透视外交语境下的合作及礼貌原则

Abstract：In 1975 Grice suggested the Cooperative Principle and in 1983 Leech proposed Politeness Principle. From then on those two principles deeply influenced the communicators and researchers.This essay tried to take the actual cases in diplomatic affairs into consideration， and analyze them with the CP and PP under special context， that is， the diplomatic context. The purpose of this essay is to prove that the adoption or violation of these principles is for the maintenance or protection of national interests and image.

Key Words：Cooperative Principle； Politeness Principle； Diplomatic Context； Adoption； Violation

1 Introduction

In 1975 Grice suggested the Cooperative Principle （CP for short） which influenced the language field. However， after considered actual use of language or verbal conversation， researchers founded that people would not totally follow the Cooperative Principle， the communicative corpus might even violate the Cooperative Principle on purpose for different reasons or need. So in 1983 Leech proposed Politeness Principle （PP for short） with the intention to supply and “rescue” Grices Cooperative Principle. This essay tried to take the actual cases in diplomatic affairs into consideration， then analyze them with the CP and PP under special context， that is， the diplomatic context.

2 Cooperative Principle and Politeness Principle

In 1975 Grice suggested that there is a general principle guiding conversation， which he called the Cooperative Principle， with Quantity， Quality， Relation and Manner as its maxims. In the book Logic and Conversation Grice wrote that： Make you conversational 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 engaged（Grice， 1975）.

Simply speaking， Grice thinks that in normal situation， people communicate with informativeness， truthfulness， relevance and clarity. In his view， communicators observe the CP in normal verbal exchange and they are assumed to observe the general conversational maxims of truthfulness， informativeness， relevance and clarity within the CP. And the CP itself could not be violated. If the conversation violated， the conversation or interaction will break down（He Zhaoxiong， 2011）.

In 1983 Leech proposed the Politeness Principle in the book Principle of Pragmatic which was considered as a supplement to Cooperative Principle. His PP is categorized into six main maxims which are explained as follows（Leech， 1983）：

（1）Tact Maxim （in impositives and commissives）；（2）Generosity Maxim （in impositives and commissives；（3）Approbation Maxim （in expressives and assertives）；（4）Modesty Maxim （in expressives and assertives）；（5）Agreement Maxim（ in assertives）；（6）Sympathy Maxim（ in assertives）；

In actual communication people will consciously or unconsciously follow the Cooperative Principle and Politeness Principle in order to be successful and smooth in social communication or intercourse. It works in most normal situation， such as the conversation happened in daily life. But if we consider the conversation in other situation， such as the diplomatic context， the two principles do not seem to work well because the addressee will violate the maxims deliberately.

3The Characteristic of Language Under Diplomatic Context

Diplomacy is the interaction between governments and counties and the main form of it is negotiation or dialogue. In this case it involves words or discourse but the language used under diplomatic contexts is different and has its unique characteristics （Jin Guihua， 2003）.

The main characteristic of language or implicature under diplomatic context can be summarized as follows：

First， be euphemistical and express your view in mild and gentle way. The diplomatic language or implicature is not radical or offensive. You should stand for you national interests but do not hurt or offend other counties interests.

Second， be implicit. The language or implicature in diplomatic conversation is usually indirect. It is rare for the diplomat to express his view straightforwardly and directly.

Third， be vague and obscure. The diplomats are good at using vague words which are thought as constructive and meaningful vagueness. A distinct manifestation of vague language is to find pretext and in this way the diplomats could avoid direct commitment and response.

Fourth， be eclectic. The diplomacy is a kind of art of compromise. Some diplomatic conflicts between governments or states usually end by multi-compromise， so in order to avoid bigger and more serious national contradiction， the language or implicature should be eclectic.

Fifth， be verbiage. The real witty is hiding in speechifying when it happens under the diplomatic context. Some language or conversation may be superfluous and useless on the surface but if the listeners consider them deeper the words will be enlightening.

At last， some diplomat even will lie for protecting his national interests. Not surprisingly， in order to guard the national benefit and defend state rights the language or words they use is not reliable（Yuan， Changpu； Qiu Tianhe，2008）.

4 Conclusion

The main subject or target in diplomatic affairs is state or country. The national sovereignty of every country is equal and people should respect each other no matter whether the state is developed ， rich， or powerful not（Zhangjie， 2012）. So people or governments should be particular about the language used under diplomatic context. The safe recommendation is try to be gentle， mild， polite and do not make other countries embarrassed.

The conversation or communication under diplomatic context might violate or do not strictly follow the Cooperative Principle and Politeness Principle for the purpose of guiding national interests， protecting of country image or retreating sensitive disputes or contradiction. From a certain angle， the violation of Cooperative Principle and Politeness Principle under diplomatic context is to attain a better communication and interaction among different states and governments.

参考文献

[1]Grice，H.P. Logic and Conversation[M]. New York：Academic Press， 1975.

[2]Leech，G. Principles of Pragmatics[M]. Longman， 1983.

[3]何兆熊. 语用学[M]. 上海：上海外语教育出版社， 2011.

[4]金桂华. 杂谈外交语言[J]. 外交学院学报， 2003 （1）： 78-82.

[5]袁长普，邱天河. 外交语言模糊性的语用分析[J]. 郑州航空工业管理学院学报， 2008 （2）： 88-93.

[6]张洁. 认知语用学分析中国外交语言[J]. 湖北广播大学学报， 2012 （4）： 106-107.

作者简介

赵佩萌（1989-），女，河北省石家庄人，广西民族大学外国语学院2012级英语语言文学硕士在读，研究方向为英美文学及文化。