Page 84 - 6688

84
Let’s consider two different types of directives (requests and orders) and
commissives (promises and threats).
Directives
Requests Orders
Preparatory 1. S believes H able to do A. 1. S believes H able to do A.
conditions 2. A is smth H would not 2. A is smth H would not normally do.
normally do. 3. S has authority over H

Commissives
Promise Threat
Preparatory 1.S believes h wants A done. 1.S believes H doesn’t want A done.
conditions

IFIDS

Most of the time, however, there is no performative verb mentioned. Other IFIDs which can
be identified are word order, stress, and intonation, as shown in the different versions of the
same basic elements (Y-G) in [8].
[8] a. You're going! [I tell you Y-G]
b. You're going? [I request confirmation about Y-G]
c. Are you going? [I ask you if Y-G]
While other devices, such as a lowered voice quality for a warning or a threat, might be
used to indicate illocutionary force, the utterance also has to be produced under certain
conventional conditions to count as having the intended illocutionary force.

The performative hypothesis

Explicit and Nonexplicit Illocutionary Acts

One of Austin’s important insights was that the most obvious device for indicating
the illocutionary force (the Illocutionary Force Indicating Device, or IFID) is an
expression of the type
[I (Vp) you that...]
where a verb explicitly names the illocutionary act being performed.
Eg.:
a. I warn you to stop cheating.
b. May I inquire where you got those stolen goods?
c. We apologize
d. We request that you come

Austin showed that English contains a set of verbs, each of which names the
illocutionary force of that verb. Consequently, he called such verbs performative verbs
(VP).
In order for a performative verb to have its performative sense (to perform the
illocutionary act it names), it must
1. be positive,
2. be present tense,