Cooperative principle.docVIP

The violations of Cooperative principle in the dialogues of Sherlock and the effects.赵潇潇 20082126541. IntroductionSherlock is a British television series that presents a contemporary version of Sir Arthur Conan Doyles Sherlock Holmes detective stories. There are many witty and humorous dialogues which have intentionally violated the cooperative principle. Some of them help to develop the unique personality of characters and others create quite humorous and funny effects. Here I will analyze some dialogues in this TV series from the perspective of cooperative principle and see how they violate the principle and what effect these violations create. Paul grice, a logician and philosopher, found that formal logic couldnt applied to natural language, and thus concluded that natural language had its own logic. His idea is that in making conversation, the participants must first of all be willing to cooperate; otherwise, it would not be possible for them to carry on the talk. Thus, the participants should obey the cooperative principle. Cooperative principle Make your conversational contribution such as required at the stage at which it occurs by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged.Here are four maxims under cooperative principle.The maxim of quantity1. Make your contribution as informative as required. (for the current purpose of the exchange)2. Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.The maxim of quality1. Do not say what you believe to be false.2. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.The maxim of relationBe relevantThe maxim of manner1. avoid obscurity of expression2. avoid ambiguity3. be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity)4. be orderlyHowever, the cooperative principle can be violated on some occasions in real life. Such violations may create some effects which may help build the personalities of the characters or make the audience laugh.2. ExamplesHere are some examples of the violation of cooperative principle in Sherlock.Mike Stamford: John! John Watson! Stamford, Mike Stamford. We were at Brats together.JW: Yes, sorry, yes, Mike, hello.Mike Stamford: Yes, I know, I got fat.JW: No, no.When mike Stamford and john Watson met, mike recognized Watson first according to the conversation. But Watson didnt recognize mike according to his answer. He said:” Yes, sorry.” This shows that he doesnt know the person who was talking to Him, but he was sure that they knew each other. Then he remembered who he is, so he added:”yes, Mike, hello.” Apparently mike had realized that so he answered he knew he got fat so his old friend didnt recognize him immediately. Here Watson violated the maxim of quantity. He talked more than he needed to reveal more facts.Mike Stamford: I heard you were abroad somewhere getting shot at. What happened?JW: I got shot. Are you still at Barts then?Mike Stamford: Teaching now, yeah, bright young things like we used to be. God, I hate them.When john Watson met his old friend mike Stamford, mike asked Watson what happened to him because he heard that Watson has been shot in the war. But Watson answered he got shot. Since mike has already known this fact, Watson has violated the maxim of quantity. He didnt provide enough information. His answer actually implied that he didnt want to talk about this unfortunate accident. Mike told john that he was teaching. Here mike violates the maxim of manner. He told john his students were like bright young man they used to be, which led us to have a feeling that he must like those students according to our common sense. When teachers find students like themselves, they normally will like them for a feeling of nostalgia and understanding. However, we found that he actually hated his students according to the sentence he said later. Mike Stamford: This is an old friend of mine, John Watson.SH: Afghanistan or Iraq?JW: Sorry?SH: Which was it, in Afghanistan or Iraq?JW: Afghanistan, sorry, how did you know?When mike introduced john Watson to Sherlock Holmes, Holmes should greet john Watson according to social norm. However, Holmes said Afghanistan or Iraq to indicate that he know that john Watson had been an army doctor and went to the Warfield with the army. As a result, john Watson was greatly confused by Holmess knowledge of him as they were just met. In this dialogue Sherlock Holmes violated the maxim of relation. The character of Sherlock Holmes is very successfully molded with similar dialogues. These dialogues show that Holmes is a geeky genius who is so smart to deduce so much information from one glance and also jump from thought to thought so quickly that people around him who have normal intellect couldnt follow his chain of thoughts. He also doesnt give a damn about social conventions and etiquette. SH: Mrs. Hudson, the landlady - shes given me a special deal. Owes me a favor. A few years back, her husband got himself sentenced to death in Florida. I was able to help out. JW: Sorry you stopped her husband being executed?SH: Oh, no, I ensured it.Here Holmes also violated the maxim of manner. He didnt tell Watson clearly how he helped out the case of the landladys husband. As the landlady gave Holmes a special treat, we would naturally think that he help save the landladys husband, however, he actually ensured the execution of the husband, which create a kind of humorous effect.SH: How do you feel about the violin?JW: Im sorry, what?SH: I play the violin when Im thinking and sometimes I dont talk for days on end. Would that bother you? Potential flat mates should know the worst about each other.JW: You told him about me?Mike Stamford: Not a word.JW: Who said anything about flat mates?SH: I did. Told Mike this morning that I must be a difficult man to find a flat mate for. Now here he is just after lunch with an old friend clearly just home from military service in Afghanistan. Wasnt a difficult leap.After deduced that Watson was looking for a flat mate, Holmes asked Watson of his opinions of violin, for potential flat mates should know the worst of each other. However, they just met and no one ever mentioned john Watson was looking for a flat mate. So when Holmes told Watson all his habits which may annoy a flat mate, Watson was very confused. He thought maybe its his friend mike Stamford who had mentioned that he was looking for a flat mate. When his friend said no, he asked who said anything about flat mates. Here Watson means to ask from who Holmes knew that he was looking for a flat mate to share a flat. From Holmess answer we can see that he deduced the information himself, instead of getting it from other people. In this conversation Holmes violates the maxim of relation. He starts to talk about something completely unrelated to the former subject, however, both Watson and the audience will find out how Holmess thoughts move from one direction to another and feel impressed by how quickly Holmess thoughts leap and how smart he is.JW: Well? What am I doing here?SH: Helping me make a point.JW: Im supposed to be helping you pay the rent.SH: This is more fun.JW: Fun? Theres a woman lying dead.SH: Perfectly sound analysis, but I WAS hoping youd go deeper.In this conversation, Holmes was asking Watson to make a medical analysis of the body of a woman who was murdered. But Watson said “Im supposed to be helping you pay the rent.” He implied that he was Holmess flat mate instead of his colleague. When Holmes expressed his interest in investigating crime cases, Watson answered:” Fun? Theres a woman lying dead.” He implied from a pe