THE FUNCTION OF IMPLICATURE IN SUSTAINING CONVERSATIONS.

THE

fUNC'f~ON

OF

IMPLICATURE

IN

SUSTAINING CONVERSATIONS

Submitted to the G

radw:.te

Depo.rtment of

Enotish

: ; f..i.JD!i·~d I ~· L1i"l~uistics ,..,_

UNIMED

rE~q~:~rcrner~t5 for

r~"'ic~ :Jr::~~r(;e of

t

- - - -·---,

I

.

MILIK PERPUSTAKAAN

UNIM~-~~

i

ENGLISH }\PPLIED LINGUISTIGS

GRADUATE

PROGRAM

STATE

ur~IVEKSITY

Of MEDAN

Name Lely Simangunsong

Reg.No.

035010097

Program English Applied Linguistics

Title :rhe Fuction af Jmplicature Sustaining Conversations

Approved.

on

July 29 th 2005

Prof. Amrin Saragth MA., Ph.D.

Prof. Banren Umar Siregar, Ph.D.

Prof.

Dr.

Jawasi

Naibaho

Dr.

IJnce Sihombing, M.Pd.

Dr. Benin Sibaranl, M.Pd.

Approved by

Program UNtMED

m

This is to certify that the Magister's Thesis of lely Simangunsong has been approved by the consultants for further approval by Board of Examiners.

Medan, July 2005

Consultant I

Nip: 131119832

Consultant 1l

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Writing a thesis is certainly difficult because it requires a special skill of writing,

sufficient knowledge to discuss a certain topic, and critical thinking in conducting the

research. Further, there should be a deeper understanding of research procedures so that

the results of the research can be well taken.

Realizing this challenge, the writer deCided to accept such an academic task with

the hope that she can complete the assignment in due time. She was quite convinced that

she would be able to accomplish it by the help of her professional lecturers whose names

are not mentioned here and thesis consultants.

Her determination has been paid off. She has received a lot of assistance from her

two consuttants who have constantly checked the progress in the assignment. Despite

unpredictable situations, she eventually managed to write this thesis. Without t~

assistance of her consultants this thesis might not have been completed as it is.

first, Prof. Amrin Saragih, Ph.D who has given his valuable time to check the content of

this thesis so that it is worthy of scientific discussion, and guided her to finish it in due time,

and next Prof. Bahren Umar Siregar, Ph.D who has never failed to give her all

information regarding the completion of this thesis. The two consultants deserve her

highest gratitude and appreciation for their constant encouragement and academic suppgrt

that made the writer feel confident in solving all kinds of problems.

Next, she is obliged to thank Prof. Dr. J. Naibaho, Director of the Post-Graduate

Program, who has always encouraged her to finish the assignment no matter how hard it

was

to

begin something that is almost beyond her academic achievement. His advice has

led to a fruitful undertaking. The Secretary to the Department.,Dra. Meisuri, M.A. should

Further, she would like to thank her beloved husband Rabungan Ignatius Sinaga

for his endless love and care to motivate her to study seriously to earn the academic degree of Master in Humanities. His moral, psychological, and financial support has been very helpful indeed. Also, the writer's beloved father V. Simangunsong and the late mother A br Pakpahan deserve her gratitude for teaching her to accept life as a challenge and never give up before trying the best in life.

Finally, she wishes to thank Bradley, the American native speaker who has

provided her with much information through the practice of English on many occasions.

The familiar typist Lamtio should receive her thanks. Her classmates Erik~ Sinambela,

Syamsul Bahrl Panggabean, Coki David Pasaribu, Rausnivanson, Yahmawati Slmatupang, Lasma Yanti Siagian, Lili Andayanti and Nazar will always be in her heart

and deserve her utmost and sincere appreciation for their friendly attitude and

understanding in making her enjoy all the studies. Their advice has led her to realize the

Medan, July 2005

The Writer,

Le~nsong

ABSTRACT

SIMANGUNSONG. LEL Y . The Function of Implicature in Sustaining Conversations. Thesis. The Graduate Department of English Applied Linguistics, UNIMED (State University of Medan).2005

This is a case study on conversations performed by several speakers who

are

fluent in English. The objective is to find out the function of implicatures in sustaining the conversations .

There

are

ten

fluent

speakers who participated

in the talk. The conversations were recorded and transcribed to be the data. The function and context of implicatures were identified in terms of concept of conversational implicatures: generalized and particularized (GCis and PCis).There are 152 implicatures identified and the dominant type is the PCI

(53.28%). The implicatures are deduced from the meanings of the sentences or utterances including the unsaid utterances as the context. One typical example of the conversational implicature is that a speaker will finish the utterances of another speaker to show that the implicature is clear and definite. There are 7 main functions of the conversational implicatures. namely (1) enabling, (2)

' J ' '

making, (7) persuading another speaker to give new information, state the same thing, offer new way of interpretation, accept what is said, probe into the topic deeper, say more about the topic, and show his or her knowledge about the topic. It is suggested that more data be taken to discover more possible conversational implicatures. The findings are useful for those who teaching speaking skills and who want to improve their conversational skins.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... i

ABSTRACT ... ... ... iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... iv

CHAPTER ONE : l NT R 0 DUCT I 0 N 1 . 1 The Background of the Study ... 1

1.2 The Problem of the Study ... 4

1.3 The Scope of

the Study ... s

1.4 The Objective of the Study ... _ ... '<

5

1.5 The Significance of the Study ... 5

CHAPTER T'lvO REVIEW OF LITERATURE 2.1 Function ... 6

2.2 Implicature ... 6

2.3 Conversation ... ... ~4

2.3.1 Sustaining a Conversation ... 17

2.4 Clarification ... ... 22

3.1 Research Design ... 23

3.2 Population and Sample ... ... 23

3.3 The Instrument for Collecting Data ... 23

3.4 The Procedure of Analyzing the Data ... 24

CHAPTER FOUR _{OAT A ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FINDINGS} 4.1 The Data ... 2~

4.2 The Data Analysis .. ... 27

4.3 The Research Findings ... ... 47

CHAPTER FIVE _{CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS} 5.1 The Conclusion ... ... ... 49

5.2 The Suggestions ... 49

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

[image:7.612.31.566.79.694.2]

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Background of the Study

I

iilll/K PERPUST

Ak

AANf

1

IJ N I

M

F

-~")

f

Conversation is often taken for granted because people never ask

much about its nature. Tbe speakers in

a

conversation assume that

conversation is just a common activity. They think that there is no problem

with it until they have a misunderstanding. In other words, the speakers begin

to ask about the nature and function of conversation when they have

confusion about the information presented in the conversation. For instance,

when tne two speakers ask questions about

a

certain topic, they then know

that

conversation

is not

easy.

Through conversation, information or knowledge is transmitted as language

has the fun~tion of transaction (Yule, 1985:5). People need information for

their daily life. It is true that without conversation, people may lose their

self-identity. As the speakers exchange information, they learn more about their

own life.

There are many linguistic elements that should be considered in

understanding

a

conversation. When two people speak to each other, there

are noticeable events such as tum-taking, elicitation (giving a cue for another

to speak), topic development and facial expression (Hudson, 1980:58). A

speaker

snould

know when to interrupt

another.

He must wait for the right

moment to continue

the conversation.

Also,

there must be a

way

of signaling

2

the other speaker to talk. The speakers' body language is an important aspect

of the conversation because there is meaning in the body movement.

It is believed that for a conversation to function successfully, each

speaker's turn should not go on too long, and should be accomplished without

interruption, and at the end of one speaker's turn another speaker should take

over without too long an intervening pause (Sabat, 1991: 161 ).

When

a

speaker cannot respond to the other's stimulus, the

conversation is going to faiL There must be a balance of exchange and

turn-taking during a conversation. Elicitation functions well when the two speakers

know

when to interrupt or close the conversation. These elements should be

familiar to those who want to know well about conversation.

At the initial stage of conversation, a topic is the most important

interesting. If there is no continuation of the talk between the two speakers,

this activity will produce a breakdown of communication. Silence is the result

of being unable to develop and sustain the conversation. It is said that a

conversation comes to

a

deadlock. Thus, a problem arises in the process of

communicating to one another.

There are various ways of topic development. First. a topic can be

shifted or changed. When a certain idea cannot make the speakers express

anything, then1 they may choose another topic. This occurs during a

conversation.

Of

course, it depends on the background knowledge of the speakers

to

continue the talk

or

not Second,

the

two

speakers

contribute

3

speakers is required for the development of the topic. If the speakers have

extremely different knowledge background about a topic, it is almost

impossible to sustain the conversation.

Facial expression can show whether the speakers really understand

the topic. When

a

speaker grimaces, this indicates that the topic is unfamiliar.

In this case, the other speaker must see the facial expression of the speaking

partner. A confused speaker can be identified by his facial e xpression.

In reality, many speakers do not have skills in sustaining a

conversation. Through the daily observation on how people actually speak to

each other, there is clear evidence that speakers should know the strategy of

speaking. This is quite acceptable. People have different ways of expressing

themselves.

Some may

be straightforward and

honest.

Others try

to

keep

a

is the case, again conversation is not an easy matter.

Evasive answers are also intended to sustain a conversation . The

reason is that people do not want to expose themselves to the truth. Honesty

is not always the best policy in conversation. Sometimes the truth must be

explained indirectly. This event can be observed or proved when speakers

use a different style such as the choice of words. When two professionals talk

about their business, they may use certain terms to protect themselves from

other people's bad intention.

Conversation can be analyzed from several aspects. It can be

discussed ftom the view of the topic. Tha topic can be general or specific. No

4

continuation of the topic. This spoken discourse can also

be

discussed from the viewpoint of strategy. People have different responses to the same

stimulus. Many want to make conversation more than a common talk. A

secret can be told indirectly

so

that other hearers may not know it. An indirect

way of saying something is called "implicature" (indirectness). This is also

called a conversational implicature which can be distinguished from

conventional implicature.

Having considered the nature and function of conversation, it is of

interest to know how people usually sustain a conversation. All the factors

mentioned above must be incorporated in understanding pragmatic aspects

of language. It is believed that many students who have studied English

cannot sustain

a

conversation because they

have

little information about

this study.

By conducting a research on the performance of speakers in

conversation, it is believed that the problems of communication are solved.

The main problem is concerned with the functions of implicature in sustaining

a conversation. This topic is treated as a scientific view of how speakers

sustain conversations.

1.2

The Problem of the Study

The problems of the study

are

formulated in the following questions.

1) What are-the functions of implicature in sustaining a conversation as

5

2) What is the context where the implicature is performed or realized by

the speakers in a conversation ?

1.3 The Scope of the Study

Strategies in sustaining a conversation vary from one speaker to

another. It is almost impossible to predict the way a speaker wants to sustain

a conversation. In the theory of conversation as part of pragmatics, an

implicature is used as a starting point to sustain a conversation. The focus of

this study is in the analysis of conversational implicatures both the

generalized and particularized implicatures. The two types are incorporated

as

the conversational implicature for the analysis of the data.

This study is aimed at finding out the functions of conversational

implicature in sustaining a conversation and also attempting to find out the

context in which the implicature is ~rformed or realized in

a

conversation.

~

1.5 The Signif icance of t he St udy

The findings of this study are expected to be useful for those who want

to improve their speaking skill because conversation is the ultimate goal for

the teaching of a foreign language like English. Enthusiasts especially

teachers of English can also benefit from the findings because they can

design a model of conversation for the purpose of teaching the speaking skill.

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 The Conclusion

_

. ...

~ -·- '

I

MILIK PERPUST AKAAN

I

UNIME IJ (

·- -- -- ·

.... - · · · ~~·- .,,

___

--·-After analyzing the functions of conversational implicatures drawn by

speakers of English in sustaining the conversations, it can be concluded that

the two types of implicatures are found. The dominant type is the PCis

(particularized conversational implicatures). This is due to the fact that most

speakers used their subjective interpretation to draw an implicature from the

other speaker's utterances. The context in which the implicatures are drawn is

varied from the common knowledge of the topic to the cultural differences

about

the topic. There are seven functions of the implicatures identified such

ettmg, making and

persuading another speaker to give comments, agree to the given idea,

propose a new idea, express cultural differences, and show his or her

knowledge about the given topic.

5.2 The Suggestions

Conducting a research on identifying conversational implicatures

requires a basic understanding on linguistic and pragmatic concepts on

language use. It is difficult to predict why a speaker says what he thinks is

right. A conversation is an unpredictable linguistic game. Therefore, to know

more about

the

nature of conversation, it is suggested that:

50

1) more data be taken from fluent speakers of English or native speakers

of English.

2) various conversations be compared to see the effect of the topic

selection and shifting on the formation of conversational implicatures.

3) conversations be reconstructed in the form of descriptions or

narrations to understand what is not said by the speakers wliich is the

REFERENCES

Clark, H.H & Clark, E.V. 1977. Psychology and Language. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich

Gleason,

J.

B & Ratner, N. B. 1998. Psycholinguistics .. New York: Harcourt Brace College

Hudson, RA. 1980. Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Fast, J. 1980. Body Politics: How to get Power with Class. New York: Tower

Books

Gazdar, G. 1980. Prgamatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form.

New York: Academic Press

Gay, L.R. 1987. Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Application. London: Merril Publishing

Grice, H.P. 1967. Logic and conversation. New York: Academic Press

Levinson, S.C. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT

Merriam - Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 1994. Springfield Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster

Omaggio, A. C. 1983. Proficiency- Oriented Classroom Testing. Washington. D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics

Peccei, J.S. 1999. Pragmatics. london: Routledge

Pride, J .B & Holmes, J. Sociolinguistics. London: Penguin Books

Reardon , K.K. 1987. Where Minds Meet: Interpersonal Communication.

Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing

Richards, J.C.et.al. 1985. The Context of Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Richards, J.1980. Conversation in TESOL Quarterly, voi.XIV,na.4

Rivers, W.M. 1964. The Psychologist and the Foreign-Language Teacher.

Chicago: The University o_f. Chicago Press

52

Saville-Troike, M .1982. The Ethnography of Communication.·An Introduction. London: Basil Blackwell

Tannen, D. 1984. Conversational Style: Analyzing Talk Among Friends. Norwood. New Jersey: Ablex Publishing

_ _ _ _ . 1994. Gender and Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press

Wardhaugh,

R.

1985. How Conversation Worl<s. London: Basil Blackwell Yule, G. 1985. The Study of Language: An Introduction. London: Cambridge