Fittipaldi 1

Gabby Fittipaldi
Professor Courtright
Paper One
29 September 2014
Speech Acts
Day in and day out, sometimes intentionally but often mindlessly,
people everywhere welcome, question, praise, demand, and even insult one
another. When individuals speak, they utter certain words to produce these
sorts of thoughtless results or acts. Acts executed from the process of
speaking are formally known as speech acts (Sadock). Speech acts are
considered to be the minimum or basic unit of communication that takes
place between individuals (Jaworowska). In other words, these acts, or
performances, are how people communicate with one another. They are how
speakers get their messages across to the recipients, or listeners. According
to Searle, a communications theorist, there are three different types of
speech acts: locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts, which will be
explained in more depth. Each of these three parts contributes to the
foundation of the speech acts theory. They are performed in everyday
interpersonal conversation and implemented subconsciously by speakers all
over the world. Individuals utilize speech acts based on their upbringing and
ethnic background; therefore, speech acts differ from country to country.
These acts are not universal; they are based on cultural influences and
language.

Fittipaldi 2
In order to grasp a general knowledge of speech acts, one must
understand the meanings of the three types. First, there are locutionary acts.
A locutionary act indicates what an utterance is in the traditional sense; it is
the physical performance of an utterance. Second, there are illocutionary
acts, which indicate what the utterance does. For example, an utterance can
be a warning, an assertion, an apology, an approval, a command, and more.
It is the effect of an utterance. Searle said, that in order to perform
illocutionary acts [one has] to engage in a rule-governed form of behavior
(What Is A Speech Act 222). There are two types of rules that follow
illocutionary acts: regulative rules and constitutive rules.
Regulative rules regulate activities, but they are independent of one
another. For example, when cutting food hold the knife in the right hand
(224). In this example, this act is not dependent on the rule itself.
Constitutive rules, on the other hand, define forms of behavior. The existing
activity is dependent on these rules or guidelines. For example, a
touchdown is scored when a player crosses the opponents goal line in
possession of the ball while a play is in progress (224). In order for one to
gain a touchdown, this rule must comply with the activity. Illocutionary acts,
altogether, correspond with both of these rules (225). Furthermore, there is
still one last type of speech act to mention.
Perlocutionary acts are the last type of speech act performed in a
conversation. These indicate the effect the utterance has on a listener, and it
is what he or she responds with. Through the performances of a

Fittipaldi 3
perlocutionary act, the speaker influenced the listener to realize or do
something. All three of these acts mentioned can be exemplified in everyday
communication, including Craig and Tracys B-K conversation.
In the B-K conversation, a minor example can be provided to clarify
these three speech acts. On page 305, lines 021 to 025, B and K talk about
buying their fathers Christmas presents. B states how her father is the main
problem, and K agrees explaining how her dad is the same way. B says, I
think weve got the same father, making an assertion jokingly, which is the
illocutionary act. Her statement itself is the locutionary act. K then responds
with, I think everybodys father must be like that at some point (Craig and
Tracy). Bs assertion allowed K to realize, in her opinion, that all dads are
the same, thus responding how she did, which is the perlocutionary act. This
situation is just one example of how speech acts take place in typical
conversations between people.
As shown, speech acts are carried out all the time in the utterance of
sounds the speaker makes. In Searles What Is A Speech Act, he says, that
theses sounds, or marks that one performs are said to have meaning
(228). To say that A meant something by x is to say that A intended the
utterance of x to produce some effect in an audience by means of the
recognition of this intention, which is called meaning (228). A particular
meaning can be indirectly or directly expressed to the listener; however,
there are complications with indirect speech acts. The problems that may
arise from indirectly stating something come from the speakers utterances.

Fittipaldi 4
It is possible for him or her to say one thing but mean something else
(Indirect Speech Acts 60). For this reason, culture plays a significant role in
indirect speech acts.
Communicative performances are subject to different interpretations
based on a listeners background, native language, and upbringing. Speech
acts are difficult to perform in a second language because learners may not
know the idiomatic expressions or cultural norms in the second language
(CARLA). This contradicts any opinion on speech acts being universal
because listeners usually apply their first language rules and norms to these
types of situations. For example, American and Chinese cultures are different
from one another in interpreting utterances. If an American said I couldnt
agree with you more, it means that individual liked anothers opinion.
However, a native from China would interpret the utterance as the American
not fully agreeing with what he or she said, and thus misconceiving the
meaning (CARLA). People tend to speak in idioms and colloquialisms in
everyday conversation, which could be confusing to someone of a different
cultural environment.
In the B-K conversation, there are examples of idioms that are geared
towards an American listener and may be understood differently if expressed
to a non-American. On page 315, B is describing rural Philadelphia to K. At
line 237 B says, I mean its not doesnt hold candle to Virginia for
example (Craig and Tracy). Doesnt hold a candle to is an idiomatic
expression meaning someone or something is not equal and not able to

Fittipaldi 5
measure up to someone or something else. This is a common idiom, in
English, that may not be translated properly or presented in a way that
Americans intend for it. Another example to point out in the B-K
conversation is on page 316. On this page, B and K are discussing horseback
riding and the riding club. At line 257, B is explaining the ride itself and
mentions, If you go over a fence and fall or anything like that [its] seen
particularly in a bad light if you go around a jump instead of going over it
(Craig and Tracy). In a bad light is another idiomatic expression that means
to make someone seem like a bad person. Therefore, B was saying if you
jump over the fence and fall, or go around it, you are seen as a coward and
weak, i.e. bad. To reiterate, an individual raised from another cultural
background, and an alternative language, would interpret a saying like that
differently.
Speech acts are not universal, and this is seen through a variety of
examples of one-on-one interaction between English speakers and nonEnglish listeners. As explained previously, there are rules involving speech
acts. Rules from one culture and language group may contrast to another
culture and language group, thus leading to different communication norms
for both parties (Nelson, Bakary, and Batal 110). If the two groups have
different rules for communication and speech acts, the listener, for example,
could believe the speaker was being rude. A bilingual listener must learn how
to determine when a speech act is being used and, based on the patterns of
those particular languages, how a speaker utters the act.

Fittipaldi 6
Speech acts are a part of everyday communication between people.
They are considered the basic unit of communication because in order for
one to converse, they have to perform these acts. There are three different
types of acts, locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary, and rules for
these performances as a whole. However, when two people from two
different parts of the world interact with one another, misunderstandings and
misinterpretations are inevitable. If speech acts were universal, people would
be able to comprehend one another perfectly without the meaning being
misconstrued. Since this is not the case, these subconscious speech acts
cannot be ubiquitous; therefore they vary from culture to culture based on
the rules of that particular language.

Fittipaldi 7
Works Cited
Craig, R. T., and K. Tracy. Appendix: The B-K Conversation. Conversational
Coherence. Ed.
R. T. Craig & K. Tracy. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1983. 299-320. Print.
Jaworowska, Joanna. Speech Act Theory. California State University, Los
Angeles. Trustees
of the California State University, 2004. Web. 21 Sept. 2014.
Nelson, Gayle, Waguida El Bakary and Mahmound Al Batal. Egyptian and
American
Compliments. Speech Acts Across Cultures. Ed. Susan M. Gass and
Joyce Neu. New
York: Mounton de Grayter, 1996. 109-128. Print.
Sadock, Jerrold. Speech Acts. Division of the Humanities: The University of
Chicago
Division of the Humanities, n.d. Web. 21 Sept. 2014.
Searle, John. Indirect Speech Acts. Syntax and Semantics Vol. 3. Ed. P Cole
& J. L. Morgan.
New York: Academic Press. 1975. 59-82. Print.
Searle, John. What Is A Speech Act? Philosophy in America. Ed. P. Cole & J.
L. Morgan.
London: Allen & Unwin, 1965. 221-239. Print.
What is a Speech Act? CARLA: Center for Advanced Research on
Language Acquisition. The

Fittipaldi 8
University of Minnesota, 2014. Web. 22 September 2014.