Vol. 9 No. 2 (2026): March 2026
Articles

Revealing Grice's theory of implicature in university taglines

Muhammad Hasyimsyah Batubara
STAIN Mandailing Natal, Indonesia

Published 23-04-2026

Keywords

  • Grice’s theory,
  • implicature,
  • pragmatics,
  • tagline,
  • university branding

How to Cite

Batubara, M. H. (2026). Revealing Grice’s theory of implicature in university taglines. International Journal of Humanity Studies (IJHS), 9(2), 222-240. https://doi.org/10.24071/ijhs.v9i2.94

Abstract

Taglines are strategic linguistic constructs that capture who a university is, what it values, and its vision, but the interpretations often go beyond just the words. Based on Grice’s theory of implicature, this research looks into the influence of conversational maxims on the construction and communicative values of university taglines. Employing qualitative discourse analysis of 76 taglines extracted from official websites and promotional materials of leading universities in Indonesia, the study reveals the existence and role of Gricean maxims: quantity, quality, relevance, and manner in creating persuasive and contextually congruent information. The results demonstrate that although the majority of the taglines observe the maxims of quality and relation for the sake of credibility and contextual salience, some overtly violate the maxims of quantity or manner for rhetorical purposes, and to incite interpretative effort. Additionally, the study shows that taglines are derived from institutional identity, mission and vision, sociocultural motivators, and global and local contexts. As a final point, the researchers remind us that these taglines are much more than branding instruments; the scholarly work suggests that they are real communicative acts that, in their nature, have to negotiate between explicitness and implicature strategically. These findings have theoretical ramifications for the generalizability of insights from Grice's theory beyond the conversational context and practical implications for higher education institutions seeking to produce appropriate and memorable tagline messages.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Aliwie, A. N. A. (2025). A pragmatic analysis of persuasive arguments in the 2011 - 2020 US Presidential campaign speeches. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(1), 480–494. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i1.7243
  2. Ariani, I., & Rachmadani, F. (2020). Internet memes with feminist content as a communication media of philosophical meaning through building a deep understanding of women’s positions. Jurnal Komunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication, 36(2), 106-123. https://ejournal.ukm.my/mjc/article/view/29066
  3. Asada, K., Itakura, S., Okanda, M., Moriguchi, Y., Yokawa, K., Kumagaya, S., Konishi, K., and Konishi, Y. (2022). Understanding the Gricean maxims in children with autism spectrum disorder: Implications for pragmatic language development. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 63, Article 101085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2022.101085
  4. Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic theories of humor. Mouton de Gruyter.
  5. Benamara, F., Inkpen, D., & Taboada, M. (2018). Introduction to the special issue on language in social media: Exploiting discourse and other contextual information. Computational Linguistics, 44(4), 663-681. https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00333
  6. Betti, M. J., & Khalaf, N. S. (2021). A pragma-stylistic study of implicature in Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Twelfth Night. International Linguistics Research, 4(3), 12. https://doi.org/10.30560/ilr.v4n3p12
  7. Blome‐Tillmann, M. (2013). Conversational implicatures (and how to spot them). Philosophy Compass, 8(2), 170-185. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12003
  8. Bondarenko, A. (2022). Verbless and zero-predicate sentences: An English and Russian contrastive corpus study. In Workshop on Marked Constructions and Information Structure (MARCO 2), Université Paris Cité, Paris, France. https://hal.science/hal-03816272
  9. Brogaard, B. (2024). Replies to Alex Byrne, Mike Martin, and Nico Orlandi. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 108, 556–581. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.13050
  10. Carey, M. A. H. (2017). Mistrust: An ethnographic theory. University of Chicago Press. https://haubooks.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Mistrust.pdf
  11. Chai, J. Y., Prasov, Z., & Qu, S. (2006). Cognitive principles in robust multimodal interpretation. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 27, 55-83. https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1936
  12. Cutting, J. (2002). Pragmatics and discourse: A resource book for students. Routledge.
  13. Dessalles, J.-L. (1998). Altruism, status, and the origin of relevance. In Hurford, J. R., Studdert-Kennedy, M., & Knight, C. (Eds.), Approaches to the evolution of language: Social and cognitive bases (pp.130-147). Cambridge University Press. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00614801
  14. Dybko, K. (2010). The role of politeness in advertisements' slogans: A study within Gricean pragmatics. Acta Philologica, 38, 20-27. https://acta.wn.uw.edu.pl/resources/html/article/details?id=227854&language=en
  15. Elder, C-H. & Jaszczolt, K. M. (2024). Towards a dynamic functional proposition for dynamic discourse meaning. Intercultural Pragmatics, 21(3), 379-402. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2024-3004
  16. Forgács, B. (2024). Meaning as mentalization. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 18, Article 1384116. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2024.1384116
  17. Genovesi, C. (2023). Grice's café: Coffee, cream, and metaphor comprehension. Front. Commun, 8, Article 1175587. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2023.1175587
  18. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Vol. 3. Speech acts (pp. 41–58). Academic Press.
  19. Hai, L. T. D., & Nguyen, Q. C. (2022). The influence of website quality on brand trust and satisfaction of students: A case study of universities in Vietnam. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 6(2022). 1403–1412. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2022.5.011
  20. Hang, X. (2023). Email etiquette: A pragmatic analysis. Frontiers in Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(8), 77-79. https://doi.org/10.54691/fhss.v3i8.5540
  21. Hanifah, D. U. (2023). Pentingnya memahami makna, jenis-jenis makna dan perubahannya. Jurnal Ihtimam, 6(1), 157-171. https://doi.org/10.36668/jih.v6i1.483
  22. Hansen, M. M., & Terkourafi, M. (2023). We need to talk about Hearer's Meaning! Journal of Pragmatics, 208, 99-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.02.015
  23. Hess, L. (2022). Inferentialist semantics for lexicalized social meanings. Synthese, 200, 358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-022-03817-5
  24. Hu, Y. (2024). A socio-cognitive reinterpretation of Grice's theory of conversation. Intercultural Pragmatics, 21(1), 99-119. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2024-0004
  25. Jørgensen, M. (2021). Er har du det et reelt spørgsmål - og hvilken forskel gør 'det'? En interaktionel analyse. In Y. Goldshtein, I. S. Hansen, & T. T. Hougaard (Eds.), 18. Møde om Udforskningen af Dansk Sprog (pp. 337-358). Institut for Kommunikation og Kultur, Aarhus Universitet. https://projekter.au.dk/fileadmin/projekter/Muds.dk/rapporter/Muds18_2_.pdf
  26. Kartika, A. D. L. (2012). The flouting of conversational implicature in the headlines and taglines. Lexicon, 1(2), 112-121. https://doi.org/10.22146/lexicon.v1i2.42070
  27. Katsos, N., Gonzales de Linares, B., Ostashchenko, E., & Wilson, E. (2023). Perspective-taking in deriving implicatures: The listener's perspective is important too. Cognition, 241, Article 105582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105582
  28. Keiser, J. (2022). Non-ideal foundations of language (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003188537-7
  29. Khramchenko, D. (2023). The power of synergy in discourse: Exploring persuasive language in English mass media. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 368-379. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v13i2.63068
  30. Kirby, W. C. (2024). Introduction: International innovation & American challenges. Daedalus, 153(2), 7–20. https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_e_02061
  31. Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. MIT Press.
  32. Maryam, F., Mushtaq, F., & Sumaira. (2023). Analysis of Pakistani advertisements under Grice's cooperative principles. Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 11(2), 1408–1418. https://doi.org/10.52131/pjhss.2023.1102.0447
  33. Mialkovska, L., Sternichuk, V., Yanovets, A., Hubina А., Kyseliuk, N., Zabiiaka, I., & Kriukova, Y. (2024). Linguistic and pragmatic aspects of communication in the modern media world. Multidisciplinary Science Journal, 6, Article 2024ss0709. https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2024ss0709
  34. Nieubuurt, J. T. (2021). Internet memes: Leaflet propaganda of the digital age. Front. Commun, 5, Article 547065. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2020.547065
  35. O’Donnell, D. E., Huffman, M. C., Burd, T. E., & O’Shea, C. L. (2024). Truth or lie: Ability of listeners to detect deceptive emergency calls of missing children. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 16(2), 97-108. https://doi.org/10.5093/ejpalc2024a9
  36. Oswald, S. (2023). Pragmatics for argumentation. Journal of Pragmatics, 203, 144-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.12.001
  37. Palmieri, R., & Rocci, A. (2023). Actions speak louder than words – strategic communication and (un)intentional signalling: A semio-pragmatic taxonomy. Journal of Communication Management, 27(3), 345–361. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCOM-12-2021-0154
  38. Park, D., Lee, J., Jeong, H., Park, S., Koo, Y., Hwang, S., Park, S., & Lee, S. (2024). MultiPragEval: Multilingual pragmatic evaluation of large language models. arXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2406.07736
  39. Purwanti, C. (2020). Eksistensi bahasa dalam komunikasi interpersonal: Sebuah pendekatan interdisipliner [Language existence in interpersonal communication: An interdiciplinary approach]. Polyglot Jurnal Ilmiah, 16(2), 266-281. https://doi.org/10.19166/pji.v16i2.2261
  40. Ramli, R., Ibrahim, R., Muthalib, K., Alamsyah, T., & Gadeng, A. (2023). Principles of politeness used and violated by Acehnese-speaking Khatibs in their Friday prayer sermons. Studies in English Language and Education, 10(1), 501-516. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v10i1.26418
  41. Rina, N., Yanti, Y., & Idham, H. (2020). Implicature in the internet memes: Semio-pragmatics analysis. Journal of Cultura and Lingua, 1(1), 27. https://doi.org/10.37301/culingua.v1i1.7
  42. Scarafone, A., & Michael, J. (2022), Getting ready to share commitments. Philosophical Topics. 50(1), 135–160. https://doi.org/10.5840/philtopics20225017
  43. Scott-Phillips, T. (2024). The communicative principle of relevance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 33(6), 371-377. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214241284937
  44. Smedegaard, F. (2022). Situationel dialektisk diskursanalyse: Hvad, hvorfor og hvordan? Research Portal Denmark, 65. https://portal.findresearcher.sdu.dk/en/publications/situationel-dialektisk-diskursanalyse-hvad-hvorfor-og-hvordan/
  45. Søe, S. O. (2016). The urge to detect, the need to clarify: Gricean perspectives on information, misinformation and disinformation. Det Humanistiske Fakultet, Københavns Universitet. https://researchprofiles.ku.dk/da/publications/the-urge-to-detect-the-need-to-clarify-gricean-perspectives-on-in/
  46. Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1987). Précis of relevance: Communication and cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10(4), 697-710. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x00055345
  47. Tamburini, V. (2023). Saying (nothing) and conversational implicatures. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 104, 816–836. https://doi.org/10.1111/papq.12445
  48. Tangdibiri, Y., & Tandisau, F. (2022). Penggunaan tindak tutur tidak langsung literal dalam Rukun Kampung Tiroallo Lembang Marante (tinjauan pragmatik). DEIKTIS Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Dan Sastra, 2(4), 632-636. https://doi.org/10.53769/deiktis.v2i4.504
  49. Westby, C. (2023). Understanding Grice’s maxims in conversation. Word of Mouth, 34(4), 8-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/10483950221150052b
  50. Williams, G. L., Wharton, T., & Jagoe, C. (2021). Mutual (mis)understanding: reframing autistic pragmatic “impairments” using relevance theory. Frontiers in Psychology. 12, Article 616664. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.616664
  51. Zhao, L., Dehé, N., & Murphy, V. A. (2017). From pitch to purpose: The prosodic–pragmatic mapping of [I + verb] belief constructions in English and Mandarin. Journal of Pragmatics, 123, 57-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.015