Performatives vs. Constatives

Performatives vs. Constatives

     In its very beginning, speech acts were classified into performatives and constatives. Those 2 divisions began to disappear as the theory was in its way to become complete and fulfilled. In fact, Austin approves this classification as a branch of his speech act theory. He also disapproves this classification as the distinction between them is unclear (Huang 96-101).

a.      Performatives

     As Austin defines it, Performatives are those sentences that denote an action. When the interlocutor wants his listener or reader to perform an action, he just uses certain words in a certain context that direct the other party to perform that intended action (Huang 95). In that case, Austin uses the expression "felicity conditions". These are the set of rules under which an utterance would be governed as performative. These conditions are:

* Those performatives should be based upon convention.

* The speaker should have the authority to perform that action.

* The intention should be understood by the hearer.

* "The procedure must be executed (i) correctly and (ii) completely."

*The utterance should reveal clearly its consequences.

He says also that if any of those conditions is not applied, then the performatives would be infelicitous (Huang 99).

I. Explicit performatives

     Performatives could be further classified into explicit and implicit. Explicit performatives usually contain a performative verb which is apparent to the other party. It bears a clear cut meaning. In the utterance; "I promise to study," there is a clear performative verb which is "promise".  The utterance in that case should be declarative. Its subject should be in the first person pronoun with an active, present simple verb. Yet, this rule has some exceptions as in "Passengers are requested to cross the railway line…." Here the subject of the utterance is plural, and the verb is in the passive mode, in spite of the fact that this is a performative utterance. In addition, these rules may be applied to constatives, as in "I promise to be there". Here, the speaker is just addressing himself (Lyons 728&729).

II. Implicit performatives

     Unlike the explicit performatives, implicit performativs do not contain a performative verb. The only way to understand that this is a performative utterance is by realizing the real intention behind that utterance. Here the context plays an important role in determining the intention of the interlocutor because the utterance does not bear a cut clear meaning as in the explicit performatives (Lyons 728&729).

b.Constatives

     These are certain utterances which do not denote an action. The do not contain a performative verb that would direct the other party to perform an action. As Austin says, these constatives are used only in descriptions and assertions (HUANG 95). It is supposed that the proposed felicity conditions could not be applied to constatives. However, Austin realized that constatives might be performatives. For example, somebody may say that "the window is open". The utterance here might be directive as the interlocutor wants the window to get closed. In that case, the constative utterance is classified as implicit performative for the performative verb is not clear. From those examples, it is found that the distinction between constatives and performatives is not that clear. They might be overlapped. Thus, Austin shifts to another classification, as he differentiates between locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary actions (Lyons 730).