sign in sign up
<<
Home , Cooperative principle

62 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN ENGINEERING AND SOCIETY, VOL.1, NO.3, 2017

Three Suggested Theories to Improve the

Cooperative Principle Du Qinglong School of Foreign , University of Jinan, Jinan, Shan Dong, 250022, China

Abstract: This paper introduces the classic and neo- two general principles: Gricean pragmatic theory of conversational A. The Q-principle: Make your contribution and a formulation of the . sufficient; say as much as you can (given both Then it gives exploration of the three pragmatic Quality and R) theories from its own principles, concluding that the B. The R-principle: Make your contribution above theories are in favour of their own principles necessary; say no more than you must (given Q) for the goal of a more powerful interpretation of The Q-principle is taken to be a principle biased in communication. favour of the hearer's interest (to be given as fully Key words: Cooperative principle; Grice's theory; articulated a verbal message as possible on the topic neo-Gricean theory; relevance theory; at hand) and is assumed to encompass Grice's first maxim of Quantity (Make your contribution as 1. INTRODUCTION informative as is required) and to mop up the first Grice's theory of conversational implicature has two Manner maxims ("Avoid obscurity of revolutionized pragmatic theorizing and remained expression" and "Avoid "). one of the cornerstones of contemporary . The R-principle, on the other hand, is taken to be a Grice thinks, in daily communication, people are principle biased in favour of the speaker's interest (to observing a set of basic rules of cooperating with expend as little articulatory [and cognitive] effort as each other so as to communicate effectively through possible) and is assumed to subsume Grice's second conversation. He calls this set of rules the cooperative maxim of Quantity ("Do not make your contribution principle (CP) elaborated in four sub-principles more informative than is required"), his maxim of (maxims), that is the cooperative principle. The four Relation and the other two Manner maxims ("Be maxims are the maxims of quality, quantity, brief" and "Be orderly") (see Horn 1989, 194). relevance and manner. The co-operative principle and So he sees these principles as pulling in opposite its component maxims ensure that in an exchange of directions and as reflections within the sphere of conversation, the right amount of information is communication of deeper contradictory forces at provided and that the interaction is conducted in a work in change: Zipf's principle of least truthful and perspicuous manner, which effort (speaker's economy), on the one hand, which revolutionizes and places an important role in the taken to its logical extreme would result in a single pragmatic theory. vocal encoding all meanings, and his "force of However, with the development on the basis of diversification" (hearer's economy), on the other hand, Grice‘s cooperative principle and its sub- maxims, which taken to its logical extreme would result in a there have also been attempts to challenge the vast vocabulary of distinct words, one for each validity of this basis and suggest some other . principles in their stead. On Horn‘s (1988:130) Both principles help to strengthen what is account, the Grice’s original framework is clearly at communicated by a sentence. The Q-principle best incomplete and at worst inadequate beyond induces inferences from the use of one expression to repair to the task of predicting sets of non-logical the assumption that the speaker did not intend to inferences in conversation. The redundancy of the communicate a contrasting, and informationally maxims, however, has provided more problems, or at stronger, one. This principle is thus essentially least more challenges, for post – Gricean theorists. Of metalinguistic in kind, and accounts for both scalar their theory models, the most influential are the neo- and clausal . It allows us, for instance, to Gricean theory (especifically the Hornian and conclude from ‗John ate some of the cookies‘ to Levinsonian theories ) and the relevance theory. ‗John didn‘t eat all of the cookies‘ (), and from ‗A or B‘ to ‗A or B, but not 2. THE NEO-GRICEAN THEORY both‘ (clausal + scalar implicature). The I-principle (1). The Q- and R-principles allows us to infer from the use of an expression to its Horn (1984) has developed an account which most informative or stereotypical interpretation. It is maintains Grice's Quality maxims(truthfulness and used, for instance, to enrich the interpretation of a evidencedness) but replaces all his other maxims with conjunction to a temporal sequential, or causal,

○C FRANCIS ACADEMIC PRESS INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN ENGINEERING AND SOCIETY, VOL.1, NO.3, 2017 63

relation, and it allows us to interpret a conditional the very act of communicating raises in the intended like ‗John walks, if Mary walks‘ as the biconditional audience precise and predictable expectations of ‗John walks if and only Mary walks‘. relevance, which are enough on their own to guide (2). The Q-, I- and M-principles the hearer towards the speaker‘s meaning. Speakers Arguing for a clear separation of pragmatic principles may fail to be relevant, but they may not, if they are governing an utterance's surface form and pragmatic communicating at all (rather than, say, rehearsing a principles governing its informational content, speech), produce utterances that do not convey a Levinson (2000) defines three basic principles linked presumption of their own relevance. to three of Grice‘s maxims (here in abridged form): Whereas Grice invokes relevance (in his ‗maxim of Q-Principle: relation‘) without defining it at all, Relevance Theory Speaker‘s maxim. Do not provide a statement that is starts from a detailed account of relevance and its informationally weaker than your knowledge of the role in cognition. Relevance is defined by Sperber world allows. and Wilson as a property of inputs to cognitive Recipient corollary. Take it that the speaker made the processes. These inputs include external stimuli, strongest statement consistent with what he knows. which can be perceived and attended to, and mental I-Principle: representations, which can be stored, recalled or used Speaker‘s maxim. Produce the minimal linguistic as premises in inference. An input is relevant to an information sufficient to achieve your individual when it connects with background communicational knowledge to yield new cognitive effects, for ends. instance by answering a question, confirming a Recipient corollary. Amplify the informational hypothesis, or correcting a mistake. content of the speaker‘s utterance, by finding the Slightly more technically, cognitive effects are most specific interpretation, up to what you judge to changes in the individual‘s set of assumptions be the speaker‘s . . . point. resulting from the processing of an input in a context M-Principle of previously held assumptions. This processing may Speaker‘s maxim. Indicate an abnormal, non- result in three types of cognitive effects: the stereotypical situation by using marked expressions derivation of new assumptions, the modification of that contrast with those you would use to describe the the degree of strength of previously held assumptions, corresponding normal, stereotypical situations. or the deletion of previously held assumptions. Recipient corollary. What is said in an abnormal way Relevance, that is, the possibility of achieving such a indicates an abnormal situation. cognitive effect, is what makes an input worth These principles provide heuristics for interpreting processing. Everything else being equal, inputs which utterances. For instance, when Mary answers yield greater cognitive effects are more relevant and elliptically ‗some of them‘, she can be seen by Peter more worth processing. For instance, being told by as producing the minimal linguistic information the doctor ‗you have the flu‘ is likely to carry more sufficient to achieve her communicational ends cognitive effects and therefore be more relevant than (following the I-Principle), and this, together with the being told ‗you are ill‘. In processing an input, mental assumption that Mary obeyed the Gricean Maxim of effort is expended. Everything else being equal, relation, justifies his amplifying the content of her relevant inputs involving a smaller processing effort utterance up to what he judges to be her point (see are more relevant and more worth processing. For Levinson, 2000, pp. 183–4). Moreover, the Q- instance, being told ‗you have the flu‘ is likely to be Principle justifies Peter in taking it that Mary made more relevant than being told ‗you have a disease the strongest statement consistent with her knowledge, spelled with the sixth, the twelfth and the twenty-first and that therefore it is not the case that she likes all of letter of the alphabet‘ because the first of these two Fellini‘s films. statements would yield the same cognitive effects as Furthermore, inconsistencies arising from the three the second for much less processing effort. Relevance potentially conflicting pragmatic principles can be is thus a matter of degree and varies with two factors; resolved by a set of precedence in the order of positively with cognitive effect, and inversely with Q>M>I.( Huang 2000a). In recent years, this neo- processing effort. Gricean pragmatic theory has generated a new Relevance Theory develops two general claims or industry of pragmatic theory production and ‗principles‘ about the role of relevance in cognition significant further progress can confidently be and in communication: anticipated in the near future. Cognitive principle of relevance. Human cognition tends to be geared to the maximization of relevance. 3. RELEVANCE THEORY Communicative principle of relevance. Every act of As a post-Gricean pragmatic theory, Relevance communication conveys a presumption of its own Theory (RT) takes as its starting point the question of optimal relevance. how hearers bridge the gap between sentence As we have already mentioned, these two principles meaning and speaker meaning. For Relevance Theory, of relevance are descriptive and not normative

○C FRANCIS ACADEMIC PRESS 64 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN ENGINEERING AND SOCIETY, VOL.1, NO.3, 2017

(unlike the principles and maxims of Gricean and There is no doubt that the Neo-Gricean theory and neo-Gricean pragmaticists). The first, cognitive Relevance Theory are the great important principle of relevance, yields a variety of predictions contributors to the theoretical approaches to regarding human cognitive processes. It predicts that pragmatics with their original points of view. They all our perceptual mechanisms tend spontaneously to developed and enriched Grice‘s Cooperative pick out potentially relevant stimuli, our retrieval Principle by arguing in favour of their own principles mechanisms tend spontaneously to activate for the goal of a more powerful interpretation of potentially relevant assumptions, and our inferential communication with their different perspectives. mechanisms tend spontaneously to process them in the most productive way. This principle, moreover, REFERENCES has essential implications for human communication [1] Horn, Laurence R. Pragmatic theory [A]. in processes. Newmeyer. F. J. (ed.) : the Cambridge In order to communicate, the communicator needs survey, vol. 1[C]. 1988.113.. her audience‘s attention. If, as claimed by the [2] Horn, L. A natural history of negation [M]. Cognitive Principle of Relevance, attention tends Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1998. automatically to go to what is most relevant at the [3] Huang, Y. The syntax and pragmatics of anaphora time, then the success of communication depends on [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1994 the audience taking the utterance to be relevant [4] Huang, Y. Anaphora: a cross-linguistic study[M]. enough to be worthy of attention. Wanting her Oxford: Oxford University Press,2003. communication to succeed, the communicator, by the [5] Jiang Wangqi. Pragmatics: Theories & very act of communicating, indicates that she wants Applications [M]. Peking University Press,2006. her utterance to be seen as relevant by the audience, [6] Levinson, S. C. Pragmatic reduction of the and this is what the communicative principle of Binding Conditions revisited[J]. Journal of relevance states. Linguistics, 1991,(27)32-38. [7] Levinson, S. C. Presumptive meanings: the theory CONCLUSION of generalized conversational implicature[M]. To conclude this section, we have three theory Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2000 models, the Gricean, the neo-Gricean and the [8] Leech, G. N. Principles of Pragmatics [M]. relevance-theoretic, each with its own goals and London: Longman, 1983. orientation, but all intersecting with each other at [9] Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. Relevance: certain points. Their differences can, at least to some communication and cognition[M]. Oxford: Basil extent, be laid at the door of the disciplines they each Blackwell, 1995. ally with: Grice with philosophical analysis, Horn [10] Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. Precis of with linguistics, in particular lexis, and relavance Relevance[J].Behavioral and Brain theory with cognitive processing. Even given their Science,1987,(10)12-19. different perspectives. it seems unlikely that they are simply complementary in all respects. Considering the issue of the ‘right’ conversational or communicative principles，it would also be odd to find that only one set of such principles that are useful for making a pragmatic analysis of the conversation or communication.

○C FRANCIS ACADEMIC PRESS