This paper addresses the following question: Can one and the same utterance token, in one unique speech situation, intentionally and conventionally perform a plurality of illocutionary acts? While some of the recent literature has considered such a possibility (Sbisà, in: Capone, Lo Piparo, Carapezza (eds) Perspectives on pragmatics and philosophy. Springer, Cham, pp 227–244, 2013; Johnson in Synthese 196(3):1151–1165, 2019), I build a case for it by drawing attention to common conversational complexities unrecognized in speech acts analysis. Traditional speech act theory treats communication as: (1) a dyadic exchange between a Speaker and a Hearer who (2) trade illocutionary acts endowed with one and only one primary force. I first challenge assumption (2) by discussing two contexts where plural illocutionary forces are performed in dyadic discussions: dilemmatic deliberations and strategic ambiguity. Further, I challenge assumption (1) by analyzing poly-adic discussions, where a speaker can target various participants with different illocutionary acts performed via the same utterance. Together, these analyses defend illocutionary pluralism as a significant but overlooked fact about communication. I conclude by showing how some phenomena recently analyzed in speech act theory—back-door speech acts (Langton, in: Fogal, Harris, Moss (eds) New work on speech acts. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 144–164, 2018) and dog-whistles (Saul, in: Fogal, Harris, Moss (eds) New work on speech acts. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 360–383, 2018)—implicitly presuppose illocutionary pluralism without recognizing it.

本文解决了以下问题：在一个独特的语音情况下，一个同一个发声标记是否可以有意地和按常规执行多种言外行为？尽管最近的一些文献已经考虑到了这种可能性（Sbisà，出自：Capone，Lo Piparo，Carapezza（eds），《实用主义和哲学观点》，Springer，Cham，第227–244页，2013年； Johnson in Synthese 196（3）： 1151年至1165年，2019年），我通过提请注意言语行为分析中无法识别的常见对话复杂性来为其建立一个案例。传统言语行为理论将交流视为：（1）演讲者与听众之间的二元交流（2）交易具有一种和仅一种主要力量的言外行为。首先，我通过讨论在二元讨论中执行多种言外之力的两种情况来挑战假设（2）：困境的审议和战略上的歧义。此外，我通过分析多元讨论来挑战假设（1），在该讨论中，演讲者可以针对具有不同发声行为的不同参与者，这些行为是通过相同的话语进行的。总之，这些分析捍卫了言语多元化，是关于交流的一个重要但却被忽视的事实。作为结束语，我将展示最近在言语行为理论中如何分析某些现象-后门言语行为（Langton，摘自：Fogal，Harris，Moss（eds））关于言语行为的新著作，牛津大学出版社，牛津，144-164页，2018年。 ）和狗哨声（Saul，选自：Fogal，Harris，Moss（eds），有关言语行为的新著作。牛津大学出版社，牛津，第360–383页，