So let’s talk about logic. This, uh, is not the greatest strength that people have.
We behave in terribly illogical ways; we puzzle Vulcans and computers alike. But being beyond
logic doesn’t mean we don’t have some rules to play by when we communicate. I’m Moti
Lieberman, and this is the Ling Space.
No matter what language we speak, when we hear a sentence, the first thing we do with
it is get the logical interpretation. We work out the exact truth of what the other person
said. But we’re not just like robotic logic machines, like some Logic-Bot 3000.We also
know there’s more to conversation than just word-for-word facts. There’s a consistent way our conversations
should work, and we use our knowledge of those rules to go beyond what the person actually
said, and figure out what it is they mean.
So, what rules do we have? The simplest place to start with this is the Cooperative Principle,
first proposed by philosopher Paul Grice in the 1970s. It basically says that you should
say things that are the right kind of things for the right kind of conversation you’re in at
the time. Which sounds totally weak! It sounds so loose, it barely feels like a rule at all.
Well, by itself, without looking at the pieces that really make up the principle, it’s
hard to see how it could really be helpful. But let’s just think about what happens when you can’t
assume that the people you’re talking with will cooperate. That’s the sort of thing
that happens in legal contracts, where everything needs to be spelled out in minute detail and
it’s crystal clear about who’s supposed to do what. Regular conversations aren’t
like that.
So what does lay under all the conversations we’re having, so we’re not stuck in legalese
all the time? Grice’s Principle can be broken down into four different Conversational Maxims:
the Maxims of Quality, Manner, Relevance, and Quantity. These sound really technical,
but they have pretty basic roles to play in guiding our conversations down friendly paths,
and you use them all the time without even knowing it.
Let’s start with the Maxim of Quality. This one just says that you should tell the truth, and
that you should have enough evidence to back up what you’re saying. This rule is very
basic – whether you’re a person or a Logic-Bot, you need to be able to assume that the person
talking with you is telling you the truth and that they know what they’re talking
about. You can’t have a quality conversation with someone if you think they’re lying
or they're misinformed. So having this as a rule for talking with people makes sense.
The next rule is the Maxim of Manner. What this one means is that you should talk in
a way that’s appropriate for the people that you’re talking with. Now, appropriate
means four different things here. First, it means you should use words you think your
listener will understand, so explaining why the sky is blue or why stars twinkle will be very different
if you’re talking to a kindergartener or a fourth-year university student. Second,
it means you shouldn’t blather on forever when you can make your point quickly. There’s
no need to go on for five minutes talking about the texture and composition of your green curry
chicken when you think all your friend wants to hear is that it’s delicious.
You’re just wasting their time.
The third rule under the Maxim of Manner is that you should stay away from ambiguity.
If you can come up with a clear way to phrase your sentence, you should go with that. So you
probably should think twice about saying “I got caught in the shower when my phone rang”
if you mean you answered a call while out in some light rain. Or “Sergio heard about
the new ice cream parlor at the mall” if he was at home when he heard about it. If
there’s a better way to say it, you should go with that.
And finally, you should go through whatever you’re trying to say in the right order,
from start to finish. This might sound straightforward if you’re not Christopher Nolan, but it
really makes a difference. You won’t just confuse people – if you list your lasagna
recipe the wrong way, your friend might create an abomination. And saying “she ate some
shrimp and went to the hospital” is very different from saying “she went to the hospital
and ate some shrimp.” Maybe the hospital cafeteria just has tasty shrimp.
Now let’s get down to the third Maxim, the Maxim of Relevance. This one’s really simple
to state: it just says to be relevant. This sounds super easy, but we say things that
just sound like total non-sequiturs all the time. We need this maxim to tell us that two things
are related, even when they don’t seem to be.
This is where our behavior really diverges from your Logic-Bots. Let’s say you ask
your friend Nilus, “Who ate all my Cheetos?” And she says, “Well, Simon has orange fingers.”
Your Logic-Bot 3000 might say, “Nilus. Why are you telling me about Simon and his dermatological
problems? I want to know where are my Cheetos!” But the Maxim of Relevance tells us that what
Nilus is saying must be related to my question. So what she’s really trying to say is that
Simon is a Cheeto thief.
Or how about the layers of relevance in an exchange like “Honey, I’m leaving you.”
“Well. Who is he?” Logic-Bot 3000 would be totally flummoxed by this. Where do you
even start interpreting it? You need to know that the question is relevant, and fill in
some real-world knowledge, to know that you’ve just been asked whether you’ve been seeing someone on
the side. Without that, this question seems just out of nowhere.
The last of Grice’s maxims is the Maxim of Quantity. Of the four of them, this one’s
the most opaque: it says that you should be as informative as you need to be, but no more
so. To put it differently, it says you should lay out the exact amount of information you
think is appropriate. But what does this mean? Well, let’s consider a sentence like “I
think some cookies are delicious.” What do you get from this? Probably that I like
some kinds of cookies, but there are also some I don’t like. Like ones with coconut.
Or macadamia nuts.
But that’s not logical! Logic-Bot 3000 would say that me saying that some cookies are delicious
is totally compatible with me thinking all cookies are delicious. In logic, the term
some means some and possibly all. But the Maxim of Quantity says that me using some
cookies is wrong if I mean all cookies. Using all is more informative. So I should use all
if I think all is true. If I used some, it must mean that I don’t think all is true. So
I must not like some kind of cookie. Like coconut.
Because we assume people are following these maxims when they’re talking with us, we
can build our interpretations that way. Whenever we go beyond what a Logic-Bot would do, we’re
creating what’s known as an implicature – extra info that takes in what we know
about people and about conversation.
Now, I’ve been saying these are really rules, when they’re more guidelines. They’re
what we should follow, what people will assume we’re doing. And they’re pretty
much universal. But we’re not obliged to go by the maxims. So you can lie, or make
up stuff about topics you know nothing about. Or you can blather on forever, or tell your
stories backwards. You can go off on total tangents, or you can be that guy who says
yes when somebody asks if you want soup or salad. But you won’t exactly be cooperative.
And that makes everyone you’re talking with sad. So you’re better off following the
rules.
So we’ve reached the end of the Ling Space for this week. If you were being cooperative,
you learned that our communication goes way beyond logic; that everyone follows the same
Cooperative Principle in all languages; that the Principle is made up of four Maxims, Quality,
Manner, Relevance, and Quantity; and that you can break all the rules, but it’ll make
you look bad.
The Ling Space is written and produced by me, Moti Lieberman. It’s directed by Adèle-Élise
Prévost, our production assistant is Georges Coulombe, and our music and sound design is by
Shane Turner. Our educational consultants are Level-Up Learning Solutions, and our graphics
team is atelierMUSE. We’re down in the comments below, or you can bring the discussion over
to our website, where we have some extra material on this topic. Check us out on Twitter and
Facebook, and if you want to keep expanding your own personal Ling Space, please subscribe.
And we’ll see you next Wednesday. A la prochaine!