| Speech Act Theory and a new revolution in linguistics | | | | express how he saw the world and not create |
| are opening unexplored ground in how we understand | | | | something new. Contrast that with the United States |
| human language. Some younger biblical scholars like | | | | Constitution, which is what Speech Act Theory calls a |
| Dr. Lace Williams-Tinajero, are already stating to use | | | | declarative. The framers of the constitution wanted to |
| these insights and they are coming to grips with what it | | | | create a new entity, the United States Government. |
| means for theology. For centuries, the central question | | | | The difference becomes apparent in that the Gospel |
| of biblical interpretation or any literary interpretation has | | | | writer was not out to create or help create a new |
| been what do the words mean. Any statement or | | | | religion, but express how the world how changed for |
| writing came under the microscope of what does it | | | | him. The framers knew they were creating something |
| mean and is it true. Scholars, believers, and skeptics | | | | new and wanted to shape it. |
| based their interpretations on what did the writers | | | | Speech Act Theory went on to look at they way |
| meant by their words. They argued endlessly like boys | | | | speaker use language shapes its function and look at |
| at the playground about whose interpretation was | | | | the different uses for language. Speech Act Theory |
| bigger and better. It would grind dialog to halt into the | | | | divided the actions of words in several categories and |
| nan, nan, na nan na chant of right and wrong. We are | | | | saw a limited number of actions a speaker or writer |
| at the cusp of a new revolution of understanding with | | | | could do with words, such as promise, declare, |
| Speech Act Theory and the other linguistics | | | | express and a few others. Austin’s famous |
| methodologies shedding new light on human language. | | | | example of saying, “I do” in the right setting |
| The implications of this new revolution will cause an | | | | changes our status from unmarried to married. “Do |
| earthquake of understanding of interpretation for years | | | | you take this woman to be your wedded wife?” |
| to come. | | | | “I do.” In other circumstances, we can say, “I |
| Speech Act Theory has its foundation in a series of | | | | do” and nothing much changes in world. “Do you |
| lectures by J L Austin at the William James lecture | | | | like Chocolate?” “I do.” In both cases, the |
| series given at Harvard in 1955, which later was | | | | words mean the same thing, but the action of the |
| gathered in a book, How to Do Things Words. His | | | | speaker is different. One declares an ontological |
| central question was what do speaker do with | | | | change from a bachelor to a husband. The second |
| language. By switching the question of language from | | | | express a preference for chocolate. Their were |
| meaning to action, he was able to open a new ways | | | | several theorists took up Austin’s insights and |
| of seeing the spoken and the written words. That a | | | | further developed Speech Act Theory including Paul |
| speaker and writer have an intention when they use | | | | Recour, John Searle, and many others. Speech Act |
| words, may seem self evident, but like any new | | | | Theory, as to be expected, was first taken up by the |
| powerful insight, it has the power to shake the | | | | law profession. What people are doing and intending to |
| foundation of Biblical Interpretation for years to come. | | | | do with their language is important in a courtroom, legal |
| For biblical understanding, we can see the power by | | | | documents and legal disputes. How we understand the |
| asking what the writer was doing with his words | | | | written work that is the Bible has also fall under this |
| rather than what his words mean. Take the beginning | | | | new understanding. It will have power to shape how to |
| of the Gospel of John; the hymn that begins the | | | | understand what the writers are trying to do with their |
| Gospel is what Speech Act Theory calls an | | | | words and how we understand theology in the coming |
| expressive. The writer sets the tone by expressing his | | | | years. |
| beliefs about the nature of the world. John wanted to | | | | |