Speech acts: Constative and performative - Colleen Glenney Boggs

语言行为: 述事与述为 - Colleen Glenney Boggs

翻译人员: Amber Qin 校对人员: Bighead Ge

Have you ever seen

你有见过

a big, red "No Running" sign at a public pool?

公共游泳池区域里一个又大又红"禁止奔跑"的标志吗？

For the most part,

在多数情况下，

the pace on the deck reflects this statement.

在泳池边上走路的人正反映了此标志。

But while the sign accurately describes

但是，尽管该标志能准确地描述

the patrons' movements,

这些守纪人的行为，

isn't it true that people are walking

难道人们走路

because the sign tells them no running?

是因为该标志告诉他们“不准跑步”吗？

So, is this sign portraying the pool's environment,

所以，这个标志只是在描绘池的环境，

or is it doing something else,

还是它确有功能——

something more powerful?

有更强有力的职责？

The difference between a statement that describes

一个陈述句

and one that commands

和一个命令句的区别

is an idea developed by British linguist J. L. Austin.

是由英国语言学家奥斯汀所提出的一个想法。

He defines this distinction

他将这种区别定义为

as two separate parts of speech:

两种不同的句型：

constatives

述事句，

and performatives.

和述为句。

Constatives are sentences

述事句就是

that describe something as true or false,

描述东西，是对或是错，

and performatives are sentences

而述为的句子呢

that denote an action.

就是表示一个动作。

In other words, a constative is,

换句话说，述事是“是”，

and a performative does.

和述为是“做“。

To help us distinguish these two parts of speech,

若要帮助区分这两个词类，

let's start by examining constatives

需要通过观察

around the park outside the pool.

泳池周围公园里的述事句。

The first sign we encounter says,

我们遇到的第一个牌子上写着

"The park closes at 6 p.m."

"公园在下午6点关门。"

After checking with a friendly park official

在与一位友好的工作人员确认

that the park does, indeed, close at 6,

公园确实在下午6点关门之后，

we can confirm that this statement

我们可以确认此句

is a true constative.

是真正的述事句。

Nearby, there's a man on a bench

附近有一名男子在一条长凳上

with a newspaper, and the headline reads,

读报纸，其标题内容如下：

"Heatwave!"

"热浪!"

However, the sky is cloudy and it feels quite chilly.

然而，此时天空乌云密布，而且感觉有点冷。

Today's headline is a false constative

今天的头条新闻就是假的述事句，

as it has proven to be incorrect.

因为它已被证明是不正确的。

Before the rain starts to fall,

在开始下雨前，

let's throw away our can of soda

我们可以把我们的苏打水扔在

at the blue trash bin that says, "Recycle."

一个蓝色垃圾箱里，它上面写着："回收"。

It's a performative.

这就是述为句。

Performatives are sentences

述为句是

that are meant to inspire actions.

为了激发行动的句子。

Rather than conveying a message,

与其说是传达信息，

it acts upon the world,

倒不如说它作用于世界，

it does something.

因为它”做“事情。

In this case, the performative of "Recycle"

在此情况下，这述为性的"回收"标志

is requesting people to put their trash

正在请求人把他们的垃圾

into the proper receptacle.

放到适当的容器中。

Words not only bring about actions,

词不只带来的行动，

sometimes words themselves are actions.

有时说话本身就是行动。

This is what is known as speech acts.

这就是所谓的”言语行为“。

These actions include, but are not limited to,

这些行动包括，但不限于，

ordering,

订购，

promising,

发誓，

apologizing,

道歉，

warning,

警告，

sentencing,

判刑，

christening,

洗礼仪式，

and even marrying.

甚至结婚。

Take a look at the wedding near the gazebo.

看看凉亭附近正在举行的婚礼，

The couple says the words, "I do."

这对夫妇说，"我愿意"。

The speech act here are the words, "I do."

在这里言语行为就是，"我愿意"。

These words cause them to marry one another.

这些话使他们与彼此共结连理。

"I do" has acted upon them

"我愿意"此时在他们身上已采取行动

and profoundly changed their world.

并且深刻地改变了他们的世界。

However, performatives depend

然而，述为句取决于

on context and reception.

语句的上下文和接收效果。

These are known as felicity conditions.

这些被称为恰当条件。

Imagine if the mayor showed up to the wedding

想象一下，如果市长出现在一个婚礼现场

and said, "By the power vested in me

并说，"由法律赋予我的权力，

as mayor of the city,

作为城市的市长

I name this gazebo 'The Mayor's Pizza Palace.'"

我命名此凉亭为”市长披萨宫'"。

His words would be a speech act

他的话就是言语行为

by which he named the gazebo.

其中由他命名了此凉亭。

And because he's the mayor,

因为他是市长，

the gazebo would be known by its new name.

凉亭就会由它的新名称而闻名。

But if someone who isn't the mayor,

但如果一个人不是市长，

just a normal passerby,

只是一个普通的路人

decides to name the gazebo after her favorite cat,

决定要用她最喜欢的猫的名字来命名凉亭

the chances are the name would not change.

大多数情况下凉亭的名称是不会变的。

Felicity conditions are the rules

恰当条件就是在特定规则下

under which the performative can be enacted.

某些行为可被实行。

These are fairly logical.

这些都是很有逻辑的。

The performative should have proper authority,

述为句应有适当的权力，

it should be understood,

应该被理解，

it should be clear,

应该是清楚的，

and it should be able to be executed.

而且它应该能够被执行。

If the performative doesn't meet these conditions,

如果述为句不满足这些条件，

then it doesn't have the power

它就没有权力

to denote action.

去激发行动。

But just because a performative meets its conditions

但只是因为表演符合这些条件，

and is clearly stated,

而且是明确地指示，

doesn't mean that it's implicitly followed.

这并不意味着它会被无条件遵守。

Back at the pool,

再说这泳池的例子，

a rowdy group of teenagers races to the high dive.

一组吵闹的青少年跑去高的跳水板。

"No running" does not seem

"没有运行"似乎

to have power over them,

无法控制他们的行为，

and they'll have to face the consequences

和他们所要面对的

of breaking this performative.

违反此述为句的后果。

They may even have to force out

他们甚至可能还要强迫着

some performatives of their own,

说一些自己的述为句，

such as apologizing to the life guard

例如向救生员道歉，

and promising to never run again.

并承诺不再在泳池边奔跑。

Maybe the life guard will respond

也许救生员会通过

with another performative,

另一个述为句作出回应，

sentencing them to be banished from the pool

命令他们被离开泳池

for the rest of the day.

一整天。

After all, these teenagers must learn

毕竟，这些青少年必须学会

to respect the power of words.

尊重词语的力量。