Searle's Speech Acts theory

John Searle
1. reformulated Austin’s
felicity condition,
2. classified speech acts
3. addressed the
indirectness issue.
A theory of language use will have to specify:

1. the conditions under which a particular kind of

act is successful.

2. what types of acts can be perfomed by

speakers
Consider the following example :

Fill in this form, please!

Which speech act is

performed by by saying this?

Request
 I will make you a copy
of this CD

Which speech act is

performed by by
saying this?

Promise
 Felicity Conditions
1. The Propositional Content
condition

specifies the semantic content and the

syntactic structure of the utterance
 I know that you have already
opened the window, so will you
open it, pls?

a REQUEST is about a future act to be carried out by the hearer (H)

a PROMISE is about a future act to be carried out by the speaker (S)
 Felicity Conditions

2- Preparatory conditions

they specify the circumstances that must

hold prior to the act
e.g.

REQUEST: S believes
1) that H can do the requested act and
2) that H would not do it without being asked
PROMISE: S believes that H will like the promised act
I know that you don’t
know where Japan is;

but can you please

tell me where it is?

Request
Preparatory Condition for a Request:
S believes that H CAN do the requested act
 Would you please mind
feeling hungry whenever
you’re hungry?

Request

• S believes that H would NOT do it

without being asked
 Would you mind
giving birth to
your baby, Jane?

Request :

• S believes that H would NOT do it without

being asked/in the expected course of events
 too honest to be a politician!

I promise I’ ll send
your children to
prison

Promise

PROMISE: S believes that H will like

the promised act.
• What’s the
preparatory
condition of
”threatening”?
 Felicity Conditions

3. The Sincerity Condition

specifies the speaker's psychological state

relevant to the act

REQUEST: S wants H to do the required act

PROMISE:
S believes that H will like the promised act /considers
the promised act is beneficial to them
S intends to do what s/he promises
Of course
I won’t! I’ll lend
you some
money
 Felicity Conditions
4- The Essential Condition

specifies what the utterance counts as in the light of

the Speaker’s intention

e.g.

a REQUEST counts as an attempt to get H to do smth

a PROMISE counts as a commitment of S to do smth
 Searle’s classification of Speech Acts

is achieved according to the following criteria:

1. the type of illocution
2. the direction of fit : ’world/word’ or ’word/world’
3. the psychological state of the speaker
 Speech act typology
REPRESENTATIVES (ASSERTIVES)
• illocution: Representatives commit the S to the truth
of the expressed proposition
• psychological state: S believes the proposition s/he
expresses
e.g.
asserting
claiming
describing
concluding
 Speech act typology

DIRECTIVES
• illocution: Directives count as attempts made by the
S to get the H to do something.
• psychological state: the S wants the H to do the act

e.g. ordering
requesting
asking
inviting
 Speech act typology

COMMISSIVES
• illocution: Commissives commit the S to some
future action
• psychological state: the S intends to do the
action in question
e.g.
promising
guaranteeing
offering
 Speech act typology

EXPRESSIVES
• illocution: express S’s state of mind/mood in
relation to some aspect of reality/event

e.g.

thanking
congratulating
apologising
 Speech act typology

DECLARATIONS
• illocution : Declarations change the state of affairs in
the world

e.g.
You're fired
I appoint you
chairman
 CRITICISM OF SEARLE (Leech,
Thomas)

• 1. Not all SA’s have propositional content

• 2. It’s not possible to distinguish fully between
one SA and another
• 3. Certain SA’s overlap
• 4. Searle’s conditions sometimes exclude
perfectly normal instances of SA’s
1. Not all SA’s have propositional
content

• Sorry.
• Excuse me.
• Wow!
• Hello!
2. It’s not always possible to distinguish
between one speech act and another

• Class dismissed!
• Thank you, prime Minister, for your
intervention!
• I’ll make some tea.
• I’m so happy to see you’re feeling better!
(after the surgery)
 3. Certain SA’s overlap

• Are you doing anything tonight?

• Would you like a glass of wine?
• How thoughtful of you!
 4. Searle’s conditions sometimes exclude
perfectly normal instances of SA’s

Traditional expressions of apology:

e.g. I’m sorry I broke your nose.
Vs. less conventional formulae:
e.g.
I’m sorry, but I shall have to report you!
Caught in traffic.
I’m sorry my husband couldn’t make it, but he had to
work today.
Sorry you’ve arrived in such lousy weather.