英語畢業dissertation：Violation of Cooperative Principle in th

Violation of Cooperative Principle in the Interviews of Celebrities
A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the School of English Studies
Tianjin Foreign Studies UniversityIn Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree

Contents
Abstract (in Chinese) I
Abstract (in English) II
Chapter I Introduction 1
A. General background 1
B. Need for study 2
C. Organization of the thesis 3
Chapter II Review of the Cooperative Principle in Related Literature 4
A. Previous studies concerning the same issue 4
B. Remaining Problems 8
C. Theoretical framework to be adopted 8
Chapter III Violation of the Cooperative Principle of Domestic and Foreign Celebrities 10
A. Violation of the Maxim of Quality 10
B. Violation of the Maxim of Quantity 13
C. Violation of the Maxim of Relation 17
D. Violation of the maxim of manner 21
E. Summary of the cases 24
Chapter IV Conclusion 25
Works Cited 27

摘要

合作原則是美國語言哲學家格賴斯在1967年為哈佛大學做題為《邏輯與會話》演講時率先提出來的，它是會話含義推導機制的總規則。格賴斯的合作原則為語用學的發展打開了一片新的天地，它是語言學研究的重要內容，也是邏輯學關注的一大焦點。此后關于合作原則的討論如雨后春筍般展開，成果頗豐。本文運用Grice的合作原則，以中外名人訪談對話為例，分析了違反合作原則后引發的會話含義以及特殊的語用意義。對dissertation的內容再多點筆墨

關鍵詞: 合作原則; 違反; 名人；訪談

Abstract
Cooperative principle was first addressed by Grice, an American linguistic philosopher in his speech with the theme of Logic and Conversation in Harvard University in 1967. Grice’ cooperative principle is taken as the general rule of derivation mechanism of conversational meaning and opens a new page for the development of pragmatics. The cooperative principle became an essential element of linguistic study and the focus concerned by logic. Great achievement has been obtained about the discussion on the cooperative principle since it was put forward. The thesis applies Grice’s cooperative principle and interviews of Chinese and foreign celebrities as examples to analyze the conversational meaning and special pragmatics meaning as violating the cooperative principle.More about what you are to write in your thesis.

KEY WORDS: cooperative principle; violation; celebrities’ interviews

Chapter I Introduction
A. General background 寫It is Grice that the first person advanced the theory of the cooperative principle in Harvard University in 1967 so as to make the communication efficiently and successfully. Grice believed that all of actions communication, in order to achieve the specific destination, there is a tacit agreement between the speaker and the hearer, an agreement that both sides are expected to observe. In Logic and Conversation (1975), he put forward that four categories are included in the cooperative principle, and each scope also includes one or several maxims, namely:#p#分頁標題#e#
Maxim of Quality: Truth
• Do not say what you believe to be false.
• Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence [2] (Grice 45).
Maxim of Quantity: Information
• Make your contribution as informative as is required for the current purposes of the exchange.
• Do not make your contribution more informative than is required [3] (Grice 45).
Maxim of Relation: Relevance
• Be relevant.
Maxim of Manner: Clarity
• Avoid obscurity of expression. ("Eschew obfuscation")
• Avoid ambiguity.
• Be brief ("avoid unnecessary prolixity").
• Be orderly [4] (Grice 46).
In the later 20 years, the cooperative principle has been studied by the domestic and foreign scholars and relevant literatures are produced. The scholars gradually supplement and improve this principle in many aspects and views. Works relating the application of cooperative principle in advertisement industry can be easily found, for instance, the article “Research and Study on the Application of Cooperative Principle in Advertisement” by Wang Junmin[13] (Wang Junmin) makes a detailed summary about the research achievement of the cooperative principle in advertisement.

B. Need for study The cooperative principle put forward by Grice acts as an important theory in the language study, making an outstanding contribution against linguistics and logic. Therefore, studies on such theme are beneficial for us to get a better effect in intercommunications.

C. Organization of the thesis
As for the organization of the thesis, firstly, the introduction of the cooperative principle is made. Secondly, the previous studies concerning this issue are explained, and the remaining problems which need further studying are illustrated. In the third part of the thesis, some interviews about celebrities are listed to demonstrate that the violation of the cooperative principle is always attached with some special purpose. In the fourth part of the thesis, a conclusion is given to summarize the whole context, purpose, significance and influence of studying cooperative principle. Furthermore, some suggestions are given for further studies in the future.
 

Chapter II Review of the Cooperative Principle in Related Literature
A. Previous studies concerning the same issueCooperative principle has become the focus of many scholars in recent 20 years and many works studying this theory were produced. These works involve many fields and some of them are summarized in this thesis as follows.

1. On Metaphors in Slogans of Advertising English by the Cooperative Principle (Liu Bei) [10]
This thesis puts that Grice ever pointed out that irony, metaphor, hyperbole and meiosis all result in the violation of the maxim of
quality in the cooperative principle. At present, the advertisement intends to violate the cooperative principle to increase the difficulty of understanding for the readers, thus, the interests of the readers are improved, the attention of the advertisement is realized, and the purpose of taking action is achieved. The relationship between the cooperative principle and the advertisement English has become the research focus. Meanwhile, metaphor is widely used in English advertisement due to special language expression and the persuasion, thus, the research on the application and function of metaphor in English advertisement logo by means of the cooperative principle possesses certain practical significance. As for metaphor, it is most closed to the maxim of quality in cooperative principle. #p#分頁標題#e#
The maxim of quality requires that the contribution shall be authentic and owns sufficient evidence to demonstrate it is true, and the speaker is not allowed to talk about the information which is false or lack of evidence. However, in order to draw the attention of the readers, people who are responsible for creating advertisement are always apt to use some “big” words to show their products. Sometimes, the advertisement even provides people with well-known false information. Such phenomena appearing in the logo of the advertisement can be classified as the violation of the maxim of quality. As a result of it, two effects may be produced:
Firstly, the violation of the maxim of quality can attract the attention of the reader.
Secondly, just as Grice said, “metaphor is the result of violating the maxim of quality”.
As rhetoric means in literature, the ultimate function of the metaphor in advertising English is to attract public attention. The metaphor is also a kind of cognitive phenomena, closely related to the mode and evolution of people’s thinking. Here, the cooperative principle of Grice is used to analyze and evaluate the function and usage of metaphors in slogans of advertising English, laying special emphasis on the advertising effect resulted from their violation of the maxim of quality.

2. Cooperative Principle: Violation and Implication-Strategy of Rhetoric and Statement of Absalom, Absalom! (Dai Xiaoli) [6]
This paper takes examples from Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom! to analyze the violation cases of the cooperative principle and the meaning and implication that the author of the novel wanted to give to the reader. As Faulkner is a writer fond of experimental narration, and violation of the cooperative principle is a rhetoric strategy that he frequently employed. From the analysis, Absalom, Absalom! violates the cooperative principle from two communicative levels: communicative level between the extra-textual real author and real reader; speech act level among the textual narrators. The dominant violation principle reveals the author’s rhetoric motivation that excessively protects the communicative cooperation, because the reader can discover the author’s illocution in the marked narrative act and gain the effect author expected.

3. Humorous Effect Caused by Disobeying Cooperation Principle in English (Zhang Jinlin) [15]
Cooperative principle is a significant maxim of pragmatics. Pragmatics is defined as the study of communicative action in its sociocultural contest. (Gabriele Kasper and Kenneth R. Rose) [1]On the basis of Grice’s conversational implication, the thesis analyzed English jokes in conversations. Through introducing four maxims of the cooperative principle, the thesis analyzes how the humor caused by violation of the cooperative principle and how to interpret humor in contest. It will be helpful to understand English humor deeply so as to improve the learner’s language communicative ability and to “help the hearer to truly understand the real intention of the speaker” (Li Yao) [9].#p#分頁標題#e#
In many cases, the sense of humor is achieved by violating the maxims of the cooperative principle deliberately. However, it is different from dull and uninteresting conversation because humor is the embodiment of intelligence.

4. Pragmatics Explanation of Thunderstorm-Application and Violation of Cooperative Principle (Qiu Jia) [12]
This paper is written by Qiu Jia and aims to analyze the pragmatics implication in the conversations of Thunderstorm with the cooperative principle and its criterions put forward by Grice from the angle of pragmatics view, aiming to analyze the features of the characters shaped by Thunderstorm. Moreover, this work makes a detailed explanation of the complicated drama plot in Thunderstorm and fully analyzes the conversation implication potentially contained in the sentences selected by the author, which is not helpful for the reader to deeply master the characteristics of the roles in the drama, but also to understand the theme. This analysis also provides a proof for the linguistics to become the powerful tool to study the traditional stylistics.

B. Remaining ProblemsFor the violation of the cooperative principle, many studies have been made and there are still several problems existing concerning this issue. The effect of violation of the cooperative principle in business letter, the way for films to employ the violation of the cooperative principle to get special effects, and some other problems are left to be studied. This paper is made to discuss the violation of the cooperative principle in the interviews of celebrities, aiming to find out the implication and special aim the speaker want to put.

C. Theoretical framework to be adopted應該寫4個maxim
This paper takes Grice’s cooperative principle as its theoretical framework to study the violation of this principle in celebrity’s interviews. Grice put forward his cooperative principle in 1967 in Harvard University and he further stated this principle in his Logic and Conversation published in 1975. In this paper, he put that, “I wish to represent a certain subclass of nonconventional implicatures, which I shall formulate a rough general principle which participants will be expected (ceteris paribus) to observe, namely: Make your conversational 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. One might label this the COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE.”[5] (45). Four categories were put forward, including, the category of quality, the category of quantity, the category of relation and the category of manner.

Chapter III Violation of the Cooperative Principle of Domestic and Foreign Celebrities
The cooperative principle describes a reasonable and ordered conversation process. If the two sides of the conversation strictly follow these maxims, the aim of smooth talking will be achieved. “According to Grice, people always follow a basic rule of cooperative principle to achieve the communication purpose.” (Zhang Jianjun) [14] However, cooperative principle will not be followed by everybody all the time. It is descriptive instead of being compulsory. People do violate them in communication, such as willingly telling lies, avoiding directly answering questions, avoiding embarrassment. In most cases, people contact the indirect words given by the other side and they have to conclude what is the true meaning of such words. Grice put that although people usually talk following the maxim of sufficient, clear and other principles, they also violate such rules. The following are some cases of English and Chinese interviews violating the cooperative principle to reach some special purposes.#p#分頁標題#e#

A. Violation of the Maxim of Quality
According to the maxim of quality, the interlocutors should offer the true information to others. They should not say what they believe to be false. Neither should they say that for which they lack adequate evidence. However, there are still many examples to flout the maxim of quality in the purpose to gain some special targets, using such techniques as irony, metaphor, hyperbole.

1. The famous sport star, Liu Xiang once was interviewed by Yang Lan (A well-known host in China, her interviews program are very popular in China). roosterLiu Xiang: When I just entered the team, when I saw the way he (Chan Yanhao, once the champion of hurdle race in Asia) is walking, I told to my father in whisper that, “Dad, this is Chen Yanhao, the champion of the hurdle race…He’s cool! Look at his way of walking, with a charm of a king.”
Yang Lan: What is his way of walking?
Liu Xiang: He walks with his head up and chest out, like a proud rooster.

Liu Xiang’s answer definitely violates the maxim of quality since he used the rhetoric method of comparison. Comparison can be divided into simile and metaphor, with the feature of using one object to describe another object according to the similarity owned by the two objects, aiming to depict or romance the object. With the employment of simile or metaphor, an analogy between the nonfigurative and bald things and the vivid and specific things will be made to make the abstract concept more simplified and concrete. Meanwhile, the connotation of the sentence is enriched and the theme is deepened, thus an innovative and obvious effect will be produced to leave a deep impression. In this conversation, Liu Xiang’s answer used a simile here to compare the way of Chen Haoyan in walking as a proud rooster, thoroughly describing the feeling that Liu Xiang’s admiration against the Asian champion in hurdle race at that time. This violates the first rule of the maxim of quality which requires that the speaker shall say the true words.

2. Famous basketball player Yao Ming and Tracy once were invited by ABC talk show hosted by Jimmy Kimmel.

Jimmy: It’s weird that he (Tracy)’s jersey would sell better than yours.
Yao Ming: Because they (Chinese basket ball fans) all have mine already.

This is an example that violates the maxim of quality. Jimmy, the host said Tracy’s jersey gets a better selling volume than Yao Ming’s in China and his true meaning was that the basketball fans prefer Tracy to Yao Ming in China. Yao Ming gave a humorous reply that they had bought his jersey. True information shall be provided according to the maxim of quality and Yao Ming obviously didn’t give the truth, aiming to avoid the embarrassment in such situation. “In the humor conversation, one of the sides may violate one of the maxims, resulting in the subjective purpose inconsistent with the object effect or the understanding of the listener and producing humor.”(Peng Fei)[11]B. Violation of the Maxim of Quantity#p#分頁標題#e#
The maxim of quantity includes two aspects: the interlocutors should make their contributions as informative as is required (for the current purpose of the exchange); they should not make their contributions more or less informative than is required. Nevertheless, as we mentioned above, in people’s daily communication, the interlocutors often offer too much or inadequate information, that is to say, it deviates from the maxims of quantity.1. The following interview of Zhou Enlai, the former premier of China will illustrate the violation of the maxim of quantity and how the special effect is produced during the process.

A western journalist once asked in a press conference that, "what the amount of the capital held by The People’s Bank of China?” Zhou Enlai answered in a roundabout way that," for the amount of the capital held by The People’s Bank of China, its 18 Yuan, 8 Jiao and 8 Fen.” When he saw the wondering faces of the audience, he explained, “RMB issued by The People’s Bank of China has ten par values, namely, 10 Yuan, 5 Yuan, 2 Yuan, 1 Yuan, 5 Jiao, 2 Jiao, 1 Jiao, 5 Fen, 2 Fen and 1 Fen, totally 18 Yuan, 8 Jiao and 8 Fen…”

This conversation violates the maxim of quantity: the words given shall be insufficient as required to satisfy the current purpose. This interview happened as Premier Zhou held a press conference to introduce the achievement in the developing China. At that time, the new China has just been established and the comprehensive strength of China was not that powerful, particularly, the economy situation was weaker. That journalist raised such question with two possibilities: one was to laugh at the poor national power of China at that time; the other was to find out the economic intelligence of China. Facing this problem, as a premier of a newly established country, Zhou Enlai showed an outstanding sense of humor in such senior diplomatic occasion that he didn’t give a specific number of the capital as required by that journalist according to the maxim of quantity. In this way, Premier Zhou not only gave a reply to the aggressive question, but also kept the economic intelligence of China.

2. Han Han, a young contemporary writer of China was interviewed by Yang Lan (a famous host of China). Han Han is a network writer and quite popular by the young generation born since 1980s. He left his higher middle school even he was in the first year, and then began to engage in his writing career with his great talents. Many people say that he is a traitorous young man since most of his works reveals many social problems. The following is an example of violation the maxim of quantity.

Yang Lan: Your father gives up you or feels at ease with you, how do you think about this? Han Han: He feels at ease. Everything I have done is successful.
maxim of quantity The answer given by Han Han violates the maximum of quantity which requires that the information provided by the speaker must be proper in quantity as required by the other side of the conversation, and less or more information is not allowed. However, Han Han not only gave the information what Yang Lan wanted to get, but add one more sentence, “Everything I have done is successful.” The added information given by Han Han aims to express that his father is confident with him although Han Han seems like a treasonous young man. #p#分頁標題#e#
3. Herbert Hainer, the global CEO of Adidas is interviewed by Yang Lan.

Yang Lan: In the Olympic history, what is the moment most making Adidas proud?
Herbert Hainer: I believe that, Adidas get many excited moments, but the most unforgettable moment is that Jesse Owens won four gold medals in Adidas shoes in 1936.

Obviously, the answer given by Herbert Hainer violates the maxim of quantity and the second rule of this maxim is not followed. Herbert Hainer gave more information than the question required. The question put forward by the Yang Lan just aimed to know the moment that most making Adidas proud and Herbert Hainer didn’t answer this question first, but added more information: “I believe that, Adidas get many excited moments”. These words given here is to emphasize that Adidas as one of the two global giants in sport supplies had performed excellently in the Olympic Games history. Therefore, the second rule of the maxim of quantity is violated in this conversation, aiming to address some other information.

C. Violation of the Maxim of Relation
As for the maxim of relation, the interlocutors should make their contribution relevant. This maxim demands that the hearer should give answers relevant to what the speaker has said in their dialogue. The “relevant theory” includes two sides. One is under the same condition, the more situation effect, the closer relation they are; the other is under the same condition, the less efforts to handle, the more relevant they are. (Sperber &Wils on, 1986)1. It was recollected by Jimmy Carter that when Deng Xiaoping (a great leader of China, 1904-1997) visited the US in 1979, Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski, a political brass once treated Deng Xiaoping in his own house. During the banquet, Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski commented, “there is one thing in common between the Chinese and the French that people from these two countries both believe that their civilization is higher than that of the others.” Deng Xiaoping answered, “Let’s put it in this way,”...
This is a good case of violation of the maxim of relation. Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski’s comment was to blame that both of the Chinese and the French are self-glorified, and a deeper meaning was that if the Chinese and the French are compared, what would be the result? The few words created an embarrassing condition against the other side. If the answer of “Yes” was given, it would mean that China has a higher civilization than France. However, this answer can not solve the problem that which country has the higher civilization as China and French are compared. If a negative answer was given, although it would give a powerful reply to the arrogant comment made by Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski, a result of negating that China’s civilization is not higher than that of the other countries would be formed. Deng Xiaoping began with, "Let’s put it in this way”. These words didn’t directly answer the question, which violates the maxim of relation. The true meaning of this sentence showed the view of the speaker that he neither agreed the point, nor disagreed and he got his own opinions. This answer made the speaker become active, rather than passive against this aggressive question. In addition, it also attracted the attention of the counterpart and put on the stress on the following words. Such wonderful answer demonstrated the wittiness of a great leader of China in an important diplomatic occasion.#p#分頁標題#e#

2. Nicole Kidman, the famous star of the USA was interviewed by Yang Lan.

Yang Lan: Someone said you met Tom, the influence of him is more strongly than your career in those years, what do you say that and in what way did he influence you?
Nicole Kidman: When I met him, I was 22. For 11 years…

This interview was held after Kidman and Tom Cruise (the American star in the entertainment circle) divorced. Under this background, Yang Lan raised this question. The answer given by Kidman seems not related to that asked by Yang Lan. She just said “when I met him, I was 22”. Although she didn’t give the answer that the way Tom influence her, she meant that it is a long time (11 years) for she and Tom getting together. In such a long time, it is obviously that Tom influenced her so deeply, she thus didn’t the specific way. Therefore, this conversation violates the maxim of relation that the answer given by Kidman has nothing related to the question put forward by the host, however, it has a deeper meaning which indicated the true feeling of Kidman towards the marriage between she and Tom Cruise.

3. Interview of Zhao Benshan, the famous sketch master, by Yang Lan.

Yang Lan: As Wei Minglun (a writer of comedy and comment) said, in the sketch of “Got the Money Anyway”, the waiter accepted RMB 100 to tell lies for the customer and this behavior violates the morality. What’s your opinion on these words?
Zhao Benshan: Wei Minglun is a big figure in cultural circle, isn’t he?
“Got the Money Anyway” is a comic piece showed for the CCTV Spring Festival Gala 2009. As long as it was broadcast, it immediately attracted many comments made by the people from all circles. Among these comments, there are some holding a positive point toward the sketch, and there are also negative ones were put forward. Wei Minglun is one of the group giving the negative comment against this sketch. Facing this question, Zhao Benshan didn’t make a direct answer to reply whether his work would violation the morality standard, and used a disjunctive question to give other information. The true meaning of this disjunctive question was to indicate that as Wei Minglun is an expert in cultural studies, maybe he doesn’t get sufficient understanding about the sketch and the comment given by him is not proper to some degree. In this way, Zhao Benshan’s answer in this conversation violates the maxim of relation. It seems that the answer given by him is not related to what the other side of the conversation wants to get, and further meaning which is the true meaning is also given through sentence.

4. An example quoted from the interview between Yao Ming, Tracy and Jimmy as introduced above.

Tracy: He (Yao Ming) has a girlfriend, a lady to be together. That’d be the thing I wasn’t supposed to tell everybody there?
Yao Ming: I keep your secret.

This is a typical case violating the maxim of relation. #p#分頁標題#e#
Tracy just talked about some private information about Yao Ming and he asked Yao Ming whether this was proper to be said in this talk show. Yao Ming didn’t give him a direct answer, and “I keep your secret” seems nothing related to the question put by Tracy. The further meaning of this sentence was that no more personal information about me should be talked here. Therefore, this answer generated a humors effect.

D. Violation of the maxim of manner
The maxim of manner is different from other maxims in that it relates not to what is said，but rather, to how what is said is to be said. The interlocutors should try to avoid obscurity and ambiguity when trying to pass a message. They should also try to be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity), and the last requirement is to be orderly. This maxim requires that the conveyed meaning should be adequately clear.
To achieve the specific effect, the technique of violating the maxim of manner is the technique of violating the maxim of avoiding ambiguity. It is also the most frequently used one of the four techniques discussed in this thesis. Through ignoring the issue /topic, occasion, background, misusing or abusing the grammar of the language, all those behaviors will lead to violating of the maxim of manner is resulted in some special effect.

1. An example quoted from the interview between Yao Ming, Tracy and Jimmy as introduced above.

Jimmy: When you are done playing basketball, will you move back to China? Or you stay here?
Yao Ming: I haven’t planned that yet.

This case demonstrates a violation of the maxim of manner. The first rule of the maxim of manner requires that the words given by the speaker shall be clear to avoid obscurity. However, in this conversation, Yao Ming didn’t directly answer the question put forward by the host, and said he hadn’t got a plan. An unclear meaning was produced by this answer since most of the sports stars or singers in the entertainment circle would not like some sensitive or private information of them to be released. These kind of obscure replies such as “no comment” are always used by these people to protect them from being the hype in the press.

2. An example from the interview between Herbert Hainer, the global CEO of Adidas and Yang Lan.

Yang Lan: USD 8000 would be the price you put on the table, right?
Herbert Hainer: This is what people saying.

This conversation violates the maxim of manner since Herbert Hainer gave an obscure answer. The first rule of this maxim requires the speaker to make his words clear. This interview made by Yang Lan under the background that Adidas had successfully got the qualification to be the official partner of Olympic Games to be held in Beijing in 2008 and held the goal to become the No. 1 in Chinese market in 2008. The question given by Yang Lan aimed to get a clear number of Adidas would put to realize this goal. However, Herbert Hainer just said that “this is what people saying” to avoid to give the exact number of this question. The reason for this is that as in the modern market with such fierce competition, keeping business secret is crucial. If your detailed amount of a business plan is released to others, your business rival may get that information and invest more in order to snatch the market share. Therefore, Herbert Hainer didn’t give a clear answer here to avoid the rival of Adidas such as NIKE to take any actions in market.#p#分頁標題#e#

E. Summary of the cases
Although following the cooperative principle would make the conversation go smoothly and effectively according to Grice, “in practical communications, the situation of violating the cooperative principle always exists” (Liang Rong, Liu Guohui)[8]. To sum up, the cases applied above show that in some occasions, the speaker would not following the cooperative principles to make some special effects, express some particular meanings, make their words more vividly, and deepen the meaning they want to express. The speaker would hide the true meaning in their words, and as the hearer, he/she must understand the true idea of the speaker if he/she want to make the conversation smooth. Therefore, it is quite important to be good at grasp the nature from the language phenomena and master the deeper connotation to avoid misunderstanding, aiming to create a harmony conversation. The implication of the speaker can be reckoned that, on one hand, the speaker will set the implication which must let the hearer understand that he/she violates the cooperative principle; on the other hand, the hearer may conclude the conversational meaning according the literal meaning and the specific situation that the speaker violates the cooperative principle.

Chapter IV Conclusion 結論沒寫suggestions for further research
This paper states that the cooperative principle put forward by Grice greatly influenced the linguistics studies and the violation of cooperative principle also becomes the hot issues of many scholars. The violation of cooperative principle can be applied to study the daily conversations, advertisements, film dialogues and other many aspects. Some of the works have discussed this issue from different angles. For this paper, the author mainly start from the interviews of foreign and Chinese celebrities to find out what special effects were given as one side of the conversation violated the cooperative principle. Although in most cases, people speak following the cooperative principle that they tell the truth, give the proper information required by their counterpart, give answers relating the questions and make their words clear and in order, however, under some circumstances, people would deliberately violate the principle to realize the special purpose and the hearer shall catch the true meaning of the words put by the hearer to completely understand the implication of the speaker. As shown in these examples above, special effects are generated as participants of the conversation violated the maxim of quality, maxim of quantity, maxim of relation and maxim of manner under concrete situations. Some times, they would use rhetoric methods such as comparison to fully express their true meaning in their mind.
Studying on the cooperative principle will facilitate to analyze the languages and “improve the appreciation and communication ability of the learner” (Jin Xiaomei) [7]. Though there are many works were created by the former scholars on various aspects, there are still many issues to be discussed on this issue, such as whether the cooperative principle is the solely rule that people follow. It is suggested that the cooperative principle shall be studied deeply to widen the field of pragmatics.#p#分頁標題#e#

Works Cited
[1]Kasper，Gabriele and Kenneth R. Rose.
Pragmatics in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. 2.
[2] Grice, H.P. Logic and Conversation. New York: Academic Press, 1975. 45-46
[3] 代小麗. 合作原則：違反與言外之意《押沙龍，押沙龍！》的修辭敘事策略. 重慶郵電大學學報（社會科學版）.重慶：重慶郵電大學外國語學院，2009, (7).
[4] 金小梅. 會話合作原則與英語幽默. 襄樊職業技術學院學報, 2009, (5).
[5] 梁榮、劉國輝. Grice’s 合作原則的“不合作”現象的語用研究.重慶職業技術學院學報，2006, (4).
[6] 李瑤. 違反合作原則產生會話含意的因素分析. 安徽工業大學學報（社會科學版），2005, (1).
[7] 劉蓓. 從合作原則看英語廣告標語中的隱喻. 青島遠洋船員學院報. 青島遠洋船員學院外語部，2009, (1).
[8] 彭菲. 從合作原則對英語會話幽默探析. 中國dissertation下載中心，2009.
[9] 邱佳.《雷雨》的語用解讀－合作原則的應用與違反. 中國dissertation下載中心，2009.
[10] 王俊敏. 廣告合作原則的應用研究評述. 文教資料. 南京師范大學，2008, (22).
[11] 張建軍. 合作原則的違反與會話含義的產生. 長春教育學院學報，2008, (3).
[12] 張晉林. 英語中由違反合作原則而產生的幽默效果.山西警官高等專科學校學報. 山西警官高等專科學校，2008, (4).