Conversational implicature is a case in which a speaker produces a coded utterance to convey certain intent. The listener of the utterance then decodes the speaker’s intent accurately and ‘intuitively’. For instance, a speaker saying that ‘the room is hot’ could mean that the listener is expected to turn on the air conditioner. However, ‘intuition’ tends to work seamlessly for native speakers but it becomes rather problematic for second language learners. This study comes with two questions: ‘what are the most problematic implicatures for second language learners?’ and ‘what are the factors affecting learners’ competence to comprehend implicatures?’ The implicatures discussed in this study are in the form of joint-taxonomy adopted from the studies of Bouton, Grice and Arseneault. The joint-taxonomy produces ten types of implicatures: POPE-Q, Indirect Criticism, Sequential, Minimum Requirement Rule, Scalar, Idiomatic, Quantity, Quality, Manner and Relevance. 110 college students at one university in Indonesia participated in this study. Vocabulary, grammar formal exposure and informal exposure are four variables affecting the students’ competence in comprehending implicatures in English. This research has been influenced primarily by the study of Bouton and Roever. The results of this study show that indirect criticism implicatures are the most problematic implicatures for all groups of respondents. Additionally, this study is able to illustrate how both Bouton’s claim on proficiency and Roever’s claim on exposure as affecting factors of implicature comprehension can be correct at the same time.

Keywords: pragmatic competence; pragmatic comprehension; conversational implicature; second language learning; communicative competence 

Arseneault, M. (2014). An implicature account of idioms. International Review of Pragmatics. Vol. 6(1), 59-77.

Bada, E. (2010). Repetitions as vocalized fillers and self-repairs in English and French interlanguages. Journal of Pragmatics. Vol. 42(6), 1680-1688.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2010). Exploring the pragmatics of interlanguage pragmatics: definition by design. Pragmatics across Languages and Cultures. Vol. 7, 219-259.

Bouton, L. F. (1992). The interpretation of implicature in English by NNS: Does it come automatically without being explicitly taught?. Pragmatics and Language Learning. Vol. 3, 53-65.

Bouton, L. F. (1994). Can NNS skill in interpreting implicature in American English be improved through explicit instruction? A pilot study. Pragmatics and Language Learning. Vol. 5, 88-109.

Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cedar, P. (2017). Apology strategies used by EFL undergraduate students in Indonesia. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature. Vol. 6(6), 214-222.

Celce-Murcia, M., Dörnyei, Z., & Thurrell, S. (1995). Communicative competence: A pedagogically motivated model with content specifications. Issues in Applied Linguistics. Vol. 6(2), 5-35.

Chandra, O. H. (2001). Pemahaman implikatur percakapan bahasa Inggris oleh penutur asli Bahasa Indonesia. (Unpublished Master Dissertation). Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta.

Cummings, L. (2005). Pragmatics: A multidisciplinary perspective. New York: Routledge.

Economidou-Kogetsidis, M. (2009). Interlanguage request modification: The use of lexical/phrasal downgraders and mitigating supportive moves. Multilingua-Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication. Vol. 28(1), 79-112.

Flores, J. F. F. (2015). Using gamification to enhance second language learning. Digital Education Review. Vol. 27, 32-54.

Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics (pp. 411-58). New York: Academic Press.

Han, H. S. (2007). Family influence on children’s second language literacy building: A case study of Korean families (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University of Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania.

Ishihara, N. & Cohen, A. D. (2014). Teaching and Learning Pragmatics: Where Language and Culture Meet. New York: Routledge.

Karakas, A. & Sariçoban, A. (2012). The impact of watching subtitled animated cartoons on incidental vocabulary learning of ELT students. Teaching English with Technology. Vol. 4, 3-15.

Kinginger, C., Wu, Q., Lee, S. & Dali, T. (2016). The short-term homestay as a context for language learning: Three case studies of high school students and host families. Study Abroad Research in Second Language Acquisition and International Education. Vol. 1(1). 34-60.

Lee, C. (2011). Strategy and linguistic preference of requests by Cantonese learners of English: An interlanguage and crosscultural comparison. Multilingua. Vol. 30, 99-129.

Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. New York: Taylor & Francis.

Levinson, S.C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Li, R., Rozina, R. & Sazalie, A. (2015). An investigation into Chinese EFL learners’ pragmatic competence. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies. Vol. 15(2), 101-118.

Li, R. & Suleiman, R. R. R. (2017). Language proficiency and the speech act of complaint of Chinese EFL learners. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies. Vol. 23(1), 60-74.

Lin, C. H., Warschauer, M. & Blake, R. (2016). Language learning through social networks: Perceptions and reality. Language Learning & Technology. Vol. 20(1), 124-147.

Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied linguistics. Vol. 4(2), 126-141.

Murray, J. C. (2011). Do bears fly? Revisiting conversational implicature in instructional pragmatics. TESL-EJ. Vol. 15(2). Retrieved from http://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume15/ej58/ej58a4/

Mulyanah, A. (2013). A pragmatic failure in interculture: The yes and no done by Indonesian. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW) . Vol. 4(2), 74-79.

Nadar, F. X. (1998). Indonesian learners' requests in English: A speech-act based study. Humaniora. Vol. 9(6), 61-69.

Nguyen, T. T. M. (2008). Criticizing in an L2: Pragmatic strategies used by Vietnamese EFL learners. Intercultural Pragmatic. Vol. 5(1), 41-66.

Potts, C. (2014). Pressuposition and Implicature. Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/~cgpotts/ manuscripts/potts-blackwellsemantics.pdf

Pratama, H., Nurkamto, J., Marmanto, S. & Rustono, R. (2016, November). Lenghth of study and students’ comprehension of English conversational implicature. Paper presented at International Conference Prasasti III. Surakarta, Indonesia. http://dx.doi.org/10.20961/pras.v0i0.1540

Roever , C. (2005). Testing ESL Pragmatics. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Sabouri, H., Zohrabi, M. & Osbouei, Z. K. (2015). The impact of watching English subtitled movies in vocabulary learning in different genders of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature. Vol. 3(2), 110-125.

Salcedo, C. S. (2002). The effects of songs in the foreign language classroom on text recall and involuntary mental rehearsal (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Louisiana State University, Louisiana.

Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. London: Longman.

Tyers, C. J. (2002). Role play and interaction in second language acquisition. Retrieved from http://www.k-junshin.ac.jp/juntan/libhome/bulletin/No32/kiyo_32_11.pdf.

Van Marsenille, A. (2015). Informal language learning: The perspective of higher education students in Brussels. A case study (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Open University: London.

Wijayanto, A., Laila, M., Prasetyarini, A. & Susiati, S. (2013). Politeness in Interlanguage Pragmatics of Complaints by Indonesian Learners of English. English Language Teaching. Vol. 6(10), 188-201.

Yamashita, J. (2013). Effects of extensive reading on reading attitudes in a foreign language. Reading in a Foreign Language. Vol. 25(2), 248.

Yates, L. & Major, G. (2015). “Quick-chatting”, “smart dogs”, and how to “say without saying”: Small talk and pragmatic learning in the community. System. Vol. 48, 141-152.