Skip to main content
Log in

Quantity, volubility, and some varieties of discourse

  • Published:
Linguistics and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Grice's Quantity maxims have been widely misinterpreted as enjoining a speaker to make the strongest claim that she can, while respecting the other conversational maxims. Although many writers on the topic of conversational implicature interpret the Quantity maxims as enjoining such volubility, so construed the Quantity maxims are unreasonable norms for conversation. Appreciating this calls for attending more closely to the notion of what a conversation requires. When we do so, we see that eschewing an injunction to maximal informativeness need not deprive us of any ability to predict or explain genuine cases of implicature. Crucial to this explanation is an appreciation of how what a conversation, or a given stage of a conversation, requires, depends upon what kind of conversation is taking place. I close with an outline of this dependence relation that distinguishes among three importantly distinct types of conversation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bach, K., and Harnish, R.: 1979,Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts (Cambridge, MA: MIT, Bradford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandom, R.: 1983, ‘Asserting’,Nous 17, 637–650.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, L.: 1983,Dialogue Games: An Approach to Discourse Understanding (Dordrecht: D. Reidel).

    Google Scholar 

  • Carberry, S.: 1990,Plan Recognition in Natural Language Dialogue (Cambridge, MA: MIT, Bradford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia, G. and McConnell-Gines, S.: 1990,Meaning and Grammar: An Introduction to Semantics (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, R.: 1987, ‘Analyzing the Structure of Argumentative Discourse’,Computational Linguistics 13, 13–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, R., Morgan, J., and Pollock J. (eds.): 1990,Intentions in Communication (MIT: Bradford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dascal, M.: 1979, ‘Conversational relevance’, in A. Margalit (ed.)Meaning and Use (Dordrecht: D. Reidel), pp. 153–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogelin, R.: 1967,Evidence and Meaning (New York: Humanities Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier, D.: 1986,Morals by Agreement (New York: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazdar, G.: 1979,Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition and Logical Form (New York: Academic Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, H. P.: 1961, ‘The Causal Theory of Perception’,Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume 35.

  • Grice, H. P.: 1967,Logic and Conversation, revised and reprinted in Grice (1989). (All page references in the text are to the reprint of this in Grice (1989)).

  • Grice, H. P.: 1989,Studies in the Way of Words (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, C. L.: 1958, ‘Questions’,Australasian Journal of Philosophy 36.

  • Hamblin, C. L.: 1970,Fallacies (London: Methuen).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, C. L.: 1971, ‘Mathematical Models of Dialogue’,Theoria 27, 130–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harnish, R.: 1976, ‘Logical Form and Implicature’, in T. Bever, J. Katz and D. Langendoen (eds.)An Integrated Theory of Linguistic Ability (New York: Crowell).

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrah, D.: 1984, ‘The Logic of Questions’, in D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.)Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol. II (Dordrecht: D. Reidel), 715–764.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinkelman, E.: 1990,Linguistic and Pragmatic Constraints on Utterance Interpretation (dissertation, Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester).

  • Hintikka, J.: 1984, ‘Rules, Utilities and Strategies in Dialogical Games’, in Vaina and Hintikka (eds.),Cognitive Constraints on Communication (Dordrecht: D. Reidel).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J.: 1988, ‘Logic of Conversation as Logic of Dialogue’, in R. Grandy and R. Warner (eds.)Philosophical Grounds of Rationality (Oxford: O.U.P.), 259–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschberg, J.: 1985,A Theory of Scalar Implicature (dissertation, Department of Computer Science, University of Pennsylvania).

  • Holdcroft, D.: 1987, ‘Conversational Relevance’, in J. Verschueren and M. Bertuccelli-Papi (eds.),The Pragmatic Perspective: Selected Papers from the 1985 International Pragmatics Conference (Amsterdam: Benjamins), pp. 477–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, L.: 1972,On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English, Dissertation, UCLA.

  • Horn, L.: 1984, ‘Toward a New Taxonomy for Pragmatic Inference: Q-based and R-based Implicature’, in D. Schiffrin (ed.),Meaning, Form and Use in Context: Linguistic Applications’, (Georgetown University Roundtable).

  • Horn, L.: 1989,A Natural History of Negation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffrey, R.: 1983,The Logic of Decision, 2nd Edition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasher, A.: 1976, ‘Conversational Maxims and Rationality’, in A. Kasher (ed.),Language in Focus (Dordrecht: D. Reidel), pp. 197–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasher, A.: 1977, ‘Foundations of Philosophical Pragmatics’, in R. Butts and J. Hintikka (eds.),Basic Problems in Methodology and Linguistics (Dordrecht: D. Reidel), 225–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kempson, R.: 1975,Presupposition and the Delimitation of Semantics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, S. C.: 1983,Pragmatics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, S. C.: 1987, ‘Minimization and Conversational Inference’, in J. Verschueren and M. Bertuccelli-Papi (eds.),The Pragmatic Perspective: Selected Papers from the 1985 International Pragmatics Conference (Amsterdam: Benjamins), pp. 61–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D.: 1969,Convention: A Philosophical Study (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D.: 1979, ‘Scorekeeping in a Language Game’, in hisPhilosophical Papers, Vol. I (Oxford: O.U.P., 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • Litman, D. and J. Allen: 1987, ‘A Plan Recognition Model for Subdialogues in Conversations’,Cognitive Science 11, 163–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinich, A. P.: 1983,Communication and Reference (Berlin: de Gruyter).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie: 1984, ‘Begging the Question in Dialogue’,Australasian Journal of Philosophy 62.

  • McCawley, J. D.: 1978, ‘Conversational Implicature and the Lexicon’, in P. Cole (ed.),Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics (New York: Academic Press), pp. 245–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manor, R.: 1981, ‘Dialogues and the Logics of Questions and Answers’,Linguistische Berichte 73.

  • McCafferty, A.: 1987,Reasoning About Implicature: A Plan-Based Approach (Dissertation, Department of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh).

  • O'Hair, S. G.: 1969, ‘Meaning and Implication’,Theoria 35, 38–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parikh, P.: 1991, ‘Communication and Strategic Discourse’,Linguistics and Philosophy 14, 473–514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parikh, P.: 1992, ‘A Game Theoretic Account of Implicature’, in Y. Moses (ed.),Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge IV (San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann), pp. 85–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, S.: 1951,The Art of Asking Questions (Princeton, NJ: Frinceton University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadock, J.: 1978, ‘On Testing for Conversational Implicature’, in P. Cole (1978)Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics (New York: Academic Press), 281–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, G.: 1982, ‘The Economics of Conversation: Comments on Joshi's Paper’, in Smith (ed.),Mutual Knowledge (London: Academic Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sperber, D., and D. Wilson: 1986,Relevance: Communication and Cognition (Oxford: Blackwell).

    Google Scholar 

  • Strawson, P. F.: 1952,Introduction to Logical Theory (London: Methuen).

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, J. J.: 1990,The Realm of Rights (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, D.: 1985, ‘New Directions in the Logic of Dialogue’,Synthese 63.

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Green, M.S. Quantity, volubility, and some varieties of discourse. Linguist Philos 18, 83–112 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00984962

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00984962

Keywords

Navigation