Speech Acts and Relevance: in Search of a Dialogue

Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka

doi:10.18778/1731-7533.21.2.04

Authors

Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka University of Łódź

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-7533.21.2.04

Keywords:

speech act theory, relevance theory, cognitive linguistics, hate, offensive language

Abstract

This paper comments on the notion of the speech act in the tradition of J.L. Austin (1962/1975) in an attempt to assess its relevance (sic!) in a relevance-theory-based research. Relevance theory (RT) since its introduction (Sperber & Wilson 1986/1995) has consistently rejected much of speech act-theoretic thinking, explicitly questioning its having a central position in pragmatics. Using the notion of “the speech act”, RT seems to ignore most of speech act-theoretic apparatus. However, despite the superficial divergence between the two frameworks, the advancements within RT, as developed especially by Deirdre Wilson, and her co-researchers over the years, are convergent with selected thoughts in the Austinian thought. The paper comments on selected points which bring the two linguistics approaches together.

References

Austin, John L. 1962/1975 2nd ed. How to do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001

Austin, John Langshaw. 1964. Sense and Sensibilia (Reconstructed from the manuscript notes by G.J. Warnock). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Austin, John Langshaw. 1970. Philosophical Papers 2nd ed. [first published in 1961; ed. by J.O. Urmson & G.J. Warnock] Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bach, Kent and Robert M. Harnish. 1979. Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Blakemore, Diane. 1991. “Performatives and Parentheticals.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Vol. 91, pp. 197–213. https://doi.org/10.1093/aristotelian/91.1.197 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aristotelian/91.1.197

Frankfurt, Harry G. 1986. “On Bullshit” Raritan Quarterly Review, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 81-100. [published as a book in 2005; New Jersey: Princeton University Press].

Goffman, Erving. 1976. “Replies and responses”. Language in Society, Vol. 5,pp. 257-313. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500007156 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500007156

Goodin, Robert E. & Michael Saward. 2005. “Dog Whistles and Democratic Mandates.” The Political Quaterly, Vol. 76, No. 4, pp. 471-476. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-923X.2005.00708.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923X.2005.00708.x

Grice, H. Paul. 1975. “Logic and Conversation”. In: Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, ed. by P. Cole & J. L. Morgan, pp. 41-58. New York: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_003

Grice, H. Paul. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Haney López, Ian. 2014. Dog Whistle Politics: How Coded Racial Appeals Have Reinvented Racism & Wrecked the Middle Class. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hornsby, Jennifer, Louise Antony, Jennifer Saul, Natalie Stoljar, Nellie Wieland & Rae Langton. (2011) “Subordination, Silencing, and Two Ideas of Illocution.” Jurisprudence, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 379-440, DOI: 10.5235/204033211798716826 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5235/204033211798716826

Jary, Mark. 2010. Assertion. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230274617 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230274617

Korta, Kepa and John Perry. 2007. “How to say things with words”. In John Searle's Philosophy of Language: Force, Meaning and Mind, ed. by Savas L. Tsohatzidis, 169-189.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Korta, Kepa & John Perry. 2011. Critical Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511994869 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511994869

Lakoff, Robin. 2017 [1992]. “Pragmatics and the Law: Speech act theory confronts the First Amendment.” In: Robin Tolmach Lakoff, Context Counts: Papers on Language, Gender, & Power, ed. by Laurel A. Sutton. pp. 315-330. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [the paper was originally published in 1992 in Papers from the Twenty-Seventh Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (CLS 27). Vol. 1, The Main Session, edited by Lise M. Dobrin, Lynn Nichols, and Rosa M. Rodriguez, pp. 306– 323. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society]

Langton, Rae. 1993. “Speech acts and unspeakable acts” Philosophy & Public Affairs. Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 293-330.

Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McGonagle, Tarlach. 2013. The Council of Europe against online hate speech: Conundrums and challenges. Council of Europe expert paper. http://rm.coe.int/16800c170f. Accessed August 12, 2017.

Piskorska, Agnieszka. 2016. “Relevance and perlocutionary effects.” In: Relevance Theory: Recent Developments, Current Challenges and Future Directions, ed. by Manuel Padilla Cruz, 287-305. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.268.11pis DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.268.11pis

Saul, Jennifer. 2018. “Dogwhistles, Political Manipulation, and Philosophy of Language.” In: New Work on Speech Acts, ed. by Daniel Fogal, Daniel W. Harris, & Matt Moss, pp. 360-383. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198738831.003.0013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198738831.003.0013

Searle, John R. 1969. Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sherman, Jeremy E. 2011. Trump’s Name-Calling a Symptom of Nounism https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/ambigamy/201105/trumps-name-calling-symptom-nounism

Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson. 1986/1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition.2nd ed. London: Blackwell.

Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 2012. “Introduction: Pragmatics.” In: Meaning and Relevance, pp. 1–27. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139028370.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139028370.002

Strawson, Peter F. 1964. “Intention and convention in speech acts.” Philosophical Review, 73, pp. 439-460, doi: 10.2307/2183301. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2183301

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/wp/2016/04/20/little-marco-lying-ted-crooked-hillary-donald-trumps-winning-strategy-nouns/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0c3c8ac2f68f

Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber. 1993. “Linguistic Form and Relevance.” Lingua 90: 1–25. doi: 10.1016/0024-3841(93)90058-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(93)90058-5

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2005: “English legal texts in translation – the relevance-theoretic approach” in: Relevance Studies in Poland. Vol. 2. Warsaw: Institute of English Studies, University of Warsaw, pp. 169-181.

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2006, ‘Relevance-theoretic perspective on legal language’ In: Carmen Pérez-Llantada Auría et al. (eds.) Actas del Congreso Internacional AELFE (Asociación Europea De Lenguas Para Fines Específicos). Proceedings of the 5th International AEL Conference: Academic and Professional Communication in the 21st century : Genres, rhetoric and the construction of disciplinary knowledge, CD-rom publication (ISBN: 94-7733-846-9), Zaragoza: Prensas Universitarias de Zaragoza, pp. 182-187. http://www.unizar.es/aelfe2006/ALEFE06/1.discourse/26.pdf.

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2008, “The relevance of vague expressions in legal language” Research in Language Vol. 6, pp. 165-186.

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. Semantic and Pragmatic Aspects of Speech Acts in English Legal Texts, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Lodz, Poland, 2001.

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2013a. From Speech Acts to Speech Actions. Łódź: Łódź University Press. https://doi.org/10.18778/7969-092-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/7969-092-3

Witczak-Plisiecka, Iwona. 2013b. “Speech action in legal contexts”. In: M. Sbisa & K. Turner (eds), Pragmatics of Speech Actions [Handbook of pragmatics; Part 2]. Berlin/Boston: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 613-658. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214383.613 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214383.613