You are on page 1of 18

D

Sino-US English Teaching, ISSN 1539-8072


November 2013, Vol. 10, No. 11, 868-885

DAVID

PUBLISHING

Meaning in the Holy Quran: A Text Analysis of the


Surah Livestock (Al-Anam) Within the Framework of
Grices Theory of Implicature*
Ali Ebrahimi Badejani

Maryam Afshari Badejani

Ahmad Reza Lotfi

Khansar Branch-Isfahan University,

University of Isfahan,

Islamic Azad University-Khorasgan

Isfahan, Iran

Isfahan, Iran

Branch, Isfahan, Iran

The Holy Quran (1982) is the Holy Book of the Moslems and the most understandable aspect of its eloquence. One
of the most interesting aspects found in different languages is the use of implicatures or implied meaning. How and
why such implicatures are generated and are discussed in pragmatics? In this study, a list of conversations (direct
and indirect) from Surah Livestock (Al-Anam), the sixth Chapter of the Holy Quran, and the implicatures
implied in the conversations are analyzed through a pragmatic theory: CP (Cooperative Principle). The present
study shows that in most cases, the non-observance of Grices (1975) maxims is found in the maxim of Quantity
and the least in Manner. Grices CP and its contributory maxims have not been observed in the Surah Livestock
in this study. All maxims of Grice have been flouted in This Surah (1982) and there is no difference among Gricean
maxims as far as flouting in the Surah is concerned.
Keywords: Surah Livestock (Al-Anam), eloquence, implicature, CP (Cooperative Principle), maxims of
Quality, Quantity, Relevance and Manner

Introduction
The Holy Quran (1982) is the Holy Book of the Moslems and the greatest miracle (mo?Jeze) of the Holy
Prophet Mohammad (P.B.U.H. (Peace be upon him)). The temporal context in which the Holy Quran was
revealed to the Holy Prophet is interesting to notice. It was the time when rhetoric, poetry, and oration were
common among people. Then, the Holy Prophet prepared people with sermons and precepts of God through the
Holy Quran and put an end to their claims on rhetoric.
Islamic scientists have different opinions toward the aspects of the miracle of the Holy Quran. As
Obeydiniaa (1995) argued:
Some [scientists] believe that it [the miracle of the Holy Quran] is related to the predictions it makes, some say it is
*

Acknowledgements: First and foremost, the authors deepest gratitude and heartfelt appreciation must go to Dr. Lotfi. The
authors thank him for being an important source of inspiration, for his mindful cooperation, guidance, and comments on this
reseaech, and for his constant help and encouragement. The authors also give a very special thanks to their advisor, Dr. Sepahi, for
his valuable consultation.
Ali Ebrahimi Badejani, master, Math and Computer Faculty, Khansar Branch-Isfahan University.
Maryam Afshari Badejani, master, Linguistics Department, University of Isfahan.
Ahmad Reza Lotfi, Ph.D., Linguistics Department, Islamic Azad University-Khorasgan Branch.

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

869

because of the news it reports from the past, some claim that it is through giving information about what people have in
mind and some believe that people are not able to discover the miracle of the Holy Quran. (p.115)

However, as Ardalaan (1996) mentioned that the miracle of the Holy Quran is related to its eloquence
(fasaahat and balaaqat) more than to other aspect. Or at least, it is the most understandable aspect of the
Holy Quran for us. The Holy Quran itself has asked its opponents to create something similar if they can. This
miraculous aspect of the Holy Quran is associated with the meanings of its verses. This meaning is, however,
not only the first meaning understood by a listener but also the implied meanings of sentences and the way
these two meanings are related to each other.
Mohkamaat and Motashaabehaat
The duality of meaning (i.e., force and sense, to use Thomas (1995) terminology) in the verses of the
Holy Quran is demonstrated in one aspect of the division of the verses to mohkamaat and motashaabehaat.
This division is alluded to in the Holy Quran (see Example 1):
Example (1) (3:7)








( He it is Who has revealed
the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others
are allegorical.)
Kamaali (1991) argued about the difference between these two groups of verses and stated that:
Mohkam is the one [verse] whose meaning [sense] is understood from the surface form without any
external analogies or reasons and motashaabeh is the one whose meaning [force] is not understood unless
through external analogies (p. 220).
Of course, there are other definitions of these two terms. Therefore, it is reasonable to look for implicit
meanings in the verses of the Holy Quran to understand more about it. It is worth mentioning that the
existence of implied meaning in this Book is something inevitable, because it is the words of God and a bit
of His infinite knowledge.
The Face of Surah Livestock (Al-Anam)
This Surah (1982) consists of 165 verses and all of its verses have been descended with especial
ceremonies in a lump sum in Mecca. Gabriel descended it on Holy Prophet Mohammad (P.B.U.H.) while 70
thousands angels were escorting him. The main message of the verses of This Surah is fighting with polytheism
and invitation to monotheism.
Since the polytheists of the Arabian Peninsula believe that some livestock were lawful and some others
unlawful, the Holy Quran states some commandments about the livestock to combat with these superstitions
that because of it, This Surah has been called Livestock.
There are some narrations about the excellence of This Surah and also about the compliance of the needs
by reading it. For instance, it has been narrated from Imam Sadeq (P.B.U.H.) that if everyone performs the
prayer twice, then reads This Surah and after that another prayer, his needs will be complied. The word Qol
(say) in This Surah has the most frequency among the all Suras of the Holy Quran. Maybe the reason of the
repetition of this address into the Holy Prophet (44 times) in This Surah refers to the fact which polytheists
vain believes, deviations, and inopportune expectations have been stated in This Surah; so there should be
trenchant. It states the fact that the Holy Prophet is a delegate to say the text of the revelation as exact as it has
been descended, no more and no less.

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

870

New Views Toward Implicatures


Pragmatics. Pragmatics is one of the new branches of linguistics. It deals primarily with the implied
meaning(s) of an utterance. Thomas (1995) distinguished three levels of meaning: (1) abstract meaning; (2)
contextual meaning (utterance meaning); and (3) force of an utterance (speakers meaning).
The first level (abstract meaning) deals with the meanings of sentences without the consideration of the
context in which they are uttered. The second one (contextual meaning) concerns the relationship between the
abstract meaning of an utterance and its context. And the third one (force of an utterance) is the meaning
implied from an utterance. For example in a sentence like I saw a lion, the first level signifies that I is the
first person singular pronoun defining the speaker, saw is the past tense of the verb see which means
look, a is an indefinite article meaning one, and lion is a large powerful flesh-eating animal of the
cat family. Through the second level, we can see the speaker and make a relationship between the abstract
meaning (sense) of I and the speaker (the referent of I). We do the same to the other words of this
utterance. We reach the third level when we correctly pass the first two ones. Here many factors like
background information, culture, level of knowledge, and so on help us understand the force of an
utterance. One force of this utterance can be I saw a man as brave as a lion. Depending on the situation,
other implicatures are also possible.
Pragmatics is mainly concerned with this third level of meaning. Many scientists in different fields of
philosophy, sociology, psychology, and linguistics have tried to reveal the nature of this process and many
suggestions have been proposed as to how and why people produce and understand implicatures.
In this study, the scope of the research is limited to the framework of Grices CP (Cooperative Principle)
and its contributory maxims and submaxims (as cited in Thomas, 1995).
CP. Thomas (1995) introduced Grices CP as: Make your contribution such as is required at the stage at
which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged (p. 61).
She continued to elaborate on the contributory maxims and submaxims of the principle:
(1) Maxim of quantity:
(a) make your contribution just as informative as is required (for the current purpose of the exchange);
(b) do not make your contribution more informative than is required;
(2) Maxim of quality: try to make your contribution one that is true specifically:
(a) do not say what you believe to be false;
(b) do not say that for which you lack adequate information;
(3) Maxim of relevance: make your contribution relevant;
(4) Maxim of manner: be perspicuous and specifically:
(a) avoid obscurity;
(b) avoid ambiguity;
(c) be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity);
(d) be orderly. (Thomas, 1995, p. 63)

It is important to know that these are not some moral pieces of advice for people to obey-this wrong
assumption has been the cause of some criticisms on Grices maxims (Thomas, 1995). Rather, Grice (1981)
believed that people learn to observe these maxims naturally, when communicating with others. If they fail to
observe or blatantly flout them, an implied meaning (implicature) will generate.
Note the following verse of the Holy Quran (see Example 2):

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

871

Example (2) (21:63)







( He said: Surely. Some doer has done it; the
chief of them is this, therefore ask them, if they can speak.)
Here the Prophet Abraham knows that the chief of the idols is not capable of destroying other idols but he
blatantly flouts the maxim of quality to generate the implicature: These idols are not able to do anything then
why do you worship them?

Review of the Literature


Enough analysis of implicatures of conversations in the Holy Quran or even any other aspect of Quranic
conversations have not ever been done in the studies carried out by either traditional Islamic rhetoric or
modern linguistic researchers. However, the implied meanings of all or some parts of the Holy Quran have
been the subject matter of a great number of works by Islamic rhetoric studies. Besides, the subject of
implied meanings as a whole has been investigated largely by a lot of researchers in the realm of pragmatics.
Here, we with a review of these studies in four separate parts: First, the studies in pragmatics specially those
concerning implicatures, Gricean implicatures, will begin. Second, the application of pragmatic, linguistic,
and discursive analysis theories in religious texts will be presented in general. Third, the Quranic studies that
indirectly deal with the subject matter of this study and the application of pragmatic, linguistic, and
discursive analysis theories in the Quranic texts in particular will be reviewed. Forth, the rhetoric studies and
the other traditional ones in the Quranic texts will be brought. Finally, the conclusion and summary of the
said facts in the chapter will be presented.
The implied meanings of all or some parts of the Holy Quran have been the subject matter of a great
number of works by Islamic rhetoric studies. Besides, the subject of implied meanings as a whole has been
investigated largely by a lot of researchers in the realm of pragmatics. The first section of the part will be divided
into four subsections: (1) pragmatics and Gricean theories in general; (2) application of pragmatic, linguistic, and
discursive analysis theories in religious texts; (3) application of pragmatic, linguistic, and discursive analysis
theories in Quranic texts; and (4) rhetoric and the other traditional studies in the Quranic texts.
Pragmatics and Gricean Theories in General
Pragmatics is one of the new branches of linguistics. It deals primarily with the implied meaning(s) of an
utterance. Thomas (1995) distinguished three levels of meaning: (1) abstract meaning; (2) contextual meaning;
and (3) force of an utterance.
The first level (abstract meaning) deals with the meanings of sentences without the consideration of the
context in which they are uttered. The second one (contextual meaning) concerns the relationship between the
abstract meaning of an utterance and its context. And the third one (force of an utterance) is the meaning
implied from an utterance. Pragmatics is mainly concerned with this third level of meaning.
Application of Pragmatic, Linguistic, and Discursive Analysis Theories in Religious Texts
Schniedewind (2004) stated that Biblical studies is the academic study of the Judeo-Christian Bible
and related texts. For Christianity, the Bible traditionally comprises the New Testament and Old Testament,
which together are sometimes called the Scriptures. Judaism recognizes as scripture only the Hebrew
Bible, also known as the Tanakh. Other texts often examined by biblical scholars include the Jewish
apocrypha, the Jewish pseudepigrapha, the Christian apocrypha, the many varieties of ante-Nicene early
Christian literature, and early Jewish literature.

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

872

There are two major approaches toward Biblical studies. The first approach studies the Bible as a human
creation and is most prevalent in the secular academic world. In this approach, Biblical studies can be
considered as a sub-field of religious studies. The other approach is the study of the Bible as a religious text,
where it is assumed that the Bible has a divine origin or inspiration.
In Judaism, especially among the Orthodox, traditional Bible study entails the study of Tanakhwith
medieval and modern rabbinic commentaries, or with Midrashim, which traditionally have followed the
Biblical interpretation or exegesis approach. Jews traditionally study at home or in institutions like the yeshiva.
In Christianity, the theological interpretation of Biblical passages is called biblical exegesis. Other
branches of Bible study aim instead at elucidating the provenance, authorship, and chronological order
of Biblical texts.
Hermeneutical exegesis focuses on the original writers sense in relation to the expected audience response.
The rule of context applies, and also scriptures interpret scriptures. The ideas and meanings are likely to be in
harmony within the language and cultural context. Therefore, the rule allows for the meaning to be limited and
interpreted within the intent and purpose of the original writers. This interpretative view obviously leads to
more focused individual understanding than collective interrelated consensus.
The Old Testament books are divided into three basic divisions. Jesus referred to them as: the law of
Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me (Luke 24:44, as cited in Holy Bible (New Living
Translation), 1996, 2004, 2007). The law of Moses was a common Jewish expression for the first five books of
the Old Testament. The books of the Old Testament included in the prophets, and are Isaiah, Jeremiah,
Ezekiel, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, and the 12 smaller prophetic books. The psalms included all the
remaining books. The books genesis is thought to have been written about 1500 B.C. and Malachi, the last
book of the Old Testament, about 425 B.C..
The New Testament is a collection of books about the life and times of Jesus and the events that
happened to His early followers. The time of the writing of the New Testament books dates from after the
crucifixion of Jesus to around the end of the first century, perhaps 45 A.D. to 95 A.D.. The first four
books are called the Gospels.
Application of Pragmatic, Linguistic, and Discursive Analysis Theories in Quranic Texts
According to Tabaatabaaiis (1984), the people of tradition explained the Quran with the traditions
ascribed to the companions and overlooked the rational arguments. But Allah has not said in His book that
rational proof has no validity. How could He say so when the authenticity of the Book itself depended on
rational proof? He has called mankind, rather, to meditate on the Quranic verses in order to remove any
apparent discrepancy in them.
Peimani (1998) offered a list of conversations from throughout the Holy Quran, and the implicatures
implied in the conversations are analyzed through two pragmatic theories: CP and PP (Politeness Principle),
and two new maxims and principles: How maxims and Why principles.
El-Awa (2006) had studied on the analysis of textual relations in the Quran from a linguistic point of view
and examined according to principles derived from modern pragmatic theory, the type of textual relations in the
Quran and the way in which verses of one sura relate to each other and to the wider context of the total
message of the Quran. It has been usually regarded as coming under the category of the study of Munasaba or

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

873

the organic unity of the Quran, an intersection between tafsir and linguistics. There is considerable debate in
the field of Quranic Studies as to whether or not the Quranic sura exhibits an organic unity.
Kalero (2010) examined the implicit meaning of Surah al-Fatiha, Chapter One of the Holy Quran,
view implicature. Although it is said to be concerned about the pragmatic normal situation in the wording
(text) rule (Product), it is still possible to analyze texts and poems, even if the lines are abnormal, because
they were not imposed by normal humans. His investigation concluded that the verses contained the
intentions of God who has confessed to certain ways by humans. It also implies a deeper meaning than can be
obtained as education for the good of the Hereafter. This analysis is based on the assumption that there is
more meaning implicit in the text of the verses that can be obtained, understanding that the text becomes more
efficient and thorough plan that what is written about God, not based on the assumption that God wants
something more to say another thing.
Al-Zaqir (1993) offered a list of such investigations done by Western researchers. Cragg (1988, p. 50)
categorized the different English translations into two groups of verses called mohkamaat and
motashaabehaat as the following: (1) mohkamaat: categorical, clear, definitive, precise, perspicuous, literal,
and decisive; and (2) motashaabehaat: allegorical, conjectural, figurative, metaphorical, allusive, analogical,
susceptible, and different interpretation.
Rhetoric and the Other Traditional Studies in the Quranic Texts
The greatest aspect of the Holy Quran or at least the most understandable one for us is its eloquence.
Eloquence (from Latineloquentia) is fluent, forcible, elegant, or persuasive speaking. It is primarily the power of
expressing strong emotions in striking and appropriate language, thereby producing conviction or persuasion.
The term is also used for writing in a fluent style. The concept of eloquence dates back to the ancient Greeks,
Calliope (one of the nine daughters of Zeus and Mnemosyne) being the Muse of epic poetry and eloquence. There
is extraordinary eloquence and purity of style in the word order or composition of the Quran.
Alavimoqaddam (1993) said:
Since the oldest rhetoric books dealing with analyzing eloquence (fasaahat and balaaqat) were written in order to
prove the miracle of the Holy Quran, it is reasonable to conclude that art first, the main aim of this science was to prove
the miracle of the Holy Quran and understand its eloquence. But later on when it got the shape of a distinct and specified
science, its aim extended to distinguish between the non-eloquent and eloquent discourse. (p. 308)

Obeydiniaa (1995) believed that in the first and second centuries A.H., no independent works were
compiled in rhetoric, but the third century A.H. was the time of development of this science because of
translating Aristotles works into Arabic.
Alavimoqaddam (1993), however, believed that the first century A.H. is the time when rhetoric started and
in the second, third, and forth centuries, this science flourished.
In the fifth century A.H., Jorjaani wrote his excellent book which is a rhetoric book referring to Quranic verses.
In the fifth and sixth centuries A.H., Zamakhshari (as cited in Obeydiniaa, 1995) completed Jorjaanis ideas.
In Islamic rhetoric, three important components of ma?aani, bayaan, and badi? are discussed. Ma?aani is
the science of a set of rules through which one can express himself in a way to suit his addressees expectations
and needs. Bayaan is the knowledge of rules and principles through which speaker/writer can state the same
meaning through different utterances having different degrees of clarity. And finally, badi? is the science of
figures of speech which make an expression more elegant.

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

874

Methodology
The method used for doing this research was the theoretical, logical, and library method that was based
on the facts of original resources and scholarly references. The materials used were the notes taken from the
books, articles, computer networks (internet), informational banks, and the other available resources. The
argumentational and comparative strategies and methods have been used for analyzing data that the large
number of examples referring to the direct and indirect dialogs which are in the Surah Livestock
(Al-Anam), have helped it.
Data for the Study
Since enough works have not ever been done on Quranic conversations, it is necessary to have a list of all
conversations in Surah Livestock (Al-Anam), the sixth Chapter of the Holy Quran, which is meant to be
the corpus for this study. This Surah consists of 2,971 words that in this study, about 1,008 words of it are
analyzed. These words make up the direct and indirect conversational verses in Surah Livestock
(Al-Anam). Wherever a dialog is reported in it, the verbs which show the matter of to state or to say are
mentioned. Therefore, the best way to start searching for dialogs is to look for the words which have the
meaning of to state or to say.
In Arabic, most infinitives, verbs, adjectives, and other words are derived from roots. These roots
consist of the main phonemes included in different words. Most of the verb roots in Arabic include three
letters. For example, the infinitive KETAABA (to write), the past tense KATABA (he wrote), and the
subjective adjective KAATEB (writer) are all derived from the root K-T-B which consists of the three main
phonemes included in all the derived words. The verb roots which are being searched in this study are
Q-V-L, S-A-L, J-V-B, KH-T-B, Z-K-R, Q-S-S, and N-D-Y which all have the common meaning of to state
or to say. The number of verses of Surah Livestock (Al-Anam) containing the aforementioned verb
roots amounts to 56 verses out of about 165 total verses. Because these verses are dispersed throughout
the Sura Livestock with no clear order, the number of verses are inserted in tables and are sorted out
and arranged in logical order.
The verses include both monologs and dialogs. Example (3) explains one typical monolog:
Example (3) (1:113)

( Say: I seek refuge in the Lord of the dawn.)
And dialogs may be embedded in one verse like Example (4):






( When his Lord said to him: Be a Muslim He said:
Example (4) (2:131)
I submit myself to the Lord of the worlds.)
Or in two verses or more like Example (5):
Example (5) (7:113.114)


( And the
enchanters came to Firon and said: We must surely have a reward if we are the prevailing
ones) He said: Yes, and you shall certainly be of those who are near (to me).)
There are even dialogs which are included in many verses. There are also verses which contain more than
one dialog.
These dialogs are then divided into two groups of direct and indirect ones: (1) direct dialogs: The
dialogs whose participants talk face to face to each other; (2) indirect dialogs: The dialogs whose participants
do not talk face to face to each other; rather a third one asks or commands them to talk this way. The verses

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

875

mentioned above, (2:131) and (7:113-114), are examples of direct dialogs and the following is an example of
an indirect one (see Example 6):
Example (6) (18:83)





( And they ask you about Zulqarnain Say: I
will recite to you an account of him.)
The Almighty God commands His Prophet Mohammad to answer the question in this way. It is not a
direct dialog because the Holy Prophet and the inquirers are not communicating to each other face to face.
Both the direct and indirect dialogs are chosen to be studied. The direct and indirect conversational verses
are analyzed totally through CP. The statistics of direct and indirect dialogs are offered in Table 1.
Table 1
The Total Number of Direct and Indirect Dialogs
Types of dialogs
Direct
Indirect
Total

Number and percentage of verses


4 = 7.3%
51 = 92.7%
55 = 100%

Number and percentage of dialogs


9 = 11.5%
69 = 88.5%
78 = 100%

Data Processing and Analysis


Makaarem (1974) said:
The most dangerous method in the interpretation of the Holy Quran is that instead of the Holy Quran itself, we try to
impose our own beliefs on it and make judgments which are the effect of our environment, scientific background, religion
and taste. (p. 17)

Therefore, regarding there is always probability to interpret Holy Books wrongly, in order to avoid any
wrong interpretations, the important and rich source of Noor Comprehensive Commentary Collection,
Jaame-at-tafaasir-e-Noor, that is a Quranic software and consists of a lot of Quranic commentaries, translations,
dictionaries, etc., supplied by Computer Research Center of Islamic Sciences, which is used to extract the
related implicatures. Through 144 commentaries, four commentaries are used more than the others, these are
Tafsir-e-Aasaan by Mohammadjavad Najafi Khomeini which its matter refers to discourse of Tafsir-e-Noor
by Mohsen Qeraaati with social and educational subjects, Tafsir-e-Nemooneh by Nasser Makaarem Shiraazi
with social matter and related to practicing in religious jurisprudence, and Bargozideh-e-Tafsir-e-Nemooneh
by Ahmad Alibaabaaei that its matter is social and analytic. Also out of 105 translations into various languages,
Mohammad Hamid Shakers translation in American English is used in this study.
Using this software, we will search throughout the whole Sura and the commentaries available in Persian.
The majority of the implicatures are found in the commentaries.
The notable point is that the implicatures are not mentioned directly in these works. Therefore, it is
necessary to read the interpretations on conversations of the Sura Livestock of the Holy Quran to see whether
they contained implicatures or not. For example, consider the following interpretation extracted from
Tabaatabaaiis (1984) Tafsir-e al-mizaan interpreting the verse 41:11:
The word TAAEIN is plural while they are two. It is not improbable that they (the heaven and the earth) want to be
humble and state that they are not separate from other Gods creatures who are all obedient to His command. (p. 585)

The implicature is stated indirectly in the part shown through bold typed letters. This verse is also
interpreted in Obeydiniaas ?oloom-e-balaaqi dar kashshaaf-e-Zamaxshari (1995, p. 481) as: In this

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

876

verse, the words AATAINAA, TAAEIN and also talking are attributed to the heaven and the earth
which are both animate.
After all interpretations are written down, it is time to extract implicatures out of them. Firstly, the
understood implicatures were formulated in the form of a sentence. For example, for the aforementioned verse,
the implicatures were formulated as the following:
(41:11) implicature: (1) We are obedient to you as animate beings are; and (2) We are not separate from
your other creatures who are obedient to you.
After all conversations implicatures are extracted, in order to know how and why such implicatures are
generated, the related Grices maxims were looked for. For example, for the above mentioned implicatures, the
related maxims and principles are supposed to be:
(41:11) (1) Grice: Quality; and (2) Grice: Quality.
The reason is that in both cases the heaven and the earth utter what is untrue and this way, first they want
to maximize the praise of the Almighty God, and second, to minimize the praise of themselves.
When verifying the relevant maxims, the most probable one is chosen, therefore, it is possible that other
maxims are involved with a lesser degree. For some dialogs, however, it is not possible to select only one
maxim or principle, because more than one are involved.
For better illustration, a table of four columns is drawn (for Grices CP) and the numbers of the verses are
inserted and the involved maxims are asterisked. The total number of violations and observances (the flouted
maxims and the number of each one of these violated maxims separately) is shown in Table 6.
The total number of the involvement of these maxims is also calculated to compare them with each
another and also with CP. Finally, these numbers are changed into percentage to be tested the hypotheses.

Results and Discussion


Quranic Conversations
Since enough works have not ever been done on Quranic conversations, especially on the conversations of
Surah Livestock (Al-Anam), the sixth Chapter of the Holy Quran, it is advisable to provide a short
statistics of conversations of Surah Livestock. It is not the main aim of this study to elaborate on the
distribution of the dialogs in Surah Livestock. However, since or no similar studies have been done so far or
enough works have not ever been done on Quranic conversations, this information could be useful for those
who intend to study such conversations.
The number and percentage of direct and indirect verses and also dialogs of Surah Livestock
(Al-Anam) are presented in Table 2.
Table 2
The Total Number of Direct and Indirect Verses and Dialogs
Types of dialogs
Direct
Indirect
Total

Number and percentage of verses


4 = 7.3%
51 = 92.7%
55 = 100%

Number and percentage of dialogs


7 = 9.2%
69 = 90.8%
76 = 100%

According to Table 2, the number of indirect dialogs exceeds direct ones. Moreover, the percentage of
direct and indirect verses and also dialogs of Surah Livestock (Al-Anam) is presented in Figure 1.

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

877

100
50

direct

indirect
Percentage of
verses

Percentage of
dialogs

Figure 1. The percentage of direct and indirect verses and dialogs of the Surah Livestock (Al-Anam).

The distribution of conversations and dialogs in different verses of Surah Livestock (Al-Anam) is
demonstrated in Table 3.
Table 3
The Distribution of Dialogs in Different Verses of Surah Livestock
Verse
19
30
91
93
12
14
37
50
56
57
71
76
77
78

Dialog
4
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

Verse
128
148
8
11
15
22
23
25
27
29
31
40
46
47

Dialog
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Verse
53
54
63
64
65
66
70
74
80
90
109
124
130
135

Dialog
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Verse
136
138
139
143
144
145
147
149
150
151
161
162
164
Total = 55

Dialog
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Total = 76

Table 4
The Detailed List of All Conversational Verses and Dialogs in Surah Livestock (Al-Anam)
Verse
Direct
8
11
12
14
15
19
22
23
25
27
29
30
***
31
37
40
46
47
50
53
Total dialogs = 76

Indirect
*
*
**
**
*
****
*
*
*
*
*
*
**
*
*
*
**
*

Verse
54
56
57
63
64
65
66
70
71
74
76
77
78
80
90
91
93
109
124

Direct

Indirect
*
**
**
*
*
*
*
*
**

*
**
**
**
*
*
***
***
*
*

Verse
128
130
135
136
138
139
143
144
145
147
148
149
150
151
161
162
164

Direct
**
*

Total direct dialogs = 7


Total indirect dialogs = 69

Indirect

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
**
*
*
*
*
*
*

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

878

The verses are arranged according to the number of dialogs and conversations they contain. Clearly the
19th verse contains the largest number of dialogs. The fewest number of dialogs is found in 38 verses with only
one dialog. It can be observed that among 165 verses of Surah Livestock (Al-Anam), only 55 of them
include conversations which embody about 33.33% of all the verses. Of course, in 110 verses of This Surah
there are no conversations. The most of the dialogs are one-verse dialogs, some of them have together one
dialog and in some other verses, sometimes there are more than one dialogs in a verse. The detailed list of all
conversational verses in Surah Livestock (Al-Anam) is presented in Table 4.
The number of the asterisks shows the number of the dialogs. Also putting them in the cells shows that a
dialog is either direct or indirect. As it has been shown four verses of it have direct dialogs, and there are
indirect dialogs in the other ones.
CP: Analysis and Results
As it was mentioned in Chapter Three, the interpretations for direct and indirect conversations are studied
for the extraction of implicatures out of the exegeses.
Some of the dialogs and conversations are similar to some others. These similar verses amount to six
dialogs contained in three verses. Among seven direct dialogs left, contained in four verses, implicatures were
found for four dialogs contained in four verses. The implicatures were extracted out of such verses. Among 69
indirect dialogs left, contained in 51 verses, implicatures were found for 58 dialogs contained in 38 verses. The
implicatures were extracted out of such verses. However, the total number of the implicatures amounts 62 ones
because in some dialogs or even verses more than one implicatures are observed. How and why implicatures
are implied in these dialogs are analyzed through Grices CP. Figure 2 and Table 5 show the results of the
analysis of how and why implicatures are implied in the dialogs through Grices CP.
80
60
40
20
0

quality
quantity
relevance
manner

Figure 2. Analysis of conversational implicatures in Surah Livestock (Al-Anam) through CP.

Table 5
Analysis of Conversational Implicatures in Surah Livestock Through CP
Verse number
8
11
12
14
15
19
22
23
25
27

Grices maxims
Quality

Quantity
*
*
*

Relevance

Manner

*
*
*
*
*

*
**

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

879

(Table 5 continued)
Verse number
29
30
31
37
40
46
47
50
53
54
56
57
63
64
65
66
70
71
74
76
77
78
80
90
91
93
109
124
128
130
135
136
138
139
143
144
145
147
148
149
150
151
161
162
164
Total = 55 verses
62 implicatures = 100%

Grices maxims
Quality
*

Quantity
**
*
*
*

Relevance

Manner

*
**
***
*
*
**
*
***
*
**
*
*
*
*
*

***
*
**
*
*
*
*
**
*

**
*

*
*
*
***

17 = 27.42%

41 = 66.13%

1 = 1.61%

3 = 4.84%

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

880

The asterisk(s) in each cell shows that in order to imply the relevant implicature(s), the pertinent maxim
or principle is involved. It is notable that 13 verses that have not asterisks mean they have observed the all
maxims of Grice and have not violated any of them. These verses are 15, 40, 47, 64, 80, 124, 143, 144, 145,
151, 161,162, and 164.
As one can notice, in most cases, about 66.13% of total implicatures, the maxim of quantity is violated. As
it was explained in Chapter One, quantity maxim is divided into two submaxims of giving more or less
information than needed. Among the studied dialogs 40 cases out of the total 41 violations of this maxim
(almost all) concern giving less information than is needed, the only exception is seen in the verse 19 that is
giving more information than needed. It can be due to the fact that the Holy Quran is an concise and intensive
Book. After the violations of the maxim of quantity, most of violations refer to the violation of the quality
maxim with 17 cases, about 27.42% of total implicatures.
In three cases, about 4.84% of total implicatures, the maxim of manner is violated. The number of
violations to the submaxims of this maxim is all following: do not be obscure = two times (in the verses of 14
and 77), do not be ambiguous = once (in the verse of 147), and no prolixity was observed in the verses, which
is something natural for a Divine Book. The least amount of violations refers to the violation of the relevance
maxim with only one case, about 1.61% of total implicatures, in the verse of number 130.
In verifying which maxim or principle was involved, the clearest one was chosen. For some implicatures,
however, violations of more than one maxim or principle are detected. It is also possible that more than one
implicatures are implied out of the same utterance and consequently more than one maxim or principle is
involved. In the next section, implicatures of these kinds will be offered.
As mentioned in Chapter Two, Thomas (1995) distinguished five ways of failing to observe Grices
maxims. From what Holy Quran interpreters assert, one can deduce that to generate implicatures in Quranic
conversations. The violations of about 44 dialogs, 67.69%, in 28 verses, 66.66% of the verses, are of the kind of
flouting. The other way of not observing maxims of the dialogs refers to violating that contains 21 dialogs,
32.31%, in 14 verses, 33.33% of the verses. The other ways of not observing a maxim (opting out, infringing,
and suspending), have not been seen in this study. In this study, violation is used for all kinds of
non-observance as used by many writers on the field.
The distribution of the different categories and ways of non-observing of Grices maxims according to
Thomas (1995), is demonstrated in Table 6.
Table 6
The Distribution of the Different Ways of Non-observing of Grices Maxims
Ways of non-observing of
maxims
Flouting
Violating
Opting out
Infringing
Suspending
Total

Number and percentage of


implicatures
46 = 74.19%
16 = 25.81%
0 = 0%
0 = 0%
0 = 0%
62 = 100%

Number and percentage of


dialogs
44 = 67.69%
21 = 32.31%
0 = 0%
0 = 0%
0 = 0%
65 = 100%

Number and percentage of


verses
28 = 66.66%
14 = 33.33%
0 = 0%
0 = 0%
0 = 0%
42 = 100%

The dialogs in three verses (25-29-136) have commonly both ways of non-observing of Grices maxims,
flouting and violating.

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

881

Implicatures
In order to clarify the results elaborated on in the previous section, conversations, their implicatures and
the relevant principles, and maxims are given in this part. The parts of conversations out of which implicatures
are implied will be typed in bold type letters. Here, since the number of the implicatures is a lot, only one
example from each kind of them is given.
Maxim of quality:
Example (7) (23)

( Then their excuse would be nothing but that
they would say: By Allah, our Lord, we were not polytheists.)
Polytheists say that were not polytheists, but they lie and violate the Maxim of Quality to imply they lie to
be forgiven by Lord (Tabaatabaaii, 1984, p. 229) (see Example 7).
Maxim of quantity:
Example (8) (25)





( And of them is he who hearkens to you and


we have cast veils over their hearts lest they understand it and a heaviness into their ears And
even if they see every sign they will not believe in it so much so that when they come to you,
they only dispute with you; those who disbelieve say: This is naught but the stories of the
ancients.)
Through this answer, disbelievers violate the Maxim of Quantity to imply that the Holy Quran has not
been descended by God (Tabaatabaaii, 1984, p. 231) (see Example 8).
Maxim of relevance:
Example (9) (130)








( O assembly of Jinn and men! did then not
come to you messengers from among you, relating to you My communications and warning
you of the meeting of this day of yours? They shall say: We bear witness against ourselves.
And this worlds life deceived them, and they shall bear witness against their own souls that
they were unbelievers)
The answer of assembly of Jinn and men is not relevant to the asked question. They violate the Maxim of
Relevance to imply they acknowledge and accept their sin, neglect and being unbelievers while they say this
world's life deceived them (Tabaatabaaii, 1984, p. 354) (see Example 9).
Maxim of manner:
Example (10)









( Then when he saw
the moon rising, he said: Is this my Lord? So when it set, he said: If my Lord had not guided me,
I should certainly be of the erring people.)
Here, Lord, the second one, is obscure and violates the Manner Maxim, because according to the previous
dialog, it is not clear and we cannot understand which Lord refers to, Allah (God) or Moon. It implies Allah
(God) is the unique creator and the real Lord (Tabaatabaaii, 1984, p. 295) (see Example 10).

Conclusions
This part deals with the conclusions of the study on the basis of the results put forward in the before
section. At first, we discuss the features of Islamic rhetoric concerning the interpretation of the verses of the

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

882

Holy Quran, then deal with the new branches of knowledge dealing with implied meanings. Furthermore, some
implications, limitations of the study, and also suggestions for further study will be included.
As mentioned before, from the early years of the revealing of the Holy Quran, many interpreters tried to
elaborate on the meanings, overt or covert, of this Divine Book. Their exegeses on the Holy Quran are often
comprehensive and inclusive. Being familiar with rhetoric, many of them were able to explain the meanings in
a knowledgeable and scientific way. Of course, though comprehensive, some of the notions they have used are
somehow complicated and difficult for common people to understand. Examples of these notions are
estefhaam-e-enkaari (positive interrogation with negative sense), estefhaam-e-taqriri (assertive
interrogation), ?ijaaz (laconism), and ?etnaab (amplification). A person who does not have enough background
knowledge has to do a lot to understand the meanings of such topics and then to find out the hidden meanings
of the verses of the Holy Quran. This lack of knowledge is more problematic for those who live hundreds of
years after the exegeses been written. These people are neither familiar with the language of those
interpretations nor with the technical terms the interpreters have used. The problem for the foreigners who do
not know a word of Arabic is out of question.
Moreover, among the new approaches toward explaining the implied meanings, Grices model is used in
this study. As was seen in the previous chapter, although treatment is somewhat technical, it is easy for
everyone to understand. Furthermore, different notions are classified in an understandable manner. In Grices
Quantity maxim, for example, giving unusual information is divided to giving less or more information than
needed. The existing CP is complemented by concepts within the traditional interpretations. Therefore, instead
of considering different definitions for different kinds of estefhaam (interrogative sentences), only a simple
definition for all of them is to be considered by a reader or a listener. The new pragmatic theories utilize very
clear classifications and precise explanations so that these are systematic.
Through the limited sources utilized for this study, it is shown that in some of the conversations of the
Surah Livestock of the Holy Quran, one or more implicatures are generated. If other sources are also
studied, more implicatures will hopefully be found out. This can be more revealing as far as the miracle of
the Holy Quran is concerned.
The results of this study can be useful in the different kinds of activity dealing with the meanings of
the Holy Quran. First, when teaching the meanings of this Glorious Book to Arab or non-Arab speakers, by
introducing these maxims and principles, a better understanding of the Holy Quran can be obtained. As
discussed before, the traditional interpretations consist of some difficult topics whose understanding is
difficult for common people who are eager to understand the meanings of the Holy Quran. But the new
notions are easier for them to grasp. They are also more interesting for learners because they can observe
their functions in their daily lives.
Second, when translating the Holy Quran into other languages, special attention should be paid to
these implied meanings. It is necessary to know whether the violation or observance of the same maxim or
principle leads to the same implicature in the target language or not, and if not, which of the other maxims
or principles should be utilized.
In this study, Grices CP and its contributory maxims have not been observed in the Surah Livestock.
All maxims of Grice have been flouted in the This Surah and there is no difference among Gricean maxims as far
as flouting in the Surah is concerned. Among seven direct dialogs left, contained in four verses, implicatures

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

883

were found for four dialogs contained in four verses. The implicatures were extracted out of such verses.
Among 69 indirect dialogs left, contained in 51 verses, implicatures were found for 58 dialogs contained in 38
verses. The implicatures were extracted out of such verses. However, the total number of implicatures amounts
to 62 ones, because in some dialogs or even verses, more than one implicatures are observed.
In most cases, about 66.13% of total implicatures, the maxim of quantity is violated. As it was explained
in Chapter One, quantity maxim is divided into two submaxims of giving more or less information than needed.
Among the studied dialogs 40 cases out of the total 41 violations of this maxim (almost all) concern giving less
information than needed, the only exception is seen in the verse 19 that is giving more information than is
needed. It can be due to the fact that the Holy Quran is an concise and intensive Book. After the violations of
the maxim of quantity, the most of violations refer to the violation of the quality maxim with 17 cases, about
27.42% of total implicatures. In three cases, about 4.84% of total implicatures, the maxim of manner is violated.
The number of violations to the submaxims of this maxim is all following:
Not being obscure are two times (in the verses of 14 and 77), not being ambiguous is once (in the verse of
147), and no prolixity is observed in the verses which is something natural for a Divine Book. The least amount
of violations refers to the violation of the relevance maxim with only one case, about 1.61% of total
implicatures, in the verse of number 130. In verifying which maxim or principle was involved, the clearest one
is chosen. For some implicatures, however, violations of more than one maxim or principle are detected. It is
also possible that more than one implicatures are implied out of the same utterance and consequently more than
one maxim or principles are involved. As mentioned in Chapter Two, Thomas (1995) distinguished five ways
of failing to observe Grices maxims. From what Holy Quran interpreters assert, one can deduce that to
generate implicatures in Quranic conversations. The violations of about 44 dialogs, 67.69%, in 28 verses, 66.66%
of the verses, are of the kind of flouting. The way of not observing maxims of the other dialogs refers to
violating that contains 21 dialogs, 32.31%, in 14 verses, 33.33% of the verses. The other ways of not observing
a maxim consist of opting out, infringing, and suspending are not seen in this study. Violation is used for all
kinds of non-observance in it as used by many writers on the field.
This research can hopefully be used as a course of teaching the meanings of the Surah Livestock, the
sixth Chapter of the Holy Quran, to Arab or non-Arab speakers who intend to learn more about the contents of
this Sura and Divine Book.

References
Abshirini, B. (2010). Deviation in Grices model in translation of Persian texts. Shiraz, Iran: Islamic Azad University Fars
Science and Research Branch.
Alavimoqaddam, M. (1993). Dar qalamrov-e-balaaqat (In the realm of eloquence). Tehran: enteshaaraat-e-?aastaan-e-qods.
Ali, A. Y. (1968). The Holy Quran: Text, translation and commentary. State of Qatar: Presidency of Islamic Courts and Affairs.
Al-Zaqir, M. H. A. (1993). Xaavarshenaasaan va pazhooheshhaa-ye-qoraani (Orientalists and Quranic researches). (M. S.
Shari?at Trans.). Tehran: mo?ssese-ye-matla?olfajr (Orientalists and Quranic Studies).
Ardalaan, J. S. A. (1996). Dar Parto-ve-Qoraan: Nokaati Darbaare-ye- Balaaqat-e-Joz-e-Avval-e-Qoraan-e-Karim (In light of the
Holy Quran: Points about the eloquence of the first part of the Holy Quran). Mishkat Journal, 119.
Bach, K. (2007). Conversational implicature. Mind and Language, 9, 124-162.
Blackburn, S. (1996). Implicature. The Oxford dictionary of philosophy (pp. 188-189). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bottyan, G. (2010, June). The operationality of Grices test for implicature (2nd ed.). Retrieved from
http://www.nytud.hu/cescl/proceedings/Gergely_Bottyan_CESCL.pdf
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1978). Universals in language use: Politeness phenomena. In E. Goody (Ed.), Questions and
politeness (pp. 56-311). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

884

Cole, P. (1975). The synchronic and diachronic status of conversational implicature. In P. Cole, & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and
semantics, 3: Speech acts (pp. 257-288). New York: Academic Press.
Cragg, K. (1988). A certain sympathy of scriptures. Sussex: Sussex Academic Press.
Daniell, P. (2009). The taxonomy of Gricean implicature. Retrieved from http://wwwpdaniell.org/grice.pdf
Davis, W. A. (1998). Implicature: Intention, convention, and principle in the failure of Gricean Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
De La Torre, M. A. (2002). Reading the Bible from the Margins. Denver: Orbis Books.
El-Awa, S. M. S. (2006). Textual relations in the Quran: Relevance, coherence and structure. Rutledge Studies in the Quran.
London: Rutledge.
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole, & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, 3: Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New
York: Academic Press.
Grice, P. (1981). Presupposition and conversational implicature. In P. Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 183-198). New York:
Academic Press.
Hancher, M. (1978). Grices Implicature and literary interpretation: Background and preface. Twentieth Annual Meeting
Midwest Modern Language Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Holy Bible (New Living Translation). (1996, 2004, 2007). Carol Stream, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc..
HUANG, Y. (2006). Neo-Gricean pragmatics. In K. Brown (Ed.), The encyclopedia of language and linguistics (2nd ed., pp. 231-238).
New York: Elsevier.
Jorjaani, A. (1989). dalai?el-ol-e?jaazfe-lqor?aan (The reasons of the miracle in the Holy Quran). (M. Raadmanesh Trans.).
Mashhad: ?aastaan-e-qods-e-razavi.
Kalero, Z. (2010). Implied meaning in verses: An analysis of implicature in the Surah al-Fatihah (Chapter 1 of Koran). Retrieved
from http://zainurrahmans.wordpress.com
Kamaali, A. (1991). Shenaaxt-e-Qor?aan (Understanding of the Quran). Qum: enteshaaraat-e-osve.
Karttunen, L., & Peters, S. (1979). Conversational implicature. In C.-K. Oh, & D. A. Dinneen (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, 11:
Presupposition (pp. 1-56). New York: Academic Press.
Kasper, G. (2003). Pragmatics: Applied pragmatics. In W. J. Frawley (Ed.), International encyclopedia of linguistics (2nd ed.,
pp. 390-392). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Leech, G. (1980). Explanations in semantics and pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lundstrm, L. (2004). Indirectness and Grices Cooperative Principle: A study based on the interaction in the sitcoms Friends and
Full House (Unpublished term paper, Department of English, Karlstad University).
McCawley, J. D. (1978). Conversational implicature and the lexicon. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and semantics, 9: Pragmatics
(pp. 245-258). New York: Academic Press.
Meibauer, J. (2006). Implicature. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (2nd ed., pp. 568-581). New York:
Elsevier.
MENG, W. J. (2009). The application of conversational implicature to communication. Retrieved from
http://www.linguist.org.cn/doc/uc200904/uc20090402.pdf
Meybodi, A. (1960). kashf-ol-asraarvaoddat-ol-abraar (The discovery of the secrets and the greetest of the pious). Tehran:
enteshaaraat-e-?aastaan-e-qods.
Miremadi, S-A. (1993). Theories of translation and interpretation. Ghom: Mehr Press.
Morgan, J. L. (1978). Two types of convention in indirect speech acts. In P. Cole (Ed.), Syntax and semantics, 9: Pragmatics
(pp. 261-280). New York: Academic Press.
Obeydiniaa, M. A. (1995). ?oloom-e-balaaqidarkashshaaf-e-Zamaxshari (Rhetoric sciences in the interpretation of
kashshaaf-e-Zamaxshari) (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Shiraz University).
Peimani, M. (1998). Analysis of implicatures of conversations in the Holy Quran (Unpublished M.A. dissertation, Shiraz
University).
Qoreshi, A. A. (1991). Tafsir-e-ahsan-ol-hadis (The interpretation of the best tradition). Tehran: enteshaaraat-e-? aastaan-e-qods.
Saul, J. (2001). Review of implicature: Intention, convention, and principle in the failure of Gricean Theory by Wayne Davis.
Nos, 35, 630-641.
Schniedewind, W. M. (2004). How the Bible became a book. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In P. Cole, & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, 3: Speech acts (pp. 59-82). New
York: Academic Press.

A TEXT ANALYSIS OF THE SURAH LIVESTOCK (AL-ANAM)

885

Shahsavand, Sh., & Davoudi Sharifabadi, E. (2009). Conversational implicature and its realizations in the Persian and
English translations of the Holy Quran: A case study of the stories of Prophets Joseph and Moses. Tehran: Scientific
Information Database.
Sobhaani, J. (1995). Tafsir-e-?ayaat-e-moshkel-e-qor?an (The interpretation of the problematic verses of the Quran). Tehran:
enteshaaraat-e-?aastaan-e-qods.
Tabaatabaaii, M. H. (1984). tafsir-e-al-mizaan (The interpretation of the Al-mizan). Tehran: enteshaaraat-e-?aastaan-e-qods.
Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. New York: Longman Group Ltd..
Thomason, R. (1990). Accommodation, meaning, and implicature: Interdisciplinary foundations for pragmatics. In P. R. Cohen, J.
L. Morgan, & M. Pollack (Eds.), Intentions in communication (pp. 325-363). Cambridge, M.A.: MIT Press.
Wherry, E. M. (1980). A comprehensive contemporary on the Quran. allaahaabaad: R.S. Publishing House.
Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (1981). On Grices theory of conversation. In P. Werth (Ed.), Conversation and discourse (pp. 155-178).
New York: St. Martins Press.
Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (1986). Inference and implicature. In C. Travis (Ed.), Meaning and interpretation (pp. 45-76). Oxford:
Basil Blackwell.
Xorramshaahi, B. (1996). qor?aanshenaaxt (Understanding of the Quran). Tehran: Tehran-no.