The following seminar paper deals with John L. Austin’s “How to Do Things with
Words” and the established speech act theory in it. First, since Austin is the
originator of the three-part division ‘locution, illocution, and perlocution’, his life
and lectures will be shortly reflected. Because of the fact that the introduced
perlocution is based on the illocution and locution, I will start analyzing the latter in
order to maintain this stream of logic. Furthermore, problems this approach brings
along will be explained and several everyday-life examples will support the
arguments. In conclusion, the influence of Austin’s speech act theory will be
evaluated.
Table of Contents
1. Way of Proceeding
2. John L. Austin and His Lectures in “How to Do Things with Words”
3. Locution
4. Illocution
5. Perlocution
6. Resulting Assumptions
6.1 Speech Acts in General
6.2 Complexity of Speech Acts
7. Conclusion
Objectives and Core Topics
This seminar paper examines the speech act theory developed by John L. Austin in his seminal work "How to Do Things with Words." The primary objective is to analyze the three-part division of speech acts—locution, illocution, and perlocution—while exploring the practical implications and challenges associated with these categories in human communication.
- The theoretical foundations of Austin’s tripartite model.
- Detailed breakdown of the locutionary act into phonetic, phatic, and rhetic components.
- The concept of illocutionary force and its identification through context and indicators.
- The role of the hearer in determining the perlocutionary effect.
- Critical evaluation of the theory's limitations regarding human communication.
Excerpt from the Book
3. Locution
Jenny Thomas describes the locutionary act as “the actual words uttered “(2.5.1). At this level of analysis we are interested in the denotative meaning, not in connotations. Austin subdivides the locutionary act further into three acts:
1. In the ‘phonetic act’ we utter certain noises which are phonological distinctive.
2. In addition, in the ‘phatic act’ we utter noises which are part of a vocabulary, which follow the rules of a certain grammar and in which some parts are especially intonated.
3. The ‘rhetic act’ claims the existence of a “more or less definite sense and a […] reference” in the uttered words (Austin, p. 93).
To give an example, the ‘phonetic act’ in the sentence ‘He learns fast’ would consist of the utterance of phonological-distinctive morphemes. In the ‘phatic act’ though, these noises belong to a certain grammar and follow grammatical rules. This includes in this case the flectional ending {-s} for the third person singular in the simple present and the irregular form of the adverb ‘fast’. In the ‘rhetic act’ the sense, namely that he is a fast learner, and reference, which means that the personal pronoun belongs to a certain masculine person, come into play for the first time.
Summary of Chapters
1. Way of Proceeding: The introduction outlines the seminar paper's focus on Austin's speech act theory and sets the logical framework for analyzing the three dimensions of speech acts.
2. John L. Austin and His Lectures in “How to Do Things with Words”: This chapter provides biographical context for J.L. Austin and discusses the origin and nature of his posthumously published lectures.
3. Locution: This section defines the locutionary act and explores its tripartite subdivision into phonetic, phatic, and rhetic acts with practical examples.
4. Illocution: The chapter focuses on the concept of illocutionary force, explaining how context and specific markers determine the speaker's intended act.
5. Perlocution: This part examines the perlocutionary act, highlighting the critical role of the hearer and the unpredictable nature of the consequences or effects of an utterance.
6. Resulting Assumptions: This chapter synthesizes the dimensions of speech acts, discusses John Searle's contributions, and illustrates the complexity and potential for misunderstanding in speech acts.
7. Conclusion: The paper concludes by evaluating the overall contribution and limitations of Austin's model in explaining human communication.
Keywords
Speech Act Theory, John L. Austin, Locution, Illocution, Perlocution, Photic Act, Rhetic Act, Illocutionary Force, Performative Utterances, Pragmatics, Communication, Hearer's Uptake, John Searle.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this seminar paper?
This paper focuses on the speech act theory established by John L. Austin, specifically examining his classification of utterances into locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts.
What are the central themes discussed in the work?
The central themes include the mechanics of how speakers perform actions through language, the importance of context, the role of the listener, and the difficulties in clearly categorizing linguistic intentions.
What is the core research question or goal?
The goal is to analyze the "three-part division" of speech acts and evaluate how well this model accounts for the complexities and potential for misunderstanding in everyday human interaction.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The paper utilizes a qualitative literature analysis of Austin's original lectures alongside secondary commentary from pragmatics scholars like Bublitz, Thomas, and Searle.
What is covered in the main body of the paper?
The main body systematically breaks down each of the three speech act categories, uses illustrative examples, discusses the interaction between these acts, and evaluates how listeners interpret and respond to them.
How would you characterize this work using keywords?
The work is characterized by terms such as Pragmatics, Speech Act Theory, Illocutionary Force, and Perlocutionary Effect.
Why is the "securing of uptake" significant for Austin?
For Austin, the "securing of uptake" is essential because an illocutionary act is only successful if the hearer understands what the speaker intends to achieve; without this, the act fails.
What is the "post festum-perspective" according to Bublitz?
The "post festum-perspective" is the concept that the intended purpose of a speech act can only be truly evaluated after the perlocutionary effect has occurred, as the hearer's response can alter the original intention.
How do misunderstandings arise in the context of the speech act model?
Misunderstandings arise because a single locution can be interpreted as different illocutions depending on context, and there is often a lack of clear indicators or shared social understanding between the speaker and the hearer.
- Quote paper
- Frederik Droste (Author), 2013, Locution, Illocution, and Perlocution, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/214710
