1-Este fin de semana piensa en varias conversational implicatures que has usado o usa alguna a propósito y fíjate en la reaciión (o no) de la gente.
2- Intenta violar una de las máximas y romper el principio de cooperación. Mira la reaciión de la gente.
Escribe una entrada en este Blog y comenta las entradas de 2 de tus compañeros (EN INGLÉS)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A group of 4 friends was watching a film. Afterwards they talked about it. The most interesting from a pragmatic point of view was some part of their conversation.
ReplyDeleteA ( the film was his favourite one): What do you think about the film?
B : It was O.K.
A: O.K. and that’s it? Aren’t you going to say something more?
In such a small extract we can notice the violation of 2 maxims, quantity and quality. In relation to the quantity the speaker B gave too little information when much more was required by the speaker A, especially as it was his favourite movie. The speaker A surely wanted to hear only good opinions in a rather more elaborated way than B did it. The reaction of the speaker A was obvious – he was very surprised by what he has heard. As for the maxim of quality, I think that it was violated here too, as the speaker B didn’t really like the film but only said so in order not to make A sad. Therefore, B said something that he believed was untrue but still said it.
Maria Lasowska
1) Two friends waiting for other friends in the city centre:
ReplyDeleteA: what time do you think it is?
B: Mmmm...shops are closing.
Obviously, speaker A was expecting B to tell her what time it was but instead of that what she obtains is a statement by which she has to presupposed the time. So we can see here that speaker B is violating the maxims of:
- Quantity, because speaker B is not given enough information
- Relation, because speaker A is not being relevant in his answer
However, although it seems that speaker B is violating those maxims, speaker A knows exactly what time is it because she has the previous knowledge of at what time the shops closed.
2) This weekend my mum told me to make a spring cleaning in my room but I don't really feel like doing anything...the situation was the following:
Mum: Vicky, you have to clean your room because it is so untidy and dirty...
Me: Oh mum...cof cof...I'm so ill today...cof cof...look! I even have a temperature.
Mum: Yes...”chicken fever” is what you have....
So, we can see that I was violating the maxim of quality because I'm not telling the truth to my mum and also the maxim of Relation because I'm not being relevant. [Well,in this case my mum didn't believe me and she knew I was lying and I was “forced” to clean my room...]
Mª Victoria Román Larios
Last Saturday I went to a party with many friends and I decided to break some maxims to see what happened.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, a friend of mine called Jesus tried to have a conversation with me, so he began to talk about stuff waiting for reactions, and I remained in silence all the time, so he started to add topics and he began to tell me things like "marta...are you alright? is everything ok?..." then he continued talking. I was wondering for how long he would be like that, cause I was exhausted.
The curious point is that he told another friend we have in common "I've been having a conversation with marta about blabla before" and I was like "no,you have had that conversation by yourself, I didn't say anything!"
Secondly, I was introduced to a girl called Noelia, who was very shy. She began to talk to me with the common questions everybody use, and the conversation went on like this:
Noelia: so, you're a friend of Alejandro's, are you?
Me: maybe...
Noelia: ... but you know him, right?
Me: is that what he says?
The poor girl seemed confused, she just gave up and looked for another conversation partner.
I had been breaking the maxim of manner, cause everything was ambiguous and not clear, and maybe also the maxim of quality, cause there was some irony in there.
Finally, I came back to Jesus (that sounds religious) and it was like this:
Jesus: now you're gonna talk to me??
Me: Yes, I love my guitar.
I wanted to break the maxim of relation, but I think he noticed it, since he began to follow my game and the conversation made no sense at all.
:) -Marta-
1)
ReplyDeleteSpeaker (A) is about to meet her best friend to celebrate her birthday. However, she hasn’t had time to buy a present until now. So she goes to a shop to look for a pair of trousers. Since she’s in a hurry, she asks a sales clerk (Speaker (B)) for some help, assuming that speaking to a sales clerk will save some of her time:
Speaker (A) – Excuse me, I was wondering whether you could help me to find a pair of black trousers, size 38.
Speaker (B) – Hi! Sure I can help you! Follow me. They are in that section. Sorry if it’s a bit untidy there, I’ve been tidying up all the other sections of the shop all day. But every time someone noses around these clothes I have to tide everything up again. I’m bored, and so tired of this job; I’ve been here just four months, you know? But I can’t handle it anymore. If at least they paid a decent wage, I wouldn’t mind that much doing this freaking repetitive and monotonous job with a smile on my face. But I’m just so tired! – (sights and continues walking in a thoughtful mood). Mhh… so here we are. Sorry, what size did you say?
This example of conversational implicature is probably better understood in terms of spoken language. Thus this is an example of a conversational particularized implicature since it is better derived from the context.
Nonetheless, it can be clearly seen how three maxims are violated:
First, Speaker (B) is violating the maxim of Quantity. He’s making his contribution much more informative as required. Speaker (A) makes a clear question and is answered with a rather unexpected confession by Speaker (B), who starts talking about personal problems, presupposing that Speaker (A) is interested in what he’s saying. Speaker (B) is neither having into account nor noticing that Speaker (A) is in hurry and that that’s actually the reason why he’s been asked for some help.
Secondly, Speaker (B) is violating the maxim of Relation. He’s not being relevant to his costumer. Instead of talking about his work unwillingly, alluding to the sense of oppression he feels, he should be trying to give a hand to his costumer.
Finally, Speaker (B) is not being brief at all on his statement, thus he also violates the maxim of Manner.
2)
In a park, Speaker (A) accidentally steps on Speaker (B)’s dress. They haven’t met each other before.
Speaker (A) – Oh, I’m really sorry!
Speaker (B) – Don’t worry, I also forgot your name!
In this case, the conversational implicature is also particularized. Unmistakably, Speaker (B) does very much flout the maxim of Quality by using a mocking, sarcastic remark.
Speaker (A) had probably expected two possible reactions by Speaker (B):
1) any kind of grumble or annoyance that would corroborate that she is not keen to accept his apology; or
2) any signal or statement that would demonstrate she has no problems in accepting his apology, such as for example a smile, or a statement such as “Don’t worry”, but no more.
However, Speaker (B) surprisingly opts for exploiting the maxim since she has a clear purpose: not only attracting the attention of Speaker (A) but also trying to flirt with him. Therefore, Speaker (A) may be quite confused by Speaker (B)’s unexpected reaction.
-Sara Garcia Delgado de Mendoza-
Really nice your example Marta...you were so rude!!! XD and I think you were violating all maxims because you were not given information, maybe what you said was not true (i don't know it is only "expeculation") and of course you were not relevant and obviously you did not use a very polite manner in your speech.
ReplyDeleteA friend of mine always gets bad grades in his exams. Yesterday I had this conversation with him:
ReplyDeleteFriend: Man, I just got a 4,5 on my last exam! That was close!
Me: Oooh you're so awesome, here's your medal!
That way I broke three maxims: Quality, quantity and relation.
Quality because what I said was not true: I wasn't giving him a medal, literally. Quantity because of the use of irony: I didn't mean what I said, I just used a different way to say "it is not that big deal". And finally I broke the maxim of relevance because my answer has nothing to do with his afirmation. He expected "yeah, that was so close" but I said a expression that it is not related to exams or grades.
- Juan Jesús Pérez Márquez -
~~~ Correction: In my second example, instead of Quality, the maxim that is violated is that of Manner. I've just realised I had it wrong!~~~
ReplyDelete1. Speaker (A) has been fixing the computer this weekend. His friend has helped him. When his friend fixed the computer, Speaker (B) asked Speaker (A): Have you fixed the computer? Speaker (A) said Speaker (B):
ReplyDeleteSpeaker A: Yes...
Speaker (B): Sure, you are a great technician.
We broke two maxims here: Quality and Quantity.
2. Quality because Speaker (A) is not telling true. Speaker (A) has not fixed thje computer. His friend has fixed the computer.
Quantity because Speaker (B) uses the irony. It did not mean that Speaker (B) said, Speaker (B) just used a different way to say 'Speaker (A)is not a great technician.
1. A married couple is talking about diets in the bar. Maria is thin but her husband is fat and she wants him to lose weight because he is drinking beers every day and he has a big tummy.
Marie: You should not drink beers.
Peter: I do not drink beers, I drink water.
Marie: You should not drink alcohol because you need lose weight, you are thin.
Peter: Will we go to the cinema tomorrow?
We broke three maxims here: Quality, Quantity and Manner.
Quality because Peter is not saying the thrue. He is drinking beers. Quantity because Marie uses the irony: Peter is veery fat and Marie says him that he is thin. And finally, Peter uses the maxims of manner because he asks anything which is not related to the conversation. Marie does not answer him because she does not want to talk about another conversation.
One conversational implicature is missing from my first message so here it goes: My friends and I always exchange gifts on the 6th of December. One of them asked me: (A) What would you like to get from "Santa Clause" this year? and I said:(B)Well, you know that I have lost my wallet last week.
ReplyDeleteIt is obvious that the implicature here was the fact that I would like to get a new wallet. By choosing this kind of response I violated the maxim of manner.
As for the comments about my classmates entries:
Sara! Your example with the complaining sales attendant is a good one and it is like an every-day situation. The same has happened to me like a million times, at least.
Jesus! I think that your response to your friend's "that was close" was relevant but by using irony you flouted the maxim of manner and not that of quantity.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSpeaker A is a man who is always in the bus station asking for some money saying that he needs 1 euro to catch the bus. Speaker B is a boy who has just bought a ticket when Speaker A stops him.
ReplyDeleteA: Could you please give me 1 euro? It's just what I need to catch my bus.
B: Sorry, I have no change (putting the change from the ticket in his pocket).
In this case, Speaker B had money but he knew that man from other times and he knew that the money he asked, was not precisely to buy a ticket.
Speaker B is violating the maxim of quality. He had money but he doesn't tell the truth to that man to not to say that he doesn't want to give money to him. He also is violating the maxim of manner because his answer is obscure because it doesn't express clearly that he doesn't want to give what Speaker A asks.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTwo friends waiting for the night bus but it doesn't come:
ReplyDelete- Girl 1: Are you felling the drop in temperature?
- Girl 2: My body is made of ice.
Two maxims are violated in Girl 2 utterance. The first one is QUANTITY because she does not answer the question. She uses an unclear contribution instead of say "yes". The second maxim which is broken is QUALITY, because she is being sarcastic but lying at the same time, she really has no ice in her body.
Case 1:
ReplyDeleteA mother asks her teenager son:
“Where are you going?”
And the teenager answers:
“Somewhere”.
Maybe, he doesn’t know where he is going, but the implication can be that he doesn’t want to tell his mother where he is going. So he violates the rule of quantity because he is not being informative enough.
Case 2:
There is a queue in the bank. One person arrives there and he asks the people:
Speaker A: Who is the last in the queue?
Speaker B: It’s me.
Speaker C: I beg your pardon!
Speaker C is not apologizing. He wants to claim his place in the queue, that’s the implicature. He flouts the rule of quality because the meaning of that sentence lacks evidence. This utterance is used politely to express disagreement.
Case 1:
ReplyDeleteSpeaker A is riding his bike and a random person (speaker B) suddenly asks him:
Speaker B:-hey can you give me a ride on your bike?
Speaker A:-Later
Here the implication is that Speaker A doesnt want to give a ride to that person, and by answering that, he is flouting the maxim of quality because his contribution is not true.
Case 2:
A boy asks his mother:
Boy:-?has visto mis llaves?
Mother:-prueba a mirar en el sitio de siempre
In this case, the mother is breaking the maxim of quantity as she is not explicitly saying where the keys are. it's a yes/no question and the mother is answering more than yes or no.