Implicatures are generally conceptualised as additional thoughts, beliefs, intentions and desires that are intended by the speaker to be recognised by the hearer as intended by the speaker. However, implicatures are not simply cognitive constructs, but in being accomplished by persons in interaction, are arguably social actions in their own right. In this chapter, it is proposed that a proper account of implicature needs to be developed with respect to the broader inferential substrate from which implicatures arise. It is suggested that while the inferables that make up this inferential substrate generally remain embedded, that is, where talk progresses without participants orienting to the action that is accomplished through the inferable as an object of interactional business, they may, on occasion, be exposed by those participants as the focus of interactional business in that sequence. It is then proposed that a range of practices license participants to expose an inferable (or set of inferables), including instances of “prompting”, where a speaker positions another participant to make a pre-emptive offer through reporting (possible) troubles, difficulties or needs. It is concluded that given through implicating participants can implicitly orient to both moral and relational concerns, our understanding of implicatures should not be divorced from the inferential substrate of interaction in which they are invariably locally situated.
2016 “Revisiting the Typology of Pragmatic Interpretations.” Intercultural Pragmatics 13 (1): 1–35.
Bach, Kent
2012 “Saying, Meaning, and Implicating.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Keith Allan and Kasia M Jaszczolt, 47–67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bertuccelli-Papi, M
2000Implicitness in Text and Discourse. Pisa: Edizoni ETS.
Bianchi, Claudia
2013 “Implicating.” In The Pragmatics of Speech Actions, ed. by Maria Sbisà and Ken Turner. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
1987 “Indirectness and Politeness in Requests: Same or Different?” Journal of Pragmatics 11: 131–146.
Bolden, Galina B., and Jeffrey D Robinson
2011 “Soliciting Accounts with Why-Interrogatives in Conversation.” Journal of Communication 61 (1): 94–119.
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson
1987Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clark, Herbert
1997 “Dogmas of Understanding.” Discourse Processes 23: 567–598.
Clift, Rebecca
1999 “Irony in Conversation.” Language in Society 28 (4): 523–553.
Culpeper, Jonathan, and Michael Haugh
2014Pragmatics and the English Language. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Curl, Traci S
2006 “Offers of Assistance: Constraints on Syntactic Design.” Journal of Pragmatics 38 (8): 1257–1280.
Davis, Wayne
1998Implicature. Intention, Convention, and Principle in the Failure of Gricean Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Drew, Paul
1984 “Speakers’ Reportings in Invitation Sequences.” In Structures of Social Action, ed. by Maxwell J. Atkinson and John Heritage, 102–128. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Drew, Paul, and Traci Walker
2009 “Going Too Far: Complaining, Escalating and Dissafiliation.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (12): 2400–2414.
Dynel, Marta
2014 “A Survey of ‘Intercultural pragmatics’ and its Outlook on the Gricean Philosophy of Communication.” International Review of Pragmatics 6: 307–319.
2007 “The Right Connections: Acknowledging Epistemic Progression in Talk.” Language in Society 36: 319–341.
Garfinkel, Harold
1964 “Studies of the Routine Grounds of Everyday Activities.” Social Problems 11 (3): 225–250.
Gauker, Christopher
2001 “Situated Inference Versus Conversational Implicature.” Nous 35 (2):163–189.
Goffman, Erving
1956 “Embarassment and Social Organisation.” American Journal of Sociology 62: 264–271.
Goffman, Erving
1981Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Grice, H.P
1957 “Meaning.” Philosophical Review 66: 377–388.
Grice, H.P
1969 “Utterer’s Meaning and Intention.” The Philosophical Review 78 (2): 147–177.
Grice, H.P
1975 “Logic and Conversation.” In Syntax and Semantics, Volume 3. Speech Acts, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.
Grice, Paul
1978 “Further Notes on Logic and Conversation”. In Syntax and Semantics Volume 9. Pragmatics, ed. by Peter Cole, 113–127. NY: Academic Press.
Grice, Paul
1989Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Haugh, Michael
2008 “The Place of Intention in the Interactional Achievement of Implicature.” In Intention, Common Ground and the Egocentric Speaker-Hearer, ed. by Istvan Kecskes and Jacob Mey, 45–86. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Haugh, Michael
2012 “On Understandings of Intention: A Response to Wedgwood.” Intercultural Pragmatics 9 (2): 161–194.
Haugh, Michael
2013a “Speaker Meaning and Accountability in Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 48: 41–56.
Haugh, Michael
2013b “Implicature, Inference and Cancellability.” In Perspectives on Pragmatics and Philosophy, ed. by Alessandro Capone, Franco Lo Piparo and Marco Carapezza. New York: Springer.
Haugh, Michael
2015aIm/politeness Implicatures. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Haugh, Michael
2015b “Impoliteness and Taking Offence in Initial Interactions.” Journal of Pragmatics 86: 36–42.
Haugh, Michael
2016a “ ‘Just Kidding’: Teasing and Claims to Non-Serious Intent.” Journal of Pragmatics 95: 120–136.
Haugh, Michael
2016b. “Prompting as a Higher-Order Pragmatic Act.” In Pragmemes and Theories of Language Use ed. by Keith Allan, Alessandro Capone and Istvan Kecskes 167 190 New York Springer
Haugh, Michael
2017. “Prompting Offers of Assistance in Interaction.” Pragmatics and Society 8(2): 183–207.
Haugh, Michael
Forthcoming. Getting Acquainted in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haugh, Michael, and Donal Carbaugh
2015 “Self-Disclosure in Initial Interactions Amongst Speakers of American and Australian English.” Multilingua 34 (4): 461–493.
Heritage, John
2012 “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 1–29.
Horn, Laurence
2004 “Implicature.” In Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Laurence Horn and Gregory Ward, 3–28. Oxford: Blackwell.
Jefferson, Gail
1987 “On Exposed and Embedded Correction in Conversation.” In Talk and Social Organisation, ed. by Graham Button and John R E Lee, 81–100. Clevedon: Mutlilingual Matters.
Jefferson, Gail
1991 “List Construction as a Task and Resource.” In Interaction Competence, ed. by George Psathas, 63–92. New York: Irvington Publishers.
Jefferson, Gail
1993 “Caveat Speaker: Preliminary Notes on Recipient Topic-Shift Implicature.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 26 (1): 1–30.
2016 “Recruitments: Offers, Requests, and the Organization of Assistance in Interaction”. Research on Language and Social Interaction 49(1): 1–19.
Lerner, Gene
2013 “On the Place of Hesitating in Delicate Formulations: A Turn-Constructional Infrastructure for Collaborative Indiscretion”. In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding, ed. by Makoto Hayashi, Geoffrey Raymond, and Jack Sidnell, 95–134. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Levinson, Stephen
2000Presumptive Meanings. The Theory of Generalised Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Levinson, Stephen C
2013 “Action Formation and Ascription.” In Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Tanya Stivers and Jack Sidnell, 103–130. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
2015 "Direct off-record requests? – 'Hinting' in family interactions." Journal of Pragmatics 86: 31-35.
Potter, Jonathan, and Alexa Hepburn
2010 “Putting Aspiration into Words: ‘Laugh Particles’, Managing Descriptive Trouble and Modulating Action.” Journal of Pragmatics 42 (6): 1543–1555.
Raclaw, Joshua
2013Indexing Inferables and Organizational Shifts: ‘No’-Prefaces in English Conversation. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Colorado.
Raymond, Geoffrey
2004 “Prompting Action: the Stand-Alone ‘so’ in Ordinary Conversation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 37 (2): 185–218.
Robinson, Jeffrey D
2004 “The Sequential Organisation of ‘Explicit’ Apologies in Naturally Occurring English.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 37 (3): 291–330.
Sacks, Harvey
1992Lectures on Conversation. Volume 1. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organisation of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 50: 696–735.
Saul, Jennifer
2002a “Speaker Meaning, What Is Said, and What Is Implicated.” Nous 36 (2): 228–248.
Saul, Jennifer
2002b “What Is Said and Psychological Reality: Grice’s Project and Relevance Theorists Criticisms.” Linguistics and Philosophy 25 (3): 347–372.
Schegloff, Emanuel
1968 “Sequencing in Conversational Openings.” American Anthropologist 70: 1075–1095.
Schegloff, Emanuel
2007Sequence Organization in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sendra, Veronica Crespo, Constanjin Kaland, Marc Swerts, and Pilar Prieto
2013 “Perceiving Incredulity: The Role of Intonation and Face Gestures.” Journal of Pragmatics 47: 1–13.
Sifianou, Maria
1993 “Off-Record Indirectness and the Notion of Imposition.” Multilingua 12 (1): 69–79.
Sifianou, Maria
1997 “Politeness and Off-Record Indirectness.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 126: 163–179.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
1995Relevance. Communication and Cognition. Second ed. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Anssi Peräkylä
2012 “Deontic Authority in Interaction: The Right to Announce, Propose, and Decide.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (3): 297–321.
Stivers, Tanya, and Federico Rossano
2010 “Mobilising Response.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 43 (1): 3–31.
2021. Topics and Settings in Sociopragmatics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 247 ff.
[no author supplied]
2021. Fundamentals of Sociopragmatics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 13 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.