Cited by 5Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesLinguistics and Discourse Analysis

Speech Act Theory

Assimakopoulos, Stavros·2026·Cambridge University Press eBooks

Abstract

Speech act theory has been foundational in establishing pragmatics as an independent field of inquiry; yet, recent pragmatic research appears to have drifted away from the theoretical investigation of speech acts. This Element explores the reasons why this is so, focusing on the difference of perspective that emerges when the scope of the discipline is viewed through a narrow versus a broad lens. Following an overview of the initial exposition of speech act theory by Austin, it tracks its evolution, through subsequent Searlean and Gricean elaborations, to the currently received view. This view is then found to have diverged substantially from Austin's original vision, largely due to its alignment with the narrow conception of pragmatics. Against this backdrop, it is suggested that embracing the broad take on the discipline can allow for a reintegration of Austin's vision into the way we theorise about speech acts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/9781009378376

Cites

88 of 88 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 40

  1. Jucker, Speech Acts: Discursive, Multimodal, Diachronic
  2. Assimakopoulos, Speech Act Theory: Between Narrow and Broad Pragmatics
  3. Alston, 1994, Foundations of Speech Act Theory: Philosophical and Linguistic Perspectives, 29
  4. Austin, 1962, How to Do Things with Words
  5. Bach, 1999, The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences, 359
  6. Ayer, 1936, Language, Truth, and Logic
  7. Langton, 1993, Speech acts and unspeakable acts, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22, 293
  8. Blakemore, 1992, Understanding Utterances
  9. Verschueren, 1987, Pragmatics as a Theory of Linguistic Adaptation (IPrA Working Document 1)
  10. Searle, 1985, Foundations of Illocutionary Logic
  11. Green, 2021, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
  12. Huang, 2010, The Pragmatics Encyclopedia, 13
  13. Schegloff, 1979, Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, 23
  14. Morgan, 1978, Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 9: Pragmatics, 261
  15. Bar-Hillel, 1971, Out of the pragmatic wastebasket, Linguistic Inquiry, 2, 401
  16. Sinclair, Alasdair . 1976. The Sociolinguistic Significance of the Form of Requests in Service Encounters: An Empirical Investigation. Unpublished PhD thesis: University of Cambridge.
  17. Juliane, 2021, Cross-Cultural Pragmatics
  18. Lakoff, 1973, The logic of politeness: Or, minding your p’s and q’s, Proceedings from the Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 9, 292
  19. Fairclough, 1997, Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction, 258
  20. Katz, 1977, Propositional Structure and Illocutionary Force: A Study of the Contribution of Sentence Meaning to Speech Acts
  21. Portner, 2004, Proceedings of SALT 14, 235
  22. Grice, 1989, Studies in the Way of Words
  23. Searle, 1975, Language, Mind, and Knowledge: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 344
  24. Bach, 2012, The Continuum Companion to the Philosophy of Language, 153
  25. Grice, 1986, Philosophical Grounds of Rationality, 45
  26. Morris, 1938, International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, 77
  27. Haaparanta, 2013, Philosophy and its recent history: Remarks on What is Analytic Philosophy? by Hans-Johann Glock, Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy, 2, 2
  28. 10.1017/9781009036672 · DOI
  29. Sbisà, 2007, How to read Austin, Pragmatics, 17, 461
  30. Huang, 2014, Pragmatics
  31. Locher, Fiction and Pragmatics
  32. Saul, 2018, New Work on Speech Acts, 360
  33. 10.1017/9781009184373 · DOI
  34. Blakemore, 1987, Semantic Constraints on Relevance
  35. Mey, 2001, Pragmatics: An Introduction
  36. Ross, 1970, Readings in English Transformational Grammar, 222
  37. Wilson, 1988, Human Agency: Language, Duty and Value, 77
  38. Sperber, 2015, Beyond speaker’s meaning, Croatian Journal of Philosophy, 15, 117
  39. Sadock, 2004, The Handbook of Pragmatics, 53
  40. Davis, 1991, Pragmatics: A Reader, 11

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Assimakopoulos, S.
Affiliations
University of Malta (MT)
Corresponding author
Assimakopoulos, Stavros
Venue
Cambridge University Press eBooks
Published
2025-12-15
OpenAlex
W7115195744
Cited by
5
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1
FWCI
10.51
Type
book
Open access
closed
Locations
Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
Keywords
speech act theory, pragmatics, Austin, John Searle, Grice, speech acts

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review