ATLAS OF LANGUAGE

Contextual explanation · NAV-G04-048

Conversational relevance

This explanation addresses the term in its originating context. It is not an additional canonical Atlas profile.

Explanation

Conversational relevance concerns an utterance's intelligible contribution to the current exchange. What counts as pertinent depends on the question, purpose, background knowledge and sequence; it is not simply a permanent property of a topic. An apparently indirect answer may become intelligible through an inferred connection. This Gricean perspective should not be silently identified with later Relevance Theory, which develops a distinct explanatory framework. The entry therefore begins with its originating maxim context. Whether an inferred contribution was intended remains open to subsequent responses and competing explanations.

Movement of thought

1. Identify the current conversational task. 2. Record the literal contribution. 3. Infer a possible connection. 4. State the background knowledge required. 5. Check alternative readings and responses.

Example

To “Is the bakery still open?”, “The lights are still on” may provide an indirect clue without explicitly answering the opening-hours question.

Counter-test

Lights do not prove that the bakery is open; inferred relevance does not make the clue infallible.

Scientific use case

Pragmatic research can vary conversational goals to test when the same contribution seems pertinent.

Effect

Relevance connects an utterance with a mutually inferable task.

Resonance

A sentence can connect with a question without repeating its words.

Distinction

Distinguish conversational relevance from truth, general importance, topical similarity and Relevance Theory as a distinct model.

Sources