Conversational Implicatures on Saturday Night Live Talk Show

Conversational implicature seems to be an everlasting concern in pragmatics for its wide-ranging investigation possibility. Applying Gricean’s principles, the present study examined the types of conversational implicatures found in the Saturday Night Live talk show. This research used a qualitative method with a pragmatic approach. The research data were collected from the utterances in Season 46 Episode 5 accessed from MBC's channel (www. saturday night live – NBC.COM). The result indicated that there were two types of conversational implicatures found in Saturday Night Live talk show namely: First, particularized conversational implicature, and second, generalized conversational implicature. We found that the utterances containing particularized implicature outnumbered the ones with generalized implicature. In our interpretation, the dominance of particularized implicature reflects the centrality of the particular context in producing and inferring utterances for meaningful and effective communication.

Implicitness, Logical Form and Arguments

In the paper I suggest that a loose notion of logical form can be a useful tool for the understanding or evaluation of everyday language and the explicit and implicit content of communication. Reconciling ordinary language and logic provides formal guidelines for rational communication, giving strength and order to ordinary communication and content to logical schemas. The starting point of the paper is the idea that the bearers of logical form are not natural language sentences, but what we communicate with them, that is, their content in a particular context. On the basis of that idea, I propose that we can ascribe logical proprieties to what is communicated using ordinary language and suggest a continuum between semantic phenomena such as explicatures and pragmatic communicational strategies such as (particularized) conversational implicatures, which challenges the idea that an implicatum is completely separate from what is said. I believe that this continuum can be best explained by the notion of logical form, taken as a propriety of sentences relative to particular interpretations.

Exploring Conversational Implicatures in the American Sitcom Seinfeld

Since learners must know how to use language in different contexts, sitcoms could help with pragmatic competence development because they display contextualized lifelike language. Could identifying conversational implicatures in a sitcom help develop metalinguistic awareness of implicatures? In addition, are there conversational implicatures in the sitcom Seinfeld that present the potential to help develop pragmatic competence? This article illustrates conversational implicatures through Seinfeld episodes and discusses how identifying implicatures could develop metapragmatic awareness. The method was a descriptive research of the qualitative type. Ten segments from the American sitcom Seinfeld were analyzed based on their conversational implicature occurrence. The implicatures present in the segments are discernible and may help develop pragmatic competence if explicitly taught to learners. Further studies could focus on quantitative research in EFL classrooms on the potential benefits of using sitcoms to develop metalinguistic awareness.

Lying Without Saying Something False? A Cross-Cultural Investigation of the Folk Concept of Lying in Russian and English Speakers

The present study examines cross-cultural differences in people’s concept of lying with regard to the question of whether lying requires an agent to say something they believe to be false. While prominent philosophical views maintain that lying entails that a person explicitly expresses a believed-false claim, recent research suggests that people’s concept of lying might also include certain kinds of deception that are communicated more indirectly. An important drawback of previous empirical work on this topic is that only few studies have investigated people’s concept of lying in non-Western samples. In the present study, we compare people’s intuitions about lying with indirect deceptions (i.e., presuppositions, conversational implicatures, and non-verbal actions) in a sample of N = 255 participants from Russia and N = 300 participants from the United Kingdom. Our findings show a strong degree of similarity between lie ratings of participants from Russia and the United Kingdom, with both samples holding it possible for agents to lie with deceptive statements and actions that do not involve the agent saying something they believe to be false.

IMPLICATURE IN SAIKIRAN’S STAND UP COMEDY SCRIPT DARK SKIN AND GETTING MARRIED

This research focuses on implicature in Saikiran’s Stand Up Comedy Script Dark Skin and Getting Married. By using Grice theory of implicature, the make up of this research strongly refers to the use of descriptive qualitative method to process the data, which are originally taken from the script. The analysis reveals two types of implicature i.e. cconventional implicatures and conversational implicatures. Conventional implicature is associated with the general meaning and also related to specific words (but, and, even). Meanwhile, conversational implicature verifies two types, i.e. generalized conversational implicature and particularized conversational implicature. There are 13 data referring to cconventional implicatures and 4 data to conversational implicatures (2 data generalized conversational implicatures and 2 data particularized conversational implicatures). The results of this research indicate that Saikiran uses those implicatures when he wants the audience to understand about his life condition in funny ways, and the audience will possibly find it difficult to understand if they do not know his utterances in the contexts.

Implicatures in Altfatah Nando’s Short Movie Terlanjur Mencinta

YouTube has been flooded with contents within a movie genre, mostly the products by junior creators. It is therefore important to appreciate their works to maintain their creativities and innovations. Positive responses to such literary works are also required to improve their quality writing. The current study was aimed at identifying and at the same time construing the implicatures found in each act of the movie entitled “Terlanjur Mencinta” directed by Alfatah Nando. George Yule’s pragmatic theory (1996) was used in relation to implicatures caused by conversational maxims (Grice, 1975) supported by linguistic evidence-based contextual interpretation, namely utterances and stage directions. Findings show that generalized conversational implicatures were identified, namely 12 implicatures in which 42% was due to violation of manner maxim, 33% attributed to that of relation maxim, 17% due to that of quantity maxim, and 8% due to that of quality maxim. In addition, 4 conventional implicatures were found in the monologue. The study concludes that the implicatures can be easily understood through the contexts of situations. It is recommended that future researchers can formulate the ideal proportion and distribution of implicatures in a particular text in terms of quality, employing comparative rhetoric and a special research instrument.

ANALYZING IMPLICATURES IN TALIWANG DIALECT

This study aims to analyze the types of implicature and flouting maxims and the reasons for doing the flouting in Taliwang Dialect. It applied the descriptive method with a qualitative approach. Data was collected by recording natural conversations among the natives of Taliwang Dialect. It was found two types of implicature, namely, Generalized Conversational Implicature (GCI) and Particularized Conversational Implicatures (PCI). In GCI, the speaker and interlocutor could easily understand the conveyed utterances because they mostly used general statements which are commonly spoken in the Taliwang dialect. In PCI, both speaker and the interlocutor needed a particular knowledge to understand each other because of the flouting maxim. Some speakers or hearers in PCI often break the maxim in a conversation due to some reasons such as accepting untrue or lie information, receiving more information than the needed information, getting irrelevant information and having unclear or ambiguous information.

Minimizer negative polarity items in non-negative contexts

Minimizer strong NPIs such as ˋˋlift a finger'' are known to be more restricted in their occurrence than weak NPIs like ˋˋever''. Sedivy 1990 points to contexts with a ˋˋnegative side message'' in which ˋˋlift a finger'' can occur but ˋˋever'' cannot. The paper provides a short overview over the relevant contexts and proposes an extension of a representational theory of NPI licensing with the following components: First, an utterance content is introduced that enriches the primary truth-conditional content by conventional implicatures and generalized conversational implicatures. Second, ˋˋever''-type NPIs can be licensed by weak NPI licensors, but only in the primary truth-conditional meaning of an utterance. ˋˋLift-a-finger''-type NPIs can only be licensed in the scope of negation, but the licensing can be checked at the representation of the enriched meaning of an utterance.

Provocative insinuations

En este artículo analizamos oracio-nes que, sin constituir explícitamente discurso de odio, no obstante transmiten un mensaje de odio. Por ejemplo, en el titular “Refugiado iraquí es condenado en Alemania por violar y asesinar una chica adolescente”, la presencia de “refugiado iraquí” no parece arbitraria. Al contrario, invita una inferencia racista en contra de los refugiados iraquíes. Argumentamos que estas inferencias no pueden ser descritas como slurs, términos neutros utilizados como insultos, dogwhistles o implica-turas conversacionales. En cambio, proponemos caracterizar estas inferencias como insinuacio-nes, concretamente insinuaciones provocativas, debido a que ninguna respuesta parece efectiva a la hora de bloquearlas. In this paper we analyse utterances that, without explicitly constituting hate speech, nevertheless convey a hateful message. For example, in the headline ‘Iraqi Refugee is convicted in Germany of raping and murdering teenage girl’, the presence of ‘Iraqi refugee’ does not seem arbitrary. To the contrary, it is responsible for inviting a racist inference against Iraqi refugees. We defend that these inferences cannot be described as slurs, ethnic or social terms used as insults, dogwhistles or conversational implicatures. Rather, we propose that these inferences are insinuations, specifically provocative insinuations, as no conversational response seems effective at blocking them.