Skip to main content

Subsection 7.3.2 The Cooperative Principle and Conversational Implicature

In our everyday use of language, what we explicitly say and what we actually mean (and intend others to understand) are often quite different.

This happens for a variety of reasons, including our desire to be brief and our need to follow social conventions, such as the rules that govern what it means to be polite.

Video cover image

One important idea that goes a long way toward explaining why communication works even in the face of this problem is the Cooperative Principle.

The philosopher/linguist Paul Grice described a set of four conversational maxims: rules that describe cooperative conversation:

  • Quality: Say only things that you believe to be true and for which you have

adequate evidence.

  • Relevance: Say only things that are relevant.

  • Quantity: Give as much information (no more and no less) as is appropriate to the

situation. Put differently: make the strongest true and relevant statement

you can.

  • Manner: Be clear and brief.

In some contexts, other maxims also apply. For example:

  • Politeness: Be polite.

  • Legality: Don’t say things that lawyers tell you not to say.

If we assume that others are following these rules, then sentences can generate implicatures: conclusions that follow from what was literally said.

Suppose that we are trying to find a way to get our whole class to the museum. I say:

My car can hold 4 people.

If you assume that I’m being cooperative, you will conclude:

My car can hold 4 people and no more than 4 people.

If my car can hold 6 people, I have violated the maxim of quantity. The claim, “and no more than 4 people” is an implicature.

Cooperative conversation is efficient because it lets speakers leave out claims that they know can be derived by listeners who assume that the maxims are being followed. But the rules of cooperative conversation complicate the mapping between English sentences and logical meaning.

Exercises Exercises

1.

Suppose that I ask you, “Do you know what time it is?” Mark each of the following possible responses as Cooperative or Not Cooperative. If you’re on the fence, choose Not Cooperative. Keep in mind that being succinct is cooperative, but that must be balanced against providing just enough information as to be useful in the current situation. Assume that everything that is stated in any of these responses is true and known to be true by the responder.

  1. Yes.

  2. Um. Let me see. Um. 2:15.

  3. No.

  4. No. But there’s a clock out in the hall.

  5. No. But it’s Tuesday.

Answer.

  1. Not cooperative.

  2. Cooperative.

  3. Not cooperative.

  4. Cooperative.

  5. Not cooperative.

Solution.

  1. “Yes” isn’t cooperative. The person who asked the question wants to know the time, not the state of your knowledge.

  2. “Um. Let me see. Um. 2:15,” is cooperative. It’s longer than “Yes” but it provides exactly the information that has been requested.

  3. “No” isn’t cooperative unless it is really the best you can do. If you know a way for the asker to get an answer, you should state it.

  4. “No. But there’s a clock out in the hall,” is cooperative because it explains how the asker can discover the required information.

  5. “No. But it’s Tuesday.” isn’t cooperative because it fails to provide the desired information and also clutters up the conversation with something irrelevant.

2.

Suppose that I ask you, “Shall we go to a movie tonight?” You reply, “I have to study for an exam tomorrow.” Which of the following describes your response:

  1. You have not been cooperative. You didn’t answer the question.

  2. You have been cooperative. I should be able to infer that you’ve said yes.

  3. You have been cooperative. I should be able to infer that you’ve said no.t

Answer.

Correct answer is C

Solution.

Explanation: We both know that you cannot study and go to a movie at the same time. So by telling me what you need to do instead, you’ve not only answered the question but given a reason for your answer. You can’t go.