Language communication in a pragmatic perspective: Flouting the cooperative principle

Abstract

The aim of the article is a pragmatic analysis of various linguistic communication situations in the light of Grice’s principle of cooperation (1975). The analysis shows that language strategies involve a deliberate flouting of the cooperative principle using various pragmatic functions. The presented communication strategies in English, German, Polish and Russian show similarities in their occurrence. The sender may convey intentions not directly, but by hidden means of expression which often become an exponent of an apparent question, a change in the argumentative direction, the use of ambiguous words, irony or even silence. Hence, we can talk about the implementation of the pragmatic functions of “language avoidance”, “counter-argumentation”, “counter-proposal”, “irony” etc.

Flouting Relevance Maxim Benefits of Hillary Clinton's President Candidate Debate on 2016

“…Avoiding getting further contradictive questions is also the benefit of giving an irrelevant answer to express indirect agreement with the debate rival. The technique is similar to a finding that the sender of information may propose his or her hidden means by using apparent questions (Komorowska, 2020). It is also very interesting that Clinton gave another irrelevant answer simultaneously that follows the abortion issue, which is the cancer screening program for women in the country.…”

“…In this term, the flouting maxim is described as a method to construct and analyze indirect communicative purposes in social interaction. The communicative situation is concluded to involve flouting the cooperative principle with the use of various pragmatic functions (Komorowska, 2020). The communicative situation is one step to analyze the communicative purpose that had been applied in this research.…”

Representasi Maksim Cara dan Relevansi Tuturan Anggota DPRD Kota Makassar

“…Dengan demikian, penutur menunjukkan maksud tidak langsung karena adanya ekspresi wajah tersembunyi. Hal ini bisa menimbulkan persepsi kata yang ambigu dan pesan yang tidak dapat dipahami oleh lawan bicara (Komorowska, 2021) Data 6 menunjukkan konteks bahwa warga atau masyarakat tampak menekan anggota dewan agar menekan pihak GMTD. Jadi, pertanyaan dewan 1 terhadap dan warga 2 dan 5 merupakan bentuk pertanyaan untuk dijawab oleh warga 2 dan 5 (masyarakat).…”