An Analysis of Conversational Implicature inTess of the D’Urbervillesfrom the Perspective of the Cooperative Principle 合作原则视阈下《德伯家的苔丝》中的会话含义分析AbstractPragmatics, as an important component of linguistics has been increasingly paid attention to. It is made up of a lot of theories, of whic h Grice’s Cooperative Principle (CP) and conversational implicature theory play a very important role in language research. Many a scholar has engaged in studying related theories in order to make communication more clear and smooth. In the 1970s, the combination of pragmatics and literature was introduced by some linguists. Gradually, these scholars attempt to appreciate literary works from the perspective of pragmatics. This thesis as an interdisciplinary study of pragmatics and literature, intends to analyze the conversational implicature in detail in Thomas Hardy’s novel—Tess of the D’Urbervilles from the perspective of pragmatics.Hardy is one of the representatives of English critical realism at the turn of the 19th century. The background of Hardy’s novels is set almost always in Wessex. The author’s characters are for the most part of the poorer rural classes. He displays his deep sense of moral sympathy for England’s working-classes, particularly for rural women. There are almost 20 long novels in his life. Undoubtedly, the most popular novel is Tess of the D’Urbervilles, which is generally considered as his finest novel.As one of his masterpieces, Tess of the D'Urbervilles was studied and commented on by scholars in various ways, such as from the perspectives of feminism, fatalism, symbolism and so on. Tess of the D'Urbervilles, to some extent, has great impact on English literature. The criticisms and reviews on the well-known novel have been numerous in number and various in approaches. These reviews are mainly surveyed with the emphasis on the subject matters and approach. Moreover, the majority of readers prefer to analyze this classic work from the view of literature—the character’s reaso ns for death and her tragic destiny. But people seldom approach this novel from the angle of pragmatics. And this thesis tries to ap ply Grice’s CP to the analysis of the conversational implicature in Tess of the D'Urbervilles.Grice’s CP is used to explain how the implicature (implied meaning) is producedand interpreted. When the speaker would not follow CP but violates the maxims, the listener should realize the difference between what the speaker says and what he means. At this moment, conversational implicature is generated. CP is to clarify why people use indirect expressions to convey their real intention.The main body of this thesis is a detailed analysis of the conversational implicature produced by the selected examples from Tess of the D'Urbervilles. The illustrations are classified into different types in conformity with their violation of each maxim of CP. The present paper is aimed at analyzing the application of Conversational i mplicature in the novel in detail to reveal the characters’ inner w orld and contribute to a better understanding of this world classic work.Key words: Cooperative Principle; conversational implicature; maxims; fictional dialogue; Tess of the D'Urbervilles摘要作为语言学的重要组成部分,语用学已引起了语言学家的广泛关注。

学者们也越来越重视对这门学科的研究，特别是其核心理论Grice 的合作原则及会话含义更是人们关注的焦点。

他们致力于其相关理论的研究,从而达到交际能顺利并有效进行的目的。

随着语用学相关理论的快速发展,它不再局限于语言学领域,在其他领域也发挥着一定的作用。

因此,在20世纪70年代,一些语言学家将语用学带入到文学领域,提出了融合语用学和文学的方法来研究文学作品。

本文就采用了这种方法,尝试从语用学角度详细分析小说《德伯家的苔丝》中的会话含义。

哈代是19世纪末20世纪初英国批判现实主义的代表人物之一。

他的小说基本上都以威塞克斯地区为背景。

作者刻画的主人公大多来自于农村的贫困阶层。

在小说中作者也充分表现出了对英国工人阶级,特别是农村妇女的深切同情。

哈代一生中创作了20多部长篇小说, 但最受欢迎的还是《德伯维尔家的苔丝》,被认为是他最优秀的小说。

《德伯维尔家的苔丝》作为哈代的代表作被许多学者分别从女性主义,宿命论,和象征等不同的角度进行分析研究和评论。

本文回顾了19世纪和现当代对苔丝的文学研究和批评, 其中绝大多数都是从文学的角度分析这部小说,而本文将文学与语用学理论结合运用分析小说中的会话含义。

本文使用的语用学理论是Grice 的合作原则和会话含义理论, 并对这两个理论进行了详细的阐述,解释了它们的产生过程及相互之间的关系。

本文从《德伯家的苔丝》中选取了大量经典地使用间接表达的对话,运用上述两种理论对其产生的会话含义进行了详细的剖析,以达到更深入地探索小说人物的内心世界,为更好的理解这部经典小说做出一些尝试。

关键词：合作原则；会话含义；准则；小说对话；《德伯家的苔丝》ContentsChapter One Introduction (1)1.1 Research Background (1)1.2 Purpose and Significance of the Thesis (2)1.3 Main Structure of the Thesis (2)Chapter Two Literature Review (4)2.1 Brief Introduction to Hardy (4)2.2 Brief Introduction to Tess of the D’Urbervilles (5)2.3 The Combination of Pragmatics and Literature (6)Chapter Three Theoretical Framework (7)3.1 Grice’s Cooperative Principle (7)3.1.1 Cooperative Principle (7)3.1.2 The Details of CP (8)3.1.3 Violation of Maxims of CP (9)3.1.3.1 Violation of the Maxim of Quantity (9)3.1.3.2 Violation of the Maxim of Quality (10)3.1.3.3 Violation of the Maxim of Relation (11)3.1.3.4 Violation of the Maxim of Manner (12)3.2 Conversational Implicature Theory (12)3.2.1 Conversational Implicature (12)3.2.2 Characteristics of Conversational Implicature Theory (12)Chapter Four Analysis of Conversational Implicature in Tess of the D’Urbervilles (16)4.1 Violation of the Quantity Maxim (16)4.1.1 Overstatement (16)4.1.2 Understatement (17)4.1.3 Repetition (17)4.2 Violation of the Quality Maxim (18)4.2.1 Being Ironic (18)4.2.2 Rhetorical Questions (19)4.3 Violation of the Relevance Maxim (19)4.3.1 Giving Hints (20)4.3.2 Giving Associative Clues (20)4.4 Violation of the Manner Maxim (21)4.4.1 Being Vague or Ambiguous (21)4.4.2 Being Incomplete and Using Ellipsis (22)Chapter Five Conclusion (23)5.1 Summary (23)5.2 Limitation and Suggestions for Future Research (24)Bibliography (25)Chapter One Introduction1.1Research BackgroundTess of the D'Urbervilles as a literary classic has been surveyed by many Chinese and overseas scholars and translated into many languages. But in the 19th century, the novel encountered brutally hostile reviews. As the industrial movement swept England in that time, many farmers and agriculture workers found themselves in devastation. People lost their homes, their jobs, and the simple lifestyles they cherished. Thomas Hardy was very concerned with the loss of beautiful rural land during the industrial development. Tess of the D'Urbervilles is one of Thomas Hardy’s most famous novels. The heroine Tess is created as an attractive and warm-hearted pure woman, who has the quality of endurance and self-sacrifice. Tess has long been regarded as the most exceptional woman character in English literary history. And the novel makes great contribution to English literature.This paper is an interdisciplinary study of linguistics and literature, which analyzes in detail the conversational implicature of fictional dialogues in Tess of the D’Urbervilles from the perspective of pragmatics.CP is first put forward by Grice in Logic and Conversation in 1976. Grice’s CP plays an important role in Pragmatics which is significant in guiding verbal communication in the living world, and verbal communication includes oral communication and written communication. In communication, people should abide by a series of rules to accomplish the conversation. However, speakers do not always observe these rules strictly and violate the maxims for various reasons, which will produce conversational implicature. To understand the speaker’s real intention of his utterances the hearer has to make a series of inferences from both the literal meaning of the utterances and the context. Such kind of inference is mainly based on contextual knowledge. CP is a very common phenomenon in daily speech.The present paper analyzes the conversational implicature of fictional dialogues in Tess of the D’Urbervilles in order to explore how characters convey their implied meanings and express their feelings. In the novel, many dialogues are suitable for thepurpose of the study. These conversations are classified into different categories and are examined in detail. The thesis attempts to exploit a new perspective to appreciate the novel.1.2Purpose and Significance of the ThesisHardy, as one of the representatives of English critical realism at the turn of the 19th century, influences a large number of writers’ writing styles. As his classic and influential novel, Tess of the D’Urbervilles makes a great contribution to the development of British literature. Many scholars appreciate this novel in their own ways. But most of them analyze it from the perspective of literature. With the development of pragmatics, its correlation theories are introduced to the study of literary works. Some scholars integrate linguistic theories with literary theories to comment on and appreciate some famous novels. For example, some scholars use CP, Politeness Theory to analyze Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice and Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre. But few people appreciate Hardy’s Tess of the D’Urbervilles from the perspective of the pragmatics.This thesis attempts to apply CP to analyze the conversational implicature in Tess of the D’Urbervilles. Through studying the implied meaning of the novel from the perspective of pragmatics, we can have more in-depth understanding of the main characters in this novel. Moreover, the new approach plays a vital role in understanding the characters’ conflicts, pushing the story ahead and revealing their inner world. It also has a far-reaching effect on the appreciation of other famous works with pragmatic analysis.1.3Main Structure of the ThesisThere are five chapters in this paper. Chapter one is a brief introduction to the thesis. The introduction includes research background, purpose and significance of the thesis and the thesis organization.Chapter two mainly discusses literature review about Tess of the D'Urbervilles. This chapter reveals some previous views about this classic novel and introduces the pragmatic theories to the literature. Studies on Hardy and Tess of the D'Urbervilles are firstly described in this chapter, including reviews of the novel. And then thecombination of pragmatics and literature is the foundation of further analysis in the following chapters.Chapter three presents the theoretical framework of the thesis: CP and Conversational Implicature Theory. They are very important theories to analyze conversational implicature in the novel. What is CP, how does conversational implicature produce and the description of Conversational Implicature Theory are explained in detail in this chapter.Chapter four incorporates the actual process of analyzing the conversational implicature in the novel, integrating pragmatic theories and methods with rhetorical devices. Conversational implicature produced by violation of the four maxims is analyzed in detail in the novel.The last chapter is the conclusion and a general summary. The limitation of CP and Conversational Implicature Theory to appreciate the novel is put forward in the chapter. In addition, some suggestions are given for further research on Tess of the D'Urbervilles.Chapter Two Literature Review2.1 Brief Introduction to HardyThomas Hardy was one of the representatives of British critical realistic novelist at the end of the 19th century. During that period, Englishmen witnessed the appearance of a number of talented critics, realistic novelists and poets, but undoubtedly one of the most famous figures was Thomas Hardy. He was not only one of the greatest novelists in Victorian age, but also the last important novelist. His birthplace was a rural region of southwestern England. This natural environment became the focus of his fiction. In 1856, Hardy was apprenticed to John Hicks, an architect who lived in the city of Dorchester. The location would later serve as the model for Hardy’s fictional Casterbridge. At the age of sixteen, he took advanced courses for language in London University and began creative writing. His first long novel was published in 1871 and the celebrated work was his fourth novel Far From the Madding Crowd in 1874. From then on, he dropped construction industry and devoted to the novel creation. There are 15 long novels in Hardy’s life. The famous novels are Tess of the D’Urbervilles (1891), Jude the Obscure (1895), and The Mayor of Casterbridge (1901). Hardy's creation period includes carrying out the transition to the stage of imperialism from non-monopoly capitalism. Therefore, Hardy is often regarded as a transitional writer.His worldwide reputation took second place compared with that of Shakespeare. As a critical realistic novelist, Hardy paid much attention to human destiny and soul. Meanwhile, Hardy expressed his dissatisfaction to this reality in his works, and he observed the society with the critical realistic eyes.As the last Victorian writer, on the one hand, Hardy showed his sharp criticism and even revolted the irrational, hypocritical and unfair institutions, conventions and morals in his novel. On the other hand, he believed that people’s misfo rtune resulted from some kind of mysterious forces beyond the individual’s command. Man proved to be impotent before fate, and he seldom escaped his destiny. That is, he thought what controlled people’s destiny was a kind of “fill the will of the universe"—a viewof fatalism. Hardy’s works reflected the change of social economy, politics, morals and tradition, and exposed women’s tragic life and hypocrisy of bourgeois morals, law and religion, especially, showing his pessimism and sympathy for human miseries. The pessimistic view of life dominated most works of Hardy, which earned him the name of a naturalistic writer. In addition, Hardy’s works not only inherited the great tradition of British realism, but also pioneered the way for 20th-century British literature.2.2 Brief Introduction to Tess of the D’UrbervillesTess of the D’Urbervilles can be regarded as one of Hardy’s most influential works. It is also one of the most representatives of him as both a naturalistic and a critical realistic writer. The novel depicts the miserable experience of a rural girl. She relies on herself to work, moving people wi th her own sincerity. She is a “pure” woman. Finally she ends up with the tragedy. She fights against the society and the hypocritical religion. All she does is to abandon the old society and to pursue a happy marriage. She has shown her courage, which indicates a resisting power ful woman’s images, especially a young rural woman. Tess of the D'Urbervilles is the essential reflection of Hardy’s style and th e society that he wanted to show.In the novel, Hardy demonstrated his deep sense of moral sympathy for English lower classes, particularly for rural women. He also exposed the sexual hypocrisy of English society. Female beauty was not only regarded as the “troubles” but also became an excuse for men to shirk their crime. These views caused widespread public controversy. Some people thought that as a Victorian male novelist writing about women, Thomas Hardy was regar ded as “an irresistible paradox”. Indeed, Hardy’s expressions about the problems of women have been widely eulogized.He vitalizes Tess of the D’Urbervilles with a far-sighted eye, remarkable conception of art, noble quality and realistic writing skills. In the world literature, Tess of the D’U rbervilles has its important position. Elaine Showalter, a famous American critic, said: “Hardy’s remarkable heroines, even in the earlier novels, evoked comparisons with Charlotte Bronte, Jane Austen, and George Elliot.” In a word, the classic novel makes a great contribution to British literature.2.3 The Combination of Pragmatics and LiteratureIn the linguistic field, the history of pragmatics is much shorter than other subjects. But with the development of pragmatics, the research of it is not merely involved in the linguistic field, and its correlation theories are introduced to the study of literary works. Many scholars integrate linguistic theories with literary theories.In the 1970s, some scholars took the combination of pragmatics and literature as a new interdisciplinary subject—Literary Pragmatics (LP). This term was first put forward in 1976 by Van Dijk in his Pragmatics of Language and Literature.In the 1980s, LP got great development. Especially, the International Literary Pragmatics Conference was first held at Abo Akademi University of Finland in 1988, and LP which was edited by R.Sell was published in 1991. The two events make LP possible to become an independent discipline. LP focuses on social significance of literary language system and application of literary language. Many Chinese and overseas scholars have their own understandings for Literary Pragmatics. Verdonk (1991) believes that LP is based on the principles and methods of pragmatics to explain the language of literary texts, especially, the communication between authors and readers. Mary Louise Pratt (1977) makes the statement for Literary Pragmatics, “there is no valid reason to assume that language stops being itself when it enters a literary works…it is both possible and ne cessary to develop a unified theory of discourse which allows us to talk about literature in the same term we use to talk about all the other things people do with language.” “Literary Pragmatics is to explain how the readers choose a corresponding context to comprehend the discourse after reading it.”(Tu Jing, 2004:24)In a word, literary pragmatics is the application of pragmatic theory to literature. Pragmatics is a theory of dynamic analysis to literary works. When the pragmatic approach probes into the literary appreciation, a new modern research has been established. As is known to all, literature can not stand totally alone in its writing and reading, its discourse analysis according to pragmatic principles may serve for LP. Therefore, it is essential and significant to make some study on literary works from the perspective of pragmatics for the development of literature and linguistics.Chapter Three Theoretical Framework3.1 Grice’s Cooperative Principle3.1.1 Cooperative PrincipleCooperative principle was first proposed by the U.S. linguist and philosopher H.P. Grice in his William James lectures at Harvard University in 1967. Logic and Conversation points out that our conversation is subject to certain restricted conditions. Grice said, in order to achieve the specific destination, there is a tacit agreement between the speaker and hearer, an agreement that both sides are expected to observe. Grice outlined an approach to what he termed conversational implicature—how hearers manage to work out the complete message when speakers mean more than what they say. Grice suggests that there is an accepted way of speaking: “Make your 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 are engaged.” (Grice 1975:45-46)To accomplish the communication efficiently and successfully, people usually follow some certain principle in conversation. Grice named this principle as Cooperative Principle. This CP has been considered as one of the most important interpersonal principles for effective communication. If an utterance does not appear to conform to this model, we assume that an appropriate meaning is there to be inferred.Grice’s CP is one of the core ideas in pragmatics which is significant in guiding verbal communication in the living world. “In fact, Cooperative Principle is very common not only in verbal communication but also in almost all human interaction” (He Ziran, 2003: 63). However, since the CP is followed reasonably instead of forcibly, the use of the principle does not mean that it will be followed by everybody all the time. Sometimes people violate the CP for special purpose which will generate conversational implicature. In order to explain further CP, Grice borrows four categories from German philosopher Immanuel Kant: quality, quantity, relation and manner. Therefore, CP is specified from these four aspects: maxim of quantity, maximof quality, maxim of relation, and maxim of manner3.1.2 The Details of CPGrice’s CP tries to explain how a speaker can mean more than what he says and how a hearer perceives what the speaker really means. He thinks there is a set of assumptions governing the conduct of conversation. People should follow this cooperative principle and its maxims in order to arrive at meaningful verbal exchanges in their communication in an effective way and to ensure that the conversation can go smoothly.The CP contains four maxims:1. The Maxim of Quantity(1) Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes ofthe exchange).(2) Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.2. The Maxim of QualitySupermaxim: 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.3. The Maxim of relationBe relevant.4. The Maxim of mannerSupermaxim: be perspicuous(1) Avoid obscurity of expression.(2) Avoid ambiguity.(3) Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).(4) Be orderly.Just as Levinson states, “People are supposed to obey these maxims to converse in a maximally efficient, rational and cooperative way. They should speak sincerely, relevantly and clearly, while providing sufficient informati on.” (Levinson, 1983:102) If all the maxims are observed, the conversation will generate no implicature. In the ideal state, Grice assumed that speakers and listeners involved in conversation aregenerally cooperating with each other. The participants in the conversation should obey the CP. This is the starting point for making sense of the conversation. Otherwise, the conversation won’t be successful. A speaker says directly what he means, and then fails to obtain implied meaning. But actually people often fail to abide by these maxims in order to achieve their conversational goals and implication occurs.3.1.3 Violation of Maxims of CPFrom what mentioned above, we may know that CP enables one participant in a conversation to communicate on the assumption that the other participant is being cooperative. These four maxims form a necessary part of the description of linguistic meaning in that they explain how it is that the speakers often “mean more than they say” in their communications. People are suppose d to speak sincerely, relevantly and clearly, while providing sufficient information. It is assumed that speakers are normally following these maxims. But they often violate these maxims for various reasons. When any of maxims is violated, the hearer may make inferences from what the speaker has said (the literal meaning of the utterance) concerning what he has not said (the implications of the utterance). Such inferences are often referred to as conversational implicatures.3.1.3.1 Violation of the Maxim of QuantityThe maxim of quantity includes two aspects: the interlocutors should make their contributions as informative as is required (for the current purpose of the exchange) and should not make their contributions more or less informative than is required. Otherwise, violation of quantity maxim is by providing non-informative information or by either providing less or more information than actually needed. In our conversations, we often violate them in order to describe things vividly or funnily.Example one:A: How did Jimmy do his history examination?B: Oh, not at all well, but there, it was not his faults. They asked him things that happened before the poor boy was born.In this conversation, “not at all well” is as enough as required, which mean s the result of the examination is not satisfactory. It seems that the adding is needless. Buton the one hand, B’s reply in this way avoids embarrassment of the dissatisfying result for Jimmy. On the other hand, it can convey the ridiculous implicature like “Jimmy’s failure caused by the teacher who asks the question before Jimmy was born”.Example two:A：Do you know when John left the party last night？B：Ten o'clock．And he went to Joan's apartment instead of his own．According to the maxim of quantity, the speakers should include the necessary information instead of making their contributions more or less informative than is required. In the conversation, A’s reply “ten o’clock” is enough to B, whereas B adds another sentence. B seems to offer unnecessary information and violates the maxim of quantity deliberately. His real intention is to tell A that John and Joan get along pretty well with each other.3.1.3.2 Violation of the Maxim of QualityAccording to the maxim of quality, the interlocutors should not say what you believe to be false, nor say that for which you lack adequate evidence. Violation of quality maxim means by saying things that are not true or saying some irresponsible and insincere things.However, people often unintentionally violate this maxim in the daily life. If hearers want to know the real intentions, they should infer the conversational implicature from the illocutionary meaning based on the special context. In rhetoric, irony, metaphor, hyperbole and understatement are conventional ways of violation of the quality maxim.Example three:A：What will you do if you fail the exam？B：I'll eat my hat．B’s answer is obviously violation of the maxim of quality---this reply would not be in accord with the reality, that is, he says what you believe to be false. We all know that the hat belongs to an inanimate creature, and it can not be eaten. B wants to express his enough confidence for the examination and believes that he will never failin the examination.Example four:He was born in 1639, and h e’s still flying with us today.This is an advertisement for wine. “1639” and “today” makes a comparative statement. Obviously, it says what you believe to be false and true, but it uses personification to imply that “It was firstly produced in 1639, and it is still popular today.” The sentence vividly displays the value of the wine to attract people’s attention. Undoubtedly, customers will be attracted by the interesting advertisement.3.1.3.3 Violation of the Maxim of RelationThe Maxim of Rel ation refers to “Be relevant” and violation of relation maxim means that the utterance of a speaker is irrelevant to the conversation or the specific context for some reasons or some purposes. Sometimes we may find that people often change the subject and use English euphemisms to say irrelevant things on the surface to express something that the speakers want to say and cannot say. The implied meaning of the utterances is relevant partially because the formation of information abides these formative principles. Generally, violations of this maxim are rare, but in the social situation, people usually violate it to keep politeness.Example five:A：Did you enjoy the play？B：Well，I thought the ice－creams they sold in the interval werequite good．Seemingly, the play and the ice－creams are totally different things, and the reply is irrelevant to the question. The expression violates the Maxim of Rela tion. B’s answer means that the play is terribly bad and makes him intolerable. In order to avoid embarrassment, B does not answer the question directly, but changes the topic in a polite way. Let’s look at this classic example once again.Example six:(At a tea party)A: Mrs. X is an old bag.(After a moment of appalled silence)B: Good weather, isn’t it”?In the dialogue, B has apparently refused to make what he says relevant to A’s preceding remark. It seems that B’s answer is quite irrelevant to A’s r emark, but B thereby implies that A’s statement should not be discussed, which perhaps violates the social etiquette and the statement is impolite. B’s real intention is to avoid embarrassment and make the party complete successfully.3.1.3.4 Violation of the Maxim of MannerThis maxim demands that the conversations should not only avoiding obscurity of expression and ambiguity, but also be brief and orderly. But if you violate the manner maxim, it means giving obscure and ambiguous information and so on. Sometimes under the communicative circumstances, the speakers, in order to avoid mentioning unpleasant and embarrassing things in a direct way, say something obscure and ambiguous, and then the hearers should carefully infer the conversational implicature of the speaker and what are their real intentions and meaning according to the specific context. To make the point clearer, we will analyze violation of the maxim of manner from the perspectives of ambiguity avoidance and being brief.Example seven:First man at bar: My wife does not appreciate me. Does yours?Second man at bar: I wouldn’t know. I have never heard her mention your name.In this conversation, “Does yours?” has two kinds of meaning leading ambiguities. One refers to “Does your wife appreciate you?” and the other means “Does your wife appreciate me?” Obviously, the second man misleads the first man’s intention, which appears an interesting reply.3.2 Conversational Implicature Theory3.2.1 Conversational ImplicatureIn our daily life, speakers and listeners involved in conversation are generally cooperating with each other. In accepting speakers’ presuppositions, listeners have to assume that a speaker is not trying to mislead them. This sense of cooperation is simply one in which people having a conversation are not normally assumed to be。