A Pragmatic Study in Light of the Theory of Conversational Implicature

Abstract

       This research aims to link the ancient rhetoricians’ study of the meanings required for constructional methods with Paul Grice’s theory of dialogic implication, by highlighting the methods that rhetoricians followed in dealing with these methods. Their studies and opinions were close to what modern linguistic studies have come up with, especially the theory of dialogical implicature. Which was developed by Grice and defined rules for it under the name (the principle of cooperation).  This research dealt with the methods: command, prohibition, interrogative, wishful thinking, and call, to reveal their obligatory connotations according to the theory of dialogic obligation, using the conditions set by rhetoricians for these methods. The research produced results, the most important of which are: that rhetoricians, through their study of structural methods, concluded that these methods It has original meanings, and it may deviate from this original to perform other meanings according to what the context requires, and its departure from the original is due to the loss of one of the conditions set for performing its original meaning. They also showed that necessary meanings can only be understood through the context in which they are contained, and this is consistent with the principle of cooperation that Grice developed for the theory of dialogic entailment. It also became clear through this study that the theory of dialogic obligation is very consistent with the proposal that rhetoricians addressed in their study of rhetorical meanings.