words combined together. Furthermore, it can be treated as an idiom whose meaning is not directly deducible from the literal meanings of the words "hate" and "speech," but whose meaning can be inferred in the sense that the words "hate" and "speech" are used together. Another possibility is that the word 'hate' is being used as an attribution metaphor, meaning that the word 'hate' often refers to the phenomenon defined by the expression HS (Marsters,2019). Walker (1994) noted that HS as a concept is just the latest term in a set of words used commonly in speech to target an individual or group of individuals based on protected characteristics, such as ethnicity, race, religion, gender, and so forth. In all probability, the phrase HS has also been present throughout human history, starting with the ancient world's earliest multiethnic societies, which refers to the expressions of identity-based envy, aggression, confrontation, violence, and oppression (Riesman,1942;Casson, 2001).
HS is defined by Rosenfeld (2003) as "speech designed to promote hatred based on race, religion, ethnicity, or national origin" (p.1523). Rosenfeld definition is narrowly limited to actions and categories. As for Fortuna and Nunes (2018), they presented a very detailed definition in terms of categories and the methods used. For them, HS is: [a] language that attacks or diminishes, that incites violence or hate against groups, based on protected properties such as physical appearance, religion, descent, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, gender identity or other, and it can occur with different linguistic styles, even in subtle forms or when humour is used. This is the case when stereotypes are reinforced, giving a justification to discrimination and negative bias toward these groups. (p.5) Although there is no scientific definition of HS, some common and constituent features can be traced. According to the Council of Europe's Committee of Ministers (1997) all forms of utterance or expression that spread, promote, incite or justify racial hatred are considered HS. Sometimes, even jokes are considered HS if they indicate a person or group based on the protected properties or are repeated. These jokes can be used to strengthen racial attitudes; though they are considered harmless, they also have psychologically negative impacts (Fortuna & Nunes, 2018). Several definitions of HS are found; all of them demonstrate that HS has particular aims and focuses on specific characteristics.
Furthermore, from the previous definitions, it can be concluded that the idea of protected characteristics is one of the main elements of HS. In this respect, specific considerations need to be taken into account. The range of protected HS characteristics can be restricted to: Skin, race, religion, religion, ethnicity, class, language, sex, sexual orientation, physical or mental impairment, nationality, and mental origin (Mihajlova, Bacovska & Shekerdjiev, 2013). The current study has adopted social class as a protected category for the study of HS. Nonetheless, for this study, Fortuna and Nunes' (2018) definition describes the presence of HS and mentions its function.

Concepts Overlapping with Hate Speech
There is a clear overlap between HS and other terms, such as bullying, and rudeness, which are very similar in context. The lack of understanding of the difference, in some instances, may lead to misunderstandings in interpreting these terms. Even though all of them offer offensive conduct, there is a significant difference between these concepts as will be explained below. HS as a complex phenomenon can be better understood by comparing it with other terms similar to it.

Rudeness
A general definition of rudeness is mentioned by Rondina (2005), who stated that "rudeness is anything you say or do or don't say or do that offends someone else, making them feel uncomfortable or inconvenienced" (p.3). Rondina (2005) pointed out that rudeness is more than not saying 'please' and 'thank you'. It ignores or damages others' feelings intentionally and does not value what is important to them. For Culpeper (2011), it is regarded as discourteous, foul, impolite, insulting, negative, or self-absorbed. For instance, eavesdropping, interrupting, pointing, ignoring, inviting, and laughing 'are described as rude behaviors. Segarra (2007) noted that the message of rudeness is one of ignorance and disregard of decent social ways and deliberate discourtesy. According to what has been described above, rudeness is not motivated by racial discrimination or a disparity in power, as is the case with HS, which is primarily motivated by bias.

Bullying
The concept of bullying identifies various actions that can affect a person's property, body, emotions, identity, and social status (Muhmed, 2014). Dennell, Brandi and Logan (2015) supported this definition and added that bullying is the actions and impacts that make someone feel hurt, threatened, afraid, or left out. Bullying is a global phenomenon with devastating implications on victims, bullies, families, schools, communities, and society.
Distinguishing between bullying and normal conflict is critical. That means not all conflict is intended to be hurtful, but some forms of these are a natural part of life. Moreover, bullying is an intentional, hurtful, and persistent type of overt and offensive conduct. Often, there are differential effects and an unbalance of power between the victim and the bully. This imbalanced power may be numerical or physical. In this regard, Namie & Namie (2009) mentioned that, the difference between bullying and other types of abuse is that bullying is usually more common than abuse. It cuts through status category membership borders and must be differentiated from criminal abuse forms. Bullying occurs if abuse is the same-gender or same-race or if the bullies receive possible legal immunity because they are part of a statusprotected community. For example, institutional bullying may result from an officer in a higher position against a subordinate or lower position as: 1. "You are a stupid little girl" (Dahl, 1997, p. 11). This sentence is taken from a short story in children literature where a teacher was addressing her student. It represents an example of verbal bullying towards the student. Furthermore, bullying can be conveyed as HS when it centers on racism, nationalism, sexuality, or any other discrimination type. That means, bullying can be a form of HS rather than HS itself (Heller & Magid, 2020). Bullying is serious and violent when it happens repeatedly and for an extended period. In this context, Beane (2008) noted that bullying is usually performed secretly, and it occurs away from adults and other people; therefore, it is often underestimated.

Some-Related Concepts
After reviewing the overlapping concepts with HS, the following section is dedicated to elaborate more about the different aspects of HS through shedding light on some other related concepts:

Prejudice
Studies on prejudice owe a debt of gratitude to Allport (1979), who defined prejudice as "an antipathy based upon a faulty and inflexible generalization"(p.9). This description embodies the way most individuals think of discrimination; when they hear the term prejudice, their minds turn to racial and ethnic discrimination instantly. Schaller and Neuberg (2008) defined prejudice as an unfavorable view or feeling formed in advance or without knowledge, reason, or thought. A hostile opinion about some persons or class of persons is usually based on misunderstandings or inflexible generalizations. For instance, African-Americans have suffered social, economic, and political prejudice at various levels. Likewise, prejudice for women has spread in Western culture since its establishment, limiting women's role and power in society (Heller & Magid, 2020). Culture affects prejudice since group members hold traditional values, including behavior, beliefs, and views. Thus, the level of strength and membership of specific ethnic or religious groups is a measure of social status, and wealth; it indicates an individual's social class, describing a person's position in the social hierarchy.

Discrimination
According to Gardner (2018), discrimination means a person or a group of people who is treated differently, in particular, in a negative way, for their skin color, sex, sexuality and other features. Discrimination is often based on bigotry, negative stereotypes and prejudice. Mehdi (2020) added that since many people fear of what seems strange or unknown, they react to anyone whose aspect, culture or behavior is unknown with suspicion or even with abuse. Discrimination may be openly practiced as direct discrimination marked by intentional bias against an individual or group. Attitudes, acts or institutional practices which depend or distinguish someone can be seen as discrimination. This may include an individual or a group of individuals refusing, restricting, or excluding. They range from gross abuses of human rights, such as genocide, slavery, racial, religious and persecution, to less severe systemic discriminatory forms, such as recruitment and promotion, living and verbal abuse. Common forms of prejudice among children are: bullying and racial slurs (e.g., 'sissy, fatso, dummy'), exclusion (as refusing to allow a child in a game), segregation, or the division of ethnic groups imposed by law or tradition. The latter is a type of discrimination which is known as a classism. In Europe, there have been formalized forms of segregation; for example, Jews were once separated into ghettos (Fischthal, 2021). Now, many Roma people in many European countries are forced to live in separate societies due to aggressive behavior or economic segregation (Ciaian & Kancs, 2016). In literature, one of the well-known examples of discrimination based on social class is found in Mansfield's story, The Doll's House, the focus of the current study. The main theme in this story is class discrimination (classism).

Classism
Prejudice or discrimination based on social class is known as class discrimination or classism (Weber, 1997). It is one of the common and somehow harsh classifications among the members of society. Classism is a prejudice due to a person's social class, such as sexism or racism. In classism, people with lower levels of social class are treated in ways which exclude, devalue, discount and distinguish them (Lott, 2002). According to Weber (1997), there is consensus that class primarily includes a notion of economic status as well as other characteristics that include social status within a society. This confirms Boas' (1949) view that ethnic disparities are not due to the innate biological differences, but to structural differences motivated by unequal power relationships.

Related Studies
One of the important uses of language that is still under consideration is Hate Speech phenomenon. Many academics and researchers have paid close attention to Hate Speech. The majority of earlier research focused on Hate Speech from different perspectives, but to the researchers' best knowledge, no study has addressed Hate Speech in children's literature. The following studies have shown how Hate Speech phenomenon is interpreted differently. One of these studies was entitled "A Critical Discourse Analysis of Hate Speech". The study used a critical discourse approach to detect Facebook posts targeting Islam and Muslims. It was a qualitative study based on Fairclough's (2001) model to distinguish whether these instances of "speech" were related to free speech or Hate Speech. The data of the study was a sample of Facebook posts that reflect the Westerners' attitudes toward Muslims.
Another study was that of Marsters (2019) entitled, "When Hate Speech Leads to Hateful Action: A Corpus and Discourse Analytic Approach to Linguistic Threat Assessment of Hate Speech". From a sociolinguistic perspective, this work dealt with Hate Speech using the analytic methods of corpus analysis and discourse. The put the query that reads: Would the experienced scholars help recognize writers who pose a high risk from those who are likely to be less risky? This study concluded that Bowers' hateful language was not unique on the network. People who spread hateful words have always existed and would continue to exist, whether in town squares, letters to the editor, blogs, or Twitter. Moreover, proposing various empirical rigor patterns of Hate Speech, both quantitative and qualitative, were adopted to debate hateful and offensive words.
In addition, "A Pragmatic Study of Racial Hate Speech" by Dhayef & Ali's (2020) investigated pragmatically the speech acts employed in articles published in Rwandan newspaper, Kangura. They examined this phenomenon in articles representing racial Hate Speech disseminated by Kangura from November 1990 to February 1994. They used qualitative and quantitative methods to analyze data according to Searle's (1979)  study concluded that directions were the most common ones of disseminating racial Hate Speech, and indirect speech actions exceeded direct speech acts. The first study looked at Hate Speech on Facebook.
As it is seen, the present work shares with the previously conducted studies the concept of hate speech. However, the data and model used in the analysis are different, and the type of hate speech under examination is limited to classism hate speech only.

Adopted Models
For the practical issues, an eclectic model is adopted; each part of the model deals with particular aspects of data analysis. This model helps clarify the hidden or intended meaning behind a particular HS. Pragmatically speaking, three theories are simultaneously employed in this study, whereby utterances will be contextually analyzed to investigate HS. The following points explain the model adopted in this study:

Searle's Speech Act
The speech act framework of this study is based on Searle's (1979) model of analyzing the kinds of acts used to convey HS phenomenon in three selected children short stories. Since HS is a linguistic phenomenon involving doing things (initiating discriminative and prejudicial linguistic behavior) via the use of words and utterances, it is best to be illustrated and analyzed by applying speech act theory and Searle's taxonomy on utterances containing the target phenomenon. By applying this theory, the researchers can show how the speaker uses different strategies to convey his/her discrimination in order to impact the hearer negatively with his/her required intended function.
Searle's primary concern is how to systematize and explain the words that perform certain functions (Mey,2001). Searle (1979) proposed a taxonomy of illocutionary acts in five exclusives. These five classifications are : a) Representatives or Assertives: This type is similar to the act of affirming where the speaker tells others about the truth. In such a case, the illocutionary point is to commit the speaker to the truth proposition to mean that something really happens. b) Directives: Searle (1979) noted that the speaker tries to get the hearer to do things like order, command, suggest, advise, and recommend. These acts express what the speaker needs. c) Commissives: These acts convey what the speaker intends to promise, deny, threaten, pledge, vow, give, and volunteer. d) Expressives: Expressive acts state the speaker's feelings; they can be expressions of happiness, pain, sorrow, etc. e) Declarations: Searle (1979) noted that declarations alter the institutional state of affairs instantly, and the speaker's utterance causes an external change, like that of declaring a war.

Culpeper's Impoliteness Theory
Culpeper's (1996) impoliteness theory is used as a model for analyzing the strategies used in children's stories to convey HS phenomenon. Culpeper followed Brown and Livenson's model of politeness. He suggested a model of five strategies for impoliteness, with one revision produced in 2005. These strategies are: bald on record impoliteness, positive impoliteness, negative impoliteness, sarcasm or mock impoliteness, and withhold politeness. By applying impoliteness theory, the researchers aim to show how children, in their linguistic behavior, use different impolite strategies to express their prejudicial attitude towards the target person. Since children are clear and direct in their speech, they express HS impolitely.

Grice's Model of Conversational
Implicature Grice's (1978; as cited in Grice, 1989)  particularized conversational implicatures refer to a conversation in a specific context where the knowledge provided is assumed to be true. Applying the implicature theory shows how HS pragmatically functions within one's utterance. Besides, it illustrates the generalized or particularized strategies adopted when initiating HS utterances.
The theoretical framework of the present study is based on an eclectic model. The research starts with identifying HS according to Fortuna and Nunes's (2018) criteria. It is followed by applying three pragmatic theories to each utterance; consider Diagram 1:

Methodology
The current study adopts a mixed-method of qualitative and quantitative analysis. At first, the researchers used a descriptive qualitative method as a research method. A qualitative method often focuses on detailed observations in order to produce a 'deep' and 'rich' description (Knudson & Morrison, 2002). The study is qualitative in terms of data sampling which is based on words rather than numbers, and in terms of the limited use of data.
To meet the objective of the study, the researchers are to do the following points: 1. providing the contextual hints for each HS instance; 2. identifying the HS instances; 3. specifying the type of speech act used to express classism HS; 4. determining the impoliteness strategy involved in the HS in question; 5. pinpointing the conversational implicature of each instance; and 6. clarifying the pragmatic function of each HS.
After interpreting the data qualitatively, the quantitative analysis is now used. According to Aliaga and Gunderson (2003), the quantitative research method examines a problem or phenomenon by collecting numerical data and analyzing them using mathematical methods and statistics. Quantitative research reflects an approach to objective hypotheses by exploring the relationship between the variables. For example, this current study uses statistics to figure out, what type of speech act is used to express a certain kind of HS. Regarding quantitative analysis, SPSS 23 program is used to determine the frequencies and percentages of the types and strategies that the researchers intend to measure. Tables and figures are used to illustrate the frequencies and percentages. Finally, in the light of qualitative and quantitative research findings, the researchers will discuss the results and conclusions.

Data Selection
The short story, The Doll's House, is the data of the current study that is taken from children literature. Dialogues are the context of the data that are taken from all the story's personalities and the total number of extracts are five. The story is a realistic one which was written by Katherine Mansfield in 1922(Azerêdo, 2013. The instances of HS phenomenon have been detected by applying Fortuna and Nunes's (2018) criteria. These utterances include the following: 1) Exclusion language, 2) Arrogance language, 3) Belittled language, 4) Negative stereotypes. It is also worth noting that the story' fundamental theme is focused on discrimination and racism, which are considered the cornerstones of HS.

Synopsis on The Doll's House
The story was written in Wellington, a British colony in New Zealand by Katherine Mansfield in the late 1800s. When the British migrated, they took their homeland's social prejudices with them (Mansfield, 2002). The British society was divided into hierarchical classes at that time, and usually, birth determined the level of a person. Mansfield criticized this elitist structure when writing, 'The Doll's House'. The principal theme in 'The Doll's House', is class discrimination (classism). Here, Mansfield explored the way people were invisibly classified into a hierarchy of social groups centered in or without an economic prosperity. Through the Kelveys' mass rejection, Mansfield explained how class prejudice's hierarchical mentality produced an invisible barrier that doomed the children of Kelvey to the same destiny as their parents (Azerêdo, 2013).

Data Analysis
The study is qualitative and quantitative in nature. In relation to the qualitative analysis, the first step is to provide contextual hints for each extract to provide a clear insight into the events occurring within their contexts. It further improves the interpretation of the information being analyzed. In order to show the results of the statistical study, descriptive statistics such as frequencies and percentages are used.

Qualitative Analysis and Findings
To achieve the first objective, the researchers need to investigate qualitatively the contextual hints, HS, speech acts, impoliteness, conversational implicatures, and the pragmatic functions. Such an investigation involves applying Fortuna and Nunes's (2018) criteria to each utterance found within selected short stories, such as: 1) exclusion language, 2) arrogance language, 3) belittled language, 4) negative stereotypes, or 5) racial slurs, together with the other pragmatic theories selected as models of the study. Extract (1) "Mother," said Kezia, "can't I ask the Kelveys just once?" "Certainly not, Kezia". "But why not?" "Run away, Kezia; you know quite well why not" (The Doll's House, pp. 79-80).

Contextual Hints:
In this extract, Kezia requested her mother to invite the Kelveys, but the mother was adamant about her refusal.

HS:
In this utterance, HS lies in the mother's expression "Certainly not, Kezia", who aggressively refused Kelvey's daughters' invitation. Her mother excluded the Kelvey's daughters and belittled them. In her speech, the mother attempted to assert that class differences and social disparities cannot be ignored from the mother's perspective (This part answers the first question, so it was placed at the beginning).

Speech Act:
An illocutionary act of refusing is used to express the overt racial sentiment against the low-income family. This is transmitted linguistically via the direct expressive speech act Kezia's mother used in "Certainly not, Kezia". Another example of a direct directive of commanding is used when she said: "Run away, Kezia you know quite well why not".

Impoliteness:
There are two Culpeper's strategies found in this utterance; positive and bald on record impoliteness. Her mother directly attacked the face of hearer. She attempted to exclude the Kelveys, refused to invite them, and immediately attacked Kezia, as in: "Run away". Moreover, her mother seemed to be unconcerned and unsympathetic. The mother claimed that the rejection is natural and that there is no need for an explanation. She expressed discrimination and bigotry in her comments without elaborating on the causes.

Conversational Implicature:
This extract is considered a particularized implicature. Therefore, the idea of HS lies in the specific contextual knowledge required to make inferences to get the intended meaning. The mother and her daughter have a shared background about the reasons of refusal which were related to the social status of the girls, though it was not shown in this utterance. (The study focuses on two types of implicaure, generalization and particularized as mentioned previously) Pragmatic Functions: Inside this utterance, HS was used to insult, disapprove and marginalize the Kelvey family. The mother's rejection clearly shows the social inequalities that prevent people of a lower status from joining in. Extract (

Contextual Hints:
This excerpt presents a dialogue between girls in the schoolyard. The scene shows the social differences as well as the abuse that poor family girls are subjected to.

HS:
In this extract, HS lies in the sarcasm voice used by Emmie Cole to insult Lil Kelvey intentionally. One of HS forms used by Emmie Cole is the use of a negative stereotype, such as that of Lil's mother being a servant, which implies that Lil would be a servant as well. Emmie also attempted to make Lil look bad by discrediting and belittling her. This utterance shows that the upper classes treat the people of the lower classes badly and disrespectfully. Mansfield's characters do not regard the poor as human beings. They use a disrespectful tone, sarcasm, and a rude manner to disparage the lower class people. Speech Act: In this extract, an illocutionary act of prediction is used to reflect the prejudice classes. This is expressed linguistically through the use of a direct assertive act as that used by Emmie in "Lil Kelvey's going to be a servant when she grows up". The meaning of this utterance is, 'Lil Kelvey does not need to study and be educated; she will be a servant as her mother". Another direct expression of deploring is used by Isabel in "Oh-oh, how awful!". The repeated exclamation words "Oh Oh stresses the idea that Isabel is initially planning to insult the girls. The interjection "Oh-oh" is used to reflect how much Lil's future is terrible.

Impoliteness:
In this extract, a sarcasm strategy is used to insult Lil. Speaking sarcastically, Emmie Cole derogated Lil Kelvey by predicting her future as a servant like her mother. Emmie's question, at the surface meaning, sounds polite, but the intended meaning is impolite. She used ridicule to express her hatred of the girls.

Conversational Implicature:
This extract is considered a particularized implicature. In this utterance, the reader or hearer requires a particular share of knowledge for understanding this conversation. Nothing supports the justification for such a prediction in Emmie's statement. Nevertheless, if the reader or listener knows exactly that Lily's mother is a servant, such discoursal motives would be obvious. In this utterance, the reader or listener needs to know something about the speaker who is bullying. Moreover, the reader or listener needs to know something about the victim who is bullied and offended.

Pragmatic Functions:
In this excerpt, it can be seen that HS speech is utilized to insult, demean and humiliate the Kelvey's girls by using a negative stereotype.

Extract (3)
"Is it true you're going to be a servant when you grow up, Lil Kelvey?" shrilled Lena. Dead silence. But instead of answering, Lil only gave her silly, shamefaced smile. She didn't seem to mind the question at all. What a sell for Lena! The girls began to titter ,she shot forward. "Yah, yer father's in prison!" she hissed, spitefully. -This was such a marvellous thing to have said that the little girls rushed away in a body, deeply, deeply excited, wild with joy". (The Doll's House, p.

80) Contextual Hints:
In this situation, Lena asked Lil if she wants to be a servant in the future. Lena wanted to insult Lil, but Lil remained silent. Then, Lena mentioned Kelvey's daughters, whose father was a prisoner.

HS:
In this extract, HS lies in the sarcasm voice used by Emmie Cole to insult Lil Kelvey intentionally as manifested in Emmie's cynical question. One of HS forms used by Emmie Cole was the use of a negative stereotype, such as that of Lil's mother being a servant, which implies that Lil would be a servant as well. Emmie also attempted to make Lil look bad by discrediting and belittling her. This utterance shows that the upper classes badly and disrespectfully treat the people of lower social classes. Mansfield's characters do not regard the poor as human beings. They use a disrespectful tone, sarcasm, and a rude manner to disparage the lower class people. Furthermore, the lower class people, according to Mansfield, realize that they are being marginalized in the society due to their weak social background. Speech Act: In this extract, an illocutionary act of prediction is used in "Is it true you're going to be a servant..". This utterance has been linguistically transmitted via an indirect assertive act used by Lena to insult Lil Kelvey. Lena used an interrogative sentence that has a declarative function. The form of the sentence is a question, however, it functions as a declarative sentence, meaning that Lil's future will be like her mother's. Another illocutionary act of insulting was performed to express the overt biased sentiment towards the lower class. This was linguistically conveyed through Lena's direct assertive speech act, as in: "Yah, yer father's in prison!".

Impoliteness:
With respect to impoliteness, sarcasm impoliteness and bald on record impoliteness have been found in extract (3). Regarding sarcasm, Lena's question seems to reflect a polite conduct, whereas its intended meaning is impolite. She intentionally humiliated Lil in a sarcastic manner. As a bald on record, Laine intentionally attacked the face of the hearer and damaged it when she mentioned, "Yah, yer father's in prison!". Directly, Elaine insulted the girls as being the daughters of an imprisoned man. Conversational Implicature: The above extract is considered a particularized implicature. In this utterance, in order to understand the conversation, contextual knowledge is necessary. Otherwise, it is not easy to rely on a literal expression to clarify such a prediction about the future of Lil. On the other hand, the literal meaning does not reflect the offence or the form of the offence intended. However, if the hearers or readers know that Lil's mother is a servant, the intention will be clear.

Pragmatic Functions:
In this situation, HS is employed to insult and humiliate Lil. Lena sought through her words to insult and belittle Lil and tried to remind Lil that she is a servant's daughter and not equivalent to them. Extract ( The Kelvey's daughters were invited to see the dollhouse by Kezia. This quote reflects Aunt Beryl's irritation when she saw the Kelvey's daughters in her garden. She annoyed, disturbed, and scolded Keiza for inviting the Kelvey girls to their house.

HS:
HS, in this excerpt, lies in the rejection tone used by Kezia's aunt, which strongly reflects a bias based on the social class. Kezia's aunt used the exclamatory expression when she saw the Kelvey's daughter in her garden. She wanted to emphasize her refusal to communicate with the Kelevy's daughters, who represent the lower class.

Speech Act:
The illocutionary act of surprising conveys bias towards the lower class. This is linguistically generated through the use of an indirect expressive speech act as represented in Kezia's aunt speech, "Oh, what a start they gave!". This utterance expresses a racist sentiment towards the Kelvey's and the poor people in general. Another illocutionary act of scolding was found in the above extract to express hatred and prejudice towards the Kelvey's daughters. This is linguistically delivered via the direct directive speech act used by Kezia's aunt, "How dare you ask the little Kelveys into the courtyard?".

Impoliteness:
As far as impoliteness is concerned, a bald on record strategy is used in this utterance. Aunt Beryl intentionally and directly attacked the girls and damaged their face. She expressed her dislike for inviting the Kelveys into their home. Conversational Implicature: The above extract is considered particularized. In this type of implicature, the reader or listener needs extra information to understand the conversation. In this utterance, the literal meaning fails to clarify the aunt's nervousness and the reason behind Aunt Beryl's being shocked and upset.

Pragmatic Functions:
In this situation, HS is employed to insult the Kelvey's daughters.

Extract (5)
"You know as well as I do, you're not allowed to talk to them. Run away, children, run away at once. And don't come back again, said Aunt Beryl. And she stepped into the yard and shooed them out as if they were chickens. Off you go immediately!! she called, cold and proud . Wicked, disobedient little girl! said Aunt Beryl bitterly to Kezia, and she slammed the doll's house to". (The Doll's House, p. 94)

Contextual Hints:
This situation is a conversation between Aunt Beryl and Kiza. Aunt Beryl scolded Kiza for inviting the Kelvey's daughters. The Aunt, then, cruelly and offensively kicked the girls out of the garden.

HS:
In this situation, HS lies in the offensive words uttered by Aunt Beryl which strongly reflects class bias and discrimination. Kezia's aunt used the exclamatory expression once she saw the Kelevys' daughters in her garden. Moreover, she belittled as well as offended them verbally. The wealthy characters in Mansfield's story do not consider the poor characters human beings. They use an insulting tone, sarcasm, and rude manners to humiliate the people from the lower class. Pragmatically, Aunt Bernal meant by "Wicked, disobedient little girl!" that the Kelevys attempted to break the artificial boundaries between the social groups. The above statement is an explicit reference to the racial sentiments against the poor and the lower class. Speech Act: Regarding speech acts, in this extract, some illocutionary scolding acts that express offensive language have been found. One of them was linguistically conveyed via a direct assertive speech act in "you're not allowed to talk to them". Further, four direct directive speech acts of ordering have also been found in the above utterance, as in: "runaway", "run away at once", "don't come back again" and "go immediately". The string of illocutionary acts exemplifies racial attitudes towards the poor; that is why, it was used by Aunt Beryl. Moreover, dehumanizing acts were used towards the Kelvey's daughters as the writer said, "shooed them out as if they were chickens". In addition, a descriptive illocutionary speech act has been found in the extract above. It was used to convey a racist sentiment towards the Kelveys' family. This was linguistically transmitted via the direct assertive act used by Aunt Bernal.

Impoliteness:
A bald on record and positive impoliteness were used in the extract above. Aunt Beryl directly attacked the girls and damaged their face. She humiliated them and roughly expelled them "Run away, children, run away". Moreover, she ordered them not to return "don't come back again". Regarding positive impoliteness, Aunt Beryl used abusive words to offend Kezia, such as 'Wicked', and 'disobedient'; she seemed cruel and unsympathetic with others. The above extract is considered particularized. In this type of implicature, a contextual background plays a role in interpreting this conversation. That is, the literal meaning of the utterance is not enough to grasp the intended meaning. Aunt Beryl mentioned that she does not allow the Kelveys to enter her house; however, the reason behind her act was unknown for the readers. Pragmatic Function: In the above utterance, HS is being used to insult, humiliate, and marginalize the Kelvey's family. Aunt Beryl emphasized her insult by repeating the phrase "run away". To sum up, consider Table 1, which states the outcomes of the pragmatic analysis in Mansfield's story:

The Quantitative Analysis
To produce an objective analysis of the selected short story and support the qualitative analysis carried out in the preceding section, a quantitative study has been conducted. It covers the frequency bands and percentages of categories, as shown below:-

Speech Act
Table (2) and Figure (1) indicate that the total number of speech acts employed is (14). Directves have been used (6) times, scoring the highest number with a percentage of (42.8%). Assertives and expressives are employed (4) times, which represent the percentage of (28.6%). At the same time, declarations and commissives are not seen in any of the extracts under investigation.

Figure 2
The Frequency Percentage of Speech Acts Table (3) and Figure (2) clarify the direct and indirect speech acts and their frequencies according to the analysis of utterances in section (3.2.1). The total number of these frequencies is (14). The study has found that the direct speech act is the most common form in children's literature with (12) frequencies which form a percentage of (85.7%). However, the indirect speech act appeared (2) times with a percentage of (14.3%).  Table (4) and Figure (3) are concerned with the analysis of the impoliteness strategies which are frequently used in the selected utterances. They show that the total number of impoliteness strategies that are used is (8). The study has found that bald on record strategy is the most common form in children literature with (4) frequencies which form a percentage of (50%). This is followed by positive and sarcasm or mock strategies, where both of them are with (2) frequencies. Negative and Withhold impoliteness are not used in the entire situations under observation.

Figure 4
The Frequencies and Percentages of Impoliteness Strategies

Conversational Implicature
Table (5) explains the types of conversational implicature and their frequencies according to the analysis of utterances in section (3.3.1). The study has found that particularized implicature is the dominant form in children literature with (5) frequencies which form a percentage of (100%). However, the generalized implicature does not appear in the selected excerpts.

Pragmatic Function
Table (6) and Figure (5) below identify the pragmatic functions of HS and its frequencies in the (5) extracts. The study has shown that insult has appeared in all extracts, with a frequency of (5) times, which represents a percentage of (100%). This is followed by humiliation with (4) frequencies with a percentage of (80%). The third function that has appeared is disapproval which has been identified (3) times, with a percentage of (60%), followed by marginalizing and defaming with (2) frequencies, and a rate of (40%). Defaming occurred (2) times, with a rate of (12.5%), followed by the promoting hostility with (4) frequencies of (12.1%) percentage. As for HS that was used to hurt and promote hostility, it does not appear within the pragmatic analysis of the target story.