Grice, H.P. 1975. “Logic and Conversation.”

Grice, H.P. 1975. “Logic and Conversation.” In Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan’s Syntax and Semantics, volume (3) Speech Acts, pp. 41-58. New York: Academic Press.

Formalist and informalist positions – where logicians create formulas to offer patterns of inferences – where specific devices (not, and, or, etc.) are utilized to insinuate similarities or differences between languages. These may or may not work in all circumstances, and would help to benefit the construction of an ideal language where all inference-deviances could be applied – hence the debate.

Implicate – implicature – implicatum – intuition of who holds responsibility of say, action, and connection of verbage to possession – the questioning the assumptions of interactional or intended labor

Conversational implicatures – connected with certain features of discourse – conversation as cooperative, mutually-accepted purposes/directions – Cooperative Principle: “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” (45)

Cooperative Principle in terms of Quantity (make contribution informative as needed, but not too informative) – Quality (Don’t falsify statements, and don’t say what you can’t support)^ but what about intentional disjunctures for inference (red herrings?) – Relation (Make your communications relevant and relative to the talk exchange patterns and subject matter) – Manner (Avoid ambiguity, obscureness, disorder, and length) – in concert with other moral, social, and aesthetic maxims (politeness, etc.)

Cooperative transactions have immediate aims, mutual dependencies, and are not exploitative of interactional labor, or disruptive. Flouts of quantity (too much conversation, too little), quality (irony, metaphor, meiosis – after breaking furniture saying that he was a little drunk, hyperbole; relation (rare but more related to social gaffes); manner (being ambiguous, loquacious)

Non-detachability – where general conversational implicature is marked by familiarity to social and contextual knowledges (^historicizing?)

Where implications are not guided by truth of what is said, but what is implied – muddling may occur, specification may be required.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: