Edited by Brian Robinson (Texas A&M University - Kingsville)
|Summary||Paul Grice coined the term 'implicature' and the two sub-categories of it: conventional implicature and conversational implicature. Speakers convey their conventional implicatures by means of linguistic conventions. Consider the example of a speaker saying, "He is an Englishman; he is, therefore, brave." According to Grice, the speaker has only literally said that he [the person referred to] is an Englishman and that he is brave. The speaker has conventionally implicated that his bravery is a consequence of his Englishness by means of the conventional meaning of 'therefore'.|
|Key works||The first, and most important key work is Grice's "Logic and Conversation" in Grice 1989, in which Grice lays out the initial account of implicature, including conventional implicature. Bach 1999 presents one of the most significant challenges to that Grice's account of conversational implicature.|
|Introductions||Grice 1989; Bach 1999|
Using PhilPapers from home?
Create an account to enable off-campus access through your institution's proxy server.
Monitor this page
Be alerted of all new items appearing on this page. Choose how you want to monitor it:
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers