3. Speech acts can caused faced threatening acts to their addressee.
2.4 Theory of Implicature
Implicature is a process of interpretation the meaning based on the situation and context. What a speaker implicates is a matter of his communicative
intention in uttering the sentence. Gazdar adds Implicature is a proposition that implied by utterance of sentence in a context, even though that proposition isn’t a
part of not entailment of what was actually said. Grice in Levinson 1983 devided implicature into; Conventional and Conversational;
a. Conventional implicature is non-truth conditional inferences that are not derived from superordinate pragmatic principles like the maxims, but are
simply attached by convention to particular lexical items or expressions Levinson 1983: 127.
e.g; 12 X : Yulie is from Solo . Y : Therefore, she is gentle.
b. The writer focuses on conversational implicature. Grice Levinson 1983:
97 deliberately coined this word to cover any non-conventional meaning that is implied, he conveyed indirectly or through hints, and understand
implicitly without ever being explicitly stated. It is something left implicit in actual use. It has three rules;
- that is not belong to utterance - that is not logical of the utterance
- that has one more implicature and depend on the context
e.g; 13 X : Can you tell me the time? Y : Well, the milkman has come.
It can be shown that the time asked by X has passed. We can see from the answer Y. X has known in what time the milkman usually go through.
There is no correlation between the question X and the respond Y. The meaning of utterance Y is implicit.
A. Generalized vs. particularized implicatures;
A. a particularized conversational implicature is one which depends on particular features of the context, as in the first example above. The proposition
Sally’s car broke down would ordinarily not convey anything about Sally going to a meeting, so the implicature in this case depends on the context as well as the
utterance itself. B. a generalized conversational implicature is one which does not depend on
particular features of the context, but is instead typically associated with the proposition expressed.
Grice distinguished between kinds of conversational implicature on another dimension;
a. Generalized conversational implicature are those that arise without any particular context or special scenario being necessary, in contrast to
b. Particularized implicature which do require such specific contexts. Here are some relatively clear examples of generalized conversational
implicatures:
14 Fred thinks there is a meeting tonight. + Fred doesnt know for sure that there is a meeting tonight.
15 Mary has 3 children. + Mary has no more than 3 children.
B. Proporties of Implicature;
A. Context-dependent B. Cancellability defeasibility — Implicatures can be denied without self-
contradiction. C. Nondetachability — any way you had expressed the proposition you uttered
would have given rise to the same implicatures with the exception of implicatures arising from the rules of Manner.
D. Calculability — you can trace a line of reasoning leading from the utterance to the implicature, and including at some point the assumption that the speaker was
obeying the rules of conversation to the best of their ability.
C. The Important Contribution of Implicature
First, implicature stands as a pragmatic example of the nature and power pragmatic explanations of linguistic phenomena. Secondly, it provides some
explicit account of how it is possible to mean in some general sense more than what is actually ‘said’ i.e. more than what is literally expressed by the
conventional sense of the linguistic expressions uttered. Thirdly, the notion of implicature seems likely to effect substantial simplifications in both the structure
and the content of semantic descriptions. Fourthly, implicature, or at least some
closely related concept, seems to be simply essential if various basic facts about language to be accounted for properly. Finally, the principles that generate
implicatures have a very general explanatory power : a few basic principles provide explanations for a large array of apparently unrelated facts Levinson
1983: 97-98.
2.5 Observing the maxims
Kategori