Marvelous presentation, it contains very clear explanations. Great job! Em..Therefore, is it possible if one utterance follows or do not follow more than 1 maxim? Thank you, presents
Yes it is possible that one sentence follows more than one maxim because basically all maxims are relates to each other. Ex follow all rules: A: where is my bag? B: it is in your room. B's anwer follow maxim of quantity because B's answer informative as is required and no more informative than is required. Follow maxims of quality because B didn't say something false. Follow maxim of relevance because b's answer relevant, it isreply relates to the question, not talking about something else. Follow maxim of manner because B be orderly, gives a clear explanation where A's bag was. Ex. Not follow the rules Boy: “The Jakarta’s in Turkey, isn’t teacher?” Teacher: “And London’s in Narnia I suppose.” It's violets maxims of quantity because teacher said "i suppose". It doesn't follow maxim of quality because teacher said something that false. It doesn't follow maxim of relevance because the answer isn't relevant (narnia isn't a real world and the question is about Jakarta not London). And doesn't follow maxim of manner because it can be intepreted that London is actually in Narnia or the opposite. Am i made my self clear?
Well done presenters! your explanation is quite clear. However, I am a little confused by "hedges maxim" materials. How to differentiate each hedges? Because you put one example of the same utterance but the type of "hedges maxime" is different
Thank you presenters for delivering this presentation! It is brief and easy to understand although some parts are explained a little bit too fast for me (It's okay, I just need to rewatch it more :D). Thank you for giving me new knowledge about cooperation and implicature!
Great job presenters! The materials are delivered cleary but i have one question. Does the speaker and hearer have to share the same knowledge so that the hearer can understand what the speaker implicate in their conversation like in reference and inference? Thankyou 🙏
I think that they both need to share the same knowledge, at least a little bit/hint about it, because if they don't, the hearer might ask in return about what the speaker's mean, and the speaker need to explain it clearly so it won't become an implicature anymore, or else if it is left without understanding from both the conversation won't take place any longer. CMIIW 😀
Yes Mitha, the speaker and hearer should have the same knowledge. Example: A: Let's go to the Monas this Saturday! B: I have to go to the doctor. B understands A's question and A understands b's answer that he cannot go to Monas because he has to go to the doctor. Even though B's answer seems irrelevant to the question, A can still understand that B cannot go to Monas because they have the same knowledge.
Thankyou for the clear presentation! I have some questions, when we create implicature or hedges we do not have to fulfill every aspect of maxim right? Then in your example of the use scalar implicatures, I got *some* of this … -- actually i think I got most of it… wouldn't it is alright to call the first *some* as (+>not all) in the first impression, and do not have to go with the second 'most of all' because I think it is imply the same meaning. Thanks and have a good day 😁
Yes it is possible that one sentence follows/didn't more than one maxim because basically all maxims are related to each other. For scalar.. sorry I would use Bahasa for better exolanation.. Jadi untuk scalar itu memang basic penentuannya lewat tingkatan hierarki, dan some sama most, meskipun artinya hampir sama, tapi tingkatannya beda seperti yang dicantumkan di slide, urutannya dari the highest to the lowest. Jadi kalau kita ganti some ke most atau sebaliknya tanpa mengganti implicaturenya maka akan mengacaukan urutan.. Apakah penjelasan saya jelas?
Thank you, presenters! I have a question regarding to your explanation, do you think a very mad girlfriend complaining to her boyfriend breaks the maxims? 😅😅😅 I heard some stories that when they are arguing, the girls just like mentions some past stuff that doesn't relate to their topic.
Thank you for the question! Yes, right. In conversation there is often a violation of the principles of converstion, and this is common. As long as listeners can understand the meaning of the speakers so there is cooperation, then it is okay.
For example,here is the conversation between a girl with her boyfriend. Boy: Kamu kenapa? Girl: KAMU KEMARIN PERGI KEMANA BARENG AMANDA?!!! (A simply relevant answer would be 'Aku lagi marah karena kamu selingkuh' or something like that) The girl's answer is irrelevant to the boy's question.
Thank you for the great presentation, presenters! It helps me to understand the topic.
Thank you presenters! great presentation and good explanation. I can understand more about implicature.
Great presentation, thank you group 4 !!
Very splendid presentation group 4 and thanks for explaining the materials very clearly.
thank you group 4! it's a good presentation, good job!
Thank you group 4!! Great presentation. Your explanation is very clear. Good job💫
Outstanding presentatation !
I learn a lot by watching the video,
Good job presenters.
Great job! I learn a lot about cooperation n implicature. Thank you presenters!
Well-presented. I have a hard time understanding about this material, thanks to this group so that I can understand more.
Although the explanations were a lil bit too fast, I can understand it by looking at the example. Good job!
Thank you for the explanation about Cooperation and Implicature. It helps me a lot to understand it. Good job, presenters✨
Marvelous presentation, it contains very clear explanations. Great job!
Em..Therefore, is it possible if one utterance follows or do not follow more than 1 maxim?
Thank you, presents
Yes it is possible that one sentence follows more than one maxim because basically all maxims are relates to each other.
Ex follow all rules:
A: where is my bag?
B: it is in your room.
B's anwer follow maxim of quantity because B's answer informative as is required and no more informative than is required. Follow maxims of quality because B didn't say something false. Follow maxim of relevance because b's answer relevant, it isreply relates to the question, not talking about something else. Follow maxim of manner because B be orderly, gives a clear explanation where A's bag was.
Ex. Not follow the rules
Boy: “The Jakarta’s in Turkey, isn’t teacher?”
Teacher: “And London’s in Narnia I suppose.”
It's violets maxims of quantity because teacher said "i suppose". It doesn't follow maxim of quality because teacher said something that false. It doesn't follow maxim of relevance because the answer isn't relevant (narnia isn't a real world and the question is about Jakarta not London). And doesn't follow maxim of manner because it can be intepreted that London is actually in Narnia or the opposite.
Am i made my self clear?
@@anoniymouze7786 wow, crystal clear, thank you
Well done presenters! your explanation is quite clear.
However, I am a little confused by "hedges maxim" materials. How to differentiate each hedges? Because you put one example of the same utterance but the type of "hedges maxime" is different
I learn a lot from your presentation. Thank you, Group 3.
Thank you presenters for delivering this presentation! It is brief and easy to understand although some parts are explained a little bit too fast for me (It's okay, I just need to rewatch it more :D). Thank you for giving me new knowledge about cooperation and implicature!
Great job presenters! The materials are delivered cleary but i have one question. Does the speaker and hearer have to share the same knowledge so that the hearer can understand what the speaker implicate in their conversation like in reference and inference? Thankyou 🙏
I think that they both need to share the same knowledge, at least a little bit/hint about it, because if they don't, the hearer might ask in return about what the speaker's mean, and the speaker need to explain it clearly so it won't become an implicature anymore, or else if it is left without understanding from both the conversation won't take place any longer. CMIIW 😀
Yes Mitha, the speaker and hearer should have the same knowledge.
Example:
A: Let's go to the Monas this Saturday!
B: I have to go to the doctor.
B understands A's question and A understands b's answer that he cannot go to Monas because he has to go to the doctor. Even though B's answer seems irrelevant to the question, A can still understand that B cannot go to Monas because they have the same knowledge.
@@zenni160 absolutely! Thank you Zenni😍😍😍😍
@@zenni160 thanks zenni ✨
@@ramadhani1851 thanks dhani ✨
Thankyou for the clear presentation!
I have some questions, when we create implicature or hedges we do not have to fulfill every aspect of maxim right?
Then in your example of the use scalar implicatures,
I got *some* of this … -- actually i think I got most of it…
wouldn't it is alright to call the first *some* as (+>not all) in the first impression, and do not have to go with the second 'most of all' because I think it is imply the same meaning.
Thanks and have a good day 😁
Yes it is possible that one sentence follows/didn't more than one maxim because basically all maxims are related to each other.
For scalar.. sorry I would use Bahasa for better exolanation..
Jadi untuk scalar itu memang basic penentuannya lewat tingkatan hierarki, dan some sama most, meskipun artinya hampir sama, tapi tingkatannya beda seperti yang dicantumkan di slide, urutannya dari the highest to the lowest. Jadi kalau kita ganti some ke most atau sebaliknya tanpa mengganti implicaturenya maka akan mengacaukan urutan..
Apakah penjelasan saya jelas?
@@anoniymouze7786 aa,, Thankyou it is clear enough!
Thank you group 4, quite clear presentation 👏👏👏
Thank you, presenters! I have a question regarding to your explanation, do you think a very mad girlfriend complaining to her boyfriend breaks the maxims? 😅😅😅
I heard some stories that when they are arguing, the girls just like mentions some past stuff that doesn't relate to their topic.
Thank you for the question!
Yes, right. In conversation there is often a violation of the principles of converstion, and this is common. As long as listeners can understand the meaning of the speakers so there is cooperation, then it is okay.
For example,here is the conversation between a girl with her boyfriend.
Boy: Kamu kenapa?
Girl: KAMU KEMARIN PERGI KEMANA BARENG AMANDA?!!!
(A simply relevant answer would be 'Aku lagi marah karena kamu selingkuh' or something like that)
The girl's answer is irrelevant to the boy's question.
@@anoniymouze7786 thank you!
@@ramadhani1851 thank you!