Abstract

Speech acts—promises, apologies, jokes, orders, threats, compliments—are actions we perform with words. This dissertation challenges us to move away from an individualistic theory of speech acts, where the focus is on the speaker and the moment of speech, and towards a more fully social theory of speech acts—a theory of how we perform actions with words over time with others. I call this a Social Contestation Theory of speech acts. Within the philosophy of language, established theories of speech acts present speech acts as actions a speaker performs intentionally in the moment of speaking, requiring either no audience response or only a minimal form of audience uptake (i.e. interpretation of what kind of speech act an utterance is). My dissertation calls this standard picture into question and reconceptualizes what it means to perform a speech act—I argue that performing a speech act is a temporally extended process, which goes beyond the moment of utterance, and within which audience responses play a crucial ongoing role. The Social Contestation Theory of speech acts I develop illuminates the ways that the speech acts we perform are not wholly within our control—speakers can perform some speech acts (such as threats, urgings, and orders) without intending to do so. It also builds on efforts to identify and counter forms of speech-based injustice, highlighting the way power shapes which speech acts we perform and the ethical and political conflicts which can arise within a speaker’s audience.