THE FUNCTION OF IMPLICATURE IN SUSTAINING CONVERSATIONS.

THE fUNC'~O
OF IMPLICATURE IN
SUSTAINING CONVERSATIONS

Submitted to the G radw:.te Depo.rtment of

Enotish
:;

f.iJD!·~d

I

L1i"l~ustc
~·

r~"'ic

UNIMED

,..,_

rE~q:cnet5
:Jr~(;e

t

for
of

- - - - - -·---,

MILIK PERPUSTAKAAN i

I.

UNIM~-

ENGLISH }\PPLIED LINGUISTIGS
GRADUATE PROGRAM
STATE ur~IVEKSTY

Of MEDAN

2005

Name

Lely Simangunsong

Reg.No.

035010097

Program

English Applied Linguistics

Title

:rhe Fuction af Jmplicature Sustaining Conversations

Approved. on

July 29 th 2005

Prof. Amrin Saragth MA., Ph.D.

Prof. Banren Umar Siregar, Ph.D.

Prof. Dr. Jawasi Naibaho

Dr. IJnce Sihombing, M.Pd.

Dr. Benin Sibaranl, M.Pd.

Approved by
Program UNtMED

{ Prof. Dr. Belferik Manullang )
Hip: 130518778

m

This is to certify that the Magister's Thesis of lely Simangunsong has been
approved by the consultants for further approval by Board of Examiners.

Medan,

July 2005

Consultant I

Nip: 131119832

Consultant 1l

Prof. Bahren Umar S1reaar. Ph.D.
Nip: C30£>0999&

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Writing a thesis is certainly difficult because it requires a special skill of writing,

sufficient knowledge to discuss a certain topic, and critical thinking in conducting the
research. Further, there should be a deeper understanding of research procedures so that
the results of the research can be well taken.
Realizing this challenge, the writer deCided to accept such an academic task with

the hope that she can complete the assignment in due time. She was quite convinced that
she would be able to accomplish it by the help of her professional lecturers whose names
are not mentioned here and thesis consultants.
Her determination has been paid off. She has received a lot of assistance from her
two consuttants who have constantly checked the progress in the assignment. Despite
unpredictable situations, she eventually managed to write this thesis. Without
t~

assistance of her consultants this thesis might not have been completed as it is.

first, Prof. Amrin Saragih, Ph.D who has given his valuable time to check the content of
this thesis so that it is worthy of scientific discussion, and guided her to finish it in due time,
and next Prof. Bahren Umar Siregar, Ph.D who has never failed to give her all
information regarding the completion of this thesis. The two consultants deserve her
highest gratitude and appreciation for their constant encouragement and academic suppgrt

that made the writer feel confident in solving all kinds of problems.
Next, she is obliged to thank Prof. Dr. J. Naibaho, Director of the Post-Graduate
Program, who has always encouraged her to finish the assignment no matter how hard it
was

to begin something that is almost beyond her academic achievement. His advice has

led to a fruitful undertaking. The Secretary to the Department.,Dra. Meisuri, M.A. should
also desel"le her gratitude for her academic support in dealing with administrative matters.

Further, she would like to thank her beloved husband Rabungan Ignatius Sinaga
for his endless love and care to motivate her to study seriously to earn the academic
degree of Master in Humanities. His moral, psychological, and financial support has been
very helpful indeed. Also, the writer's beloved father V. Simangunsong and the late
mother A br Pakpahan deserve her gratitude for teaching her to accept life as a challenge
and never give up before trying the best in life.
Finally, she wishes to thank Bradley, the American native speaker who has
provided her with much information through the practice of English on many occasions.

The familiar typist Lamtio should receive her thanks. Her classmates

Erik~

Sinambela,

Syamsul Bahrl Panggabean, Coki David Pasaribu, Rausnivanson, Yahmawati
Slmatupang, Lasma Yanti Siagian, Lili Andayanti and Nazar will always be in her heart
and deserve her utmost and sincere appreciation for their friendly attitude and
understanding in making her enjoy all the studies. Their advice has led her to realize the

Medan, July 2005
The Writer,

Le~nsog

ii

ABSTRACT
SIMANGUNSONG. LELY . The Function of Implicature in
Sustaining Conversations. Thesis. The Graduate Department

of English Applied Linguistics, UNIMED (State University of
Medan).2005

This is a case study on conversations performed by several
speakers who are fluent in English. The objective is to find
out the function of implicatures in sustaining the
conversations . There are ten fluent speakers who participated
in the talk. The conversations were recorded and transcribed
to be the data. The function and context of implicatures were
identified in terms of concept of conversational implicatures:
generalized and particularized (GCis and PCis).There are
152 implicatures identified and the dominant type is the PCI
(53.28%). The implicatures are deduced from the meanings
of the sentences or utterances including the unsaid
utterances as the context. One typical example of the
conversational implicature is that a speaker will finish the
utterances of another speaker to show that the implicature is
clear and definite. There are 7 main functions of the
conversational implicatures. namely (1) enabling, (2)
'

J

'

'

making, (7) persuading another speaker to give new
information, state the same thing, offer new way of
interpretation, accept what is said, probe into the topic
deeper, say more about the topic, and show his or her
knowledge about the topic. It is suggested that more data be
taken to discover more possible conversational implicatures.
The findings are useful for those who teaching speaking skills
and who want to improve their conversational skins.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................... i
ABSTRACT
............ ............... .............................................. iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
......................................................................... iv

CHAPTER ONE

CHAPTER T'lvO

: l NT R 0 DUCT I 0 N
1 .1 The Background of the Study .................. 1
1.2 The Problem of the Study ....................... 4
1.3 The Scope of the Study .......................... s
1.4 The Objective of the Study ....... _............'< 5
1.5 The Significance of the Study ................. 5
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Function .................................................. 6
2.2 Implicature .............................................. 6
2.3 Conversation ....................................... ... ~4

2.3.1 Sustaining a Conversation ................. 17
2.4 Clarification ..................................... ....... 22

3.1 Research Design ..................................... 23
3.2 Population and Sample ........................... 23
3.3 The Instrument for Collecting Data .......... 23
3.4 The Procedure of Analyzing the Data ...... 24
CHAPTER FOUR

OATA ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FINDINGS
4.1 The Data ................................................ 2~
4.2 The Data Analysis .. ................................ 27
4.3 The Research Findings ................... ....... 47

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 The Conclusion ..... .................. ................ 49
5.2 The Suggestions .................................... 49

REFERENCES
APPENDICES

iv

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

Iiilll/K PERPUSTAk AANf

1

1.1 The Background of the Study

IJ N I M F

- ~")

f

Conversation is often taken for granted because people never ask
much about its nature. Tbe speakers in

a conversation assume that

conversation is just a common activity. They think that there is no problem
with it until they have a misunderstanding. In other words, the speakers begin

to ask about the nature and function of conversation when they have
confusion about the information presented in the conversation. For instance,
when tne two speakers ask questions about

a certain topic, they then know

that conversation is not easy.

Through conversation, information or knowledge is transmitted as language
has the

fun~tio

of transaction (Yule, 1985:5). People need information for

their daily life. It is true that without conversation, people may lose their selfidentity. As the speakers exchange information, they learn more about their
own life.
There are many linguistic elements that should be considered in
understanding a conversation. When two people speak to each other, there
are noticeable events such as tum-taking, elicitation (giving a cue for another

to speak), topic development and facial expression (Hudson, 1980:58). A
speaker snould know when to interrupt another. He must wait for the right

moment to continue the conversation. Also, there must be a way of signaling
1

2
the other speaker to talk. The speakers' body language is an important aspect
of the conversation because there is meaning in the body movement.
It is believed that for a conversation to function successfully, each
speaker's turn should not go on too long, and should be accomplished without
interruption, and at the end of one speaker's turn another speaker should take
over without too long an intervening pause (Sabat, 1991: 161 ).
When

a

speaker cannot respond to the other's stimulus, the

conversation is going to faiL There must be a balance of exchange and turntaking during a conversation. Elicitation functions well when the two speakers

know when to interrupt or close the conversation. These elements should be
familiar to those who want to know well about conversation.
At the initial stage of conversation, a topic is the most important

interesting. If there is no continuation of the talk between the two speakers,
this activity will produce a breakdown of communication. Silence is the result
of being unable to develop and sustain the conversation.
conversation comes to

It is said that a

a deadlock. Thus, a problem arises in the process of

communicating to one another.
There are various ways of topic development. First. a topic can be
shifted or changed. When a certain idea cannot make the speakers express
anything, then 1 they may choose another topic. This occurs during a
conversation. Of course, it depends on the background knowledge of the
speakers to continue the talk or not Second, the two speakers contribute
more information to the given topic. Again the general knowledge of the

3
speakers is required for the development of the topic. If the speakers have
extremely different knowledge background about a topic, it is almost
impossible to sustain the conversation.
Facial expression can show whether the speakers really understand
the topic. When

a speaker grimaces, this indicates that the topic is unfamiliar.

In this case, the other speaker must see the facial expression of the speaking
partner. A confused speaker can be identified by his facial e xpression.
In reality, many speakers do not have skills in sustaining a
conversation. Through the daily observation on how people actually speak to
each other, there is clear evidence that speakers should know the strategy of
speaking. This is quite acceptable. People have different ways of expressing
themselves. Some may be straightforward and honest. Others try to keep a

is the case, again conversation is not an easy matter.
Evasive answers are also intended to sustain a conversation. The
reason is that people do not want to expose themselves to the truth. Honesty
is not always the best policy in conversation. Sometimes the truth must be
explained indirectly. This event can be observed or proved when speakers
use a different style such as the choice of words. When two professionals talk
about their business, they may use certain terms to protect themselves from
other people's bad intention.
Conversation can be analyzed from several aspects. It can be
discussed ftom the view of the topic. Tha topic can be general or specific. No

matter how and what the topic is, the speakers should be ready for the

4
continuation of the topic. This spoken discourse can also be discussed from
the viewpoint of strategy. People have different responses to the same
stimulus. Many want to make conversation more than a common talk. A
secret can be told indirectly so that other hearers may not know it. An indirect
way of saying something is called "implicature" (indirectness). This is also
called a conversational implicature which can be distinguished from
conventional implicature.
Having considered the nature and function of conversation, it is of
interest to know how people usually sustain a conversation. All the factors
mentioned above must be incorporated in understanding pragmatic aspects
of language. It is believed that many students who have studied English
cannot sustain a conversation because they have little information about

this study.
By conducting a research on the performance of speakers in
conversation, it is believed that the problems of communication are solved.
The main problem is concerned with the functions of implicature in sustaining
a conversation. This topic is treated as a scientific view of how speakers

sustain conversations.

1.2 The Problem of the Study
The problems of the study are formulated in the following questions.

1) What are- the functions of implicature in sustaining a conversation as
found in the recorded conversations by selected speakers?

5
2) What is the context where the implicature is performed or realized by
the speakers in a conversation ?

1.3 The Scope of the Study
Strategies in sustaining a conversation

vary from one speaker to

another. It is almost impossible to predict the way a speaker wants to sustain
a conversation. In the theory of conversation as part of pragmatics, an
implicature is used as a starting point to sustain a conversation. The focus of
this study is in the analysis of conversational implicatures both the
generalized and particularized implicatures. The two types are incorporated

as the conversational implicature for the analysis of the data.

This study is aimed at finding out the functions of conversational
implicature in sustaining a conversation and also attempting to find out the
context in which the implicature is ~rfomed

or realized in a conversation.

1.5 The Signif icance of t he St udy

~

The findings of this study are expected to be useful for those who want
to improve their speaking skill because conversation is the ultimate goal for
the teaching of a foreign language like English. Enthusiasts especially

teachers of English can also benefit from the findings because they can
design a model of conversation for the purpose of teaching the speaking skill.
Readers in general will be much more infonned about the nature of talking.

CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

....

_

I

~ -·

'

MILIK PERPUSTAKAAN I

IJ (
·-UNIME
-- -- ·
___ --·-

5.1 The Conclusion

....-

· · · ~·-

.,,

After analyzing the functions of conversational implicatures drawn by
speakers of English in sustaining the conversations, it can be concluded that
the two types of implicatures are found. The dominant type is the PCis
(particularized conversational implicatures). This is due to the fact that most
speakers used their subjective interpretation to draw an implicature from the
other speaker's utterances. The context in which the implicatures are drawn is
varied from the common knowledge of the topic to the cultural differences

about the topic. There are seven functions of the implicatures identified such
ettmg,

making and

persuading another speaker to give comments, agree to the given idea,
propose a new idea, express cultural differences, and show his or her
knowledge about the given topic.

5.2 The Suggestions
Conducting a research on identifying conversational implicatures
requires a basic understanding on linguistic and pragmatic concepts on
language use. It is difficult to predict why a speaker says what he thinks is
right. A conversation is an unpredictable linguistic game. Therefore, to know
more about the nature of conversation, it is suggested that:

49

50
1) more data be taken from fluent speakers of English or native speakers
of English.
2) various conversations be compared to see the effect of the topic
selection and shifting on the formation of conversational implicatures.
3) conversations be reconstructed in the form of descriptions or

narrations to understand what is not said by the speakers wliich is the
context of use.

REFERENCES
Clark, H.H & Clark, E.V. 1977. Psychology and Language. New York:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich
Gleason, J. B & Ratner, N. B. 1998. Psycholinguistics.. New York: Harcourt
Brace College
Hudson, RA. 1980. Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Fast, J. 1980. Body Politics: How to get Power with Class. New York: Tower

Books
Gazdar, G. 1980. Prgamatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form.
New York: Academic Press
Gay, L.R. 1987. Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and
Application. London: Merril Publishing
Grice, H.P. 1967. Logic and conversation. New York: Academic Press
Levinson, S.C. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized
Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT

Merriam - Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 1994. Springfield Massachusetts:
Merriam-Webster
Omaggio, A. C. 1983. Proficiency- Oriented Classroom Testing. Washington.
D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics
Peccei, J.S. 1999. Pragmatics. london: Routledge
Pride, J .B & Holmes, J. Sociolinguistics. London: Penguin Books
Reardon , K.K. 1987. Where Minds Meet: Interpersonal Communication.
Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing
Richards, J.C.et.al. 1985. The Context of Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Richards, J.1980. Conversation in TESOL Quarterly, voi.XIV,na.4
Rivers, W.M. 1964. The Psychologist and the Foreign-Language Teacher.
Chicago: The University o_f. Chicago Press

51

52
Saville-Troike, M.1982. The Ethnography of Communication.·An Introduction.
London: Basil Blackwell
Tannen, D. 1984. Conversational Style: Analyzing Talk Among Friends.
Norwood. New Jersey: Ablex Publishing

_ _ _ _. 1994. Gender and Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press
Wardhaugh, R. 1985. How Conversation Worl