28
Conversational Implicatures

Semantics vs Pragmatics Semantics = the study of meaning, esp. denotation (wikipedia). Pragmatics = the study of meaning, esp. denotation and beyond

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Conversational Implicatures

What is Pragmatics?

Semantics vs Pragmatics Semantics = the study of meaning, esp.

denotation (wikipedia). Pragmatics = the study of meaning, esp.

denotation and beyond (connotation)

Issues in Pragmatics

Reference and Deixis Speech Act ImplicaturesPolitenessPresupposition Conversation Analysis

Implicatures

Proposed by Paul H. Grice  (i) the act of meaning, implying, or

suggesting one thing by saying something else, or (ii) the object of that act. (Stanford, 2010)

What is said vs What is implicated What is said can be contradicted, agreed

or disagreed with, whereas what is implicated cannot

(Cruse, 2011)

Implicatures

A: Has John cleared the table and washed the dishes?

B: He has cleared the table. ▪ i. That’s not true.▪ ii. ? That’s not true, he has washed the dishes.▪ iii. You’re right.▪ iv. ? You’re right, he has washed the dishes

• What is implicated is “he has not washed the dishes”

B has said that John has cleared the table and implicated that he has not washed the dishes.

Implicatures

Another example Shut that flaming door!▪ ?You have every right to be.▪ ?No, you’re not – you’re only pretending.

Anger is not said but implicated. (Cruse, 2011)

Cooperative Principle

Make your 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.

Comprised of 4 maxims

Maxim of Quality

Do not say what you believe to be false.

Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.

Maxim of Quantity

Make your contribution as informative as is required for the current pruposes of the exchange in which you are engaged.

Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.

Ex. A: What did you have for lunch today?

▪ Sandwich▪ ?Food▪ ?I had seven pieces of sandwiches, three of which was

slight burnt.

Maxim of Relation

Be relevant A: Have you seen Mary today? B: ?I’m breathing.

Make the strongest statement that can be relevantly made, justifiable by your evidence (Levinson, 1983) John captured a wild cat >> Somebody

caught an animal.

Maxim of Manner

Avoid obscurity. Avoid ambiguity. Avoid unnecessary prolixity (lengthy,

wordy). Be orderly.

? The lone ranger rode off into the sunset and jumped on his horse.

Nature of CP

Theoretical Definition: S conversationally implicates p iff S implicates p when:

(i) S is presumed to be observing the Cooperative Principle (cooperative presumption);

(ii) The supposition that S believes p is required to make S's utterance consistent with the Cooperative Principle (determinacy); and

(iii) S believes (or knows), and expects H to believe that S believes, that H is able to determine that (ii) is true (mutual knowledge).

Flouting Maxims

Flouting = Speaker (S) intentionally violates the maxims, knowing that the hearer (H) is well aware of his/her intention. I married a rat. ▪ Metaphoric expression

It must be somewhere. ▪ Further search is needed.

A: Did you hear about Mary’sB: Yes, well, it rained the whole time (Mary

is approaching)

Flouting Maxims

A: I’ll look after Sam for you. Don’t worry.

B: Oh, don’t offer her any post-prandial concoctions involving super-cooled oxide of hydrogen.

Conventional vs Conversational

Conversational Implicatures 1. Generalised conversational

Implicatures (GCI) 2.Particularised conversational

Implicatures (PCI)

(Meibauer, 2009)

Distinction

A: What time is it?B: Some of the guests are already leaving

PCI: It must be late.GCI: Not all of the guests are already

leaving. A: Where’s John?

B: Some of the guests are already leaving.PCI: Perhaps John has already left.GCI: Not all of the guests are already

leaving.

Generalised Conversational Implicatures

Levinson(200) divides DCI into 3 types Q-Implicatures I-Implicatures M-Implicatures

Q-Implicatures

What you do not say is not the case Choosing a weaker member of a set

implicates that the stronger members do not apply He owns 3 cars.▪ Imp: He does not own 4 or 5 cars.

It made her ill.▪ Imp: She did not die.

The gunman’s target was the PM.▪ Imp: The gunman did not hit the PM.

I-Implicatures

Enrichments of what is said. What is simply expressed is

stereotypically exemplified. We went to that new restaurant

yesterday.▪ Imp: I had a meal.

John is going out with a nurse.▪ Imp: The nurse is female.

M-Implicatures

Marked expressions call for marked interpretations.

There is a good reason to speak unconventionally. Bill caused the car to stop▪ Normal: Bill stopped the car.▪ Imp: Bill did not stop the car in the normal way

The corner of Sue’s lips turned slightly upwards▪ Normal : Sue Smile.▪ Imp: Sue’s expression is not a smile.

Cooperation and Translation cooperative principle is formulated for

instances in which interactants are interested in 'a maximally effective exchange of information' (Grice, 1975: 47). We cannot assume that a writer's primary purpose in writing a literary text is the effective exchange of information nor, even, that the writer necessarily intends the reader to grasp his or her intentions (Hickey, 1998).

Cooperation and Translation

the writer at least would like the reader to grasp the basic, literal meaning of his or her written utterance and that the reader shares this desire; as long as this is all that is meant by the effective exchange of information.

Translator’s Role

Render exactly what S says and implicates

Facilitate the communication between S and H

Textual equivalence vs Maximal cooperation

Examples

  น ส ยิ่��งลั�กษณ์� ชิ�นวั�ตร นายิ่กร�ฐมนตร� กลั�าวัส�นทรพจน�ในพ�ธี�เปิ�ดการปิระชิ�มWorld Economic Forum on East Asia ปิ! 2555

Ms.Yingluck Shinawatra, the Prime Minister of Thailand, gave the opening speech at …….(The context is not clear whether it is known that Ms.Yingluck is from Thailand.) observe Maxim of Quantity

Examples

His rose-white boyhood วั�ยิ่หน��มก�หลัาบขาวั วั�ยิ่หน��มส�ขาวัเหม%อนก�หลัาบ วั�ยิ่หน��มบร�ส�ทธี�'ด�งก�หลัาบขาวั วั�ยิ่หน��มท��แสนบร�ส�ทธี�'

Examples

การจ�ดกระบวันการการส%�อสารแลัะแลักเปิลั��ยิ่นเร�ยิ่นร) *ก�บกลั��มต�างๆ ใน ชิ�มชิน ท�,ง 7 หม)�บ*าน ปิระกอบด*วัยิ่ กลั��มผู้)*น.าชิ�มชิน ( ได*แก� ก.าน�น

ผู้)*ใหญ่�บ*าน กรรมการหม)�บ*าน สมาชิ�กสภาเทศบาลั) กลั��มแกนน.าชิ�มชิน( ได*แก� แม�บ*าน อสม. ผู้)*ส)งอายิ่� เกษตรต.าบลั เยิ่าวัชิน) เคร%อข�ายิ่พระ

สงฆ์� คร) ประชาชนในช�มชน Communication and learning exchange process

between different groups from the seven villages i.e. local administrative officers ( the sub-district headman, the village headmen, the village committee members, the municipality members), community leaders (housewives, volunteers, elders, agricultural officers, youths), monks, teachers and other inhabitants

References

Cruse, D.A. (2011). Meaning in Language.

Fawcett, Peter (2003). Translation and Language.

Hickey, L. (1998). The Pragmatics of Translation Topics.

Levinson, S.C. (1983). Pragmatics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

(2010). Implicatures.