Simora, Donna Jean C.

ABELS 3B

CRITIQUE PAPER: COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE

Grice's Cooperative Principle was historically significant in pragmatics, as it

distinguished pragmatics from linguistics. However, his theory's interpretation is debatable.
There appears to be an imbalance between the common understanding of "cooperation" and
Grice's technical phrase. Grice's theory disregards examining the ambiguous phrase
"cooperation" and does not explain how the authors interpreted and applied the notion in their
works. Opposing interpretations of the concept of "cooperation" derive from a conflict between
Grice's usage of the term in a technical sense and the more general understanding of the term.
It is not a term that often appears in Grice's ideas, and it is not the driving force behind his study
of how language works. By applying these two interpretations to the same field, linguists
become confused.
The Cooperative Principle appears to deal with a more comprehensive definition of
"cooperation." According to some scholars, Grice's Cooperative Principle and related maxims
are universal. For instance, Green (1996) argues that because rationality and cooperativeness
are characteristics shared by all speakers worldwide, non-cooperative talks should be seen as
cooperative when broader issues such as listener and speaker are considered. Cappella (1995)
also notes that disregarding the cooperative principle as a prescriptive standard may result in
inefficient and incomplete interactions. However, Grice never expressly declared that his theory
was universal in applicability, so these researchers made this mistake.
Certain Linguists criticize Grice's theory for three misinterpretations, along with an
optimistic view of human nature, the proposal of a set of rules for productive conversation, and
the assumption that his suggested maxims would always be considered. It asserts that while
Grice's theory is imperfect and has numerous flaws, no better idea has been discovered to
replace it. Sarangi and Slembrouck (1992) similarly disputed Grice's notion about collaboration
being standard. They took a pragmatic approach to institutional discourse, arguing that Grice's
framework should be expanded to include societal aspects such as communicators' social
positions.
They stated, "If we follow Grice's definition of cooperation, the institution would be
expected to adopt, at least from the client's perspective, the client's aim as its own, or work
toward negotiating a mutually accepted goal' in such situations." As a result, numerous
researchers have questioned or rejected both the universality and viability of Grice's
cooperation principle. Grice's philosophy is too oriented to the concept of cooperation in human
conversation. However, he cannot address the following questions: what would happen in
instances where humans prefer non-cooperative solutions, and how the cooperative principle
accounts for misunderstanding.
In conclusion, Grice's theory is flawed. To begin, it is too cooperative. Grice believes that
individuals strive to communicate effectively and to solve their concerns. Indeed, he overlooked
the reality that there are instances where the intention is to miscommunicate intentionally.
Second, his theory is fundamentally lacking contextual factors. We can claim that he adopts
Chomsky's strategy of positing an "ideal speaker-listener in an entirely homogeneous speech
community." As a result, he cannot explain how individuals interact in complex social
circumstances, such as when speakers seek acceptance in all social settings in which they find
themselves. His theory is inflexible, as it ignores the reality that human communication, like his
nature, is a complex, diverse, and rich phenomenon. Additionally, it ignores scenarios in which
the interactants' motive is to miscommunicate. While Grice's approach has significant limitations
in that it is based on data rather than interpersonal aspects, it remains at the heart of the
pragmatics disciplines. Its critical function in this field cannot be questioned. However, we
should exercise caution when interpreting Grice's CP's definition of "cooperation." His concept is
distinct from the common understanding of cooperation. Specific authors make this distinction
clear evident to their audience. To gain a proper understanding of Grice's CP, it is preferable to
study it to meet the requirements of Grice's writings than in isolation.
 Reference

Hadi, A. (2013). Open Journal of Modern Linguistics. A Critical Appraisal of Grice’s Cooperative
Principle. Vol.3, No.1, 69-72, http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojml.2013.31008.