Conversational Implicature: Its Recognition and Production by University Students

Authors

  • Hamid Jasim Mohammed College of Education for Humanities, University of Wasit
  • Faris Kadhim AL-Attabi College of Education for Humanities, University of Wasit

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31185/eduj.Vol4.Iss41.1941

Keywords:

Conversational implicature, recognition, production.

Abstract

       Conversational implicature is considered as one of the essential ways of communication. This study, however, aims at finding out university students’ recognition and production of conversational implicature. To achieve the aims of the study, two types of multiple-choice discourse completion tasks are used in collecting the data, and a quantitative research methodology is used in analysing these data. The sample of the study included 100 male and female students studying at the English department, college of education for humanities, university of Wasit. The test was carried out electronically by using online educational platforms such as Google Classroom and Free Conference Call on 30 of March 2020. To achieve the aims of the study, it has been hypothesized that university students can recognize and produce conversational implicature. The study has come up with the results that university students are unable to recognize and produce Conversational Implicature.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Bassnett, S. (1992). Translation studies, London and New York, Methuen.

Birner, J. (2013). Introduction to pragmatics. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Black, E. (2006). Pragmatics stylistics: Edinburgh textbooks in applied

linguistics. Great Britain: Edinburgh University Press.

Bouton, L. (1994). Can NNS skill in interpreting implicature in American

English be improved through explicit instruction?: A pilot study. In L.

Bouton and Y. Kachuru (Eds.) Pragmatics and language learning (pp. 88-

. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

Brown, H. (2004). Language assessment principles and classroom practices.

London: Pearson Edition Print.

Burns, A., and Joyce, H. (1997). Focus on speaking. Sydney: National Center

for English Language Teaching and Research.

Bussmann, H. (Ed.). (2006). Routledge dictionary of language and linguistics,

(G. Trauth and K. Kazzazi, Trans). London & New York: Routledge.

Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge

Language Teaching Library. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.

Crystal, D. (2008). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. Oxford: Wiley.

Blackwell Publication.

Eckard, R., and Kearny, M. (1981). Teaching conversational skills in ESL.

Washington: Centre of Applied Linguistics.

Fromkin, V. (1971). Non-anomalous nature of anomalous utterances. Language

, 47, 27-52.

Gaskell, M., and Marslen-Wilson, W. (1997). Integrating form and meaning: a

distributed model of speech perception. Language and Cognitive

Processesm1997, 12, 613-656.

Gaskell, M., and Marslen-Wilson, W. (1998). Mechanisms of phonological

inference in speech perception. Journal of experimental psychology: Human

Perception Performance 1998, 24, 380-396.

Gazdar, G. (1979). Pragmatics: implicature, presupposition, and logical form.

New York: Academic Press.

Gorlée, D. (1994). Semiotics and the problem of translation, Amsterdam,

Atlanta, G.A.

Grice, p. (1975). Logic and conversation. Syntax and semantics. New York:

Academic Press.

Halliday, M., and Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London & New York,

Longman.

Harley, A. (2014). The psychology of language: from data to theory. London.

Taylor and Francis. Psychology Press.

Jianda, L. (2006). Assessing EFL learners’ interlanguage pragmatic knowledge:

implication for testers and teachers. Reflections on English Language

Teaching 2006, 5, 1-22.

Levelt, W. (1989). Speaking. From intention to articulation. Cambridge: M.I.T.

Press.

Levinson, C. (1983). Pragmatic. London: Cambridge University Press.

Levinson, C. (1995). Interactional biases in human thinking. In E. Goody (ed.),

Social intelligence and interaction (pp. 221-60). Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Liu, M. (1991). CE-EC contrastive studies and translation, Nanchang, Jiangxi

Education Publishing House.

Mey, J. (2001). Pragmatics: an introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.

Nida, E.(1993). Language, culture, and translating. Shanghai, Shanghai

Foreign Language Education Press.

Pratama, H., Nurkamto, J., Rustono, F., & Marmanto, S. (2017). Second

language learners' comprehension of conversational implicatures in English.

The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies 2017, 23, 50 – 66.

Richards, J. (1990). Conversationally speaking: approaches to the speaking of

conversation. In J. Richards (Eds.), The language teaching matrix (pp. 67-

. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Print.

Roever, C. (2005). Testing ESL Pragmatics. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Tan, Z. (1990). On semantic contrast in translating. In L. Yang (Eds), An

anthology of contrastive studies between English and Chinese (pp. 128-139).

Shanghai, Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

Traxler, M., and Gernsbacher, M. (2006). Handbook of psycholinguistics

Burlington, MA: Academic Press.

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. London: Oxford University Press.

Downloads

Published

2020-12-05

How to Cite

Jasim Mohammed, H., & Kadhim AL-Attabi , F. (2020). Conversational Implicature: Its Recognition and Production by University Students. Journal of Education College Wasit University, 4(41), 563-580. https://doi.org/10.31185/eduj.Vol4.Iss41.1941

Issue

Section

Articles