Deliberative speech acts: An interactional approach

Conclusions of Practical Argument: A Speech Act Analysis

“…8 One main consequence of it is a shift of focus away from the internal propositional attitude of intention to some externalised and collective speech act, notably, that of proposal. 9 Accordingly, the analyses of proposals have attracted some attention-especially in argumentation theory 8 See (Lewiński 2017;2019), (Corredor 2020), (Dascal 2005), (Green 2017), and (Walton 2006;. While some authors claim that this connection is a sign that "Aristotle has confused the psychological process by which a person comes to resolve a practical problem with the logical argument in which the steps leading to the resolution are formally set out" (Gauthier 1963, 26;cf.…”

“…Organon F 28 (2) 2021: 420-457 (Aakhus 2006;Corredor 2020;Ihnen Jory 2015;Kauffeld 1998;Walton 2006). Crucially, proposals shift the agent of the conclusion of PR from an individual "I" or "you" to plural "we": "so I should do m" or "so you should do m" is reformulated to "so let us do m".…”

Speech Act Pluralism in Argumentative Polylogues

“…On the most straightforward speech act interpretation, this is a real, informative question, as is also ostensibly confirmed in Jane's follow-up ("I am just trying to be clear on the eligibility conditions"). But here it comes as a response to Peter's act of soliciting proposals, a speech act typical of deliberative argumentation (Corredor 2020;Lewiński 2021b). This solicitation of proposals has also a very specific nature here: Peter's opening can be glossed as "any volunteers?"…”

“…Given the context of practical argumentation within a deliberative activity (Corredor 2020;Lewiński 2021b), Jane's indirect proposal is thus the main speech act performed by way of her asking a question that constitutes a conversational nomination. But, also, given that Ralph is present in that meeting, and given Jane's follow up where she directly addresses him as "you, Ralph," "Is Ralph eligible?"…”

Illocutionary Performance and Objective Assessment in the Speech Act of Arguing

“…Interestingly, the "taking effect" of illocutionary acts is characteristically a conventional effect, "as distinguished from producing consequences, in the sense of (...) changes in the normal course of events" (p. 116). These ideas have given support to a view of speech acts according to which they (i) bring about changes on the interpersonal or social context of the interlocutors and (ii) these changes can be analyzed in terms of the normative positions that the interlocutors recognize and assign each other (Sbisà 2006(Sbisà , 2009(Sbisà , 2018Witek 2015Witek , 2019; see also Corredor 2020Corredor , 2020a. Within this framework that I endorse, the interactional aspect of speech is mainly deployed in virtue of its illocutionary dimension and is not perlocutionary.…”