AN ANALYSIS OF COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE OF THE INTERVIEW GIVEN

BY IMRAN KHAN TO A CNN REPOTER

BY

MUHAMMAD ZAHIR

Semantics and Discourse Analysis

Allama Iqbal Open university, Islamabad

 1

Introduction:

Paul Grice has developed Cooperative Principle (CP), which is against the sentences that are

ambiguous; convey implied meanings, too informative, etc. The general rules of the CP that Grice

proposes are “make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage in which it

occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged.” (Yule

1996: 37). This is a pragmatic rule in conversation, elaborated in four maxims:

Maxim of Quantity, make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes

of the exchange); Do not make your contribution more informative than is required. Maxim of

Quality: Try to make your contribution a true one. (a) Do not say what you believe to be false; (b)

Do not say those that lack adequate evidence. Maxim of Relation: Be relevant. It requires a speaker

simply to make contributions that are relevant to the conversation. Maxim of Manner: Be

perspicuous; Avoid obscurity of expression, Avoid ambiguity, be brief (avoid unnecessary

prolixity), be orderly. (Cited in Yule, 1996:37).

The rule appears to ‘manage’ conversations, so that the conversation is clear, relevant, and is free

of irrelevant sentences and utterances. One example of the cooperative dialogue according to CP

is as follows:

A: “Where is Ali?” (1)

B: “He is at home, in his room.”

The dialogue in (1) is cooperative according to Grice’s maxims because it observes each of the

maxims above. B gives sufficient information about where Ali is, gives correct information, gives

relevant answer to the question of A, and gives perspicuous answer (not ambiguous, orderly, and

brief).
 2

Following is the analysis of Bilawal Bhutto’s interview, who is the co-chairman of Pakistan People

Party, with Voice of America. The researcher has looked into the instances where Bilawal has

violated the Gracian Principle of conversational cooperation.

Research Questions:

In this research study, the author aims to focus on the following problems:

Q: Does Prime Minister Imran khan violates conversational maxims?

Q: Which maxim is the most flouted one and why?

Significance of the study:

This research will let us reach the true meaning of the text. Similarly, it will be helpful in spreading

linguistics and pragmatic awareness. Personally, this research will add to the knowledge of the

researcher for further pragmatic studies.

Delimitation of the study

The interviews given by Imran Khan are more in number. However, this short live interview given

to CNN has been selected for analysis.

Research Methodology:

In this study, the researcher analyses a political talk by using qualitative method which consists of

following parts.

1. Research plan:
 3

This research deals with qualitative design as this study focuses on analyzing the data collected

from the conversation that takes place in a talk.

2. Research data:

For this research, political talk of Bilawal Bhutto has been chosen as focus because of the

popularity of politics in Pakistan.

3. Source of Data:

The data used in this specific research is the conversation between host and Bilawal Bhutto in an

interview.

4. Techniques of collecting data:

For this research process, data was collected by following steps which are: Selecting the interview,

selecting the specific dialogues for analysis, transcribing the conversation and finding the flouting

of maxims in the selected conversation

Analysis

The following dialogues have been transcribed from a live interview given by Imran Khan to CNN.

An American newspaper is asking from Imran Khan why he is in favor of the elimination of drones

in Pakistan. He stresses that it was not the solution rather should have separate Al- Qaida from

Taliban who clubbed together and led to the disaster we see now.

News reporter

So can we agree that the United States and Pakistan have a common interest in rooting out the

presence of al-Qaida that is hiding within Pakistan.

 4

Imran Khan

Absolutely. I think both countries have a common interest.

In this exchange no maxims have been violated. Imran Khan is precise, relevant, proper,

and seems truthful in his response.

News reporter

So then the question inevitably arises how do we accomplish that objective. Clearly at this moment

the relationship between Pakistan and the United States is spiraling down over the issue of the use

of drones. What would your strategy be to root out the presence of al-Qaeda within Pakistan.

Imran Khan

Well what I would do is isolate al-Qaida and I would isolate al-Qaida by winning over the tribal

people over to my side. Now you must understand that there are a million armed men in the tribal

areas of Pakistan. It is the most unique area in the world where every man is armed and can use

weapons. And it has a history of resisting every bit of it was British or Russians or muggles before

that. So what is happening right now is that this current strategy is pushing these people towards

al-Qaida whereas what it should have done is isolate al-Qaida because the current strategy is never

going to succeed.

Imran khan has violated the maxim of manner of cooperative principle. However, the rest

of the maxims is followed. When Khan talks about the isolation, he does not clarify how he do

that? And from whom he will isolate Al Qaida.

 5

News reporter

Mr. Khan what you're saying is eminently sensible but it just begs the follow up question. How do

you isolate al-Qaida. We have tried we being the United States who have spent a great deal in

terms of foreign aid in terms of cultural in terms of agricultural assistance. How would you say

you can effectively and successfully isolate al-Qaeda rather than pursuing merely the the drone

attacks that you are so much against.

Imran khan

Well let me just say one thing. The initial mistake was made when Taliban and al-Qaida

were clubbed together no Taliban were fundamentalists but they were not terrorists. And the

Taliban never had the capability of hitting western targets because they you know they're just not

don't have the education they don't understand the Western societies to actually operate there. I

think that was the first mistake. But second mistake was that you know they should have just then

once the Taliban were dislodged they should have been development work done good governance

given you know people should have had a stake in and the new regime instead The I was lifted off

the ball and all concentration went to Iraq and all the forces went over to Iraq. So it is a series of I

would say disasters that led to the current situation where it has really got that way I can say that

the solutions are not simple anymore.

In this exchange no maxims have been violated. Imran Khan is precise, relevant, proper,

and seems truthful in his response. However, the maxim of manner seems to be violated due his

ungrammatical use of language.

 6

News reporter

So you're basically recommending a strategy of negotiation with the Taliban and in a complete

elimination of the drones. If I hear you properly it is the only way.

Imran khan

Believe me it is the only way either drone attacks really succeeding in making us win this war on

terror. The answer is No.

The maxim of relation has been violated. Khan is not giving the response which is required

in the light of CP. He also adds another question for making his answer effective.

News reporter

But the CIA would say that the efforts to use drones has been successful in eliminating the

leadership of al-Qaida in Pakistan and to a great extent that's why al-Qaida has been become a

much less for significant force. And with respect to terrorism at a global level. So how do you

respond to that argument that in fact this has been quite successful. but if it's successful then they

should stop it now.

Imran khan

If it's successful then they should stop it now. I mean look I'm sitting in Pakistan I'm telling you

the impact drone attacks are having in this country and I'm telling you that there are more drone

attacks. The more anti-Americanism the more anti-Americanism the more radicalization the more

radicalization there is only one beneficiary and that's al-Qaida.

 7

In this exchange no maxims have been violated. Imran Khan is precise, relevant, proper,

and seems truthful in his response. He is not vague, lengthy, untruthful and irrelevant in his speech.

Thus, he adheres to all the maxims of cooperative principle.

Conclusion

Imran khan has mostly followed the maxims of cooperative principle. However, he has

violated both the maxims of manner and relation for one time. He talks indirectly so his message

would be conveyed effectively. It is also common to explain the political history in order to defend

the argument. That’s why he violate the maxims of manner and relation.