This document discusses scalar implicatures and conversational implicatures. Scalar implicatures are meanings implied by the use of expressions on a scale, such as "some" implying "not all". Conversational implicatures depend on the specific context of an utterance. They allow speakers to imply additional meanings without stating them directly. Conversational implicatures can be calculated from utterances, suspended, cancelled, or reinforced depending on how the conversation progresses.

1. JOHN GARCIA
LINA RESTREPO

2. 
When no special knowledge is required in the
context to calculate additional conveyed
meaning.

Any phrase with an indefinite article of the
type “a/ an”

3. 
I was sitting in a garden one day. A child
looked over the fence.

The Implicatures Calculate if the speaker
was capable of being more specific, more
informative.

4. 
In terms, for expressing quantity, certain
information is always communicated by
choosing a word which expresses one value
from a scale of values.

All, most, many, some, few.
Always, often, sometimes.


5. 
When producing a expression, a speakers
selects the word from the scale which is the
most informative and truthful (quality and
quantity) in the circumstances, as in.

I am studying linguistics and I´ve
completed some of the required courses.
Not most, not many.


6. 
There are many scalar implicatures produced
by the use of expressions that we may not
immediately consider to be a part of any
scale.

It´s is possible that they were delayed.
Not certain.



This should be stored in a cool place.
Not must.

7. 
One noticeable feature of scalar implicatures
is that when speakers correct themselves on
some detail, as in they typically cancel one
of the scalar implicatures.
I got some of this jewerly in Hong Kong. Um
actually
I think I got most of it there.

Not most and still to be interpreted with a
scalar, Not All.

8. A particularized conversational
implicature is one which depends on
particular features of the context.

9. Our conversations take place in very specific contexts in
which locally recognized inferences are assumed.


Rich: Hey, coming to
he wild party tonight?
Tom: my parents are
visiting.

10. The speakers appears not to adhere to
(to flout) the maxim of manner


Ann: Where are you
going with the dog?
Sam: To the V-E-T.

11. 
Leila: Whoa!! Has your
boss gone crazy?

Mary: Let`s go get some
coffe.
( non-relevant remark)

12. 

Bert: Do vegetarians eat
hamburguers?
Ernie:Do chicken have
lips?
The response initially
appear to flout relevance

13. We
hear the
maintain
the
utterances and
asumption of
attempt
to
cooperative
interaction.
The implicatures are part of what is
communicated and not said. ( the
speakers can deny).
“Conversational implicatures are
deniable.”

14. 




The conversational implicatures: can be
calculated, suspended, cancelled and
reinforced.
You have won five dollars! (only five)
You`ve won at least five dollars!.
You`ve won five dollars, in fact, you`ve won
ten!.
You`ve won five dollars, that`s four more
than one!.