Shanghai International Studies University
A STUDY OF CONVERSATIONS IN WUTHERING HEIGHTS
FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE
A Thesis
Submitted to the Graduate School and College of English
In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for
Degree of Master of Arts
By Zhu Yiyin
0123100354
Under Supervision of Professor Huang Hao
October, 2014
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to show my deepest gratitude to my supervisor,
Professor Huang Hao, who, with consistent encouragement and patience, has
provided me with valuable guidance in every stage of writing this thesis, and without
whose instruction and advice, this thesis could not have been completed.
Second, I shall extend my heartfelt gratitude to all the professors who have
helped me to develop the fundamental and essential academic competence, and their
keen and vigorous academic observation enlightens me not only in this thesis but also
in my future study.
Besides, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my classmates, who
have provided me with their invaluable assistance and sound suggestions from which
I have benefited a great deal.
Last but not least, I am grateful for all those who have been supporting and caring
for me during the course of writing this thesis.
i
摘要
《呼啸山庄》是英国文学中最为独特的作品之一，它蕴含着强烈的感情和独创性，并且
将复杂的故事情节用高超的叙述手法娓娓道来。目前对该小说的研究不胜枚举，然而，大多
是从文学的角度出发，而从语言学的角度的研究却还远远不足。
本文旨在以合作原则和会话含义理论分析《呼啸山庄》的对话，并探寻对话中所反映出
的主要人物的性格及他们之间的关系。本文包括对格莱斯及新格莱斯会话含义学说的概述及
它们在人物话语分析中的应用，并从中推断出结论。本文的主要部分是以上述理论对《呼啸
山庄》中所选取的对话进行分析，对被选取的对话进行分类，分别分析其对合作原则下各准
则的违反，并对由此所产生的会话含义及其文学效果进行了阐述。
会话准则的违反可以由不同的原因造成：一部份准则的违反是说话者欲借此表达自己内
心的情感，而一部分准则的违反是出于对另一准则或礼貌原则的遵守。通过分析说话者不遵
守准则的情况，可以反映出人物的情感，个性和动机，从而更全面客观地分析故事的主题。
综上所述，运用合作原则的理论框架研究该小说，可以对其进行更客观、全面的分析。
同时，本研究也证明了格莱斯会话含义学说对文学研究的适用性，本文的方法与成果也可用
于与其他文学作品赏析。
关键词：会话含义；合作原则；对话；违反
ii
Abstract
Wuthering Heights is regarded as a unique masterpiece in English literature,
featuring exceptional passion, strong originality, and superb narrative skills. There
have been various studies on the novel, however, most of them are from literary
perspective, and studies from linguistic perspective are inadequate.
This thesis aims to analyze the conversations in Wuthering Heights under the
theory of Cooperative Principle and Conversation Implicature, and find out how
conversations reflect the personalities of the main characters and the relationship
among them. The thesis includes an outline of Grice‘s theory of Cooperative principle
as well as Neo-Gricean studies, their application to the analysis of the characters‘
utterances, and its inferred conclusion. The major part of this thesis analyzes
conversations selected from Wuthering Heights with the above- mentioned theories.
The selected conversations are categorized respectively under the non-observance of
the maxims of Cooperative Principle, then the conversational implicatures generated
through the violation and the literary effects are elaborated in detail.
The violation of the conversational maxims may be caused by various reasons:
some are intended by speakers to express their inner emotion, whereas some are
―sacrificed‖ for the observance of another maxim or the politeness principle. Through
the analysis of speakers‘ non-observance of the Maxims , the characters‘ feelings,
personalities and motivation can be revealed, and a more comprehensive and
objective view on the theme of the story can be offered.
To sum up, by applying the theoretical framework of Cooperative Principles to
the studies of this novel, its text can be analyzed in a more objective and
comprehensive way. At the same time, the study may in turn prove the applicability of
the theories, and the outcome of the study may also be applied to the analysis and
appreciation of other literary works.
Key words: Cooperative Principle; Conversational Implicature; conversation;
non-observance
iii
Contents
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... i
摘要................................................................................................................................ii
Abstract .........................................................................................................................iii
Chapter One Introduction.......................................................................................... - 1 1.1 Rationale of the Study ..................................................................................... - 1 1.2 Objective of the Study ..................................................................................... - 2 1.3 Research Methodology .................................................................................... - 2 1.4 Main Structure ................................................................................................. - 3 Chapter Two Literature Review of Wuthering Heights............................................. - 4 2.1 Studies from Literary Perspectives abroad ...................................................... - 4 2.2 Studies from Literary Perspective at Home..................................................... - 5 2.3 Studies from Linguistic Perspective ................................................................ - 6 Chapter Three Theoretical Framework ..................................................................... - 8 3.1 Grice‘s Theory of Implicature ......................................................................... - 8 3.1.1 Cooperative Principle ............................................................................ - 8 3.1.2 Four Conversational Maxims ................................................................ - 9 3.1.3 Non-observance of the Maxims........................................................... - 10 3.1.4 Conventional Implicature and Conversational Implicature ................. - 12 3.2 Neo-Gricean Studies...................................................................................... - 13 Chapter Four Conversational Implicatures in Wuthering Heights .......................... - 17 4.1 Non-observance of the Quantity Maxim ....................................................... - 17 4.1.1 Flouting the First Maxim of Quantity ................................................. - 17 4.1.2 Violating the First Maxim of Quantity ................................................ - 19 4.1.3 Flouting the Second Maxim of Quantity ............................................. - 23 4.1.4 Generalized Quantity Implicature ....................................................... - 27 4.2 Non-observance of the Quality Maxim ......................................................... - 28 4.2.1 Violating the First Maxim of Quality .................................................. - 28 4.2.2 Flouting the First Maxim of Quality ................................................... - 30 4.2.3 Violating the Second Maxim of Quality.............................................. - 39 4.2.4 Flouting the Second Maxim of Quality ............................................... - 40 4.3 Non-observance of the Relation Maxim........................................................ - 41 4.4 Non-observance of the Manner Maxim......................................................... - 44 4.4.1 Infringing the Manner Maxim ............................................................. - 44 4.4.2 Flouting the Manner Maxim................................................................ - 46 4.5 Summary........................................................................................................ - 47 4.5.1 Characterization of Narrators .............................................................. - 47 4.5.2 Characterization of Heathcliff and Catherine ...................................... - 49 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. - 50 Bibliography............................................................................................................ - 52 -
Chapter One Introduction
As the introductory part of the thesis, the introduction aims to illustrate the
meaning of the study and explain what research questions it intends to answer and in
which way the research is to be conducted. Besides, the structure of the thesis is
presented in the last part.
1.1 Rationale of the Study
Linguistics is generally defined as the study of language, and the use of language
is one crucial element of literature; from this perspective, we can easily draw a
connection between the studies of linguistics and that of literature. As a
newly-developed branch of modern linguistic, Pragmatics has various definitions. A
general definition can be that it is a kind of meaning study, i.e., how speakers of a
language use sentences to effect successful communication. (Dai, 2002: 84)
Literary pragmatics is an emerging interdisciplinary subject which integrates
pragmatic theories with literary theories and probes into the structure, usage and
interpretation of literary language, as well as the process of its production. In the
course of discipline development, many pragmatic theories and methodologies such
as Speech Act Theory, Cooperative Principle, Politeness Principle have been
introduced to the research on literary works, and they provide richer insights into the
study of literary texts.
Wuthering Heights, Emily Bronte‘s only novel, is regarded as a unique
masterpiece and one of the most contentious novels in English literature. Although
Wuthering Heights has drawn wide attention from researchers at home and abroad,
most of the studies are from literature perspective, mainly from the perspective of
feminism, religion, characters, narrative skills, symbolism, and its Gothic elements;
studies from linguistic perspectives are inadequate.
Since speech can powerfully indicate the character of a sp eaker, the motivation
and personalities of speakers and their relationships can be inferred from their speech.
By applying pragmatic theories such as Cooperative Principles and conversational
-1-
implicature to the studies of this novel, a new viewpoint may be provided for the
appreciation of the novel. At the same time, the study may also provide a deeper
understanding of Cooperative Principle.
1.2 Objective of the Study
The theory of conversational implicature, first outlined by H. P. Grice in giving
the William James Lectures at Harvard University in 1967 and then developed by
Horn, Levinson, Sperber and Wilson, remains one of the most influential theories in
the field of Pragmatics. The Cooperative Principle and its related conversational
maxims are intended to distinguish what is meant from what is said; and are thus
widely used in the analysis of literary works.
Through the application of the theory of Cooperative Principle and its related
maxims, the thesis intends to answer the following questions: How do conversations
reflect the personalities of the main characters? How can we view Catherine ‘s
relationship with Heathcliff or Linton respectively? What is Nelly Dean‘s role in the
series of events? Does the tragedy in the novel come from social inequality or from
the inner souls of Catherine and Heathcliff?
This thesis analyzes selected conversations in Wuthering Heights under the
theoretical framework of conversational implicature, and aims to reveal the thoughts
and feelings of the characters.
1.3 Research Methodology
This thesis adopts a qualitative analysis from pragmatic perspective, and the
conversations extracted from Emily Bronte‘s Wuthering Heights are used as samples
for analyses. Under the theory of Cooperative Principle and conversational
implicature, the author tries to figure out how the characters convey their implied
meaning and real intention by non-observance of the CP or its associate maxims, and
how they manage to achieve literary effects through conversational implicature. This
thesis concentrates on the generation and effects of conversational implicature; and
starting from this point, the characters‘ emotion, personalities, and their relationships
-2-
are further studied.
1.4 Main Structure
The thesis is divided into five parts:
Chapter one is the introductory part which provides a broad outline of the thesis,
illustrating its rationale, objective, methodology, and structural organization.
Chapter two is the literature review of Wuthering Heights, introducing previous
studies on it from home and abroad. The literary review is divided in to two parts:
reviews from literary perspective and from linguistic perspective. In this chapter, the
theme, influence, and expressive skills of the novel will be discussed.
Chapter three is the theoretical framework of the thesis, which is the basis for
further analysis in the following chapters. In this chapter, a brief introduction of
Grice‘s theory of Cooperative Principle and conversational implicature as well as
Neo-Gricean studies is presented. The mechanisms of pragmatic inference evolved
from the above- mentioned theories are also introduced.
Chapter four is the main body of the thesis, and is of vital importance in the
study. This part includes the conversational analysis under the theoretical framework
of CP and CI. Selected excerpts of conversations in the novel, categorized according
to different kinds of non-observance of conversational maxims, will be studied
according to the theory of conversational implicature. Based on that analysis, the
further discussion of the characters‘ feelings and thoughts is also included in this
chapter. Then the analysis goes on to the characterization reflected by non- fulfillment
of conversational maxims.
The last chapter is the concluding part of the thesis. Based on the studies in the
previous chapters, a conclusion will be drawn through summing up the findings in the
previous chapters. The theme and characterization of the novel, as well as the
applicability of the theoretical framework are demonstrated in this part.
-3-
Chapter Two Literature Review of Wuthering Heights
2.1 Studies from Literary Perspectives abroad
As one of the most contentious novel, Wuthering Heights has drawn attention of
all manner of critics since its publication in 1847. Some complimented the force and
original beauty of the novel, whereas others criticized its ―coarseness‖ and
―immorality‖.
Charlotte Bronte, the author of Jane Eyre, and Emily Bronte ‘s sister, was one of
the earliest critics of this novel. In her 1850 preface, she gives an analysis of the
characters and attributed the originality and coarseness of the novel to Emily Bronte ‘s
personality and life experience. Her analysis of the characters, including her
comments on Nelly Dean, Edgar Linton and Catherine are to some extent made from
the values of her time. Her criticism has great influence on her contemporaries and
critics of the later age. Mary Ward (1899) focuses on the similarity between
Wuthering Heights and the works of Scott, Southey and Coleridge, and the influence
on the novel by German romanticism, and she compliments Wuthering Heights for its
power, originality, and its author‘s extraordinary writing skill. Virginia Woolf
compares Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights and concludes that the latter is more
sophisticated and with broader view and deeper theme. She commented that:
Wuthering Heights is a more difficult book to understand than Jane Eyre,
because Emily is a greater poet than Charlotte. When Charlotte wrote she
said with eloquence and splendor and passion ―I love‖, ―I hate‖, ―I suffer‖.
Her experience, though more intense, is on a level with our own. But there
is no ―I‖ in Wuthering Heights … There is love, but it is not the love of
men and women. Emily was inspired by some more general conception.
The impulse which urged her to create was not her own suffering or her
own injuries. She looked out upon a world cleft into gigantic disorder and
felt within her a power to unite it in a book. The gigantic ambition is to be
felt throughout the novel- a struggle, half thwarted but of superb
-4-
conviction, to say something through the mouths of her characters which
is not merely ―I love‖ or ―I hate‖, but ―we, the whole human race‖ and
―you, the eternal powers…‖ the sentence remains unfinished…(Woolf,
1925: 201-202, 202-204)
Arnold Kettle describes Wuthering Heights as ―concrete and yet general, local and yet
universal‖, ―an expression in the imaginative terms of art of the stresses and tensions
and conflicts, personal and spiritual, of nineteen-century capitalist society.‖(Kettle,
1951:139) He studies the realistic elements of Wuthering Heights and compares it
with Oliver Twist; he also comments on the relationship between Heathcliff and
Catherine, and analyzes the social and psychological factors behind Heathcliff ‘s
depravation. Maugham (1948) discusses Emily Bronte‘s sadistic nature and
homosexual tendency, and argues that Heathcliff is the reflection of the author herself.
He also praises Wuthering Heights for the power and original beauty it contains
despite some defects in the plot and narration. Anne Smith (1976) edited an anthology
The Art of Emily Bronte, which studied Wuthering Heights from different perspectives.
Generally, the book describes Wuthering Heights as an ingenious and original novel
with Gothic element, some researchers analyzed the novel from the viewpoint of
Emily Bronte‘s psychology and life experiences, whereas some argue that Emily
Bronte draws inspiration from German legends and Scottish Ballids.
2.2 Studies from Literary Perspective at Home
Many Chinese researchers have also studied on Wuthering Heights since its
introduction into China. Most studies focus on its theme, narration, symbols and
images, Gothic elements, and character analysis. There are also studies from the
viewpoint of comparative literature and pragmatics.
Zhang Yunjun and Shen Jingkui (2005) argues that the theme of Wuthering
Heights is multi- layered and that the novel inherits and transcends traditional Gothic
novel in the author ‘s unique and deep understanding of life and universe. In another
article written by Zhang Yunjun and Zuo Tianjiao (2004), the characters are,
according to the tradition of Gothic novel, separated into two groups, i.e., ―angel‖ and
-5-
―demon‖. Zhang and Zuo also maintains that although Emily Bronte employs the
traditional Gothic modal which features the confrontation between ―angel‖ and
―demon‖, the characters in this novel are vivid and round characters, which adds to
the artistic value of the novel. Wang Hailv (2004) lists ―wilderness‖ and ―windstorm‖
as two crucial images in Wuthering Heights, and concludes that by creating grotesque
and unique images, Emily Bronte depicts the ―overwhelming windstorm that swept
people‘s mind‖. Wu Xiangzhi (2011) studies the images of Wuthering Heights, and
she points out that the heights symbolizes the universe in Emily Bronte‘s mind, and
Catherine symbolizes both ―windstorm‖ and ―tranquility‖, whereas Linton stands for
―tranquility‖. She also draws a comparison between the marriage in Wuthering
Heights and the marriage in The Dream of Red Mansions and concludes that by
marrying Linton, Catherine broke soul and body, and thus broke her integrity. Lu
Xiaoning and Liu Zhiyi (2000) compare Wuthering Heights with The Golden Cangue
by Eileen Chang, and they argue that the two novels are similar in their theme,
emotions, the revenge of protagonists and the influence of material wealth on human.
2.3 Studies from Linguistic Perspective
Some recent researches are conducted from linguistic perspective. Yao yong
(2007) conducted a textual analysis of Wuthering Heights, studying the coherence and
cohesion of the text. Liu Yanxia (2003) also analyzes the novel from the perspective
of Halliday‘s theory of functional grammar by conducting textual analysis of
conversation under clause complex theory. Han Liyang (2012) applied Halliday‘s
metafunction theory to the study of Wuthering Heights, analyzing the foregrounded
stylistic features of the story in terms of ideational metafunction, interpersonal
metafunction, and textual metafunction. He provides a scientific and objective way of
analyzing the novel instead of resorting to the intuition of the researchers. He
proposes that Nelly Dean is not only the narrator of the story, but also the one
transferring Emily Bronte‘s moral value to the readers. This opinion is different from
most criticisms, which depicts Nelly Dean as a woman representing social convention
and homely wise, limited by her own sight and place, whose understanding and
-6-
knowledge of the situation and other people are always shallow and prosaic, and
whose values are not appreciated by Emily Bronte. Nelly Dean symbolizes traditional
masculine values of that time, whose precision of narrative does not necessarily mean
acuteness of judgment. Through her ―unreliable‖ narration, her incapability of
appreciating the special nature of Heathcliff and Catherine, and her harsh judgment of
them, the readers may unexpectedly develop a feeling of sympathy for them and form
their own judgment of the story and characters. Chen Xiaobo and Ge Lingling (2010)
study the deixis in the conversation of Wuthering Heights and figure out the
relationships between Nelly Dean and other main characters in the novel. Cooperative
Principle is also used to analyze the conversation in Wuthering Heights. Song Hongbo
and Fu Jingjing (2013) applied the four maxims of CP to the analysis of the
conversation in the novel and thus studied the emotion of characters and their relation.
Dong Shirong (2008) applied the same method to the analysis of file script of
Wuthering Heights and discussed the personalities of Catherine and Heathcliff.
From the review above, it can be pointed out that most of the researches of
Wuthering Heights focus on literature study; there are some studies from the
viewpoint of linguistics, such as functional grammar and cooperative principle.
However, the studies are still inadequate, and more efforts should be paid to a more
comprehensive and systematic study from linguistic perspective.
-7-
Chapter Three Theoretical Framework
3.1 Grice’s Theory of Implicature
H. P. Grice was invited to deliver William James Lectures at Harvard University
in 1967, and it was there he first bring up the conception of implicature. In 1975,
Grice published a paper logic and conversation, in which his theory of implicature is
expounded. Grice‘s theory of implicature, though described by some researchers as
incomplete, sketchy, and somewhat problematic, is proved to be one of the most
influential theories in the field of Pragmatics. The analysis in this thesis is focused on
conversational implicature, as distinguished from conventional implicature.
3.1.1 Cooperative Principle
In order to explain the mechanisms by which people understand implied meaning
and to explain why and how people mean more than what they say, Grice (1975)
proposed the Cooperative Principle based on his observations of meaning. In his
theory, Grice mentioned that talk exchanges are not sets of disconnected remarks,
otherwise the conversations would not be rational. The participants engaged in the
conversation recognize ―a common purpose, or set of purposes, or at least a mutually
accepted direction‖. (Grice, 2002: 26) Therefore, talk exchanges can be taken as more
or less cooperative. Participants in a conversation should adhere to a general principle,
to ensure that the conversation can be carried on smoothly:
We might then formulate a rough general principle which participants will
be expected
(ceteris
paribus)
to observe, namely:
Make your
conversational 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. One might label this the Cooperative Principle. (Grice,
2002: 26)
Though phrased in imperative mood, Grice was not trying to instruct speakers
how they are expected to behave. The principle is intended to describe how people
-8-
normally behave in talk exchanges; In Grice‘s opinion, people engaged in talk
exchanges have a shared assumption that a set of over-arching rules are in operation,
unless there are evidences to the contrary; and in that case, the conversation is likely
to break down.
3.1.2 Four Conversational Maxims
Grice (1975) listed four conversational maxims in his Logic and Conversation,
namely, the maxims of Quantity, Quality, Relation and Manner. The four maxims run
as follows:
i. 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.
ii. Quality: Do not say what you believe to be false.
Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.
iii. Relation: Be relevant.
iv. Manner: Avoid obscurity of expression.
Avoid ambiguity.
Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).
Be orderly. (Grice, 2002: 26-27)
Grice pointed out that according to a well-recognized empirical fact, people in
general do proceed as is prescribed by these principles, and a radical departure from
the principles will cause a great deal of efforts and troubles. He also drew a
connection between talk exchange and cooperative transactions and found their shared
features:
i. The participants have some common immediate aim … their ultimate
aims may, of course, be independent and even in conflict … In
characteristic talk exchanges, there is a common aim … namely, that each
party should, for the time being, identify himself with the transitory
conversational interests of the other.
ii. The contributions of the participants should be dovetailed, mutually
-9-
dependent.
iii. There is some sort of understanding (which may be explicit but which
is often tacit) that, other things being equal, the transaction should
continue in appropriate style unless both parties are agreeable that it
should terminate. You do not just shove off or start doing something else.
(Grice, 2002: 29)
From this perspective, it is rational to observe CP and its related maxims if the
speakers wish to converse in an efficient and profitable way: they are expected to be
informative, truthful, relevant, and clear.
However, in natural conversations, it is not always the case. For examp le:
A: Has Mary arrived?
B: Well, it‘s already 10 o‘clock.
Here B‘s answer seems to violate both the Quantity maxim and the relevance
maxim by failing to answer A‘s question clearly. However, despite his apparent
non-observance to the maxims, B is, in a deeper level, cooperative. If we can
successfully draw a connection between ―ten-o‘clock‖ and Mary‘s whereabouts, we
may infer that if Mary is expected to arrive at some time after 10 o‘clock (which can
also be inferred from the adverb ―already‖), she has not arrived yet.
In short, conversational maxims can generate inferences beyond semantic
contents of the utterance. Such inferences are termed by Grice as ―implicature‖(cf.
implying), a noun related to the verb ―implicate‖.
3.1.3 Non-observance of the Maxims
Grice also noticed that there are many cases in which people fail to observe
certain maxims. There are five kinds of non-observance to a maxim, namely, flouting
a maxim, violating a maxim, infringing a maxim, opting out of a maxim, and
suspending a maxim.
Among the five ways of non-observance, infringing a maxim is caused by
speaker‘s imperfect linguistic performance due to poor command of the language or
psychological factors; therefore, there is no intention of deceiving, misleading, or
- 10 -
generating implicature on the part of the speaker. This thesis mainly focus on two
kinds of non-observance: flouting and violating; however, unintentional failures to
observe the maxims are also studied.
3.1.3.1 Flouting a maxim
When a speaker blatantly violates a maxim without any intention of deceiving or
misleading, he or she can be said to be ―flouting‖ the maxim. It is this kind of
non-observance that drew Grice‘s attention most.
The flouting of a maxim may be caused by different reason. Some are
necessitated by a clash with another maxim, and some are employed by speakers to
imply meanings which are not stated by the semantic content of the sentence uttered.
In the latter case, the non-observance occurs at the superficial level, with speaker ‘s
deliberate purpose of generating implicature. Such way of flouting was termed
―exploitation‖ by Grice. For example:
A: Where do you live?
B: Somewhere in Shanghai.
Since there is no evidence that B does not know his own address, or that to
answer A‘s question will violate another conversational maxim, B is flouting the
quantity maxim by providing less information than is required by A‘s question. B may
be implying that he does want to talk about the question, or that he simply does not
want A to know his address.
Example: A: What did the boss tell you?
B: Shall I get some coffee for you?
In the example above, B is flouting the Relevance Maxim by failing to answer A‘s
question. B may be implying that it is inappropriate of him to tell A what the boss said
to him in private.
Example: (after a fierce quarrel) You are so sweet!
It is obvious to A and his listener that A has said something he does not believe,
which means that he has flouted the first maxim of Quality, i.e., do not say what you
believe to be false. Therefore, he must be implying something different with what he
is saying. The most possible one is the opposite of the proposition he purports to
- 11 -
make.
3.1.3.2 Violating a Maxim
If a speaker fails to observe a maxim unostentatiously, then he or she is, in
Grice‘s words, violating the maxim, and there exists probability of misleading. Take a
wide-spread joke for an example:
A: ―Mom, can you give me one dollar?‖
B: ―Where is the money I gave you yesterday?‖
A: ―I gave it to an old lady.‖
B: ―Oh, You are a kind- hearted boy!‖
If the conversation stops here, no one can notice that the boy is violating the first
maxim of Quantity by failing to be as informative as is required: He did give the
money to the old lady; however, it is revealed later that the old lady is a candy seller,
and the boy used the money to buy himself candies. The example above also shows
that violating a maxim is liable to mislead.
3.1.4 Conventional Implicature and Conversational Implicature
Grice distinguished expressed meaning (literal meaning) from implied meaning,
which in his theory is termed implicature. He went further to distinguish two different
types of implicature: conventional implicature and conversational implicature.
Conventional implicature can be expressed through the use of adverbs (already,
also, only, too, etc.), connectives (but, so, therefore, however, etc.), implicative verbs
(fail, manage, stop, bother, etc.), and subordinating conjunctions (although, despite,
though, etc)
Conversational implicature refers to
non-truth-conditional inferences, or
pragmatic inferences, which is derived from pragmatic principles in a particular
context of utterance. It is an inference from the semantic content which depends on
context, speaker's intention, hearer's attitude and the mutual assumption.
Grice also divided conversational implicature into two categories: generalized
conversational implicature and particularized conversational implicature.
A generalized implicature is a conversational implicature that can be inferred
- 12 -