Theoretic Analysis of Implicatures in Pride and Prejudice and Its Pedagogical Implications




implicatures, relevance theory, knowledge, performance


This study was aimed at finding out the implicatures, the types of the implicatures, and the intended meaning of the implicatures employed by the characters in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. This study was a descriptive qualitative study with corpus-based approach. The data were collected through some procedures, namely reading the novel repeatedly and thoroughly, determining the utterances containing implicatures in dialogues based on the relevance theory, and selecting and organizing the data to be analyzed. To analyze the data, the procedures were presenting and describing the data,  interpreting the data by referring to the relevance theory, determining the implicated premises and implicated conclusions, determining the strongly implicated conclusions and weakly implicated conclusions, and interpreting and describing the intended meanings of the implicatures. From the results, there were 60 implicatures found in the novel and the two types of them were strong and weak implicatures. As the follow-up, a dissemination to the second semester students of Graduate Program of Sriwijaya University was conducted which yielded to the result that there was no significant association between the respondents’ knowledge of implicatures and relevance theory and their performance in analyzing implicatures using the theory with the p-value of 0.406 (p-value > 0.05).


Abdelhafez, A. M. M. (2016). The effect of conversational implicature instruction on developing TEFL students’ pragmatic competence and language proficiency. US-China Education Review A, 6(8).

Arbain, & Sandi, M. T. A. (2016). Critical discourse analysis of Eminem’s “Love the Way You Lie part II.†Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching, 1(1).

Chemezov, Y. R., & Gural, S. K. (2015). Difficulties in Interpretation of Situation-bound Utterances by Russian EFL Students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 200, 174–178.

Creswell, J. W. (2011). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Depdikbud. (2013). Permendikbud No. 81A Tentang Implementasi Kurikulum Pedoman Umum Pembelajaran.

Dinges, A. (2015). Innocent implicatures. Journal of Pragmatics, 87, 54–63.

Ditjen Sumber Daya Iptek Dikti. (2018). Formula 4C untuk Bertahan pada Era Revolusi Industri 4.0.

EF EPI. (2017). EF English proficiency index 2018: The world’s largest ranking of English skills.

Evason, N. (2019). British culture.

Geometry, R., & Analysis, G. (n.d.). No 主観的å¥åº·æ„Ÿã‚’中心ã¨ã—ãŸåœ¨å®…高齢者ã«ãŠã‘ã‚‹ å¥åº·é–¢é€£æŒ‡æ¨™ã«é–¢ã™ã‚‹å…±åˆ†æ•£æ§‹é€ 分æžTitle.

Grice, P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. Syntax and Semantics: Speech Acts, 3, 41–58.

Grundy, P. (2008). Doing pragmatics (3rd ed.). Malta, IT: Hodder Education.

Guerrero, B. M. (2016). Interpreting silence on interaction. Pragmatic, cognitive and dynamic principles . Pragmalinguistica, 24, 169–186.

Holmes, J. (2007). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics (2nd ed.). London, UK: Longman.

Holtgraves, T., & Kraus, B. (2018). Processing scalar implicatures in conversational contexts: An ERP study. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 46, 93–108.

Indonesia. (2012). Peraturan Presiden Nomor 8 Tahun 2012 tentang Kerangka Kualifikasi Nasional Indonesia. Jakarta: Sekretariat Negara.

Ispriyani, N. (2008). Social problems and moral values in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim.

Kleinke, S. (2010). Speaker activity and Grice’s maxims of conversation at the interface of Pragmatics and Cognitive Linguistics. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(12), 3345–3366.

Mazzone, M. (2013). Attention to the speaker. The conscious assessment of utterance interpretations in working memory. Language & Communication, 33(2), 106–114.

Mitchell, P., Robinson, E. J., & Thompson, D. E. (1999). Children’s understanding that utterances emanate from minds: using speaker belief to aid interpretation. Cognition, 72(1), 45–66.

Nanda, S., Sukyadi, D., & Ihrom, S. M. (2012). Conversational Implicature of the Presenters in Take Me Out Indonesia. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 120.

Ngenget, S. (2017). A Revisit of the Gricean maxims in Manado Malay language. Script Journal: Journal of Linguistic and English Teaching, 2(2), 204–211.

Nunan, D. (2003). The Impact of English as a Global Language on Educational Policies and Practices in the Asia-Pacific Region. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 589.

OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume I): Excellence and Equity in Education. OECD ILibrary, 1.

Paltridge, B. (2012). Discourse Analysis An Introduction 2nd edition. London, UK: Continuum International Publishing Group.

Rachman, D., Nur, D. R., Sunarti, & Puspita, R. H. (2019). The hurdles of the teacher in the practice of target language in the Indonesian EFL junior high school. Acitya Journal of Teaching and Education, 1(1), 49–54.

Sartini, S. (2014). Students’ use of conversational implicature in conversational implicature in academic reading class of Ahmad Dahlan university academic year 2013/2014. The 3rd UAD TEFL International Conference 2014, 1069–1075.

Scott, C. L. (2015). What Kind of Learning for The 21st Century? Education Research and Foresight UNESCO, 1–14.

Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and Cognition (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

Syrett, K., Austin, J., Sanchez, L., Germak, C., Lingwall, A., Perez-Cortes, S., … Baker, H. (2017). The influence of conversational context and the developing lexicon on the calculation of scalar implicatures: Insights from Spanish-English bilingual children. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 7(2), 230–264.

Tan, B. P., Mahadir Naidu, N. B., & Jamil@Osman, Z. (2018). Moral values and good citizens in a multi-ethnic society: A content analysis of moral education textbooks in Malaysia. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 42(2), 119–134.

Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. New York: William Morrow & Co.

Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Thornberg, R., & Oğuz, E. (2016). Moral and citizenship educational goals in values education: A cross-cultural study of Swedish and Turkish student teachers’ preferences. Teaching and Teacher Education, 55, 110–121.

Trudgill, P. (2000). Sociolinguistics: An Introduction to Language and Society. Penguin Books, 243.

Vergis, N. (2017). The interaction of the Maxim of Quality and face concerns: An experimental approach using the vignette technique. Journal of Pragmatics, 118, 38–50.


Additional Files