A question about generative anthropologie

I just saw this post. I don't see a problem here. Ostensives and imperatives are necessarily performative acts--Austin's example, "I now pronounce you man and wife," i.e., a speech act that doesn't describe the world but changes it, is essentially an ostensive, even if grammatically, it's a declarative. It names the new condition of the couple and thereby creates it. You could say GA radicalizes and completes speech act theory--even straightforward declaratives that just make a claim about reality are really performative, or perlocutionary, insofar as they defer some imperative and direct attention toward something.

---

I think it's perfectly consistent with speech act theory, and provides an anthropological basis for the distinction between performative (ostensives and imperatives) and constative (declaratives).

Gans has a chapter in *Originary Thinking* on speech act theory.