ENG508 Final Term Preparation 2020 by Paragon

ENG 508 SOLVED FINAL PAST PAPERS COMPILED BY 2nd SEMESTER · Syllabus: Lesson 23-43 (Topics 114-225) · Q. Driving force behind the Grice, s work (Topic#114)

The fact that “what we literally say and what we clearly mean often differ is intuitively obvious but difficult to describe or explain systematically, was the driving force behind Grice's work. He was Interested in developing a systematic explanation of how and why literal and intended meaning differs. Implicatures are context-dependent.

Q. What is implicature? (Topic#114)

The term “Implicature” accounts for what a speaker can imply, suggest or mean, as distinct from what the speaker literally says (Grice, 1975). Any meaning conveyed indirectly or through hints, and understood implicitly without ever being explicitly stated.

Example:

Sara: My brother has just told me that he cannot look after our daughter after all.

Irum: He’s such a considerate man!

Explanation:

Here, we have clear sense that literal meaning of irum ‘s word cannot tell us everything what she meant, without particular knowledge of the talk. It perhaps most likely that she is speaking sarcastically or she might genuinely believe that he is a considerate man.

Q: What is the difference between generalized and particular conversational implicature? (Topic#116)

Generalized Particular: It is a conversational implicature that is inferable without reference to a special context (no special knowledge is required to figure out the additional meaning). It means that a generalized conversational implicature is one which does not depend on particular features of the context, but is instead typically associated with the proposition expressed.

A particularized conversational implicature occurs when a conversation takes place in a very specific context in which locally recognized inferences are assumed.

EXAMPLE:

1. “Fred thinks there is a meeting tonight”.

Fred doesn’t know for sure that there is a meeting tonight.

Q2. A: Did you invited bella and Cathy?

B: I invited Bella.

EXAMPLE:

Q1. Where is my book?

Your young sister is drawing something. The action “draw “of young sister would ordinarily not convey anything about her book, so implicature in this case depends on the context as well as the utterance itself.

Q2. A: hey, coming to the party tonight?

B: My parents are visiting.

Occur when a conversation takes place in a very specific context in which locally recognized inferences are assumed. The particularized conversational implicature is used widely, because it can provide with

more contents, more aspects of speech than generalized conversational implicature.

Q: What is scalar implicature? (Topic#117)

A scalar implicature is a quantity implicature based on the use of an informationally weak term

in an implicational scale. Example Some professors are famous, where the speaker ‘s use of some typically indicates that s/he had reasons not to use a more informative term .e.g. all. Some professors are famous, therefore, give rise to the implicature that not all professors are famous. Similarly, in the utterance, some of the boys went to the party, the word some implicates "not all of the boys went to the party. " Classic examples of scales include numerals (< … three, two, one>), modals (<necessarily, possibly>, <must, should, may>), connectives (<and, or>), adverbs (<always, often, sometimes>), degree adjectives (<hot, warm>) and verbs of ranking (<know, believe>, <love, like>) or completion (<start, finish >).

Q: Write the Properties of conversational implicature. (Topic#119)

Non-detachability - a conversational implicature is attached to the semantic content of what is said, not to the linguistic form i.e. it is possible to use a synonym and keep the implicature intact. It will not be detached from the utterance as a whole, even though the specific words may be changed.

Reinforceability - Implicatures can be reinforced, e.g. John answered most of the questions. But he wasn't able to answer the last question. (not redundant)

Non-conventionality - implicature is not carried by what is said, but only by the saying of what is said, or by putting it that way. '

Calculability — speakers try to convey conversational implicatures and hearers are able to understand them suggests that implicatures are calculable.

Q. Define cancellability. (Topic#119)

Cancellability is one of the properties of conversational implicature. It is also known as defeasibility. Presence of a conversational implicature relies on a number of factors such as the conventional meaning of words used, the linguistic and situational contexts, etc. So if any of them changes, the implicature will also change.

Example

1. John has 3 cows.
2. John has only three cows.
3. John has 3 cows, if not more.
4. John has at least 3 cows.

Q. Conventional implicature does not depend on social content for interpretation. however, they can associate it with specific words. Elaborate the concept with the words such as even and yet. (Topic#120)

Conventional implicature is based on the cooperative principle or the maxim. They do not have to occur in a conversation. They do not depend on special contexts for their interpretation. However. they are associated with specific words that result in additional conveyed meanings when used. The English conjunction but' is one of these words. The interpretation of any utterance of the type ‘p but q' will be based on the conjunction ‘p & q' Plus an implicature of contrast' between the information in ‘p and the information in q· Other English words such as even and yet' also have conventional implicatures.

Q: Define non-truth conditionality of conventional implicature. (Topic#121)

Non-truth-conditionality of conventional implicature do not make any contribution to truth conditions e.g. a) We want peace and they want war. b) We want peace but they want war. Both a ‘and b ‘shares the same truth conditions. Conventional implicature is associated with speaker or utterance rather than a sentence.

Q: What is Weak implicature? (Topic#123)

Weak Implicature is a communicated implication of an utterance which is not by itself the main

communicative point of the utterance. The idea is that for some utterances a hearer can understand what a speaker is trying to communicate even if he fails to get one or more implicatures. Weak implicature is the weaker the encouragement, and the wider the range of possibilities among which the hearer can choose, the weaker the implicatures. For example,

John: What are you planning to do today? Mary: I ‘m tired.

There is no single implicature which the hearer must take Mary to be communicating in order to understand her utterance here. Instead, there are several assumptions that he might supply as an implicated premise, each of which would lead to a different implicature e.g. If Mary is tired, she doesn’t want to go out. The weaker the implicature, the less responsibility the speaker takes for their truth, i.e. the more they are the responsibility of the hearer.

Q. Give examples of deictic expression ‘this’ and ‘that. (topic #124 but exp from google)

Deictic expressions this and that are demonstrative pronouns come under the category of spatial deixis. The demonstrative this and that are used to mark the movement towards the speaker.

Examples