Editing Performative utterance (section)

==Austin's definition==
In order to define performatives, Austin refers to those sentences which conform to the old prejudice in that they ''are'' used to describe or [[wikt:constate|constate]] something, and which thus ''are'' true or false; and he calls such sentences "constatives". In contrast to them, Austin defines "performatives" as follows:

*Performative utterances are not [[Truth|true or false]], that is, not [[Logical value|truth-evaluable]]; instead when something is wrong with them then they are "unhappy", while if nothing is wrong they are "happy". 
*The uttering of a performative is, or is part of, the doing of a certain kind of action (Austin later deals with them under the name [[illocutionary act]]s), the performance of which, again, would not normally be described as simply "saying" or "describing" something (cf. Austin 1962, 5).

The initial examples of ''performative sentences'' Austin gives are these:
* "I do (''[[sc.]]'' take this woman to be my lawful wedded wife)" – as uttered in the course of a marriage ceremony.
* "I name this ship the ''Queen Elizabeth''"
* "I give and bequeath my watch to my brother" – as occurring in a will
* "I bet you sixpence it will rain tomorrow" (Austin 1962, 5)

As Austin later notices himself, these examples belong (more or less strikingly) to what Austin calls, [[explicit performatives|''explicit'' performatives]]; to utter an "explicit" performative sentence is to make explicit what act one is performing. However, there are also "implicit", "primitive", or [[inexplicit performatives|"inexplicit" performatives]]. When, for instance, one uses the word "Go!" in order to command someone to leave the room then this utterance is part of the performance of a command; and the sentence, according to Austin, is neither true nor false; hence the sentence is a performative; – still, it is ''not'' an ''explicit'' performative, for it does not make explicit that the act the speaker is performing is a command.

As Austin observes, the acts purported to be performed by performative utterances may be socially contested. For instance, [[Divorce in Islam|"I divorce you", said three times by a man to his wife]], may be accepted to constitute a divorce by some, but not by others.

Every performative utterance has its own procedure and risks of failure that Austin calls 'infelicities'.<ref name="Austin 1962"/>{{rp| 14}} He sees a sharp distinction between the individual text and the 'total speech act situation' surrounding it. According to Austin, in order to successfully perform an illocutionary act, certain conditions have to be met (e.g. a person who pronounces a marriage must be authorized to do so).<ref name="Austin 1962"/>{{rp|8}} Besides the context, the performative utterance itself is unambiguous as well. The words of an illocutionary act have to be expressed in earnest; if not, Austin discards them as a parasitic use of language.