Abstract
In order to avoid being thoroughly ad hoc, any classification has to be principled — which holds with classifying (types of) illocutionary acts in particular. As a theory of illocutionary acts is best seen to be a special branch of action theory in general, it seems to be clear where the relevant classification-principles have to come from. (i) It is a general theory of action, in terms of which (basic) illocutionary acts are to be explicated; and, in order to be reliable, (ii) the needed classification-principles have to be derived from (the logical connections existing between) these action-theoretic explications themselves. Now, although much lip-service has been paid to (i), until quite recently virtually nothing has been done about working it out systematically.1 Consequently, the same holds true with the state of the art of task (ii). Thus, one has to make a new start.2
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Alston, W.A. (1964): Philosophy of Language. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.
Armstrong, D.M. (1971): “Meaning and Communication”. The Philosophical Review 80, 427–447.
Austin, J.L. (1962): How To Do Things With Words. Cambridge, Mass: Havard University Press.
Bach, K. & R.M. Harnish, (1979): Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
Ballmer, Th. (1979): “Probleme der Klassifikation von Sprechakten”. In: G. Grewendorf, ed.: Sprechakttheorie und Semantik. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 247–274.
Bennett, J. (1976): Linguistic Behaviour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grice, H.P. (1957): “Meaning”. The Philosophical Review 66, 377–388.
Meggle, G. (1981; 19972): Grundbegriffe der Kommunikation. Berlin: de Gruyter. (In the paper referred to by GBK)
Meggle, G.: HTS, Handlungstheoretische Semantik. Unpublished - but widely spread in at least five different versions by copies.
Meggle, G. (1993): “Gemeinsamer Glaube und Gemeinsames Wissen”. In: W. Lenzen, ed.: Tractatus physico-philosophici. Osnabrücker Philosophische Schriften, 145–151. Reprinted in: Allgemeine Gesellschaft für Philosophie, ed.: Neue Realitäten–Herausforderung der Philosophie. Berlin, 761–767.
Meggle, G. & M. Ulkan: “Das sprechakttheoretische Unaufrichtigkeits-Argument”. Forthcoming.
Meggle, G. (1997a): “Communicative Actions”. In: G. Holmström-Hintikka & R. Tuomela, eds.: Contemporary Action Theory. Vol. II, The Philosophy and Logic of Social Action. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Searle, J.R. (1975): “A Taxonomy of Illocutionary Acts”. In: K. Gunderson, ed.: Language, Mind and Knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 344–369.
Schiffer, S. (1972; 19882): Meaning. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1997 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Meggle, G., Ulkan, M. (1997). Informatives and / or Directives?. In: Rolf, E. (eds) Pragmatik. Linguistische Berichte. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-11116-0_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-11116-0_13
Publisher Name: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-531-13105-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-663-11116-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive