Understanding Nonconversational Implicature
Nonconversational implicature refers to the meaning that is conveyed by an utterance, but which is not strictly part of what is said. This meaning is inferred from the context and shared background knowledge, rather than from the explicit linguistic content or conversational norms alone.
Key Concepts
Unlike conversational implicature, which relies on the Cooperative Principle and maxims, nonconversational implicature arises from specific contextual cues or conventions. These can include:
- Conventional Implicature: Meaning built into the conventional meaning of certain words (e.g., ‘but’ implies contrast).
- Conversational Context: The surrounding circumstances and setting of the utterance.
- Shared Knowledge: Information assumed to be known by both the speaker and the listener.
Deep Dive into Contextual Clues
The inference process for nonconversational implicature often involves recognizing specific linguistic devices or situational elements that signal intended meaning. For instance, the use of a particular idiom or a specific tone of voice can carry implications not present in the literal words.
Applications and Examples
This type of implicature is crucial in:
- Literature: Authors use it to add layers of meaning and subtext.
- Advertising: Slogans often rely on nonconversational implicature to create associations.
- Everyday Communication: Understanding implied meanings in social cues and unspoken messages.
Challenges and Misconceptions
A common challenge is distinguishing nonconversational implicature from literal meaning or other forms of inference. It’s not about what is said, but what is understood indirectly through context.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: How is it different from conversational implicature?
A: Conversational implicature relies on maxims of conversation; nonconversational does not necessarily.
Q: Can you give a simple example?
A: Saying ‘It’s cold in here’ might imply a request to close a window, based on the context.