MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407238360 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v15n4p49

The Art of the Unsaid: Analyzing the Use of Conversational Implicature in Political Communication

2025· article· en· W4407238360 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shaikah H. Ghawaidi, Nuha Abdullah Alsmari

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Discourse, Communication Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPrince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University
KeywordsUnsaidImplicaturePoliticsComputer scienceLinguisticsPsychologyCommunicationPolitical sciencePhilosophyPragmaticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the use of conversational implicature by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) during a September 2023 interview with Fox News. The research is grounded in Grice’s conversational maxims and the theory of implicature, focusing on how conversational implicature is strategically utilized to navigate sensitive topics and influence public perception. Using a qualitative research design grounded in Grice’s theory of implicature, the analysis highlights the frequent flouting of conversational maxims—particularly quantity, relation, and manner—to avoid direct responses, reframe controversial questions, and maintain diplomatic flexibility. The findings indicate the frequent use of particularized conversational implicatures (PCI) tied to specific geopolitical contexts, where MBS relies on context to imply meaning without making explicit statements. Conversely, generalized conversational implicatures (GCIs) were observed in broader discussions on Saudi Arabia's military and economic strategies, where meaning is naturally inferred without dependence on specific contexts. The findings suggest that MBS effectively employs implicatures to manage multiple audiences, deflect criticism, and shape public perception. Future research could expand on these findings by analyzing a wider range of interviews and incorporating non-verbal cues.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesFrench-language works237,207