Global Communication in Multi-

Cultural Settings

Principle of Cooperative
Conversation
 Definition
• Conversation – oral exchange of information, sentiments,
observations, opinions, or ideas (Merriam Webster Dictionary)
• - talk between two or more people in which thoughts, feelings
and ideas are expressed, questions are asked and answered, or
new and information is exchanged(Cambridge Dictionary)
 Four Types of Conversation
• Debate – is a competitive, two-way conversation. The goal is to win an
argument or convince someone, such as the other participant or third-party
observers.
• Dialogue - is a cooperative, two-way conversation. The goal is for
participants to exchange information and build relationships with one
another.
• Discourse - is a cooperative, one-way conversation. The goal to deliver
information from the speaker/writer to the listeners/readers.
• Diatribe - is a competitive, one-way conversation. The goal is to express
emotions, browbeat those that disagree with you, and/or inspires those that
share the same perspective.
 Examples
• Debate: two family members from opposite sides of the
political spectrum arguing over politics.
• Dialogue: two undecided voters talking to each other about the
candidates, trying to figure out who they want to vote for.
• Discourse: a professor giving a lecture on international affairs.
• Diatribe: a disgruntled voter venting about the election’s
outcome.
• It is important to know which type of conversation you
are in, because that determines the purpose of that
conversation. If you can identify the purpose, you can
better speak to the heart of that conversation. But, if
you misidentify the conversation you are in, you can
fall into conversational pitfalls.
• Two Essential Questions in Effective Communication
1. How do we know what people intend to communicate?
2. How can we ensure that communication is effective?
In order to be understood correctly (or in a particular
way), participants in a conversation must act cooperatively and
mutually accept one another.
In the English-speaking world, one of the essential theories in
pragmatics is Paul Grice’s cooperative principle in communication,
and his four conversational maxims. 
 Cooperative Conversation

• Cooperation can be understood as an essential factor

when speakers and listeners are interacting.
• It is an expectation that the listener has towards the
speaker. The speaker is supposed to convey true
statements and say nothing more than what is required.
• When people talk with each other, they try
to converse smoothly and successfully.
Cooperation is the basis of successful
conversations.
 The Cooperative Principle

• A principle proposed by the philosopher

Paul Grice in 1975, whereby those involved
in communication assume that both parties
will normally seek to cooperate with each
other to establish an agreed meaning.
• In his own words (1975): “Make your contribution
such as it 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’s Four Conversational Maxims
• The Maxim of Quality – DO NOT DECEIVE (do not lie, and do not say
things for which you lack evidence)
• The Maxim of Quantity – OFFER JUST THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF
INFORMATION (no more, no less than required for the current purposes of
the exchange)
• The Maxim of Relation  – BE RELEVANT
• The Maxim of Manner – BE CLEAR, ORDERLY, BRIEF,
UNAMBIGUOUS
 Maxim of Quality
• The Maxim of Quality requires information provided in conversations to
be genuine and justified.
• Grice proposes this maxim as an explanation for a certain kind of
regularity in conversational behavior with respect to the authenticity of
information provided at each turn of a conversation.
• It is one of the four conversational maxims of the Cooperative Principle.
 Definition
• When engaged in conversation, the Maxim of Quality requires
that you:
1. Do not say what you believe to be false.
2. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence. (H.P.
Grice, 1975)
Examples
 Maxim of Quantity
• When engaged in conversation, the Maxim of Quantity
requires you to:
1. Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the
purpose of the exchanges).
2. Do not make your contribution more informative than is
required. H.P. Grice (1975)
 Definition
• The Maxim of Quantity relates to the amount of information provided in
conversations.
• It is one of the four conversational maxims that make up the Cooperative
Principle.
• Grice proposes this maxim as an explanation for a certain kind of regularity in
conversational behavior with respect to the amount of information provided in
each turn of a conversation.
Examples
Flouting a Maxim
Implicatures
 Maxim of Relation/Relevance
• When engaged in conversation, the Maxim of Relation
requires you to:

Be relevant.
H.P. Grice (1975)
 Definition

• The Maxim of Relation is one of the four

conversational maxims of the Cooperative Principle.
• Grice proposes this maxim as an explanation for a
certain kind of regularity in conversational behavior
with respect to the relevance of information
provided at each turn of a conversation.
Examples
 Maxim of Manner
• When engaged in conversation, the Maxim of Manner requires you to be
perspicuous.
• Includes (but not restricted to)
- Avoid obscurity of expression.
- Avoid ambiguity.
- Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).
- Be orderly.
Example
 Definition
• The Maxim of Manner is related to how something is being said in the
conversation.
• It is one of the four conversational maxims that are part of the
Cooperative Principle.
• Grice proposes this maxim as an explanation for a certain kind of behavior
with respect to the way information is provided at each turn of a
conversation.
Example
 Scope of Manner
Violations of the Maxim of Manner can take many forms:

• Order of presentation of information

• Vagueness and ambiguity
• Volume and pace
• Choice of words
• Attitude
• Even facial/gestural expressions
 Criticism

• Conversational Implicature
The basic assumption in conversation is that the
participants are adhering to the cooperative
principle and the maxim.
Example
 Conversational Implicatures
• According to Grice, utterance interpretation is not a matter of decoding
messages, but rather involves:
1. Taking the meaning of sentences together with contextual information.
2. Using inference rules.
3. Working out what the speaker means on the basis of the assumption that the
utterance conforms to the maxims. The main advantage of this approach from
Grice’s point of view is that it provides a pragmatic explanation for a wide
range of phenomena, especially for conversational implicatures – a kind of
extra meaning that is not literally contained in the utterance.
 Scalar Implicature

• Scalar implicatures occur when certain information is

communicated by choosing a WORD which
EXPRESSES one value from a scale of values.
• From the highest to the lowest
(all, most, many, some, few)
(always, often, sometimes)
• The basis of the scallar implicature is that when any form in a scale
is asserted, the negative of all forms higher on the scale is
implicated.
• “I’m studying linguistics and I have completed some of the required
course.”
• By using (some of the required courses), the speaker creates an
implicature (+> not all), this is only one of the scale:
• <all, most, many, some, few)
• In fact, the speaker creates the implicature (+>not all, +>not most,
+> not many).
• Conventional implicatures are not based on
the cooperative principle or the maxims.
They do not have to occur in conversation,
and they do not depend on special contexts
for their interpretation.
• Conventional implicatures are associated with specific words and result in
additional conveyed meanings when those words are used. The English
conjunction ‘but’ is one of these words.
• YET
• BUT
• EVEN
• Mary suggested black, but I chose white. In this sentence, ‘Mary
suggested black’ is contrasted, via the conventional implicature of
‘but’, with my choosing white. Other English words such as ‘yet’
also have
• Conventional Implicatures:
“Dennis isn’t here yet.”
In uttering this statement, the speaker produces an implicature that
she/he expects the statement ‘Dennis is here.’ The conventional
implicature of ‘yet’ is that the present situation is expected to be
different, perhaps the opposite, at a later time.
 For Supplemental Learning
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRMgGCNKijM
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUs8GAi_cIw
End of Presentation