Philosophical Background: Language as Action

Before the 20th century, language was traditionally seen as a tool for describing facts—meaning
that sentences were judged only by their truth or falsity.
However, this view changed with the work of J.L. Austin, a British philosopher of language, who
introduced a revolutionary idea:
“Language doesn’t only describe the world—it also performs actions.”

This idea gave rise to what is now known as Speech Act Theory, a branch of pragmatics (the
study of language in context).

Definition:
Felicity conditions are the set of contextual, social, and psychological prerequisites that must
be satisfied for a speech act to be successful, appropriate, and meaningful within a given
communicative situation.

The term was introduced by J.L. Austin in his speech act theory and further systematized by
John Searle, who identified four main types of felicity conditions—propositional content,
preparatory, sincerity, and essential—each specifying a distinct requirement for the
effectiveness of an illocutionary act (such as promising, apologizing, or requesting). These
conditions determine whether an utterance performs an act as intended, rather than merely
states a fact.

In pragmatic terms, felicity conditions are crucial for distinguishing between grammatically
correct sentences and communicatively successful utterances. They ensure that speech acts are
not only linguistically well-formed but also contextually valid and socially accepted.

Linguistic Significance
➢ The introduction of felicity conditions had a profound impact on:
➢ Pragmatics: Emphasizing context and speaker intention.
➢ Philosophy of language: Shifting focus from "truth" to "function"
➢ Discourse analysis: Evaluating real-life communication (e.g., politics, law, teaching).
➢ Artificial intelligence: Programming machines to recognize valid speech acts.
Importance in Linguistics and Pragmatics
Felicity conditions are central to:

➢ Speech Act Theory

➢ Pragmatics (meaning in context)
➢ Politeness theory and discourse analysis
➢ Language teaching and translation
➢ AI and computational linguistics (chatbots, assistants)
 Central Role in Pragmatics
➢ Felicity conditions are fundamental in pragmatics, the branch of linguistics concerned
with contextual meaning.
➢ They explain how meaning depends not just on words, but on speaker intentions, social
context, and shared understanding.
➢ They shift the focus from “What does this sentence mean?” to “What is this speaker
doing with this sentence in this situation?”
J.L. Austin’s Contribution (1911–1960)

Austin’s landmark work “How to Do Things with Words” (1955 lectures, published
posthumously in 1962) laid the foundation of felicity conditions.

Austin challenged the traditional view that language only describes facts and instead proposed
that: "To say something is to do something."

He distinguished between:
I. Constative utterances: Statements that can be true or false.

e.g., “The sky is blue.”

II. Performative utterances: Utterances that perform an action when spoken

e.g., “I apologize,” “I promise,” “I name this ship…”

Austin argued that performatives must meet certain conditions to succeed. He called these
felicity conditions from the word felicitas, meaning success or happiness in Latin.
A speech act is felicitous if the context and speaker roles are appropriate.
A speech act is infelicitous when the speaker is not sincere, the act is performed in the wrong
context, and the speaker lacks the authority to perform the act.
Example:
“I now pronounce you husband and wife.”
Only works if said by a licensed officiant in a valid context (e.g., at a wedding).

It fails (is infelicitous) if said by a random person on the street.

John Searle’s Expansion (1969)

John R. Searle, an American philosopher of language, played a major role in formalizing and
systematizing the concept of Felicity Conditions in the field of pragmatics and Speech Act
Theory.
Building on the foundational work of J.L. Austin, who introduced the idea of speech acts and
felicity conditions in How to Do Things with Words (1962), Searle extended and refined the
theory in a more structured and logical way.
Searle’s Key Contribution

Searle’s most significant contribution was his development of a systematic classification of

felicity conditions in his influential work: Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language
(1969), Searle provided a clear framework to evaluate the success or failure of different types of
illocutionary acts (speech acts performed with intent, such as requests, promises, or apologies).

He broke down felicity conditions into four types:

1.Propositional Content Condition – the act must refer to a suitable situation.

2. Preparatory Condition – contextual and social conditions must be appropriate.

3. Sincerity Condition – the speaker must genuinely intend the act.

4. Essential Condition – the speaker must intend that their utterance counts as the act.
Example:

“I apologize for being late.”

Felicitous if:

➢ The speaker was truly late (propositional)

➢ The speaker had a reason to apologize (preparatory)
➢ The speaker regrets being late (sincerity)
➢ The utterance counts as an apology (essential)
Types of Felicity Conditions (According to Searle)

Searle classified felicity conditions into four main types:

1. Propositional Content:

The propositional content condition states that the utterance must express a proposition that fits
the nature and purpose of the speech act being performed.

In other words, what is being said (the proposition) must be the kind of thing that can
appropriately function within that specific speech act category (e.g., promise, request, apology,
etc.).
Purpose:

To ensure that the subject matter or proposition matches the function of the speech act (e.g.,
promises must refer to future actions)
Examples by Speech Act Type:
Promise A future action the speaker intends to do.

Request A future action the hearer can perform.

Apology A past wrong action done by the speaker.

Warning A future event or danger that could harm the hearer.

Declaration A change in status or condition resulting from the utterance.

Example:
Promise:

“I promise to help you with your homework tomorrow.”

→ The content involves a future action, which is appropriate for a promise.

Incorrect: “I promise I was at home yesterday.”

→ This refers to a past action, which does not match the nature of a promise.

→ Hence, it is infelicitous.
2. Preparatory Conditions:

Preparatory conditions refer to the background assumptions that must be true regarding the
speaker, the hearer, and the situation in order for a speech act to be appropriate and effective.

Core Elements of Preparatory Conditions.

1. or Right to perform the speech act.

2. Speaker’s Belief about the hearer’s ability or readiness

3. Hearer’s Ability to perform the act (if required)
4. Appropriateness of the situation (e.g., not already fulfilled or unnecessary) 1. Request.

Purpose:
To make sure that the circumstances allow the speech act to be meaningful and socially
acceptable.
Example:

Correct: A teacher tells a student: “You must submit your assignment tomorrow.”
→ The teacher has the authority and the request is feasible.

Incorrect: A student says the same to a teacher.

→ The student lacks authority, making it infelicitous.
3. Sincerity Conditions

A sincerity condition is fulfilled when the speaker honestly means what they say, according to
the kind of speech act being performed.

Sincerity conditions refer to the requirement that the speaker genuinely holds the belief,
attitude, or intention appropriate to the speech act being performed.

A speech act is considered infelicitous (unsuccessful) if the speaker does not truly mean what
they say, even if the words and grammar are correct.

Purpose:
To ensure the speech act is truthful and emotionally genuine, not fake or sarcastic.

Example:
Promise: The speaker intends to carry out the action.

Request The speaker wants the hearer to do the action.

Apology The speaker feels regret or remorse.

Thanks The speaker feels gratitude.

Congratulation The speaker feels pleased or happy for the hearer.

Assertion The speaker believes the statement is true.

Example of Sincerity Condition (Valid and Invalid)

Promise
Valid (Sincere):
“I promise to call you tonight.” → Speaker genuinely intends to call.

Invalid (Insincere):
“I promise to call you tonight.” → Speaker says this to end a conversation but has no intention to
call.
4. Essentials Conditions:

The essential condition is the felicity condition that defines what makes an utterance a particular
kind of speech act. It specifies that by uttering certain words, the speaker is committing to
performing an act and recognizing the act as having a specific force (such as promising,
ordering, requesting, etc.).
Examples of Essential Condition (Valid and Invalid)
Purpose:

To make sure the speaker and hearer understand the function of the utterance as a speech act, not
just a statement.

Example:
Correct:

Promise
Valid (Essential Condition Met):

“I hereby promise to return the book tomorrow.”

→ The speaker intends this as a promise.

Invalid (Essential Condition Not Met):

Incorrect: Saying “I promise” as a joke or without intending to fulfill it.

→ The act is not seriously meant, so it is infelicitous.

Conclusion

The concept of felicity conditions originates from the shift in 20th-century philosophy and
linguistics—led by J.L. Austin, and later expanded by John Searle—to understand language not
just as a way of stating facts, but as a way of doing things.
It forms the theoretical backbone of Speech Act Theory and has influenced many modern fields
including: Linguistics, Communication studies, Philosophy, Computer science and Language
teaching.