违反合作原则产生的幽默效果英语毕业论文.doc

毕 业 论 文（设 计）题目： 违反合作原则产生的幽默效果 （英文）：The Humorous Effect from the Violation of the Cooperative Principle院 别： 外国语学院 专 业： 英语（商务） 姓 名： 叶仰生 学 号： 2007064343014 指导教师： 吴庚堂 答辩日期： 2011年5月22日 The Humorous Effect from the Violation of the Cooperative PrincipleAbstractThis paper mainly discusses the humorous effect from the violation of Grices cooperative principle. As a language phenomenon, humor plays an important role in English culture. However, we find that there are difficulties in understanding English humor for Chinese because of cultural differences. From the perspective of pragmatics, this paper analyzes cooperative principle and the humorous effect by violating the principle based on humorous English stories and directed by theory. It aims to help the language learners have a better understanding and appreciation of language. The first chapter simply introduces cooperative and leads into the topic. The second chapter mainly describes the cooperative principle、its modification and development and the introduction of it to China. The third chapter analyzes the four maxims and the humorous effect by flouting each maxim through using lots of humorous English stories. The last chapter summarizes the whole paper and emphasizes on appreciating English humor from the prospect of cooperative principle. Key words：Cooperative Principle; four maxims; humorous effect违反合作原则产生的幽默效果摘要本文主要讨论违反格莱斯会话合作产生的幽默效果。作为一种语言现象，幽默在英语文化中有着举足轻重的作用。但是由于文化差异，我们发现很多时候对于英语幽默的理解存在很大困难。文章从语用学的角度,以英语幽默实例为基础，以理论为指导，分析会话原则,探讨了说话者在会话中因违反合作原则的四个标准产生的幽默效果，将有助于我们更好地理解和掌握英语幽默,提高鉴赏和运用英语幽默的能力。本文第一章概述合作原则，引入话题。第二章主要介绍合作原则理论、合作原则的修改和发展、合作原则引入中国。第三章详细分析四个准则，运用大量英语幽默实例，分析违反每个原则产生的幽默效果。最后一章对全文进行总结，强调从分析合作原则的角度理解英语幽默。 关键词：合作原则；四准则；幽默效果Content1Introduction12. Literature review12.1 The notion of CP12.2 Specification of the theory of CP-Conversational Maxims22.3 Modification and development of CP32.4 The introduction of CP to China33. The violation of CP and the humorous effect43.1 The maxim of quantity43.2 The maxim of quality53.2.1 Irony73.2.2 Hyperbole83.2.3 Personification93.3 The maxim of relation93.4 The maxim of manner104. Conclusion11The Humorous Effect from the Violation of the Cooperative Principle1IntroductionHumor is almost everywhere. We can find humor in our conversation, in the movies, on televisions, in books, newspapers and magazines, on the radios, etc. Berger (1992) puts it, “There is no escaping humor and there is no subject, whether it be sex, marriage, politics, religion, work, sports -you name it that has not been ridiculed, joked about, and used or abused one way or another, as grist for someones comic militancy.” Berger believes that lacking of co-ordination plays a decisive role in the sense of humor in both production and perception, and it can make people laugh only when such a co-ordination is revealed and understood.Grices conversational implicature focuses its discussion on the Cooperative Principle which is supposed to be the basis of any successful communication. Only when the principle is observed can we ensure the effective exchange of information. While in order to make humorous effect, people usually violate one or two maxims in the Cooperative Principle, and they are often thought to be non-cooperative. Sometimes people violate some of the maxims simply to achieve some special effects or intend the listener to figure out the hidden meaning in the utterances. Furthermore, in humorous conversations, the purpose is to cause laughter rather than convey information. Therefore, humorous conversation is produced through the absurd violation of the maxims to produce effects such as exaggeration, satire, amusement, and self-mockery, etc. The paper aims to analysis those humorous effects caused by the violation of Cooperative Principle，or CP in short. 2. Literature review2.1 The notion of CPA major theory in pragmatics is the theory of conversational implicature，proposed by an Oxford philosopher Herbert Paul Grice. Grice began to formulate his ideas of this theory in 1950s，but it was through the William James lectures delivered at Harvard in 1967 that this theory first became known to the public. Grice noticed that in daily conversations people do not usually say things directly but tend to imply them. Grice stated that, “Make your contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange.” (Grice 1975:47). In order to achieve the purpose of mutual understanding, Grice suggested，there should be a set of over-arching assumptions guiding the conduct of conversation. He took it as a fundamental principle. The Cooperative Principle is consisted of four maxims, called the Gricean maxim. In 1975, he published an article entitled Logic and Conversation that created quite a stir on the linguistic scene and generated a large number of linguistic publications. The basic assumption of Grices theory is that any discourse, whether written or spoken, is a joint effort of the speaker and the addressee and both of them have to follow certain rules in order to communicate effectively.2.2 Specification of the theory of CP-Conversational Maxims To specify the Cooperative Principle further, Grice breaks it down further into more detailed and explicit maxims and sub maxims by borrowing from the German philosopher Immanuel Kants four categories, namely, Quantity, Quality, Relation and Manner. According to Grice, the content of each maxim is as follows: Quantity: 1 Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes of the exchange) 2 Do not make your contribution more informative than is required. Quality: Try to make your contribution one that is true. 1 Do not say what you believe to be false, 2 Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence. Relation: Be relevant. Manner: Be perspicuous. 1 Avoid obscurity of expression 2 Avoid ambiguity 3 Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity) 4 Be orderly. Levinson observes that these maxims specify what participants have to do in order to converse in a maximally efficient, rational, cooperative way: participants should speak sincerely, relevantly and clearly, while providing sufficient information (Levinson, 2001:102).2.3 Modification and development of CPSince the theory of CP and its attendant Conversational Maxims have not gone uncriticized, it is quite natural that some supplement, modifications, and development are made in accordance.Based on Grices maxims of relation, Kasher (1976) poses the Rationalization Principle, as an alternative explanation for the operation of implicature in his Conversational Maxims and Rationality. Sperber and Wilson (1986) developed their Relevance theory, which He Zhaoxiong regards as not merely a simple continuation but more of a supplement and development of Grices theory (2000: 187). Leech (1983) and Brown & Levison (1978; 1987) have extended the CP into what has been known as the Politeness Theory. Horn (1984, 1989) puts forward a bipartite model. In his view, all of Grices maxims can be replaced with two fundamental and antithetical principles: the Quantity-principle and the Relation-principle. Moreover, Levinson(1987) proposes that the original Gricean can be reduced to three neo-Gricean pragmatic principles: what he dubs the Quantity，Informativeness，and Manner-principle.2.4 The introduction of CP to ChinaThe notion of the CP and the content of its related four maxims are introduced to Chinese readers mainly based on Grices Logic and Conversation. As an important theory in pragmatics, the theory of CP was first introduced to China by Hub Zhuanglin in 1980. The relatively comprehensive and faithful introduction of the CP is marked by the publication of Chen Cumins article Grecian Conversational Implicatures and Related Discussions in 1983. Since then, heated discussion about the CP has been carried out by the Chinese circle of pragmatics. Shortly after the appearance of the CP in China, many famous Chinese scholars engaged in the study of pragmatics, like Chen Rong (1985), Sun Yu (1994) and Liu Ji (2001) also joined in and contributed to this field either by translating related articles or by making comments on the CP. Besides articles, the introduction of the CP also takes the form of pragmatic books by He Ziran(1988), He Zhaoxiong (2000) , and Wu Tieping(1993)，etc.3. The violation of CP and the humorous effect3.1 The maxim of quantityThis maxim requires: 1）Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purpose of the exchange). 2）Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.This maxim is concerned with the quantity of information to be provided. It requires speakers to make their contributions as informative as is required, but not more informative than is required. It means that speakers should provide enough information and avoid redundancy. But in some humor, we find the speakers give so little information that the hearers cannot infer what the speakers mean and have to guess. Then when the speakers finally tell what they really want to express, it forms a sharp contrast to the previous guess of the hearer, and thus attains humorous effects. For examples,(1) A：“I understand you had an argument with your wife. How did it end up ?”B：“Oh , she came crawling to me on her hands and knees.” A：“Is that so? What did she say？” B：“She said, come out from under the bed and fight like a man! ”At the beginning, when asked by friends about the fight results, the husband only provided a small part of the information. He said that his wife climb over to him with four limbs on the floor. In order to cover up his weakness, he did not mention the fact that he was hiding under the bed. Hearing this, his friends thought it was his wife yield to the husband. Until the husband quoted the words of his wife, his friend finally realized that the wife climbed with four limbs on the floor so as to drag him out from under the bed because the husband was hiding under the bed. The husbands words flout the maxim of quantity by hiding some key information that is required. Though the husbands final purpose is not to make fun, the whole conversation makes humorous effect.(2) Chandler: Where is the book you are reading?Monica: It is in the living room，where there is also light and no one will kick you.(Laughter)This is a dialogue between Chandler and Monica in the popular US comedy friends. Chandler cant sleep, so he turns on the light and asks Monica for the romantic novels which she usually reads，for he believes those books could be effective for his insomnia. But Monica is drowsy at that time and she is awakened by the light and gets annoyed. The information“It is in the living room” is enough. However，Monica violates the maxim of quantity by giving more information，in order to warn Chandler: if he reads the book in the bedroom with the light tuned on，she will kick him out. 3.2 The maxim of qualityAs is mentioned before，the maxim of quality requires: 1) Do not say what you believe to be false; 2) Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence. This maxim suggests that speakers should not provide anything they believe to be false or things that lack adequate evidence for. Here, to Grice the observance of the quality maxim is a matter of greater urgency than is the observance of others (Jiang Wangqi, 2000:39), because no other maxims will come into operation unless the maxim of quality is satisfied. The following stories are examples to show what humorous effect is resulted from the violation of the maxim of quality.(3) A woman came up behind her husband while he was enjoying his coffee and slapped him on the back “ I found a piece of paper in your pant pocket with the name Marylou written on it, she said, furious, “you had better have an explanation. “Calm down, honey,” the man replied, “remember last week I was at the race? That was the name of the horse I bet on.” The next morning his wife sneaked up and again slapped him, “what was that for?” he complained. “Your horse called last night.”The husband explained to his wife that its a horses name at the race. While，actually， it was his lover. He said what he believed to be false, which is the violation of the maxim of quality. The next morning, his wife slapped him again and said his horse called him last night. She intentionally flouted the maxim of quality. Because actually, at this moment, his wife realized it was his lover but not a horse. In this conversation, both the husband and his wife flout the maxim of quality and it is the violation of the maxim that makes the whole story funny. (4) A fruit vender in the Philippines sold a watermelon to an old woman and assured her that it was very sweet because it was red inside. As she rode home in a jeep, the vehicle skidded and the watermelon fell to the street and broke open. The old woman was surprised to see that the fruit was pale pink and not red. So she return with it to the vendor and complained loudly. “Madam,” replied the vendor, “when one falls out of a vehicle to the street, one can expect to turn pale. What about a watermelon?” In this example, obviously, the vender said something lack adequate evidence, which is the violation of the second sub-maxim of quality. His words sound absurd but quite humorous. Grice points out the use of several rhetoric devices, including irony, metaphor, hyperbole and meiosis, typically give rise to the flouting of the first sub-maxim of Quality. In the book Pragmatics and Discourse, Cutting (2002: 37) claims that the Maxim of Quality may be flouted in several ways: speakers may flout the maxim by exaggerating in the hyperbole; similarly, a speaker can flout the maxim by using a metaphor, conventional euphemisms, irony and banter.3.2.1 IronyIrony is a linguistic device that achieves emphasis by saving the opposite of what one intends to say. The ironic meaning is created in the interaction of the said and the unsaid. When analyzed in terms of the CP, irony is regarded as a flouting of the Maxim of Quality owing to its characteristics. According to Leech (1983: 144), irony is an apparently friendly way of being offensive. Different from exaggeration, irony completely reverses normal logic of things, turning black into white, bad into good. The author deliberately adopts such an ironic tone to tell what he believes to be false, thus violating the maxim of quality in the CP. Here is the example.(5) There is nothing more beneficent than accident insurance. I have seen an entire family lifted out of poverty and into affluence by the simple boon of a broken leg. I have had people come to me on crutches, with tears in their eyes, to bless this beneficent institution. In all my experience of life, I have seen nothing so seraphic as the look that comes into a freshly mutilated mans face when he feels in his vest pocket with his remaining hand and finds his accident ticket all right. And I have seen nothing so sad as the look that came into another splintered customers face when he found he couldnt collect on a wooden leg. (Wang Qun and Chen Lang 2007:159). This piece of extraction is from a humorous story by Mark Twain published in 1875 when American capitalism was experiencing a booming development. In the accumulation of primitive capital and production, capitalists fortune swoop was full of violence and jiggery-pokery. In the story, Mark Twain tells us that some people cheat others by lying to make money, which is a violation of the maxim of quality. Choosing the new rising insurance line of business as a cut-in point, Mark Twain wittily expose the greedy nature and expanding desire covered under the mask of commonweal and civilization by virtue of the director of an insurance company. The most distinct feature of this story lies in irony that could be found everywhere in it. For example, a family lifted out of poverty and into affluence luckily by a broken leg; or the seraphic look that a freshly mutilated man has when he finds his accident ticket all right; and also the miserable customers gratitude to such a beneficent institution. The humorous effect of this story is right achieved through such ironic expressions.3.2.2 HyperboleHyperbole is the deliberate use of overstatement or exaggeration to achieve emphasis. Effective hyperbole is more than just to emphasize something in exaggerated terms. It can be used to achieve various literary effects, to intensify emotion or to poke fun at or ridicule.(6) The elderly couple had just gotten married. Preparing for bed , the wife put a glass of water on the night stand. Then she opened a bottle of pills and took one.“You never told me you were on medication ,”the husband said.“Oh , this ? This is just something to make me feel young.”“Well , if it is good for you , it will be good for me ,”replied the husband , taking several pills.The next morning the wife woke up and looked around her husband wasnt there. She searched all through the house, but couldnt find him anywhere. Then she looked out the front window, and there he was sitting beside the mailbox crying his eyes out .“Whats the matter, dear?” she cried, running outside.“I miss the school bus !”he wailed.The maxim of quality requires us said what is true. In example (6), the wife says the medicine can make people feel young. The next morning, after have some this medicine, her elderly husband feels himself as a pupil and cries for being late for t