The Non- Observance Maxim

nervousness, darkness, excitement may make impairment of the speakers performance, in these cases she does the infringement Thomas 74. Sometimes speaker infringes the maxims because he is incapable to speak clearly, he does not know the culture or he has not enough knowledge of language. For example: Someone learning English as a second language speaks to a native speaker. English speaker : Would you like ham or salad on your sandwich? Non-English speaker : Yes The implicature has not been generated by interlocutor; she has not understood the utterance. The answer might be interpreted as non-operative; this is a case of different social knowledge which implied a different implicature Dornerus 7. The difference between violating and infringing located in the fact of speakers intention; in violating the speaker is liable to mislead the hearer, whereas in infringing the speaker unintentionally fails to observe a maxim. Violating is a kind of misleading the hearer to get implicatures, the speaker here intends to mislead in order to save face or avoid hurting the audiences. Infringement occurs when a speaker fails to observe the maxim because he has no perfect knowledge to communicate . 4. Opting out the maxim When the speaker opts out from the maxim, she seems unwilling to cooperate in the way the maxim requires Grice 71. Moreover, Thomas 74 said that the example of opting out occurs frequently in public life, when the speaker cannot, perhaps for legal or ethical reason, reply in the way normally expected. The speaker usually wishes to avoid generating a false implicature or appearing uncooperative. Thomas also stated that giving the requested information might hurt a third party or put them in danger. For example: If a doctor or a nurse, who has complete confidentiality regarding hisher patients, is asked by the police or the press to reveal something about the patient that she is treating, he she will reply: A: I am sorry but cant tell you anything. The doctor or nurse opted out maxim when she prevented from answering; the doctor seems to be unwilling to cooperate, due to the procedures of the hospital or for the sake of secret information or something else. Dornerus 7. 5. Suspending the maxim If there is no expectation on the part of any participant that the maxims will be fulfilled hence the non-fulfillment does not generate any implicatures, the speakers do not observe the maxims. It may be culturally-specific to a particular event. The suspending of the maxim of quality can be found in funeral orations and obituaries, when the description of the deceased needs to be praiseworthy and exclude any potentially unfavorable aspects of their life or personality. Poetry suspends the manner maxim since it does not aim for conciseness, clarity and lack of ambiguity. In the case of telegrams, telexes and some international phone calls quantity maxim will be suspended because such means are functional owing to their very brevity .It is difficult to find any persuasive examples in which the maxim of relation is suspended Thomas 76-78.

E. Implicature

Implicature can be considered as an additional conveyed meaning Yule 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. Implicatures are inferred based on assumption that the speaker observes or flouts some principles of cooperation. The concept of implicature was first introduced by H.P Grice 1975 to solve the problem of language meaning. Implicature is used to determine what the meaning of the utterance whether it is from explicit or implicit. While Gasdar 38 point out that implicature refers to a proposition implied by an utterance in a context even though it is not part, nor the entailment of what actually said. Moreover, Levinson 61 claimed implicatures as one of the most important ideas or thoughts in a pragmatic one of the single most important ideas in pragmatics. One important reason he gives is that implicatures provide explicit explanations on how to imply more than what is spoken Provides some explicit account of how it is possible to mean more than what is actually said. Example: A: Can you tell me the time? B: Well, the milkman has come. The answer from the question above seems irrelevant with a request about time, but B actually wants to say that B exactly does not know what time it was. In the conversation actually B hopes that A can suggest the time by himself by saying that the milkman has arrived. In this context, it seems both A or B knows about what time usually the milkman has come.

1. Conventional Implicature

According to Yule 45, that conventional implicatures are associated with specific words and result in additional conveyed meanings when those words are used. ‘But’, ‘even’, ‘yet’ are the words recognized having this kind of implicatures. Grice in Levinson 127 states that the word ‘but’ has the same truth-conditional or truth-functional content as the word ‘and’ with an additional conventional implicature to the effect that there is some contrast between the conjuncts. When ‘even’ is included in any sentence describing an event, there is an implicature of ‘contrary to expectation’. While the conventional implicature of ‘yet’ is that the present situation is expected to be different, or perhaps the opposite, of a later time. In addition, conventional implicature 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. Yule 45. Conventional implicature is always conveyed, regardless of context. According to Levinson 127, conventional implicature are non-truth conditional inferences that are not derived from super ordinate pragmatic principles like the maxims, but are simply attached by convention to particular lexical item.

1. Conversational Implicature