Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T00:49:56.856Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Going through the motions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Tom Wachtel
Affiliation:
Graduate School in Arts and Social Studies, University of Sussex

Extract

Harris (1978) discusses the ‘descriptivist’ and ‘non-descriptivist’ interpretations of performative utterances; on the former account, a performative utterance is an assertion, and may thus be true or false, depending on whether the speech act is felicitous or not, and on the latter account, the performative utterance itself constitutes the act in question, and is not an assertion, and therefore has no truth value.1 He presents the following argument against the descriptivist position. A speech act (I apologize, say) may be reported by using the same verb non-performatively: He apologized. This report, however, can be true even when the reported speech act was infelicitous in some way, e.g., He apologized, but to the wrong person. He claims that utterances of this type create a dilemma for the descriptivist position. If the assertion reported is considered to be true in this case, then its truth value does not depend on the success or failure of the performance.

Type
Notes and Discussion
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

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

REFERENCES

Austin, J. L. (1976). How to do things with words. (2nd ed.) Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. & Morgan, J. L. (eds), Syntax and semantics 3: speech acts. Academic Press. 4158.Google Scholar
Harris, R. (1978). The descriptive interpretation of performative utterances. JL 54. 309310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar