Talking as an activity is sometimes referred to somewhat negatively. Consider the phrases:
- “When all’s said and done, there’s a lot more said than done.”
- “Actions speak louder than words”
But in the 1960s Austin, Searle, Winograd and others developed “Speech Act Theory, building on the work of previous philosophers and linguists. One of the core ideas was that to speak is to perform an action. They went further and Winograd said that he “takes language as the primary dimension of all human cooperative activity …”
Speaking (language generally) is far from being a second-rate alternative to action but it is an action in itself and the primary means for all significant human endeavour to be achieved.
There are several varying classifications of speech acts and here I summarise the ones used by Winograd and Flores (in their book – Understanding Computers and Cognition), focussing on the most relevant four in this context:
- “direct” – to ask (in various degrees of emphasis) someone to do something. This may range from asking to directing, instructing or requiring.
- “commit” – to undertake and make a commitment to perform some task.
- “assert” – committing the speaker (in varying degrees of emphasis) to the truth of an expressed proposition. Eg Southampton are not as good a football team as Brighton and Hove Albion.
- “declare” to “make it so” – more formally, to bring correspondence between the propositional content of what was said and reality. Literally, it becomes so because they said it.
The distinction between assertion and declaration is best illustrated on the cricket pitch. The fielders may assert the batsman is out (typically with cries of “Howzat?”. But only the umpire can declare that he is in or out. The difference between asserting and declaring is the position of authority of the speaker. If the speaker has the relevant authority, then it’s a declaration.