Conversational postulates revisited
LanguagePublished 1 June 1977
Jerry L. Morgan
Citations20
SJR quartileQ1
SJR score1.02
SNIP1.84
Generate an AI Snapshot to get a quick, structured summary of this paper.
Study Snapshot
ObjectiveStudy objective
MethodsResearch methodology
PopulationPopulation studied
Sample sizeSample sizes
OutcomesStudy outcomes here
ResultsStudy results comes here
LimitationsResearch study limitations comes here
A concise AI-generated summary of the paper will appear here once you click Generate AI Snapshot.
Abstract
Examining Gordon & Lakoff's influential article (1971) on conversational postulates, this paper shows that the term POSTULATE is misleading; that GL and that their view of the interaction of conversational implicature and syntactic rules is based on an incorrect analysis. It is suggested that some of the problems in their paper stem from a pernicious ambiguity of the phrase 'can convey'.
Keywords
PsychologyArts and Humanities
Cambridge University Press eBooksIndirect speech acts
1,399 Citations1979John R. Searle
An important class of cases is that in which the speaker utters a sentence, means what he says, but also means something more, in which a sentence that contains the illocutionary force indicators for one kind of illOCutionary act can be uttered to perform, in addition, another type of illocutionsary act.