Pragmatics Lecture 8 PDF

Conversational Implicature PART 2  Flouting a maxim The situations which chiefly interested Grice were those  in which a speaker obviously fails to observe a maxim, not with any intention of deceiving or misleading, but because the speaker wishes to prompt the hearer to look...

Conversational Implicature PART 2  Flouting a maxim The situations which chiefly interested Grice were those  in which a speaker obviously fails to observe a maxim, not with any intention of deceiving or misleading, but because the speaker wishes to prompt the hearer to look for a meaning which is different from, or in addition to, the expressed meaning. This additional meaning he called 'conversational  implicature' and he termed the process by which it is generated 'flouting a maxim‗ Grice was well aware, however, that there are many occasions when people fail to observe the maxims. Flouting a maxim is one of the ways of failing to  observe a maxim  Flouting  A flout occurs when a speaker obviously fails to  observe a maxim at the level of what is said, with the deliberate intention of generating an implicature. Examples of flouts of each of the maxims Flouts necessitated by a clash between maxims  A speaker flouts the Maxim of Quantity by  blatantly giving either more or less information than the situation demands. Example 11 (giving more information)  The speaker is Rupert Allason (an expert on the  British intelligence services). He is discussing the identity of the so called 'Fifth Man‗ It was either Graham Mitchell or Roger Hollis  and I don't believe it was Roger Hollis According to Grice, such a response would set in motion  a process of informal reasoning which would lead the listeners to derive an additional piece of information (i) Rupert Allason has obviously given more information  than required (he could simply have said The Fifth Man was Graham Mitchell'). Allason appears to have breached the maxim of Quantity.  (ii) However, we have no reason to believe that Allason  is being deliberately uncooperative (i.e. that he is failing to observe the Cooperative Principle (CP). (iii) We must conclude that his failure to observe the  maxim of Quantity is due to his wish to observe the CP in some other way. We must work out why the CP should lead Allason to  give more information than was requested. (iv) The failure to observe the maxim of Quantity can be  explained if we assume that Allason also wished to observe the maxim of Quality. We conclude that for some reason he is confronted with a clash between these two maxims (either he tells the truth or he gives just the right amount of information). (v) His reply is a compromise, which leads us to deduce  that whilst he strongly believes that Mitchell was the spy, he doesn't have sufficient evidence to assert this as a fact. He has signaled that his belief may not be accurate. In this instance the speaker found himself unable  simultaneously to observe the maxims of Quality and Quantity, signaled his dilemma by flagrantly failing to give the right amount of information and prompted his interlocutor to look for an implicature.  Giving less information A similar explanation might be offered for the  following instance of non-observance of the maxim of Quantity. In this case, the second speaker gives less information than the situation demands: Example 12  A is asking B about a mutual friend's new boyfriend:  A : Is he nice?  B: She seems to like him.  B could simply have replied: 'No' — this would give the  maximum amount of information possible in the situation. Instead, B gives a much weaker and less informative  response. It would be possible to argue that his failure to do so  stems from a clash between the maxims of Quantity and Quality (B cannot say for certain whether the new boyfriend is  nice or not, and speaks only on the basis of the evidence he has)  Flouts which exploit a maxim According to Grice's theory, interlocutors operate on  the assumption that, as a rule, the maxims will be observed. When this expectation is confusing and the listener is  confronted with the obvious non-observance of a maxim (i.e. the listener has discounted the possibility that the speaker may be trying to deceive, or is incapable of speaking more clearly, succinctly, etc.), he or she is again prompted to look for an implicature. Flouts exploiting maxim of Quality Flouts which exploit the maxim of Quality occur  when the speaker says something which is blatantly untrue or for which he or she lacks adequate evidence. In the 'ambulanceman' example, an implicature is  generated by the speaker's saying something which is patently false. Since the speaker does not appear to be trying to  deceive the listener in any way, the listener was forced to look for another plausible interpretation.. (1) There is no example in recorded history of  people being delighted at having someone vomit over them. 2) The ambulanceman is not trying to deceive us in  any way. (3) The most obviously related proposition is the  exact opposite of the one he has expressed. (4) The ambulanceman is extremely annoyed at  having the drunk vomit over him.  Cases of flouting the maxim of Quality ‗Generating a conversational implicature by means of something like a figure of speech‗ 1. Metaphor  You are the cream in my coffee  2. Hyperbole (exaggeration)  My car breaks down every five minutes.  I called you hundreds of times yesterday  3. Sarcasm/ Irony  I like it when you sing out of key  4. White lie  The food is delicious (it is not at all)  5. Unexpected response  Often an individual will try to deflect unwelcome attention by giving  an improbable or obviously untrue response. For example, if someone asks you your name and you don't want to  tell them, you might say: I‘m the Queen of Sheba'. Example 14  B was on a long train journey and wanted to read her book.  A was a fellow passenger who wanted to talk to her:  A : What do you do?  B: I'm a teacher.  A : Where do you teach?  B: Outer Mongolia.  A : Sorry I asked!  Outer Mongolia is seen as somewhere impossibly remote, so that  B's improbable response prompted the hearer to look for an implicature. (in this case that his attentions were unwelcome).  Flouts exploiting the maxim of Quantity A flout of the maxim of Quantity occurs when a speaker  blatantly gives more or less information than the situation requires. We have already seen one instance (example 12) of a  person giving less information than required by the situation, and the following examples operate in the same way: Example 15 (less information)  A: How are we getting there?  B: Well we're getting there in Dave's car.  B blatantly gives less information than A needs, thereby  generating the implicature that, while she and her friends have a lift arranged, A will not be travelling with them.  Example 16 Petruchio has come to ask Baptista for his daughter's  hand in marriage: Pet: And you, good sir! Pray, have you not a daughter  call'd Katherina, fair and virtuous? Bap: I have a daughter, sir, call'd Katherina.   By confirming that he has a daughter called Katherina,  but omitting any mention to her fairness or virtue, Baptista implies that she does not possess these qualities to any marked degree. Another case of flouting Quantity is tautology  A tautology is an expression or phrase that says the  same thing twice Boys are boys  A win is a win  War is war  A sandwich is a sandwich  NP+ to be + NP  For example, during their lunch break, one woman  asks another how she likes the sandwich she is eating and receives the following answer. Example : Oh, a sandwich is a sandwich  In logical terms, this reply appears to have no  communicative value since it states something obvious and doesn’t seem to be informative at all.( less informative) However, if the woman is being co-operative ,then the  listener must assume that her friend is communicating something. Given the opportunity to evaluate the sandwich, her friend  has responded without an explicit evaluation, thereby implying that she has no opinion, good or bad, to express. That is, her friend has essentially communicated that the  sandwich isn’t worth talking about  Flouts exploiting the maxim of Relation The maxim of Relation ('Be relevant') is exploited by  making a response or observation which is very obviously irrelevant to the topic in hand (e.g. by abruptly changing the subject, or by overtly failing to address the other person's goal in asking a question). Examples of flouting the maxim of Relation by changing  the subject or by failing to address the topic directly are encountered very frequently  Flouting the Maxim of Relation Son : I’m going to the movies tonight  Father : The chemistry exam is tomorrow, isn’t  it? The father is changing the topic by giving a seemingly  unrelated answer. Having an ―exam tomorrow‖ conventionally involves ―study tonight,‖ and ―study tonight‖ precludes ―going to the movies.‖ Yet the father‘s response will be immediately interpreted as ―No‖ or ―Probably not.  Examples of Flouting Relation  A: Susan can be such an idiot sometimes  B: Oh what a lovely day!  + One shouldn‘t speak ill of people behind their back  A: Has your boss gone crazy?  B: Let’s go get some coffee.  + The boss may be nearby , so Mary makes an  apparently irrelevant remark  Flouts exploiting the maxim of Manner The following is an example of a flout of the maxim of  Manner. Example 20  This interaction occurred during a radio interview with  an unnamed official from the United States Embassy in Haiti: Interviewer: Did the United States Government play  any part i n Duvalier's departure? Did they, for example, actively encourage him to leave? Official: I would not try to steer you away from that  conclusion. The official could simply have replied: 'Yes'.  Her actual response is extremely long-winded and  complex and it is obviously no accident, nor through any inability to speak clearly, that she has failed to observe the maxim of Manner. There is, however, no reason to believe that the official is  being deliberately unhelpful (she could, after all, have simply refused to answer at all, or said: 'No comment'). What caused her to flout the maxim of Manner in this  way is occasioned by a clash of goals: the desire to claim credit for what she sees as a desirable outcome, while at the same time avoiding putting on record the fact that her government has intervened in the affairs of another country. In fact, this exchange was widely reported and the  implicature spelt out in news broadcasts later the same day: 'Although they have not admitted it openly, the State  Department is letting it be known that the United States was behind Jean-Paul Duvalier, "Baby Doc's", decision to quit the island.‗ The desire 'to say and not say.   Flouting The Maxim of Manner Example 1  A: Did John smile?  B: The corners of his lips turned slightly upwards  + He did not exactly smile  Example 2  A: Did he sing well?  B: Actually, he produced certain sounds trying to match  the tune and music. Example 3  A:Is there any where I can powder my nose ( I need a  toilet)   Spelling out words is a way of flouting the maxim of  manner Example 1  A: I think I‘ll go for a W-A-L-K (in front of a dog)  Example 2  A: Let‘s get the kids something  B: O.K. but I veto I-C-E –C-R-E-A-M   Exercise 1.I can jump higher than the Empire State Building.  2. This meal is delicious ( the food is not delicious)  3. A: I’ll watch Titanic now  B: What about the exam you have tomorrow?  4. A: She did a P.G.C.E in T.E.S.O.L as they call it T.E. F.L  nowadays. B: Sorry I don’t understand.  5. Teacher : What time is it ?( near the end of the class)  Student : 10: 44: 33 ( seconds)  6. A: How are you?  B : I am dead  7. Student: Tehran is in Turkey , isn’t it?  Teacher : and London is in America , I suppose.  8. A: I’m the top of my class  B: yeah and I’m the Queen of England  9. A: What are you reading?  B: a book  10. A: Do you like linguistics?  B: Well , let’s say I don’t jump for joy before class  THANK YOU