Intentionality in Speech Act Theory: The Derrida-Searle Debate

Authors

  • Abd El Hak Gasmi PhD (Research Professor, Section B) linguistic sciences National Institute for Research in Education Algiers, Algeria

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22046/LA.2024.21

Keywords:

Intentionality, Speech Acts, Deconstructive Analysis, November 1st Declaration, Iterability, Context, Pragmatics

Abstract

This study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the role of intentionality in speech act theory by synthesizing analytical and deconstructive approaches, as exemplified in the works of John Searle and Jacques Derrida. The study employs the November 1st Declaration, the founding document of the Algerian Revolution, as a case study to apply this dual perspective. The research adopts a multidimensional methodology that combines critical theoretical analysis, linguistic examination, and comparative case study. The analysis reveals that integrating these approaches offers a more holistic understanding of speech acts, highlighting both their transformative power (Searle) and their multifaceted, mutable nature (Derrida). This finding suggests that the optimal application of speech act theory requires a synthesis of analytical and deconstructive school methodologies.

References

Abu al-Qasim, S. (n.d.). Tarikh Al-Jaza'ir al-Thaqafi (Vol. 10). Dar al-Gharb al-Islami.

Alfino, M. (1991). Another look at the Derrida-Searle debate. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 24(2), 143–152.

Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words. Oxford University Press.

Belhocine, M. (2000). Le courrier Alger-Le Caire (1954-1956). Casbah Editions.

Bitour, A. (2022). Wathiqat bayan awwal November 1954: Taqadim wa tahqiq [Document of the November 1st 1954 statement: Introduction and investigation]. Al-Maghribiyah Journal of Manuscripts, 18(1), 217–240.

Bornedal, P. (2020). Deconstructive vs pragmatic: A critique of the Derrida–Searle debate. The European Legacy, 25(1), 62–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/10848770.2019.1652039

Bu 'Aziz, Y. (2004). Thawrat Al-Jaza'ir fi al-qarnayn al-tasi' 'ashar wa-al-'ishrin (Vol. 1). Dar al-Gharb lil-Nashr wa-al-Tawzi'.

Culler, J. (1981). Convention and meaning: Derrida and Austin. New Literary History, 13(1), 15–30.

Derrida, J. (1985). Marges de la philosophie. Рипол Классик.

Derrida, J. (1988). Limited Inc. Northwestern University Press.

Farrell, F. B. (1988). Iterability and meaning: The Searle-Derrida debate. Metaphilosophy, 19(1), 53–64.

Fotion, N. (2014). John Searle. Routledge.

Glock, H. (2013). What is analytic philosophy? Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy, 2(2). https://jhaponline.org/jhap/article/view/18/17

Hacker, P. M. S. (1996). Wittgenstein's place in twentieth-century analytic philosophy. Blackwell.

Hacker, P. M. S. (1997). Wittgenstein's place in twentieth-century analytic philosophy. Blackwell.

Halion, K. J. (1989). Speech act theory and deconstruction: A defence of the distinction between normal and parasitic speech acts [PhD thesis, McMaster University].

Harbi, M. (1980). Le FLN, mirage et réalité: Des origines à la prise du pouvoir (1945-1962) (1st ed.). Les Editions J.A.

Harris, D. W., & Unnsteinsson, E. (2018). Wittgenstein's influence on Austin's philosophy of language. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 26(2), 371–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/09608788.2017.1396958

Holdcroft, D. (1991). Saussure: Signs, system and arbitrariness. Cambridge University Press.

Kimball, R. H. (2015). Intentionality and psychological explanation. In The encyclopedia of clinical psychology. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118625392.wbecp361

Leclercq, B. (2010). Des actes aux règles: Aller (Wittgenstein) et retour (Austin). Dissensus, 3. https://popups.uliege.be/2031-4981/index.php?id=586

Lucy, N. (2004). A Derrida dictionary. Blackwell Publishing.

Moati, R. (2014). Derrida, Searle: Deconstruction and ordinary language. Columbia University Press.

Raffel, S. (2011). Understanding each other: The case of the Derrida-Searle debate. Human Studies, 34(3), 277–292.

Searle, J. R. (1977). Reiterating the differences: A reply to Derrida. Glyph, 2, 198–208.

Searle, J. R. (1983). Intentionality: An essay in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge University Press.

Searle, J. R. (1992). The rediscovery of the mind. MIT Press.

Searle, J. R. (1995). The construction of social reality. Simon and Schuster.

Skinner, B. F. (1989). The behavior of the listener. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior (pp. 85–96). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-0447-1_2

Smith, B. (Ed.). (2003). John Searle. Cambridge University Press.

Ya-wen, H. E. (2009). Significance lies in use: Teaching goals of multi-media class teaching in non-English majors' English course. Journal of Harbin University, 30(12), 125–128.

Zamoum, A. (1996). Tamurt Imazighen: Mémoires d’un survivant, 1940-1962. ENAL-RAHMA.

Published

2024-11-30

How to Cite

Gasmi, A. E. H. (2024). Intentionality in Speech Act Theory: The Derrida-Searle Debate. LANGUAGE ART, 9(4), 37–60. https://doi.org/10.22046/LA.2024.21

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Similar Articles

1 2 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.