In his investigation of direct and indirect speech acts. A. differs from Searle's position in the following way. He postulates for indirect speech acts two types of derivation. The first type is the result of an obligation, marked in the language, to apply a law of discourse. It is deductible partly from the linguistic structure of the utterance. The second type of derivation is allusive, and the speaker can always refuse to acknowledge the conveyed effect since nothing in the structure of the utterance marks its identification.