1998
DOI: 10.1017/s1352325200000902
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Free Speech and Illocution

Abstract: What one ought to mean by “speech,” in the context of discussions of free speech, is whatever it is that a correct justification of the right to free speech justifies one in protecting. What one ought to mean, it may be argued, includes illocution, in the sense of J.L. Austin. Some feminist writers, accepting that free speech includes free illocution, have been led to take the notion of silencing seriously in discussions of free speech.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
95
0
3

Year Published

2005
2005
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 202 publications
(98 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
95
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…I will illustrate how "gendered language" silences professional women. In their wellknown paper, Hornsby and Langton (1998) develop an account of silencing:…”
Section: Silencingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…I will illustrate how "gendered language" silences professional women. In their wellknown paper, Hornsby and Langton (1998) develop an account of silencing:…”
Section: Silencingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Chapter 4, Jenny's identity as a science teacher, with the structural warrant this provides her to say some false things in service of her students' learning needs, is partly what warrants her asserting something she knows to be false. And in Chapter 10, Nancy's identity as 1 Based on a reading of Austin (1962), Langton (1993) and Hornsby and Langton (1998) view it as a failure of hearer uptake , but Kukla (2012) views this as a misdiagnosis. Wyatt (manuscript) argues that Langton and others base their argument on a misreading of Austin's view of uptake.…”
Section: Something Missingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed the debate on free speech, pornography and censorship is one of the most remarkable current applications of speech act theory (cf. Hornsby 1993, Hornsby & Langton 1998, Langton 1993, 2009, Bianchi 2008, Langton, Haslanger and Anderson 2012. Catharine MacKinnon's claim that pornography subordinates women (MacKinnon 1987) has been defended by Rae Langton and Jennifer Hornsby in terms of speech acts: works of pornography can be understood as illocutionary acts.…”
Section: Claudia Bianchimentioning
confidence: 99%