謝惠英

【Abstract】It is a universal phenomenon that people use indirect language in daily interpersonal communication. With the development of the pragmatics， scholars， abroad and home， are focusing on the use of language and making contributions to pragmatics. This paper， based on violation of Cooperative Principles and adoption of Face Theory， will analyze the phenomenon of language indirectness in In the Name of People .

【Key words】Language indirectness； Cooperative Principle； Face-saving Theory

Ⅰ. Introduction

Pragmatics does not have a long history， however， pragmatics has made quick progress in recently. Today， pragmatics has been regarded as a significant branch of linguistic studies. Many pragmatic strategies have been put into practice to deal with some problems of language use. This paper will focus on one part of pragmatics—language indirectness， to analyze the phenomenons of indirect language in In the Name of People. The framework of this paper is based on Grice Cooperative Principle and Face Theory proposed by Levinson and Brown.

Ⅱ. Theoretic framework

In daily life， people tend to choose a implicit way to express what they want to say， which can be seen as a phenomenon of language indirectness. There are two conditions of using indirect language：one is that people have alternative choice， but they use indirect language to express a specific intention so that they can achieve their communication purpose. The other is that they have no choice but to use indirect language. In a word， no matter what way you choose， it is a success once you achieve your communication purpose.

2.1 Cooperative Principle

American philosophy， Grice， put forward that in all language communication activities， in order to achieve specific purpose， speakers and listeners should have some principles to abide by， and Grice named this principle as Cooperative Principle. It is defined as that make your conversational such as required at the stage at which it occurs by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged. And it is divided into four maxims as following：

1. Relation：be relevence.

2. Quality：do not say what you believe to be false； do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.

3. Quantity：make your contribution as formative as is required； do not make your contribution more informative than is required.

4. Manner：avoid obscurity； avoid ambiguitity； be brief（avoid unnecessary prolixity）； be orderly.（Grice， 1975：307～308）endprint

According to Grices Cooperative Principle， once the speaker breaks any maxim， conversational implicature will appear.

2.2 Face Theory

The politeness theory of Brown and Levinson is generally called Face-saving Theory， and we can also call it—Face Theory. So， the first thing that should be figured out is what is“face” which is taken to be important to individuals in both a positive and negative aspect. To some extent， “face” can be regarded as a kind of public self-image that every social member wants to claim for himself， which includes negative face and positive face. Negative face refers to the basic claim to territories， personal preserves， rights to non-distinction， freedom of action and freedom from imposition. Positive face refers to the desire that his self-image be appreciated and approved of claimed by interaction.

Ⅲ. Realization of language indirectness

3.1 Violation of Cooperative Principle

Grices Cooperative Principle， as the principle people should abide by in daily communication， requires high efficiency and reasonability in peoples language communication activities. High efficiency is in that speakers express what they want to in a direct way， and listeners can understand what they say in a very quick way. Reasonability is in that such language activity is a better realization of form logic. But， actually， these principles are often violated， thus conversational meaning is generated. Based on this principle， in the following， this paper will analyze the language indirectness through Gao Yuliangwords in In the Name of People.

Gao Yuliang， a experienced man in the official field， deals with things with sophisticated and thoughtful ways. In this paper， three different situations regarding to Gao Yuliang will be chosen to analyze the purpose of using language indirectness.

Exmple 1：

高育良：都說咋們漢東省有個漢大幫，還把我編排成這個漢大幫的頭頭，我都不知道該怎么解釋。

沙瑞金：既然你說到這個敏感的話題了，我問一句啊，在咋們省，真的有漢大幫這么一個干部小團伙嗎？上次開會時有的同志提出這個問題，被你一句話就否掉了，說我們省是平原地區(qū)，沒有山頭。

高育良：怎么說呢，主觀上沒有，但客觀上或許存在。我從來沒有想到過把人民賦予我的權(quán)利向任何一個學生轉(zhuǎn)讓?？蓪嶋H上了，我或許這么做了。

3.1.1 Violation of relation

This conversation is between Gao Yuling and Sha Ruijin. From what they talk about， we can easily find ou that Sha is doubting about the way of dealing things related to political work of Gao. When Sha asks him weather there exists a gang of officials， he says that our province is a area of flatland， without mountain. Obviously， it is a violation of relation. The relation maxim claims that the utterances should be relevant which suggests that Gaos answer needs to be in great relevance to Shas question. However， Gao utters something which is seemingly irrelevant to the question， and he user a another way to change what Sha are focusing on. It is no doubt that Gao has a very clear understanding of what Sha says but to achieve some kinds of communicative needs he deliberately violate the maxim.endprint

3.1.2 Violation of manner

The manner maxim claims that people should avoid ambiguity and obscurity in order to have a clear and smooth communication. In the example1， Gao aviolates this maxim many times in his conversation with others and answers question in a vague and ambiouguous way. When Sha askes whether he is partial to his students， he dos not answer this question directly. He says“I do not transfer my rights that people give to me to any student of mine”. However， he adds in the end“I may have inadvertently done because， after all， they are my students”. He uses this vague means to answer questions. In the one hand， it is a good way to avoid the embarrassment he is facing at that moment. In the other hand， at first glance， it seems that what he does is reasonable. Thus， vagueness sometimes can help speaker avoid detailed explanation and revelation of what the speaker do not want to talk about.

3.1.3 Violation of quantity

The quantity maxim requires people to make their contribution as formative as is required and not to make their contribution more informative than is required.

Example 2：

錢同志：高書記，在我們漢東省，山頭主義，團團伙伙還是存在的嗎，這一點你不得不承認吧。

高育良：不要扣帽子嗎，咱們省是平原地區(qū)，哪來那么多山頭。不是所有鋪的好干部，都要提上來做大官。當年少奇同志跟掏糞工人時船祥聊天的時候就這樣說過，我做國家主席，你掏糞，都是為人民服務(wù)嗎。

This dialogue comes from Li Dakang and Gao Yuling where Li Dakang is questioning of Gao Yuliangs appointment system. Li believes Gao is building his own small political groups so that Gao always promotes his familiar people， and puts those people who are really willing to dedicate themselves to working for Chinese aside. Gao tactfully answers the question. In addition， in order to cover up what he has done， he deliberately adds some informations irrelevant to the question to speak for himself. For example， He has been using the example of Liu Shaoqi to avoid Gaos questioning of him， so that the attention of those people can be transferred and thus he achieves his communicative purpose. However， these are more informative than is required.

3.1.4 Violation of quality

The quality maxim claims that we should not say that for which you lack adequate evidence and what we believe is false. For example， in other words， when doing social activities， I hope your help is sincere and not hypocritical. If youre helping me make a cake， when I need the sugar， and I hope you wont pass the salt to me.（Grice， 1975：308～309）

Example 3：

高育良：找老師興師問罪來了？

鐘小艾：高老師，以您對亮平的了解，你覺得，他會干那些貪贓枉法的事嗎？endprint

高育良：誰也沒說他一定貪贓枉法，就是停職反省嘛，這事情查清楚了，該干什么干什么。這事情有人舉報了。而且舉報人還是他發(fā)小。

侯亮平：對對對，有報必查嘛，公事公辦。小艾，這也不能怪高老師。

高育良：你看，還是亮平有度量，真金不怕火煉。小艾，說實話，其實我一直到現(xiàn)在都不相信對亮平的舉報。我這心里，糾結(jié)的很吶。

This conversation comes from the questioning of Gao Yuliangs students. The couple wants to figure out why Hou Liangping is suspended. However， Gao dont give them the answer， and he just says“its none of my business”. It is no doubt that he is not sincere in social activities， besides， he will not tell them the truth but make up some reasons to convince them， which is a violation of quality. It is easily understood that by violating the quality maxim in cooperative principle， which is good way to avoid the awkward questions that may embarrass him.

3.2 Adoption of Face Theory

Face and facework can be considered as the metaphor which presents the self-image of the interactors. Face is connected to avowed identity in some sense. Basically， we have two kinds of facework. The first one is self-directed. The second one is other-directed. So to speak， people from all cultures strive to maintain and negotiate face in all communication situations.

In the example of 3， Teacher Gao considers himself as the higher-level in the communication. So he can convert his passive situation into active situation. He puts his face in the first place. Then he would consider his student Hous face. In his talking， we can see clearly that he tries to mitigate the Hous feeling about this matter by understating the suspensin. But soon he expresses his dilemma. For Hou is an outstanding student. But Gao has his duty to carry， and the evidence is so clear that he has to do something.

Ⅳ. Conclusion

Rolloff proposed that interpersonal communication is a“symbolic process by which two or more people bound together in a relationship provides each other with resources and negotiates the exchange with resources”（Roloff， 1981：30）. There is no doubt that the use of the indirect language plays a crucial role in communicative activities， which can not be ignored. If the speakers use indirect language properly in the specific context， which will make the language more polite and effective. Exploring the reasons why speakers violate cooperative principles， whether in order to save the listeners face， or maintain relationship between speakers and listeners， or to ease atmosphere， its purpose is to make the communication more harmonious， and more fluent. Whats more， the indirectness of language has become an important expression of euphemism.

References：

[1]Grice，H.P.Meaning，Philosophical Review 67，1957.

[2]Grice，Syntax and Semantics：Speech Acts，New York：Academic Press，1975.

[3]Roloff，E.（1981）.Interpersonal Communication：The Social Exchange Approach.Beverly Hills：Sage Publication.endprint