On the formation of linguistic constructivism from Austin to Searle
Abstract
The article examines the evolution of speech act theory, one of the key ideas of ordinary language philosophy in the twentieth century. The research problem lies in the indeterminacy of the methodological relationship between the concepts of John Austin and John Searle: the question remains open whether Searle’s theory represents a development, a critique, or an independent construction. The aim of the study is to identify the specific nature of the relationship between the two thinkers at the levels of method and content. The methodological framework is based on a comparative analysis of primary sources (Austin’s Harvard lectures of the 1950s and Searle’s "Speech Acts", 1969) combined with elements of conceptual reconstruction. The empirical material includes the classifications of illocutionary acts proposed by both authors, the conceptual apparatus of speech act theory, and its later modifications (indirect speech acts, the concepts of intentionality, Network and Background). The scientific results of the article substantiate the fact that Searle neither explicitly criticizes Austin nor constructs an alternative theory; rather, he engages in "loyal systematization", transforming the teacher’s empirical classifications into a deductive framework. The novelty of the approach lies in the metaphorical conceptualization of this relationship as a shift in semiotic regimes: from impressionistic observation to constructivism (Bauhaus). The conclusion states that Searle’s subsequent turn from the philosophy of language to the philosophy of mind is explained by the exhaustion of systematization itself, rather than by a critical break with his teacher.