Conversational Implicatures Are Still Cancellable
(2013) In Acta Analytica 28(3). p.321-327- Abstract
- Is it true that all conversational implicatures are cancellable? In some recent works (Weiner 2006, followed by Blome-Tillmann 2008 and, most recently, by Hazlett 2012), the property of cancellability that, according to Grice (1989), conversational implicatures must possess has been called into question. The aim of this paper is to show that the cases on which Weiner builds his argument—the Train Case and the Sex Pistols Case— do not really suffice to endanger Grice’s Cancellability Hypothesis. What Weiner has shown with his examples is that a conversational implicature cannot be cancelled if the speaker, whose utterance gives rise to the implicature, does not intend to cancel it. To implicate is an intentional speech act and, therefore,... (More)
- Is it true that all conversational implicatures are cancellable? In some recent works (Weiner 2006, followed by Blome-Tillmann 2008 and, most recently, by Hazlett 2012), the property of cancellability that, according to Grice (1989), conversational implicatures must possess has been called into question. The aim of this paper is to show that the cases on which Weiner builds his argument—the Train Case and the Sex Pistols Case— do not really suffice to endanger Grice’s Cancellability Hypothesis. What Weiner has shown with his examples is that a conversational implicature cannot be cancelled if the speaker, whose utterance gives rise to the implicature, does not intend to cancel it. To implicate is an intentional speech act and, therefore, cancelling an implicature must also be intentional and must be performed by the same speaker whose utterance gives rise to the putative implicature. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/3173637
- author
- Colonna Dahlman, Roberta LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2013
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Conversational implicatures, Cancellability hypothesis, Implication by irony
- in
- Acta Analytica
- volume
- 28
- issue
- 3
- pages
- 321 - 327
- publisher
- Springer
- external identifiers
-
- wos:000323733500004
- other:DOI 10.1007/s12136-012-0177-x
- scopus:84883463190
- ISSN
- 0353-5150
- DOI
- 10.1007/s12136-012-0177-x
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 5cad7091-7d90-437f-a340-8bca1d34945b (old id 3173637)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 09:49:51
- date last changed
- 2022-04-03 23:41:40
@article{5cad7091-7d90-437f-a340-8bca1d34945b,
abstract = {{Is it true that all conversational implicatures are cancellable? In some recent works (Weiner 2006, followed by Blome-Tillmann 2008 and, most recently, by Hazlett 2012), the property of cancellability that, according to Grice (1989), conversational implicatures must possess has been called into question. The aim of this paper is to show that the cases on which Weiner builds his argument—the Train Case and the Sex Pistols Case— do not really suffice to endanger Grice’s Cancellability Hypothesis. What Weiner has shown with his examples is that a conversational implicature cannot be cancelled if the speaker, whose utterance gives rise to the implicature, does not intend to cancel it. To implicate is an intentional speech act and, therefore, cancelling an implicature must also be intentional and must be performed by the same speaker whose utterance gives rise to the putative implicature.}},
author = {{Colonna Dahlman, Roberta}},
issn = {{0353-5150}},
keywords = {{Conversational implicatures; Cancellability hypothesis; Implication by irony}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{3}},
pages = {{321--327}},
publisher = {{Springer}},
series = {{Acta Analytica}},
title = {{Conversational Implicatures Are Still Cancellable}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12136-012-0177-x}},
doi = {{10.1007/s12136-012-0177-x}},
volume = {{28}},
year = {{2013}},
}