Speech Act Theory

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 13

FLHS, AC

Department of English Studies

Semantics and Pragmatics


SEM&PRAG/5
Professor Dr. M. Afkir

Chapter 3
Speech Act Theory

1
Outline:
● Chapter 3 will shed light on the following aspects:

1. Austin’s Speech Act Theory


1-1 Saying as doing
1-2 Textual characteristics
1-3 Felicity conditions

2. Searle’s Speech Act theory


2-1 Explicit and less explicit speech acts
2-2 Rules and conditions

2
1. Austin’s Speech Act Theory

● Speech act theory is a basic area in pragmatics. It was first developed


by the British philosopher John Austin in a series of lectures that
were, later on, compiled in the book How to Do Things with Words
(1962).

1-1 Saying is doing

● Speech act theory is based on the belief that speakers use language
to perform actions. Austin (1962:1) pointed out that “many utterances
which look like statements are either not intended at all, or only
intended in part, to record or impart straightforward information
about the facts.”

● There are sentences the uttering of which involves “the doing of an


action” (Austin, 1962:5).

3
● This theory implies the following:

● Not all sentences are propositions that can be true or


false.

● By saying something, the speaker may be doing something.

● These utterances fulfill actions, such as naming, sentencing,


bequeathing, etc.

● Austin called these utterance performatives and distinguished them


from other types of propositions.

- constatives

- ethical utterances

- phatic utterances
4
Examples:

a. I do (take this woman to be my lawful wedded wife)


(uttered in the course of a marriage ceremony in a
church).

b. I name this ship the ‘Queen Elizabeth’.

c. I give and bequeath my watch to my brother.

d. I bet you sixpence it will rain tomorrow.

5
● Austin segmented a speech act into three components. That

is, when speakers produce an utternace, they do three


different ‘things’ with this utterance.

● A locutionary act (A locution): it is the act of saying something.


It is the uttering of an expression.

● An illocutionary act (An illocution): It is the act performed


(naming, sentencing, betting, promising …..). It is the
illocutioanary force of an utterance

Cruse (2000:331) stated,

Communication is not just a matter of expressing propositions


[…]. To communicate we express propositions with a particular
illocutionary force, and in doing so we perform particular kinds
of action.
6
● A perlocutionary act (A perlocution): A perlocutionary act
refers to the “consequential effects” of an utterance on the
hearers.

Wardhaugh and Fuller (2015:251) stated that

Illocutions also often cause listeners to do things. To that


extent they are perlocutionary. If you say ‘I bet you a dollar
he’ll win’ and I say ‘on’, your illocutionary act of offering a
bet has led to my perlocutionary uptake of accepting it.

7
1-2 Textual characteristics

● Performatives include a verb that realizes an action (name, bequeath,


sentence…), and the verb is in the present tense.

● Performatives have a first person subject.

● Performatives may include the adverb ‘hereby’: I hereby


name this ship.......

8
1-3 Felicity conditions

● Performatives should meet certain conditions to be successful/

felicitous (and not infelicitous).

● A conventioanl procedure must exist for doing whatever is


to be done (the presence of particular persons, a particular
setting)

● Certain thoughts, feelings, and intentions

9
2. Searle’s Speech Act Theory

● Austin’s speech act theory was later on expanded and incorporated


into linguistic theory by Searle (1969). Searle’s speech act theory
builds on Austin’s theory, but a new way of approaching speech
acts emerged.

● For Searle, a speech act is the basic unit of communication.

● Speech act rules are a basic component of speakers’ linguistic


knowledge as are phonological, morphological, syntactic, and
semantic rules.

● With Searle, the inventory of speech acts was expanded, and


the focus was on the function/functional value of utterances.

10
● For Searle, there is not a one-to-one relation between form
and function.

● Searle’s speech act theory, with its new insights, started to


be used in the analysis of discourse.

11
2-1 Explicit and less explicit speech acts

● An indirect/implicit speech act is one in which there is no


relation between the form of an utterance and the illocutionary force
intended by the speaker.

● Speech acts may be totally implicit. For instance, utterances such as


‘savage dog’, ‘Thin ice’ are totally implicit , but they are considered
as acts fulfilling the illocutionary force of warning.

● A warning may also be expressed by an utterance which includes


the verb ‘warn’ as in ‘I warn you’. But this utterance is different from Austin’s
performatives, which have a conventional procedure.

12
2-2 Rules and conditions

● Searle proposed conditions and rules that allow an utterance


to perform an illocutionary act. These fall into four types.

● The propositional content condition: it refers to the content


of the utterance and is considered textual.

● The preparatory condition: it includes speakers,


hearers, and background information.

● The sincerity condition: it involves the psychological state of


speakers and hearers (intentions, beliefs, desires).

● The essential condition: it is the point/ intent of the


utterance. It is the functional value of the utterance.

13

You might also like