However, in the case of IBS the content of intention of the speaker is realized in a particular linguistic domain. Language use or expression meaning is domain specific or context bound activity. The domain specifies the rules of the language use. There is fixity of ‘reason’ in the domain of communication intention which could be maintained precisely for the convenience of recognition of intention. Moreover, the reason for having such rules in the IBS is not a limiting factor, rather a constitutive condition for the coherent linguistic communication. As Grice points out, “This points to the fact for x to have meaningnn, the intended effect must be something which in some sense is within the control of the audience, or the in the sense of “reason” the recognition of intention behind x is for the audience a reason not merely a cause …(‘reason for believing’ and ‘reason for doing’).”⁶ The rational way of believing and performing linguistic behaviour in the specific context follows specifically certain rules. For Grice, linguistic rules are conventionally defined. Convention here strictly signifies the specificity of language use within a particular context. That justifies the reasonable discourse of linguistic exercise insofar as the IBS is concerned.