Abstract
The aim of this paper is to critically examine the role of authority in the phenomenon of illocutionary frustration. Drawing on Hesni's (2018) notion of illocutionary frustration and McDonald's (2021) analysis of cat-calling, I attempt to explain the role of authority not on the part of the one being frustrated/cat-called, but on the side of the speaker who is doing the frustrating/cat-calling.
I focus on cases of failed leave-taking and how interlocutors are coerced into continuing a conversation they have already attempted to leave. The main line of argumentation is that this coercion is made possible by coercing the interlocutor into acting as if the one doing the frustrating/cat-calling had the authority to do so.
I argue for two different types of such illegitimate authority: (i) misplaced authority, where the speaker transfers their authority from a context where it is fully legitimate to another one, in which their attempt to enforce such authority should misfire, but it does not, (ii) socio-politically generated authority, where the speaker is able to coerce their interlocutor through leaning on the socio-political context in which the speaker has an advantage.