An Exploration of Conditional Clause Exegesis 387 illocutionary act, but this will rarely be an end in itself. Conditional statements lend themselves to use in indirect illocutionary acts because, expressing things with a degree of uncertainty, they intrinsically necessitate the drawing of inferences by the hearers. 2. Reading Galatians 1,6-9 in the light of Speech Act Theory The illocutionary force of the statements made in Gal 1,8-9 cannot be considered in isolation since they are semantically linked to each other and to what precedes. In v. 6 Paul expresses his astonishment at the turning of the Galatians, from the one who called them, to a different gospel. This directly asserts something about Paul, but may also function indirectly as rebuke or lament. Thuren (128) actually suggests that using qaumavzw in this way is a standard rhetorical device which says little about Paul’s emotional state, but just indicates “the author’s unhappiness vis-à-vis the addressee’s behaviour and attitudes”(129). Possible felicity conditions for rebuke and lament, based on Young’s work (130), are shown (with those for other relevant Speech Acts) in Table 5. ILLOCUTIONARY PROPOSITIONAL PREPARATORY SINCERITY ESSENTIAL ACT CONTENT CONDITION CONDITION CONDITION Rebuke (131) Past act of hearer Speaker does not Speaker Speaker intends believe act was in angered by the utterance as speaker or hearer’s act reprimand best interest Lament (132) Past event Speaker does not Speaker Speaker counts believe event was grieved utterance as in speaker or because of expressing sorrow hearer’s best event interest Counts as Assert / Argue (133) Any proposition Speaker has Speaker undertaking to the evidence for truth believes effect that of proposition proposition proposition Not obvious to speaker that hearer represents the actual knows state of affairs For ‘Argue’: Counts as attempt to convince hearer of truth of proposition (128) L. THUREN, “Was Paul Angry? Derhetorizing Galatians”, The Rhetorical Interpretation of Scripture (ed. S.E. PORTER – D.C .STAMPS) (Sheffield 1999) 307. (129) See also LONGENECKER, Galatians, 11. (130) YOUNG, “Classification”, 40-42. (131) YOUNG, “Classification”, 40-41. (132) YOUNG, “Classification”, 41-42. (133) SEARLE, Speech Acts, 66.