# name
Is Metalinguistic Usage a Conversational Implicature?

# metadata.dc.description.abstract[].value
I argue against the view that metalinguistic usage is a form of conversational implicature. That view, suggested by Thomasson (Anal Philos 57(4):1-28, 2016) and Belleri (Philos Stud 174(9):2211–2226, 2017), has been most recently fleshed out by
Mankowitz (Synthese 199:5603–5622, 2021). I provide two types of criticism to the implicature view. From an empirical point of view, metalinguistic usage differs in key respects from standard cases of conversational implicature. From a conceptual
standpoint, I argue that the calculation algorithm provided by the implicature view makes undesirable predictions. Although my main objective is negative, I end the paper by sketching an alternative neo-Stalnakerian view of metalinguistic usage, that
can be gathered from work by Barker (Linguist Philos 25(1):1–36, 2002; Inquiry 56(2–3):240–257, 2013) and others.

# metadata.dc.relation.ispartof[].value
Topoi. An International Review of Philosophy, 2023, vol. 42, num.4, p. 1027-1038

# metadata.dc.source[].value
Articles publicats en revistes (Filosofia)

# metadata.dc.title[].value
Is Metalinguistic Usage a Conversational Implicature?