المرجع الالكتروني للمعلوماتية
المرجع الألكتروني للمعلوماتية

English Language
عدد المواضيع في هذا القسم 6222 موضوعاً
Grammar
Linguistics
Reading Comprehension

Untitled Document
أبحث عن شيء أخر المرجع الالكتروني للمعلوماتية
الشكر قناة موصلة للنعم الإلهية
2025-01-12
أسباب ودوافع الكفران وطرق علاجه
2025-01-12
عواقب كفران النعمة
2025-01-12
معنى كفران النعمة
2025-01-12
دور الإدارة الحكوميـة فـي التنـميـة التكـنولوجـيـة 2
2025-01-12
دور الإدارة الحكوميـة فـي التنـميـة التكـنولوجـيـة 1
2025-01-12

طوبوغرافية الدنا DNA Topology
11-2-2018
الشكل والإعجام
15-11-2020
أشعة دلتا delta rays
4-8-2018
Cylinder with Massive Piston
25-8-2016
التصرفات التبرعية الصريحة في مرض الموت من القانون الجزائري
22-4-2019
بلاءه بفتح مكة (عليه السلام)
10-02-2015

Generalized versus particularized conversational implicatures  
  
2349   04:50 مساءً   date: 6-5-2022
Author : Jonathan Culpeper and Michael Haugh
Book or Source : Pragmatics and the English Language
Page and Part : 98-4


Read More
Date: 21-4-2022 782
Date: 2023-12-27 541
Date: 11-5-2022 316

Generalized versus particularized conversational implicatures

Another key claim made by Grice was that conversational implicatures may be made available through one-off reasoning in a particular context by the speaker, which gives rise to particularized conversational implicature, or through regularized or conventionalized reasoning, which gives rise to generalized conversational implicature. To put it more straightforwardly, particularized conversational implicatures (PCI) require some specific contextual knowledge in order to be inferred by the hearer, whereas generalized conversational implicatures (GCI) do not.

The difference between particularized and generalized conversational implicatures can be illustrated by considering the following situation. Say, for instance, Michael is in a café with a friend who is eating some cake with her coffee, and he comments that the cake looks really nice. In saying that he thinks that his friend’s cake looks nice, a particularized conversational implicature potentially arises (i.e. that Michael would like to try his friend’s cake). Of course, whether this request is implicated on this particular occasion depends on the relationship between Michael and his friend (including whether they are close enough for such an offer to seem appropriate), whether Michael himself already has some cake at that time, and so on. It also depends, in part, on the response of Michael’s friend; if she responds with something like “Would you like some?” then not only does she show that she has drawn this particularized conversational implicature, but also gives rise to a generalized Conversational implicature by her saying “some cake”, which through conventionalized reasoning implicates “[but] not all of it”. Grice’s claim was that the latter is implicated in all contexts unless somehow blocked or suspended in some manner by other information in the context (e.g. going on to say something like “in fact why don’t you have it all?”). Generalized conversational implicatures were only treated in passing by Grice himself, but they have become a key focus of analysis in subsequent neo-Gricean accounts of implicatures, a point to which we will return.

We have discussed thus far a number of different types of implicature proposed by Grice. These different representations of what is implicated are summarized. 

However, as we have seen, while various types of implicature were proposed, Grice himself focused primarily on conversational implicatures, as it is to these that the Cooperative Principle and conversational maxims were intended to apply.