See, that kind of comments don't contribute anything to the conversation.
All you're doing is portraying yourself as a victim and hijacking the issue back into the bullshit "are we too pc" debate again, which quite frankly most people are already sick of.
In Sweden:
Swedish citizens really are the victims and their society has become too PC. It's not like here in the US.
If you hang a Swedish flag outside of your house you are automatically deemed a racist by your community. ANY semblance of pro-sweden is viewed as unfair by the immigrant community because they aren't swedish, because they aren't included. They've create a culture of everyone is a victim, citizens and immigrants.
It's really a fucked up situation. A situation I hope never comes to the US.
Can people rename this to something that makes sense? Seeing a post on the front page saying "A brief update" is so vague. An update by whom? About what? There's literally not enough information to gauge whether or not I should pursue this further without clicking on it.
That is one region of the world that I do not know much about. Would you have any links about the history that led to the current state of the affairs that you've described?
I find taxonomy useful, but I think Derrida is right that Searle was more preoccupied making SAT (and language in general) into a mathematical formula than the "art" of language. I think the only really crucial elements are:
- locutions
- illocution (act/force and [or vs] intent)
- perlocution (act/force and [or vs] intent)
I find very little use teaching or using the 5 categories of Searle for interpretation of verbal or written speech acts.
I find studying a locution from illocutionary intent or perlocutionary intent more useful than Assertive, Directive, etc.
Hope it made sense and it was a useful answer! I still find it a fascinating field that is under-utilized because people try to make it into a programming language (a la Searle) instead of a way to understand semantics and semantic intent.
Thank you for your insights, this has been useful! (I was actually hoping to ask this to a linguist for some time now, so I was happy when I saw your message!)
You surmised my current situation well, I've been focusing a lot on the 5 categories and little on the locutions. I shall remedy that :)
One thing in your answer that I'm a bit fuzzy on is what you meant by the confusing thing in the brackets (act/force and [or vs] intent)?
"Homelessness isn't a problem, you just need some seeds. Ergo if the homeless are starving they must be too lazy or maybe they spend all their money on drugs so they can't even afford a few seeds!"
Try being homeless, then go back and tell us how "easy" it is.
(Speaking as someone who has been homeless before).
> I'm Dutch, and bluntly calling out flaws in each other's work is not considered all that rude over here; it's almost the opposite: not calling someone out on their flaws implies we either consider them a lost cause or not worth the hassle of educating.
Woah, I do that too! Maybe I should move to Netherlands.
All you're doing is portraying yourself as a victim and hijacking the issue back into the bullshit "are we too pc" debate again, which quite frankly most people are already sick of.