1

3rd YEAR PRAGMATICS IMPLICATURES. GRICES COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE& CONVERSATIONAL MAXIMS. Paul Grice (1975 : Logic and conversation): HOW the H gets from what is said to what is meant the way from expressed meaning to implied meaning. In his explanation of implied/additional meaning, Grice distinguished btw. 2 kinds of implicatures : 1. Conventional implicatures, which convey the same extra meaning regardless of context and which are always lexicalized 2. Conversational implicatures, which convey different meanings according to different contexts, i.e. are calculated afresh each time the S and the H interact. is carried by a restricted no. of words : but, even, therefore, yet e.g. He is poor but honest (honesty appears contrary to expectations) He is an Englishman therefore he is brave (triggers entailment)
1.

2. e.g. A: Is that scotch over there? B: Help yourself. Any implied meaning risks being (mis) understood by the H as the S intended it to be uptaken.==> a S may imply smth that the H may fail to infer e.g. Is that scotch over there? may imply, under the circumstances that B is an alcoholic, that B shouldnt keep spirits at hand or that B is suspected to have started drinking again. To explain how people get from the level of expressed meaning to that of implied meaning, Grice formulated the Cooperative Principle (CP): Make your 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 Grice is not being prescriptive, i.e. telling people how they ought to behave when having a conversation people tend to observe certain regularities while they interact verbally. They (attempt to) observe a certain set of rules is in operation, unless they receive indications to the contrary like when driving). When such rules fail to be observed, interlocutors tend to look for reasons why the Speaker has chosen deviance from standard conversational behaviour. e.g. B has locked herself out and is shivering in the middle of the night in her camisole. A: Do you want a coat? B: No, I want to stand out here and freeze stiff.

At face value, Bs reply appears untrue and uncooperative, but such instances of sarcasm are equally encountered and correctly inferred. The observation that the S has said smth which is manifestly untrue, combined with the assumption that the CP is in operation prompts the H into searching for an implicature. Which that implicature is/is likely to be can be established by envisaging the 4 Conversational Maxims: Quantity: Make your contribution as informative as is required for the current purpose of the exchange. Do not make your contribution more informative than is required. Quality: Do not say what you believe to be false. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence. Relation: Be relevant. Manner: Avoid obscurity of expression. Avoid ambiguity. Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity) Be orderly. Observing the maxims S says exactly what s/he means, neither more nor less, there is no distinction btw. what is said and what is implied (no inferential work for H) e.g. Where are the car keys? Theyre on the table in the hall. More often than not, people fail to observe the maxims 5 ways of failing to observe a maxim : 1. Flouting 2. Violating 3. Infringing 4. Opting out 5. Suspending 1. Flouting a maxim applies to instances when a S blatantly fails to observe a maxim, not with any intention of deceiving or misleading, but because the S wishes to prompt the H to look for a meaning which is different from, or in addition to, the expressed meaning (Thomas 1995 : 65). A flout occurs when a S blatantly fails to observe a maxim, with the deliberate intention of generating an implicature and triggering an inferential process on the part of the H. In such cases, one or several maxims are exploited Flouts exploiting the Quality Maxim : S says smth blatantly untrue e.g. On Christmas, an ambulance picks up a collapsed drunkard who collapsed on the sidewalk. Soon the drunkard vomits all over the paramedic. The paramedic says: Great, thats really great! Thats made my Christmas! Inferencing in the Gricean framework: i) The paramedic expressed pleasure at having smb vomit over him

ii) iii) iv) v) vi)

There is no example in recorded history of people being delighted at having smb vomit over them. I have no reason to believe that the paramedic is trying to deceive us Unless the paramedics utterance is entirely pointless, he must be trying to convey some other proposition. The most obviously related proposition is the exact opposite of the one he has expressed. The paramedic is extremely annoyed at having the drunkard vomit over him.

Woman about ex: In all my greasy past, hes the biggest grease spot. i) It is patently false that a man is a grease spot. ii) The wife does not appear to be trying to make us believe that her ex is a greasy spot. iii) Unless her U is entirely pointless, she must be trying to convey some other proposition iv) This proposition must be somehow related to her U v) The most obviously related proposition is that, like grease spots, her ex is extremely disgusting. Phil to his wife Vivian: You look great, did you lose some weight? Vivian: Yes, and it seems to me that you have found it. (The Prince of Bel-Air) Flouts exploiting the Quantity Maxim: when a S blatantly gives more or less information that required. e.g. George Costanzas message on his answering machine: Believe it or not, George isnt at home. Please leave a message after the beep. I must be out or Id pick up the phone. Where could I be? Believe it or not, Im not at home. (Seinfeld) Patient: Is he a good man? Wilson: He's a good doctor. (House MD - pilot episode) Flouts exploiting the Relation Maxim: the response is obviously irrelevant to the topic (abrupt change of topic, overt failure to address interlocutors goal in asking a Q) Father to daughter at family dinner: Any news about the SAT results? Daughter : Ice-cream anyone? Suspicious wife to allegedly unfaithful husband: Why would you smell of Chanel 5? Husband: Im going to turn in. Ive just been swamped at the office these days. Utterances that sound contradictory in meaning: Al: Christmas is about family, about giving. Now lets see all the crap I got from my family last year. (Married with Children)

Flouts exploiting the Manner Maxim: A. Cybill enters a club for old celebrities and one of the retired actors there tries to make a pass on her : Retired actor: Listen, baby, do you know who I am? Cybill: No, but Im sure after a little nap youll remember. (Cybill) B. Man sitting next to Will at the opera. We are trying to enjoy the opera. Will: I know, its hard, isnt it? (The Prince of Bel-Air) Violation = the unostentatious / quiet non-observance of a maxim. A S who violates a maxim will be liable to mislead (Grice 1975:49) Violation of the quantity maxim : Supervisor: Did you read the articles and wrote up literature review? Supervisee: I certainly read the articles. Werent they captivating! Violation of the quality maxim A : You stained my dress with red wine, you klutz! B: Nobody will notice. Violation of the relation maxim A : Did you like my presentation? B : The attendance was impressive, wasnt it? Violation of the manner maxim Pierce: Major Frank Burns, M.D., manic-depressive. Its an honourary title. Trapper: Hes also schizoid. Pierce: He sleeps in two bunks. (M.A.S.H.) Infringing a maxim - occurs when a S fails to observe the maxim, although s/he has no intention of generating an implicature and no intention of deceiving. Generally infringing stems from imperfect linguistic performance (young child, foreigner), impaired L performance (nervousness, drunkenness, excitement, disability) Kramer: You let out one emotion, and all the rest will follow. Just like Andora's box. Jerry: That was the mother on "Bewitched." I think you mean "Pandora." Kramer: Yeah, well, she had one too. (Kramer infringes the maxims of quality and manner) Elaine: You were born in Italy? Frank Costanza: Yeah, that's why I could never become president. That's also why, from an early age, I never had any interest in politics. I refuse to vote. THEY DON'T WANT ME, I DON'T WANT THEM. (Frank infringes the maxims of quality, relation and manner)

Opting out of a maxim: A S opts out of observing a maxim whenever s/he indicates unwillingness to cooperate in the way the maxim requires. Detective: Has the defendant ever told you she hated her father and wanted him dead? Shrink: Such information is confidential and it would be unethical to share it with you. Reporter to Britney Spears: Whos the guy you were spotted snogging last night? Britney Spears: Its really none of the paparazzis business to pry into my life !! Suspending a maxim Under certain circumstances/as part of certain events there is no expectation on the part of any participant that one or several maxims should be observed (and non-fulfillment does not generate any implicatures). e.g. quality maxim in case of funeral orations and obituaries manner maxim in poetry quantity maxim in the case of telegrams, e-mails, notes all 3 above in the case of jokes.