| This study investigates insincere invitations, a typical case of insincere speech acts in the Chinese context, within the framework of speech act theory (hereafter referred to as SAT), with a view to offering a critique of the felicity conditions in the Searlean SAT. It starts with a discussion and revision of what type of speech act inviting is by nature and then the pragmatic features of insincere invitations are explored, followed by an investigation of the relations of these features and the felicity conditions. It argues that insincere speech acts as pretence in communication are different from other types of non-serious use of language, in which the intention to express demonstrates different attitudes, rather than the intention to do something, hence the felicity conditions in the Searlean tradition fail to account for insincere speech acts, as illustrated by the case of insincere invitations in Chinese (hereafter referred to as IICs). It is proposed that the felicity conditions have to be replaced by the success conditions so that both insincere and insincere speech acts will be accounted for.The dissertation is composed of seven major chapters.Chapter One provides a brief introduction of the objectives, the rationale, the significance, as well as the general layout of the study, stating that the current study aims to (1) elucidate that the act of inviting is not purely a directive act, as proposed in the traditional speech act theory, but rather a commissive directive, (2) analyze the pragmatic features of insincere invitations in Chinese and their relations with each of the felicity conditions, and (3) make a critical analysis of the felicity conditions in the Searlean speech act theory, and make tentative amendments according to what has been discovered in the analysis of insincere invitations in Chinese. The present research explores the following four questions: (1) What is the act of inviting by nature as one of the illocutionary acts? (2) How are insincere invitations realized, as apposed to sincere ones, with respect to their pragmatic features? (3) How are insincere speech acts manifested as pretence in communication? (4) Why do the felicity conditions in the Searlean speech act theory fail to explain ISAs?Chapter Two reviews the history of using language as action in anthropology, sociology, as well as the philosophy of langauge. A detailed review is also made on the various taxonomies of speech acts. Although there have been different versions in the classification of speech acts, most of them have followed the Searlean tradition, with slight modifications and/or amendments. It is proposed in this chapter that, following Searle’s criteria, inviting bears the features of both directives and commissives, for in issuing an invitation, the speaker requests the hearer to do some future action on the one hand, and meanwhile commits himself/herself to the obligation of accepting the hearer’s presence on the other.Chapter Three analyzes the pragmatic features of insincere invitations in Chinese. Based on the data collected from real life experience, a comparative analysis is made to find out in what aspects insincere invitations are distinct from sincere ones. Six features are concluded, and statistic analyses have indicated that all of them show significant difference. The general functions of insincere invitations are also discussed. It is indicated that, contrary to the western cultures in which they are taken as face-threatening acts, insincere invitations are in fact face-caring acts in the Chinese culture. These pragmatic features, seen from a communicative perspective, are actually communication strategies the inviters adopt to express propositional attitudes rather than to express the intention to do what is literally meant by the utterances. On the other hand, they also function as comprehension strategies by which the invitees make inferences about the inviters’intentions, according to which appropriate responses are made.Chapter Four discusses the relationship between the pragmatic features of insincere invitations and the felicity conditions of the act of inviting. The discussions reveal that, besides the sincerity condition, at least one other condition is not satisfied in the performance of insincere invitations. The defectiveness of the other one or more conditions is employed to cover up the insincerity of the inviter’s performance of the act per se. This chapter draws the conclusion that the felicity conditions in the Searlean speech act theory fail to account for insincere invitations.Chapter Five provides an analysis of pretence in various non-serious use of language, including insincere speech acts in specific. The study of pretence has long been explored in philosophy and psychology. Linguistic studies have focused on some particular types of the non-serious use of language, e.g. irony and/or hyperbole, which involve non-deceptive pretence. Contrary to the traditional view of taking insincere speech acts as involving non-deceptive pretence, it is found that, based on the analysis of insincere invitations in Chinese, insincere speech acts involve both deceptive and non-deceptive pretence, though the intention behind the pretence is not meant to deceive.Chapter Six makes a critique of the felicity conditions in the Searlean speech acts theory. It is concluded that Searle’s felicity conditions have explanatory power in analyzing serious use of language, i.e. the“felicitous/non-defective”performance of speech acts, but fail to provide a sound account of the“infelicitous/defective”performance, which are nevertheless successful in communication. A comparison is made between the felicity conditions and the success conditions, which leads to the conclusion that sincerity of the speaker in the performance of illocutionary acts is not a prerequisite, i.e. a necessary condition. In performing speech acts, either sincere or insincere, the speakers actually express two different propositional attitudes. In the former case, it is the intention to do something, and in the latter, the pretence to do. A tentative revision of Searle’s felicity conditions is also made to account for both sincere and insincere speech acts.Chapter Seven is the concluding part of the study, which points out the contributions the present study has made. It also summarizes the major findings of the research, the limitations, and gives a brief account of the possible trends and/or orientations in further studies in the topic explored in this research.The following contributions have been made in the present study: First, it has provided a comprehensive analysis of insincere speech acts in general, and insincere invitations in particular, within the framework of speech act theory. Second, the study has found the interrelation between the pragmatic features and the felicity conditions, hence providing an account on how each of the conditions is violated in the case of insincere invitations. And third, the success conditions are proposed based on the tentative revision of the felicity conditions by claiming that sincerity is not a necessary condition for the performance of speech act. |
PDF Full Text Request