英语本科生论文合作原则分析奥普拉脱口秀

本科毕业设计（论文） ( 2013届 )

题 目：从违反合作原则角度分析奥普拉.温弗里脱

口秀节目

分 院： 文 学 专 业： 英 语 学生姓名： 学号： 09096609 指导教师： 职称： 讲师 合作导师： 职称： 完成时间： 2013 年 4 月 18 日 成 绩：

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

浙江师范大学行知学院本科毕业设计(论文)正文

目 录

Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii 摘要 .................................................................................................................................... ii 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 2. Literature review............................................................................................................. 2 2.1 Pervious Studies of Cooperative Principle ............................................................... 2 2.2 Pervious Studies of Oprah Winfrey Show ................................................................ 3 2.3 Previous Studies of Talk Show from Perspective of CP ........................................... 4 3. An Analysis of the Violation of CP in Oprah Winfrey Show ......................................... 5 3.1 Violation of Quantity Maxim ................................................................................... 5 3.1.1 Repetition ...................................................................................................... 5 3.1.2 Prolixity ......................................................................................................... 6 3.1.3 Ellipsis ........................................................................................................... 6 3. 2 Violation of Quality Maxim .................................................................................... 7 3.2.1Metaphor ......................................................................................................... 7 3.2.2 Rhetorical Questions ..................................................................................... 8 3.2.3 Hyperbole ...................................................................................................... 9 3. 3 Violation of Relevance Maxim ................................................................................ 9 3.3.1 Giving Hint .................................................................................................. 10 3.3.2 Giving Association Clues ............................................................................ 10 3. 4 Violation of Manner Maxim ................................................................................... 11 3. 4.1 Obscurity ..................................................................................................... 11 3.4.2 Ambiguity .................................................................................................... 12 4. Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 12 Works Cited ...................................................................................................................... 14

i

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show

from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

Lin Yuqian

Abstract: Oprah Winfrey Show is one of the most well know and influential programme in thousand kinds of talk shows in the world. The article analyses it from the perspective of the violation of the cooperative principle. The article lists a series of tactful strategies often used by the host and the guest in the interview to analyze the process of how both sides violate cooperative principle and generate conversational implicature to avoid the direct confrontation, embarrassment or other negative consequences. It can help us to better understand the consequence of TV interview between host and guest.

Key Words: Cooperative Principle ; talk show ; violation: conversational implicature

从违反合作原则角度分析奥普拉.温弗里脱口秀节目

林渝茜

摘要：奥普拉·温弗里的脱口秀节目可以算作是最受欢迎，最具影响力的一个。本文通过违反合作原则理论对奥普拉的脱口秀进行分析本文列举了一系列采访中主客双方常常会用到的策略,分析双方为避免直接冲突,尴尬和其他不良后果而违反合作原则产生会话含义的过程。以帮助我们更好地了解电视访谈中主持人和嘉宾在交谈中所表达的效果。

关键词：合作原则；脱口秀；违反；会话含义

ii

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show

from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

English Department 2009 (06) Lin Yuqian

Tutor: Li Huiming

1. Introduction

In our daily life, Observing cooperative Principle(CP) is one of the factor to determine the success of our conversation. CP is very commonly applied in our daily life. According to Grice?s Conversational Implicature Theory, the CP is the premise and guarantee for a successful conversation. It demands people?s observance to its sub-maxims to reach their personal or social goals in the process of communication in which dialogues are adopted as the main means. However, for some reason, CP is violated. The violation of CP usually creates certain implicated meanings which are used as an indirect way to indicate a speaker?s intention. Oprah Winfrey Show as one of the most success talk show in the world provids with us important corpus. Why Oprah Winfrey Show is so successful? It is because the host and guest can use the CP appropriately, it is also the reason why the programme can be so marvelous.

Though the analysis of Oprah Winfrey Show from the perspective of violating the CP, we can find that the host and guest is not always observing the CP. Sometimes they would like to violating the CP to ignore or avoid some question, or to make a joke... Through the analysis of violat the CP it will be better for us to communicate or interview with other people. The article is based on the theoretical framework of Grice?s Conversational Implicature Theory, borrowing some academic experience from other people. Grice?s Conversational Implicature Theory is proposed by four maxims, the maxims of Quantity, Quality, Relation and Manner. The maxim of Quantity is concerned with the amount of information to be provided by an utterance. The maxim of Quality try to make your contribution one that is true, specially. The maxim of Relevance, The maxim of Manner which is be perspicuous, and specifically in short, these maxims specify what participants have to do in order to converse in a maximally efficient, rational, cooperative way: they should speak sincerely, relevantly and clearly, while providing enough information.(Grice, 132)

Overall, every maxim is different. In the first part, the article will introducing what the article mainly talk about and analyze with CP. In the second part, which will show some previous studies. And the main part will quote some strategies to show how the host and guest violating the CP, in order to avoid conflict and embarrassment. It will be better for readers to appreciate the talk show and communicate with others. What?s more, in the final part, it will show you the conclusion of this article.

1

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

2. Literature review

2.1 Pervious Studies of Cooperative Principle

In 1967, the Oxford philosopher H. P. Grice delivered his William James Lectures at Harvard University. In these lectures, Grice presented a panorama of his philosophical thinking on meaning and communication. (Huang Yan 23) In his second lecture titled “Logic and Conversation”, which is published in Syntax and Semantics, Vol.3: Speech Acts, Grice proposed the Cooperative Principle and Conversational Implicature.“Grice?s suggestion is that there is a set of over-arching assumptions guiding the conduct of conversation. These arise, it seems, from basic rational considerations and may be formulates guidelines for the efficient and effective use of language in conversation to further cooperative ends. Grice identifies as guidelines of this sort four basic Maxims of Conversation or general principles underlying the efficient cooperative use of language, which jointly express a general Cooperative Principle.” (Levinson 101)

The Cooperative Principle runs as follows: make your 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. Echoing Kant, Grice calls these four maxims Quantity, Quality, Relation, and Manner. 1) The maxim of Quantity

The maxim of quantity is concerned with the amount of information to be provided by

an utterance, and under it fall the following maxims:

(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. 2) The maxim of Quality

try to make your contribution one that is true, specially: (1) do not say what you believe to be false.

(2) do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.Under the category of Quality falls a super-maxim— “try to make your contribution one that is true”, according to Grice, if someone flouts this maxim, then he/she tells a lie.

3) The maxim of Relevance

make your contributions relevant This maxim can be interpreted as making sure what you say is relevant to the conversation at hand. The point of this maxim is that it is not sufficient for statement to be true for it to Constitute an acceptable conversational contribution. 4) The maxim of Manner

be perspicuous, and specifically:

2

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

(1) avoid obscurity (2) avoid ambiguity

(3) be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity) (4) be orderly (Yu Dongming 73)

Levinson proposed speakers give enough and not too much information: quantity. They are sincere and genuine, saying “truth” or facts: quality. Utterances are relative to the Content of the speech: relation. Speakers try to deliver meaning concisely and clearly, Avoiding ambiguity:manner.(102)

That is to say, these maxims specify what Participants have to do in order to communicate in a rational,co-operative and maximally efficient way: “they should speak sincerely, relevantly and clearly, except provide sufficient information at the same time” (Levinson 102)

The conversational implicature will never generate if all the maxims are observed : As speaker says directly what he means and the force is the same as the sense. But in fact people often fail to observe these maxims on purpose and implication occurs.

2.2 Pervious Studies of Oprah Winfrey Show

Oprah Winfrey Show, acknowledged as the front runner of American shows, has been popular for over twenty years with the highly functional and efficient format. Many scholars have studied this program from various perspectives. Some scholars point out that the glamour of this program comes from Oprah Winfrey?s personality. She shares her personal experiences with guests and the audience in a friendly atmosphere.( Zhong Xin, 1999).She is an inspiring host. Zhong Xin from Renmin University of China carries out a study concerning the characteristics of Oprah Winfrey in the following two aspects: Oprah?s roles in the program and her image and background. Zhong Xin points out that Oprah?s roles in the talk show program exteriorize the combination of host role and leading role. Her host role is exhibited by the realities that she is the representative of the talk show, and has been the host of this show for 20 years; moreover, she always makes efforts to highlight guests as the focus of the audience. The leading role means that Oprah, by controlling the process, pace and tone of the program, becomes the soul of it. As for the image and background of Oprah Winfrey, Zhong Xin analyzes it in the following four aspects: first, since Oprah is plain-looking, guests and audience may feel easy to talk with her; second, in the talk show program, Oprah usually wears simple and informal clothes, which may serve to shorten the psychological distance between her and the guests; third, Oprah used to live in poverty and misery in her childhood, and for such a natural psychological and value identification with the audience, she can sincerely share her experience with them and makes the audience feel that she is just“one of them”; and finally, though Oprah did not even finish her college study, her ability to communicate with other people is outstanding.(4)

Cornelia Ilie from department of English, Stockholm University, has published

3

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

Question-response argumentation in talk shows and semi-institutional discourse: the case of talk shows, in which Oprah Winfrey Show is the object of the study. The former provides the interpretation of the discursive and argumentative functions of non-standard questions that occur in talk shows with focus on three types of questions, expository questions, rhetorical questions and echo questions. She carries out her analysis according to two criteria: response elicitation and argumentative orientation. In terms of response elicitation, she categorizes questions into four types: information-eliciting, answer-eliciting, action-eliciting and mental response-eliciting questions. In terms of argumentative orientation, she proposes three types: argument-eliciting questions, argument-prefacing questions and argumentative questions.(Ilie, Question-response argumentation in talk show 4) In semi-institutional discourse: the case of talk shows, Ilie explores the nature of talk show as a particular instance of broadcast discourse with focus on discursive features of the talk show, namely, host-controlled, participant-shaped and audience-evaluated speech event through analysis in aspects of discursive configuration and goal, participant role assignment and role switching, talk and topic control. (semi-institutional discourse, 5)

2.3 Previous Studies of Talk Show from Perspective of CP

Wang Ya from Shanghai Foreign Language University investigate this type of discourse from the perspectives of Pragmatics, adopting the CP and the Politeness Principle. Thus the analysis is divided into the observation of the CP and the PP and violation of the CP and the PP respectively. Through investigation, it is discovered that the hostess is always the party who can abide by the CP better because her effort is the foundation of the whole interview, without which the smooth going of the conversation would be impossible. In contrast to the hostess, the guests are more likely to flout the CP for they are often confronted with some questions they do not want to or feel awkward to answer. Under such circumstances, they have to flout the CP. However, as a rescue, they often follow some maxims of the PP consciously or unconsciously, through which they could mitigate the damage to each other?s face.(1)

Wang Ling from Wuhan University of Technology , in her thesis, as a qualitative case study, attempts to analyze the conversational implicature of conversations in Chinese TV talk show based on cooperative Principle and theory of conversational implicature in order to explore the way of analyzing interviewing Programs from Perspective of pragmatics.The author gives an elaboration of the conversational implicature produced by the selected examples from varieties of Chinese talk show programs in Chapter Four. The illustrations are classified into different categories in accordance with its violation of each maxims of cooperative Principle. In the section of case study, the author lists a series of tactful strategies often used by the host and the guest in the interview to analyze the Process of how both sides violate cooperative Principle and generate conversational implicature to avoid the direct confrontation,

4

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

embarrassment or other negative consequence.(2)

This article based on the violation of Grice?s Cooperate Principle to analysis the Oprah Winfrey Show. And the main part will quote some strategies to show how the host and guest violating the CP, those strategies listed in the case study are classified according to the four categories of non-observance of maxims: quality, quantity, relation, and manner, in order to avoid conflict and embarrass.

3. An Analysis of the Violation of CP in Oprah Winfrey Show

3.1 Violation of Quantity Maxim

Contribution as informative as is required, secondly, do not make your contribution more informative than is required (Grice, 175). So when people talk, they should make their information which was fixed in his or her words accurate, precise and effective. However, this rarely happens in a realistic conversation. Instead, people tend to give information over-needed or insufficient. 3.1.1 Repetition

Repeating indicates saying something one has already said again and again, either one or an umber of times. Repeating those word violates the quantity maxim that is giving more information than is required. But Particularized conversational implicature comes from the redundant information while the communicators use the strategy of repeating.

(1)Oprah: Ladies and gentleman, Michael Jackson. Oprah: How nervous are you? Michael: How What?

Oprah:How nervous are you right now? Micheal: I?m not nervous at all, actually. Oprah: You don?t? Michael: No.

Oprah: Not even for your first interview and it?s live around the world? I thought You?d be a little nervous but you?re not and that?s great because if you?re not nervous I won?t be nervous.

This is excerpted from an interview of super star—Michael Jackson, happened between the first Oprah met Micheal Jackson in his Neverland Ranch. The host repeats: “ are you nervous?” Obviously, Oprah opts out the Quantity Maxim by repeating the word “nervous”. Actually she knows that Michael was not nervous at all. Because he is such a super star who has experienced so many big spectacles. She asks those questions in order to avoid the embarrassment and can close the distance with hosts and guests. (2) Oprah:Well, you know, I had read that I was so actually impressed when I read that when you first came into this office, the very first time, you closed the doors,

5

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

spent ten minutes alone in the office. What did you-what did you-what did you think or do?

Obama: Well, y-y-you know, this office, I think, reminds you of what?s at stake, how many hopes and dreams are placed in, uh, what goes on here at the white house, all profound decisions that have impacted the American people, uh, and the world.

Oprah: But in that first minutes alone here, did you have a prayer? Obama:Oh, I pray all the time. Oprah: You pray all the time? Obama: Always pray.

This is an exclusive interview with American president—Barack Obama in White House. In the interview Oprah asks the question: What did you think when you closed the door, spent then minutes alone in the office in the very first time?” Obama does not talk about the feeling about himself, he talks about the American people, the world. So Oprah asks him, “Did you have a prayer?” to let him talk about himself. From the example, we can see that the host use repetition to revert to the original topic. It is one of the important strategies for hosts in their interview. 3.1.2 Prolixity

Prolixity means by saying more or providing more information than is required, is a violation of the Quantity Maxim, which invites the communicator to think why the speaker complements more information and what the real implicature is. (3)Oprah: What grade would you give yourself for this year?

Obama:Good solid B-plus. I-I mean, I think that we have inherited the biggest set challenges of any president since, uh, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Uh, we stabilized the economy, prevented the possibilities of a great depression or a significant financial meltdown. Uh, we have reset our image, uh , around the world. We have achieved an international consensus around the need for Iran and North Korea to disable their nuclear weapons. And I think that we?re gonna pass the most significant pie since social security—and that?s health—, health insurance for every American.

This is also a clip from an exclusive interview with American president—Barack Obama in White House. The dialogue is exemplified the feature of the prolixity strategy which violating the Quantity Maxim. Oprah wants to know what grade would Obama give himself for this year. Obama?s first sentence is totally enough for the question. By providing the additional information, He fills the post satisfactorily, in future he also has lots of plans for America, he deserve the B-plus. 3.1.3 Ellipsis

This strategy is a violation of the quantity maxim or manner maxim. the article will analyze It from the flouting of Quantity maxim. It is apparent that the speaker gives less

6

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

Information as the situation commands and leaves a whole sentence half undone, making the implicature unsettled. The hearer has to draw the speaker?s real intention by understanding the unfinished utterance. For example:

(4)Oprah: You?re not here for that. But she?s happy to accept any apologies or anything you want to say. So Deborah, come on out and let?s here. Bringing a little closure. Nice to see you. How you doing. Nice to see you. Here?s Deborah. Well now, so you all were married how long? Deb: About a year and a half.

Oprah: A year and a half. And you have been divorced for fourteen? Deb: Yes.

Oprah: For fourteen years. What?d you want to say to her? Ed: I?m sorry.

Deb: It?s OK. I accept your apology. Ed: I really treated her bad. Oprah: You did? Ed: Ah yes, Oprah. Oprah: How bad?

Ed: Too bad to mention on TV. Oprah: Too bad to mention on TV. Ed: Yeah.

Oprah: And you, now, you can laugh about it?

Deb: Well, uh, we were young, you know, things happened. And uhm, that?s how life goes.

This clip comes from an interview of a couple who has divorced. Edward is a recovering alcoholic. He acknowledges he was not an ideal husband during his short-lived marriage with Deborah, therefore he wants to make amends. Deborah comes to the show not only because she wants to get back with Edward but alao because she is ready to accept his apology. Facing the one that he had badly dealt with, Edward tells his heart felt sorry to her; Deborah also thinks it is okay to settle things down. While Oprah asks him how badly he had dealt with Deborah, he rejects to give detailed description of his previous deeds only by saying “too bad to mention”. He totally opts out the CP, out of shame and regret.The past time has been a heavy burden upon his mind; Now his intention is just to see if everything is alright with Deborah andgive a apologize to her. Reminding both parts of the old heartbreaking history would be a bad idea, so he refuses Oprah and opts out the CP. This rejection may goes contrary to her expectation, in order to ease the tension and once again to make sure he really does not want to talk about it, she repeats what he has said and then moves the interview to the next step.

3. 2 Violation of Quality Maxim

The maxim of Quality requires: try to make your contribution one that is true; do

7

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

not say what you think to be false; do not say that for which you lack suitable evidence (Levinson, 201). That is to say, this maxim asks to say what we have sufficient evidence to prove it is truth. In the talk show, there are people of all trades and of course, they are dishonest. So the violation of quality maxim was hackneyed. 3.2.1Metaphor

Metaphor is a figure of speech occurring when a comparison is made by speaking of one thing in terms of another. It is an inferred comparison between two different things which share at least one attribute. It is an association between two unlike things(Avs.B) achieved by borrowing the language that refers to thing A and applying it to thing B. That is, to use one word or Phrase to indicate something different from the literal meaning, metaphor exists on the base of the similarity of two things. Its implicature is generated from some particular context.

(5)Oprah: When I look at those tapes of you, and heaven knows, putting this together I think I have seen every piece of video every done of you, and watching these tapes when, especially in the younger years, you seem to really come alive on stage. Were you as happy off stage as you appear to be on stage?

Michael: Well, on stage for me was home. I was most comfortable on stage but once I got off stage, I was like, very sad.

This is excerpted from an interview of super star-- Michael Jackson, in this part, Oprah asks Michael “ Is he as happy off stage as you appear to be on stage? ” Michael compares the “stage” to his “ home” to show that he feel relaxing on the stage just like feels at home,and he also explains that how much he loves the stage. What?s more, it also means how depressed he feels when off the stage. In the interview the guest would like to use the metaphor strategy to violate the the Quality Maxim. It is because he wants to make his sentence more vivid to let the hearer can better understand him.

(6)Oprah: So, when you?re standing there and there?s a sea of people responding to you, screaming your name as they were, what does it feel like?

Michael: Love, you just feel lots of love and I feel blessed and honored to be able to an instrument of nature that was chosen to give them that, what I give them, I?m very honored and happy about that.

This is also excerpted from an interview of Michael Jackson, at this clip, Oprah asks Michael?s feeling about a sea of people responding you, screaming your name as they were, Michael compares himself to “an instrument of nature” to tell us that he is natural singer, he is born to sing for his fans. He proud of these clapping and screaming, and responds the love from his fans. In the interview the guests will like to use the metaphor strategy to violate the the Quality Maxim. It is because he want to make his words more more vivid and appealing to let the audience know what he actually mean. 3.2.2 Rhetorical Questions

To ask a rhetorical question, the speaker has no intention of obtaining an answer

8

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

from the hearer. The answer to the question is very obvious. The speaker just invites implicatures to express his or her anger, criticism, surprise, irony etc. In fact, asking rhetorical question breaks a sincerity condition on questions and the speaker wants the hearer to get the indicated information. By employing rhetorical questions,the speaker violates the maxim of Quality and indirectly conveys what he means.For instant: (7)Oprah: All right. Just recently, there was a story and I know one of your attorneys held a news conference, there was a story about young wanting a little white child to play you in a Pepsi commercial.

Michael: That is so stupid. That is the most ridiculous, horrifying story I have ever heard. It?s crazy. Why, number one, it?s my face like a child to play me? I?m a black American, I am proud to be black American, I am proud of my face, I am proud of who I am. I have a lot of pride and dignity.

This is also excerpted from an interview of Michael Jackson. The two rhetorical questions serving as a criticism indirectly delivered by means of implicature which convey his anger about those ridiculous stories. Superficially, Michael does not directly express his criticism, but on a deeper lever, hearers may feel his anger and accusations stronger. That is the effect to rhetorical questions. 3.2.3 Hyperbole

Hyperbole is a strategy of speech in which exaggeration is used for stress or effect. Statement of hyperbole is not literally true. Even the speaker himself know she says something not true or lacking of evidence. Hence it is a flouting of Quality maxim. But People use “hyperbole” to sound impressive or stress on something, such as a feeling, effort or reaction. For example:

(8)Oprah: What do you think the finale will gonna be like ?

Lisa: I think Jennifer will be out of breath, because she start crying on the action in the first day we got here this year. Oprah: Did you ?

Jennifer: I am crying right now. Oprah: You crying right now?

This is clip from the interview of Friends. When Oprah ask them about the feeling of the finale. Lisa says that Jennifer will out of breath. But actually, it is impossible for Jennifer out of breath, she is exaggerates it in order to show that Jennifer is so sensitive and she is easy to cry. From this clip, we can know that in the talk show, the guests like to use exaggerate strategy to stress on what they are talking about, it can also make their words humorous.

3. 3 Violation of Relevance Maxim

Some conversational implicatures are produced by violation of the relevance maxim. The speaker may not say anything that is explicitly connected to the topic of the conversation and invites the communicator to seek for an interpretation of the possible

9

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

relevance. The following are two ways of exploiting this speaking strategy. 3.3.1 Giving Hint

This strategy is a violation of the maxim of relevance of Grice?s CP.The speaker?s utterance, seemingly unrelated to the desired act, prompts the hearer to search for the possible relevance. For example:

(9)Oprah: “Dr. Hueston, you think mad cow's a threat to US cattle?” Dr. Hueston: “...there?s no evidence at all that we have BSE in the US.”

Oprah: “What else are they going to say “ Are they going to say, ?Public, you are at risk. Some of you may die and the cows are going to go crazy.?They could not have said that.”

Lyman: “Why are we skating around this when we know that [cease feeding cows to cows] would be the safest thing to do? Why is it? Because we have the greedy that are getting the ear of government instead of the needy, and that?s exactly why we?re doing it.... (P.S. BSE: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, an animal disease in British cattle )

Nowadays mad cow disease is familiar word to the public, but more than ten years ago, a hot discussion about the threat of mad cow disease was launched in Oprah Winfrey show. Among the guests are all representatives from the victims? families, officials from the government, and one ex-rancher turned vegetarian later, Howard Lyman. The public is deeply related to the safety of American beef. They want to know whether it is dangerous about their daily diet; they want to know the truth. When Oprah asks Dr. Hueston, an official from the government, whether mad cow disease is a threat to US cattle, in place of answering her question directly by saying “Yes” or “No”, he shifts the topic and says something very subtle: “...there?s no evidence at all that we have BSE in the US.” Apparently, as the spokesman of the government, The conversational implicature here is clear: he takes side with the government and the government has the right to stop some news from the public for the sake of authority and stability. Surely, Oprah does not believe him either; she doubts whether the government would give the public the truth by asking “What else are they going to say”? She feels angry at the government?s action and tries to speak for the people. 3.3.2 Giving Association Clues

Similar to the above strategies “giving hint” which is a sudden addition and has no necessary relation with the conversational aim or separation on the surface from current topic. Giving association clues, mentions something relevant to the Conversational goal by the—association clues.This clue functions as abridge between what speaker is talking about and the conversational implicature he tries to show. It also flouts the Relation maxim because speaker gives information by the indirect clue rather than expresses his true meaning straight forward. The clue must be reciprocal knowledge or precedential expression of speaker and hearer as to carry on the conversation smoothly, conversely,

10

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

the hearer can?t get across the conversational implicature. For instant:

(10)Arnold Schwarzenegger: Of course I can?t remember every interview. I don?t remember the Oui magazine interview, nor any of the others, because I?ve done thousands of interviews.

Oprah: But do you remember the parties, Arnold?

Arnold Schwarzenegger: I?ve done thousands of interviews. I don?t, I really don?t, no, but I mean, you know, these were the times when I was saying things like, you know, a pump is better than coming and all those kind of things, you know.

Schwarzenegger is one of two Republicans running for Governor of California. It is the first time he appears on the Oprah Winfrey Show, trying to win the women?s vote, because there are suggestions he is a chauvinist or even a misogynist. His early interview with a magazine in which he said something very inappropriate has been dug out by tabloid correspondents. Here he has to explain the remarks which in California have deemed to be offensive and should never be uttered by a serious candidate for governor. In Oprah?s show, when confronted with this question, which makes him very embarrassed and nervous, Schwarzenegger does not reply directly but only emphasizes that he has done too many interviews and he could not remember everyone. Actually, being asked such a taboo question, his positive face is severely endangered, no wonder he is not willing to answer and only gives some information irrelevant to it. This is another example of violating the maxim of Relevance by giving association clues. 3. 4 Violation of Manner Maxim

Hearers presumed that speakers observe the cooperative principle. Besides, that it is the knowledge of the four maxims that allows hearers to draw inferences about the speakers? indications and implied meaning. The meaning conveyed by speakers and recovered as a result of the hearers? inferences, is known as conversational implicature (Grice, 175). In the first three maxims, we have seen how “what is said” violates the Cooperative Principle, for now, we analyze the ways in which “how to say” could violate.

3. 4.1 Obscurity

If the maxims of quality, quantity, and relation are related to what is said, the maxim of Manner is about how to say, Below we discuss two methods of the violation of the Manner Maxim that resulted in conversational implicatures. For example:

(11)Rowling: Yeah, I do. I couldn?t stop. I don?t think you can when you have been that involved with the characters for that long. It?s still all in there. They?re all in my heart still. I mean I could write--I could --I could definitely write a eight, ninth, tenth--could--easily. Winfrey: Will you?

Rowling: I?m not going to say I won?t. I don?t think I will. I loved writing those

11

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

books. I love writing it, So I feel I am done but you never know.

It happened between Oprah and famous writer J.K Rowling. When Oprah asks her “will you?” she says: I?m not going to say I won?t ...” You can see that she means nothing actually, because it is possible for her continue to write or stop. Maybe she has a thought of stop write but if she tell the audience directly some of her fans will be sad. So she just give this answer. By analyzing the conversation between Oprah and Rowling, we can know sometimes the guests want to avoid delicate some question, they will use the strategy of obscurity. 3.4.2 Ambiguity

When the recipient comes across the “non-obvious interpretation” or incongruity, which will occur unhappiness. But speaker can turn to the other explanation of the ambiguous expression so as to eliminate the annoyance.

(12)Oprah: I have to ask you this, so many mothers in my audiance have said to please ask you this question, Why do you always grab your crotch? Michael:(giggle) Why do I grab my crotch?

Oprah: You?ve got a thing with your crotch going on there.

Michael: I think it happens subliminally. When you?re dancing, you know you are just interpreting the music and the sounds and the accompaniment if there?s a

driving base, if there a cello, if there?s a string, you become the emotion of what that sound is, so if I?m doing a movement and I go bam and grab myself it?s... It?s the music that compels me to do it, it?s not is a great place you don?t think about it, it just happens, sometimes I?ll look back at the footage and I go ... and I go did I do that, so I?m a slave to the rhythm, yeah, okay.

This is selected from the interview of Michael. Here Oprah asks “ You?ve got a thing with your crotch going on there?” This sentence was ambiguous, it will lead audience to think that there are something wrong with Michael?s crotch. But in fact, she just wants to ask the reason why he like to grab his crotch. This part of the interview is made audience laugh, so use the strategy of ambiguity will make the conversation more interesting. 4. Conclusion

The main theory supporting this thesis is CP as well as its four subordinate maxims, Proposed by Grice. Grice suggests a set of rules that people are supposed to abide by inordinary conversations. However, in real human interaction, People frequently mean much more than their words literal convey or mean something quite different from what their words mean, even just the opposite. Grice?s CP is established to account for those uncooperative behaviors, describe their Producing Process and illustrate the relation between the utterance meaning and the implied meaning.

In this article, it has showed the general idea and analysis with CP firstly. In the

12

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

second part, it has showed some previous studies. In terms of the four maxims, the main part of the article was divided into four parts. In each part, which has quoted some strategies to show how the host and guest violating the CP, in order to avoid conflict and embarrass. From the article, we can see that host and guest prefer to use strategies to express there attitude or emotion, so that the host and audience will believing them.

By doing so, we can better comprehend and appreciate the talk show. Beside, the study will benefical to the further comprehension of the conversational features of the talk show. What?s more, this study may supply the findings of previous research on conversational implicature of the talk show. In addition, findings in this paper are prospected to set light on the further investigation of Chinese TV talk show, and promisingly the results of this research could be used to design dialogue of the talk show.

13

Analysis of Oprah Winfrey Talk Show from the Perspective of the Violation of Cooperative Principle

Works Cited

Grice, H.P. Logic and Conversation Pcole and Mogan(eds.) Syntax and Semantics New York: Academic Press, 1975.

Grice, H.P. Studies in the Way of Words. Beijing:Foreign language Teaching and Research Press, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1975.

Huang, Yan. Pragmatics. London: Oxford University Press, 2007.

Illie, Cornelia. Question-response Argumentation in Talk Show. Beijing: Journal of

Pragmatics Elsevier Science Ltd., 1999.

Illie, Cornelia. Semi-institutional discourse: the case of talk shows. Journal of

Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics. Beijing: Foreign Language and Research Press,2001. Pragmatics. Elsevier Science Ltd, 2001.

Levinson, SC. Pragmatics. London: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

Wang Ling. “Analysis of Conversational Implicature in Chinese Talk Show from the Cooperative Principle.” MA Thesis, Wuhan University Of Technology, 2010. Wang Ya. “Anlysis of Oprah Winfrey Show from Perspectives of the Politeness

Princeple and the Cooerative Principle.” MA Thesis, Shanghai International Studies University,2010.

徐盛桓,“新格赖斯会话含义理解和语用推理”，《上海外国语学报》1993年第1期:第7页- 14页。

[Xu Shenghuan. “Pragmatic Reasoning and Understanding of New Grice Coversational

Implicature” Journal of Shanghai Foreign Language Unversity 1(1993): 7-14.] 俞东明,《什么是语用学》,上海:上海外语教育出版社, 2001。

[Yu Dongming. What is Pragmatics. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education

Press, 2011] 钟新, “美国电视脱口秀女王—奥普拉.温弗里”《国际新闻界》1996年第6期：第4

页。

[Zhong Xin. “Oprah Winfrey— the Queen of TV Talk Show in American” Journalism

World 6(1996): 4.]

14

本文来源：https://www.bwwdw.com/article/csu6.html