Suppose that we confront ‘France is hexagonal’ with the facts, in this case, I suppose, with France, is it true or false? Well, if you like, up to a point; of course I can see what you mean by saying that it is true for certain intents and purposes. It is good enough for a top-ranking general, perhaps, but not for a geographer. ‘Naturally it is pretty rough’, we should say, ‘and pretty good as a pretty rough statement’. But then someone says: ‘But is it true or is it false?’ I don’t mind whether it is rough or not; of course it’s rough, but it has to be true or false – it’s a statement, isn’t it? (p. 142)
|Types of act||Examples*|
|1.||Verdictives||acquit, convict, rule, place, grade, diagnose, analyse, find, reckon, rate etc.|
|2.||Exercitives||appoint, degrade, demote, dismiss, name, order, command, direct, grant, nominate, choose, claim, beg, announce, recommend, repeal, veto, etc.|
|3.||Commissives||promise, undertake, give my word, contract, plan, purpose, etc.|
|4.||Behavitives||apologize, thank, deplore, commiserate, criticize, overlook, welcome, bid, bless, curse, defy, dare, etc.|
|5.||Expositives||affirm, deny, state, describe, class, identify, conjecture, report, inform, appraise, tell, recognize etc.|
This, one can sense, is entirely tentative. Almost the same is left for Austin to say about the outcome of all the lectures: “I have been doing to things which I do not altogether like doing. These are: (1) producing a programme, that is, saying what ought to be done rather than doing something, (2) lecturing”. I guess the programme mentioned in (1) is our programme here under the heading of “Pragmatics”.
 Some other more recent attempts proposed by Searle can be seen here.