2. Analytical Framework
2.3 Speech Acts
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
principles adhered to by ROC and PRC leaders since the 1950s. Since then this rule has become the prime source of many of “Taiwan's Dilemmas” as almost each of the dozen contributions in FRIEDMAN (2006) has pointed out. Similarly, WU (2005a) described this “hegemonic One China world order” as an “institution” that has gradually boosted Beijing's profile at the expense of Taiwan's diplomatic space and standing in the international arena. Although Wu used a historical and sociological version of a new institutionalist framework, his definition of “institution” offers many parallels to how rule-based constructivism defines rules:
[Institution can be defined as] a human-constructed arrangement, formally or informally organized, which consists of cultural-cognitive, normative, and regulative elements that serve to stabilize interactions or provide meanings to human actions.” (WU 2005a: 320)
He also stressed the importance of mutual constitution of agents and institutional structures for the development of these institutions. In the case of the “one China institution” this was done through the incorporation of the concept into diplomatic texts between the PRC and other countries, especially since the 1970s, as well as in various policy realms. Finally, he argued that this institution is constantly being reconstructed and reproduced by the PRC as it benefits from it the most.
In the later chapters it will be analyzed how, as a rule, “one China” gradually began to and continues to favor the People's Republic over the Republic of China (on Taiwan) in the international arena. After having reached this step it seems natural for agents in Beijing to use all available resources at their disposal to maintain the predominance of their interpretation of “one China,” while different agents in Taipei either try to emphasize their own interpretation or try to break the rule altogether.
2.3 Speech Acts
Rules are sustained by speech acts. According to the theory of speech acts, utterances not only represent deeds but can in fact perform them. Under the premise that people use language in order to achieve certain goals, speech acts establish a connection between a speaker's utterances and his or her intentions. Moreover, being the mechanism behind rules, speech acts can be understood as an “act of speaking in a form that gets someone else to act” (ONUF 1998: 66). Certain verbs like claim, promise, warn etc. are not merely descriptions of actions (like walk, leave, stand etc.) but at the same time performances of these actions. However, clearly identifiable
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
verbs are not a prerequisite for speech acts. Instead, speech acts may deploy their effect just through the context in which they are uttered (KRATOCHWIL 1989: 29). When there are rules (or norms) underlying these kinds of actions, speech acts have a normative component or are situated within a practice in which they “'count' as something” (KRATOCHWIL 1989: 7). Or in the words of ONUF (2001: 77): speaking is an
“activity with normative consequences.” Simply put, in equalizing speech with deeds, the theory of speech acts elevates the act of speaking to the most important way in which human beings construct the world (ONUF 1998: 59).
The concept of speech acts as understood here dates back to the linguistic philosophical treatments of the term by J. L. Austin and John Searle. AUSTIN (1962) originally distinguished between three levels of speech acts: locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary acts. While the locutionary act refers to the (phonetic) performance of an utterance and the ostensible meaning of what is said, illocutionary acts refer to the actual intention behind the utterance. Perlocutionary acts go yet one step further in that they concern the effect that what was said had on others, for example, the listener's reaction to threats or promises. SEARLE (1969) equated most speech acts with illocutionary acts that are called rule-governed, and differentiated between five different types: assertives, directives, commissives, expressives and declarations. In his adaptation of the theory into the realm of social science theory, and in particular the field of International Relations, ONUF (1989: 89-90) regarded expressives and declarations as being unable to produce rules and therefore negligible for IR analysis, which leaves us with three classifications of speech acts that correspond to the three types of rules mentioned above: assertives, directives and commissives. All of them let us draw inferences about a speaker's intentions and they are often (but not necessarily) performed by using certain representative verbs. In the following paragraphs I will give a short description for each of the three types of speech acts followed by practical examples taken out of frequent Cross-Strait relationship discourses before discussing them in more detail in the following chapters.
Firstly, assertive speech acts are statements about beliefs that express what, in the eyes of the agents, is a real fact or what they wish to portray as such. By giving this kind of information assertive speech acts are coupled to the speaker's expectation
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
that the hearer accepts this belief. Some of the typical verbs linked to assertives are
“state,” “affirm,” “insist” etc. Assertive speech acts create instruction-rules or establish principles. Common examples from the realm of Cross-Strait relations include the often repeated assertion by agents from Taiwan's government that “[t]he Republic of China is a sovereign country,”16 or the statement often heard from Beijing's agents that “Taiwan is an inalienable part of China.”17
Secondly, directive speech acts tell us what we should do and inform us about the consequences if we fail to act accordingly. Thereby, the speaker reveals his intentions by letting the hearer know what kind of act he would like to have performed. Typical representative verbs include “ask,” “demand,” “permit,” “caution”
etc. The rules caused by directive speech acts are called directive-rules. For example, before the long and controversially discussed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with China was finally implemented in June 2010, Mainland Affairs Council Minister Lai Shin-yuan (賴幸媛) warned in an interview with Taiwan Today that “[i]f Taiwan does not sign the ECFA, the country risks being marginalized and losing competitiveness overseas.”18 Similar claims were repeatedly made before and after, sometimes more indirectly and more implicitly than in the given example but always with the same illocutionary force. For example, during a meeting with US scholars President Ma stated that “the ECFA will not only assist in normalizing economic relations between the two sides, but will also help Taiwan avoid being marginalized in the region.”19 Directives often warn of legal sanctions in case of non-compliance. Beijing's Anti-Secession Law passed in March 2005 is a prime example.
Article 8 states:
In the event that the “Taiwan independence” secessionist forces should act under any name or by any means to cause the fact of Taiwan's secession from China, […] the state shall employ non-peaceful means and other necessary measures to protect China's sovereignty and territorial integrity.20
16 PO (19 May 2011): “President Ma holds press conference to mark third anniversary of his inauguration,” via: http://english.president.gov.tw/Default.aspx?tabid=491&itemid=24428&rmid=
2355 (accessed: 2011-07-19).
17 TAO (23 February 2000): “The One-China Principle and the Taiwan Issue,” via:
http://www.gwytb.gov.cn/en/Special/WhitePapers/201103/t20110316_1789217.htm (accessed:
2011-10-23).
18 Taiwan Today (12 March 2010): “ECFA talk with MAC Minister Lai Shin-yuan,” via:
http://www.taiwantoday.tw/ct.asp?xItem=96009&ctNode=427 (accessed: 2011-07-19).
19 Quoted after PO (14 April 2009): “President Ma meets American scholars Participating in International Conference on 30 Years of TRA,” http://english.president.gov.tw/Default.aspx?
tabid=491&itemid=19388&rmid=2355 (accessed: 2011-07-19).
20 NPC (14 March 2005): “Anti-Secession Law,” via:
http://www.npc.gov.cn/englishnpc/Law/2007-‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Lastly, commissive speech acts occur when agents make promises that hearers accept.
“Pledge,” “promise,” “vow,” “intend” are some of the typical verbs associated with this type of speech act. It is important to note that the normativity of commitments increases significantly when the according statement is made publicly instead of, for example, only to oneself (cf. ONUF 1989: 88). Commitments which are accepted by others serve as rules (=commitment-rules) for those who are making such commitments. One more recent example from the field of Cross-Strait relations would be President Ma's promise to “follow the letter and the spirit of the Constitution”21 or his “three noes” pledge, which refers to his promises of no negotiations for unification, no declaration of formal independence and no use of force in order to keep the “status quo” over the Taiwan Strait.
The repetition of speech acts is important because it has the effect of making everyone involved think that the repetition itself becomes significant. As people start to believe that the words themselves and not the speakers who utter them, are responsible for the way things are, conventions are created that are already similar to rules. Just like rules, conventions, when given in the form of a speech act, generalize the relation between speaker and hearer. Put differently, rules given in the form of speech acts make hearers into agents to whom these rules apply (ONUF 1998: 66-67).
Although every successful speech act possesses some degree of normativity, their repetition over time may furthermore increase their normativity and with them that of the respective rules and conventions that they help to sustain:
When any such rules becomes a convention, constitution of the rule by speech acts accepting its status as a rule begins to supplant its constitution by the repetition of speech acts with complementary propositional content. Then the rule is normatively stronger, its regulative character supporting its independent constitution, and conversely. The change in condition is signified by a change in nomenclature: constitution becomes institution.” (ONUF 1989: 86)
Speech acts are social performances because they have social consequences by affecting others and require them to respond on their own in one way or another. On the other hand, speech acts, by constituting the practices that make material conditions of the human experience meaningful, and charging them with normativity lead to the creation of rules that “fix preferences and expectations and shape the future against the past” (ONUF 1989: 183).
12/13/content_1384099.htm (accessed: 2011-07-19).
21 PO (20 May 2008): “Inaugural Address: Taiwan's Renaissance,” via: http://english.president.gov.tw/
Portals/4/FeaturesSection/Other-feature-articles/20080520_PRESIDENT_INAUGURAL/
e_speech.html (accessed: 2011-07-20).
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
In order to analyze speech acts related to Cross-Strait relations, I will take a look at sources that provide insights into how norms and rules influence behavior, such as written official documents (white papers, laws etc.), texts of speeches given on meaningful occasions by agents, documents by key individuals, press releases, interviews etc. Therefore, in the following chapters, source or content analysis of speech acts in these documents will be conducted. Apart from these written accounts, there is also a non-linguistic component, such as the participation of key party or government leaders in certain festivals or other practices that these agents observe in order to convey their interests and meanings. Using secondary literature to supplement these sources will help to put them into the appropriate context. I will now turn to discuss some features of agents and how these “relevant participants” can be determined in the Cross-Strait relationship.