Could there be an implicature whose content is not propositional? Grice's canon is somewhat ambivalent on this question, but such figures as Sperber & Wilson, Davis, and Lepore & Stone presume that there cannot be, and argue that this causes glaring failures within the Gricean programme. Building on work by McDowell and Buchanan, I argue that, on the contrary, the notion of non-propositional implicature is very much worth investigating. I show how the notion has promise to illuminate the content of many sorts of complex utterance—from the cases of verbal irony, metaphorical usage, slurring, insinuation, and (some kinds of) humour, to various others which involve expressive or evaluative content.

中文翻译：

---

有非命题含义吗？

会不会有一个内容不是命题的暗示？Grice 的经典在这个问题上有些矛盾，但 Sperber & Wilson、Davis 和 Lepore & Stone 等人物认为不可能存在，并认为这会导致 Gricean 计划中的明显失败。在 McDowell 和 Buchanan 的工作的基础上，我认为相反，非命题暗示的概念非常值得研究。我展示了这个概念如何有望阐明多种复杂话语的内容——从口头反讽、隐喻用法、含糊不清、含沙射影和（某些）幽默的案例，到涉及表达或评价内容的各种其他案例。