Pragmatics 

(Lecture on Language Education

D. Y. Oshima
Second Semester, AY 2010‐2011
DICOM‐GSID‐Nagoya University
 Speech Act Theory
Speech Act Theory
• Initiated
Initiated by John L. Austin,  developed by John 
by John L Austin developed by John
R. Searle. 
• saying & doing, words & deeds
saying & doing words & deeds
 Performatives vs. constatives
Performatives vs. constatives
• Background:
Background: Logical positivism; the key 
Logical positivism; the key
function of language is to make true or false 
statements.
statements
1. Snow is white.
• Some sentences do not state:
d
2. Good morning!
3. Is she a vegetarian?
4. Close the window, please. 
 Performatives vs. constatives
Performatives vs. constatives
• The
The ‘performativity’
performativity  can be made explicit by 
can be made explicit by
the use of a performative verb and the adverb 
hereby.
hereby
• A performative verb typically (i) has a first‐
person singular subject and (ii) is in the
person singular subject, and (ii) is in the 
simple present tense, the indicative mood, 
and the active voice
and the active voice.   
 Performatives vs. constatives
Performatives vs. constatives
• Some declaratives 
Some declaratives – performatives – are not used 
are not used
to describe a state of affairs but rather to carry out 
an action. 
1. I christen/name this ship the Princess Elizabeth.
2. I now pronounce you man and wife.
3. I sentence you to ten years in prison.
4. I promise to come back by 6pm.
5. I command you to surrender immediately.
6. I apologize for being late.  
 Performatives vs. constatives
Performatives vs. constatives
• Constatives:
1. It is raining outside.
2. He will come to the party.
He will come to the party.
3. I promised to come to the party.
• Performatives:
• Explicit (with a performative verb) 
3 I promise to come to the party.
3. I promise to come to the party
• Implicit (without a performative verb)
4 II’llll come to the party.
4. come to the party
 Felicity conditions on 
performatives
• felictity
felictity conditions vs. truth conditions
conditions vs truth conditions
• Certain conditions must be met for a 
performative to be successful (or ‘felicitous’)
performative to be successful (or  felicitous ).
• misfire, abuse   
 Locutionary, illocutionary, and 
perlocutionary speech acts
• From
From the constative/performative dichotomy 
the constative/performative dichotomy
to a general theory of speech acts:
1 a. (in the middle of an academic talk) Excuse 
1. a (in the middle of an academic talk) Excuse
me, but I think ...   
b h ’
b. John’s wife is feminist.
f f
2. I hereby state that John is innocent. 
• Constatives are a special case of 
p
performatives. 
 Locutionary, illocutionary, and 
perlocutionary speech acts
• Three facets of a speech act:
Three facets of a speech act:
• locutionary act (phonic, phatic, rhetic): the production of a 
meaningful linguistic expression
• illocutionary act: the action intended to be performed by 
a speaker in uttering a linguistic expression, by virtue of 
the con entional force associated with it.
the conventional force associated ith it
• perlocutionary act: the bringing about of consequences or 
effects on the audience through the uttering of a linguistic 
g g g
expression, such consequences or effects being special to 
the circumstances of the utterance. 
 Locutionary, illocutionary, and 
perlocutionary speech acts
• An
An illocutionary act refers to an action that 
illocutionary act refers to an action that
the speaker accomplishes (or intends to 
accomplish) in the course of an utterance;
accomplish) in the course of an utterance; 
e.g., accusing, apologizing, blaming, 
congratulating giving persmission joking
congratulating, giving persmission, joking, 
nagging, naming, promising, ordering, 
refusing swearing and thanking
refusing, swearing, and thanking. 
• illocutionary force, illocutionary force 
indicating device illocutionary act potential
indicating device, illocutionary act potential
 Locutionary, illocutionary, and 
perlocutionary speech acts
• The
The same locutionary act may have different 
same locutionary act may have different
illocutionary forces in different settings. 
1 The gun is loaded.
1. The gun is loaded
• The same force may be realized by different 
types of clauses. 
f l
2. Give me coffee, please.
3. Can I have coffee? 
4 II’d
4. d like coffee. 
like coffee
 Locutionary, illocutionary, and 
perlocutionary speech acts
• Perlocutionary
Perlocutionary acts/effects (i) are not always 
acts/effects (i) are not always
intentional, (ii) are not under the speaker’s 
full‐control
full control, (iii) and are less conventionally 
(iii) and are less conventionally
tied to linguistic forms.
• consequence, by‐product
consequence by product
 Felicity conditions as 
constitutive rules
• Searle’s
Searle s view: the felicity conditions are not 
view: the felicity conditions are not
only ways in which a speech act can be 
(in)appropriate but they also jointly
(in)appropriate, but they also jointly 
constitute the illocutionary act/force.
• In other words, the felicity conditions are the 
In other words the felicity conditions are the
constitutive rules, i.e., rules that create the 
activity itself
activity itself. 
 Felicity conditions as 
constitutive rules
• Searle
Searle’ss classification of felicity conditions: 
classification of felicity conditions:
i. propositional content
ii
ii. preparatory conditions
preparatory conditions
iii. sincerity conditions 
i
iv. essential conditions
ti l diti
 Taxonomy of speech acts
Taxonomy of speech acts
• Austin s five types:
Austin’s five types:
i. verdictives
ii. exercitives
iii. commissives
iv. behabitatives
v
v. expositives
 Taxonomy of speech acts
Taxonomy of speech acts
• Searle’s
Searle s taxonomy (of illocutionary acts):
taxonomy (of illocutionary acts):
1. illocutionary point (speech act type)
2. direction of fit (‘words to world’ or ‘world to 
d f f (‘ d ld’ ‘ ld
words’)
3. expressed psychological state
4. propositional content 
p p
 Taxonomy of speech acts
Taxonomy of speech acts
• Searle s five types:
Searle’s five types:
i. representatives (assertives)
ii. d
directives
iii. commissives
iv. expressives
v
v. declarations (declaratives)
declarations (declaratives) 
 Taxonomy of speech acts
Taxonomy of speech acts
i.i representatives (assertives)
representatives (assertives)
• asserting, claiming, concluding, reporting, 
stating, ...
stating
• words‐to‐world
• expresses the speaker’ss belief
expresses the speaker belief
ii. directives
• advice, command, order, question, request, ...
d i d d i
• world‐to‐words
• expresses the speaker’s desire
 Taxonomy of speech acts
Taxonomy of speech acts
iii commissives
iii.
• offer, pledge, promise, refusal, threat, ...
• world to words
world‐to‐words
• expresses the speaker’s intention
i expressives
iv. i
• apologizing, blaming, congratulating, praising, 
thanking, ...
h ki
• no direction of fit
• expresses the speaker’s emotions
 Taxonomy of speech acts
Taxonomy of speech acts
v declarations (declaratives)
v. declarations (declaratives)
• declaring war, excommunicating, firing from 
employment nominating a candidate
employment, nominating a candidate, ...
• two‐way fit
• does not express psychological state
does not express psychological state
• relies on extralinguistic institutions
 Direct vs. indirect speech acts
Direct vs. indirect speech acts
• Three (arguably) universal clause types:
( g y) yp
i. declarative
ii. interrogative 
iii. imperative
• Clause types may be differentiated by various morphological, 
syntactic, and phonological means.
• Different clause types are associated with different 
illocutionary forces: declaratives & asserting/stating
illocutionary forces: declaratives & asserting/stating, 
interrogatives & questionning, imperatives & 
ordering/requesting
 Direct vs. indirect speech acts
Direct vs. indirect speech acts
• direct
direct speech acts:
speech acts: cases where there is a direct 
cases where there is a direct
match between a clause type and an illocutionary 
force (including explicit performatives)
• indirect speech acts: cases where there is no direct 
match. 
1. I request you to pass the salt.
2. Pass the salt.
3. Can you pass the salt? 
• Indirect  speech acts are generally considered to be 
more polite than direct ones.
 Direct vs. indirect speech acts
Direct vs. indirect speech acts
• Indirect usages are not rare or marginal. 
Indirect usages are not rare or marginal.
1. Close the window.
2
2. I want you to close the window
I want you to close the window.
3. You ought to close the window.
4
4. I
I wonder if you’d mind closing the window.
d if ’d i d l i th i d
5. Can you close the window? 
6. Would you close the window? 
7. Would you mind closing the window? 
 Direct vs. indirect speech acts
Direct vs. indirect speech acts
• How
How is an indirect speech act analysed? 
is an indirect speech act analysed?
1) Searl (1975b): dual illocutionary force 
• primary (indirect, non‐literal) vs. secondary 
primary (indirect non‐literal) vs secondary
(direct, literal)
• disambiguation involves Gricean inference 
disambiguation involves Gricean inference
(based on the Co‐operative Principle)
• There is a certain degree of conventionality 
There is a certain degree of conventionality
about indirect speech acts (Morgan’s (1978) 
short‐circuited implicature)
 Direct vs. indirect speech acts
Direct vs. indirect speech acts
1 aa. 
1. Can you pass the salt? 
Can you pass the salt?
b. Are you able to pass the salt? 
c.  Do you have the ability to pass the salt?
h h bl h l?
2. a. Please pass the salt. 
b. Can you please pass the salt?
c
c. ?Are you able to pass the salt please?
?Are you able to pass the salt please?
d. ?Do you have the ability to pass the salt 
please?
 Direct vs. indirect speech acts
Direct vs. indirect speech acts
2) Conversational
Conversational postulates (Gordon & Lakoff 
postulates (Gordon & Lakoff
1975)
3) Idiom model (Sadock 1974, among others)
Idiom model (Sadock 1974 among others)
1. Can you pass the salt? – Yes, I can. Here you are.
2. Would you mind closing the window? –
ld d l h d ? Of  f
course I don’t. 
 Assignment
• pp.128
pp 128‐130:
130: Problems 1, 2, 3, 6, 8 & 9
Problems 1 2 3 6 8 & 9