• Formalist: Formal language is different and better than ordinary language
  • Informalist: Ordinary language has a broader use

 

 

 

1. Implicatures

Logic and Conversation

  • Divergence Thesis Prior Consensus

    The () and the ("and", "or", "if...then...", "not") mean different things

    Example

    "" means " and "

    However, in the example of

    • They got married and they had a baby
    • They had a baby and they got married

    "and" has a different use

  • Grice's Position: This consensus is not warranted

    The formal connectives and the natural language terms mean the same thing

    Often, however, we add to the meaning of sentences in conversation by non-explicit means, or Implicatures

  • Types of Implicature

    1. Conventional implicature

    2. Conversational implicature Grice's paper is about this

      says something, and can infer the implicature from the context

  • Why do Implicatures arise?

    The Maxims (see 2.) are responsible for conversational implicatures

 

 

 

2. Cooperative Conversation

  • Cooperative Principle

    "Make your contribution such as required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged"

    Grice: Conversation is not a random succession of sentences, it should have some common direction / purpose

    Simply Put: conservation has a purpose and what you say should serve that purpose

  • The Maxims

    1. Relation

      Everything that is said should "be relevant" to the conversation being had

    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 as informative as is required

      Do not make your contribution more informative than is required

    4. Manner

      Avoid obscurity of expression

      Avoid ambiguity

      Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity)

      Be orderly

 

 

 

3. Grice's Predictions

Grice's theory makes certain predictions that are verifiably true

  • Cancellability

    When embedding a sentence under a logical connective, sometimes the connective will become logically stronger. As such, the implicature will disappear

    Simply Put: Implicature can be cancelled by SAYING MORE

    Example

    1. You may have soup or salad
    2. You may have soup and salad
    3. You may not have soup or salad
    4. If you have soup or salad, then you must pay

    Implicature of [1]: "It is FALSE that [2]"

    • Otherwise, by the Maxim of Quantity, the speaker would directly say [2], since this is logically stronger

    Embedding [1] under Negation leads to [3]

    • [3] is equivalent to "You may not have soup and may not have salad"
    • The Implicature of [1] is covered explicitly in this sentence, hence no longer an implicature
    • And it does not violate the Maxim of Quantity

    Embedding [1] under Conditional leads to [4]

    • [4] means that either you have soup, or have salad, or have both, then you have to pay
    • The Implicature of [1] is no longer of significance, hence no longer an implicature
    • And it does not violate the Maxim of Quantity

    For conjunction, its implicature will disappear in certain language context

    Examples

    • Toto is a dog or an animal

      • Unlike the previous "soup or salad" example, dog is a subset of animal!
      • So there is no implicature like "It is FALSE that Toto is a dog and an animal"!
    • You need to take Logic or Discrete Math (to satisfy the course requirement)

      • Considering the context, you can take both courses, but only one is required
      • There is no stronger thing you can say, then there is no implicature
  • Context-Sensitivity

    In making sentences relevant in different contexts, it is expected that different information will be taken as implied

    Example

    "It’s getting late!" as uttered

    • to one’s child at home

      Implicature: "Time to wash up and sleep!"

    • at a business meeting

      Implicature: "Time to wrap up!"