Page 494 - Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Language

Pragmatics and Speech Act Theory
U to H in C, then H presumes that if S could be speaking literally, S probably is speaking literally(cf. Bach and Harnish 1979:12). However, Sperber and Wilson (1986:230) counter that there is 'no empirical evidence for a convention of literalness or anything of the sort.' They believe that S intends H to interpret both literal and nonliteral utterances by inference from the locution once its denotation/referencehas been ascertained. Consider (1), whose illocutionary point is nonliteral and off-record, which makes it classically indirect:
I'm sure the cat likes you pulling its tail. (1)
In uttering (1), S is not normally taken to be com- menting on the pleasures of a masochistic cat, but as asking H to desist from pulling the cat's tail. Just how one arrives at this conclusion can be seen in the following inference schema, derived from work of Bach and Harnish (1979) and Allan (1986); it is consistent with Sperber and Wilson's relevance theory with a few changes such as replacing 'cooperative principle' with 'relevance theory.'
In uttering (1) S intends H to reason Basis: that:
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
language use.
5, 7, knowledge of language use, definitions of illocutionary acts.
8, definition of statements.
principle.
10, cooperative principle, definitions of illocutionary acts.
11, definition of requests.
3, 12, definitions of illocutionary acts, encyclopedic knowledge, context.
472
1. S utters U in a context where H has been pulling the cat's tail ( = C). [Recognition of the utterance act]
2. U consists of <n,e> in English, and <n,e> means 'S says I'm sure the cat likes you pulling its tail.' [Recognition of the locution]
3. ByT Smeans'S,'by'thecat' S means 'the (contextually identified) cat,' by 'you' S means 'H', by 'its tail' S means 'the cat's tail'. S is using
< n,e > to mean *Ssays that s/he is sure that the (contextually identified) cat likes H pulling its tail. [Recognition of reference]
4. S reflexively-intends U to be taken as a reason for H to believe that S is sure that the cat likes H pulling its tail. [Recognition of the primary illocutionary intention]
5. S is saying s/he is sure the cat likes H pulling its tail. [Recognition of the primary illocution]
6. Animals do not generally like having their tails pulled, so S's statement is probably false, and S must know this; and s/he must know that H will know it, too. [Recognition that S blatantly violates the maxim
of quality]
7. People sometimes say the
Hearing S utter U inC.
1, cooperative principle, knowledge of English.
2,semantic theory, context.
3, definitions of illocutionary acts.
4, definition of statements.
5, encyclopedic knowledge, cooperative principle.
S, 6, knowledge of
do things to animals which they don't like unless there is good reason for doing it. And S has indirectly drawn this ethical principle to H's attention.
S reflexively-intends U to be taken as a reason for H to desist from pulling the cat's tail or to inform S of the reason for
not doing so. [Recognition of the tertiary illocutionary intention]
S is asking H not to pull the cat's tail or to inform S of the reason not to comply. [Recognition of the tertiary illocution]
There is no reason to believe that any further illocutionary intention can be inferred, therefore S is asking H to desist from pulling the cat's tail or to explain why s/he should not. [Conclusion as to the illocutionary point of U]
opposite of what they mean
if they are being sarcastic. [Recognition of sarcasm]
If S is being sarcastic, S must reflexively-intend U to be a reason for H to believe that S is sure the cat does not like H pulling its tail. [Recognition of the secondary illocutionary intention]
S is saying that s/he is sure the cat does not like H pulling its tail. [Recognition of the secondary illocution]
H has been pulling the cat's
tail, and S has said s/he is
sure the cat doesn't like it. In
our society, it is unacceptable to cooperative
The speech act schema operates in the same way for a literal utterance such as 7 m sure the cat doesn't like you pulling its tail for which steps 5-8 are omitted with the effect that step 9 of the schema above becomes step 5 (the secondary illocution of the schema above becomes the primary illocution of the new schema), 10 becomes 6, and so on, until the conclusion as to the illocutionary point is determined in step 9.
See also: Indirect Speech Acts; Speech Act Hierarchy. Bibliography
Allan K 1986 Linguistic Meaning, vol. 2. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London
Allan K 1992 'Something that rhymes with rich.' In: Kittay E, Lehrer A (eds.) Frames. Fields, and Contrasts. Lawrence Erlbaum, Norwood, NJ
9, context, encyclopedic knowledge,