ANSWER KEY Semantics: a coursebook

Unit 24 Study Guide and Exercises

Directions: After you have read Unit 24 you should be able to tackle the following questions to
test your understanding of the main ideas raised in the unit.

1. You should understand these terms and concepts from this unit:

direct illocution
indirect illocution
2 types of illocutionary act:
directive act
commissive act

2. Give an example of an utterance (not in the book) that carries out several illocutionary acts
simultaneously, and identify them. How can one utterance have more than one illocution at the
same time?
"There's a Doberman in the kitchen." This can be an assertion about the
location of the Doberman, a warning that there's a ferocious dog in the kitchen,
a complaint that there is such a dog in the kitchen, etc. One utterance can have
more than one illocution associated with it because it can be used in different
contexts, each of which carries with it different background assumptions.

3. Briefly describe the difference between direct and indirect illocutions.

The direct illocution of an utterance is the one that is directly associated with
the literal meaning of the sentence type of the utterance. Indirect illocutions of
an utterance are those acts that are invoked according to the context in which
the utterance is made by means of the act's felicity conditions.

4. Give the direct and indirect illocutions of the following utterances. Speaker is abbreviated
as "S" and Hearer is abbreviated as "H".

a. "Can you hand me the butter?"

Direct illocution: S asks H if H has the ability to give S the butter.
Indirect illocution: S requests the H to hand over the butter.

b. "The car is dirty."

Direct illocution: S asserts that the car is dirty.
Indirect illocution: S asks H to wash the car, or warns H or complains
to H about the car.

c. "When do you plan to dust your room?"

Direct illocution: S asks H at what time she plans to clean her room.
Indirect illocution: S asks (requests) H to clear her room.

d. "Maybe we could go to the movies."

Direct illocution: S asserts it is possible for S and H to attend the
movies.
Indirect illocution: S suggests that S and H go to the movies, or S
asks H to go to the movies.

e. "This place is really dusty."

www.cambridge.org/hurford
© James R. Hurford, Brendan Heasley and Michael B. Smith 2007
ANSWER KEY Semantics: a coursebook

Direct illocution: S asserts that the place is dusty.

Indirect illocution: S asks H to dust the place.

f. "I'd like the salt."

Direct illocution: S asserts she wants the salt.
Indirect illocution: S asks H to give her the salt.

g. "The sugar is over there."

Direct illocution: S asserts that the sugar is over there.
Indirect illocution: S asks the H to give him the sugar.

h. "Let me be the first to say that I'm glad you're back."

Direct illocution: S orders H to let S say that he is glad H is back.
Indirect illocution: S welcomes H back

i. "Don't you think we ought to leave?"

Direct illocution: S asks H whether H thinks they should leave.
Indirect illocution: S asks the H to leave.

j. "Why can't you take out the garbage?"

Direct illocution: S asks H why she is not able to take out the garbage.

Indirect illocution: S requests the H to take out the garbage.

k. "I could clobber you for that."

Direct illocution: S asserts that he would be able to clobber H.
Indirect illocution: S threatens to clobber H.

l. "You took the last cookie!"

Direct illocution: S asserts that H took the last cookie.
Indirect illocution: S blames/accuses H for taking the cookie.

m. "I wish you would wash the car."

Direct illocution: S asserts that he wishes H would wash the car.
Indirect illocution: S orders H to wash the car.

n. "Is it right to condone murder?"

Direct illocution: S asks whether it is right to condone murder.
Indirect illocution: S asserts that it isn't right to condone murder.

o. "Why don't you take out the garbage?"

Direct illocution: S asks why H does not take out the garbage.
Indirect illocution: S requests the H to take out the garbage.

5. Suggest unhelpful, pedantic (but literally correct) replies to each of the utterances in question
4 above, alongside more natural helpful ones. The possibility of both types of reply gives
evidence that both direct and indirect illocutions are involved.

Only suggested pedantic replies are given. In some cases, the possibility of such
replies is very remote, and so the suggested replies may sound odd.

4a: "Yes, I can (pass the butter)."

4b: "Yes, it is (dirty)."
4c: "I plan to dust my room next week."

www.cambridge.org/hurford
© James R. Hurford, Brendan Heasley and Michael B. Smith 2007
ANSWER KEY Semantics: a coursebook

4d: "Yes, maybe we could (go to the movies)."

4e: "Yes, this place certainly is dusty."
4f: "Yes, I see that you do (want the salt)."
4g: "Yes, I see that the sugar is over there."
4h: "Yes, I am back'"
4i: "No, I don't think we ought to leave."
4j: "I'm not strong enough (to take out the garbage)."
4k: "I think you probably could (clobber me)."
4l: "Yes, I did (take the last cookie)."
4m: "I do, too (wish that I would wash the car)."
4n: "I don't know, is it?"
4o: "I don't know (why I don't take out the garbage)."

6. How are we able to relate the indirect illocutions of utterances to their direct illocutions--i.e.
how are we able to figure out an utterance's indirect illocution(s) from its direct illocution? What
previously-studied notion plays a crucial role in this relationship? Be sure you fully understand
this (the main point of the unit).

By means of the felicity conditions on the illocutionary act involved. See Unit 24
for details.

7. Give one or two additional utterances that have the same indirect illocutions as each of the
utterances in question 4 above.

Answers will vary. Here are several samples:

4a: "Could you hand me the butter?"
"Would you hand me the butter?"
"The butter is near you."
4b: "Could you wash the car?"
"Would you wash the car?"
4c: "Could you dust your room?"
"Would you dust your room?"
"Your room is very dirty."

8. Briefly describe the difference between directive and commissive acts. What (if anything) do
they have in common? Give several examples of each type (from the book if you like), and
explain briefly why they belong to each type.

Directive acts involve the speaker getting the hearer to do something.

Commissive acts involve the speaker committing herself to doing some act.
What they have in common is that both kinds of acts involve someone getting
someone to do something.

9. Why are such speech acts as apologizing, thanking, congratulating, insulting, etc. not
examples of either directive or commissive acts? Can you think of additional types of speech acts
which also do not fall into either of these two categories?

Such acts do not involve getting someone to do something. Other examples not
in either group: mocking, accusing, admitting, complaining, protesting,
toasting, etc.

10. Classify the following acts as either directive, commissive, or neither, and be ready to
explain your choice. Directives are marked "D", commissives "C", and neither "N".

www.cambridge.org/hurford
© James R. Hurford, Brendan Heasley and Michael B. Smith 2007
ANSWER KEY Semantics: a coursebook

a. pledging (C) g. giving permission (D)

b. accosting (N) h. surrendering (C)
c. accusing (N) i. declining (C)
d. imploring (D) j. praising (N)
e. complaining (N) k. protesting (N)
f. inviting (D) l. recommending (D)

11. Classify the following utterances as belonging to one of the following categories: direct or
indirect directives, direct or indirect commissives. For the indirect acts explain which felicity
conditions are invoked.

The felicity conditions invoked are not given here.

a. "Put on this sweater." direct directive

b. "It would be a good idea for you to stay here." indirect directive
c. "I'll volunteer to feed the tiger." direct commissive
d. "Could I get you a drink?" indirect commissive
e. "Send back that package." direct directive
f. "I don't think I'll be able to go with you." indirect commissive
g. "Why don't you put on this sweater." indirect directive
h. "Could you give me the answer?" indirect directive
i. "I accept your challenge." direct commissive

12. Comment on the importance of directive and commissive acts in our everyday lives. Would
it be possible for us to get along without them?

A good deal of our everyday lives involves either trying to get others to do
things or committing ourselves to doing things for others. Without such speech
acts it is difficult to imagine how communication could be carried out.

13. Imagine you are the first person mentioned in each situation below, and compose (a) an
assertion of the hearer's ability to carry out the desired action and (b) an enquiry about the
hearer's ability to carry out the action. In each case you will have constructed an utterance with
the illocutionary force of an indirect directive.

a. Professor asking the departmental secretary to take his calls.

You can take my calls./Can you take my calls?

b. Parent who wants her child to wash the car.

You can wash the car./Can you wash the car?

c. Person who wants help in lifting a heavy object.

You can help me lift this heavy object./Can you help me lift this heavy
object?

14. We noted that only some commissive illocutions can be conveyed indirectly by asserting or
questioning the speaker's ability to perform the action. Thus it is possible to make an indirect
offer by saying "Can I get/offer you a cup of coffee?", but this utterance cannot be interpreted as
an indirect promise, and you also can't say "*Can I promise you a cup of coffee?" (at least not
with the force of an indirect promise). We suggested this is because a promise, in being more
solemn and binding than an offer, requires a more direct means of expression (while

www.cambridge.org/hurford
© James R. Hurford, Brendan Heasley and Michael B. Smith 2007
ANSWER KEY Semantics: a coursebook

volunteering is somewhere in between). Consider now the commissive illocutionary acts you
identified in question 10 above, as well as vow, undertake, and guarantee, and decide whether
each follows the pattern of promise, offer, or volunteer with respect to being able to be conveyed
indirectly. Does our explanation above for promise account for these commissive acts, too?

The commissive acts from question 10 are: pledging, surrendering, declining.

Attempts to convey commissive acts indirectly:
a. ??Can I pledge to give the money?
b. Can I surrender to Darth Vader now?
c. Can I decline your offer?
d. ??Can I vow to help you?
e. ?Can I undertake this new responsibility?
f. ?Can I guarantee that I'll do that?

Behaves like promise (can't be conveyed indirectly): pledge, vow

Behaves like offer (can be conveyed indirectly): surrender, decline
Behaves like volunteer (somewhere in between): undertake, guarantee
The explanation for promise seems to account to some extent for the behavior
of these commissive acts, though opinions may vary about how we have
apportioned them into the three types. This question should prompt a good
deal of class discussion.

15. The meaning of an individual predicate plays a role in whether it can be used to acceptably
convey an indirect illocution. Assume the judgments indicated for each of the following pairs of
utterances involving commissives, where the question mark is meant to indicate that the
utterance is probably less likely in most situations. Can you think of a reason why this could be
so, given the meanings of the verbs and the context in which the utterances might occur?

a. "I accept your offer."

b. ?"Can I accept your offer?"

Offers are typically either accepted or rejected directly. 15b is less direct in a
context where we might expect the person to be eager to accept the offer,
assuming the offer is something the person wants, and so it sounds less
acceptable than 15a.

c. ?"I decline your offer."

d. "Can I decline your offer?"

This is the inverse of 15a,b. Here 15b might be more acceptable if the person
declining the offer wants to avoid hurting the feelings of the person making the
offer, or if the person declining is not sure he wants to decline the offer.

16. In order for a speaker to felicitously utter a request the following felicity conditions must
hold:

a. the speaker believes that the task has not yet been done.
b. the speaker believes that the hearer is able to do the task.
c. the speaker believes the hearer is willing to do the task.
d. the speaker wants the task to be done.

Formulate four indirect requests, each of which invokes a different felicity condition (i.e. each of
which asserts or questions each of the given felicity conditions for a request).

www.cambridge.org/hurford
© James R. Hurford, Brendan Heasley and Michael B. Smith 2007
ANSWER KEY Semantics: a coursebook

16a: The car hasn't been washed; Has the car been washed?
16b: You can wash the car, can't you? Can you wash the car?
16c: You want to wash the car, don't you? Do you want to wash the car?
16d: I want you to wash the car. ?Do I want you to wash the car?

Comment: Note that questioning felicity condition d. sounds odd.

17. The following are indirect questions. Use them to formulate the three felicity conditions for
questions (keeping in mind that indirect speech acts invoke or mention the felicity conditions for
the act).

a. "I don't know the answer to that."

b. "I'd like to know the answer to that."
c. "Do you know the answer to that?"

Felicity conditions for a question:

a. The speaker doesn't know the truth about the state of affairs.
b. The speaker wants to know the truth about the state of affairs.
c. The speaker thinks the hearer knows the truth about the state of affairs.

www.cambridge.org/hurford
© James R. Hurford, Brendan Heasley and Michael B. Smith 2007