Is Metalinguistic Usage a Conversational Implicature?

Abstract 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 Mankowitz (Synthese 199:5603–5622, 2021). provide two types criticism to implicature view. From an empirical point differs in key respects from standard cases conceptual standpoint, calculation algorithm provided makes undesirable predictions. Although my main objective negative, end paper sketching alternative neo-Stalnakerian usage, can be gathered work Barker (Linguist 25(1):1–36, 2002; Inquiry 56(2–3):240–257, 2013) others.