Cover not available

Article published In: Pragmatics and Society
Vol. 6:4 (2015) ► pp.475–501

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

A tale of two intentions

Intending what an utterance means and intending what an utterance achieves

Published online: 21 December 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.6.4.01san
Speaker intention is conceptualized as a property of utterances in context, not speakers; it is based on communally shared knowledge of discursive means to ends. The article’s main theoretical claim is that utterances, in addition to being produced with an intention about their pragmatic meaning, are also produced with an intention to bring about some post-interactional end result. Both types of intention bear on the utterance’s pragmatic meaning. Empirical aspects of the theoretical difference between these two types of speaker intention are shown through analysis of naturally occurring interactions; here, the analytical focus is on the scope, interdependence, recognizability, and fulfillment of each type of intention, with special attention to the functionality of an utterance’s content, composition, and sequential placement as a means of getting a response from the interlocutor(s) that goes along with what the speaker intends as regards the end result of the interaction.
References (51)
Adegbija, Efurosibina, and Janet Bello. 2001. “The Semantics of ‘Okay’ (OK) in Nigerian English.” World Englishes20 (1): 89–98. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Austin, John L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1966. “Three Ways of Spilling Ink.” The Philosophical Review75 (4): 427–440. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bach, Kent. 2006. Impliciture vs. Explicature: What’s the Difference?Available: [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail M. 1986. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. (Trans. byVern W. McGee and Ed. byCaryl Emerson & Michael Holquist). Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bauman, Richard, and Joel Scherzer(eds). 1974. Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bianchi, Claudia(ed.). 2004. The Semantics/Pragmatics Distinction. Stanford, Calif.: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Capone, Alessandro. 2005. “Pragmemes (A Study with Reference to English and Italian).” Journal of Pragmatics37 (9): 1355–1371. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cicourel, Aaron. 1987. “On John R. Searle’s Intentionality.” Journal of Pragmatics111: 641–660. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. 2004. “Pragmatics of Language Performance.” InThe Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. byLaurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward, 365–382. Malden, Mass: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1992. “Contested Evidence in Courtroom Cross-Examination: The Case of a Trial for Rape.” InTalk at Work: Interactions in Institutional Settings, ed. byPaul Drew and John Heritage, 470–520. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, and Kathy Chilton. 2000 . “Calling Just to Keep in Touch: Regular and Habitualised Telephone Calls as an Environment for Small Talk.” InSmall Talk, ed. byJustine Coupland, 137–162. Harlow, UK: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1957. “Meaning”. Philosophical Review661: 377–388. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1975. “Logic and Conversation.” InSyntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, ed. byP. Cole and J.L. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gumperz, John. 1982. Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael(ed.). 2008. Intention in Pragmatics (Special issue of Intercultural Pragmatics, v. 5 no. 2). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael, and Kasia M. Jaszczolt. 2012. “Speaker Intentions and Intentionality”. InThe Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. byKeith Allan and Kasia M. Jaszczolt, 87–112. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Steven Clayman. 2010. Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities, and Institutions (“Gatekeeping and Entitlement to Emergency Service”, pp.69–86). Chichester, UK & Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, Lawrence R. 2001. A Natural History of Negation. Stanford, Calif.: Center for the Study of Language and Information. (Originally published 1989, University of Chicago Press). Available: [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell. 1974. Foundations of Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaszczolt, Kasia. 2005. Default Semantics: Foundations of a Compositional Theory of Acts of Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan. 2000. “A Cognitive-Pragmatic Approach to Situation-Bound Utterances.” Journal of Pragmatics32 (5): 605–625. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1992. “Activity Types and Language.” InTalk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. byPaul Drew and John Heritage, 66–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. “Action Formation and Ascription.” InHandbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. byJack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 103–130. Chichester, UK: Wiley-­Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mey, Jacob. 2001. Pragmatics: An Introduction.2nd ed. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Philipsen, Gerry. 1975. “Speaking “Like a Man” in Teamsterville: Cultural Patterns of Role-­Enactment in an Urban Neighborhood.” Quarterly Journal of Speech621: 13–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita, and John Heritage. 2012. “Preference”. InThe Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. byJack Sidnell, and Tanya Stivers, 210–228. Chichester, UK: Wiley-­Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosaldo, Michelle. 1982. “The Things We Do with Words: Ilongot Speech Acts and Speech Act Theory in Philosophy.” Language in Society111: 203–237. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanders, Robert E. 1987. Cognitive Foundations of Calculated Speech: Controlling Understandings in Conversation and Persuasion. Albany, N.Y.: SUNY Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. “The Production of Symbolic Objects as Components of Larger Wholes.” InMessage Production: Advances in Communication Theory, ed. byJohn O. Greene, 245–277. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. “Conversational Socializing on Marine VHF Radio: Adapting Laughter and Other Practices to the Technology in Use”. InStudies in Language and Social Interaction, ed. byPhillip Glenn, Curt LeBaron, and Jenny Mandelbaum, 309–326. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. “Strategy and Creativity in Dialogue.” InSpaces of Polyphony, ed. byC.U. Lorda and P. Zabalbeascoa, 11–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “The Duality of Speaker Meaning: What Makes Self-Repair, Insincerity, and Sarcasm Possible.” Journal of Pragmatics48 (1): 112–122. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanders, Robert E., and Kristine L. Fitch. 2001. “The Actual Practice of Compliance-Seeking.” Communication Theory111: 263–289. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanders, Robert E., Yaxin Wu, and Joseph A. Bonito. 2013. “The Calculability of Communicative Intentions through Pragmatic Reasoning.” Pragmatics and Cognition21 (1): 1–34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schank, Roger C., and Robert P. Abelson. 1977. Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1988. “Presequences and Indirection: Applying Speech Act Theory to Ordinary Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics121: 55–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. “Discourse as an Interactional Achievement III: The Omnirelevance of Action.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 281 (no. 3, Special Issue, Co-construction, ed. by Sally Jacoby & Elinor Ochs): 185–211. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., and Gene H. Lerner. 2009. “Beginning to Respond: Well-Prefaced Responses to Wh-questions .” Research on Language and Social Interaction42 (2): 91–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scollon, Ron, and Susan B.K. Scollon. 1981. Narrative, Literacy, and Face in Interethnic Communication. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Searle, John R. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. London: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1976. “A Classification of Illocutionary Acts.” Language in Society51: 1–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1983. Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taylor, Carolyn E. 1995. “You Think it was a Fight?”: Co-Constructing (the struggle for) Meaning, Face, and Family in Everyday Narrative Activity. Research on Language and Social Interaction 281 (no. 3, Special Issue: Co-construction, ed. by Sally Jacoby & Elinor Ochs): 283–317. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Varonis, Evangeline M., and Susan Gass. 1985. “Miscommunication in Native/Nonnative Conversation.” Language in Society141: 327–343. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
von Heusinger, Klaus, and Ken Turner(eds). 2006. Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Whalen, Jack, Don H. Zimmerman, and Marilyn R. Whalen. 1988. “When Words Fail: A Single Case Analysis.” Social Problems35 (4): 335–360. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Li, Yueyuan & Chaoqun Xie
2025. Defending speaker intention in a model of the hearer's meaning. Journal of Pragmatics 242 ► pp. 126 ff. DOI logo
Elder, Chi-Hé & David Beaver
2022. “We’re running out of fuel!”: When does miscommunication go unrepaired?. Intercultural Pragmatics 19:5 ► pp. 541 ff. DOI logo
Elder, Chi-Hé
2021. Speaker Meaning, Commitment and Accountability. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 48 ff. DOI logo
Elder, Chi-Hé
2024. Pragmatic Inference, DOI logo
Elder, Chi-Hé & Michael Haugh
2018. The interactional achievement of speaker meaning: Toward a formal account of conversational inference. Intercultural Pragmatics 15:5 ► pp. 593 ff. DOI logo
Elder, Chi-Hé & Michael Haugh
2024. The role of inference and inferencing in pragmatic models of communication. Journal of Pragmatics 229 ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. Fundamentals of Sociopragmatics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 13 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue