N. claims that there exist both conversational and nonconversational maxims which may contradict each other, leading to double bind situations. An exploration of such situations reveals (1) that the consequences of violating conversational and nonconversational maxims differ, (2) that the latter carry more weight, (3) that non-directness in speech acts provides speakers with a strategy successful in implicating politeness, avoiding taboos and confrontations, and thereby of extricating themselves from double binds.