| Scalar implicatures have been considered by many scholars as the paradigm case of pragmatic inference and an important testing ground for competing pragmatic theories. Two main accounts of scalar inferences have been developed beyond Grice's original proposal. Neo-Griceans hold the scalar implicatures as their central concern. The scalar inferences are viewed as one kind of Generalized Conversational Implicatures. Neo-Griceans stay relatively close to Grice's formulation and assume that scalar implicatures are produced rather mechanically on weak scalar terms; Relevance Theory, developed by Sperber and Wilson, is one of the most significant additions to pragmatic theory in recent decades. Relevance Theory argues against the neo-Gricean view and in favor of a more contextual account. They hold that scalar implicature is only one example of pragmatic inferences that arise when a speaker expects a hearer to draw the relevant interpretation of an utterance. The listener's processing an utterance's meaning is governed by principles concerning effects and efforts.In the field of scalar implicature, Neo-Griceanism and Relevance Theory differ from each other in the following three aspects: implicature vs explicature. defaultism vs contextualism, and Maxim of Quantity vs the principle of relevance. The thesis presents an all-round comparative analysis through theoretical and empirical study of the two theories' application on scalar implicature. The study shows that a speaker conveys a distinct "explicature" rather than "implicature"; pragmatic implicature is a product of intentional processing, requiring efforts beyond automatic processes; and communicators choose their stimuli in accordance with considerations of relevance, not just quantity maxim.The correct inference of scalar implicature by a second language learner will improve his pragmatic competence and logical skills, which will surely facilitate the process of second language acquisition.
|
PDF Full Text Request