Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 77 views

    Conventional Impicature: Non-Truth-Conditional Because of The Conventional Features Particular Lexical Items

    Uploaded by

    Ding Ling
    This document discusses conventional implicature, which is a non-truth conditional inference that arises due to conventional features of lexical items or linguistic constructions. Some examples of lexical items that trigger conventional implicatures are "therefore", which implies that the second proposition follows from the first, and "but", which implies a contrast between the two propositions. The conventional implicature is different from conversational implicature in that it is arbitrary and stipulated by convention rather than derived contextually.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Conventional Impicature: Non-Truth-Conditional Because of The Conventional Features Particular Lexical Items

    Uploaded by

    Ding Ling
    77 views5 pages
    This document discusses conventional implicature, which is a non-truth conditional inference that arises due to conventional features of lexical items or linguistic constructions. Some examples of lexical items that trigger conventional implicatures are "therefore", which implies that the second proposition follows from the first, and "but", which implies a contrast between the two propositions. The conventional implicature is different from conversational implicature in that it is arbitrary and stipulated by convention rather than derived contextually.

    Original Description:

    a introduction to conversational implicature

    Original Title

    conversational implicature

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses conventional implicature, which is a non-truth conditional inference that arises due to conventional features of lexical items or linguistic constructions. Some examples of lexical items that trigger conventional implicatures are "therefore", which implies that the second proposition follows from the first, and "but", which implies a contrast between the two propositions. The conventional implicature is different from conversational implicature in that it is arbitrary and stipulated by convention rather than derived contextually.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    77 views5 pages

    Conventional Impicature: Non-Truth-Conditional Because of The Conventional Features Particular Lexical Items

    Uploaded by

    Ding Ling
    This document discusses conventional implicature, which is a non-truth conditional inference that arises due to conventional features of lexical items or linguistic constructions. Some examples of lexical items that trigger conventional implicatures are "therefore", which implies that the second proposition follows from the first, and "but", which implies a contrast between the two propositions. The conventional implicature is different from conversational implicature in that it is arbitrary and stipulated by convention rather than derived contextually.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 5

    Conventional Impicature

    • 1. an example:
    • a. We want peace and they want war.
    • b. We want peace but they want war.
    • 1). the same truth condition (semantic content)
    • 2). conventional lexical item: but engenders an implicature of contrast.
    • 3).implicature : conventional implicature
    • unconventional implicature: conversational
    • other unconventional
    • 2. What is conventional implicature?
    • 1). a non-truth-conditional inference
    • 2). arises solely because of the conventional features
    • 3). the conventional features are attached to particular lexical items and /or linguistic
    constructions.
    Conventional Impicature
    • 3. some representative lexical items and the conventional implicatures they trigger
    • 1). therefore
    • p therefore q +>> q follows from p provides good reason for
    • He is a Chinese; he therefore knows how to use chopsticks.
    • Being a Chinese provides good reason for knowing how to use chopsticks.
    • 2). P but q +>> p contrasts with q there is a contrast between ...
    • John is poor but he is honest.
    • There is a contrast between John's poverty and his honesty.
    • 3). Even p+>> q contrary to expectation some sort of unexpectedness, surprise or unlikeness
    • Even his wife didn't think that John would win the by-election.
    • John's winning of the by-election is unexpected.
    • 4). p moreover q +>> q is in addition to p is in addition to
    • Xiaoming can read Germany. Moreover, he can write poems in the language.
    • Xiaoming's ability to write poems in Germany is in addition to his abilit to read Germany.
    •
    • other conventional lexical items:
    • : so, actually, also, anyway, barely, besides, however, manage to, on
    the other hand, only, still, though, too and yet.
    • so : provides an explanation for explains why
    • actually: although it is hard to believe,
    • too: others other than
    • manage to: it is difficult for sb. to do
    Conventional Impicature
    • 4. A comparison of conventional and conversational implicatures
    • similarities:
    • 1). non-truth conditional (don’t contribute to any truth conditions)
    • 2). associated with speaker or utterance (the speaker-intended meaning)
    • The conventional implicature, though generated by conventional words, is intended by the speaker, too, like that in conversational
    implicature. For example, there is not necessarily a contrast between one's poverty and one's honesty. The speaker think that there is a
    contrast in the two propostions, so the speaker uses the word but to show an implicature of contrast between one's wealth and one's good
    quality.
    • differences: conventional vs conversational
    • 1). arbitrary vs motivated (derived from conventional lexical terms vs from cooperative principle)
    • 2). stipulated vs caculable (given by convention vs infered )
    • 3). not cancellable vs cancellable (eg. the implicature of contrast of but do not disappear)
    • 4). detachable vs non-detachable (from semantic content)
    • ( depend on particular linguinstic items vs attached to semantic content not to lexical words. (except those arise from M-principle)
    • 5). not universal vs universal ( the cooperative principle is universal while the conventional lexical items are not )
    • notes:
    • 1. but three uses :
    • 1). denial of expectation:
    • 2). constrastive: Our sales have gone up but theirs have gone down.
    • John is poor but he is honest.
    • 3). correction: That's not my father but my uncle.
    • 2. different uses of but are lexicalized in some languages (two “buts”)
    • eg: in Germany aber denial of expectation/constrastive but
    • sondern correction but
    • Finnish (mutta, vaan), Spanish (pero, sino), Swedish (men, utan)
    • Russian (no, a)
    • 3. examine conventional implicatures before indulging in any free use of them

    You might also like