Austin's illocutionary acts are conventionally constituted, not reducible to layered Gricean intentions, so the reflexive structure Grice posits is neither necessary nor sufficient for meaning.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Austin, J.L.(as the originator of illocutionary act theory): A 20th-century British philosopher who studied language and argued that saying something can actually *do* things in the world—like when you say 'I promise' you're not just describing a promise, you're making one.
Conventionally constituted(as describing how illocutionary acts work): Something that exists or has meaning only because society has agreed to make it that way, like how a handshake means respect because we collectively decided it does.
Grice, Paul(as proposing an alternative theory of meaning): A 20th-century philosopher who argued that meaning comes from a speaker's *intentions*—specifically, the complex layers of what you intend to communicate and what you intend the listener to recognize about those intentions.
Gricean intentions(in philosophy of language and meaning): A theory by philosopher Paul Grice about how meaning works: the idea that what someone means to communicate depends on what they intend their audience to understand, rather than just the words themselves.

Based on where you are in your exploration