Abstract
The present study aims at the analysis of conventional implicatures (Grice, 1991) actualized in Ukrainian dialogical discourse. The distinction between conventional and conversational implicatures is described. We argue that what is commonly considered conventional implicature is in fact implicature only in discourse. Implicatures are inherently conversational because they are intended by the speaker and derived by the addressee in discourse. Therefore, it makes sense to regard conventional implicatures as such that are actualized not only in discursive context (such being the case with conversational implicatures), but by certain language means in virtue of their semantics. They serve as triggers allowing the addressee to derive implicature through its conventional meaning. Implicature triggers are culture-specific, since their semantics is determined by conventions of a particular natural language. Depending on language status of the trigger, conventional implicatures are divided into lexical, paroemiac and syntactic.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
