Talk:NMTS-InferencePage - Revision history

Slc: /* User:Ulrike */

2012-12-10T16:39:12Z

User:Ulrike

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:39, 10 December 2012
Line 48:		Line 48:
	== [[User:Ulrike]] ==		== [[User:Ulrike]] ==
	* The type of your Implicature is a hedge. Nice examples!		* The type of your Implicature is a hedge. Nice examples!
			* The implicature shows that the speaker is conscious of the maxim of quality, she does not want to give false information.

	* MS: Your example of entailment is at the same time a presupposition. An example of an entailment would be: "I think they live in Hammersmith." entails "It is possible that they live in Hammersmith."		* MS: Your example of entailment is at the same time a presupposition. An example of an entailment would be: "I think they live in Hammersmith." entails "It is possible that they live in Hammersmith."

Slc: /* User:Hilâl */

2012-12-10T16:33:40Z

User:Hilâl

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:33, 10 December 2012
Line 73:		Line 73:

	* "He didn't pass the exam." -> The presupposition would be that "He took an exam." "Jake had to take an exam in order to go to Brazil." would be the Particularized Conversational Implicature of the sentence.		* "He didn't pass the exam." -> The presupposition would be that "He took an exam." "Jake had to take an exam in order to go to Brazil." would be the Particularized Conversational Implicature of the sentence.

			*Yes (see above), "He didn't pass the exam" would at first seem to go against the maxim of relevance, but we assume the implicature is +> Jake had to take an exam to go to Brazil". This requires specific knowledge of the situation i.e. you often need to pass language exams to go and study or work in other countries, this means it is a particularized conversational implicature.

	== [[User:FlorianB]] ==		== [[User:FlorianB]] ==

Slc: /* User:Lisa */

2012-12-10T16:24:28Z

User:Lisa

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:24, 10 December 2012
Line 15:		Line 15:
	== [[User:Lisa]] ==		== [[User:Lisa]] ==
	* The presupposition "Lisa has a dog" in Line 3 is a existential presupposition. I like the rest of your examples!		* The presupposition "Lisa has a dog" in Line 3 is a existential presupposition. I like the rest of your examples!
	* ~~Slc: your~~ example of an implicature is good, you could also talk about the implicature of "and" here - I think the implicature would be +> plus, but you could also interpret it as +>and then. This would be a conventional implicature.		* Your example of an implicature is good, you could also talk about the implicature of "and" here - I think the implicature would be +> plus, but you could also interpret it as +>and then. This would be a conventional implicature.

	== [[User:AnKa]] ==		== [[User:AnKa]] ==

Slc: /* User:Anna */

2012-12-10T16:24:11Z

User:Anna

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:24, 10 December 2012
Line 36:		Line 36:
	* MS: Yes!! She was not there is an entailment. That is a wonderful example of one.		* MS: Yes!! She was not there is an entailment. That is a wonderful example of one.
	* MS: Line 5 could also be seen as a violation of relevance, with the effect that a change of topic is brought about.		* MS: Line 5 could also be seen as a violation of relevance, with the effect that a change of topic is brought about.
	* ~~Slc:~~ The implicature of line 5 cannot be "Peter wants Mary to pass him the salt", as this is what he actually says, if he is flouting the maxim of relevance (see above), the implicature could possibly be +> Never mind, let's eat our dinner now or +> let's talk about something else.		* The implicature of line 5 cannot be "Peter wants Mary to pass him the salt", as this is what he actually says, if he is flouting the maxim of relevance (see above), the implicature could possibly be +> Never mind, let's eat our dinner now or +> let's talk about something else.

	== [[User:Anna Böcher]] ==		== [[User:Anna Böcher]] ==

Slc: /* User:Anna */

2012-12-10T16:20:48Z

User:Anna

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:20, 10 December 2012
Line 36:		Line 36:
	* MS: Yes!! She was not there is an entailment. That is a wonderful example of one.		* MS: Yes!! She was not there is an entailment. That is a wonderful example of one.
	* MS: Line 5 could also be seen as a violation of relevance, with the effect that a change of topic is brought about.		* MS: Line 5 could also be seen as a violation of relevance, with the effect that a change of topic is brought about.
			* Slc: The implicature of line 5 cannot be "Peter wants Mary to pass him the salt", as this is what he actually says, if he is flouting the maxim of relevance (see above), the implicature could possibly be +> Never mind, let's eat our dinner now or +> let's talk about something else.

	== [[User:Anna Böcher]] ==		== [[User:Anna Böcher]] ==

Slc: /* User:Lorena */

2012-12-10T16:13:53Z

User:Lorena

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:13, 10 December 2012
Line 12:		Line 12:

	* I like your other examples, and you're right, Kevin's sentence "Well, if I hadn´t had to pick my parents from the airport…" is also a Particularized conversational implicature.		* I like your other examples, and you're right, Kevin's sentence "Well, if I hadn´t had to pick my parents from the airport…" is also a Particularized conversational implicature.

	*Slc: Your hedge also shows that the speaker is observing the maxim of quality.

	== [[User:Lisa]] ==		== [[User:Lisa]] ==

Slc: /* User:Lisa */

2012-12-10T16:05:13Z

User:Lisa

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:05, 10 December 2012
Line 17:		Line 17:
	== [[User:Lisa]] ==		== [[User:Lisa]] ==
	* The presupposition "Lisa has a dog" in Line 3 is a existential presupposition. I like the rest of your examples!		* The presupposition "Lisa has a dog" in Line 3 is a existential presupposition. I like the rest of your examples!
	* Slc: your example of an implicature is good, you could also talk about the implicature of "and" here - I think the implicature would be +> and then. This would be a conventional implicature.		* Slc: your example of an implicature is good, you could also talk about the implicature of "and" here - I think the implicature would be +> plus, but you could also interpret it as +>and then. This would be a conventional implicature.

	== [[User:AnKa]] ==		== [[User:AnKa]] ==

Slc: /* User:Lisa */

2012-12-10T16:04:26Z

User:Lisa

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:04, 10 December 2012
Line 17:		Line 17:
	== [[User:Lisa]] ==		== [[User:Lisa]] ==
	* The presupposition "Lisa has a dog" in Line 3 is a existential presupposition. I like the rest of your examples!		* The presupposition "Lisa has a dog" in Line 3 is a existential presupposition. I like the rest of your examples!
			* Slc: your example of an implicature is good, you could also talk about the implicature of "and" here - I think the implicature would be +> and then. This would be a conventional implicature.

	== [[User:AnKa]] ==		== [[User:AnKa]] ==

Slc: /* User:Lorena */

2012-12-10T16:00:16Z

User:Lorena

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:00, 10 December 2012
Line 12:		Line 12:

	* I like your other examples, and you're right, Kevin's sentence "Well, if I hadn´t had to pick my parents from the airport…" is also a Particularized conversational implicature.		* I like your other examples, and you're right, Kevin's sentence "Well, if I hadn´t had to pick my parents from the airport…" is also a Particularized conversational implicature.

			*Slc: Your hedge also shows that the speaker is observing the maxim of quality.

	== [[User:Lisa]] ==		== [[User:Lisa]] ==

Caterina: /* User:AnKa */

2012-12-10T14:29:50Z

User:AnKa

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:29, 10 December 2012
Line 18:		Line 18:
	== [[User:AnKa]] ==		== [[User:AnKa]] ==
	* You could maybe specify that the Implicature is a Generalized Conversational Implicature.		* You could maybe specify that the Implicature is a Generalized Conversational Implicature.
	* I ~~do not~~ think that the question "Is there a male English teacher at your school?" contains a presupposition.		* I don´t think that the question "Is there a male English teacher at your school?" contains a presupposition.

	== [[User:Moonhwa9113]] ==		== [[User:Moonhwa9113]] ==