Communication is one of the principal criteria for describing activity that is human. The nature and function of language as Man's chief vehicle of communication occupies a focal position in the human sciences, particularly in philosophy. Human communication is problematic from the beginning, because the term is at once a nominative description for varying states of affair, and yet, the term suggests an explanation for the process nature of speech as an activity. Now the shape of a problem emerges. We are faced with an antinomy. Is the apparent happy relationship between the nature and function of language actually contradictory? Or to reformulate the question, is "communication" a name for both the nature (description) and function (explanation) of language use in human behavior exchange? This is the basic question that the present study seeks to answer. Thus, the focus of the investigation proceeds to focus explicitly on the speech act theory of language use which in fact presupposes a theory of communication, in the same sense that a conceptual structure presupposes a conceptual infrastructure.¹