CAS LX 502 Semantics

1. CAS LX 502Semantics 12a. Speech acts Ch. 10(3)

2. Conventional sentence types • Declarative. (Assertion) • I seem to have forgotten my umbrella. • Interrogative. (Question) • Where did I leave it? • Imperative. (Order/Request) • Go find my umbrella! • [ Optative. (Wish) ] • If only I had my umbrella!

3. Austin (1955/1962/1975) • A traditional view of meaning in language at the time (which we have been exploring as well) revolved around the assumptions that: • The basic sentence type is declarative. • The main use of language is to describe states of affairs • The meaning of utterances can be described in terms of truth and falsity (or the situations in which an utterance would be true/false). • However, there are many sentence types and usages that cannot really be said to be “true” or “false”. This seems to cover only declaratives, and not even all of them.

4. How to do things with words • Language—actually affecting the world. • — I bet you $1 you can’t name the Super Tuesday states. *(—You’re on). • I ate a sandwich. • I promise to get up early and vote. • I need the day off. • I (now) pronounce you man and wife. • I hereby revoke your license for 90-days. • May I have the salt? NY, CA, MA, OH, VT, MN, CT, MD, RI, GA

5. Performative utterances • Certain utterances actually perform an act. • I promise that I will do my homework. • I hereby declare this meeting adjourned. • #I hereby cook this cake. • For performative utterances, whether they are true or not is not at issue; rather, we might ask whether they work (felicitous) or not (infelicitous).

6. Felicity • Generally speaking: • A1. There must be an accepted conventional procedure having a certain conventional effect, the procedure to include the uttering of certain words by certain persons in certain circumstances… • A2. The particular persons and circumstances must be appropriate for the invocation of the particular procedure invoked… • B1. The procedure must be executed by all the participants correctly… • B2. …and completely… • Also: sincerity as specified by the procedure.

7. Misfire and abuse • A speech act will misfire if the conditions aren’t met. • I pronounce you man and wife. • You are hereby charged with treason. • A speech act can be abused if insincerly performed. • I bet you $1,000,000 you will fail the test.

8. Three elements of a speech act • Locutionary act: speaking/writing a grammatical utterance. • Illocutionary act: action intended by the speaker. • Perlocutionary act: effect intended by the speaker. • Arrest that man! • Urging, advising, … • Persuading, …

9. Categorization of speech acts • Searle (1976): Five main types • Representatives.Commit to the truth of expressed proposition • Asserting, concluding, … • Directives.Attempts to get addressee to do something • Demanding, questioning, requesting, … • Commissives.Commit to a future course of action • Promising, threatening, offering, … • Expressives.Express a psychological state • Thanking, apologizing, congratulating, … • Declarations.Effect immediate changes in the institutional state of affairs. • Christening, firing, marrying, …

10. Defining speech acts à la Searle • Schema: • Preparatory condition(s) • Propositional condition(s) • Sincerity conditions(s) • Essential condition(s) • Promising(by S to H of A via P using E): • Prep1: H would prefer S’s doing A to his not doing A and S believes H would prefer S’s doing A to not doing A. • Prep2: It is not obvious to both S and H that S will do A in the normal course of events. • Prop: In expressing that P, S predicates a future act A of S. • Sinc: S intends to do A • Ess: the utterance E counts as an undertaking to do A.

11. Defining speech acts à la Searle • Schema: • Preparatory condition(s) • Propositional condition(s) • Sincerity conditions(s) • Essential condition(s) • Questioning(by S to H via P using E): • Prep1: S does not know the missing information. • Prep2: It is not obvious to S and H that H will provide the information without being asked. • (Prop: No condition, any proposition.) • Sinc: S wants the missing information. • Ess: The act counts as an attempt to elicit this information from H.

12. Implicit v. explicit performatives • I hereby promise to pay you 35 euros. • I’ll give you 35 euros. • (a promise, not a prediction or a statement). • It’s a fuzzy line.

13. Overriding convention:indirect speech acts • Can you pass the spinach? • Why don’t you go find your teddy bear? • Direct act: question, indirect act: request. • I must ask you to leave. • Direct act: statement, indirect act: order/request • It’s freezing in here. • Direct act: statement, indirect act: request • So how do we know which one is meant?

14. Literal and non-literal • Can you pass the spinach? • (Please) pass the spinach. • I wish you wouldn’t tap your pencil. • (Please) stop tapping your pencil. • Are you going to eat your peas? • (Please) eat your peas. • Searle: These work by addressing one of the conditions. • Requesting (by S to H of A) • Prep: H is able to perform A. • Sinc: S wants H to do A. • Prop: S predicates a future act A of H. • Ess: Counts as an attempt by S to get H to do A.

15. How we understand indirect speech acts • Searle: reasoning from • Felicity conditions • Context • Principles of cooperative conversation • Can you pass the salt? (Quantity) • I wish you wouldn’t tap your pencil. (Relation) • Convention:Are you capable of passing me the salt? • Perception of the direct act:Yes indeed.

16. Why be indirect? • Close the window. • Can you close the window? • I don’t suppose you could close the window, could you? • I wonder if you’d mind closing the window. • It’s rather chilly in here. • Diminishing threats to face (worthiness, autonomy). • I’d love to go, but I have to wash my hair, I have a headache, and it’s my mother’s birthday. Maybe another time.

17.          

18. Librarians and limits on QR • Some librarian or other found every book. • One librarian, or one per book. • [S some librarian found [NP every book] ] • [NP every book]i [S some librarian found ti ]. • Some librarian knows that Pat found every book. • One librarian, but not one per book. • In order to get the “one per book” interpretation, we would need to use QR to bring every bookup higher in the structure than some librarian or other. This suggests that QR can only move a quantifier as high as the smallest S in which it is found. • [SSome librarian knows [S that Pat found every book]] • [NP every book]i[S some lib. knows [S that Pat found ti]].

19. More about librarians • Some librarian or other found out which book every student needed. • One librarian or one librarian per book. • Some librarian found out, for each student x, the book that x needed. • For each student x, there is a (possibly different) librarian that found out the book that x needed. • That shouldn’t be possible: • [Ssome librarian found out[S which book every student needed]].

20. Still more about librarians • And it isn’t really… • Some librariani or other found out which book every boy stole from heri. • One librarian, not one per boy. • #For every boy x, there is some librarian or other that found out the book that x stole from her. • Why? • [Ssome librariani found out[S which book every boy stole from heri]]

21. QR of questions? • Consider the pair-list kind of question What did everyone buy? interpreted as a series of questions What did Pat buy?What did Tracy buy? … defined by the smallest set that can count as everyone. • Some librarian or other found out [which book every student needed]. • For every question Q in the series defined by Which book did every student need?, some librarian or other found out the answer to Q.

22. QR of questions? • Some librarian or other found out [which book every student needed]. • [Ssome librarian found out [S which book every student needed]] • Some librarian or other found out every answer. • [S which book every student needed]i [S some librarian found out ti] • It’s as if the entire embedded question acts as a quantifier. That isn’t moving out of its S. • Idea: when a question is interpreted as a series of questions (the “pair-list” interpretation), it can be considered a quantifier itself.

23. Librarians continued… • Some librariani or other found out which book every boy stole from heri. • For every question Q in the series defined by Which book did every boy steal from heri?, some librariani or other found out the answer to Q. • [Which book did every boy steal from her]i some librariani found out ti. • The idea is that if the question is raised up to a position above some librarian in the tree, some librarian no longer has scope/control over the pronoun her, and so the choice of (possibly different) librarians cannot determine the referent of her.

24. Last point on librarians and QR • Some librarian or other thinks I found out which book every boy needed. • One librarian, not one-per-boy. • [SSome librarian or other thinks [S I found out[S which book every boy needed]]]. • [SSome librarian or other thinks [S I found out[S which book every boy needed]]].