When Actions and Meanings Meet Each Other (in Relation to Performatives in Political Practices and Discourses)

The publication of Austin's Lectures was a significant event for both philosophy of language and theoretical linguistics in the second half of the twentieth century. After the systematic approach developed by John Searle, the theory of speech acts and performatives acquired a more rigorous form in terms of linguistic structure, but it ignored a number of extralinguistic factors that determine communicative behavior. The author suggests an alternative reading of Austin's work to highlight the clarifications and reservations that remain beyond the boundaries of Searle's interpretation. This make it possible to develop another approach where the provisions considered but not developed by Austin might be its cornerstones. Instead of refinement, the theory can be enriched by considering phenomena that Austin treated as “non-pure,” “non-direct,” and “parasitic.” These aspects have become especially noticeable in descriptions of political and social practices. The standard theory of performatives describes some isolated standardized situations (e.g., speech etiquette or formulas of politeness), but it has proved ineffective beyond them. Another approach was to emphasize on aspects that could transform the theory of performatives into the theory of social action (Derrida, Bourdieu, Butler). In the last decade, a range of conceptions considering the possibility of transcending from speech acts to actions and situations (Sbisà, Turner, May, Capone, Ilyin) have emerged. The theories of meaning developed in sociology (Weber, Goffman, Luhmann), allows for convertability of verbal and non-verbal components of communication and social interaction. The textual representation replaces the primary actional pattern; then, textual entities cause actions and vice versa. Based on the abovementioned approaches, we suggest to supplement the theory of performatives with the concept of social meaning and action.