recognition properly. A theory of social interaction that employs the
ditransitive structure of giving may indeed be sufficient. At the same
time, thefigure of gift exchange as highlighted by Hénaff and Ricoeur
has not been a false lead in previous research. On the contrary, it has
led us to pay attention to the complex reciprocities expressed in the
LatinRecognitionsand feudal ideas of mutual bonding. These phe-
nomena can be explained in terms of constitutive gift exchange but
I have argued that they can also be properly approached with the
language of giving.
Both anthropology and linguistics may, however, shift the attention
from the recognizer to the recognizee in problematic ways. The history
of religious recognition shows how the transformation of the recognizer
should remain the focus of attention. While the conceptions of giving
and gift transfer tend to focus on the thing and the recipient, the broader
and less profiled conception of social interaction may be needed to keep
the focus on the agent performing the act of recognition.
In sections 4.1 and 4.2, two ideas were briefly launched that also
maintain the focus on the recognizer when we discuss gifts and
giving. First, the view that recognition is a creative and constitutive
event is extremely important, as it allows us to distinguish this event
from the overall institutions of patronage and ceremonial gift
exchange. Acts of recognition establish relationships as well as estab-
lishing the roles of the recognizer and the recognizee through this act.
In terms of language, sentences expressing such recognition have
a powerfully performative character. In sentences like‘this thing
presents itself’and‘we recognize your baptism as true baptism’
(pairs 2–5 above), not only does the recipient undergo a performative
change but the agent-giver (this thing, we) does as well.
Second, the category of promise is helpful as it expresses a per-
formative that relates to the subject of the sentence. Acts like‘I
promise to obey you and be your servant’and‘I recognize you as
my lord’commit the speaker or the recognizer. The acts of conversion
and existential attachment likewise stress the performative move that
the recognizer brings about. In terms of linguistic giving, gifts like
promise or attachment represent some property of the giver. Hénaff
may here be right in claiming that, in the event of A’s recognizing B,
A gives a kind of surrogate self to B.^50 Our study shows, however, that
(^50) Hénaff 2010, 124–8. Cf. section 1.2.
232 Recognition and Religion