Grammar
Tenses
Present
Present Simple
Present Continuous
Present Perfect
Present Perfect Continuous
Past
Past Continuous
Past Perfect
Past Perfect Continuous
Past Simple
Future
Future Simple
Future Continuous
Future Perfect
Future Perfect Continuous
Passive and Active
Parts Of Speech
Nouns
Countable and uncountable nouns
Verbal nouns
Singular and Plural nouns
Proper nouns
Nouns gender
Nouns definition
Concrete nouns
Abstract nouns
Common nouns
Collective nouns
Definition Of Nouns
Verbs
Stative and dynamic verbs
Finite and nonfinite verbs
To be verbs
Transitive and intransitive verbs
Auxiliary verbs
Modal verbs
Regular and irregular verbs
Action verbs
Adverbs
Relative adverbs
Interrogative adverbs
Adverbs of time
Adverbs of place
Adverbs of reason
Adverbs of quantity
Adverbs of manner
Adverbs of frequency
Adverbs of affirmation
Adjectives
Quantitative adjective
Proper adjective
Possessive adjective
Numeral adjective
Interrogative adjective
Distributive adjective
Descriptive adjective
Demonstrative adjective
Pronouns
Subject pronoun
Relative pronoun
Reflexive pronoun
Reciprocal pronoun
Possessive pronoun
Personal pronoun
Interrogative pronoun
Indefinite pronoun
Emphatic pronoun
Distributive pronoun
Demonstrative pronoun
Pre Position
Preposition by function
Time preposition
Reason preposition
Possession preposition
Place preposition
Phrases preposition
Origin preposition
Measure preposition
Direction preposition
Contrast preposition
Agent preposition
Preposition by construction
Simple preposition
Phrase preposition
Double preposition
Compound preposition
Conjunctions
Subordinating conjunction
Correlative conjunction
Coordinating conjunction
Conjunctive adverbs
Interjections
Express calling interjection
Grammar Rules
Preference
Requests and offers
wishes
Be used to
Some and any
Could have done
Describing people
Giving advices
Possession
Comparative and superlative
Giving Reason
Making Suggestions
Apologizing
Forming questions
Since and for
Directions
Obligation
Adverbials
invitation
Articles
Imaginary condition
Zero conditional
First conditional
Second conditional
Third conditional
Reported speech
Linguistics
Phonetics
Phonology
Semantics
Pragmatics
Linguistics fields
Syntax
Morphology
Semantics
pragmatics
History
Writing
Grammar
Phonetics and Phonology
Semiotics
Reading Comprehension
Elementary
Intermediate
Advanced
Teaching Methods
Teaching Strategies
Conversational implicatures
المؤلف:
Jonathan Culpeper and Michael Haugh
المصدر:
Pragmatics and the English Language
الجزء والصفحة:
93-4
6-5-2022
1200
Conversational implicatures
Grice introduced the notion of conversational implicature to refer to representations of what is implicated that arise in a principled way, namely, with reference to the Cooperative Principle, which was formulated as follows:
Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged (Grice [1975]1989: 26).
The notion of cooperation proposed by Grice was a technical one that attempted to encompass the expectations we normally have when engaging in talk about the kinds of things people will say, how they will say things, how specific we need to be, the order in which things are said, and so on. These expectations change depending on the kind of talk involved. Consequently, the notion of cooperation has to be fleshed out with reference to the activity type of the “talk exchange” in question (Mooney 2004). An activity type is essentially a culturally recognized activity such as intimate talk, family dinner table conversation, problem sharing, small talk, joke telling and so on. The Cooperative Principle should not be confused with cooperative in the folk sense of jointly engaging in an activity with a particular common purpose in mind, although it often has been, as Davies (2007) points out.
The Cooperative Principle was further elaborated through the four conversational maxims:
The idea is that the speaker makes available a conversational implicature through the expectation that he or she is observing the Cooperative Principle at a deeper level, and so not observing a specific conversational maxim in relation to the surface meaning of that utterance gives rise to a conversational implicature in maintaining that assumption. In other words, a conversational implicature arises because the speaker believes that such a meaning representation is required to make his or her utterance consistent with the Cooperative Principle.
A few examples will suffice here to illustrate the general mechanism by which speakers can implicate conversational implicatures by means of exploiting (or what Grice termed “flouting”) the various conversational maxims. In [4.9], Grampa implicates that he doesn’t want to talk to Homer and that he doesn’t accept Homer’s apology by flouting the Quality1 maxim (“do not say what you believe to be false”).
It is quite evident that Grampa can hear what Homer is saying (although Homer apparently thinks otherwise). In order to maintain the supposition that Grampa is observing the Cooperative Principle, then, something must be implicated, a point that is strengthened by Grampa pointedly saying something he obviously doesn’t believe to be true. In fl outing the Quality1 maxim by pretending he can’t hear Homer’s apology, he thereby implicates that he doesn’t want to listen to Homer.
In the course of this next conversation, example [4.10], the two characters reach a consensus that it is not worth going for their appointment for marriage counselling with Dr. Wexler:
This decision is reached through a series of conversational implicatures. John and Jane both implicate that Dr. Wexler is boring or unhelpful (and thus sessions with him are boring and unhelpful) by fl outing the Quantity1 maxim (“make your contribution as informative as required”), since saying a professional counsellor is “nice” and has a “nice manner” is clearly not very informative. In order to maintain the supposition that John and Jane are observing the Cooperative
Principle, then, something else must be implicated here. What isn’t said here is that Dr. Wexler is interesting or helpful (i.e. characteristics of a “good” counsellor), which leads us to what is implicated, namely, that Dr. Wexler is uninteresting and unhelpful, and thus so are their sessions with him. They then invoke the Relevance maxim (“make your contribution relevant”) to implicate that there are other reasons for not going to the appointment, including the fact that it is a long way to his office from their home, and that they would have to drive through very busy traffic to make it in time for the appointment. While it is never said (cf. “Good. That’s settled then”), it is clear by the end of the conversation that they have decided to miss their appointment.
الاكثر قراءة في pragmatics
اخر الاخبار
اخبار العتبة العباسية المقدسة

الآخبار الصحية
