Chapter 3. Violation of Quantity and Quality Maxims

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Chapter 3. Violation of Quantity and Quality Maxims"

Madeline Wood
5 years ago
Views:

1 Chapter 3 Violation of Quantity and Quality Maxims 3.0 Preliminaries This chapter deals with the violation of Cooperative Principle with reference to the flouting of Quantity and Quality Maxims by Barack Obama in his speeches. Highly marked utterances from the speeches are selected for analysis. 3.1 Model for Analysis The following Gricean pragmatic model is adopted for the analysis of data: 1. Identification and classification of the maxim violated in the utterance. 2. Exploring into the context in which the utterance was generated. 3. Identifying the purpose and conversational / political goal behind the violation of the maxim. 4. Finding out the pragmatic meaning and how more is communicated than is said via implicature. 5. Stating the effect of the violation on the audience or the uptake. 79

2 3.2 Analysis: Violation of Quantity Maxim The following are the examples which deal with the violation of Quantity maxim by Barack Obama: Example 1 I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances.. I don't oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army.. I don't oppose all wars. After Sept. 11, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. I am not opposed to all wars. (P:11) Identification of the maxim violated The utterance, I don t oppose all wars, is repeatedly used by Barack 80

3 Obama in his speech. The repetitive use of the above utterance results in the violation of the maxim of Quantity. Context The utterance, I don t oppose all wars, is from the famous Dumb Wars An Anti-Iraq War Speech. Barack Obama delivered this speech on October 26, 2002 to an anti-war rally at Federal Plaza in Chicago, Illinois. The theme of the speech is to oppose, not all wars but, the imminent Iraq war which started in March Purpose & Implicature This violation of the Quantity maxim is with a purpose and that is to oppose and criticize the Bush Administration s inclination to wage a war against Iraq. Through the repetitive use of the utterance, I don t oppose all wars, Barack Obama, urges the audience to understand that he is opposed to the Iraq war in particular and not all the wars. His conversational goal is to make the American citizens understand that the Iraq war is a dumb and rash war. Indirectly, Obama is labeling the imminent Iraq war as a war based not on reason but on passion, a war based not on principle but on politics. Through the repetitive use of the utterance, Obama succeeds in reaching the climax of his speech which is to build a consensus against the Bush Administration s decision to wage a war against Iraq. The implicature is to bring to the fore the futility of the Iraq war as it means the U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost and devastating results. Thus, the implied meaning of the utterance is to convince the American people that the Iraq war, if fought, would turn out to be a 81

4 blunder; and eventually a miscalculated, rash and wrong decision of President George W. Bush and his administration. It is also implies that Obama is not against the wars which are fought for upholding the American ideals. In addition to the above conversational implicature, this utterance is also an example of scalar implicature because Obama conveys certain information through his utterances by selecting a word i.e. all that expresses a value from a scale of values (all, most, many, some, few). In such situations, when a speaker chooses all from the above scale, the positive of all the lower forms on that scale is implied by the speaker. Therefore, Obama in the above utterance by choosing all (from the scale of all, most, many, some, few) has conveyed the implicature that he is opposed to some or a few wars like the Iraq war. Effect or Uptake The repetitive use of the utterance, I don t oppose all wars, is a perfect example of an anaphora. Anaphora is a rhetorical device that consists of repeating a sequence of words at the beginnings of successive clauses, thereby lending them emphasis. The flouting of the maxim of Quantity functions as a sincere and earnest appeal to the emotions of the audience in order to persuade, inspire, motivate and encourage them to oppose the imminent Iraq war. This use of anaphora by Barack Obama resembles to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s famous speech, I Have a Dream. The utterance, "I have a dream", is repeated eight times throughout the speech by Dr. King. The use of repetition by both Dr. King and Obama in their respective contexts appeals to the audiences and persuades them to bring about the desired change. 82

5 The repetition also adds rhythm to the speech thereby making it more pleasurable to read / listen and more effective in terms of impact. It gives an artistic effect to the speech and eventually makes it eloquent, passionate and memorable. Example 2 You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with bin Laden and al-qaeda,. You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure that the U.N. inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil. (P:12) Identification of the maxim violated Barack Obama has violated the maxim of Quantity because the utterance, You want a fight, President Bush?, is repeated four times at the end of the speech. 83

6 Context The utterance, You want a fight, President Bush?, is from the famous Dumb Wars An Anti-Iraq War Speech. Barack Obama delivered this speech on October 26, 2002 to an anti-war rally at Federal Plaza in Chicago, Illinois. The context is of opposition and criticism of the imminent Iraq war. Purpose and Implicature behind violation The purpose is to denounce vehemently President George W. Bush s rationale to wage a war against Iraq. The repetition of the utterance, You want a fight, President Bush?, is an example of an anaphora which Obama employs to achieve his conversational and political goals. Obama is implying that if President Bush wants a fight, then the Iraq war would be the wrong and unjustified fight. He is implying that waging a war with Iraq would be a rash decision and it does not have the popular support of the people of America. At the pragmatic level, Obama is indicating that if President Bush wants a fight then there are other important issues and causes of national and international importance for which the President should fight and the nation would support the President in fighting such wars. Thus, Obama is challenging the President s decision to go to war with Iraq. Effect or Uptake The effect on the audience is positive. The violation of the maxim of Quantity makes the utterance effective in its denouncement of the imminent Iraq war. It lays emphasis on Obama s logical arguments that the fight against Iraq is uncalled for and is not justified. 84

7 Example 3 You know, you probably never thought you'd hear this at a Take Back America conference, but Newt Gingrich made a great point a few weeks ago. He was talking about what an awful job his own party has done governing this country, and he said that with all the mistakes and misjudgments the Republicans have made over the last six years, the slogan for the Democrats should come down to just two words: Had enough? I don't know about you, but I think old Newt is onto something here. Because I think we've all had enough. Enough of the broken promises. Enough of the failed leadership. Enough of the can't-do, won't-do, won'teven-try style of governance. Four years after 9/11, I've had enough of being told that we can find the money to give Paris Hilton more tax cuts, but we can't find enough to protect our ports or our railroads or our chemical plants or our borders. I've had enough of the closed-door deals that give billions to the HMOs when we're told that we can't do a thing for the 45 million uninsured or the millions more who can't pay their medical bills. I've had enough of being told that we can't afford body armor for our troops and health care for our veterans and benefits for the wounded heroes who've risked their lives for this country. I've had enough of that. I've had enough of giving billions away to the oil companies when we're told that we can't invest in the renewable energy that will create jobs and 85

8 lower gas prices and finally free us from our dependence on the oil wells of Saudi Arabia. I've had enough of our kids going to schools where the rats outnumber the computers. I've had enough of Katrina survivors living out of their cars and begging FEMA for trailers. And I've had enough of being told that all we can do about this is sit and wait and hope that the good fortune of a few trickles on down to everyone else in this country. (P:82) Identification of the maxim violated The maxim of Quantity is violated by Barack Obama because he repeats the utterance, I ve had enough, several times during the course of the speech. Thus, giving the same information again and again at the beginning of various statements makes the utterance redundant at the surface level. Context The above utterance is from the famous speech, This is our Time which Barack Obama delivered on June 14, 2006 at the Take Back America Conference, sponsored by the progressive Campaign For America s Future in Washington, D.C. Purpose and Implicature behind violation The purpose is to arouse the, had enough feeling in the American people about the failed leadership of President George W. Bush and his administration which gave America a rash war, financial crisis, a politics of cynicism and a moral vacuum negating the American spirit and promise. 86

9 By repeating the utterance, I ve had enough, Obama gives more information than is required and hence flouts the maxim of Quantity. The implicature or the political goal that Obama wants to achieve through the violation of the Quantity maxim is to imprint on the minds of the audience the famous saying that too much is too bad about the broken policies, broken promises and broken politics of the Republican Bush Administration. He is blatantly criticizing the huge tax cuts to the already rich corporations in the United States, carelessness for the social security issues like health care and retirement security; indifference towards the wounded soldiers, veterans and people displaced by natural disasters like Katrina hurricane; increased dependence of Gulf countries for fuel instead of investing in renewable energy sector; apathy towards education and schools, etc. Thus, Obama, through the violation of the Quantity maxim, conveys more than is said about the administrative failure of the Republican Bush Administration. Effect or Uptake The effect of the flouting of the maxim of Quantity is profound. It emphasizes the idea of administrative failure in the minds of the audience. The violation of the maxim arouses the feeling of enough is enough in the audience against the Republican administration under the leadership of President George W. Bush. Obama, through the violation of the maxim wants to arouse the feelings of irritation, dissatisfaction and deception in the audience in relation to the Bush administration. Example 4 And tonight, I think about all that she's seen throughout her century in 87

10 America -- the heartache and the hope; the struggle and the progress; the times we were told that we can't, and the people who pressed on with that American creed: Yes, we can! At a time when women's voices were silenced and their hopes dismissed, she lived to see them stand up and speak out and reach for the ballot: Yes, we can! When there was despair in the dust bowl and depression across the land, she saw a nation conquer fear itself with a New Deal, new jobs, a new sense of common purpose: Yes, we can! When the bombs fell on our harbor and tyranny threatened the world, she was there to witness a generation rise to greatness and a democracy was saved: Yes, we can! She was there for the buses in Montgomery, the hoses in Birmingham, abridge in Selma, and a preacher from Atlanta who told a people that "we shall overcome": Yes, we can! And this year, in this election, she touched her finger to a screen, and cast her vote, because after 106 years in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how America can change: Yes, we can! And where we are met with cynicism and doubt and those who tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people: Yes, we can! (P: 227) 88

11 Identification of the maxim violated Obama has violated the maxim of Quantity because he has repeated the expression, Yes, we can!, seven times at the beginning of various utterances in his speech. The repetition of the same utterance does not give any new information at the surface level of the talk. Context Barack Obama delivered this inspiring victory speech- Yes, We Can! on November 4, 2008, before the huge at Grant Park in Chicago, IL. Obama expresses his gratitude towards the Americans who brought about a change in the history of the nation by electing him as the President of the United States of America. He humbly gives the credit of his victory to the people of America. This speech is the embodiment of the American Dream. He talks about the challenges ahead and the determination to overcome these challenges with a resounding Yes, we can! Obama highlights that his victory is the reaffirmation of the faith of American people in the ideals of democracy, liberty, opportunity, unity and unyielding hope. Purpose and Implicature behind violation The purpose is to highlight the possibilities and opportunities in a magical place called America and the realization of the American promise and the American Dream. Obama, by violating the maxim of Quantity conveys more than is said via the resultant implicature. It would have been sufficient to use the expression, Yes, we can! only once at the end of the speech but by using it repeatedly he wants to reinforce the ability of the American people to bend the history. By using the utterance, Yes, we can! at the end of various historical achievements, Obama is highlighting the possibility of the impossible which 89

12 sumps up the American spirit. The violation of the Quantity maxim cherishes the ideas of hope, optimism, justice and fulfillment of promise. It also symbolizes the American Dream which advocates that regardless of social class or circumstances of birth, a person should get his fair share of opportunity and a chance for upward mobility. And Barack Obama himself is the true embodiment of the American Dream, given his mixed race, class, difficult circumstances and his ascent from bottom down to top. The emphatic Yes points to optimism, possibility, faith and the audacity of hope for a better future. The use of first person plural pronoun- we, gives emphasis on the ideas of collective responsibility, shared sacrifice, shared prosperity and brotherhood. And the auxiliary verb can signifies ability of the American people to change the course of history. Effect or Uptake The utterance, Yes, we can! mesmerizes the audience so much so that the audience becomes one with the speaker and they spontaneously respond by uttering, Yes, we can! as is seen in the video footage of the speech. These words instill a ray of hope and boost the morale of the audience to think and act for better days ahead. A wave of optimism is seen in the audience. Barack Obama s violation of the maxim of Quantity also creates the effect of Martin Luther King Jr. s epoch making speech, I Have a Dream, in which Dr. King repeats the utterance, I Have a Dream, several times to instill hope and optimism in the American blacks and whites. Moreover, the recurrent utterance of Yes, we can!, makes one nostalgic of the motivational freedom song We shall overcome which Martin Luther King Jr. and his followers had sung during the Civil Rights Movement in America. 90

13 3.3 Analysis: Violation of Quality Maxim After the collection and analysis of the data related to the violation of the maxims of Cooperative Principle, it is observed that Barack Obama does not violate the maxim of Quality in the selected speeches. The analysis shows that there are no instances of violation of the maxim of Quality because Obama doesn t indulge in giving false information in his speeches or giving information for which there is no adequate evidence. On the contrary, it is observed that Obama adheres to the maxim of Quality and hence observes the Cooperative Principle by giving the information which is true and factual. Therefore, there are no examples of the violation of the maxim of Quality in the selected speeches of Barack Obama. Purpose The reason behind Obama s not flouting the maxim of Quality is his political ideology which is deeply rooted in the ideals of American Dream and American promise. As eloquently declared by him in his speeches, his autobiography- The Dreams from My Father- A Story of Race and Inheritance (2004) and his second book- The Audacity of Hope- A Promise to Reclaim the American Dream (2007), he believes in the politics of hope rather than in the politics of cynicism. The purpose behind the observance of the maxim of Quality is to practice by choice a politics of values and unity rather than a politics of division, moral deficit and empathy deficit. His appeal for the active participation of the citizens in shaping America calls for faith and trust between the people and its government. Obviously, his politics of shared sacrifices and shared prosperity cannot be based on false ideals or principles. 91

14 Effect or Uptake The observance of the maxim of Quality makes his speeches genuine, earnest, passionate and eloquent in tone and content. The adherence to the Quality maxim makes his utterances relevant to the context in which they are generated. By saying things that are true, Obama makes his utterances and speeches more acceptable to the audience and voters of the United States. By making statements which have enough evidence, he wins the confidence of the voters and eventually persuades them to do things for achieving his communicative and political goals. Above all, the adherence to the Quality maxim makes him a principle centered leader. 3.4 Conclusion The following conclusions are arrived at after the analysis of the data related to the violation of the Quantity and Quality maxims: 1. Barack Obama violates the maxim of Quantity 2. But, he does not violate the maxim of Quality. 3. There is a definite purpose in both the violation of the Quantity maxim and the observance of the Quality maxim. 4. Whenever a maxim is flouted it gives rise to an Implicature beyond the semantic content of the utterance. 92

15 5. The violation of the maxim of Quantity makes the speeches more effective and persuasive. 93

When Only Words Prevail

Brittany Scott English 1101 Dr. Desmet Fall 2010 When Only Words Prevail On November 4, 2008 at 11:13 p.m, change came to America. The 2008 election had been finalized; for the first time in history, America