Implicature and its application in teaching listening comprehension skills to students

Implicature and its application in teaching listening comprehension skills
to students
Nguyen Bich Ngoc
M.A student , course 18, university of languages and international studies,
Vietnam national University
Abstract
Conversational implicature appears to play a vitally important role in
understanding spoken English. As not all conversations go in a direct and
straight forward way but sometimes implied and indirect, students have to infer
the real meaning from a conversation. The author, from her real teaching
experience, has found out that college students’ English Listening
Comprehension relies much on how students interpret conversational
implicature of the speakers, which, in fact, bring them a lot of difficulties.
This paper examines the notion of implicature in Grice’s theory with a
focus paid on conversational implicature and his cooperative principles, then
goes into the possible application in teaching College English listening skills to
students by looking at the study of Wang Sihai (2005): the factors that affect
students’ listening comprehension, the classification of conversation that
involves conversational implicature in listening comprehension the importance
of culture in interpreting implicature and the possibilities to enhance the
students’ listening comprehension competence.
1. Implicature
The term “implicature” is used by Grice (1975) to account for what
speakers may imply, mean or suggest as different from what they literally say.
Grice’s theory of implicature includes two main kinds that he called
conventional implicature and conversational implicature.
1. 1. Conventional Implicature
1


Conventional implicature is defined as an addition unstated meaning

associated with the use of a specific word (Vo, 2005). Vo (2005) also divides
conventional implicature into two types which are Common and Scalar.
However, I find Lyons’ classification more comprehensive. While Vo (2005)
concentrates on ‘word’ level, Lyons has analyzed conventional implicature from
the small unit of ‘word’ to the larger unit of ‘expression’.
Take for example the utterance: “He is poor but honest”, “poor but
honest” implies a contrast between “poor” and “honest”. With this, the speaker
may be implicating that it is unusual for someone to be both poor and honest.
The conventional implicature of “but” here is “contrast”. We can also extend the
list of forms which meet Grice’s criteria for Conventional Implicature
considerably. Many of the connectives giving cohesion to a text fall within the
scope of this definition: therefore, however, nevertheless, moreover, yet, ect. So
do modal particles such as even, well or just as in the following examples:
E.g. Even Daisy likes that dish
She may well be right
It was just one of the good news
Lyons (1996) even logically extends the notion of conventional
implicature with the choice of one form of an expression, rather than another.
For example, if the speaker says
Michael asks me to work for him
or
Michael has asked me to work for him
rather than
Michael asked me to work for him
he or she may imply that Michael ‘s statement had or still has validity. In fact,
differences of tense and mood are also associated with differences of expressive
meaning frequently.

2

From the above analysis, Lyons (1996) defines conventional implicature
as the one depends on something other than what is truth-conditional in the
conventional use, or meaning, of particular forms and expressions.
1.2. Conversational Implicature
This is the type of implicature which is mentioned the most frequently.
Because of the reasonable explanation for implications in conversations, it is not
difficult to understand why conversational implicature has received such a lot of
attentions from linguists.
As we know, there are many situations where the speakers and listeners’
responses seem to be not literally relevant but the participants yet understand
each other. In fact, they interpret the information by implying, not stating. Grice
argued that this predictability of inference information could be explained by
postulating cooperative principle which is a kind of tacit agreement by
speakers and listeners to cooperate in communication. Thus, in order to
understand the notion of conversational implicature thoroughly, we need to
understand the maxims of Cooperative Principle suggested by Grice (1975).
Maxims:
a. Quantity (also called the Maxim of Informativeness)
- Make your contribution as informative as is required.
- Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.
b. Quality (also called the Maxim of Truthfulness)
Try to make your contribution one that is true
- Do not say what you believe to be false.
- Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.
c. Relation (also called the Maxim of Relevance)
- Be relevant.
d. Manner (also called the Maxim of Clarity)
Be perspicuous
3

- Avoid obscurity of expression.
- Avoid ambiguity.
- Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity)
- Be orderly.
Understanding the maxims above, we now come to the definition of
conversational implicature. Vo (2005) stated that conversational implicature is
created by flouting the maxims. It has an additional unstated meaning that has to
be assumed in order to maintain the cooperative principle. Further examples of
implications below will illustrate the logic between the maxims and
conversational implicatures
a. Quantity
A: Did you do the final assignment?
B: I intended to
Literally and grammatically, the question “Did you do the final
assignment?” requires the answer of “Yes” or ”No”. Thus, the response “I
intended to” is not as informative as required. Moreover, A did not ask about B’s
intention so B’s response contribute more information than it is required. In
short, the response violates the Maxim of Quantity. However, A can still assume
B’s unstated meaning in order to maintain the cooperative principle. Then the
response can be understood as “I intended to do but I haven’t done it yet” and
the implication in this case is “No”.
b. Quality
A: (To a friend who did a terrible thing to him) You are a fine friend!
The utterance “You are a fine friend!” in this situation infringes the
Maxim of Truthfulness: do not say what you believe to be false. The friend who
did a bad thing to A can not be called a fine friend. A certainly knows that but he
intentionally says so because he wants to imply the contrary: “You are a bad
friend!”. This way of irony is also popular in everyday conversations.

c. Relation
4


A: Where’s Bill, do you know?
B: His coat’s gone
Instead of saying something related to the place where Bill is, B’s
response mentions Bill’s coat which seems not to be relevant to the question.
This violation of Relevance Maxim indicates that “His coat has gone so he
perhaps went home and is not here”.
d. Manner
A: Who are those standing by the door?
B: That’s my father and his wife
B does not say ”Those are my parents”. The way B says “That’s my
father and his wife” violates the Maxim of Clarity. Assuming that B is in fact
obeying the Maxim of Clarity and also Truthfulness, B’s reason for speaking
this way is that she/ he means that the woman is not a mother to her/him and B
may also implicate that she/ he does not like the woman.
So far, we have looked through kinds of implicature as well as the ways
to interpret an implication. In the next part, I would like to mention some of the
practical aspects of implicatute.
2. Implicature and English listening comprehension classroom.
In listening comprehension classroom the importance of interpreting the
conversational implicature is obvious. For the teacher, his/her major task should
not be just finish the class by letting the students listen to the materials again
and again and then provide the correct answers to the questions. Instead the
toughest part of the job is that how to support the students in the process of
listening and interpretation, and how to develop the competence of implicature
interpretation in listening comprehension classroom.
Wang Sihai (2005) has stated a number of ideas relating to implicature

and English listening comprehension classroom. The followings are taken from

5


her points and are those which I find useful and also applicable in my context of
teaching.
2.1. What are some factors that affect the listening process?
Listening is a demanding process, not only because of the complexity of
the process itself, but also due to factors that characterize the listener, the
speaker, the content of the message, and any visual support that accompanies
the message (Brown & Yule, 1983).
The Listener
- Interest in a topic increases the listener's comprehension.
- The ability to use negotiation skills, such as asking for clarification, repetition,
or definition of points not understood, enable a listener to make sense of the
incoming information.
The Speaker
- Colloquial language and reduced forms make comprehension more difficult.
- A speaker's rate of delivery may be too fast, too slow, or have too many
hesitations for a listener to follow.
- Awareness of a speaker's corrections and use of rephrasing ("er. . . I mean . .
.That is . . .") can assist the listener. Learners need practice in recognizing these
speech habits as clues to deciphering meaning.
Content
Content that is familiar is easier to comprehend than content with unfamiliar
vocabulary or for which the listener has insufficient background knowledge.
Visual Support
Visual support, such as video, pictures, diagrams, gestures, facial expressions,
and body language, can increase comprehension if the learner is able to

correctly interpret it.
2.2. The classification of conversation that involves conversational
implicature in listening comprehension.
6


In college English listening comprehension, as far as the conversations
are involved, they fall into several categories.
A: Those that observe the Cooperate Principles very strictly and are easy to
infer the meaning.
For example:
a) M: I’d like to see the blue jacket in the window.
W: What size do you want?
In this example the answer to the question is both informative and relevant, so it
brings not too much difficulties to the student listener. Only by the interpretation
of the literal meaning of the sentence can the student understand all the
information conveyed through the dialogue.
b) M: When is Mary coming?
W: Well, it’s eight forty. She’ll arrive in fifteen minutes.
In this example both the speakers are very cooperative and the answer to the
question is relevant and informative enough to provide the sufficient
information that the first speaker needs. To these kinds of conversation it is not
a difficult task for the both the students and the teacher.
B: Through the flouting of CP maxim(s) there evokes the conversational
implicature that listeners should try hard to interpret. In listening
comprehension classroom, the types of conversation that need to be interpreted
to figure out the implicature includes (Laurence F.B, 1999):
a) Relevance
A: How about going for a walk?
B: Isn’t it raining out?

b) Minimum Requirement Rule
Two golfers are talking about their chances in the local university golf
tournament.
A: What do you think it will take to make the cut tomorrow, Brad?
7


B: Oh, a 75 ought to do it. Did you have a 75? I didn’t.
c) The POPE Q implicature:
The POPE Q implicature answers one question with another. For the implicature
to work, the person asking the first question with another. For the implicature to
work, the person asking the first question must realize that the answer to that
question is the same as the answer to the second one and just as easy. This
implicature is highly formulaic and is named for the prototype response, Is the
pope Catholic?
A: Does Sr. Walker always give a test the day before vacation?
B: Does the sun come up in the East?
d) Indirect criticism:
The Indirect Criticism implicature often follows a request for an evaluation of
something. When expressed using this implicature, the evaluation is negative.
That effect is achieved by praising some unimportant feature of the item being
evaluated, thus implying that there is nothing more flattering that can be said.
A: Have you seen Robin Hood?
B: Yeah. I went last night.
A: What did you think of it?
B: The cinematography was great.
A: Oh, that bad, hug?
e) Sequence-based implicature
Sequence-based implicatures are based on the assumption that unless there
are indications to the contrary, events being described occur in the order in

which they are expressed. The effect of this assumption is easily seen in the
difference in the sequence of events implied by sentences such as :
Jack drove to Chicago and had dinner.
Jack had dinner and drove to Chicago.
f) Irony:

8


Bill and Peter work together in the same office. They sometimes are sent on
business trips together and are becoming good friends. They often have lunch
together and Peter has even invited Bill to have dinner with him and his wife at
their home several times. Now Peter’s friends have told him that they that they
saw Bill out dancing with Peter’s wife recently while Peter was out of town on a
business trip. On hearing this, Peter’s comment was…
Peter: Bill knows how to be a really good friend, doesn’t he?
2.3. Culture and the interpretation of implicature
Culture plays an important role in the course of the implicature
interpretation. , and now more and more teacher and student have come to
realize the importance of culture teaching in College English. Only after you
have a solid foundation of the culture of the target language, can you get what
they mean implied. So it required to enhance cross-cultural awareness and to
understand the culture of second language with open-minded attitude from
different perspectives.
Some approaches are recommended here to help English-learners better
perceive and understand cross-cultural awareness:
1)

To encourage learners to read extensively, including varieties of
newspapers, magazines, novels, fiction and even children’s

books. Through such exposure learners will develop a more
mature and comprehensive understanding of second language and
its culture.

2)

Attach the emphasis of learning the culture of English speaking
countries with the importance of one’s own native culture.
Students may be in a better position to develop cross-cultural
skills and make comparisons and contrasts between the properties
of their own culture and that of the target culture so as to get a
better understanding of another culture.
9


3)

To motivate learners to participate in all kinds of English
activities, such as English poem recitations, oral English
completion, English programme performances; to watch TV
programmes on Channel 9, CCTV, to listen to the radio of BBC
or VOA, and to encourage interpersonal contacts that learners are
apt to pick up some of the authentic and cultural information they
would not be able to obtain from classroom or textbook.

As a teacher of English listening he should keep in mind the principle of
teaching English in a cultural perspective, a major concern in the whole
teaching process. The teacher should not miss the chance to inform the
students of the TL culture knowledge concerned, and to compare it wity the
SL culture so that the students could have a better understanding and memory

of it.
Proverbs, folk tales, legends, etc. show the students English natives’
important values, beliefs, customs and their ideas about life, death,
relationship, nature, and the like, and thus were used frequently in the class.
English songs and movies also work well in disclosing TL culture. This was
ultimately to inspire the students’ interest in English, to increase their cultural
awareness, and to help them use their knowledge as guidance to effective
inference in the interpretation of conversational implicature in listening
comprehension class.
2.4. What should be considered when selecting listening techniques and
activities in interpretation of conversational implicatures?
What is known about the listening process and the factors that affect
listening can be a guide when incorporating listening skill development into
adult ESL classes. The following guidelines have been adapted from a variety of

10


sources including Brod (1996), Brown (1994), Dunkel (1991), Mendelsohn
(1994), Morley (1991), Peterson (1991), Richards (1983), and Rost (1991).
Listening should be relevant.
Because learners listen with a purpose and listen to things that interest
them, accounting for the goals and experiences of the learners will keep
motivation and attention high. For example, if learners at a worksite need to be
able to understand new policies and procedures introduced at staff meetings, in
class they should be helped to develop the abilities to identify main ideas and
supporting details, to identify cause and effect, to indicate comprehension or
lack of comprehension, and to ask for clarification.
Material should be authentic.
Authenticity should be evident both in language and in task. The

language should reflect real discourse, including hesitations, rephrasing, and a
variety of accents. Although the language needs to be comprehensible, it does
not need to be constantly modified or simplified to make it easier for the level
of the listener. Level of difficulty can be controlled by the selection of the task.
For example, in a unit on following instructions, at the beginning level, the
learner might hear a command ("May I borrow your hammer?") and respond by
choosing the correct item. At an intermediate level, the learner might hear a
series of instructions ("Go to the broom closet, get the floor polisher, take it to
the hall in front of the cafeteria, polish the floor there, then go to the . . .") and
respond appropriately by tracing the route on a floor plan of the worksite. An
advanced-level learner might listen to an audio tape of an actual work meeting
and write a summary of the instructions the supervisor gave the team. Use of
authentic material, such as workplace training videos, audio tapes of actual
workplace exchanges, and TV and radio broadcasts, increases transferability to
listening outside of the ESL classroom context--to work and to community.

11


Opportunities to develop both top-down and bottom-up processing skills should
be offered.
Top-down oriented activities encourage the learners to discuss what they
already know about a topic, and bottom-up practice activities give confidence in
accurate hearing and comprehension of the components of the language
(sounds, words, intonation, grammatical structures).
The development of listening strategies should be encouraged.
Predicting, asking for clarification, and using non-verbal cues are
examples of strategies that increase chances for successful listening. For
example, using video can help learners develop cognitive strategies. As they
view a segment with the sound off, learners can be asked to make predictions

about what is happening by answering questions about setting, action, and
interaction; viewing the segment again with the sound on allows them to
confirm or modify their hypothesis (Rubin, 1995).
Activities should teach, not test.
Teachers should avoid using activities that tend to focus on memory
rather than on the process of listening or that simply give practice rather than
help learners develop listening ability. For example, simply having the learners
listen to a passage followed by true/false questions might indicate how much the
learners remembered rather than helping them to develop the skill of
determining main idea and details. Pre- and post-listening task activities would
help the learners to focus attention on what to listen for, to assess how
accurately they succeeded, and to transfer the listening skill to the world beyond
the classroom.
References
1. Brown, G. 1990. Listening to Spoken Language[M].Longman.

12


2. Hurford, I.R., and Heasley, B. (2003). Semantics - A course book. Vietnam:
First New.
3. Kearns, K. (2002). Implicature and Semantic Change. Retrieved March 06,
2009 from www.ling.canterbury.ac.nz/documents/implicature.pdf
4. Kearns, K. (2000). Semantics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
5. Lyons, J. (1996). Linguistic Semantics - An introduction. Cambridge: CUP.
6. Nguyen Hoa. (2004). Understanding English Semantics. Hanoi: VNU
Publishing House.
7. Saeed, J. I. (2005). Semantics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
8. Vo Dai Quang. (2005). Semantics. Hanoi: Publishing House of Culture and
Information.

9. Wang Sihai. (2005). Interpretations of Conversational Implicature in
Listening Comprehension. Retrieved June 23rd, 2020 from
www. modlinguistics.com/PAPERS/2005/wangsihai.doc

13