A taxonomy

of illocutionary acts
Margarita S.
“ The minimal complete unit of human linguistic
communication. Whenever we talk or write to each other,
we are performing illocutionary acts”- Searle

An “illocutionary act is communicatively successful if the

speaker´s illocutionary intention is recognized by the
hearer . . . “- Searle

“Illocutionary acts are all intentional and are generally

performed with the primary intention of achieving some
perlocutionary effect” - Searle
Weaknesses of Austin‘s taxonomy
Not alllisted verbs are illocutionary verbs i.e.
sympathize, intend, shall.

Lack of clear, consistent principle or set of

principles on basis of which the taxonomy is
constructed.

Similar characteristics of different categories

result in a great chance of overlap.

A huge dissimilarity within categories.

Searle’s list of the differences
between illocutionary acts:
1. Differences in the point (or purpose) of the (type of)
act.
Illocutionary point –The basic purpose of speaker in
making an utterance.
Illocutionary force – speaker’s intention in delivering an
utterance
2. Differences of the direction of fit between words
and the world. directions of fit: world-to-word, word-
to-world
3. Differences in expressed psychological states.
Sincerity condition- is the psychological state of the
speaker concerning the propositional content of an
illocutionary act.
Searle’s taxonomy of the illocutionary acts:

1. Assertives: statements that may be

judged true or false because they
describe a state of affairs in the world

Point or purpose: to commit the speaker

to something’s being the case
The direction of fit: words to the world
The sincerity condition: belief
2. Directives: statements that attempt to make
the hearer´s actions fit the propositional
content: ask, order, command, plead, prey,
invite, advise…

Point or purpose: speaker’s attempts to get the

hearer to do something
The direction of fit: world to the words
The sincerity condition: want (wish or desire)

# Questions are a subclass of directives, as they are attempts by

S to get H to answer.
3. Commissives: statements which commit the
speaker to a future course of action.

Point or purpose: the speaker S does

some future action A
The direction of fit: world-to-word
The sincerity condition: intention
4. Expressives: statements that express the
psychological state specified in the sincerity
condition about the state of affairs specified in
the propositional content. Verbs like:
apologize, thank, congratulate, condole,
welcome…

Point or purpose: to expresss the “sincerity

condition of the speech act”
The direction of fit: no
The sincerity condition: variable
In performing expressives there is
nodirection of fit. The truth is presupossed.

i.e. Apologize for having stepped on your toe.

This fact is reflected by syntax.

i.e. *I apologize that i stepped on you toe.

I apologize for stepping on you toe.

*Thank that you paid for me.

Thank for paying for me.
5. Declaratives: statements that attempt to
change the world by “representing it as having
been changed” i.e. if i successfuly perform the act
of appointing you chairman, then you are a chairman

Point or purpose: to declare

The direction of fit: both world-to-word and
word-to-world
The sincerity condition: no
Every declaration requires extra-linguistic
institution. However, there are two
exceptions:

1. Supernatural declarations
God says:”Let there be light.”

2. Declarations that concern language itself.

One says:”I name…”
 Some declaratives overlap with
the assertives.
As in certain institutional situations we not only ascertain
the facts, but we need authority to lay down the decission as
to what facts are, after the fact-finding procedure.

Assertive declarations

Point or purpose: issuing an assertive with the force of

declaration.
The direction of fit: both world-to-word and word-to-world
The sincerity condition: belief