Skip to main content

Speech Acts and Ventriloquation: The Contribution of Marina Sbisà to a General Theory of Action and Performativity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Sbisà on Speech as Action

Part of the book series: Philosophers in Depth ((PID))

  • 130 Accesses

Abstract

Sbisà’s contributions to philosophy of language, pragmatics, and semiotics have been a wonderful source of inspiration for many scholars interested in speech act theory. Since the publication of her 1980 article with Paolo Fabbri (“Models (?) for a Pragmatic Analysis”), she has indeed encouraged us, following Greimas’s work, to focus on the transformative dimension of speech acts, that is, their actional dimension. While speech act theory is still today mainly mobilized to study what people do when they communicate with each other, her contributions allow us to account, more generally, for how other-than-humans do things with or without words. Her semiotic reinterpretation of speech act theory reminds us what pragmatics owes to pragmatism as a philosophical movement—a movement that acknowledges the multiple agencies that compose our world and bring it into being. In this world, situations confirm or contradict what we believe to be true, arrows indicate where we should proceed to go to the restroom, and agreements commit signatories to a set of shared principles. In this chapter, I pay homage to Sbisà’s work by showing how it leads us to an investigation of what I call the ventriloquial dimension of communication. For communication to occur, something or someone always needs to be made to say or do things, which is the essence of ventriloquism. I show how this interpretation of communication allows us to reconsider how speech acts function.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For the sake of this discussion, and in keeping with Sbisà’s (2007) position, I will not create artificial distinctions between the words “acts” and “actions” even if some subtle nuances can, of course, always be introduced.

  2. 2.

    I always hesitate calling a request that cannot be turned down an order. An order indeed usually consists of giving an authoritative instruction to do something, which is not the case when someone politely says, “Would you be kind enough to give me this file?” Maybe the verb “instruct” would be better in this case, as instructing is not as strong as ordering even if it is supposed to mark that what is requested cannot or should not be turned down.

  3. 3.

    Although I don’t have enough space to develop this point, it is noteworthy that thinking, in this case, is always a form of saying. Although thinking can take the form of images, what Peirce (1991) would call icons, when a thought is articulated under the form of symbols in the Peircian sense, that is, what Austin would call words, this thought always materializes, by definition, as a form of speech in our head. We always hear ourselves privately thinking, a phenomenon that is well translated by the expression “thinking to oneself,” which is symptomatically translated by “se dire” in French (literally speaking to oneself).

References

  • Allard-Poesi, Florence, and Laure Cabantous. 2021. Strategizing. In Handbook of Management Communication, ed. François Cooren and Peter Stücheli-Herlach, 195–211. Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, John L. 1975. In How to Do Things with Words, ed. James O. Urmson and Marina Sbisà, 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bach, Kent, and Harnish, Robert M. 1979. Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caponetto, Laura. 2020. Undoing Things with Words. Synthese 197 (6): 2399–2414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooren, François. 2000. The Organizing Property of Communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2004. Textual Agency: How Texts Do Things in Organizational Settings. Organization 11 (3): 373–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. The Contribution of Speech Act Theory to the Analysis of Conversation: How Pre-sequences Work. In Handbook of Language and Social Interaction, ed. Kristine L. Fitch and Robert E. Sanders, 21–40. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006. The Organizational World as a Plenum of Agencies. In Communication as Organizing: Empirical and Theoretical Explorations in the Dynamic of Text and Conversation, ed. François Cooren, James R. Taylor, and Elizabeth J. Van Every, 81–100. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008a. Between Semiotics and Pragmatics: Opening Language Studies to Textual Agency. Journal of Pragmatics 40: 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008b. Speech Act Theory. In International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, ed. William A. Darity Jr., 2nd ed., 56–57. Detroit: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. The Haunting Question of Textual Agency: Derrida and Garfinkel on Iterability and Eventfulness. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42 (1): 42–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Action and Agency in Dialogue: Passion, Incarnation, and Ventriloquism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012. Communication Theory at the Center: Ventriloquism and the Communicative Constitution of Reality. Journal of Communication 62: 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2015a. Speech Act Theory. In The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction, ed. Karen Tracy, Cornelia Ilie, and Todd Sandel. Oxford: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2015b. Studying Agency from a Ventriloqual Perspective. Management Communication Quarterly 29 (3): 475–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. Ethics for Dummies: Ventriloquism and Responsibility. Atlantic Journal of Communication 24 (1): 17–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2020. Reconciling Dialogue and Propagation: A Ventriloquial Inquiry. Language and Dialogue 10 (1): 9–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooren, François, and Frédérik Matte. 2010. For a Constitutive Pragmatics: Obama, Médecins Sans Frontières and the Measuring Stick. Pragmatics and Society 1 (1): 9–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, Donald. 1980. Essays on Actions and Events. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, Jacques.1988. Limited Inc. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazdar, Gerald. 1981. Speech Act Assignment. In Elements of Discourse Understanding. Cambridge, ed. Aravind K. Joshi, Bruce H. Weber, and Ivan A. Sag. UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greimas, Algirdas Julien, and Joseph Courtes. 1982. Semiotics and Language. An Analytical Dictionary. Trans. Larry Christ, Daniel Patte, James Lee, Edward McMahon II, Gary Phillips, and Michael Rengstorf. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greimas, Algirdas Julien. 1987. On Meaning: Selected Writings in Semiotic Theory. Trans. Paul J. Perron and Frank Collins. London: Frances Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krämer, Sybille. 2015. Medium, Messenger, Transmission: An Approach to Media Philosophy. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, Charles S. 1991. Peirce on Signs: Writings on Semiotics. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, John D. 1999. Speaking into the Air: A History of the Idea of Communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2015. The Marvelous Clouds: Toward a Philosophy of Elemental Media. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sbisà, Marina. 1972. Il problema della classificazione degli atti illocutori. In Ricerche di filosofia linguistica, ed. Renzo Piovesan, 3–41. Firenze: Sansoni.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1984. On Illocutionary Types. Journal of Pragmatics 8: 93–112. Reprinted in Marina Sbisà (forthcoming), Essays on Speech Acts and Other Topics in Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1985. Manipulation et sanction dans la dynamique des actes de langage. In Exigences et perspectives de la sémiotique. Recueil d’hommages pour Algirdas Julien Greimas, ed. Herman Parret and Hans-George Ruprecht, 592–538. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1996. Feminine subject and female body in discourse about childbirth. European Journal of Women’s Studies 3: 363–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2001. Illocutionary Force and Degrees of Strength in Language Use. Journal of Pragmatics 33: 1791–1814. Reprinted in Marina Sbisà (forthcoming), Essays on Speech Acts and Other Topics in Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2003. Cognition and narrativity in speech act sequences. In Rethinking Sequentiality, ed. Anita Fetzer and Christiane Meierkord, 71–97. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. How to Read Austin. Pragmatics 17 (3): 461–473. Reprinted in Marina Sbisà (forthcoming), Essays on Speech Acts and Other Topics in Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. Review of the Book “Action and Agency in Dialogue: Passion, Incarnation and Ventriloquism” by F. Cooren. Language and Dialogue 1 (2): 320–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. Some Remarks about Speech Act Pluralism. In Perspectives on Pragmatics and Philosophy, ed. Alessandro Capone, Franco Lo Piparo, and Marco Carapezza, 227–244. Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017. Implicitness in Normative Texts. In Pragmatics and Law, ed. Francesca Poggi and Alessandro Capone, 23–42. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sbisà, Marina, and Fabbri, Paolo. 1980. Models (?) for a Pragmatic Analysis. Journal of Pragmatics 4: 301–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1988. Presequence and Indirection. Applying Speech Act Theory to Ordinary Conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 12: 55–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1991. Conversation Analysis and Socially Shared Cognition. In Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, ed. Lauren B. Resnick, John L. Levine, and Stephanie D. Teasley, 150–171. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, John R. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1979. Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1983. Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge. UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. (2002). Consciousness and Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weigand, Edda. 2021. Dialogue: The Complex Whole. Language and Dialogue 11 (3): 457–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to François Cooren .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Cooren, F. (2023). Speech Acts and Ventriloquation: The Contribution of Marina Sbisà to a General Theory of Action and Performativity. In: Caponetto, L., Labinaz, P. (eds) Sbisà on Speech as Action. Philosophers in Depth. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22528-4_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics