Article published In: Pragmatics
Vol. 29:1 (2019) ► pp.107–132
Toward a pragmatic account and taxonomy of valuative speech acts
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 7 March 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.17045.won
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.17045.won
Abstract
This paper presents an account of value ascription as an illocutionary force, based on four claims: (1) that value
ascription is a kind of illocutionary force, defining a specific kind of speech act, i.e. valuative speech acts (VSAs); (2) that
the point of VSAs is ascribing an axiological value to a referent; (3) that VSAs create a weak, inside-oriented truth commitment;
and (4) that they are therefore more about the valuating subject than they are about the valuated object. This illocutionary force
is described using criteria taken from contemporary speech act theory as well as others that have proven informative. This
description results in a rich taxonomy of VSAs. This shows the viability and fruitfulness of a pragmatic account of value
ascription, and it contributes to the development of speech act theory, specifically with regard to the distinction between
primary and secondary illocutionary points, and the speech act taxonomy itself.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.What is valuating?
- 2.1Value ascription is a kind of illocutionary force
- 2.2The point of VSAs
- 2.3The truth commitment of VSAs
- 2.4So what are VSAs about?
- 3.The valuative illocutionary force
- 3.1Felicity conditions
- 3.2Degree of strength of the IP
- 3.3Mode of achievement
- 3.3.1Speaker status
- 3.3.2How the referent is considered
- 3.3.3Value scales
- 3.3.4Situational boundedness
- 3.4Content conditions
- 3.5Causal force
- 3.6Impeachability
- 3.7Summary: A typology of VSAs
- 4.Conclusions: VSAs in speech act theory
- Notes
References
References (34)
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Colbert, S., J. Stewart, C. Licht, T. Purcell, M. Bennet, and B. Julien, prods. 2018. The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. New York: CBS, January 24, 2018.
Coley, John D., Patrick Shafto, Olga Stepanova, and Elizabeth Baraff. 2005. “Knowledge and Category-Based Induction.” In Categorization Inside and Outside the Laboratory: Essays in Honor of Douglas L. Medin, ed. by W. Ahn, R. L. Goldstone, B. C. Love, A. B. Markman, and P. Wolff, 69–86. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Dafoe, Willem. 2018. Interview by Stephen Colbert. The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, CBS, January 24, 2018.
Galbán Pozo, Ana María. 1999. “Análisis dimensional de verbos con semántica valorativa en lengua alemana.” Masters thesis, University of Havana.
. 2003. “Aproximación al estudio de las macro-categorías semánticas modales (valoración, lealtad, certidumbre, interés, afectividad y expresividad) y su expresión a través de verbos de las lenguas española y alemana.” PhD diss., University of Havana.
González de Prado Salas, Javier, and Iván Milić. 2018. “Recommending Beauty: Semantics and Pragmatics of Aesthetic Predicates.” Inquiry 61 (2): 198–221.
Green, Mitchell. 2017. “Speech Acts.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017 edition), ed. by Edward N. Zalta. [URL]
Hampton, James A., and Iben Cannon. 2004. “Category-based Induction: An Effect of Conclusion Typicality.” Memory & Cognition 32 (2): 235–243.
Kennedy, Christopher, and Louise McNally. 2005. “Scale Structure, Degree Modification, and the Semantics of Gradable Predicates.” Language 81 (2): 345–381.
Kudrow, Lisa, and Martin Short. 2018. Interview by James Corden. The Late Late Show with James Corden, CBS, January 31, 2018.
Martin, James R., and Peter R. R. White. 2005. The Language of Evaluation. Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
McGowan, Rose. 2018. Interview by Stephen Colbert. The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, CBS, January 31, 2018.
Moeschler, Jacques. 2004. “Dialogue et Causalité : Force Causale, Actes de Langage et Enchaînement.” Cahiers de Linguistique Française 261: 67–85.
Oishi, Etsuko. 2006. “Austin’s Speech Act Theory and the Speech Situation.” Esercizi Filosofici 11: 1–14.
Oteíza, Teresa. 2017. “The Appraisal Framework and Discourse Analysis.” In The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics, ed. by T. Bartlett, and G. O’Grady, 457–472. London: Routledge.
Sbisà, Marina. 2007. “How to Read Austin.” Pragmatics 17 (3): 461–473.
. 2014. “The Austinian Conception of Illocution and its Implications for Value Judgments and Social Ontology.” Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics 16 (2): 619–631.
Searle, John R. 1975. “A Taxonomy of Illocutionary Acts.” In Language, Mind, and Knowledge, ed. by K. Gunderson, 344–369. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
2002. “Speech Acts, Mind, and Social Reality”. In Speech Acts, Mind, and Social Reality: Discussions with John R. Searle, ed. by G. Grewendorf, and G. Meggle, 3–16. Berlin: Springer.
2010. Making the Social World: The Structure of Human Civilization. New York: Oxford University Press.
Searle, John R., and Daniel Vanderveken. 1985. Foundations of Illocutionary Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Siebel, Mark. 2002. “What Is an Illocutionary Point?” In Speech Acts, Mind, and Social Reality: Discussions with John R. Searle, ed. by G. Grewendorf, and G. Meggle, 125–139. Berlin: Springer.
