《The Conversational Implicature Createdthe Violation of the Cooperative Principle英语论文.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《The Conversational Implicature Createdthe Violation of the Cooperative Principle英语论文.doc（2页珍藏版）》请在三一办公上搜索。
1、The Conversational Implicature Created by the Violation of the Cooperative PrincipleAbstractThe Cooperative Principle (or CP for short) plays a very important role in Pragmatics. This paper analyzes the conversational implicature derive from the violation of the CP. Examples in conversations below a
2、re given to illustrate how it works. It will be helpful to understand the CP deeply so as to improve learners language communicative ability.KeywordsThe Cooperative Principle violation conversational implicatureI IntroductionThe CP was advanced firstly by Oxford philosopher Herbert Paul Grice as fol
3、lows: Make your contribution such as is required，at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged. Grice identified it into four maxims, which go towards making a speakers contribution to the conversation “cooperative”. It include: (
4、1) Quantity; (2) Quality; (3) Relation; (4) Manner. But the use of terms such as “principle” and “maxim” does not mean the CP and its maxims will be followed by everybody all the time. People do violate them to make the conversational implicature in the purpose of humor, politeness and so on. In thi
5、s paper, I will analyze the conversational implicature created by the violation of the Cooperative Principle.II The Violative Examples of the CP1. Violation of the Maxim of QuantityThe maxim of quantity includes two aspects: the interlocutors should make their contributions as informative as is requ
6、ired (for the current purpose of the exchange) and should not make their contributions more or less informative than is required. However, in our daily conversations, we often violate them in order to describe things vividly or funnily. Eg1: War is war.Eg2: Mrs.X: How did it Jimmy do his history exa
7、mination?Mrs.Y: Oh, not at all well, but there, it was not his faults. They asked him things that happened before the poor boy was born.We can see that Eg1 is uninformative at the superficial level, but it implies that “War is terrible by nature”. In Eg2, “not at all well” is as enough as required,
8、the adding is needless. But it can covey the ridiculous implicature like “Jimmys failure caused by the teacher who asks the question before Jimmy was born”. 2. Violation of the Maxim of QualityAccording to the maxim of Quality, the interlocutors should not say what you believe to be false, nor say t
9、hat for which you lack adequate evidence. However, advertisers often intentionally violate this maxim by using figures of speech.Eg3: He was born in 1639, and hes still flying with us today.This is an advertising for wine. Obviously, it says something untrue, but it used personification to imply tha
10、t “It was firstly produced in 1639, and it is still popular today.” Undoubtedly, we will be attracted by the original one.3. Violation of the Maxim of RelationAs for the maxim of Relation, it refers to be relevant. Violations of this maxim are rare, but in the social situation, people usually violat
11、e it to keep politeness.Eg4: At a party, A says “Mr.X is an old bag”. After a moment of appalled silence, B says “Good weather, isnt it”?It seems that Bs answer is quite irrelevant to As remark, but B thereby implies that As remark is impolite4. Violation of the Maxim of MannerThis maxim demands tha
12、t the conversations should not only avoiding obscurity of expression and ambiguity, but also be brief and orderly. To make the point clearer, I choose two aspects (ambiguity avoidance and being brief) to analyze.In English, humor usually is created by the ambiguity.Eg5: A: Where is Washington? B: He
13、s dead.待添加的隐藏文字内容2This dialogue is quite funny, for B misunderstands the meaning of “Washington”, which not only means the capital of U.S.A., but also the name of the first president in American history. Let us look at another example about prolixity.Eg6: a. Mrs.X sang “Home sweet home”.b. Mrs.X pro
14、duced a series of sounds that corresponded closely with the score of “Home sweet home”.From Eg6, we can see that the second one is quite prolix, but it also uses irony to imply that Mrs. X isnt good at singing.III ConclusionAs shown in these examples above, the violation of the CP can reach many eff
15、ects such as humor, politeness and so on. In Grices view, conversational implicatures can only be worked out on the basis of the CP, so learning about the CP and the violation will benefit us to understand English culture and more efficiently to use this language.References1. 语言学教程 胡壮麟 北京大学出版社2. W3. 论话语交际中的幽默原则 何文波 外语教学出版社4. Flouting of Cooperative Principle in Advertising language. 王楠 中国学术期刊网5. 反讽的语用研究 朱小舟 湖南师范大学科学学报
