See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/307638710

Grice’s maxims and the principle of selectiveness: An advertising language

perspective. Fu Jen Studies

Article · March 2004

CITATIONS READS

2 333

1 author:

Grace Qiao Zhang

Curtin University
53 PUBLICATIONS   309 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Elastic/vague language in healthcare, social media ... View project

Elastic language in persuasion: A cross-cultural perspective View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Grace Qiao Zhang on 12 September 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 FU JEN STUDIES
LITERATURE & LINGUISTICS
NO.38 2004

CONTENTS

Page

NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS ii

ZUR RHETORIK DES NEURECHTEN IDEOLOGEN ALAIN I

DE8ENOIST.................. .. .....NOBERTPOLZER

ZU..VERERBLNG'UND,,VAIER-SCHULD'INSTORMS 37
NOVELLE C,4RSIEN CUXATOR.,....,,.LUZIA MEI.LINC WANG

LE DREYFUSISME PROUSTIEN......,,,....T'NG,YU EH HONG 55

ETUDE CONTRASTIVE DES SYSTi:MES TEMPORELS 93

cHrNors ETFRANCArS........................MENG-LAN HUANG

GRICE'S MAXIMS AND THE PRINCIPLE OF I2'7

SELECTIVENESSi AN ADVERTISING LANGUAGE
PERSPECTIVE..................................CR 4CE S|AO ZHANC

FU JEN UNIVERSITY
TAIPEI, TAIWAN, R.O.C.
Fu.len studies, vol 18.2004

GRICE'S MAXIMS AND THE PRINCIPLE OF

SELECTIVENESS:
AN ADVERTISINC ;NGUAGE PERSPECTIVEI

Gftce QiaoZha s

The abilitv to be selective, i e saving the right thing ai the right time
Ihe
,* .',...1" il".'*ri"i successfrrl inreiacrion Thrs aflicle e{amines
ilff;;.;;;;i;-"'.ssion and comprehensron in ransuage interaLtrons

:il d.,r.';;;''; i.;i.. rhe nrsr i" rirat beir

"€recriveness
r< common and

L'*",e. *. rr shourd accepred as an appropridre

';;;;;
communr.alron devrce The olhel rssue rs how the selechveness prrncrpre
rhis
ii'']" *'ii'ciJ, itsrt, 1e8e) four context
conversationar maxims studv

"r]'"i.
i".Jr.,"l prlrnar v in the
age.rli
'f real estate Io conve)
use
advertising
r,nnuape. tv anatv"ine how real eslale "elecrr!enes'
;;;";;;;.J;,;i#'"n and hea'er" $ork our rhe inrerenrrar meaning
cues '
* -;;.;i;;
based on their conrmon knowledge and contexnnl
hare been conlnuous deba'es on
decades. lhere
rlxee
""',
ThF srudv qrll propose rhe inclusion or the tlecrivenec'
"".-;"timi'
;',;:;. a;.;; .uii.. ir'. p.po',t rs based on dn Iend anarvr; or
';;;
;;;.,1;t";";;"";. wnrch uirr
"how
rhdr ranguase users to be
.i"", ""r,'rl""ilir manasins ro fit In "i!h Grice's ftarnesork it is.a Beins

;i::ii;;'l ;';;, on uJ lo.-ct'"u,acr"isti" of advertisins lansuage;

devrce used rn
."*"tt*. f*ui","., tactful. and effeclive communrcalive
principle r a natter ol
i'.,'i"" r"""""r-. Following rhe selecriveness $ar whrre
i.rr*ii" ""i."1"-."n sense rht 'esearch will argue
$ar it is u\ed
;i:.;;';.;;;'" cricer ma\ims it is dirrerenr In
";i"(e in terrns of cultural and social norms'
i"--""ii"* "pp*p'i"t".ess meanins and 91ce:s
ilrr"'"*"1 i'i:'a'u*" u"w""n inferential proposed modification of Grice's
to jusdry lhe
""".*.""ii"."i1-pli"".'e
maxims with the addition of the s€l€ctiveness principle

I. A Pervasive, Legitimate, Tactful, and Effective Communicative

Devrce
Betnp rn language uce is to choose an appropriate unerance
."',"ti. ',i "electrve
ir'.-p""i."r"' .inri',t ro"^o*pt' a neighbour's reenase sitl

121
128 FU JEN STUDIES

has a weight problem and is v€ry self-conscious about it Wllen asked about
her weight, on€ may stop short by saying 'sh€ looks fin€ to m€, no need for
everyone to have a supermodel figure'. Another exampl€, commenting on a
f€llow student's essay, one may say 'it reads well and has no t?os' Hearen
would be able to work out that the sp€akers are b€ing selective about what
they say. They don t want to hurt their neighbour or fellow shrdent but don t
want to li€ either. fius they have to choose words carefullv, in order to
avoid talking about any negatives regarding the gnl's weight or the student's

Wlile it is not rare tosee selectiveness in everyday language use, this

kind oflanguage behaviow occurs most ftequendy in advertising due to its
commercial narur€. Imagine that one is looking through a propertv pless
and reads a description ofa house as 'a house with character'. mat would
rhe reader think ofit? It would not be surpdsing that the r€ader infers that
the hous€ is old, possibly in bad shape. From the advenisels point ofview,
he is not lying by b€ing s€lective or skiltul with his words lnstead of using
'old, not in good shap€' he chos€ 'character' Fortunat€ly, r€ad€n ar€, most
of the time, able to get the infer€ntial meaning out of the literal meaning of

This phenomenon d€monstrates how people use language in reality. It

is cornrnon practice that language userc ar€ seleciive whenever necessary
and selectiveness is also part of language comp€t€nc€. The more skiltullv
one uses the principl€ of selectiveness, the more tacttut and efi€ctive one
becomes in language cornmunication This poses a challeng€ to li4uists
and others to go b€yond the sernantic meaning when studying language and
work out the pragrlanc meaning conveyed by utterances

L I Advertising Language and Selectiveness

Let us analyse examples of selectiveness in rcal estate advertising,
extracted prinlarily ftom iss\es ol Ptuperty Prcss, published ilt Auckland,
New Zealand.
a. 'A classic villa/character ctarmer'
Probably a place falling apart, in any event an old hous€. The agent
uses 'classic' to avoid saying that the vjlla is aging and inferior. The
word 'classic' attsacts people's att€ntion more in its positive asp€cts:
stylish, creative, artistic and establish€d.
b. 'A first buyeis home/a great place to start/suit young
couple/affordable living'
Probably a cheap, run down plac€ with not much spac€ However, the
right pfuas€s are chosen to steer buyers' attention away ftom those
negaiive aspects to their own realistic situation, rnaking th€ house
appear to be worth considering
ZHANC GRICE'S \4,{X]MS 129

c. A house with great polenlial/polential to redevelop and

renovate/do up/polish up & prosper'
Probably a house in bad shape. Agent selects the abov€ descriplions to
Iead people to thint whal lhey can do with the propeny in the future,
rather than focusing on the present state which is probably undesirable.
Providing the buyer a rosy picture for ihe future would certainly
increase lhe chances ofselling the property.
d. 'Needs iender loving care'
PosslbLy a pretty bad situation inside and out The agent shifts ahention
from lhe house to the potenlial buyer and places the responsibility of
taking care ofthe hoLrse on then. Someone nnght buy into Lt thinking
that he is the one who will be able to look afier l|e property well
e. 'Easy living/care section'
Possibly a small outdoor area. The focus is on the posilive side of a
small outdoor area, meaning there is no ne€d to spend a lot of time
looking afler the ga.dcn and mowing the laM
| 'No n€ed for cars. walk to everywh€re'
Mosl definitely no car park or garage. The agent knows very well thal
pcople consider parkiDg space something essential. He figures that ifhe
says that there is no need fo. a car ihen clients may be more likely to
acccpt the propery. Tbe logic is iflhere ls no need for a car then it is
allrlght having no car park.
g. 'Cosy and neat'
Probably a small house. However. since 'snall hous€' would not go
down well with buy€Is,'cosy and neat's'ould do a betterjob. Ilpeople
get a warm and comfofable feeling about the place. they may be more
inclined to buy lbe honse.
h.'lnvesimentoppo$unity'
May not be suilable for owner to live in. possibly due to ihe shabby
condltions of ihe house. Saying that it is for investment may op€. a
new opportunity for the prop€rty to sell. BuyeN for investmenr would
cetainly be interested in taking a look.

Examples tike the above are everywhere in real estale adverlisjng.

,^.gents need to think very hard in ord€. to cone up wrlh lhe righi thlng io
say w|en advertisiDg. They have to be skilful when it cones doln to using
th€ pinciple of selectiveness.

1.2 why Selectiveness

The above exanples illustrate that agents select words catetully by
focusing on positives and avoiding negatives in order to maximize the
benefit ofadvedismg. They know fuil well that al the end ofthe day, many
l
buyers woL d figur; out the contextuai/pragmatic meaning The reason
 FU JEN STUDIES
l3o

:'-#r iljitrif"T,' tr';:i'';ffii*1,l:j'}tr[';""'".t

j'
"' "g;;;";.| llil"ll,lii-,**'::.:^:x :":#*:,fi:'f fi :
;i'rl'q'i*a'l" a"
l1,1lli?;fli;l i.^?l,l,lil' ":i5: il'lLTTJ;il
real estare
"o s"t".tiu.n."s i' not unique ro commercials The sralegies
*. 1' "q' ""1 1'11':ll l""T ll?:: l:H"i,1lili*il.'iiili;.lLl
"e*o
l-H,,;ffi i','r'TH*+il+li",Xg"'*.:#rxi#:ir*
f ::'#f :1:T:[":",jil.Ti*'-"1#yitihlri:,{r'l:;:1,,:;
commen$"9l;.
ana arrisuc in order ro avoid -. sould be happy to
awfur. Srrmrarrv when connenri's ".". i1Tl,'ilioi"r i" l'r|l. ii+,'y
ano no
aacnte lo* great his personality rs '.
is nor verv rnrellisent
lliii'0""'.0,,"".0 'r'"'i"rsa)ing thathe
""'''5il*r" in us,rng ranguaee?
"'. 'aecirw :i:;1'ili,:'i:"t';
'i..or' normto*v.T:::"'i"",;;;;r socieiy: orherwise
thar jr i: our socrervs
protocol one.can
conrornxns ro rhrs
"'-lI: il;d, Howerei. the rnost
one w r noL go wrv far nor t1" $ar;;il;;i*.in'i .ill,'ii;; *a
*ponun, ,.u'on tor being serectrw-'s ..i*."n.'i".
ug.o*
conmunicatronal device. As
menboneo.ao"
serv" h" .'ff*,"Ar. In everyday life.
pyf::.1:':"",";nt*L.
s,tualion. ,t certainlv r., u, i..;"'t.r'"
beins serecrive rs arso a mof
** y"J-t;:;;;i;rmardinner if a guesr
case"orcomrnemmgon th" !*v:":i lii:d;;;jl"ni. i *""ra "p*'
('id .taiehr ro the cooks face '":i T:H"'l; ;;'". 'r'. .""ti tv
"'' rrul
"" one
lnstead
^tr'*. ";ecnllv the cook
;;;; ;:;; i* *' preseoration ordish is crea; to.'"r..nu.n.s, i,
'
o"ne remainiog quesrion
then-
I' Y"'ii'j [y *ins selecthe?
l€siLirnale. I e. it is the
flFbt qiic t:.1: J.",..*. 1la food rastes good
't *t.t*ti:1",'J .." saying
eiuatty not. uecause d" we
*r'." i" r".,
when m facl rt does Dot' or sa)'log there a d";? u.i,"?'*
iiiJ",. i-. *' 9:
t'': "llT.T.p,l;'15;';'j::i:i::T::.";
""rv ^'
ffiTi:i'"Ti,*:l};ili";i[H.J:lre:mT;;i*l*i n:r
il:;.1:T;i,'J. T'; ;; :iJ"o.:l etc ll,o"llol!,i',:
as a
ir'owrne ioliteness. keeptng face "X,j;i.XiT$::'i;
is a pervasive' resitinare
tacttur'
:::;:;? il;'";;'t*u''har serecnveners
 ZHANC CRICE'S MAXIMS
r3i

j:1:le. \.comnuf caronar dev,ce. re:\r $eo,.Luss $here,. n,. jn $,rh

ur r(< s conler canonat maxrms

IL Grice's Conversalional Maxtms and Selectiveness

. What has been discussed above raises a question ofwhether or not the
selective principle could be jn tine wirh
cric;,s coop"*,*. ;;;*i;il'a;
conversational maxims, lhe focus of
ihis sect,on.

2 I crice's Maxims
."nar, !1_*11-n." '* rrin,,pr
panr(rprnlc expecr rrrdr cJch
c d p,,nc,p.e or con\er.a,,on.
w.
ctd,n,ng
mj[e a con\er,alondl connrb lion
j:^::11'::1 :i l* s'dse d'| qhich ,' oc. u''. bv ,r,. u...p,.a pu.po.l
::,"1:.*:'"' rheu,,ce\
":'.1,.1: rark exchJnge rn uh.ch ror a,e engaeea
ru,rci rbrs
ma$nb ,s ,o nure r..te,r ro Lneu,ee u.er" wrar
:^1,'_1.--*l "'
ruoq cormunr.arror prJcrjc" r. rnd ir $e
a mdte dn erron ,o ro,to" rtrem
no,e efre.r.\" rn rdrk.nc.o edcn orh*. r*.,,,,....""i
::-:11be
rure_ :ntr
DJr rdl,,er . on\, n,iur. o, rjgf, rhrnA. rn
oo
,, ,o l:T-b.u :-f-1".!". *," o.en done or cncFs rrame$ork. 5uch a'
lo8). l08o t08
li:":.1,:
.1.:j -,''"1: ,. nor
ldnd Keenar rrq-0, r, r", u"."'"o,J
llll hetd by .pedker. or ranoL. (urirre, lor
Timpre Keetun rls-6rcrared rhdr peopte in
Madaga.cJr ,.na g,r.
iL,qmallon shen required. rhu5 rnren,rond y
"
and,vsrerndlicalv"o,vhr;,n"
:lcer y Jnt ry Mdrin Keenrn queeroned rhe ie*,t,t,,y,r,", ri,.."",-!
and ,ndependenrr) orcurrure. .ryre and gerue.
'l:"",lpl:-T'I_:':,i, Kashei
..,:":l '_ly:l:" -"' ,.:en"n. dnd .irILrdr apparenr coLnrer_e:\dmprF. ro
,
c.ll! be bener^e\prarned rn rcrm< or rhe rarronailr)
:j::,:".i:,1:., con.equences. ,r p-ope- arenr,un rs pJjd
,l',.j....1"'.. :
'-_:ll|:^11.1- nor onty ro rrs
bur also ro ,,s .ar reav cosr:66.0on.n,-,, ou,
:q-p"*",
\.,tahsasy sperr$
:".1:.i:0,,*'
*lll::1,::l^c_l'll "eemed ro nt ro snrre .ome brtance
rn Dresenuns rhel ber:ef.. qhrre pdyins rhe
:"*rtre
'.r)ne. (I,'o4J r(vj,ed nrrrrru for rnrerculrurat dndlysrs ha!e more
.,.duve pdnem,
l;J -y::^l:: Encr;h .,r",*, r.,*.,*,
l5-i:Irn mee. rhe needs ot orrnrernonculturrt
uon arogether
'-i \e'.dl ) or uflce\ Co_ope.arrve pnnciDte conunurrcd,ron. lhe
and Bro$n drd Ie\rn.ons
i..ll.j1 t"l:l:1.,^:p:"li ""9 t.,,".* r08-r r". b"en que_;;on;d
,ll l.l"l /00, dnd
,'lli.ll "li l
, r\ oi .unurdr
uoddd,d ard w,e?b.ck" ro,i1 ir,.
exanpie.".rhere
retatrvrr\ and d.f.erel .,rtrr,.r sclpr\. tor
expecrarron. and inre.prerurions
.:i.:,:""t-.-.lti::ll "r,,"..,,,) ";i
unrcalron. o, in rhe ranl ng otimposrtron
when
Wrlson and Sperber (2002) quesrion the
--
:omrnunrcatron is govemed by a
view that verbal
nnxinl norm or conveniion ofrurhfulness
t32 FU JEN STUDIES

which applies at the level of what is literally m€ant, or what is said Thev
argue that verbal conununication is govem€d by expectations of relevance,
raised by literal, toose and figuativ€ us€s alike. In additio& thev state that
the notions of'literal meaning' and 'what is said' play no usefirl th€or€tical
role in the study of language use, and that the nature of explicit
I
corununication would have to b€ rethought.
A Nlnber of questions have b€€n raised, including th€ source of the
cooperative principle and rnaxims (e.g. wh€ther they are cultuially specific
or universal), definition of t€minologi€s (e g. vaguen€ss of'relevance') and
adequate explanation of cornprehension procedure (e.9. exactly how hear€rs
identify conversational irDlicatures).
In general, tlere have been three directions for the development of
Crice's original proposals:
a. To fulher develop Gdce's maxirns while rernaining close to the
spirit of the original rnaxins, including Levinson (1983, 2000), Brown
and L€vinson(198?), Hom(1973, 1984) and Clark (1996).
b. To Fopos€ altemative pdnciples and maxims, including R. Lakoff
(1973, 19?6), Leech (1983), Attardo (1997, 1999, 2000).
c. To substitute Grice's original poposal v/ith a more general
cognitive pdnciple, i.e. Spe$er and Wilsons relevance{heoretic
ftamework ( 1986/1995, 1998, 2002, Wilson and Sperber 2004)
Itshould b€ pointed out that Grice's maxims depict a rosv, idealised
and sirnplified language us€, whercas reality is a much more conplex and
multi-dimensional. In actual conversations, telling the whole tru0r might be
s€er as impolite or somehow inappropriate. There also tend to be cross_
cultural difer€nces, not always foltowing a miversal pdnciple. It seems
that som€ cultures/languages (e.g. Chinese) Fescript their speakers quite
ftequently to express things in an indircct manner, wlich means they are
unable to follow Grice's maxims. ln such cases, there is a clash between
Grice's maxims and the Fagnatic rules of conversatiorL which are
cultually sensitive. For example, when being offercd a ddnk, a typical
Chinese would habitually say no the tust time while expecting the off€r
would be nade at least twice or thr€€ times. ThG is a kind of phatic
language cornmuicatio& i.e. saying no and not really meaning no. In this
sort of situatioq if som€one doesn! play by lhe cultural nonr! then he
\'r'ould sound odd.

2.2 Grice's Maxirns aM the Selectiv€ness P nciple

Fist, let us examine ifselectiveness violaxes any ofcice's maxims
Maxim ofquality: "'Try to mak€ your contributioD one that is ttue".. 1.
Do not say what you believe to be false. 2. Do not say that for which vou
lack adequate evidence' (Gric€ 1975146).
 ZH NG GRICE'S N,IAXIMS Ill
Being selective rs nor necessarily urtrurhtut Iior examplej aD agenr
says that a house suits younS couples or first homc buyers.. whilc the
inlereDtial neanjng of the descriprlon could be rhat the house is small and
not luxurious, as far as the speaker is concemed. alt he does is ro select one
pafticular aspect ofthe house to suit his purpose In any event. rhc agenr is
lelling the lruth because he believes rhat rhe house does suit young couples
or fi6t homebuycN Only {|en thc house has one bedroom but is
adveiiscd as havng two. docs the agent vjotaie the quality maxrm Hcre rhe
agenl docsnt give false rnfonnation, he isjusr berng setecrive, and therefore
Do nle has been broken as far as the maxjn of qmlity is concerned.
Maxinr ofquantity: l. Make your contriburion as infomarjve as rs
required (for thc cunent puposes ofthe exchange). 2. Do not makc your
coDhibution nrore informatile rhan is required.(Grice 1975: 45).
One may think that selectrveness seems to viotate rhis fltxim. due ro
rls Dature of beirg less informatrve. lor exarnple, real estate agents tend
only to louch on certain desirabtc aspects (cha.acrer. great pote.r;al, suitable
to firsl homc buyers. ctc.), but do not provide negative informarion (old,
scrufy conditions, erc).'lhe sime applies ro situarions jn everyday ljfe
when peoplc say only whai is considered to be polire
However. it is not quite thc case, because the naxim here says rhat s,e
should be as inlbrnulive As RFQLIRED. Biving No MoRE and no less
infomalion. Requrred by what? For examplej as far as the real esrare
commercials are conccmed, ihey are not required by their culturat protocots
to us. words like old' and 'scruffy'i th€y may, as they prefer, adverljse in a
positive tone by usjng words like 'character' and .srear potenljat'. Sjmilarlv.
rr socrd. ..r rd ion\ sF r-e dl.o .rnr reoIr..d hJ ou' cJIru'a rory. ro rc:l
somcone straighl to his face that he is .slow ro leam and incompetenl.si
rathcr we would prefer to say somerhing ljke he is .kind to othcrs,. So.
going back to the question of s,hether or not selecliveness violares the
maxim ofquantity, the answer is negarive. The argument is that although it
may not sive the fuil infonnation lron both posirive md negative sides, the
reality is thal in situatioDs where selectiveness prevails, therc is probably no
requircnent for language nsers ro gjve more infomation rhan thev want to.
ll,ere ,. d d,sr.nl ,o1 berqi; .equjremer,. trom rangu"gi rr.,-11
requirements liom the culhrre where the languagc js used. The requnement "n6
could be the context at a specific monent, in ivhich tanguage consideration
alonc may not be enoug|. In the case of the principle of selecliveness.
cultural considerations play a hnge rote. Very often tanguage users behave
the way their cullrral prolocols require them ro. Iror example. out of
politeness, not aticulaiing someonet shorlcomiDgs unless it is necessary.
lhr. b d.ulual tu. or. wl r.l- onen uper.ede, r\. ldrguage fd.ror ir.eil
That is to say, when there is conflict between language conechless and
cullual corectness, the lalrer tends to prevail. It is also expecred to be the
ll,1 FIJ IFN STIJDIES

case that some cultures (e.g. Chuese) may embrace more indirectness than
other culiures. so we see more application of the principle ofsel€ctiveness
in these ianguages than in orhers.
Maxim of relevancei'Be relevant' (Grice l97s: 46)
This onc is relatively straightfol'ard Selectiveness doesnl violate this
naxinr. By applying the pinciple of selectiveness we usuallv trv to avoid
ralkrnS about the negative side of things and focus on the positives This
doesnt mean tlut the Posltive side of infomrtion is ir.elevant lt could be
just as relevant as lhe negatives So we are not breaking any rules on

Maxin ofmann€r: "'Be perspicuous". I Avoid obscuritv of

erpre.ron.2. Avord ambtgurly. I B€bfleira\ordulnP\ercrryp-ol \ir)) 1
Be orderl) (Gn(e lsl5 4o).'
Berrg 'rlecn!e doe.n' prevenr one from be ng oe-spicuou"
It is intcresting to note that the maxim of quantitv and maxim oi
relevance may not accommodate the way the Chinese lend to communicate
For cxample, when talking about sensitive issues (e g borowlng monev)'
the Churese tend to beat around the bush, saving thmgs seeminglv
superfluous and nrelevani. lhe purpose of this indirectness is to avoid
being tolally enbarassed by asking bluntly Although this kind oflanguage
behaviour may wcll violale Griceh maxims. it is the tlpical Chtuese wav to
conrmunicate and the risht way as lar as the Chinese are concerned
ft seerns thal laneuase use is just like driving a carl evervone on the
road must loLlow road rules. If someone doesn't follo\{ the nl€s' then car
rccldents may happen. However. the problem here is what rules ar€ trulv
appropriate 10 govem our language usc The rules for language use are not
ri clear-cut as road rules. Gice's conversalional naxims state what should
be said and hos, it should be said; however. without culturll considerations'
they u,ould always rcnain as idealized conventions. while conve$ational
maxims like Grice's cenainly help, it would be a mistake lo think that his
naxinN wotrld be able to accornmodaie all the communicative d€vices
people use in reaLity.
The abov€ analysrs on selecliv€ness based on real estate advenising
language provid€s a similar obse arion as stated in Kohhoff (in press)
Based on an analysis ofconversation humour, Koltboffpoints out life-world
relevance is quite differeDl from the cognitive relevance that Sperber and
Wilson {1986) focus on. ln order to delemine how specificjokes work, we
need knowledge ofthe socral milieu wnh its social norms and normal wavs
ofspeaking. Cultural retevance is panicrlariy important in humour'
Aiong the same line, sel€ctiveness is sensitive over different situations
{€.g. formal oL informal, nilimate or distant) and cultures
(eg Chines€ or
New Zealand. academjc ot corporate) An in-depth
 ZHANC-CRICE'S MAXIMS
|t5
analysis and sysrematic classjficatjon ofthese situarions
and cuttures would
require a separar€ research proj ect.
..-- Next, we wilt discuss selectiveness and crice,s rnaxims from a
different angler rhe nature of infere.tial meaning deriv€d
from setective
uft€rances. helping us to uDdersrand more about the principte
of

IIL Inlerential Meaning and Implicatures

In this study, the concept of inferential meaning is d€fined
in a more
specific way, differeni ftom cric€'s corversarional i,npfi"u,ur"".
tn u U;a io
show the uniqneness ofthe setediveness principte.

3.1 Inferential Meanings

Pnor io discusstug the inferential n€an'ng, let us first look
at a retated
concept: connorative m€anjrg.

. Ac orJrlg lo Crv,rdt ttosl 74). connoralr\e mednrng rs

,".i,""".,person3ror conmunrt, $hrch are.ugge,ied rhe
pan ol irt' mernrne oi. a LINGUIS ( r \
lTil'1",r by or
a,e espec,a t; IFXIaAL
ITEM.' For exampte, the connorations of the word .paris; may inctude
'rcmantic , luxurious', .high class', etc.
. I,he.rnxla
thal
r'y bclween rnferen dl neanirg dnd connorar\e meanrj,g
bo h ore nol l .'dl neanirC.. drd borh need
.s

., ,re\Ll.roslcdge nt rnlerlocutors tor a ,pccrfic i"r.rp,.,,r,o". Uo".*,,

Ife N\o d ller n a number ofaspecls.
a. Connorations tend ro rclate more to a lexical ite4 but inferenrial
meanmg relates mor€ to linguistic unirs broader rhan a lexicat
itenl
such as phrase, s€ntence, utterance. etc.
b. Connorations coutd be pan oflexicat item,s meaning.
For exanple,
dre of the connotations of .dog' ir Chinese is a perso.' oi
urquelrronrlg obediencc tlprca y ro r gang teadcr oi Lhe like
t^tht.t r'^riand^ I4q6: 152,. this i\ nliketl rhe case tor
in.erenrrsl n,ern,ng for e\ampte. rhe rnter"nrai reanrng .olC:
r.'lenrd tiom {hou,e $ilh).hara.rer. $ortd norbe Jnj pa;ot
rhe
original item,s meaning.
c. Connotarions dre inlended mednings rhat rhe speaker q,jnls
rhe
hrarer ro know. For exa,npte. rt someone tooki unt dpp)
du,rng
Chjnese New ye3r, and I say to hir4 .Com€ on, it," Crii'.1*
N"ri
Y€ar', the connotative meaning of .New year, is .happy and
joyful'. I as a speaker certainly want the hearer to knoiv
the
.onno?ri\e meaning. $lich rs you should.hee|rp during rhr"
Joyrr'l sedsor-. Howevcr rn".renuat neanins, dre ror nece.iantv
in ended o be recognr,ed by hea"ers. rn rair rn rhe ca.e
oire;
estate advertisements, ag€nts ralher hope thar rheir readers
are not
 FU JEN STUDIES

able ro work oul the irferential neaning behind thc advenisements

(see Seclion 3.2 for nore discussion)
Takc an exanple frotn real estate .drenjsemenl, a house with great
.oLetrrirl . lte.De;lcrr .n",ded me,:1rnb ir rh.' d'e
qorrld be lLr'r Ihe
.emJnlr. r'r'".atr'm"rIrnA, J |oL,e hd, ar e\.ellerr oDpomrnrry lo p orper'
Howe\er, rhinking throuSh the senrantic meaning, a pragmatic (or
contextual) meani; tbat a hearer mav infer ls thal tbe current condition of
rhe housc is not that great. probablv ne€ding renovation of some sort Thc
.n.-ker $,rld r"pe rr,r ri,e l-e-rer 'rr.L ro rl' foc F ' gred porenrdl )
,'l'"',,' tn" aa'irr''"'nenr rrd nor qorl oLr rhrr rhe huL'e r'r'' dn
indesirable state at tbe nomenl The tlpe of meaning we are deallng with
hearer's
here is inferenlial meaning infered with recourse to context or the
knowledge. as opposed 10 semannc meamng (cognilive/denotaiivei
refcrent'almeanlnS).
Next.*e sh"it discuss rhe chrraclerislics of Grice's conversalional
IiDl(,nI. '. $ ,r \ cdn -r'o hell r' ro urd-rscrd more aboul'\' rrarure ot
rltr pni rtlr or ..1'. r'ver c .hard' er. ed v rrh rr rren iJl nreJnils

l.2Inrplicatures
lmplierl meaning usually refers to a meaning derived fiom the gLven
text. Foi cxample, Joh came back to his shared flat and lumed his stereo
on Marv said to John. 'someone has to studvl'Thc implied meanjng is
obvious: she wants Joirn to trim ihe volume down ls this kind ol implied
neaning similar ro the mferential neaniig?
Thiy have one thing in conrmon: being inferrcd fron a certain context
If it wcre not for the above spccific conlext' the implied neaning of the
sentencc 'somcone has 10 snrdvl could be something different For
instance. rl this is said by I teacher to a student. ihen the inplied meaning
could be that the teache; is telling lle student to studv n1ore; otherwise he
wouLd tiril exams and not be able ro graduate The infereniial mcaning is
also conlext sensitivc. For exrmple. a real estate adlenisement refers io a
house witir great potential'i viewers may nrfer tl]at tle house is of little
srate. Howev€r, if a colleague says
jt, they may at least
in its oresent
""nha look, iecause usually a colleague wouldn'r have a hidden asenda
take
Holvever. lhe difference between implied and inferential neaning is
tlrat. again. rhe inferedial meaning is not intended to be kno\n bv the
t'",rer."ey cont.o'r. fte implied neaning is For exanple, for the sake of
no,renc,,. sor' one qr\s lhal 3 Ph D l\'si' r' irrteretrng to d 'rlitrg
'ro
i'1 rren oi.rna'noongin.l roea' erc lr$ouldbea-umed
*
'.oo6111
rt.r rnc.peaket doe' no sdnl l\c l'eJrer ro know wl-ar he rerll) Ihrnk' ol
the thesi;. The lnferential meaning here would be entirely lhe hearer's
naking; hc lvould have to work it out bv himself, without much helP from
1he sp;ker. The implied meaning, however, is rsuallv int€nded
for hearers
 ZHANG-GRICE'S MAXIMS

to knov. For insrance, Mary would very much hope rhat John gor her
message of'tum your volume down'by sayins .som"one tras to stuav.
Orheft:p rhe'e r, no poinr ror Marv ro uner thai .enrence rt a . One orlier
exanple u irony. A stand-up comedian uses irony with the definire
ir),cr'jon o'_ndk rts hrc aud,ence knoq rhe imDtied mednrng ot rhe Ion). Il
he doecn r. rhen he cnutd e\pecr d gtoomJ ,rrure as . conredian

^ rlr heare' ro kror brrng,roup he

lh€ .ss,re ot $\"r1er or rte,elllat meaning r rnrended
for 'mptied
alolher drTe-ence belween rhernterel]l_dl
meaning and implied neaningi different purposes for cornmunicarion.
The
tormer.is used often for the purpose of being s€lective, focusing on one
padicular aspect in ord€r to minimize some other undesirabte asp;ct(s).
A
tpical case is rcal estate commercials. On the other hand, rtre impircd
meanrng *rves somewhat different purposes. One t),pjcal case is ;ony. in
which the speaker oveily flouts crjce's naxims forfiumorous effed.
On. or\e eldred concepr i" tu//) mednrlt $hrch ,. deftncd ar:
"emflrc merning rr,zr hd. no cleaFcur rernrng boundd,ie5 For e\ampt..
how tall rs 'rall' and how beautitut is .preny'? The meaning of the iw;
varies from contexr to contexr, individual to individuat. There are
differences anong the four conceprs of tuzziness, vaguensss, generality,
and ambiguity; see Zhang (1998) for a detaiied discussion ofthe topic.
.rr lar.ly l.el$een Iu//v meanrng and rnterenrrat ne:n.ng r. rhar
. A
rhe) bo h Lon ,rn a underFrmjned nean.ng Iu,,,,) mrnrng ha". needte.s
ro cd r. S_e) d'. r. anJ { jrh .rrrerenrral rnrerprercrron lh.r" r.
often i .maybe
,irudrro ,. or rn ab.olL e one t-or e\a'npte. r,,err we .ee an ad s irh .need,
le.lder lo\rng \-re. uh,l seinter fiom ca be drfirrcrl. due ro d lerenL
conrerl and o rr vaIoLr. ba.tSroLnd, and tro$tedgF ofrhe \rortd.
. Horvever. fuzzy meanjDg is paft ofa lexicat items denoraiive meaning,
whrcli^r. drffe-enl fiom rnfe-enrrat
'neanrng becdusF.he taner rr unt.kety d
pafl.ol rhe origrndl mean,g olrhe uheralce grven. Atso. fLrzzy meaning
ian
h"rdly bc re,ol\ed by conre\'. For e\ampte morr trkely we $ou,d n;r be
able ro pro\ ide a univeFd' (3ndard tor dppl,carron or .,;e wo,d ,ir e jecnr.
no nDtter vhat context we are in. However. inferential meaning could be
Ceremined by a
'pecrfic conrexr t-o' e\ampt-. in rhe \ onrexr of I reJt esrare
dJ. rhe h"arer $ould be oble ro inter .d ,habbl hou.e.f,om ho sc w h

To sumup, while inferenrial meaning associare{:l with selectiveness has

simrla- ledfirc. lo L ces converca.ional inrplicarures.
drlfe,c p,imarlty rn
re,Fb or .pedkc,\ rnrended n)ednrng. Betow r, an overa p;ofite oi,he
'hc
similarities and differences ofihe four meannrgs discussed in this section.
 by

The Inlerence Process of Scl,;ctiveness

In tiris section. the focus is oD the rnference process ofselectiveness
tl ough a comparison \rith Grices convcrsltional unplicalures Grice
discusscd during his 1967 lcctures at Halaard Univenity s'lut he calied
'convcrsalional implicatures'. concernrng how hearers try to get the
co'nplete mcssage when speakers mean more than they say these w€rc first
proposcd u the 1960s and later revised in Glice (1989).
Grices maxims can be violated (mtentionally or unintentionally) to
achieve certain conversational implicatures. Grice proposed that the
trnplicature could be worked out based on:

a. Tle litcrll lnisuistic meaning ofwhat is said

b. Infornation indicaied in the coDtext
c. A beliefrhat the speaker would folLow the cooperative plinciple

I cr ,.. .ompare Lhe iolloslr: r$o e\rnp cr'

Erample (convcrsational implicature): I leacher lvalks ituo a classroon

I
aDd says: 'lt is stuffy here' . He implies that the wiodo\( t should be opened.
which would be infened by students in the room.
Examplc 2 (nlference in selectiveness): In Chnrcse, oul ofpoliteness people
rend to say someone s physical cordllion is leally strorg $4ren in facl thjs
somconc is overweighl. Thc hearer would normally be able 1() work out the
message of beins olenveight. Another example would be real estaie
advertisements. Th€ readers may get the sense of 'old or possible shabby'
fiom a house with claracte.'.
whal, then, are the diffcrences bets'cen Gric€'s coDversaiional
inplicatures and the inlerence guided by the principle ol selectivcness?
They are as follows.
a. As prcviously mentioned. in Grice's conversaiional nnplicatures,
speakcrs would like their herrers to know the iDformation that is
implied. In Exanrple I above. the tercher would cerlainly hope tllat
his students in the classroom could get his hinl and open lhe
rvindolvs. Interestingly, in the case of inference for seleciiveness
speakers cetanrly do not intend hearers to work our aDy
information that is no1 good as far as the speaker is concemed.
 ZHANC CRICE'S MAXIMS
l]9
That is, usualty the speaker does nor mean
to imply any different
'nedr,;ns
crcep|'he ,"rat nedrrnC Ac .hoqn r,r t_\dmD,e ,,
leirhelhe ( \rnFce rpedker or rhe pot,re remd,t ;he ,",ri,,.,"
.o tno$ rnylh:ng "",$,ur ha becn
orh"r rhJ.,
Jro nr a|\ e\ --rl. rh( sprake,. who $o$. treJre,.
nrJy \ork o rl
sornelhing more, woutd not be wjling to
disclose ;;i,r;;;;;
morc to hearers.
b lr r ^d-np,.,.,he,perkrr -nedf .nore.,an shd.\J.been\J,.t nr
|mpre 2 .h.
:.",,.._" i:.t
,.".i ft,n e\Jc,rr "pfd,{( s oo ,"
."." ."," ir-"
"*,
lll:l shdr rhe) ard rhe) q:r .,,e[
maref( o rt(. r)orhIrg rrore rrom r,. "r).ln .elec,r\enc... unr \
'r. e L no
anythins
rmpl.cJtur- rronr rhe ,pedker. end It heareA qcr
orhe. than rhe semantic mianing the
would not be the speaker,s i.tention.
,p.rk". ;"r:j;
rrrrprrarur*. rrre.pcJker r..Lppnc.d ro
Ll"o:,::.
r-rr\' L-l_.",,onar
dn elron ,o Ier rhrrr h.are,. inoq uhd. js ,-pt,e" ,,r,ai Uy
L. bcen lrJ t hJ, 6 rh. sp.J(er - .urposed ro *metl.. ,_*;
ro rnaKe rne |ol,rrg o. mdxjn\ \noln r" rh. hea.er. Rur in rie
._- ot .etecrrrene... sDed\e,. n,. hare no h
"o,.ld "u,
pr("cr rhJr rhe ,red,ers Lndcr,rdnd (xaLrty ";.r;;" ;;Letl
$hdUhe\
'h( n. I',. ed,or r,.,mpte rhe,e.peaker,dorr iir.ra,.r.,,.,'i.i
n otL ctJre. ,;om ,he,r
(,r,r y e I ea,L,.. job Irrrdnrc. ll lherc
ro $ork ,hem ou, b)"re "ny, worhdtlc-
rhem.el\e,
ld ;e
't
s' rKr1g oul the ,nterenIa/ nedrrnp depcld. corFt)
on h"ar, r,,
abiliry ro recognize rhe setediveness
d. B"d.. t on lhe ,br\e rhree. L r, e\pechd
lh-l rhe h(drer, .n rhe ca,e
,rer.,,)s Alrhoust- rr,,a rougterJob. r""..;
\ork 'oL e\"nr rJIy r,_rr"
"_,? Jbow, h, rr";,
or erampte. in I rdmptc
I
rji",.
rreF\pe(teJ ro he able ro rnle, oU. ..rJ v. lrorr a rcal
advertrsement of .a house wjrh
e,rdle
poF.rriat sjmrtdrJy
characrer. t
r,"*. *irl, e.""i
"i con,"r.r. .tr.o.ra
hear"r,. Srven r* ,p_rfc
probrem knowrns rt-d rhe pcrson reh,re,l
:i" ",.': "9
ovrrweighr.
Lo r,
ltuoLgh lhe .erranric mernrng of .red y,rrong.

.-. ,1-:'-ll:''":" .''' ,,,'e,' rce nro.ess o, co,\e,.a,.ondl

rnrprrcature Jnd sel.ctl\ enF<(

Conversational implicature:
a. The sp€aker means more rhan he says; he
says A bur acrualty
means B.
n dnd a,e d{d,e rhd. rhe .peJr,er r.,., e r,er
::ll
rn.enr :o.li"I' ',eaier
ona'l) o, unrrrentro dlly. \ ro,dled r nDxlm
 FU JEN STUDIES
I4O
(via
c. The speaker assumes that the hearer will, one wav or another
figure out
conteit, knowledge and comnon sense, etc )' manage 10

B from A.

It should be notcd thal one of the reasons for using conversationat

is that the speaker counts on the hearer being able 10 work
out
impl;ature

--.'". is being selective in siving certain information and

il'" .p*t*
using c€iain words to sr'rit cenain purposes ie g advenising
or
nol,tenessl. Thev !av A and mean A
'goLn ,oearn ana nearcr a.e dqare'har rl,e .peaker. eirher
b.
or Lr'nLenriond,l\, I' berng le'' inforrari!e abour
'rienr!onall\
cenain asD;crs {but nol necessarilv violatjng the maxim9 Usuallv
,1" fr*.i. aware that the speaker mav withlold certain
"
The speaker hopes that the hearer cannot work out the iniomalion
they are trying to widfiold

As shown. the infercnce process for selectiveness and the

conversational inplicatrres rs not quite the same ln the
fomer case' th€
probablv kDows at the start that the
int.,l.ilne tl'ting is that the speake;
r'""*. *itra e"ventuallv work out the unspoken pad of the inlormation
nor rhe 'p..ker'' rnlenrron). btr''rn'P berrts 'elecr'\e '
'"r,l."rft,.
."n1ln.'.0".'^. '' ,,d people fron bol\ end' taner rl rell ue keep doing
is ju'r
l" .,* o, berng polrre borh pdnre' knou tl'ar rhe speakerJ'ing
',. 'r'.
beinc polrr. by nor .rling antrhrng blunrl) lr is nor a mdrter oi a

."',i.i r' rorm rh" r'cl tu' a nraner ol ptdgmdrrc

""j"" be,nL ruder
,.".i'."*ii"i' 'o 'r"re
Me3nshrle Ihe ledrerr rn 'rence has ror
."i''. ,r'r*ir'' systJmatic logical reasoninsi it is an informal
inference/reasoning in an evervday sinntion'
''
r''.1i". I'o* rire alp'oce's r' made b} rhe hearer tn
thc case oi rhe"'i,.
'" "' 'nrere'
celecri\ene" pr.ncrpre r\o elcmenrs Jr€ crucial com'mon
r"'* -a t*tg-t"a knowledgi shared wilh the sperker: and the
irem' uced in J 'pecific rrrua|on for
-*"'i* "f,1" lrnguirr'c arrd
"'^"'*," a tear ecrare rd
it,"-"i. .""'"e "'; "-arrrg ' co1 ea'v care hou'eI'rnp'obablv cmall'
*,a.i, 'r,""r4""t-"f't be aole ro inier rhar Ihe hou'e
by using common sense and readingb€tween the Iines

V. Conclusions
rie utn, nre o. 'elecr \eneJ' r' dr'cu"'ed roge\er wrrt Gri"'s
-".;;,,,;;;r i"y'm. Ba.ed on u\a, ,as been
dr"us'Pd rr I"oncruded
 ZHANC-GRICE'S MAXIMS
l,1l

that the applicabilfty ofcricet maxinrs is a matter or degree. The nuxims

camrot be raken as absojute rLrtes; rhis would
be neither right nor pracr;cable.
Language is not as ctear cut as nurhemaricat
fornutas; ir .d;;;;;;
culture, society, etc. As shoqn in thrs stud),.
cor..,l-ar,or, re,,d ro be d dec,J,is rd-o. io, .har
.riiprrg.";;.
",,lt
"on;u.;.",,;
D rLrpt$.to u,e rn orJc- lo rchirve d,uc.eslLrloulco.ne V"ryo
en $hen
:im jrnd LutI e sJpers, de. t,"gu"ge ..,-,
cul:,..at norm . rach.
:,"n".]Jc,,
ar-r ad\enr< rg and .rtud-ion. wtc-e potlenes. i, ,.q,:r.j Wn."
.ornr.Irn..JrrnB peop'e musr ro lo\ .e dil c[lturdt
,r,t ,ocr"i,.n, enrron.,
suited to paI1icular conrexls.
Thc reason that comnmnicarors rvill make rccoLDse
to selectiveDess is
because ir rs approprjate to do so for various puryoses
(pemonal rnleresrs.
bu.r,e.s t-olr.. c 'rurdl JnJ soLiil no,mat \ polrre..*. e. tn rn. ca."
ad\ear\rng. ,gefli .rr b.nefir trom nor mdtin3
I
.no rhe
rrc oI hou,e, ,o obv,ous sinL d,lv. ." .,",)d"J
'.on
selectiveness rs very imponaDt in siiuations ""","r.;,,";,
like *"Iariii"j. rr *" A"lr"li
mJ r.r rh( fr.n\ rpJe o' \cte.rivere,, 6ns 1o, ror
b" abt, ,o fir rnru .o. r;iy
suc(e$tult\
\e
,-.-,1 -n":"" rcqunored rhdr tansuase L(er. ,voutd no,mat.y be dc
cd e\.eDr qhe,e rhi5 goe" agrrncr rt"rr dbrtr;,e-.
rhe,,
own lnterests or prefcrences. Wlether or nor we
enploy slectiveness is a
ndrrc_ ol r.e,d lr i rn rh< conrunr.aror. o$,,
rnlere.rc ro mdLe .hex
ulte.a.ces as informative or orherwise as selective
on.*cumndn, es.
as possibler ir a deoenrr.

While the principle of selectiveness doesn,t seem ro

^ vrolate anv of
cncc', nuxrn'. jr ., no. adequarely rerre,en"d by anJ ot,f";;;;h;,
snosn. Interrntrdt .nednrng Js\o"idred wIh .ete, rivene"s ;,
rs ditferenr lrom
urrce\ con\crsdriond'i rmpticature. in rid, .Dea\er do
no. $ar, .rrerredrcrr
ro so,k o,.1 orhcr lhdl ln. tllerdl mealrng ofrh. unerarce,. Ba.J
'nv-\.nB
on he "acr rhdr sete. rve'e.. rl t"rSJJge u.(,. .,y .rte,nd .no,i;
"
rrFreloe bc reprFer?d jr L propo.pd ro rdd irrocnce. ",rrrrr. a marin
or Jpproprkrene\\^go\eming ptugmalrc. Jtn-jrt cor..,tercrron, pracrrc,
rKe,rne pnncrple ot .el"crrvenes. could be "
ttaLed under rhb bannry. shrch
rcur rren co'np-rdre tbr I qedk ooinr otufice. ma\rm\. ie.,he tack ot
Lur(rrar consroerabon\
Tr,e rmplfdfion ot rhi, eJdy rs rhdt ue ,hoLtd
never urderesImdre rtre
':1":1111.c,11"r ":g "rher prdgnarrc f:crors have on our 1"Igua3" u..

^)?j-i.._1:l:
or l:nI ",
L"suatse uce .hou,d rdre
rantuage and cu tture.
r o
"cc.
,nL rr" rnr"irar,on
 FU JEN STUDIES

Notes

ot Fu Jen stu'lies at'd

- \w,*,o *u* Murphv and Gretchen I ee
'o' for therr valuablenerp
lhe anonvmous revi€wers .,.,- ..neaker' iocludes
;iuq-'":'#'.:'htiqj$:*ff ""."r"."r*!l;i"'i:Hi
an u*erance occurs) and
::x?ff:'i"il:ii l?"]:Jliil.'"],"i ,t.i.;, -w;
""' jH:'IiSfi::*T',lli:[-:i"*":lXn,;l;*,*.#il:llf ;:
;i#l#'$iiri,T,i":i:ii:;!i[iqif:.l'ffi f ',",m*,
l^:#':l"'Ji il',ffIi'*': i1i'i':.'ll:ll?,iil
;; u" "'t"ri" i.. no'l

o"Ii".l;.* a ptcNre which mav help buverr ro

ads normally include

:runf rft:".;;,44!;$ffi i,ti'iil*-3r-

.-,"rl;":Tf'#',':*'.:t?#it":#li.#"1::1.:ff
:hr,*;
r*'i
:::i?:fi ""5:,iT:l;:l;.;II J.iffil'Ji"iii.
r..n
" "''

Refercnces
Aitardo. salvatore leeT Lo***" l"qt"il::i::?,::%":;:;i;
?;":,*':f,*#;;'T'li::';;':t'::,i,:f ion l"'{*gi1:e?::il'
place olcoopetXloo, in cognition EnroPedn
Afiard;, salvarore. 19s9. The o.rooo
,o,u_ octote'
sieno' tatv
Z::):::;Z ;; A ;;;;' ffi"e isbcs'ss) ","",
t?r8lt'o''v ro'mdi o/
inappropriateness

iprle
^*,.i'':t"1;11"1?.atics )2
r a sr' alics
"''a*o"'.--
12.1tei-62o
93'826 Dolircnc$: So e Miv?rsals
Brown. Pe-nelope and Srephen !'ly*l 'Y,l-,,-..,...'* u-.".
,:if,:#;:';;;;:c"!'t;','"9T*1i"-."tji:1,o":1,i,i
[,!ff#"f#." Ei;,"1j,',,? i-;;ai.
*rnbrrdee universiry
"",.'
*.'*;"x;l6':,1;;t16;'i'1;,9ff
crustal- Davrd lggl.,4 dictiondry
oJ tinguts cs d;l;#;:fr ,t',",",k,"",
London: Blackwell Publishe$
 l4l
ZHANG-GRICE'S MA"YIMS

coddard .lili and Anna wrer/brcka lqaT Di,.nutse and culrue

"""-';".;;;.; ,, -.,a1 nkruc'ior' ed bv reln\anD'rk 2lr'57
T.ondon: Saee
and conversalrol s)trldr and scnanti" t''d
""" i'""in. rod
c,i... "e '
i""" ."L *i'erry
r
Morgan 4l s8 Nes Yo'k Academc Pres'
.,.r*.;',; H' tisq s',,a,es in rt'i"o,ot wor'i Cambndse \4Al
Hanard Unirersity Press'
ir,'.*. n la.] creekGr'ce: A b'refsurvev orploro-
u.rn.
" P n'eedn{ nl th' \nth
p.,, Merns ofth? ChkaBo Lneu^tic Sa' i"D '
".',lrtt,ol'"r*r.srnrhehrsloryorlogrc
- " i,;;;*;
'''"- R.-i;d i.*aa, a ni' axonomv tor prasmarrc nrerence
lo'n
iii"'.i, 'a R ba'cd 'mPlrcarures n'le/atnc rirn a d usP.in
'onrc'l
i ,rrr."ir"^ ic bvDeborahs'h ll 4l washingron
",
DC-",Ceoreerot\n lJn'versity Press
a""""rsationaj naxims and ratior,atit! Ld suase
in
K,"hJ;;1;t?
''"" '' Kasher' la7-
r"*a"i'i,,. ncrhodt and tt:rens ed bv A"a
'",,,i -;;";; inference reconsidered Phitosophica (Ge t)
)16. Rerdel Dordrechr'
*,"llJ;;'i;si
29.25-11.
"'.""'- t., iqi. Politcness and raLrondlrrv Prugndti s and liagttisti'5
''""" .;',;.; r;;"b L Me) l0l-14 oden5e: odenqe unrvet(itv
'f,;
Nett
r*f,...,qra tq8f lustincadon ofspeech acts' and speech acts
"""^"a,'1,,1"i" L, ed bi Emest Le Pore' 281'303 London:
'"*"i,tcs,
Academic Press.
r*"-. i]:'"". 6. rs?o on the universalitv of conversational implicatures
Lanldre n Sociltf 5 61'8O
**r'J.li.r-1,i" PrasrnaLrc rheor) and rhe analvn' ol
"" '"1i".'..'r""Joi*'r
i"*"*'1r" "pp*' tnHunour tnta na nonnt rou'nat
of Hunaur Research l q's
t.^k.ff:'R";t;;. i;;L ile iogic of politeness, or ninding vour p's and
"'^""'ii"i' ,t'" ntnth
"Regioiat
Meeting of the chicdsa Linguistic
i"^
Societv 292-305
ii"ii"i. isli whv vou can't sav what;'eica
-"*"i;ft;;;;'
r."kon vou mean Reviewof
be the death of
; ,:iitt ,p**ns'' wi
Enel$h: CentrLth 4\2) l5t 70
Longmdn
r.*r,, C.'"n'.1 tess Parcirlcs ot prasndri" London:
(ambridge Unrversrrv
i."i"."", tt.pr'." Prosnaric' Cambtrdse:
lqSJ

r.","."",ir.pr''." Pe5uapttvc h?anLnBs Th .!hPory or sen?rclEed

"- -.or,,r-t.^,t.2OOo. i^plrcal'e Cr'Tbndge MA: MIT Pre*
 FU JEN STUDIES

SDerber. Dan. ard Deirdre Wrlson lqS6 i?I?vancer Conmuncatioa and

' ronitton. oxfotd: Blackwell t2nde&tion l995l
s.".1*. ii""l,"Jo.r'a'. wit.on t iol lt'e rnupprng beween rhe rnental
"'"*;;;-;Jai; xicon Ldnsuaee nd thousht : Inkrdtsciptin-aD
a

;;;;^;. id tv pet.' cu"utt'i's and Jill Boucher' 184-200'

Carnbddser CaflhidgeUniversitv Press
s"..b.;;;;; D;d'" drboo 20o2 eragnarics modularirv and mind-
' 1. dl^a. Mtnd and Lans aee l1 3'23
wi";"k; i; la85 Diff;ren-r culrues different languases drfferent
soeech Jounat oI Praematics 9 145'1R
p'g a 's: rhe \emanncs of
wt."bi:;:';;; i6r 'rttoi. c,iunan'tde Cruyer'
^cts
hunan iNeftdion BetllJl I Moulon
M''a
w;lson, Deirdre. and Dan Sperber' 2002 T thfirlness
and relevatrce
lll {443).583-612.
tu.."
**r;';;;';;:4.;v
rj.i.at.. O"" Sperber 2004 Relevance 6eory Handbook of
' ""a .j,Llence R Hom and cregory ward' secrion 3
Oxford: Blackwell
Xihud dictionary' 1996. Beijing: Corffnercial Prcss'
Journal of
2i'".g, qi".. r6qs. r*,iness'vaguenesvgeneralitv-anlloigurtv
P rusn a t i c s 29 (l).13'3 r'

View publication stats