Cooperative Principle

1
Cooperative Principle
2
Introduction to the Gricean cooperative
principles A Could you tell me how late it
is? B No. (walks on) Why wont B just reply
with a simple yes and walk on? Necessity for
understanding concluding process ?
inference-process - knowledge about
speaker/author - knowledge about circumstances
of situation of utterance - knowledge of
general principles of coperative acting ? Theory
of conversational implicatures
3

• Conversational implicatures
• bridge between said and meant
• Conversational implicatures are context based ?
  context forms inference
• Example
• A Whats the time? C Lets go for a walk!
• B The evening news just started! D The evening
  news just started!
• A-B context shows one has to know when the
  evening news starts
• C-D context shows D want to see the news and is
  only then willed to go out

4

• Basic theory
• Communication means cooperative acting
• Speaker listener/author reader WANT to
  cooperate
• As a listener you have to ask the question
• What does the author/speaker want to tell me?
• What intention is connected to the utterance?
• In what connection stands his/her utterance to my
  or his/her preliminary utterances? (if existing)

5

• Asking that questions means
• We assume everytime that the speaker wants to
  tell us something
• We assume a minimum of cooperative behaviour of
  our communication-partner ? he/she takes account
  of the cooperative principles
• It logically follows that
• we have (therefore) to find out what he/she
  means especially if not uttered obviously
• ? We effort after meaning try to find a deeper
  meaning
• Question
• What does therefore cooperation during
  conversation mean?

6

• Grices maxims of cooperation
• Divided 4 different level of how and what to
  communicate
• 3 refering to content uf utterance
• 1 refering to form of utterance
• Formulated communication on this 4 levels in 4
  maxims
• Be cooperative!
• content related form related
• quality quantity relation manner

7

• 4 maxims
• quality 1. say what is true
• 2. never tell something you believe that it
  might not be true
• 3. Never say something you dont have any reason
  for
• quantity 1. give as much as possible
  information that is needed,
• 2. but not more
• relation 1. be relevant keep on the subject,
  dont get carried away
• manner 1. speak clear
• 2. make brief precise utterances

8

• But notice
• Grices maxims are
• - NO mandatory rules or acting-instructions!
• ? They just reflect actions from every-day-life
• ? are just decriptive, NOT prescriptive, but
• - basis for every kind of human interaction
• the probablities for if the maxims are folowed
  change by the different types of verbal
  interaction
• Example a judge wont believe the defendant
  that all he says is true
• ? because he may just be pretending

9

• Make your conversational contribution just as
  is required, at the state at it occours, by the
  accepted purpose or driection of the talk
  exchange in which you are engaged. from
  Grices Cooperative Principles (1975)
• ? Gricean cooperation is therfore an, to the
  context arranged, concept
• robustness - effort after meaning assuming
  minimum of cooperativeness
• ? never give up assuming the validity of the
  maxims, although form and content of an utterance
  are opposite
• central maxim ? relation as long as we assume
  an utterance as relevant in an given context
  well try to give it an appropriate (useful)
  interpretation

10

• The cooperative principle were never meant to be
  the only pragmatic principles that could cause
  pragmatic inference (politeness e.g. might too)
• terminus tecnicus conversational implicatures
  ? is just used for pragmatical inferences
  based on cooperative principles

11

• Classifying conversational implicatures in 2
  ways
• Question
• Is the implicature created by following or
  disregarding the maxims?
• Is the implicature bound to a special context or
  not?
• to 1. ? differentiate between - standard
  implicatures
• - non-standard implicatures
• Example
• A Would you like some dessert? B Do they eat
  rice in Japan?
• ? conversational implicature Yes, of course.
• C Lets get the kids something? D But no
  I-C-E-C-R-E-A-M!
• ? conversational implicature Dont mention
  icecream. As soon as they will hear
  it, they will ask for it!

12
But non-standard implicatures can also be caused
by conflicting maxims Example A Where does
John spend his holidays? B Somewhere in
Germany. What maxims used B wrong to answer
A? 1. quantity (1) - give as much as possible
information that is needed 2. quality (2) -
never tell something you believe that it might
not be true 1 vs. 2 ? shows that B doesnt
really know where John had been
13

• Prototype of conversational implicature is a
  context-dependent implicature
• ? particularized implicatures
• - most of non-standard implicatures
• - but also standard implicatures
• Like here
• A Whats the time? C Lets go for a walk!
• B The evening news just started! D The evening
  news just started!
• especially in questions of passing the functions
  between pragmatics semantics the
  context-independent implicatures are of very high
  importance
• generalized implicatures
• -especially scalar implicatures

14

• scalar implicatures
• based on the maxim of quantity (1)
• no need for more inference then the said/written
  gives
• no more intensive expressions possipble per
  utterance
• ? Stronger interpretation impossible!
• Examples of some scales
• 1. (all,most, many, some) 2. (excellent, good)
• 3. (always, often, sometimes) 4. (love, like)
• pragmatic inference-relation from right to
  left
• semantic inference-relation from left to right

15

• Example
• A Many kids ate biscuit. B John often lies.
• If it is true that many children ate biscuits,
  then it must be true too that also some children
  ate biscuits
• compare 1. (all,most, many, some) 2.
  (excellent, good)
• 3. (always, often, sometimes) 4. (love, like)
• Useful to keep meaning for a lexeme less
• Example or - create a scale (and, or)
• - for semantic inclusive reading ? if and,
  then or possible
• - for pragmatic exclusive reading ? if or,
  then and impossible

16

• Example
• A I need somone who speaks Polish or Russian.
• Whom is the speaker looking for? Someone who
  speaks only Russian/Polish?
• cancellability - the speakers possibility to
  revoke his utterance
• by adding for example Of course, anyone
  speaking both languages will be most welcome!
• - possibility for speaker/(author) to say
• I never wanted to express that feeling, it
  was ment in another way!
• calculability - possibility to trace the whole
  inference-process, to create conversational
  implicatures, back, step-by-step

17

• Non-conventionality - conversational
  implicatures are not a part of a
  conventional meaning of single an utterance
• ? therefore not derivable from them
• Example
• Scalar implicatures can also just be infered on
  the basis of the maxim of quantity(1)

18

• Sources
• Kortmann, Bernd. Lingustik Essentials
  Anglistik Amerikanistik. Berlin Cornelsen,
  1999.
• Leech, Geoffrey. Principles of pragmatics. New
  York Longman, 1983.
• Avramides, Anita. Meaning and mind.
  Massachusetts, MIT Press, 1989.

19
Neo-Gricean Models
20
Introduction

• based on the original model by Grice several
  alternative models of the cooperative principle
  were developed in the 80s
• in general 2 different approaches can be
  distinguished
• ? reductionist models contain fewer maxims or
  principles than the original

21
Introduction

• ? expansionist models add further maxims to the
  original
• most of them simply confirm the basic ideas of
  the original and basically attempt to improve or
  complement it
• most are reductionist models

22
Gricean Model

• Quality Make your contribution one that is true.
  Do not say what you believe to be false (Quality
  1). Do not say for what you lack adequate
  evidence (Quality 2).
• Quantity Make your contribution as informative
  as is required for the current purposes of the
  exchange (Quantity 1) and not more informative as
  required (Quantity 2).
• Relation Be relevant. Do not change the topic.
• Manner Be perspicuous Avoid obscurity of
  expression (M1), avoid ambiguity (M2), be brief
  (M3) and orderly (M4).

23
The Hornian System

• does not so much reduce but rearrange the maxims
• Quality same as Grices
• Q-Principle Quantity 1 M1 M2
• R-Principle Quantity 2 Relation M3

24
The Hornian System

• Rearrangement gives an answer to an important
  question about Grices conversational maxims
• Why do some utterances evoke further
  interpretation while others do not?
• According to Horn this depends on which Principle
  the speaker makes use of

25
The Hornian System

• both principles can be traced back to a much more
  general linguistic principle, the Principle of
  Least Effort, where the
• R-Principle is connected to speaker economy ?
  Say no more than you must Hearer, infer as
  much as possible.
• Q-Principle is connected to hearer economy ?
  Speaker say as much as possible and say it as
  clearly as possible.

26
The Hornian System

• R-Principle motivates conversational implicatures
  ? leading to stronger interpretations (so-called
  R-based implicatures)
• Q-Principle motivates so-called negative
  implicatures ? no need for further
  interpretations
• also introduces Q- or Horn-Scale

27
The Horn-Scale

• describes lexical items that can be arranged on a
  scale ? most of them are gradable
• e.g. ltall, most, many , somegt or ltexcellent,
  goodgt
• idea is that, the hearer assumes that an
  utterance made represents the strongest possible
  statement in the given context ? no need to read
  more in the statement ? negative implicature

28
The Horn-Scale

• if one of the weaker expressions is used the
  hearer automatically knows that none of the
  stronger expressions could have been used
• e.g. John often lies. ? John does not
  always/most of the time lie.
• Strongest possible statement made ? no further
  interpretation needed

29
Examples

• 1. I broke a finger last night.
• 2. The weather was good.
• 1. Not the strongest possible statement made ?
  invitation for stronger interpretation ? hearer
  will most likely interpret it as I broke my
  finger last night. ? speaker made use of the
  R-Principle

30
Examples

• 2. Strongest possible statement made ? The
  weather was good - not excellent ? no need for
  stronger interpretation ? speaker made use of the
  Q-Principle

31
Summary

• Horn claims to give explanation why some
  expressions lead to further interpretation
  whereas others do not
• R-Principle
• Make your contribution necessary. Say no more
  than you must. ? speaker oriented ? leads to
  stronger interpretation

32
Summary

• Q-Principle
• Make your contribution sufficient. Say as much as
  you can. ? hearer oriented ? no need for further
  interpretation
• Main difference Cooperative Principle does not
  have to be utilized as a whole in order to
  communicate successfully and cooperatively ?
  speakers subconsciously choose either principle
  depending on whether or not they want the hearer
  to interpret their statement

33
Problems

• The use of either principle seems to be highly
  context-dependent.
• An utterance like It is raining. can, depending
  on the context in which it occurs, be connected
  to either the R- or the Q-Principle

34
Problems

• If asked about the weather, there is no need for
  further interpretation of It is raining. ?
  speaker made use of the Q-Principle
• Yet, if there has not been a reference made
  concerning the weather, then It is raining.
  requires stronger interpretation ? speaker made
  use of the R-Principle

35
Problems

• Politeness seems to be problematic as well ?
  John lies once in a while. could also mean
  John lies most of the time.
• Horn-Scale somewhat problematic ? sometimes weak
  expressions are used in the place of the strong
• Cultural differences could lead to problems as
  well
• E.g.. Face-saving

36
Exercises

• Do these utterances belong to the R- or
  Q-Principle?
• Remember R-Principle is speaker oriented while
  Q-Principle is hearer oriented
• Remember the Horn-Scale is a indicator for the
  Q-Principle

37
Exercises

• I spent the night preparing my presentation.
• Some of the kids like ice cream.
• It has been raining most of the summer.
• It has been a while since the accident.
• I spent the night at the log cabin.
• I spent the night at a log cabin.
• John has finished most of the homework.

38
Bibliography

• Huang, Yan. Pragmatics. Oxford Oxford
  University Press, 2006.
• Kortmann, Bernd. English Linguistics
  Essentials. Berlin Cornelsen, 2005.
• Yule, George. The Study of Language. Cambridge
  Cambridge University Press, 1993.