Why does conversational implicature rely so heavily on shared context between a speaker and listener, rather than explicit semantic encoding?

💡 Explanation

Conversational implicature uses pragmatic inference to understand the speaker's intended meaning, going beyond the literal semantic content, because the listener interprets unsaid meaning using shared knowledge. Therefore, implicature relies on pragmatics, rather than only semantics, because semantics can be ambiguous in context.

• A statistical machine translation (SMT) system exhibits systematically lower BLEU scores when translating technical documents with heavy jargon. Which mechanism explains this effect?
• In speech production, why does a spoonerism (exchange of initial sounds between words) occur more frequently between words that are semantically or phonologically related?
• What distinguishes acoustic analysis of fricatives from that of vowels in speech pathology?
• Why does formant analysis of speech sometimes misidentify vowels produced during rapid speech?
• Why does semantic drift cause ambiguity in long-term archival of legal documents?
• Why does a bilingual child, exposed equally to Mandarin and English from birth, initially exhibit slower vocabulary growth in each language, relative to monolingual peers?