1) Just like Austin, Sean. Others believe that speaking a language is the implementation of speech acts, such as making statements, issuing orders, asking questions and making promises. Speech is action, meaning equals some kind of behavior, so it claims that language learning is a part of behavior theory (1969; 17).
2) Searle's speech act theory is embodied in his distinction between philosophy of language and philosophy of language. (1969:4) He believes that philosophy of language tries to solve specific philosophical problems by paying attention to the daily usage of specific words or other components in individual languages, while philosophy of language tries to give a clear philosophical description of some universal features of language, such as reference, truth, meaning and inevitability. ? In his view, philosophy of linguistics can be regarded as a synonym for a certain method, while philosophy of language can be regarded as a synonym for a certain discipline. He (1969; 4) It is clearly pointed out that although he sometimes uses philosophy of language, his theory belongs to philosophy of language rather than philosophy of language.
3) Searle thinks that speech act theory belongs to thinking. What did he say? Language? This category. The implementation of speech act must follow the rules of language, so it must involve many formal features of language. However, Searle believes that any theory that only studies these formal features is incomplete, and it must also explain how these features are used to implement certain speech acts. Any sentence, in a certain context, must implement a certain speech act; On the contrary, any speech act can only be implemented through a certain sentence.
4) In Searle's view, the study of sentence meaning and speech act are hardly two independent studies, but they should be regarded as two different sides of the same study. Of course, some people accept this view, while others raise objections.
5) In (Speech Act) (1969), Searle classified speech acts into four categories: speech acts, propositional acts, actions by words and deeds, and speech acts. In his view, positioning behavior is just a kind of pathological positioning behavior. Speech act is the act of saying certain words, phrases or sentences, and propositional act is the act of making references or conclusions.
6) Searle thinks that the relationship between speech act and propositional act and speech act is not the relationship between means and purpose. Speech acts are just words, phrases or sentences, while propositional acts and behavioral acts are words, phrases or sentences with certain intentions in a certain context and under certain conditions. Therefore, we can complete a speech act without completing a propositional act or words and deeds, or we can complete the same propositional act or words and deeds with several different speech acts. For example:
Will John leave the room?
John will leave the room.
John, leave the room.
If only John had left the room?
If John leaves the room, so will I.
In Searle's view, these five sentences have the same propositional content, but on different occasions, they have implemented different illocutionary acts.
(6) Rules for implementing speech acts
Since Searle regards the use of language as a social behavior governed by rules, which rules should be followed? Earlier, we mentioned that Searle's teacher Austin put forward three appropriate conditions for implementing speech acts. On this basis, Searle made a further elaboration to make it more perfect.
Among all kinds of rules that restrict people's social activities and behaviors, Searle first distinguishes two types: regulatory rules and constitutional rules. Regulatory rules regulate behaviors or activities that exist independently outside the rules. The composition rules are different. Abiding by them constitutes or produces some form of behavior or activity. If it is violated, such behavior or activity will not exist. The purpose of Searle's distinction between these two types of rules is to show that the use of language, a social activity, should follow the constitutive rules, that is, if we implement certain behaviors through language, such as? Order? We must abide by certain rules. If we violate one of them, we can't give orders effectively.
When any two people communicate in language, no matter what purpose the speaker wants to achieve or what speech act he wants to implement, both sides must have the same language and have the objective conditions for language communication. The speaker must be able to express his intention successfully according to the rules of the used language, and the listener must also be able to correctly understand the speaker's intention according to the rules of the used language.
(7) The development of Searle's speech act theory
1) five classifications of behaviors Searle (1979: 12-20) classifies behaviors into the following five categories:
(1) assertion
(2) instruction
(3) Commitment
(4) Expression mode
(5) the appropriate class (declaration
Searle's classification is scientific, but quite general. It is difficult to classify so many kinds of speech acts into several categories. But so far no one has broken through him and put forward a more reasonable classification. This is why everyone has recognized a more reasonable classification so far.
2) Indirect speech act theory: conventional and unconventional indirect speech acts.
1975, Searle put forward the concept of indirect speech act, which provided a unique explanation method for understanding the essence of illocutionary force, explaining the relationship between illocutionary force and sentence form or agreed usage, and the relationship between illocutionary force and the speaker's knowledge and conversational principles, thus making up for the shortcomings of his early classical theory. Searle's purpose in proposing indirect speech acts is to explain and illustrate the following two problems:
(1) From the speaker's point of view, how can a speaker express another meaning while saying one sentence?
(2) From the listener's point of view, how does the listener understand another meaning that the speaker wants to express after hearing such words?
Searle believes that in indirect speech acts, the reason why the speaker can convey more or different meanings from the literal meaning of words depends on his * * * knowledge with the listener, including verbal and nonverbal information, and the listener's general analysis and reasoning ability.