 There are various possible types of linguistic information exchange, ranging from one-party monologues to multi-party interaction. The letter is referred to as conversation, but what exactly is conversation? Well, conversation is defined as a linguistic interaction between two or more parties that is characterized as highly contextualized, that is, speakers' contributions must be tuned to those of the other interlocutors and need to be anchored in the shared here and now of the interaction. Conversation is goal-directed and intentional, that is, conversation serves to realize certain communicative intentions of the participants, like giving information, sharing feelings, making agreements, and so on and so forth. And last but not least, conversation is co-operative, that is, the participants mutually assume that their contributions are purposeful, well-conducted, or more generally co-operative. In looking at conversation, the following general organizational principles can be defined and will be discussed in this e-lecture. We will look at dikesis, that is, the techniques of using particular elements that can point at certain things. We will discuss local reference, that is, how the elements that we use in a conversation are organized in space and in time. We will look at the rules of turn-taking, that is, the rules that define whose turn it is to say something. And finally, we will look at the main interpretive principle, the so-called co-operative principle. Let us start with dikesis. Now, an important way in which interlocutors make their contributions relevant to the situation is by relating to the spatial temporal context of the utterance. German psychologist Karl Bühler referred to this kind of anchoring as dikesis, the Greek term for pointing with words. The following diketic elements can be defined in conversation. We have diketic elements that relate to time, diketic elements that define the place. Persons can be addressed by particular diketic elements such as pronouns, for example. And last but not least, we have discourse, dikesis, elements like this and that can be used as examples here. Now, here is a short dialogue between two speakers. The first one says, have you seen this? The second one answers, you asked me that before, but I wasn't here then. And if we look at this short dialogue, we can identify the following diketic elements. You is certainly person dikesis. This is a typical discourse dikesis element. Here we have another occurrence of you. Then me is a diketic element that relates to a person. That, again, discourse dikesis. Before is typically temporal dikesis. I is another pronoun that refers to a person. And here we have with here a typical local diketic elements or place dikesis. And then finally is a temporal element again. So this is how we can identify diketic elements in conversation. Let's look at local reference next. Now, there are several ways of defining the position of an object in space. This is referred to as local reference. And I'm using the setup that is involved in my production of these e-lectures. This is my position. In front of me there's a camera and behind me there's the active board by Promethean. And with the local reference type referred to as primary diketic reference. I would define everything from my point of view. So I as a speaker, I am the reference point and also the origin of the coordinate system. And all other objects would be related to my position. So I would say the board, the active board is behind me. Now with the reference type referred to as secondary diketic reference. I would say the active board is on the wall. And this secondary diketic definition of an object in space uses the speaker as the origin. So again, my point of view as the origin of the coordinate system. But the reference point is now any other object here, the wall. The board is on the wall. The third type is referred to as intrinsic reference. And now I would say you are in front of the board. This intrinsic definition of an object in space uses an external address C as the origin of the coordinate system. You. The reference point is any other object. So the origin is your position. And you are for me behind the camera. And the reference point is the board. So this is from your point of view. These and other principles contribute to the organization of conversation. But how do we know whose turn it is? Well, the so-called turn taking rules will help out here. A major property of conversation is that overwhelmingly speakers talk in turns and not simultaneously. This can be modeled by specific turn allocation rules which guarantee that only one speaker talks at a time. The turn of a speaker can be of any length. Not only because there is no formal limit to the size of a contribution, but also as you will see in a second these turn taking rules can be applied recursively. And thus allow an unlimited number of contributions to be knitted together to a single turn. So let us illustrate this with our model which you can access on the virtual linguistics campus. Let's start a conversation. Now we have made someone the current speaker. This speaker is entitled to utter a unit and he does so. Now after this unit the question arises does the speaker continue? If yes, he or she can utter a new unit. And once this unit has been uttered we can ask the same question and enter into a recursive loop. Now if the speaker does not continue, then the question arises does the current speaker assign the right to speak to any other party? Let's assume he does. What would you do in such a situation? Well, you would probably ask you interlocutor what do you think about it? So now we have a new speaker, a new current speaker who enters into the same loop. Does he continue? Well, let's assume no. Does the new speaker assign the right to speak to any other party? If yes, we have the same loop again. Let's assume that this is not the case. Now we are in a new situation. The current speaker doesn't say anything anymore. But is there any other one who claims the right to speak, who wants to become the new current speaker? Well, if yes, we start all over again. And now, if there is no other party who claims the right to speak well, then the conversation comes to an end. Now this is the turn-taking model that explains to you how we organize our turns in a conversation. A central assumption about conversation is that all contributions are cooperative. According to the philosopher Herbert Paul Grice, commonly referred to as HP Grice, parties in a conversation mutually ensure that their contributions are governed by this cooperative principle. So whatever you say, it is first of all interpreted as cooperative. Here is an example. Let's assume someone is telling me, I'm hungry. And I would reply, get your cell phone. You would certainly try to make sense of this. And this is what you would probably do. You would get your cell phone out and do something like this. Avanti Pizza Service. Oh yes, my speech recognition works. And this is what my cell phone found. A pizza service. So what did you do? Well, you interpreted my response like this. If I get my cell phone, I can call a pizza service and make use of their home delivery option. And they would bring me a pizza which I can eat. And then I will no longer be hungry. To cut this long story short, I said, get your cell phone. And you considered my answer to be cooperative. In fact, I even violated a so-called conversational maxim. Which one? Well, let us postpone that for a while. Perhaps you know it already. Here are the so-called conversational maxims. These are used in addition to this superordinate cooperative principle. And I will explain them to you in my own words. The first one is referred to as the maximum of quantity. It simply says, give the right amount of information. Do not say more. Do not say less than required. The second, the maximum of quality means make your contribution one that is true. Do not lie. Do not say anything that is false. The maximum of relation means make sure that everything you say is relevant for the ongoing conversation. And the last one, the maximum of manner. Do not make your utterance obscure, ambiguous, or difficult to understand. Which one did I violate earlier on? Of course, the maximum of relation. But this violation led to an additional intended effect, a so-called implicature. The notion of conversational implicature is among the most important ideas in pragmatics. It defines all those inferences that can be drawn from an utterance beyond its semantic content. Often, utterances superficially have little to do with each other, since one or several maxims of conversations have been violated. However, under the assumption of a general adherence to the cooperative principle, a large number of implicatures can be found. In our case, the intended implicature was, ring up a pizza service. However, implicatures are cancelable. That is, they can be replaced by other implicatures. So, you could have also thought, ring up the supermarket and test whether it's still open and then buy some goodies. In fact, implicatures can be associated with a number of such properties. They are, as I said, cancelable. And furthermore, they are indeterminate. You could easily think of further implicatures and cancel this one. One could be, in a very strange case, that you are a fan of chocolate cell phones and I could have thought, well, why don't you eat your chocolate phone? Of course, this is a little bit far-fetched. Anyway, implicatures are indeterminate and implicatures are not necessarily part of the conventional meaning of utterance. So, the drawing of implicatures is central in conversation. This e-lecture completes our overview of pragmatics. In the e-lecture about speech acts, we showed how speakers act with language, how they warn, how they praise, how they criticize, and so on and so forth. This e-lecture introduced additional aspects of pragmatic analysis. It showed how words or phrases can relate an utterance to time, to space or to persons and how speakers organize conversations. I hope these two e-lectures gave you an idea about the role of pragmatics within linguistics and at the same time sharpened your awareness as far as your own use of language is concerned. Thank you.