The particular dialect or language that a person chooses to use on any occasion is called a code 4068 Copyright © 2025 The Author IDEAS is licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0 License Issued by English study program of IAIN Palopo IDEAS Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) Volume 13, Number 2, December 2025 pp. 4068 - 4084 A Pragmatic Comparison of Commissive Acts in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube Vivin Sumanti1, Hendi Pratama2, Rini Susanti Wulandari3 1,2,3Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, FBS Universitas Negeri Semarang Corresponding E-Mail: vivinsumanti07@gmail.com Received: 2025-06-26 Accepted: 2025-08-07 DOI: 10.24256/ideas. v13i2.7266 Abstract This study investigates the utilization of commissive acts in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube through a pragmatic lens. In digital advertising, brands often use language to express commitments that influence viewer behavior. Although speech act theory has been widely applied in linguistic research, limited attention has been given to how brands strategically use commissive acts to build trust and persuade audiences. Grounded in Searle’s (1976) speech act theory, this study examines how six types of commissive acts (promises, threats, refusals, volunteers, guarantees, and offers) are used by Grammarly and QuillBot to convey brand commitment and influence viewer perceptions. A qualitative descriptive approach was applied to 14 video advertisements (seven per brand) published between 2021 and 2025. Each commissive utterance was identified, categorized by type, and analyzed using the illocutionary force indicator device (IFIDs). The findings revealed 33 guarantees, 24 promises, and 4 offers in the Grammarly advertisements, while QuillBot displayed 14 guarantees, 11 promises, and 26 offers. In addition, ten informants participated in a Likert-scale questionnaire and semi-structured interviews to assess the clarity, persuasiveness, and credibility of commissive messages. The results showed that Grammarly tended to emphasize emotionally driven promises and assurances to build credibility, while QuillBot focused on functional offers related to academic tasks. The informants generally considered Grammarly’s commissive acts clearer and more persuasive, while QuillBot’s were perceived as practical but less emotionally appealing. The study concludes that commissive acts play an important role in digital brand communication and that pragmatic analysis provides valuable insights into how linguistic strategies shape audience responses. Keywords: Commissive Acts, Digital Advertising, Grammarly, Pragmatics, QuillBot, Speech Act Theory, YouTube http://u.lipi.go.id/1457703302 mailto:vivinsumanti07@gmail.com IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 4069 Introduction In today’s digital communication landscape, language is not only a tool for conveying information but also a means for performing social actions. One such act is the commissive act, where the speaker commits to a future action. According to Searle’s (1976) classification of speech acts, commissive acts such as promises, guarantees, and offers are essential for building trust, increasing credibility, and influencing user behavior. With the rise of digital platforms such as YouTube, advertisers are increasingly using short, persuasive videos to convey commitments that appeal to their audiences. This trend is particularly evident in the educational technology space, where brands such as Grammarly and QuillBot are competing to position themselves as reliable writing tools. These two brands were chosen because of their similar functions, wide usage, and active promotional campaigns on the same platforms, which makes the comparison relevant and balanced. The core issue addressed in this study is the limited understanding of how brands pragmatically utilize commissive acts in digital advertisements to influence audiences. In digital marketing, language has a dual role: to inform and to perform. Commissive acts are intentionally used in advertising not only to describe features but also to convey a sense of brand commitment. They are performative tools that help shape audience perceptions, foster trust, and guide user intentions. Despite their importance in advertising, few studies have closely examined their pragmatic implementation and audience reception across brands competing on the same platform. As Pratama (2019) emphasizes, digital communication lacks physical cues, so politeness and intent must be conveyed through language choices, multimodal elements, and careful planning to avoid miscommunication. This reflects how advertisers use verbal and visual strategies to effectively express commitment in the digital space. This study is theoretically based on Austin's (1962) and Searle's (1976) speech act theories. Searle classifies commissive acts into six types: promises, guarantees, offers, refusals, threats, and voluntarism. In advertising, positive commissive acts, especially promises, guarantees, and offers, are more commonly used to enhance brand image and credibility. Of the fourteen YouTube advertisements selected, seven each from Grammarly and QuillBot, only three of these types were found. Their frequent use suggests that both brands intentionally choose positive and supportive language to communicate their messages, while avoiding confrontational or negative tones. The main purpose of this research was to analyze how commissive acts are utilized in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube and how these acts are perceived by the informants. Specifically, this study identifies the types and frequency of commissive acts utilized by each brand, compares their use, and examines how these messages are interpreted in terms of clarity, persuasiveness, credibility, and influence on user intention. The informants’ perceptions were collected through a Likert-scale questionnaire and semi-structured interviews, Vivin Sumanti, Hendi Pratama, Rini Susanti Wulandari A Pragmatic Comparison of Commissive Acts in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube 4070 which provide a reception-based view that links linguistic intent to audience interpretation. Several previous studies have explored speech acts in advertising and digital communication. Afzaal (2022) identified commissive, assertive, and directive speech acts as common in online advertising. Rababah (2023) highlighted the persuasive power of promises and offers, especially when framed with figurative language. More recent research by Ma et al (2024) and Chen et al (2023) analyzed speech acts in live streaming commerce, while Ibrahim and Qura (2021) examined the use of promises in YouTube content to retain viewers' attention. Syafitri (2019) noted the dominance of promises and guarantees in TV shopping advertisements. In an institutional and cross-cultural context, Mosambonga et al (2022) showed how universities use commissive language to attract students. Putri and Pratama (2019) revealed that cultural background influences the way commitments are expressed in talk shows. In the field of language education, Pratama (2020) argues that linguistic competence must now be integrated with science and technology literacy to prepare students for real-world challenges. Meanwhile, Wulandari (2021) conducts an ecofeminist critique of Kingsolver's work, Homeland, which reveals how commissive and expressive speech acts in fiction convey resistance, identity, and ideological commitment, demonstrating that pragmatic strategies transcend genres, from literature to advertising. Grundlingh (2018) and Chairani et al (2020) discuss how performative language in memes and YouTube content shapes audience reactions, while Alafnan (2022) and Kone (2020) explore commissive acts in political and institutional discourse. Although these studies provide valuable insights, few have directly compared the pragmatic use of commissive acts between two competing brands on the same platform, and even fewer have explored how audiences (informants) interpret these commitments. This study addresses this gap by combining qualitative analysis of advertisement content with informant-based reception data. It offers a more holistic understanding of how persuasive language operates pragmatically in digital advertising. This study does not propose controversial or contradictory hypotheses. Instead, it adopts an exploratory and descriptive approach based on established pragmatic theory. It seeks to uncover patterns in the use and perception of commissive acts in branded advertising. The objectives of this research are as follows: 1. To describe the existence, frequency, and manner in which commissive acts are utilized in Grammarly’s and QuillBot’s advertisements on YouTube. 2. To compare the similarities and the differences in the utilization of commissive acts between Grammarly’s and QuillBot’s advertisements. 3. To explore which advertisement, Grammarly’s or QuillBot’s, is perceived as more effective based on the informants’ opinions. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 4071 Theoretically, this research contributes to the field of pragmatics and digital discourse analysis by illustrating how commissive acts function in online brand communication. Practically, this research provides useful insights for educators, linguists, and digital marketers into how language can be used to build trust, engage users, and influence decision-making in the context of educational technology. Method Research design This research used a qualitative descriptive research design to examine the utilization of commissive acts in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube. This research was non-experimental and observational, with no manipulation of variables or assignment of participants to conditions. Data were collected naturally and analyzed interpretively. The primary data sources included the linguistic content of video advertisements and informant responses. The analytical framework was based on Searle's (1976) taxonomy of commissive acts: promises, guarantees, offers, refusals, threats, and voluntarisms. These categories serve as the conceptual and operational basis for identifying, classifying, and interpreting commissive speech acts. As Creswell (2012) asserts, a qualitative descriptive approach allows for in-depth exploration of natural language use in its authentic context, making it suitable for pragmatic research in media discourse. Research Participants and Sampling Procedures This study also involved human participants whose insights were used to assess audience perceptions of commissive acts in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube. According to Creswell (2012), selecting the right participants is crucial for obtaining valid and meaningful data. Therefore, this study employed a sampling technique aimed at selecting informants capable of providing rich and relevant feedback. The informants were recruited through educational institutions, online forums, or even social media platforms where Grammarly and QuillBot users were likely to be active. Participants included students, educators, and professionals who met the following criteria: 1. No prior affiliation with Grammarly or QuillBot 2. No prior exposure to Grammarly or QuillBot advertisements 3. Voluntary participation with informed consent 4. Adequate understanding of English 5. Willing to complete a Likert-scale questionnaire and engage in semi- structured interviews. In this research, I took 10 informants as my sample. According to Creswell (2012), a sample size ranging from 1 or 2 to 30 or 40 participants is recommended Vivin Sumanti, Hendi Pratama, Rini Susanti Wulandari A Pragmatic Comparison of Commissive Acts in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube 4072 for qualitative research using purposeful sampling. This range was sufficient to gather in-depth insights while ensuring the data was manageable for analysis. The goal was to achieve data saturation, which occurred when no new information or themes emerged from additional data collection. This sample size allowed the study to thoroughly explore the effectiveness of Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements. It provided a balanced mix of perspectives from students, professionals, and educators, as outlined in the Selection Criteria. The selected informants offered valuable insights into the persuasiveness, credibility, and influence of advertisements on consumer behavior. Sample size, Power, and Precision This research analyzed a total of 14 YouTube video advertisements, seven from Grammarly and seven from QuillBot. In addition, qualitative data were obtained from ten informants. Although the sample size is modest, it is in line with the principles of qualitative research, where the goal is depth of understanding rather than statistical generalization. As Creswell (2012) emphasizes, qualitative validity is achieved through data saturation, the point at which no new themes or insights emerge. The target population included digitally literate individuals with educational or professional backgrounds in communications, making them ideal for assessing the linguistic strategies used in advertisements. Data Collection Data were collected in two stages: 1. Advertisement Transcription and Analysis Fourteen YouTube advertisements were selected based on the following criteria: 1. Published between October 2021 and March 2025 2. Available on the official Grammarly and QuillBot YouTube channels 3. Contain spoken English 4. Are promotional and related to stationery or education 5. Range in length from 30 seconds to 5 minutes Each video was manually transcribed, following a multimodal transcription protocol adapted from Ochs (1977) and Bucholtz (2007). Transcriptions included timestamps, speaker labels, and annotations of visual and auditory cues (e.g., tone, gestures, on-screen text, music). This approach ensured an accurate interpretation of each commissive act in its multimodal context. 2. Informants’ perceptions To explore how informants perceived commissive acts, the researchers used a 5-point Likert-type scale with five statements per brand. These statements were not analyzed statistically; instead, they served as a prompt to guide qualitative interpretations of the informants’ perspectives. After completing the scale, each informant engaged in a semi-structured interview, which allowed them to elaborate on their assessments, clarify their responses, and compare their IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 4073 impressions of Grammarly and QuillBot. These interviews provided rich contextual insights into how commissive messages were interpreted and evaluated. Measures and Covariates The primary instrument for analyzing the advertisements was a document analysis checklist developed from Searle's (1976) speech act theory. For each commissive utterance, the following variables were recorded: o Timestamp and video context o Type of commissive act (promise, guarantee, offer, refuse, volunteer, threaten) o Presence or absence of Illocutionary Force Indicating Devices (IFIDs) o Visual and contextual cues indicating commitment To ensure the reliability of the coding process, the checklist and categorization of commissive speech acts were validated through investigator triangulation by a linguistic expert familiar with speech act analysis. The expert provided feedback and confirmed the consistency of the classifications, thereby enhancing the credibility and validity of the analysis. In addition to analyzing commissive utterances, Likert scale responses were interpreted qualitatively to support thematic insights. These responses helped highlight initial patterns, which were then explored in more depth in follow-up interviews. Interview data were coded and analyzed thematically, allowing key categories related to clarity, persuasiveness, and credibility to emerge. Triangulation of textual, perceptual, and interview data increased the credibility of the findings, while cross-case matrices and visual diagrams were developed to compare the use of commissive acts across the two brands. Manipulations or Interventions There was no intervention or manipulation involved in this study. All material was naturally occurring and publicly accessible on YouTube. Informants were not guided or influenced, other than being shown advertisements and asked non- leading, open-ended interview questions. The researcher maintained a neutral interpretive role, ensuring the ecological validity of all data Results This section presents the findings of the analysis of commissive acts identified in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube. Referring to Searle’s (1976) theory, the analysis focuses on six types of commissive speech acts: promises, guarantees, offers, volunteers, threats, and refusals. The study examines how these acts are utilized in each advertisement, both explicitly and implicitly, along with their formulations, patterns, and frequencies. This analysis includes both explicit and implicit implementations. Additionally, data from ten informants, through Likert-scale responses and interviews, was used to understand audience perceptions of these actions. The categorization of commissive acts was validated Vivin Sumanti, Hendi Pratama, Rini Susanti Wulandari A Pragmatic Comparison of Commissive Acts in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube 4074 through expert review and inter-coder agreement, ensuring analytical consistency and reliability. Commissive Acts Frequency Overview The total number of commissive acts identified across the 14 advertisements is shown below: Commissive Act Type Grammarly (n = 7) QuillBot (n = 7) Total Guarantees 33 14 47 Promises 24 11 35 Offers 4 26 30 Volunteers 0 0 0 Refusals 0 0 0 Threats 0 0 0 Total 61 51 112 1. The Utilization of Commissive Acts in Grammarly Advertisements A total of 61 commissive acts were identified in the seven Grammarly advertisements: 33 guarantees, 24 promises, 4 offers, 0 volunteers, 0 refusals, and 0 threats. Most were conveyed implicitly, indicating persuasive intent through implicatures rather than direct performative verbs. Grammarly often framed its commitments using language that evoked emotion and motivation. a. Guarantee Example: “Grammarly helps me be a better communicator.” Although this utterance does not have an explicit performative verb like “guarantee,” it functions as an implicit guarantee, committing the brand to enhance its communication skills. This is aligning with Searle’s felicity requirements for commissive acts and supports Levinson’s (1983) observation that guarantees in advertising are often indirect in their attempts to enhance persuasiveness. b. Promise Example: “With GrammarlyGO, you can do it all—compose, rewrite, ideate, and reply.” The phrase “You can do it all” signals an implicit promise, indicating future benefits for the user. As Yule (1996) explains, the expression strengthens the illocutionary force by emphasizing user-centered outcomes. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 4075 c. Offer Example “Now you can generate full-length texts based on your prompt with GrammarlyGO.” This utterance functions as an implicit offer, using the modal “can” to present an available service or option. Although “offer” is not explicitly mentioned, its pragmatic function is clear. 2. The Utilization of Commissive Acts in QuillBot Advertisements In contrast, 51 commissive acts were found in the seven QuillBot ads: 26 offers, 14 guarantees, 11 promises, 0 volunteers, 0 refusals, and 0 threats. The QuillBot advertisements emphasized practicality, efficiency, and access to features. Most commissive actions were conveyed implicitly through functional language, rather than through emotional appeals. a. Offer Example: “You can paraphrase sentences, paragraphs, or entire essays instantly.” This utterance is an implicit offer, where “you can” frames the action as a benefit to the user. The word “instantly” enhances the persuasive appeal. b. Guarantee Example: “Grammar Checker corrects grammar, punctuation, spelling mistakes, and more.” Although indirect, this statement acts as a guarantee of performance, fulfilling the illocutionary force of the commissive act. Promise Example: “It’s time to start communicating with clarity and confidence.” This motivational phrase is an implied promise, indicating that using QuillBot will result in better communication. The future-oriented nature of commitment is in line with Searle's (1976) concept of commissive act 3. Similarities in the Use of Commissive Acts Despite their differing styles, Grammarly and QuillBot demonstrate similar strategies in their use of commissive acts: Vivin Sumanti, Hendi Pratama, Rini Susanti Wulandari A Pragmatic Comparison of Commissive Acts in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube 4076 a. Implicit Language: Both brands avoid overt verbs such as “we promise” or “we guarantee,” instead using modals (e.g., can, will) and a confident tone to convey commitment. b. Personalization: Advertisements are often user-centered, making the message more relevant: o Grammarly : “Gain confidence in your writing.” o QuillBot : “You can choose the tone or style.” These strategies reflect Searle’s (1979) and Yule’s (1996) claims that indirect speech acts can be pragmatically powerful when supported by context and linguistic cues. 4. Differences in the Use of Commissive Acts Some differences are also noted in the use of commissive actions: 1. Grammarly emphasizes emotionally charged promises and guarantees, which convey trust, identity, and brand assurance. Example: “Grammarly protects your data with advanced encryption.” 2. QuillBot focuses more on offers and demonstrations, using straightforward language that emphasizes user control and convenience. Example: “You can paraphrase entire essays instantly.” 3. Tone and Message: Grammarly uses motivational narrative to position itself as a long-term writing partner. QuillBot uses a practical, task- based tone that emphasizes efficiency. 5. Informants’ Perceptions of Commissive Acts Informant responses collected through Likert scale items and interviews revealed five main thematic patterns. 1. Clarity: Most respondents found Grammarly’s commissive actions clearer, citing its direct message and emotional resonance as key strengths. 2. Persuasiveness: Grammarly’s confident and motivating tone was often perceived as more persuasive. However, some respondents IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 4077 appreciated QuillBot’s demonstration of practical features, particularly for academic use. 3. Believability: Grammarly’s emotional language and use of testimonials were seen as enhancing credibility. Meanwhile, QuillBot’s clear display of functionality-built trust through visible evidence, albeit in a more neutral tone. 4. Intention to Use: Respondents reported that statements promising improved writing and time-saving features positively influenced their intention to try the product. Personal needs often shaped whether they leaned toward Grammarly or QuillBot. 5. Standout Commitments: Respondents recalled key statements that captured the brand’s values: Grammarly: “Gain confidence in your writing.” QuillBot: “Paraphrase and summarize instantly.” These were cited as the most memorable and convincing commissive acts The findings presented in this section reveal clear patterns in the use of commissive acts across Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements. Althoug both brands use similar implicit strategies to convey commitment, their emphasis varies with Grammarly leaning toward emotionally driven promises and assurances, while QuillBot prioritizes practical offers and tool accessibility. Subsequent informant responses validate these patterns by highlighting differences in perceived clarity, persuasiveness, and credibility. These results not only demonstrate how commissive acts are strategically embedded in digital advertising but also underscore their impact on audience perceptions. The following discussion section interprets these findings in more depth, connecting them to relevant theories and previous research to explain the pragmatic effectiveness and persuasive functions of commissive acts in online brand communications. Discussion The findings of this study provide an in-depth understanding of how commissive speech acts are used strategically in digital advertising, specifically by Grammarly and QuillBot on YouTube. The analysis is based on Searle’s (1976) classification of speech acts, which focuses on six types: promises, guarantees, offers, volunteers, threats, and refusals. Each brand uses these acts differently to build commitment, establish trust, and influence user perceptions. This section interprets these findings, compares them with previous research included in this study, and integrates insights from informant responses to draw meaningful conclusions. Vivin Sumanti, Hendi Pratama, Rini Susanti Wulandari A Pragmatic Comparison of Commissive Acts in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube 4078 1. Utilization of Commissive Acts in Grammarly’s Advertisements Grammarly’s advertisements predominantly use guarantees, promises, and offers, with a dominant emphasis on implicit guarantees. For example, the utterance “Grammarly helps me be a better communicator” serves as an implicit guarantee, even though it lacks a performative verb. According to Searle’s felicity condition, this satisfies the sincerity condition by expressing the speaker’s belief that the service truly improves communication. Yule (1996) explains that such implicit acts can still convey strong illocutionary force if the listener can clearly infer the speaker’s intent. In addition, Grammarly frequently uses promises such as “With GrammarlyGO, you can do it all: compose, rewrite, ideate, and reply.” These promises imply future benefits and are typically conveyed using modal verbs such as “can,” supporting the idea that modality serves as a strong cue for commitment (Levinson, 1983). Offers such as “Now you can create full text on demand” also occur but are less frequent. The brand’s consistent avoidance of negative words such as threaten or refuse suggests a deliberate focus on positivity and encouragement. These findings are supported by Afzaal (2022), who identified that commissive acts are often used in advertisements to gain consumer trust and engagement. Furthermore, Maulidina & Wibowo (2022) found that students who consistently used Grammarly experienced improvements in writing accuracy, supporting the brand's implied guarantee. However, their study also noted that Grammarly cannot replace human feedback for developing argumentation and critical thinking, which complements the observation that Grammarly advertisements tend to emphasize surface-level improvements such as clarity and fluency. 2. Utilization of Commissive Acts in QuillBot’s Advertisements In contrast, QuillBot places greater emphasis on the offer, using it as its primary means of engagement. Statements such as “You can paraphrase sentences, paragraphs, or entire essays instantly” serve as implicit invitations to use a particular feature. These utterances position QuillBot as a functional assistant, particularly suited to academic and task-oriented writing. Although implicit, these offers have high illocutionary force due to their directive, action-oriented tone. QuillBot also employed guarantees, such as “Grammar Checker corrects grammar, punctuation, spelling mistakes, and more,” to reinforce the product’s consistency and automated support. Although structured as descriptions, they imply the brand’s commitment to reliable performance, fulfilling commissive intent pragmatically. IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 4079 Promises in QuillBot’s advertisements, such as “It’s time to start communicating with clarity and confidence,” have a motivational tone. However, unlike Grammarly’s emotionally rich messaging, QuillBot tends to tie these commitments to specific, demonstrable features, underscoring its role as a practical tool. These patterns are in line with Kurniati & Fithriani (2022), who studied students' perceptions of QuillBot and reported that its corrections helped improve grammar and sentence flow, although some users found that odd structures required manual revision. Similarly, Fitria (2021) noted that QuillBot improved students' ability to effectively paraphrase academic texts through synonym substitution and restructuring. These practical benefits are echoed in the commissive acts found in QuillBot advertisements, particularly those that focus on speed, academic efficiency, and usability. 3. Similarities in the Use of Commissive Acts Despite these differences, both Grammarly and QuillBot rely on implicit commissive acts to convey persuasive content. Modal verbs such as “can” and “will” are commonly used in place of explicit speech act verbs such as “we promise” or “we guarantee.” This reflects Searle’s (1979) claim that commissive acts do not require formal performatives to be pragmatically effective. In fact, avoiding explicit commitments can help maintain a conversational and user-friendly tone, which is especially important in digital advertising. Both brands also integrate personalized benefits to enhance the strength of their commitments. For example, Grammarly’s “Gain confidence in your writing” and QuillBot’s “You can choose the tone or style” serve as user-centric messages, appealing to individual needs and strengthening trust through relevance. 4. Differences in the Use of Commissive Acts The main differences lie in the tone and function of the commissive acts. Grammarly leans toward emotionally persuasive guarantees and promises, highlighting long-term value, self-confidence, and personal development. Its language often evokes a sense of professional identity and security, suggesting that Grammarly is more than just a tool; it’s a writing partner. In contrast, QuillBot’s commissive acts are more functional, direct, and feature-driven. Its offerings emphasize convenience and autonomy, making it ideal for users who value efficiency and task completion. These contrasting strategies reflect the brands’ marketing orientations: Grammarly as a holistic writing coach and QuillBot as a flexible academic assistant. Vivin Sumanti, Hendi Pratama, Rini Susanti Wulandari A Pragmatic Comparison of Commissive Acts in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube 4080 5. Informants’ Perceptions of Commissive Acts The responses from the informants reinforced the textual findings, particularly in terms of clarity, persuasiveness, and believability. Most informants found Grammarly’s language clearer and more emotionally resonant, in line with the frequent use of affective appeals. Its emphasis on increasing confidence in writing was particularly influential for informants seeking personal growth and credibility in communication. Meanwhile, QuillBot’s commissive acts were appreciated for their directness and practicality. Informants with academic or productivity-oriented goals were attracted to its offering of tools for summarizing, paraphrasing, and quoting. These responses confirm that commissive acts are not simply formal commitments but also serve as strategic tools that shape audience intentions, perceptions, and engagement. It is also important to note that some informants may have had prior experience or preferences for one of the brands, which may have subtly influenced their evaluations despite attempts to maintain neutrality in data collection. 6. Theoretical Implications This study affirms that commissive acts are a powerful tool in digital advertising, capable of expressing commitment, building trust, and shaping brand identity. This shows that pragmatic competence is not only a linguistic skill but also a valuable asset in marketing communications, where indirectness, politeness, and relevance must be balanced to maintain credibility and persuade diverse audiences. This study supports pragmatic theory, particularly Austin (1962) and Searle (1976), which emphasize that implicit speech acts can be as impactful as explicit speech acts when effectively framed in context. This analysis highlights how advertising, especially in educational technology, relies on pragmatic cues such as modality, personalization, and emotional tone to convey commitment without performative markers. The frequent use of modal verbs such as can and will, combined with indirect yet affective phrases, demonstrates how advertisers adapt speech acts for persuasive effect. These results reinforce Searle's (1979) claim that the power of commissive acts can manifest even without explicit signification, as long as the context and the speaker's intention are aligned. 7. Practical Implications Practitioners in digital marketing, particularly in educational technology, can benefit from understanding how implicit commitments, when framed through user-centric and emotionally supportive language, can drive engagement and differentiate brand voice. Tone, word choice, and contextual relevance all influence how users interpret a brand’s commitment. Well-crafted commissive speech acts, such as promises of support, guarantees IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 4081 of repair, and offers of easily accessible tools, not only enhance persuasion but also foster trust and emotional connection. When these speech acts align with user expectations, both emotional (building confidence) and functional (academic productivity), the likelihood of audience engagement and brand loyalty increases. Advertisers must maintain a balance between direct and indirect engagement. Emotional appeals, as demonstrated by Grammarly, can build long-term identity and affinity, while practical offers, as seen with QuillBot, can effectively meet immediate needs. Strategic use of commissive speech acts helps marketers not only promote features but also build meaningful relationships with consumers. In conclusion, this study investigates the use of commissive acts, including promises, guarantees, offers, threats, refusals, and volunteers, in Grammarly and QuillBot YouTube advertisements. The study combines textual analysis of fourteen videos with insights from ten informants to uncover distinct persuasive strategies. Grammarly’s messages focus on emotional persuasion, using implicit guarantees and promises to increase confidence and trust. In contrast, QuillBot adopts a feature-oriented approach, emphasizing practical offers and assistance for academic tasks. Informants confirmed this pattern, finding Grammarly’s messages more emotionally engaging and QuillBot’s messages more direct and helpful. These findings reinforce the idea that commissive speech acts function beyond their surface form; they operate as rhetorical strategies that influence audience perceptions, build credibility, and encourage usage. By aligning pragmatic theory with real-world advertising, this study contributes to our understanding of language as a persuasive force in digital marketing. 8. Limitations and Directions for Future Research While this study offers valuable insights, several limitations should be acknowledged. The sample size was limited to ten participants, which may not fully represent all audience perspectives. Furthermore, because the advertisements were in English but evaluated by Indonesian informants, some cultural and linguistic nuances may have influenced perceptions. Furthermore, participants' prior familiarity with Grammarly or QuillBot may have introduced bias, despite attempts to control for this variable through the selection criteria. Future research should include a more diverse group of informants, consider cross-cultural comparisons, and examine other types of speech acts or product categories to broaden generalizability. Conclusion This research investigates the use of commissive speech acts, promises, guarantees, refuse, volunteer, threaten, and offers, in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube, and how these acts are perceived by informants. By applying Searle’s (1976) speech act theory and analyzing fourteen video advertisements and perceptions from ten informants, this research uncovers Vivin Sumanti, Hendi Pratama, Rini Susanti Wulandari A Pragmatic Comparison of Commissive Acts in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube 4082 differences persuasive strategies used by each brand. Grammarly was found to rely heavily on emotionally persuasive language, often using guarantees and promises to build trust and confidence among users. In contrast, QuillBot focused on practical offerings that emphasized feature accessibility, meeting both academic and task-based needs. These different approaches reflect the brands’ underlying communication strategies: Grammarly as a long-term writing partner and QuillBot as a flexible writing tool. Informants’ perceptions supported these findings. They generally found Grammarly’s commissive acts to be clearer and more emotionally resonant, while QuillBot’s messages were appreciated for their functionality and directness. These results are in line with Searle and Austin’s theory, which argues that the success of commissive acts lies not only in their expression of intent but also in their contextual relevance and pragmatic effectiveness. Overall, this research suggests that commissive acts in advertising are more than just linguistic structures; they are persuasive commitments that shape audience engagement and brand perception. Advertisers can enhance their impact by carefully balancing emotional appeals with practical clarity, ensuring that their promises align with users’ varying expectations. References Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford University Press Afzaal, A. (2022). Identification of Speech Acts: A Linguistic Analysis of Advertisements in Pakistan. Journal of English Language, Literature and Education, 3(3), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.54692/jelle.2021.030398 Alafnan, M. A. (2022). Uniting for Peace: A Speech Act Analysis of the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 377 A (V). World Journal of English Language, 12(6), 50–58. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v12n6p50 Bani, M., & Masruddin, M. (2021). Development of an Android-based harmonic oscillation pocketbookfor senior high school students. JOTSE: Journal of Technology and Science Education, 11(1), 93-103. Bucholtz, M. (2007). Variation in transcription. Discourse Studies, 9(6), 784–808. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607082580 Chairani, M., Sofyan, D., & Hardiah, M. (2020). Illocutionary and Perlocutionary Acts on Youtube Videos Employed by Niana Guerrero. Journal of English Education and Teaching, 4(3), 413–430. https://doi.org/10.33369/jeet.4.3.413-430 Chen, A., Zhang, Y., Liu, Y., & Lu, Y. (2023). Be a good speaker in livestream shopping: A speech act theory perspective. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 61(June 2022), 101301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2023.101301 Fitria, T. N. (2021). QuillBot as an online tool: Students’ alternative in paraphrasing and rewriting of English writing. Englisia: Journal of Language, Education, and Humanities, 9(1), 183. https://doi.org/10.22373/ej.v9i1.10233 https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v12n6p50 IDEAS, Vol. 13, No. 2, December 2025 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 4083 Grundlingh, L. (2018). Memes as speech acts. Social Semiotics, 28(2), 147–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2017.1303020 Ibrahim, N., & Qura, U. (2021). Speech Acts Used By a Gaming Youtuber in an Online Game Video. RETORIKA: Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Pengajarannya, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.26858/retorika.v14i2.18891 Kone, N. (2020). Speech Acts in UN Treaties: A Pragmatic Perspective. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 10(06), 813–827. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojml.2020.106051 Kurniati, E. Y., & Fithriani, R. (2022). Post-Graduate Students’ Perceptions of Quillbot Utilization in English Academic Writing Class. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 7(3), 437. https://doi.org/10.21462/jeltl.v7i3.852 Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1–55 Ma, X., Ren, J., Lang, X., Yang, Z., & Li, T. (2024). The influence of live video hosts’ speech act on purchase behaviour. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 81(92), 103984. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103984 Maulidina, P., & Wibowo, H. (2022). the Use of Grammarly Tools To Enrich Student’S Writing Ability. Lingua, 18(2), 179–189. https://doi.org/10.34005/lingua.v18i2.2246 Mosambonga, F. W., Yuliasri, I., & Faridi, A. (2022). Comparison of Commissive Acts between University of Oxford’s and Universitas Indonesia’s Prospectuses. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 7(2), 365. https://doi.org/10.21462/jeltl.v7i2.863 Ochs, E. (1979). Transcription as theory. In E. Ochs & B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Developmental Pragmatics. Academic Press Pratama, H. (2020). Improving Scientific and Technological Awareness Through Language Classroom. 443(Iset 2019), 450–453. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200620.116 Pratama, H., & Semarang, U. N. (2019). Politeness in Online (Issue November). Rababah, L. M. (2023). Examining Speech Acts in Jordanian Advertising: Pragmatic Functions, Linguistic Features, and Rhetorical Devices. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 10(5), 212–223. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejecs/1722 Rahma Putri, A., & Pratama, H. (2019). Journal of Literature, Linguistics and Cultural Studies The Use of Speech Act by Native and Non-native Guests in Ellen Show; A Comparative Study Article Info. 8(2). http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/rainbow Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge University Press Searle, J. R. (1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 5(1), Vivin Sumanti, Hendi Pratama, Rini Susanti Wulandari A Pragmatic Comparison of Commissive Acts in Grammarly and QuillBot advertisements on YouTube 4084 1–23. Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge University Press Susanti Wulandari, R. (2021). Alienasi Terhadap Alam: Kritik Ekofeminis Terhadap Karya Barbara Kingsolver, Homeland. Adabiyya t: Jurnal Bahasa Dan Sastra, 5(1), 94–114. https://doi.org/10.14421/ajbs.2021.05105 Syafitri, W. (2019). An Analysis of Commissive Speech Act Used by The Shopping Hosts of MNC Shop. Jurnal Arbitrer, 6(1), 28–34. https://doi.org/10.25077/ar.6.1.28-34.2019 Yule, George. (1996). Pragmatics. Hongkong: Oxford University Press