LV CONVERSATIONAL STRATEGIES IN THE LIGHT OF THE COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE

1 Chapter 1.1 INTRODUCTION Rationale A communicational event is not a brute fact, but a social act made possible by shared principles and rules among the participants in the event Communication is controlled not only by conventional grammatical rules but by pragmatic principles as well A conversation, as the most effective means of communication, proceeds under the control of conversational principles In the process of communication, it is assumed that speakers and listeners involved in conversations are generally cooperating with each other For example, listeners normally assume that a speaker who says “your dog” really has the dog that is mentioned and isn’t trying to mislead the listeners This sense of cooperation is one in which people having a conversation are not normally assumed to be trying to confuse, trick, or withhold relevant information from each other Consider the following example: (1) There is a woman sitting on a park bench and a large dog lying on the ground in front of the bench A man comes along and sits down on the bench Man: Does your dog bite? Woman: No The man reaches down to pet the dog The dog bites the man’s hand Man: Ouch! Hey! You said your dog doesn’t bite Woman: He doesn’t But that’s not my dog [30, 36] The problem in this example is caused by the man’s assumption that his question “Does your dog bite?” and the woman’s answer “No” both apply to the dog in front of them From the man’s perspective, the woman’s answer provides less information than expected In other words, she might be expected to provide the information stated in the last line Her reply may be indicating that she does not want to take part in any cooperative interaction with the stranger Obviously, the assumption of mutual cooperation is the key point in securing contextually appropriate encoding and decoding of communicative intentions In most circumstances, the assumption of cooperation is so pervasive that it can be stated as the cooperative principle of conversation and elaborated in its four maxims In short, to be a competent interlocutor, one is required to approach basic conversational principles and acquire a variety of conversational strategies However, due to the lack of knowledge of linguistics and the influence of some non-linguistic factors, most Vietnamese learners of English fail to exploit the conversational strategies As a result, during the process of communication, the English used in conversations seems to be informative, rather than lively and natural as expected 1.2 Justification of the study An investigation into the conversational strategies in the light of the cooperative principle will be a contribution to the recognition of the valuable insights that the cooperative principle has given into the process of utterance interpretation Especially, the findings of the study are expected to be of paramount significance to Vietnamese teachers and learners of English Once knowing how the conversational strategies work and should be applied, learners will be able to communicate more cooperatively and thus, more effectively 1.3 Purposes of the study This study aims at raising the awareness of conversational strategies in order to be cooperative in communication and providing learners of English with conversational strategies compatible to their competence of English so as to remain the cooperation in daily conversations 1.4 Objectives This study is intended to: - set up a set of verbal conversational strategies in the light of the cooperative principle - evaluate the significance of each strategy - suggest conversational strategies applicable to learners of English of different levels 1.5 Research questions To achieve the objectives mentioned above, the following research questions should be solved: - What are the possible strategies to be cooperative in conversations? - How these strategies work in the light of the cooperative principle? - How are these strategies applied in conversations made by speakers of English with different levels? - How are speakers of English aware of the conversational cooperation? 1.6 Hypotheses - In the light of the cooperative principle, there are several strategies built on the basis of linguistic as well as non-linguistic factors - Interlocutors with different levels of language proficiency are expected to use different strategies to be cooperative in conversations 1.7 Scope of the study Daily conversations of several topics collected from authentic recordings and real-life as well as classroom interactions 1.8 Organization of the thesis The thesis is presented in five chapters: Chapter 1: Introduction In this chapter, the researcher deals with general issues of the study such as the reason to choose this topic, justification, purposes, objectives, and scope of the study The audience will also find it easy to follow the study through research questions posed in this chapter Chapter 2: Theoretical background This chapter is an overview of previous related studies and theories employed as the basis for arguments and analysis of the data in the study This chapter covers such terms as conversation, conversational strategies, conversational cooperation, the cooperative principle, the politeness principle and the relevance theory Chapter 3: Research design & data collection This chapter demonstrates the setting, participants, and method of data collection as well as the process of data analysis in particular and the procedure of research in general Chapter 4: Findings & discussions The answers to the research questions will be presented in this chapter The first part of this chapter discusses how conversational strategies work in the light of the cooperative principle The next part notifies some violating cases to be avoided in conversation Lastly, this chapter deals with the application of the strategies for being conversationally cooperative Chapter 5: Conclusions & implications This chapter is the summary of research questions, the procedure employed and the results obtained In the end, the implications of the findings and limitations of the research will be pointed out This is also the suggestion for further research on the issues to be investigated in the study Chapter 2.1 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND Review of literature Conversation has been one of the central topics of linguistic studies since the dawn of this science A large number of studies have been carried out to probe into the nature and phenomena of communication in general, and conversation in particular Among the research papers related to conversation, I have approached the points of view and valuable findings of several ones as follows: Nguyen Thi My Phuong (1999), with “A Study on Gambits in English Conversations”, deals with gambits – conversational strategy signals – functioning from introducing a topic, structural turn-taking, to indicating a speaker’s readiness to receive some information, and so on Also in respect to conversational phases, Nguyen Cung Tram (2002), in an effort to develop an awareness of pragmatics amongst learners, explores strategies employed for conversational openings in English and Vietnamese The conversational openings are described and analyzed with different functions ranging from requesting to enquiring, expressive, informative or phatic Types of speech act, different situations and people relationship are all taken into account Besides, factors such as age, gender, social status which influence the choice of conversational openings are once again touched upon in her research Another research on verbal communication is done by Duong Thi Thu Trang (2001) whose focus is on common representations of misunderstanding as perceived in English and Vietnamese She also suggests a set of strategies which can be employed to avoid misunderstanding in verbal communication In her research, the maxims of conversation, the theory of politeness and devices of forming conversational implicatures are used as part of the background for the analysis of the corpus The studies on factors affecting verbal communication and conversational cooperation have also been approached during the procedure of this study Firstly, it is in the position of Pham Dang Binh (2000) where gaps in communication between interlocutors are traced to the differences in linguistic knowledge, interaction skills, and cultural knowledge Nguyen Hoa (2000) takes a further step into studying the influence of culture on verbal communication through the cultural value system He finds it essential to bring cultural values of the target language into the teaching of language Nguyen Trong Do (1999) mentions the social roles and relations of interlocutors as an environment for interlocutors to perform verbal communication Regarding the cooperative principle, since H P Grice (1975) systematically introduced his theory, there have been many studies on the issue Most of them focus on the interpretation of Grice’s ideas or the mechanism of creating and interpreting implicature For instance, Davis (2005) studies a variety of problems related to implicature A part of his study is devoted to examining the cooperative principle He also recognizes Grice the one who developed the most influential theory to explain and predict conversational implicatures, and to describe how implicatures are understood However, what Davis suggests in his study is purely theoretical and we hardly find anything to with language teaching and learning The most closely related study the researcher has approached is “A study on verbal responses to questions in English and Vietnamese conversation” by Nguyen Thi Chau Ha (2002) In her study, she investigates different ways of responding to questions in English and Vietnamese The response types, in her findings, include direct and indirect replies, ignorance, evasion, refusal, challenge to speaker’s right, and other special types such as misunderstanding and non-understanding, ‘greeting or polite’ responses (in Vietnamese only) She also examines social factors that hinder the process of question responding behaviour The theoretical background for her study includes pragmatic principles constraining conversational interaction such as the cooperative principle and politeness principle, and many other theories on conversation or interaction As far as we are concerned, the cooperative principle is always the first principle to be mentioned in pragmatics Yet, at the time of this study, the researcher hardly finds previous studies employing this principle as the basis for the investigation to be made For that reason, this study is an attempt to deal with conversational strategies, in terms of utterance’s content or meaning, mainly in the light of the cooperative principle Also, a part of this study will be devoted to notifying some cases of non-observance of conversational maxims as the violation to be avoided in conversation Furthermore, with an intention to apply the findings of the study in language teaching and learning, the corpus comes from coursebooks for communicative English courses as well as conversations around academic environment, not from literary works or previous researches Last but not least, the study takes into consideration the application of conversational strategies and the cooperative principle of English speakers at different levels 2.2 Concepts 2.2.1 Definitions of terms 2.2.1.1 Conversations Conversation has been the subject of study since the dawn of linguistics Therefore, all researchers have made a lot of attempts to build on, or to take on the term conversation for their own purposes of study Basically, conversation (or rather talk-exchanges in general) is defined as structured sequences of expressions made by more than one single speaker [1, 415] Here, conversation refers to an interactional activity displaying features which can be analyzed as the specific achievements of speakers and hearers In terms of social nature, conversation is an intrinsically social phenomenon, and a characterization of the amount of conversation that takes place between members of a speech community must take into consideration the amount and quality of referential, social, and affective meaning that linguistic form entails [2, 749] Another definition of conversation that covers most essential properties of conversation and is commonly used in research papers is the one stated by Crystal (1987) He states that conversation is a highly structured activity, in which people tacitly operate with a set of basic conventions Although the structure of conversation has not been exhaustively described, and conversation is still the subject of a large number of studies, some major properties of conversation have been pointed out and become the basis for arguments in researches on this subject First, any reasonable number of people can participate, and there are principles that govern how and when people can take a turn Second, there are principles make certain aspects of the conversation socially obligatory, such as saying hello and goodbye Third, there are principles making contributions to conversations relevant to each other, such as answering questions or justifying refusals 2.2.1.2 Conversational strategies Conversational strategies are the ways in which speakers make use of interactional structure in order to gain their conversational goals They are ways that enable interlocutors to involve themselves into a successful conversation which is no more than a mutually satisfying linguistic exchange The interlocutors need to feel they are contributing something to it and are getting something out of it There are some general strategies for interlocutors as shown in Figure 2.1 acquiring an opportunity to speak having a sense of when to speak or stay silent; when to proffer information or hold it back Strategies developing a mutual tolerance, allowing speaker’s unclarity and listener’s inattention recognizing their communicative weaknesses through the use of rephrasing and clarification, or strength through flouting, or implicature making their roles clear Figure 2.1 General conversational strategies (extracted and modified from [3]) Besides the general strategies, there are some others dealing with the pragmatic aspects of utterances in conversations; among them are the strategies mentioned in the inferential approach According to the theory of communication to be presented in inferential approach, linguistic communication is successful when the hearer, upon hearing an expression, recognizes the speaker’s communicative intention Linguistic communication is possible because the speaker S and the hearer H share a system of inferential strategies leading from the utterances of expression E to H’s recognition of S’s communicative intent [1, 399] The basic idea is quite simple: linguistic communication is a kind of problem solving [1, 399] The speaker faces the problem of getting the hearer to recognize certain communicative intentions; so the speaker must choose an expression that will facilitate such recognition, given the context of utterance Utterance of expression Direct Strategy What S is communicating directly Literal Strategy Nonliteral Strategy What S is communicating literally What S is communicating nonliterally Indirect Strategy What S is also communicating indirectly Figure2.2 The system of inferential strategies [1, 401] 10 From the hearer’s point of view, the problem is to successfully recognize the speaker’s communicative intent on the basis of the words the speaker utters This system can be characterized in the Figures 2.2 above In the point of view of inferential strategies, the process of communication may be promoted by means of literal and direct communication While the direct strategy can enable the hearer (H) to infer from what H hears the speaker (S) utter to what S is directly communicating, the other, namely the literal strategy, will enable the hearer to infer from what the speaker would be directly communicating, if speaking literally, to what the speaker is literally (and directly) communicating Still, as the conversation goes on, speakers in the process tend to mean something other than what their words mean At times what one means to communicate is not compatible with what their expression literally means, then they are characterized as speaking nonliterally Here are some typical examples of utterances that are sometimes uttered nonliterally Overstatement/Exaggeration: (2) A pig wouldn’t eat this food (A person, given a choice, wouldn’t eat it) [1, 406] Irony, Sarcasm: the opposite of what is said (3) Boy, this food is terrific! (terrible) [1, 407] (4) That argument is a real winner (loser) [1, 407] Metaphor, Metonymy: some relation of salient similarity or association (5) The White House said so (the president or staff) [1, 407] (6) She’s a ball of fire (She’s got a lot of energy) [1, 407] (7) Kim is a block of ice (Kim is cold and unresponsive) [1, 407] As with literal and direct communication, in order to account for a common type of talk-exchange, it is necessary to take into consideration the non-literal direct communication strategy 71 - Sorry, who’s Tom? - Which Tom are you talking about? Tom with dark or grey hair? - Wait a minute Let me remember This kind of exercise is also a chance for teachers to help learners recognize violating cases to be avoided This can be done by including several unsuitable replies in the list and asking learners, firstly, to pick out the violating cases, then to explain why those replies are not applicable in the situation To take another form, the practice of conversational strategies can be performed through open-ended conversations for learners to complete with their own solutions, as long as the solutions are relevant to the strategies imposed by teachers in the requirements of the task Once again, it is necessary that teachers bear in mind which strategies should be introduced to learners of different levels and the relevance of language used in the exercises to learners’ language competence as well as the topic discussed in the lessons In short, the pragmatic analysis on conversational cooperation and strategies is treated as sketchy proposals for improving the effect of language teaching and learning in communicative approach To what extent the application may be performed depends dramatically on the awareness of teachers themselves and their own cleverness in processing their teaching stuff During the procedure of the study, the researcher is deeply conscious of the limitations of the study Firstly, the source of data collected may not be universal for all kinds of speakers It is restricted in the academic environment of some schools and a number of coursebooks Secondly, the theoretical basis of the study is the cooperative principle The researcher wishes there will more opportunities to deal with other pragmatic principles And lastly, the study focuses on verbal strategies whereas there are many other non-verbal strategies affecting the communication 72 Finally, once having identified such limitations above, the researcher does hope to have opportunities to continue working on those issues, or at least, to approach further studies conducted by other researchers 73 REFERENCES English [1] Akmajian, A., Derners, R A., Farmer, A K., Harnish, R.M (1990), Linguistics: An Introduction to Language and Communication, The MIT Press, England [2] Asher, R E (ed.) (1994), The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Vol & 6, Pergamon Press, England [3] Bright, W (Editor in Chief), 1992, International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Vol 1, OUP, U K [4] Tran Thi Thanh Chau (2003), Evidential Markers in English versus Vietnamese, M A Thesis, University of Danang, Danang [5] Crystal, D (1987), The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language, CUP, U K [6] Doff, A., Jones, C (1999), Language in Use - Beginner, CUP, U K [7] Doff, A., Jones, C (1999), Language in Use - Beginner - Workbook, CUP, U K [8] Doff, A., Jones, C (1999), Language in Use - Pre-intermediate, CUP, U K [9] Doff, A., Jones, C (1999), Language in Use - Pre-intermediate - Workbook, CUP, U.K [10] Doff, A., Jones, C (1999), Language in Use - Intermediate, CUP, U K [11] Doff, A., Jones, C (1999), Language in Use - Intermediate - Workbook, CUP, U.K [12] Finch, G (2000), Linguistics Terms and Concepts, Macmillan Press, London [13] Grice, H P (1975), “Logic and Conversation”, In Cole, P (ed) Syntax and Semantics, Academic Press, New York [14] Nguyen Thi Chau Ha (2002), A study on Verbal Responses to Questions in English and Vietnamese Conversations, M A Thesis, University of Danang, Danang [15] Hurford, J R , Heasley, B (2001), Semantics – A coursebook, CUP, England [16] Jones, L (2002), Let’s Talk 1, CUP, U K [17] Jones, L (2002), Let’s Talk 2, CUP, U K [18] Jones, L (2002), Let’s Talk 3, CUP, U K 74 [19] Nguyen Thi My Phuong (1999), A Study on Gambits in English Conversations, M A Thesis, University of Danang, Danang [20] Richards, J C (2002), New Interchange 1, CUP, U K [21] Richards, J C (2002), New Interchange 2, CUP, U K [22] Richards, J C (2002), New Interchange 3, CUP, U K [23] Thomas, J (1995), Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics, Longman, England [24] Duong Thi Thu Trang (2001), A Preliminary Study of Misunderstanding in English and Vietnamese and Strategies to Avoid it in Verbal Communication, M A Thesis, University of Danang, Danang [25] Viney, P., Viney, K (1997) Grapevine 1, OUP, U K [26] Viney, P., Viney, K (1997) Grapevine 2, OUP, U K [27] Viney, P., Viney, K (1997) Grapevine 3, OUP, U K [28] Weir, C J (1990), Communicative Language Testing, Prentice Hall, UK [29] Yule, G (1997), The Study of Language, CUP, U K [30] Yule, G (1997), Pragmatics, OUP, U K Vietnamese [31] Phạm Đăng Bình (2000), “Vai trị yếu tố văn hố q trình giao tiếp tiếng nước ngồi”, Thành tố văn hố dạy-học ngoại ngữ - Kỷ yếu hội thảo khoa học quốc gia, Hà Nội [32] Nguyễn Hữu Cầu (1999), “Bình diện ngữ dụng dạy tiếng”, Những vấn đề ngữ dụng học - Kỷ yếu hội thảo khoa học Ngữ dụng học, Hà Nội [33] Nguyễn Trọng Do (1999), “Môi trường giao tiếp: Định nghĩa phân loại”, Những vấn đề ngữ dụng học - Kỷ yếu hội thảo khoa học Ngữ dụng học, Hà Nội [34] Nguyễn Đức Dân (1998), Ngữ Dụng Học, Tập một, NXB Giáo dục, Tp HCM [35] Nguyễn Hoà (2000), “Giá trị văn hố giao tiếp ngơn ngữ”, Thành tố văn hoá dạy-học ngoại ngữ - Kỷ yếu hội thảo khoa học quốc gia, Hà Nội 75 [36] Nguyễn Đức Hoạt (2000), “ Bàn khái niệm lịch giao tiếp ngôn ngữ”, Thành tố văn hoá dạy-học ngoại ngữ - Kỷ yếu hội thảo khoa học quốc gia, Hà Nội [37] Đặng Hảo Tâm (1999), “Nghĩa hàm ẩn: ngữ cần yếu để tạo lập, lý giải, phản hồi”, Những vấn đề ngữ dụng học - Kỷ yếu hội thảo khoa học Ngữ dụng học, Hà Nội Other sources: [38] http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/implicature [39] http://www.dan.sperber.com/relevance_theory.htm [40] http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/projects/stylisctics/topic12/14cp1.htm [41] Recorded real-life & classroom conversations 76 QUESTIONNAIRE To Teachers of English (Native and Local) This survey questionnaire is being conducted by Le Thi Nguyen Hoang, who is doing her M.A course at the Department of English, College of Foreign Languages, University of Danang The researcher wishes to find out what you and other teachers think about the strategies possible for being cooperative in conversations (Conversational strategies are the ways in which speakers make use of interactional structure in order to gain their conversational goals.) Your viewpoint will be assisting the advance of the knowledge in the area if you complete the following questionnaire: _ For the following questions, tick (√) the box next to the answer you find the most appropriate: How often are you aware of showing cooperation while taking part in conversations? Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never Do you find it possible to show your cooperation upon taking part in conversations? Yes No If “yes”, go to question 3 How cooperative are you in conversations? Very cooperative Quite cooperative 77 Not very cooperative Just a little How often are you aware of the need to use conversational strategies for cooperative and effective communication? Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never For the following questions, tick (√) the boxes next to the answers you find appropriate: Which of the following non-linguistic factors you think may affect the cooperation in conversations? Age Gender Relations of interlocutors Face affect Situations Awareness of practice or taboos in culture Intentions of interlocutors Shared belief or knowledge of the interlocutors Which of the following linguistic factors you think may affect the cooperation in conversations? The ability to use vocabulary and structures properly The ability to understand the partner’s utterances The ability to use conversational strategies (that is, the ways someone uses to makes oneself understood, to express oneself fully, or to gain certain goals in conversations) 78 Among the following conversational strategies, which ones you think you ever use in communication? Say directly and tell the truth Say directly and not tell the truth Say indirectly and tell the truth Say indirectly and not tell the truth Hold information back or give less information than expected Show your communicative weaknesses through rephrasing and clarification Show your communicative strength through flouting, or implicature Use politeness strategies Use hedges (such expressions as: As far as I know, As you probably know, I don’t know if this is important, I don’t know if this is clear at all, …) Allow speaker’s unclarity and listener’s inattention _ Questions 8, 9, 10 deal with what you have experienced with communicative English courses Please tick (√) the box next to the answer you find the most appropriate: Do your learners show their cooperation upon making conversations? (Please tick in the table for classes you have experienced) Frequency Always Level Often Sometimes Rarely Never Beginner Pre-intermediate Intermediate Upper-intermediate I never notice this issue Do your learners raise questions on conversational strategies for effective communication? Always 79 Often Sometimes Rarely Never 10 Do you consider equipping learners with conversational strategies a part of teaching communicative English courses? Strongly agree Neither agree nor disagree Strongly disagree Reasons: _ For the following questions, tick (√) the boxes next to the answers you find appropriate: 11 Among the following replies, which ones you think possible to: “What’s the time?” It’s It’s time for “Weather Forecast” on Sorry, I have no watch I don’t know Ask Mary Why you want to know the time? What you mean? Yeah, let’s go home Huh, I’m always your speaking clock Other replies: 80 12 Among the following replies, which ones you think possible to: “Do you know where Tom is?” Yes, I (and walk away) Sure, I know where he is (and walk away) He’s in the kitchen I don’t know Ask Mary! He’s sleeping Is the pub still open? You are not his wife, aren’t you? (A: Tom’s wife - B: Tom’s mother) Other replies: 13 Complete the following pair of exchanges with one or more than one replies: A: Would you like to go to the party tonight? B: 14 Complete the following pair of exchanges with one or more than one replies: A: Is he nice? B: Thank you for your cooperation 81 QUESTIONNAIRE To Learners of English This survey questionnaire is being conducted by Le Thi Nguyen Hoang, who is doing her M.A course at the Department of English, College of Foreign Languages, University of Danang The researcher wishes to find out what you and other learners think about the strategies possible for being cooperative in conversations (Conversational strategies are the ways in which speakers make use of interactional structure in order to gain their conversational goals.) Your viewpoint will be assisting the advance of the knowledge in the area if you complete the following questionnaire: _ For the following questions, tick (√) the box next to the answer you find the most appropriate: How often are you aware of showing cooperation while taking part in conversations? Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never Do you find it possible to show your cooperation upon taking part in conversations? Yes No If “yes”, go to question 3 How cooperative are you in conversations? Very cooperative Quite cooperative 82 Not very cooperative Just a little How often are you aware of the need to use conversational strategies for cooperative and effective communication? Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never _ For the following questions, tick (√) the boxes next to the answers you find appropriate: Which of the following non-linguistic factors you think may affect the cooperation in conversations? Age Gender Relations of interlocutors Face affect Situations Awareness of practice or taboos in culture Intentions of interlocutors Shared belief or knowledge of the interlocutors Which of the following linguistic factors you think may affect the cooperation in conversations? The ability to use vocabulary and structures properly The ability to understand the partner’s utterances The ability to use conversational strategies (that is, the ways someone uses to makes oneself understood, to express oneself fully, or to gain certain goals in conversations) 83 Among the following conversational strategies, which ones you think you ever use in communication? Say directly and tell the truth Say directly and not tell the truth Say indirectly and tell the truth Say indirectly and not tell the truth Hold information back or give less information than expected Show your communicative weaknesses through rephrasing and clarification Show your communicative strength through flouting, or implicature Use politeness strategies Use hedges (such expressions as: As far as I know, As you probably know, I don’t know if this is important, I don’t know if this is clear at all, …) Allow speaker’s unclarity and listener’s inattention Questions 8, deal with what you have experienced with communicative English courses Please tick (√) the box next to the answer you find the most appropriate: Do you ever raise questions on conversational strategies for effective communication to your teachers? Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never Do you consider acquiring conversational strategies a part of learning communicative English courses? Strongly agree Neither agree nor disagree Strongly disagree 84 Reasons: For the following questions, tick (√) the boxes next to the answers you find appropriate: 10 Among the following replies, which ones you think possible to: “What’s the time?” It’s It’s time for “Weather Forecast” on Sorry, I have no watch I don’t know Ask Mary Why you want to know the time? What you mean? Yeah, let’s go home Huh, I’m always your speaking clock Other replies: 11 Among the following replies, which ones you think possible to: “Do you know where Tom is?” Yes, I (and walk away) Sure, I know where he is (and walk away) He’s in the kitchen I don’t know Ask Mary! He’s sleeping Is the pub still open? You are not his wife, aren’t you? (A: Tom’s wife - B: Tom’s mother) 85 Other replies: 12 Complete the following pairs of exchanges with one or more than one replies: (1) A: Would you like to go to the party tonight? B: (2) A: Is he nice? B: Thank you for your cooperation ... study An investigation into the conversational strategies in the light of the cooperative principle will be a contribution to the recognition of the valuable insights that the cooperative principle. .. conversationally cooperative These strategies will be examined in the light of the cooperative principle to check whether they are observance or non-observance cases of the maxims Besides, the frequency of the. .. guarantee the success of the talkexchanges and lead their conversations to the goal of the communication process In the light of the cooperation principle, these strategies may fall into all kinds of