ImageVerifierCode 换一换
格式:DOCX , 页数:27 ,大小:30.46KB ,
资源ID:9945511      下载积分:3 金币
快捷下载
登录下载
邮箱/手机:
温馨提示:
快捷下载时,用户名和密码都是您填写的邮箱或者手机号,方便查询和重复下载(系统自动生成)。 如填写123,账号就是123,密码也是123。
特别说明:
请自助下载,系统不会自动发送文件的哦; 如果您已付费,想二次下载,请登录后访问:我的下载记录
支付方式: 支付宝    微信支付   
验证码:   换一换

加入VIP,免费下载
 

温馨提示:由于个人手机设置不同,如果发现不能下载,请复制以下地址【https://www.bdocx.com/down/9945511.html】到电脑端继续下载(重复下载不扣费)。

已注册用户请登录:
账号:
密码:
验证码:   换一换
  忘记密码?
三方登录: 微信登录   QQ登录  

下载须知

1: 本站所有资源如无特殊说明,都需要本地电脑安装OFFICE2007和PDF阅读器。
2: 试题试卷类文档,如果标题没有明确说明有答案则都视为没有答案,请知晓。
3: 文件的所有权益归上传用户所有。
4. 未经权益所有人同意不得将文件中的内容挪作商业或盈利用途。
5. 本站仅提供交流平台,并不能对任何下载内容负责。
6. 下载文件中如有侵权或不适当内容,请与我们联系,我们立即纠正。
7. 本站不保证下载资源的准确性、安全性和完整性, 同时也不承担用户因使用这些下载资源对自己和他人造成任何形式的伤害或损失。

版权提示 | 免责声明

本文(语言学Howtodothingswithwords.docx)为本站会员(b****8)主动上传,冰豆网仅提供信息存储空间,仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对上载内容本身不做任何修改或编辑。 若此文所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私,请立即通知冰豆网(发送邮件至service@bdocx.com或直接QQ联系客服),我们立即给予删除!

语言学Howtodothingswithwords.docx

1、语言学HowtodothingswithwordsHow to do things with words (1)How to Do Things with Words (1)b. Are you serving?c.Hello.d.Six pints of stout and a packet of peanuts, please!e.Give me the dry roasted ones.f.How much? Are you serious?Such sentences are not descriptions and cannot be said to be true or false

2、. Austins secondobservation was that even in sentences with the grammatical form of declaratives, not all are usedto make statements. Austin identified a subset of declaratives that are not use to make true or falsestatements, such as in the examples below:a. I promise to take a taxi home.b. I bet y

3、ou five pounds that he gets breathalysed.c. I declare this meeting open.d. I warn you that legal action will ensue.e. I name this ship The Flying Dutchman.Austin claimed of these sentences that they were in themselves a kind of action: thus by uttering: I promise to take a taxi home. a speaker makes

4、 a promise rather than just describing one. This kind of utterance he called performative utterances: in these examples they perform the action named by the first verb in the sentence, and we can insert the adverb hereby to stress this function, e.g. I hereby request that you leave my property. We c

5、an contrast performative and non-performative verbs by these two features. A speaker would not for example expect the uttering of (a) below to constitute the action of cooking a cake, or (d) the action of starting a car. These sentences describe actions independent of the linguistic act. Accordingly

6、 the use of hereby with these sentences.a. I cook this cake.b. ?I hereby cook this cake.d. I start this car. b. ?I hereby start this car.Evaluating performative utterancesAustin argued that it is not useful to ask whether performative utterances like those above are true or not, rather we should ask

7、 whether they work or not: do they constitute a successful warning, bet, ship-naming etc.? In Austins terminology a performative that works is called felicitous and onethat does not is infelicitous. For them to work, such performatives have to satisfy the social conventions for a very obvious exampl

8、e, I cannot rename a ship by walking up to it in dock and saying I name this ship the Flying Dutchman. Less explicitly, there are social conventions governing the giving of orders to co-workers, greeting strangers, etc. Austins name for the enabling conditions for a performative is felicity conditio

9、ns. Examining these social conventions that support performatives, it is clear that there is a gradient between performatives that are highly institutionalized, or even ceremonial, requiring sophisticated and very overt support, like the example of a judge pronouncing sentence, through to less forma

10、l acts like warning, thanking, etc. To describe the role of felicity conditions, Austin (1975: 25-38) wrote a very general schema:How to Do Things with Words (2)There must exist an accepted conventional procedure having a certain conventional effect, theprocedure to include the uttering of certain w

11、ords by certain persons in certain circumstances. The particular persons and circumstances must be appropriate for the invocation of theparticular procedure invoked .The procedure must be executed by all the participants correctly. and completely.Austin went on to add sincerity clauses: firstly that

12、 participants must have the requisite thoughts,feelings and intentions, as specified by the procedure, and secondly, that if subsequent conduct iscalled for, the participants must so conduct themselves. If the speech act is unsuccessful by failingthe (1) or (2) conditions above, then he described it

13、 as a misfire. Thus my casually renaming anyship visiting Dublin docks is a misfire because (2) above is not adhered to. If the act is insincerelyperformed, then he described it as an abuse of a speech act, as for example saying I bet . with nointention to pay, or I promise . when I already intend t

14、o break the promise. Linguists, as opposedto philosophers, have tended not to be so interested in this second type of infelicity, since theprimary speech act has, in these cases, been successfully communicated.Explicit and implicit performativesLooking at examples of performative utterances earlier,

15、 we can say that they are characterized by special features:a. They tend to begin with a first person verb in a form we could describe as simple present: I bet, I warn, etc.b. This verb belongs to a special class describing verbal activities for example: promise, warn, sentence, name, bet, pronounce

16、.c. Generally their performative nature can be emphasized by inserting the adverb hereby,as described earlier, thus I hereby sentence you to.Utterances with these characteristics we can call explicit performatives. The importance of speech act theory lies in the way that Austin and others managed to

17、 extend their analysis from these explicit performatives to other utterances. The first step was to point out that in some cases the same speech act seems to be performed but with a relaxation of some of the special characteristics mentioned above. We regularly meet utterances like those below, wher

18、e this is so:a. You are (hereby) charged with treason.b. Passengers are requested to avoid jumping out of the aircraft.c. Five pounds says he doesnt make the semi-final. /LIHow to Do Things with Words (3)Come up and see me sometime.We can easily provide the sentences above with corresponding explici

19、t performatives, as below:1. I (hereby) charge you with treason.2. We request that passengers avoid jumping out of the aircraft.3. I bet you five pounds that he doesnt make the semi-final.4. I invite you to come up and see me sometime.欢迎下载 2It seems reasonable to say that the sentences (a-d) could b

20、e uttered to perform the same speech acts as those in (1-4). In fact it seems that none of the special characteristics of performative utterances is indispensable to their performance. How then do we recognize these other performatives, which we can call implicit performatives? Answers to this have

21、varied somewhat in the development of the theory but Austins original contention was that it was an utterances ability to be expanded to an explicit performative that identified it as a performative utterance. Austin discussed at length the various linguistic means by which more implicit performativ

22、es could be marked, including the mood of the verb, auxiliary verbs, intonation, etc. We shall not follow the detail of his discussion here; see Austin (1975: 53-93). Of course we soon end up with a situation where the majority of performatives are implicit, needing expansion to make explicit their

23、force.One positive advantage of this translation strategy is that it focuses attention on the task of classifying the performative verbs of a language. For now, the basic claim is clear: explicit performatives are seen as merely a specialized subset of performatives whose nature as speech acts is mo

24、re unambiguous than most.Statements as performativesAustins original position was that performatives, which are speech acts subject to felicity conditions, are to be contrasted with declarative sentences, which are potentially true or false descriptions of situations. The latter were termed constati

25、ves. However, as his analysis developed, he collapsed the distinction and viewed the making of statements as just another type of speech act, which he called simply stating. Again, we neednt follow his line of argument closely here: see Austin (1975: 133-47) and the discussion in Schiffrin (1994: 50

26、-4). In simple terms, Austin argued that there is no theoretically sound way to distinguish between performatives and constatives. For example, the notion of felicity applies to statements too: statements which are odd because of presupposition failure, like the sentence The king of France is bald d

27、iscussed earlier, are infelicitous because the speaker has violated the conventions for referring to individuals (i.e. that the listener can identify them). This infelicity suspends our judgment of the truth or falsity of the sentence: it is difficult to say that The king of France is bald is false

28、in the same way as The president of France is a woman, even though they are both not true at the time of writing this. So we arrive at a view that all utterances constitute speech acts of one kind or another. For some the type of act is explicitly marked by their containing a verb labeling the act,

29、warn, bet, name, suggest, protest etc.; others are more implicitly signaled. Some speech acts are so universal and fundamental that their grammaticalization is the profound one of the distinction into sentence types we mentioned earlier. In their cross-linguistic survey of speech acts Sadock and Zwi

30、cky (1985: 160) observe:It is in some respects a surprising fact that most languages are similar in presenting three basic sentence types with similar functions and often strikingly similar forms. These are the declarative, interrogative, and imperative. As a first approximation, these three types c

31、an be described as follows: The declarative is used for making announcements, stating conclusions, making claims, relating stories, and so on. The interrogative elicits a verbal response from the addressee. It is used principally to gain information. The imperative indicates the speakers desire to i

32、nfluence future events. It is of service in making requests, giving orders, making suggestions, and the like.欢迎下载 3Though the authors go on to discuss the many detailed differences between the uses of these main forms in individual languages, it seems that sentence type is a basic marker of primary performative types.This conclusion that all utterances have a speech act force has led to a widespread view that there are two basic parts to meaning: the conventional meaning o

copyright@ 2008-2022 冰豆网网站版权所有

经营许可证编号:鄂ICP备2022015515号-1