Poetic Perlocutions: Poetry after Cavell after Austin

2Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Although perlocution has received more interest lately, it remains the great unthought of Austin’s theory. The privilege he gives to illocution over perlocution, rather than being a necessity of his linguistic theory, is a contestable philosophical claim that leads him, I argue, to exclude from his consideration poetic and other ‘parasitical’ uses of language. Cavell’s reconceptualisation of perlocutions as ‘passionate utterances’, however, provides a more fruitful theoretical framework to approach poetic phenomena. Reading Austin through a Cavellian lens offers keys to make space for the parasitic uses Austin rejected and for poetry within a philosophy of language.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Mills, P. (2022). Poetic Perlocutions: Poetry after Cavell after Austin. Philosophical Investigations, 45(3), 357–372. https://doi.org/10.1111/phin.12328

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free