What is left unsaid; implicatures in political discourse.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Dylgjeri, Ardita
dc.date.accessioned 2017-03-04T09:23:45Z
dc.date.available 2017-03-04T09:23:45Z
dc.date.issued 2016
dc.identifier.isbn 978-9951-494-62-5
dc.identifier.uri https://dspace.aab-edu.net/handle/123456789/285
dc.description.abstract The participants in a conversation adhere to the cooperative principle and the maxims. However, some things are left unsaid because of the fact that diplomatic discourse or political discourse makes frequent use of ‘implicatures’, in order to suggest information not explicitly expressed in the text. These inferences are usually based on particular beliefs, opinions and knowledge of some concrete situation. The political implicatures that is, the specific political inferences that participants make in the communicative situation, for instance MPs in a parliamentary debate may make, are based on (their understanding of) this speech and its context. In this paper, several instances of maxim violation and inplicatures present in political discourse will be analyzed, by paying importance to the way politicians favor them so as to conceal the truth. We will take into consideration Edi Rama`s interview to CNN about the presidential election in USA, as a case study of implicatures use and function. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Kolegji AAB en_US
dc.subject implicature en_US
dc.subject cooperative principle en_US
dc.subject politics en_US
dc.subject discourse en_US
dc.subject context en_US
dc.title What is left unsaid; implicatures in political discourse. en_US
dc.type Article en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


Browse

My Account