Language is a
variety of action. Linguists have recognized this fact in its contemporary
understanding since at least the 1960s, when J. L. Austin coined the terms
“speech acts” and “performative utterances” to refer to the non-declarative
functions of language.[1] Various other scholars had also written on
the performative nature of language as far back as the Greeks, and the power of
speech as an act even features prominently in early Christian texts (e.g., the
creative power of God’s speech as he shapes the world with merely an utterance,
“Let there be light,” or the concept of the biblical Word). But in the years
prior to Austin, philosophers of language, influenced by analytic philosophy
and logical positivism, were mainly interested in what sentences mean,
i.e., their semantic, declarative, or propositional content, and especially
their truth values. Austin, however, pointed out that people do more than just
communicate with language — they use it to do things as well. Speaking is often an
act in itself, such as when we say “I promise” or “I hereby declare.” Today
many linguists acknowledge that all language is performative. Even the
innocuous declarative sentence “I went to the store” constitutes an act, i.e.,
the act of informing. Just like any other action, we speak and write in order
to bring about effects on the world, or in the mental states of others.
Language, therefore, is a species of action, and thus subject to the laws of
praxeology……To Read More…..
My Take - I posted this article deliberated before the next article to make a point. Language needs foundation. What we have today is the lack of foundation for the way words are used to promote unacceptable ideololgies.
No comments:
Post a Comment