Chapter Report

Relevance Theory

By Group 5:
- Fadlillah SAZ
- Luthfi Rahinal Amanat

- Galih Depri Lenggana

- Nanda Satia Nugraha

Introduction
Sperber and Wilson (1986) argue that the process of utterance
understanding can be explained by a single principle of relevance. For
instance, if a speaker says something less relevant to the context A, then
he or she may not understand the utterance uttered by the interlocutor.
So, in the other word, it means that relevance theory is a theory about the
relevance of what the speaker says with the context exists in the
conversation. What the speaker said enables the hearer to work out
something that most relevant to the exact meaning, not only just its
literal meaning. Usually those we address have no difficulty working
out the most relevant understanding because the context mostly
considerable. Indeed, the greater difficulty we have working out what
somebody means by what they say, the less relevant it will be (Grundy,
2008)
Chapter Review
Three major points are discussed in this chapter, they are:
Determining Relevance,
Relevance in The Real World,
Context and Cognition.
Each of which has specific sub-points which will be briefly discussed
in this chapter report.
I.

Determining Relevance
In this sub-point, Grundy discusses Explicature and Implicature.
Explicature is, simply, the hearers (orreaders) inferences of utterance
(or writing). For instance, the phrase Angel Parking may have two
explicatures to the reader (written language), the first one is that
whether it is a place for Angel to park, or there is an angel is parking
there. Explicature depends on hearers (or readers) real-world
knowledge about what is said (or written), in this case Angel Parking.
Relevance Theory - Pragmatics
1

Higher-level explicature also exists in this sub-point discussion. Higherlevel explicature are required.
II. Relevance in The Real World
Ostension and The Plural Audience

Ostension A way of attracting attention

for instance:

Just like the wife is used by a butcher to attract costumers

the butcher uses the sentence in order to represent his saussage
which is
You dont have to be mentally ill to suffer
mental illness
used in poster to attract
many people (plural auidence)

Can you tell me how to get from the airport to X?

This example is uterred in order to deliver the speakers message. It

is can you pick me up. He is not really asking how to get there.
Examples :
Anda tidak harus menjadi korban bencana alam untuk merasakan
bencana alam
By ostensive relevance theorists make reference to the overt or public
nature of the speaker's communicative intentions in acts of communication.
Communication will be successful (i.e., understanding will occur) when the
addressee recognizes those intentions. This process is mostly inferential and
it has costs. So, the addressee would not start the inferential process without
a presumption that it will report her some benefits, that is, without a
presumption that the input is not only relevant, but as relevant as it
can, ceteris paribus. Then, when someone utters something with a
communicative purpose, she does it, according to relevance theory, with the
presumption of optimal relevance, which states that
a. The utterance is relevant enough to be worth processing.
b.

It is the most relevant one compatible with the communicator's abilities

and preferences

Relevance Theory - Pragmatics

2

III. Context and Cognition

Time : When SARS Epidemic from Hong Kong is being a trending
topic among people around the world
Place : a conference held in a certain place outside Hong Kong
Utterances/Figure
(1)I returned from Hong kong

Context/Ground
SARS epidemic

two days Ago

(1)Dont worry Im not ill
(2)<cough cough>

SARS epidemic + (1)

SARS epidemic + (1) + (2)

*this is an example of ostension where an utterance is made to draw

attention.
We can infer that an utterance generates not only explicature, but
also the implicature.
-

Where explicature consisted only of the literal meaning of a

sentence, while implicature included the intentional meaning.

Both explicature and implicature form a figure from an utterance

which need a context as a ground that make the utterance become
clearer.

Lets imagine a painting, drawing or photograph.

First (cognitive) principle of relevance: Human cognition is geared towards

the maximization of relevance (that is, to the achievement of as many
contextual (cognitive) effects as possible for as little processing effort as
possible).

Second (communicative) principle of relevance: Every act of

ostensive communication (e.g. an utterance) communicates a
presumption of its own optimal relevance.

Relevance Theory - Pragmatics

3

IV.

Discussion

In the discussion session, there are several constructive questions.

Those questions make us more comprehend about the topic. This
discussion creates several related points. They are first, redefining
ostension and its features, revealing the relation between intentional
meaning in relevance theory and perlocutionary act (or meaning), and
other notion about relevance.
Relevance theory has intentional meaning intended by the speaker
(or the writer on written advertisements). This intentional meaning differs
from perlocution. It has no relation with perlocution, yet it has something
to do with illocution, because illocution has a meaning as the meaning
that is intended by the speaker which is similar to intentional meaning.
Relevance theory also has a term called ostension. Ostension can be said
as to draw a massive attention. We can see a simple and common
example in advertising. Several advertisements have taglines that
characterize and identify the message that is intended to draw people
attention by reading the advertisement itself.
Last but not least, our comprehensibility increases. There is another
notion about relevance theory, it is relevance is something which is not
determined by the context, yet it is constrained by the context. Our
perception about this notion is that the relevance of, let us say, a
conversation in a contextual topic is not determined by the context itself,
but it is the context that gives limitation to the relevance. For instance,
someone reads Angels Parking in a parking lot. He or she may be
confused and asking Is it for angel? Here, we can see that the context
constrains the relevance. If the context does not constrain the relevance,
then the relevance becomes more irrelevant.

Relevance Theory - Pragmatics

4