THE CO-OPERATIVE PRINCIPLE AND IMPLICATURE

1.

What might the second speaker mean in each of the following dialogues? Write a pragmatic paraphrase in each case, and think about how you inferred the meaning. a. Virginia: Do you like my new hat? Mary: Its pink! b. Maggie: Coffee? James: It would keep me awake all night. c. Linda: Have you finished the student evaluation forms and the reading lists? Jean: Ive done the reading lists. d. Phil: Are you going to Steves barbecue? Terry: Well, Steves got those dogs now. e. Annie: Was the dessert any good? Mike: Annie, cherry pie is cherry pie. Do the same thing, this time with a different utterance from the first speaker (the same participants). Write a pragmatic paraphrase for the second speakers response in each dialogue. a. V: Try the roast pork. M: Its pink! b. M: We went to see The Omen last night but it wasnt very scary. J.: It would keep me awake all night. c. L: You look very pleased with yourself. J: Ive done the reading lists. d. P: His garden looks awful. T: Well, Steves got those dogs now. e. A: I thought the pie would cheer you up. M: Annie, cherry pie is cherry pie.

2.

Unlike presuppositions and entailments, conversational implicatures are inferences

that cannot be made from isolated utterances. They are dependent on the context of the utterance and on the shared knowledge between the speaker and the hearer. Grice has proposed a way of analysing implicatures based on the co-operative principle. That is, we assume that in a conversation the participants will co-operate with each other when making their contributions. In Grices analysis, the speakers flouting of a maxim combined with the hearers assumption that the speaker has not really abandoned the co-operative principle leads to an implicature. Grices maxims: 1. RELEVANCE/RELATION: Make sure that whatever you say is relevant to the conversation at hand. Be relevant. 2. QUALITY: Do not say what you believe to be false. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence. 3. QUANTITY: Make your contribution sufficiently informative for the current purposes of conversation. Do not make your contribution more informative than is necessary.

4. CLARITY/MANNER: Do not make your contribution obscure, ambiguous or difficult to understand. Avoid obscurity of expression. Avoid ambiguity. Be brief. Be orderly. 5 ways of failing to observe/breaching a maxim: Violating a maxim: it is not obvious at the time of the utterance that the speaker has deliberately lied, supplied insufficient information, or been ambiguous, irrelevant or hard to understand. Violations do not lead to implicatures. Flouting a maxim: it is obvious to the hearer at the time of the utterance that the speaker has deliberately and quite openly failed to observe one or more maxims; the S wishes to prompt the H to look for a meaning which is different from, or in addition to, the expressed meaning. Infringing a maxim: the S fails to observe a maxim, although she/he has no intention of generating an implicature and no intention of deceiving (linguistic incompetence to perform successful speech acts) Opting out of a maxim: the S indicates unwillingness to cooperate in the way the maxim requires. Suspending a maxim: no expectation on the part of any participant that one or several maxims should be observed (e.g. quality maxim in the case of funeral orations and obituaries, manner maxim in poetry, quantity maxim in the case of telegrams, e-mails) 3. Suppose you were considering X for a job that needed good writing skills. You have written to his English teacher asking her to assess his performance in this area. You receive this following reply: X has regularly and punctually attended all my classes. All his assignments were handed in on time and very neatly presented. I greatly enjoyed having X in my class. (a) What maxim does the teacher seem to flout? (b) What implicature would you draw about X writing skills? (c) Why do you think the teacher phrased her response this way? 4. Which maxim has the child failed to observe? Would you consider this a case of flouting or violation of that maxim? Speech therapist: So you like ice cream. What are your favourite flavours? Child with a pragmatic disorder: Hamburgerfish and chips. 5. In each of the following, decide whether the inference in brackets is a presupposition or an implicature derived from the underlined utterance. (a) A: My boyfriend lives in Luton. B: My boyfriend lives in Paris. (I have a boyfriend) (b) A: What? B: Why are you laughing at me? (You are laughing at me) (c) A: Why is she eating those? B: Her father didnt give her any supper. (She didnt have any supper) (d) A: Is Mike engaged? B: Hes bought a ring. (Mike is engaged) (e) A: You look pleased. B: I managed to pass the exam. (I tried to pass the exam) (f) A: Did you finish that report?
2

B: I started it. (I didnt finish the report) 6. Decide which maxim has not been observed (flouting or violation?). In case of flouting, what implicature might be drawn? Background information is given in square brackets. (a) Annie: Mike, did you drive the driving test? Mike: No. [Mike knows hes passed the driving test] (b) Annie: Do you want some pie? Mike: gmmm uh mmm [Mikes just had his wisdom teeth extracted] (c) Annie: I really liked that dinner. Mike: Im a vegetarian. (d) Teacher: What time is it? [towards the end of a lecture] Student: Its 10:44 and 35.6 seconds. (e) Student A: How are you? Student B: Im dead. (f) Host: Would you like a cocktail? Its my own invention. Guest: Well, mmm uh its not that we dont not drink 7. Return to exercise 1 and decide which maxim was flouted by the second speaker in each dialogue. 8. Give an implicature of Bs utterance in each of the situations below. a) A: Come to my cheese-and-wine party, please! Of course, you dont drink, do you? B: Well, we dont drink. b) A: Do you love me? B: Im quite fond of you. c) A: Do you love me? B: Are you rich? d) A: Was there a fiddle at the bar last night? B: There was a man scraping a bow across a violin. e) A: Do you like my new carpet? B: The wallpapers not bad. 9. Fill in an appropriate utterance for B, so that what B utters yields the provided implicature: a) A: Lets try the new Arab restaurant round the corner. B: . [Arab restaurants are unlikely to serve vegetarian food] b) A: Meet me at Piccadilly Circus at midnight. B: .. [Piccadilly Circus is not a safe place to be at midnight] c) A: Do you use your local swimming pool? B: .. [Bs local swimming pool has salt water] d) A: How much do I owe you now? B: [As debts to B are large and complicated to work out]
MORE ON IMPLICATURES

1. For each dialogue, answer the accompanying question based on the implicature that you can draw from the second speakers response. Think about why you drew those implicatures. [Generalized conversational implicatures] (a) Carmen: Did you get the milk and the eggs? Dave: I got the milk. Did Dave buy the eggs? (b) Carmen: Did you manage to fix that leak? Dave: I tried to. Did Dave fix that milk? (c) Faye: I hear youve invited Mat and Chris. Ed: I didnt invite Mat. Did Ed invite Chris? (d) Steve: What happened to your flowers? Jane: A dog got into the garden. Did the dog belong to Jane? 2. If you were Jane, what implicatures would you have drawn from each of Steves responses? [Scalar implicatures] (a) Jane: Who used all the printer paper? Steve: I used some of it. (b) Jane: I hear youre always late with the rent. Steve: Well, sometimes I am. (c) Jane: Mike and Annie should be here by now. Steve: Possibly. (d) Jane: This cheese looks funny. The label said to store it in a cool place. Steve: Yeah, I did. 3. Now examine those implicatures in light of the following information known only to Steve. Would you say that Steve was lying to Jane in exercise 2? Why? (a) Steve has in fact used all the printer paper. (b) Steve has been late with the rent every month since he moved in. (c) Steve knows for a fact that the plane was late because Mike and Annie called him from the airport. (d) Steve had absentmindedly put the cheese in the freezer. 4. Look at each of these dialogues and the implicatures which appear in brackets. Then decide what knowledge the speaker and the hearer would have to share in order for that implicature to be drawn.[Particularized conversational implicatures] (a) Tom: Are you going to Mikes party tonight? Annie: My parents are in town. [No] (b) Tom: Where is the salad dressing? Gabriela: Weve run out of olive oil. [There isnt any salad dressing] (c) Steve: Whats with your mother? Jane: Lets go into the garden. [I cant talk about it in here] (d) Mat: Want some brownies? Chris: There must be 20,000 calories there. [No] 5. Decide whether each of the inferences in brackets is a presupposition or an implicature. For the implicature, decide whether they are generalized or particularized.
4

(a) Mike: Dave: (b) Patrick: Virginia: (c) Doris: Dave: (d) Mat: Chris: (e) Steve: Ed: (f) Maggie: James: on)

I heard about the mess. Yeah, Steve regrets sending that e mail. (Steve sent that e - mail) I didnt take it. Why do you always lie? (You always lie) Did Carmen like the party? She left after an hour. (She didnt like the party) How did you do on those exams? I failed physics. (I didnt failed the others) Did you buy the car? It cost twice as much as I thought it would. (Ed didnt buy the car) The bathrooms flooded! Someone must have left the tap on. (It wasnt James who left the tap

6. Point out instances of non-observance of maxims (flouting, violation, infringing, opting out) in the following dialogues. Specify when the interlocutors intention fails to be inferred correctly by the other participant in the conversation: A. Will: Uncle Philip, you have to admit: you eat far too much. Uncle Phil: Come on, you know thats not true. I have exactly the same weight as in high school. Will: Yes, in all four years together. By uttering the words, using a constative speech act, according to Austins theory, Will simply tells his uncle Philip that he consumes too much food (locution). The illocution of the words uttered by Will is that of stating something which he considers to be true about his uncle, hoping that his statement will influence his uncles future behavior (perlocution). According to Searles theory of speech acts, Will is performing an indirect representative speech act, committing himself to the truth of what he is expressing, representing the external reality by making his words fit the world as he believes it to be, therefore stating what he believes to be true about his uncle. At the same time, his utterance can also be interpreted as a directive speech act, directing the hearer, that is his uncle, to perform some future act , suggesting that he should stop eating that much. As far as Grices Cooperative Principle is concerned, we may consider that by saying the words, Will is fully cooperative, not breaching any of the maxims of conversations, but simply stating something. The same thing can be said for the words uttered by Uncle Phil, who uses the same type of speech acts, according to Searles theory, that is representatives, simply to state something he believes to be true. The locution of Phils words consists in the fact that he admits he managed to keep the weight he used to have when he was a teenager, the illocution being that of stating something which he considers to be true about himself, while the perlocution is aimed at stopping Will from making further comments on Phils physical appearance. Wills last reply (representative speech act), is meant to somehow make Phil aware of the fact that he should stop eating (perlocution). Although in the beginning Will seems to fully agree with Uncles Phil previous statement, by saying yes, he breaches Grices CP, flouting the maxim of quality, saying something for which he lacks adequate evidence, as, for sure his utterance only relies on what he sees, not being able to tell for sure Phils exact weight, as well as the maxim of quantity, as he is less informative than required by the context, not providing his uncle all the information required (he could have simply said: you are four times fatter than you used to be in high school) the implicature being you are far too fat.
5

Mai trebuie analizat si punctul de vedere al Teoriei lui Brown&Levinson si a lui Leech (dar dupa ce le faceti la curs ) B. Phil (to his son, Carlton, reluctant to helping him fix the babys cradle): Am I keeping you from something more important? Carlton: As a matter of fact, I have to study for my mid-term, to go to a party with the boys, and Id like to have a wife and kids to go on with my life. C. Will (to his cousin Carlton, a wimpish underachiever): Carlton, what are you doing here? Carlton: I have to write an essay for tomorrow with the theme: Imagine yourself twenty years from now Will: Oh, I see, no wonder youre so depressed. D: 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. E: Man sitting next to Will at the opera: We are trying to enjoy the opera. Will: I know, its hard. isnt it? F: 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. G: Phoebe to Monica and Chandler, who have made up after a tiff and are kissing passionately: Get a room! Chandler: We have one. Phoebe: I know. Use it! H. Rachel (pick up the phone): Hello, Vegas? Wed like some more alcohol. And yknow what else? Wed like some more beers. OH (giggling) I forgot to dial! Ross (hearing a knock on the door): That must be our alcohol and beers. I: C.C. and Niles loathe each other and take delight in hurting and embarrassing each other. C.C.: Ive never felt so insulted in my life! Niles: Youve never been so insulted? Well, now Im insulted! J: Frans mother, Sylvia, seeing Fran devouring a chocolate cake: Stick that out? Fran: Isnt she like one of those dope-sniffing dogs? K: On Christmas, an ambulance picks up a 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! L: A: How are we getting there? B: Were getting there in Daves car.

M: Father to daughter at family dinner: Any news about the SAT (standard aptitude test) results? Daughter: Ice-cream anyone? N: Victor has been buried up to his neck in the back garden by an irate builder. His wife, Margaret, comes out. Margaret: What are you doing? Victor: Im wallpapering the spare bedroom, what do you think Im doing ? O: Supervisor: Did you read the articles and wrote up literature review? Supervisee: I certainly read the articles. Werent they captivating! P: A: Did you like my presentation? B: The attendance was impressive, wasnt it? R: Reporter to Madonna: Why do you think they rated you as one of the worst-dressed artists of the year? Madonna: Why bother to talk about other peoples tastes?