Grice maxims and implicature in waiting for godot


Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Grice maxims and implicature in waiting for godot

  2. 2. INTRODUCTION  The researcher has selected the all times best drama by Samuel Beckett “Waiting For Godot” for presentation. In this project researcher will analyse some conversation among the characters of the drama on the basis of Gricean maxims of quality,quantity,relevance and manner ,which when flouted or violated give rise to conversational implicature.  In Waiting For Godot what is said and what is implicated together form the meaning of the utterances in the context. In this play the gap between what is literally expressed and what is intended is so great that a reader unable to understand what is implicated will not appreciate the complex nature of exchanges between Viladimir and Estragon(two main characters of the drama).  A Gricean approach may be useful in studying this aspect of the use of language in Waiting For Godot.
  3. 3. People convey their meaning through linguistic elements however, these elements are sometimes incapable of conveying some specific meanings for understanding of which we have to resort to the other intervening factors, e.g. the context in which an utterance takes place. Infact, there is a great difference between what one says and what one implies. An American language philosopher, Paul Grice (1975) proposed some principles speakers and hearers share in their conversations. These maxims are known as co- operative principle which include maxims of quality, quantity, manner and relevance. Grice believed that any deviation from these maxims leads to the emergence of conversational implicatures. PROBLEM STATEMENT
  4. 4. RESEARCH QUESTION  What creates implicature in Waiting for Godot?
  5. 5. HYPOTHESIS  Whenever there is a deviation from the Gricean Maxims of quality,quantity,relevance and manner it gives rise to conversational implicature.
  6. 6. LITERATURE REVIEW: IMPLICATURE DEFINITIONS  Implicature is the study of contextual meaning.  Implicature is the study how more gets communicated than is said.  Implicature is the study of expression of relative closeness.  Implicature is the study of speaker`s meaning. (Yule,G 1996)
  7. 7. CONTD……………  Implicature is a component of speaker meaning that constitutes an aspect of what is meant in a speaker’s utterance without being part of what is said. (R.HORN,LAURENCE ;2006)  Conversational implicature: a meaning or message that is implicated in a conversation  When people over say (or say more of ) or under say (say less of ) something, they produce certain extra meaning or meanings beyond the literal meanings of words and sentences. This extra meaning is conversationally dependent, hence conversational implicature.
  8. 8. Literature review contd…… Grice’s Maxims  Maxims of Quantity:  1. “Make your contribution as informative as required.”  2. “Don’t make your contribution more informative than is required.”  Maxims of Quality: Be truthful.  1. “Don’t say what you believe to be false.”  2. “Don’t say what you lack adequate evidence for.”
  9. 9. Grice’s Maxims, cont’d……. Maxim of Relation: “Be relevant.” Maxims of Manner: “Be perspicuous.” 1. “Avoid obscurity of expression.” 2. “Avoid ambiguity.” 3. “Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).” 4. “Be orderly.”
  10. 10. RESEARCH METHDOLOGY  Since I have selected an English Drama Waiting For Godot for my project of pragmatics ,I will use Qualitative Research Methodology in this project because it best suits my topic.  I have selected some particular material from my the drama Waiting For Godot in written form and will try to test my hypothesis through analysis of the material taken from the drama by applying Gricean theory of conversational implicature generated by four maxims of quality,quantity,manner and relevance.
  11. 11. CONVERSATION 1.1  Estragon: Do you remember the day I throw myself into the Rhone?  Vladimir: We were grape harvesting.  Estragon: You fished me out.  Vladimir: That's all dead and buried.
  12. 12. Here, Vladimir first violates the maxim of quantity by doing circumlocution instead of saying "Yes" (we were grape harvesting), then, he violates the maxim of relation [they are all dead and buried] to show that he is not willing to talk about the past events. ANALYSIS
  13. 13. CONVERSATION 1.2  Estragon:why don't we hang ourselves?  Vladimir:with what?  Estragon:you haven't got a bit of rope?  Vladimir:no  Estragon:then we can't  Vladimir:oh,wait,there is my belt  Vladimir:it's too short  Estragon:you could hang on to my legs  Vladimir:and who would hang onto mine?  Estragon:true
  14. 14. ANALYSIS  In the above stated conversation there is just verbal discussion and nothing happens in actual which implies that neither of them is willing to commit suicide and this notion is implicated in their conversation.
  15. 15. 3. Estragon: [Angrily] use your head, can't you? Vladimir: You're my only hope. In this conversation, Vladimir cannot answer Estragon's question and by giving an irrelevant reply, he tries to convince Estragon to answer it himself. The implicature arose from flouting the maxim of relation CONVERSATION AND ANALYSIS 1.3
  16. 16. CONVERSATION AND ANALYSIS 1.4  Vladimir : Where are your boots?  Estragon : I must have thrown them away.  Vladimir : When?  Estrgon : I don't know.  Vladimir : Why?  Estragon : (Exasperated). I don't know why I don't know!  Vladimir : No, I mean why did you throw them away? In this conversation there is a violation of relevance maxim as Estragon utters ambiguous statements to avoid direct statement of his stupidity.
  17. 17. Estragon: Where do we come in? Vladimir: Come in? Estragon: Take your time. Vladimir: Come in? On our hands and knees. Estragon: What is our job now? Vladimir: Our job? Estragon: Think thoroughly. Vladimir: Our job? Nothing and every thing. This conversation happened when Vladimir was in dispute with Estragon about waiting for Godot. Actually, Vladimir uses an ambiguous language to imply that they have no rights and no other choice but to wait for Godot. CONVERSATION AND ANALYSIS 1.5
  18. 18. CONCLUSION  Thus in the light of all above stated conversation and its analysis on the basis of Gricean maxims it can be concluded that whenever there is deviation from Gricean maxims of quality,quantity,relevance and manner ,conversational implicature is generated.  Our hypothesis also stands proven that if the interlocutors deviate from Gricean maxims they convey something more than they say through conversational implicature.
  19. 19. •REFERRENCES  YULE,G(1996) PRAGMATICS  R.HORN,LAURENCE(2006), A HANDBOOK OF PRAGMATICS.  BECKETT,S.(1956),WAITING FOR GODOT.  Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.),  Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature ISSN 2200-3592 (Print), ISSN 2200-3452 (Online) Vol. 2 No. 5; September 2013.  KIRPA K.GAUTAM(1986)MODERN DRAMA ,VOL 29,NUMBER 4,WINTER 1986.
  20. 20. Thank you........