In this paper, I claim that even though the conventional account of illocution (Sbisà, in Lodz Pap Pragmat 5(1):33–52, 2009a; In: B Fraser, K Turner (eds) Language in life, and a life in language. Emerald, pp 351–357, 2009b) makes an attempt to theorize social relations in illocutions, the attempt is unsuccessful. Sbisà's conventional account fails to describe the ways in which a fair social agreement can be established. A fair social agreement is a key element for the idea of social relations in the conventional account of illocution. However, considering the role of gender and power relations embedded in social construction, it is difficult to accept the possibility of such an agreement. Since Sbisà fails to provide a probe into power relations, her attempt to establish the point of social relationships remains insufficient. The main argument here is that in the unjust social milieu, the kind of social agreement essential to illocution is difficult. Moreover, what may look like a social agreement might be a result of the systemic oppression done to one particular group. In what follows, I claim that the problem of theorizing the social relation in illocutions remains unresolved.

在这篇论文中，我声称，即使对 illocution 的传统描述 (Sbisà, in Lodz Pap Pragmat 5(1):33–52, 2009a; In: B Fraser, K Turner (eds) Language in life, and a life in语言。Emerald, pp 351–357, 2009b) 尝试将语用中的社会关系理论化，但尝试未成功。Sbisà 的传统描述未能描述建立公平社会协议的方式。公平的社会协议是传统的 illocution 中社会关系观念的一个关键要素。然而，考虑到性别和权力关系在社会建构中的作用，很难接受这样一种协议的可能性。由于 Sbisà 未能提供对权力关系的探讨，她试图建立社会关系点的努力仍然不足。这里的主要论点是，在不公正的社会环境中，那种对言谈必不可少的社会协议是困难的。此外，看起来像社会协议的可能是对某个特定群体进行系统性压迫的结果。在接下来的内容中，我声称在语录中对社会关系进行理论化的问题仍未解决。