when the lecture tells about pragmatics theory. The question is asked directly, but it can become a different way when it is declared as “I haven’t any idea at all in
theory.” This simple statement is not only bound to provide information for whoever the listener but also an expressing of wanting a re-explaining and clear
information from the lecturer without stated directly. If the lecturer provides a more time to make clear the explanation of linguistic theory, it will reach a
satisfactory to the speaker. The satisfactory that is the result effect is known as perlocutionary
effect. The speaker often makes distinct about what is said and what is imply.
The speaker and listener have to make a cooperative effort to make a successful communication. When speaker utters something, he will implicate
something in the way of exchanging the information. If the speakers’ formulation in uttering can be understood by the listener, the speaker is success in delivering
the information. But it will turn into a fail effort when the listener cannot understand about what was being talked about. The formulation’s utterance that
what the speaker’s intentio and imply called implicature.
B. Implicature
There are argumentations about the definition of Implicature. The first is according to Grice’s definition about implicature in his paper Logic and
conversation,
19
when he first introduced the term ‘implicature’ in a term of a verb,
19
Grice, H.P 1975, op. cit. 44
‘implicate.’ Then he turns into the related noun of implying called implicature and use this term in the analyzing of meaning. Speaker implicates and the listener
tries to arrive at the meaning of the implicature. If they can do it, they have making an active communication.
As it always being argued about the basic definition of implicature, Horn also concludes about implicature as a component of meaning that constitutes an
aspect of what is meant in a speaker’s utterance without being part of what is said.
20
It is closer to what a speaker intends to state A without brings it in the utterance. The communication can goes smoothly or fail when the speaker makes
an implicature. If the listener can not deduce what is being talked by the speaker through A, it means that they fail. By putting an intention in a form of an
implicature, the speaker tries to exploit the message without appearing it in the
utterance. But the cooperative efforts will success, if the speaker and listener can reveal the implicature in their conversational.
There are two kinds of implicature. Grice in his paper explains that the first kind is a conventional implicature. The meaning in this implicature can take
from the literal meaning in the text directly. When a speaker utters or states something, his partner the listener can know the meaning as it appears on the
utterance. The meaning concludes in the statement like in the dialogue below, the dialogue taken from the Last Yankee drama where Leroy describing his wife to
his friend:
20
Horn, Laurence R and Gregory ward. The Handbook of Pragmatics Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. 2006, p.3
Leroy: Mine was never very optimistic. She’s Swedish.
21
By implicating that she is a Swedish, Leroy realizes that he has committed to the consequence of what he has said. The case that she never be very
optimistic is because the consequence of she is the Swedish, but if the dialogue exchange like “mine was never very optimistic and she is Indonesian”. Sure the
utterance does not implicate that ‘she never be very optimistic’ because of she is a Swedish. But because of it is the consequence of she is being a person that has no
optimism still on her. The conventional implicature does not always appear the directly in the text and has no dependent on the context.
Second is the conversational implicature. The conversational implicature is the additional meaning inside an utterance.
22
It happens because the speaker and listener talk exchange. They can not include the utterance that somehow
connect and it is usually because the participants have a set of purpose when they uttering something.
The conversational implicature exists because of the conversation does not give a contribution to the requirement of the topic of issue. There is no suitable
exchange and a cooperative effort. Grice worked in formulating a general rule term about how the listener and speaker must contribute in making their
communication success. Afterwards his formulation called the cooperative principle and argued that the conversational implicature appears because of both
21
Miller, Arthur. “The Last Yankee.” The Portable Arthur Miller, ed. Bigsby, Christhoper New York: Penguin Books, 1995, p. 452, line 28
22
Yule, George. 1996, op. cit.35
of the speaker and listener disobeys the cooperative principle.
C. Cooperative Principle
