Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:58:29.280Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Speech act theory and literary studies

from READER-ORIENTED THEORIES OF INTERPRETATION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2008

By
Peter J. Rabinowitz
Edited by
Raman Selden
Peter J. Rabinowitz
Affiliation:
Hamilton College
Get access

Summary

The basic concepts of speech act theory

Speech act theory originated during the 1950s in the ordinary language philosophy of J. L. Austin and continued most notably in the work of John Searle. The following discussion surveys its impact on literary studies up until 1990. This impact was powerful and quickly achieved. Indeed, by 1975, Quentin Skinner was able to assert the centrality of speech act theory, pointing to the vital influence of Austin and Searle on the two new ‘orthodoxies’ that challenged formalism by stressing that both intention and context were necessary for understanding (‘Hermeneutics’, passim). Yet barely a decade later, Vincent Leitch could write a history of American literary criticism from the 1930s to the 1980s without reference to Austin, and with only two tangential mentions of Searle. Granted, Skinner and Leitch present extreme views on the value of speech act theory; but their respective claims reflect a real shift in critical perspective. Once a major theoretical position, speech act theory is remembered today primarily as what, following Richard Rorty, might be called the ‘straight person’ (‘Deconstruction and circumvention’, p. 2) for one of Jacques Derrida's more famous deconstructive performances. What caused the initial enthusiasm, and why did the promise not materialize?

In order to answer these questions, it is necessary to move back from literature to examine the philosophical premises of speech act theory. In a way, this is easier with speech act theory than with most philosophical movements, since it has its origins in a single, specific text: Austin's How to do Things with Words, originally delivered as the William James Lectures at Harvard in 1955, and posthumously published in 1962.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism , pp. 347 - 374
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altieri, Charles, ‘The hermeneutics of literary indeterminacy: a dissent from the new orthodoxy’, New Literary History, 10 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altieri, Charles, ‘The poem as act: a way to reconcile presentation and mimetic theories’, Iowa Review, 6 (1975).Google Scholar
Altieri, Charles, ‘The qualities of action: a theory of middles in literature’, Boundary 2, 5 (1977).Google Scholar
Altieri, Charles, Act and Quality: A Theory of Literary Meaning and Humanistic Understanding (Amherst, MA, 1981).Google Scholar
Altieri, Charles, Philosophical Papers, 3rd edn., ed. Urmson, J. O. and Warnock, G.J. (Oxford, 1979).Google Scholar
Austin, J[ohn] L., How to Do Things With Words, 2nd edn., ed. Urmson, J. O. and Sbisa, Marina (Cambridge, MA, 1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beardsley, Monroe C., The Possibility of Criticism (New Haven, 1970).Google Scholar
Beardsley, Monroe ‘The concept of literature’, in Brady, Frank, Palmer, John, and Price, Martin (eds.), Literary Theory and Structure: Essays in Honor of William K. Wismatt (New Haven, 1973).Google Scholar
Behnhabib, Seyla, ‘Epistemologies of postmodernism: a rejoinder to Jean-Francois Lyotard’, New German Critique, 33 (1984).Google Scholar
Benveniste, Emile, ‘La philosophic analytique et le language’, in Problems de linguistique generale, Volume I (Paris, 1966); trans, as ‘Analytical philosophy and language; in Problems in General Linguistics, Volume I (Coral Gables, FL, 1971).Google Scholar
Brewer, Maria Minich, ‘A loosening of tongues: from narrative economy to women writing’, Modern Language Notes, 99 (1984).Google Scholar
Cavell, Stanley, Must We Mean What We Say?: A Book of Essays (1969; rpt. Cambridge, 1976).Google Scholar
Cole, Peter and Morgan, Jerry L. (eds.), Syntax and Semantics: Volume III: Speech Acts (New York, 1975).Google Scholar
Culler, Jonathan, On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism after Structuralism (Ithaca, 1982).Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques, ‘But, beyond …. (Open Letter to Anne McClintock and Rob Nixon)’, trans. Kamuf, Peggy, Critical Inquiry, 13 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derrida, Jacques, ‘Limited Inc abc ….’ (Baltimore, 1977);Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques, ‘Limited Inc abc …’ trans. Weber, Samuel, Glyph, 2 (1977).Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques, ‘Signature evenement contexte’, in Marges de la Philosophie (Paris, 1972);Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques, ‘Signature Event Context’, trans. Weber, Samuel and Mehlman, Jeffrey, Glyph, 1 (1977).Google Scholar
Eaton, Marcia M., ‘Art, artifacts, and intentions’, American Philosophical Quarterly, 6 (1969).Google Scholar
Eaton, Marcia ‘James's turn of the speech-act’, British Journal of Aesthetics, 23 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eaton, Marcia ‘The truth value of literary statements,’ British Journal of Aesthetics, 12 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felman, Shoshana, Le Scandale du corps parlant: Don Juan avec Austin ou La seduction en deux langues (Paris, 1980); The Literary Speech Act; Don Juan with J. L. Austin, or Seduction in Two Languages, trans. Porter, Catherine (Ithaca, 1983).Google Scholar
Fish, Stanley, ‘With the compliments of the author: reflections on Austin and Derrida’, Critical Inquiry, 8 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fish, Stanley, Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities (Cambridge, MA, 1980).Google Scholar
Flanigan, Beverly Olson, ‘Donne's “Holy Sonnet VII” as speech act’, Language and Style, 19 (1986).Google Scholar
Gale, Richard M., ‘The fictive use of language,’ Philosophy, no. 46 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. Paul, ‘Utterer's meaning, sentence-meaning, and word meaning’, Foundations of Language, 4 (1968).Google Scholar
Grice, H. ‘Logic and conversation’, in Cole, Peter and Morgan, Jerry L. (eds.), Syntax and Semantics: Volume III: Speech Acts (New York, 1975).Google Scholar
Grice, H. ‘Utterer's meaning and intentions’, Philosophical Review, 78 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancher, Michael, ‘Beyond a speech-act theory of literary discourse’, Modern Language Notes, 92 (1977).Google Scholar
Hancher, Michael, ‘Three kinds of intention’, Modern Language Notes, 87 (1972).Google Scholar
Hancher, Michael, ‘Understanding poetic speech acts’, College English, 36 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernadi, Paul, ‘Doing, making, meaning: toward a theory of verbal practice’, Publications of the Modern Language Association, 103 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernadi, Paul, ‘Literary theory: a compass for critics’, Critical Inquiry, 3 (1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsch, E. D. Jr., ‘What's the use of speech-act theory?’, Centrum, 3 (1975).Google Scholar
Iser, Wolfgang, Der Akt des Lesens: Theories asthetischer Wirkung (Munich, 1976); The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response (Baltimore, 1978).Google Scholar
Jameson, Fredric, ‘Foreword’, in Lyotard, Jean-Francois, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, trans. Bennington, Geoff and Massumi, Brian [Theory and History of Literature, Volume 10] (Minneapolis, 1984).Google Scholar
Jameson, Fredric, The Ideologies of Theory, Essays 1971–1986: Volume I: Situations of Theory [Theory and History of Literature, Volume 48] (Minneapolis, 1988).Google Scholar
Jameson, Fredric, The Political Unconscious: Narratives as a Socially Symbolic Act (Ithaca, 1981).Google Scholar
Johnson, Barbara, ‘Poetry and performative language: Mallarmé and Austin’, in Barbara, Johnson, The Critical Difference: Essays in the Contemporary Rhetoric of Reading (Baltimore, 1980).Google Scholar
Leitch, Thomas M., ‘To what is fiction committed?’, Prose Studies, 6 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leitch, Vincent B., American Literary Criticism from the Thirties to the Eighties (New York, 1988).Google Scholar
Lyotard, Jean-Francois and Thebaut, Jean-Loup, Au Juste (Paris, 1979); Just Gaming [Theory and History of Literature, Volume 20], trans. Godzich, Wlad (Minneapolis, 1985).Google Scholar
Lyotard, Jean-Francois, La Condition postmoderne: Rapport sur le savoir (Paris, 1979); The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, trans. Bennington, Geoff and Massumi, Brian [Theory and History of Literature, Volume 10] (Minneapolis, 1984).Google Scholar
Mailloux, Steven, Interpretive Conventions: The Reader in the Study of American Fiction (Ithaca, 1982).Google Scholar
Margolis, Joseph, ‘Literature and speech acts,’ Philosophy and Literature, 3 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolis, Joseph, ‘The logic and structures of fictional narrative’, Philosophy and Literature, 7 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martland, T. R., ‘Austin, art, and anxiety’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 29 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, Christopher, ‘"That the truest philosophy is the most feigning": Austin on the margins of literature’, in The Deconstructive Turn: Essays in the Rhetoric of Philosophy (London, 1983).Google Scholar
Norris, Christopher, Deconstruction: Theory and Practice (London, 1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohmann, Richard, ‘Instrumental style: notes on the theory of speech as action’, in Kachru, Braj B. and Stahlke, Herbert F. W. (eds.), Current Trends in Stylistics (Champaign, IL, 1972).Google Scholar
Ohmann, Richard, ‘Speech acts and definition of literature’, Philosophy and Rhetoric, 4 (1971).Google Scholar
Ohmann, Richard, ‘Speech, literature, and the space between,’ New Literary History, 4 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrey, Sandy, ‘Castration, speech acts, and the realist difference: S/Z versus Sarrasine’, Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 102 (1987).Google Scholar
PrattLouise, Mary, Toward a Speech Act Theory of Literary Discourse (Bloomington, 1977).Google Scholar
Pratt, Mary ‘The ideology of speech-act theory’, Centrum, 1 (1981).Google Scholar
Reichert, John, ‘But that was in another ball park: a reply to Stanley Fish’, Critical Inquiry, 6 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reichert, John, Making Sense of Literature (Chicago, 1977).Google Scholar
Rivers, Elias L., Things Done with Words: Speech Acts in Hispanic Drama (Providence, DE, 1986).Google Scholar
Rorty, Richard, ‘Deconstruction and circumvention’, Critical Inquiry, 11 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosaldo, Michelle Z., ‘The things we do with words: Ilongot speech acts and speech act theory in philosophy,’ Language in Society, 11 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholes, Robert, ‘Deconstruction and communication’, Critical Inquiry, 14 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R., ‘Austin on locutionary and illocutionary acts,’ Philosophical Review, 77 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, John ‘Reiterating the differences: a reply to Derrida’, Glyph 1 (1977).Google Scholar
Searle, John ‘The word turned upside down’, New York Review of Books, 27 October 1983.Google Scholar
Searle, JohnExpression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts (Cambridge, 1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, JohnSpeech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language (Cambridge, 1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skinner, Quentin, ‘Hermeneutics and the role of history’, New Literary History, 7 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skinner, Quentin, ‘Motives, intentions and the interpretation of texts’, New Literary History, 3 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Barbara Herrnstein, On the Margins of Discourse: The Relation of Literature to Language (Chicago, 1978).Google Scholar
Stampe, Dennis W., ‘Meaning and truth in the theory of speech acts’, in Cole, Peter and Morgan, Jerry L. (eds.), Syntax and Semantics: Volume III: Speech Acts (New York, 1975).Google Scholar
Steinmann, Martin Jr., ‘Perlocutionary acts and the interpretation of literature,’ Centrum, 3 (1975).Google Scholar
Straus, Barrie Ruth, ‘Women's words as weapons: speech as action in “The Wife's Lament'”, Texas Studies in Literature and Language, 23 (1981).Google Scholar
Strawson, P. F. ‘Intention and convention in speech acts’, Philosophical Review, 73 (1964).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, Dorothy, ‘Literary art and linguistic meaning’, British Journal of Aesthetics, 12 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodmansee, Martha, ‘Speech-act theory and the perpetuation of the dogma of literary autonomy’, Centrum, 6 (1978).Google Scholar
Wright, Edmond, ‘Derrida, Searle, contexts, games, riddles’, New Literary History, 13 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×