Imperative Sentences R. M. Hare, Mind, New Series, Vol. 58, No. 229 (Jan., 1949), 21-39. Stable URL: fip:flinks jstor-org/sici sici=0026-4424928 194901 202%9 A58%3A 229%3C21%3A IS %3B2.0,.COWIB2-4 Mind is currently published by Oxtord University Press, Your use of the ISTOR archive indicates your acceptance of ISTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at flip: feworwjtor org/aboutterms.htmal. ISTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in par, that unless you fave obtained pcior permission, you may not dowaload an cnt isus of @ journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content inthe ISTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial uss. Please contact the publisher cegarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at baupsferwer,jstor.orp/jounals/oup.htal. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transtnission. ISTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For more information regarding ISTOR, please contact support @jstor.org- hup:thrwwjstor.orgy ‘Thu May 26 11:44:00 2005IL—IMPERATIVE SENTENCES. By R, M. Hane. Ir has often been taken for granted by logicians that there is ‘a class of sentences which is the proper subject-anatter of logic, and tat they aze at Liberty to ignore all sentences which are not included in this class, Tor example, mast logicians would undertake to tell you something about the eentenes “ Tt is rait- ing”; for instance, that it contradicted the sentence “It ie not raining; but $f confronted with the sentence “* What a foul day it is!” they would be likely to look down their noses and refuse to say anything about the logic of auch a sentence, This would seem e natural attitude to adopt. But it is much tore dificult to say precisely what are the criteria, which deter- mine whether or not & sentence is to he admitted into the logical fold, This cxtiole is an attempt to east doubt, upon one such criterion which bas beon popular recently, and in eo doing to shed some light. on the question, * What is Togie ehout ‘The criterion which I shall be attacking tas been formulated in various ways, but more often taken for granted without being formulated ai all. The cort of sentences which are to he ad- aitted into the logical fold are variously referred ta as “ seien- tific", “cognitive”, “informative ", “fact-stating ",, trve- or-false", * theoretical”, “referential ®, “symbolic”, ete. land the sort of eontences which are ta be excluded ste called “emotive”, “evocative ”, “non-fact-stating ”, ete. The latter are beld not to state gentine propnsitions, and therefore, since propositions ate the bricks ont of which a logical system is built, to be altogether beyond the pale of such a system. They are sometimes even said to be “ literally seuseless ” ‘As examples of the view which I'am attacking, the following passages may be quoted — “In the scientific use of language . . . the connexions and relations of references ta one snother must be of the kind which wwe call logical. . . . But, for emotive purposes logiea) arrange- rmentsis nab necessary ' (Richards, Principles of Literary Critician, 268), “The symbolic use of words is statement ; the recording, the suppart, the organisation and the communication af references. ‘The emotive use of words is... the use of words to express or excite feelings and attitudes.22 RM, HARE presive thm statements in any sense. How expressive o sentence is, can hardly ever be decided by looking af the mere words of which itis composed, let alone by simply noticing what ‘mood itis jn. Te depends on the eiremstaness, the context, ‘he tone of voige, and many other factors. HF commands are not markedly more expressive than other sentences, are they more evocative ¢ Here again, we must be careful to distinguish between different ways in which « sentence may evoke, or be designed to evoke, emotion, In the strong sense, ‘emotion ” may mesa. “ agitation or some ather violent state of feeling”. Tn this sense, any sentence may he evocative for example, the statement “A scorpion bas just crawled up your trouserleg” might be highly evocative, and the command Como in” highly unevoeative. In the weak sense, a sentence right, be said to he evocative if it is intended to, or dacs, produce cana change. in the hearer’s atate of mind or behaviour. In this sense ib would be hard to find any sentence that was not evocative, ‘At the Inast, a sentence that is heard ard understood must pro dace the dispositional property called “understanding the sentence". It is true that; commands are designed to produce fn action, or a will to action, in the hearer ; but even this does uot necestarily make them more evocative than other sentences. Tf you want a man to take off his trousers, yon will more readily succeed hy saying “A seorpion has just crawled up your trouser leg” than by saying “Take off your trousers " Tis, in short, impossible to ascribe the logically undesirable character of emotivity to classes of sentences en Blac. Th is quite true that the logician should be on his guard against the danger of trying to bs mare logical about: any group of words ‘than ite nature will bear ; but this does not absolve him from doing his jab, which isto tell us how to say whatever we want to say without ambiguity or inconsistency. If there is any kind of sentence in which precision and consistency are virtnes, then it is the logician’s husiness to tell us how to achieve them, IE commands are atch a ikind of sentence, then the logician must stndy the imperative mood.