Speech Act as a Factor of Socio-Political Change: Stating the Problem
https://doi.org/10.31249/kgt/2023.05.11
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to pose the problem of analyzing the relationship between conceptual (linguistic) and social changes, as well as to reveal the role of socio-political speech action of political theorists as key actors in these processes. The article considers the issues of the construction and changes of social and political reality, as well as the role of speech acts in these processes as a special type of social action. According to J. Searle’s general theory of social reality, speech acts are seen as the basis and a necessary condition for socio-political changes. The structure and elements of speech acts are described within the framework of J. Austin’s theory of speech acts, supplemented and formalized by Searle. The article discusses the influence of this theory on the formation of the theoretical and methodological approach of the Cambridge School of Intellectual History, used to understand the analysis of socio-political changes in various societies and historical periods. As an example of such research, the article describes the main elements of the approach of one of the Cambridge School’s founders Quentin Skinner. The analytical tools used by Skinner and his colleagues help to understand the connection between conceptual and social changes in the history of political thought. Considering political theorists as ideologists, Skinner explains through the analysis of political languages and ideological context how authors-ideologists, using statements that are the basis of their theoretical concepts and rhetoric, intentionally take certain actions that change the social reality. The possibilities, attempts and prospects of applying the Cambridge School’s methodology to the Russian history are also considered.
About the Author
D. E. Kadyrov
Institute of Scientific Information for Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences (INION RAN)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Daud E. KADYROV, PhD (Philosophy), Researcher
References
1. Araújo P. (2017). Pocock and historiography as political language. Resgate: Revista Interdisciplinar de Cultura. Vol. 25, no. 1 (33), pp. 275–294 (in Portuguese).
2. Atnashev T., Velizhev M. (2018). The Cambridge School: History and Method. In: Atnashev T., Velizhev M. (eds.). The Cambridge School. Theory and Practice of Intellectual History. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, pp. 7–52 (in Russian).
3. Austin J. (1975). How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 168 pp.
4. Austin J.L. (2004). Performative – Constative. In: Searle J.R. (ed.). Philosophy of Language. Moscow: Editorial URSS, pp. 23–34 (in Russian).
5. But N.A. (2003). Category Apparatus of Speech Act Theory in the Aspect of Actual Theories. Vestnik TGTU. Vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 130–135 (in Russian).
6. Cervera-Marzal M. (2012). For a cooperative conception of the reading methods of Leo Strauss and Quentin Skinner. Klesis. Revue philosophique. No. 22, pp. 11–28 (in French).
7. Chikov M.V. (2007). The Analysis of Transformation of Institutes: Methodology of Research. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. No. 294 (January), pp. 212–214 (in Russian).
8. Chomsky N. (2007). On Language: Chomsky’s Classic Works Language and Responsibility and Reflections on Language in One Volume. New York: The New Press, 496 pp.
9. Gallotti M., Michael J. (2014). Objects in Mind. In: Gallotti M., Michael J. (eds.). Perspectives on Social Ontology and Social Cognition, Heidelberg, New York, London: Springer, pp. 1–15.
10. Garsten, B., Palonen K (2007). Book Reviews (Review of Quentin Skinner: History, Politics, Rhetoric). Ethics. Vol. 117, no. 3, pp. 566–571.
11. Kadyrov D.E. (2018). Methodology of Sociohistorical Knowledge: Approach of the Cambridge School of Intellectual History. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie. No. 3, pp. 253–260 (in Russian).
12. Karimov A.R. (2010). John Searle on Language Origin and Deontology. Uchenye zapiski KFU. Gumanitarnye nauki. Vol. 152, no. 1, pp. 82–93 (in Russian).
13. Krassina E.A. (2016). Discourse, Statement And Speech Act. Russian Journal of Linguistics. Vestnik RUDN. Seriya: Lingvistika. Vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 91–102 (in Russian).
14. Levin S.M. (2011). Metaphysics and J. Searle’s General Theory of Social Reality. Vestnik LGU imeni A.S. Pushkina. Seriya: Filosofiya. Vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 161–171 (in Russian).
15. Mulsow M., Mahler A. (2010). The Cambridge School of the History of Political Ideas. Berlin: Suhrkamp, 286 pp. (in German).
16. Nikonenko S. (2017). Intentionality: An American Point of View. HORIZON. Fenomenologicheskie issledovaniya. Vol. 6, no. 1 (11), pp. 9–44 (in Russian).
17. Palonen K. (2003). Quentin Skinner: History, Politics, Rhetoric. Cambridge: Polity Press, 216 pp.
18. Pocock D.G.A. (2018). The State of the Art (Introduction to Virtue, Commerce, and History). In: Atnashev T., Velizhev M. (eds.). The Cambridge School. Theory and Practice of Intellectual History. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, pp. 142– 190 (in Russian).
19. Pospelova O.V. (2010). Fundamental Ontology of John Searle and requisite conditions of Political Reality. Vestnik LGU imeni A.S. Pushkina. Seriya: Filosofiya. Vol. 2, no. 1. pp. 193–203 (in Russian).
20. Pospelova O.V. (2011). Political Action and the Problem of Free Will in Practical Philosophy of J. Searle. Izvestiya Penzenskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. V.G. Belinskogo. No. 23, pp. 42–48 (in Russian).
21. Radbil V.A., Yumatov T.B. (2013). Application of the Theory of Speech Acts in Forensic Linguistic Examination. Opportunities and Prospects. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. N.I. Lobachevskogo. No. 1 (1), pp. 286–290 (in Russian).
22. Richter M. (2018). Pocock, Skinner and Begriffsgeschichte. In: Atnashev T., Velizhev M. (eds.). The Cambridge School. Theory and Practice of Intellectual History. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, pp. 348–380 (in Russian).
23. Searle J. (1983). Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 288 pp.
24. Searle J. (1995). The Construction of Social Reality. New York: Free Press, 241 pp.
25. Searle J. (2004a). Introduction. In: Searle J.R. (ed.). Philosophy of Language. Moscow: Editorial URSS, pp. 6–13 (in Russian).
26. Searle J. (2004b). Rationality in Action. Moscow: Progress-Tradiciya, pp. 75–76 (in Russian).
27. Searle J. (2010). Making the Social World: The Structure of Human Civilization. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 208 pp.
28. Skinner Q. (1988). “Social meaning” and the explanation of social action. In: J. Tully (ed.) Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and His Critics. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 79–96.
29. Skinner Q. (2002a). Moral Principles and Social Change. In: Skinner Q. Visions of Politics. Vol. 1: Regarding Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 145–157.
30. Skinner Q. (2002b). The Idea of Cultural Lexicon. In: Skinner Q. Visions of Politics. Vol. 1: Regarding Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 158–174.
31. Skinner Q. (2002с). Visions of Politics. Vol. 1: Regarding Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. 225 pp.
32. Skinner Q. (2005). Language and political change. Logos. No. 3 (48), pp. 143– 152 (in Russian).
33. Skinner Q. (2018a). Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas. In: Atnashev T., Velizhev M. (eds.). The Cambridge School. Theory and Practice of Intellectual History. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, pp. 53–122 (in Russian).
34. Skinner Q. (2018b). Motives, Intentions, and Interpretations of Texts. In: Atnashev T., Velizhev M. (eds.). The Cambridge School. Theory and Practice of Intellectual History. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, pp. 123–141 (in Russian).
35. Skinner Q. (2018с). The Answer to My Critics. In: Atnashev T., Velizhev M. (eds.). The Cambridge School. Theory and Practice of Intellectual History. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, pp. 253–346 (in Russian).
36. Skornicki A. (2019). Critical readings. Revue française de science politique. Vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 501–509 (in French).
37. Skripnik K.D. (2020). J. Searle: the Analytic-Semiotic Frame of the Construction of Social Ontology. Vestnik Armavirskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta. No. 2, pp. 102–109 (in Russian).
38. Syrjämäki S. (2011). Sins of a Historian. Perspectives to the Problem of Anachronism (Academic Dissertation). Tampere: Tampere University Press, 224 pp.
39. The Cambridge School. Theory and Practice of Intellectual History (2018). Atnashev T., Velizhev M. (eds.). Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 632 pp. (in Russian).
40. Tully J. (2018). Feather – A Mighty Weapon: Quentin Skinner Analyzes Politics. In: Atnashev T., Velizhev M. (eds.). The Cambridge School. Theory and Practice of Intellectual History. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, pp. 253–346 (in Russian).
41. Vavlov A.V. (2018). Peregrinations of a method: The Cambridge school (of political thought) in varying contexts. Logos. No. 4, pp. 261–302 (in Russian).
42. Velizhev M. (2018). Language and Context in Russian Intellectual History: Chaadaev’s First Philosophical Letter. In: Atnashev T., Velizhev M. (eds.). The Cambridge School. Theory and Practice of Intellectual History. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, pp. 500–521 (in Russian).
43. Weymans W. (2003). A new lesson of history. Karakter: tijdschrift van wetenschap. Vol. 1, issus 4, pp. 17–19 (in Dutch).
44. Wittgenstein L. (2018). Philosophical Investigations. Moscow: AST, 352 pp. (in Russian).
Review
For citations:
Kadyrov D.E. Speech Act as a Factor of Socio-Political Change: Stating the Problem. Outlines of global transformations: politics, economics, law. 2023;16(5):187-203. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31249/kgt/2023.05.11
Views:
99
Email this article 