1. In Austins lectures upon the performative utterance, he stated:
It is worthy of note that, as I am told, in the American law of evidence, a report of what he said is an utterance of our performative kind: because this is regarded as a report not so much of something
he said, as which it would be hear-say and not admissible as evidence, but rather as something he
did, an action of his. This coincides very well with our initial feelings about performatives.
Define Austin’s concept of the performative utterance.
What types of utterances that occur in the courtroom would be performative? Explain your choice
of courtroom utterance and how it fits Austins theory.
Using the Austins ideas of infelicities, (1.) describe a scenario in which a performative utterance is pronounced and then (2.) give specific (made-up) examples of each of Austins infelicities and how would each make the actions of the performative utterance go wrong.
Your situation plus the performative utterance involved:
A. An example of a misinvocation:
B. An example of a misexecution:
C. An example of an insincerity: