cooperation and implicature ppsx

It is the speaker who communicates something via implicatures and the listener recognizes those communicated meanings via inference.. COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE Cooperative principle make our

Date:11/ 03/ 2011

Name: Lê Minh Sơn

Class: Anh07A

COOPERATION AND IMPLICATURE

1 DEFINITIONS

When people talk with each other, they try to converse smoothly and

successfully Cooperation is the basis of successful conversations

The concept and the function of cooperation and implicature are

fundamentally linked "This sense of cooperation is simply one in which people having a conversation are not normally assumed to be trying to confuse, trick, or

withhold relevant information from each other" Cooperation can be understood as

an essential factor when speakers and listeners are interacting, in other words, it is the expectation that the listener has towards the speaker The speaker is supposed to convey true statements and say nothing more than what is required

Implicature can be considered as an additional conveyed meaning (Yule,

1996: 35) It is attained when a speaker intends to communicate more than just what the words mean It is the speaker who communicates something via implicatures and the listener recognizes those communicated meanings via inference

II COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE

Cooperative principle make our 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 Specifically, there are four maxims under

this general principle

1 Quantity:

(i) Make your contribution as informative as is required for the current purpose

of exchange

(ii) Do not make your contribution more informative than is required

2 Quality: Try to make your contribution one that is true.

(i) Do not say what you believe to be false

(ii) Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence

3 Relation: be relevant

4 Manner:

(i) Avoid obscurity of expression

(ii) Avoid ambiguity

(iii) Be brief

(iv) Be orderly

E.g Man: Does your dog bite? Woman: No.

(The man reaches down to pat the dog The dog bites the man's hand.)

Man: Ouch! Hey! You said your dog doesn't bite

Woman: He doesn't But that's not my dog.

Asking the question, the man assumes that the dog belongs to the woman

The woman's answer provides less information than expected The maxim of

quantity is flouted Is the woman willing to talk with the man? The answer is No, it

means the woman flouted cooperative principle here

3 HEDGES

Hedges are certain expressions can be used to indicate the degree of certainty concerning the information given when making a statement

E.g As far as I know, they are getting married

Some expressions:

Quality: As far as I know, I maybe mistaken, I’m not sure if that is right, I guess… Quantity: As you probably know, to cut a long story short, I won’t bore you with

all the details…

Relation: I don’t know if this is important, this may sound like a dumb question,

not to change the subject…

Manner: This may be a bit confused, I’m not sure if this make sense, I don’t know

if this is clear at all…

IV CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURE

Conversational implicature is the basic assumption in conversation that the participants are adhering to the cooperative principle and the maxims

E.g Wife: I hope you brought the bread and the cheese.

Husband: Ah, I brought the bread

In this case, the husband did not mention the cheese Then, he must intend that the wife infers what is not mentioned was not brought The husband has conveyed more than he has said via a conversational implicature Using the symbol +> for

an implicature, we can represent the additional conveyed meaning: Wife:

b & c? Husband: b ( +> NOT c)

1 Generalized conversational implicatures

Through the above example, it is possible to perceive that generalized conversational implicatures happen when there is no special background

knowledge required in the context to calculate the additional conveyed meaning

E.g I was sitting in a garden one day A child looked over the fence.

The implicature here the garden and the child mentioned is not the speakers

2 Scalar implicatures

Scalar implicatures occur when certain information is communicated by choosing a word which expresses one value from a scale of values

From the highest to the lowest :

<all, most, many, some, few>

<always, often, sometimes>

The basis of the scalar implicature is that when any form in a scale is asserted, the negative of all forms higher on the scale is implicated

E.g I’m studying linguistics and I’ve completed some of the required

courses

By using (some of the required courses), the speaker creates an implicature (not all, not most, not many)

2 Particularized conversational implicatures

Particularized conversational implicatures occur when a conversation takes place in a very specific context in which locally recognized inferences are assumed

E.g 1 Rick: Hey, coming to the wild party tonight?

Tom: My parents are visiting

In order to make Tom’s response relevant, Rick has to draw on some assumed knowledge that one college student in this setting expects another to have Tom will

be spending that evening with his parents, and time spent with parents is quiet

(consequently +> Tom not at party).

E.g 2 Bert: Do vegetarians eat hamburger?

Ernie: Do chickens have lips?

In the above example, Ernie’s response does not provide a ‘yes’ or ‘no’

answer Bert must assume that Ernie’s response means ‘of course not!’

3 Properties of conversational implicatures

All the implicatures taken into consideration are part of what is communicated and not said Thus, speakers can always deny that they intended to communicate such meanings Conversational implicatures are deniable They can be explicitly denied (or alternatively, reinforced) in different ways The example below can illustrate this idea:

E.g you have won only five dollars! (+> ONLY five)

It is quite easy for a speaker to suspend the implicature (only) using the

expression ‘at least’ (You’ve won at least five dollars!), or to cancel the

implicature by adding further information, often following the expression ‘in fact’ (You’ve won five dollars, in fact, you’ve won ten!), or to reinforce the implicature with additional information, as in: You’ve won five dollars, that’s four more than one!

IV CONVENTIONAL IMPLICATURE

Conventional implicatures are not based on the cooperative principle or the

maxims They do not have to occur in conversation, and they do not depend on special contexts for their interpretation

Conventional implicatures are associated with specific words and result in additional conveyed meanings when those words are used The English

conjunction ‘but’ is one of these words The others is yet, even, and …

E.g 1 Mary suggested black, but I chose white

In this sentence, ‘Mary suggested black’ is contrasted, via the conventional implicature of ‘but’, with my choosing white

Other English words such as ‘yet’ also have conventional implicatures:

E.g 2 Dennis isn’t here yet.

In uttering this statement, the speaker produces an implicature that she/he expects the statement ‘Dennis is here’ The conventional implicature of ‘yet’ is that the present situation is expected to be different, or perhaps the opposite, at a later time

The other conjunction “and” have conventional implicatures When two

statements are containing static information are joined by “and”, the implicature is

“in addition” or “plus” When two statements contain dynamic, action-related information, the implicature is “and then”

E.g Nam is handsome and intelligent (p & q, +> p plus q)

Nam put on his clothes and left the house (p & q, +> q after p)

V QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1 What are differences between presupposition and implicature?

Superficially speaking, implicatures and presuppositions show similarities:

Implicatures: Information that has not been stated explicitly It can be cancelled Presuppositions: Information that has not been stated explicitly It can be denied However, presuppositions and implicatures are different things:

1 The inferences occur at different steps in the interpretive process

2 The cancellation / denial of either kind of inference has different consequences

3 Presuppositions project out of embedded contexts Implicatures do not show

this behaviour

2 How can we distinguish presupposition from implicature?

1 The inferences occur at different steps in the interpretive process

Presuppositions: need to be known or accepted by speaker and hearer before

the utterance can even be interpreted Without the presupposed information, the utterance becomes nonsensical

Implicatures: are derived after the hearer has interpreted the utterance and matched

it to the conversational context

2 The cancellation / denial of either kind of inference has different consequences

If an implicature is retracted, the literal content of the sentence remains asserted, whereas retracting a presupposition will subsequently also retract the literal content of the sentence in question

E.g 1 Tom kissed some of the girls (In fact, he even covered all of them)

=> retracted implicature „Tom did not kiss all girls“ leaves the content intact

E.g 2 Tom is in the pizzeria at the Vatikan (There is no pizzeria at the Vatican.)

=> denied presupposition Content of E.g 2 can not be true either.

3 Presuppositions project out of embedded contexts Implicatures do not show this behaviour (If an embedded clause leads to an implicature that is similar to its nonembedded implicatures, then this happens by independent application of the

conversational maxims.)

E.g 1 Bonnie has one child.

=> Speaker suggests that Bonnie does not have more (cancellable)

Does Bonnie have one child?

=> speaker may have neutral expectations about the number of children of

Bonnie, as long as it is in a reasonable range (e.g between 0 and 3)

E.g.2 Bonnie stopped writing Sonnets.

=> speaker has to believe that Bonnie used to write Sonnets

Has Bonnie stopped writing Sonnets?

=> speaker has to believe that Bonnie used to write Sonnets (and perhaps still does)