在会话分析中，合作原则是一种假设，即会话参与者通常试图提供信息、真实、相关和清晰。哲学家H.Paul Grice在其1975年的《逻辑与对话》一文中提出了这一概念，他在该文中指出，“谈话交流”不仅仅是“一系列断开连接的评论”，如果是这样的话，就不会是理性的。相反，格赖斯建议，有意义的对话以合作为特征。“在某种程度上，每个参与者都承认其中有一个共同的目的或一组目的，或者至少是一个双方都接受的方向。”

关键收获：格赖斯的对话格言

格赖斯用以下四条对话准则扩展了他的合作原则，他认为任何希望进行有意义、有说服力的对话的人都必须遵循这四条准则：

• 数量：不少于对话要求的数量。不要说超出对话要求的话。
• 品质：不要说你认为是假的。不要说你缺乏证据的话。
• 态度：不要含糊其辞。不要模棱两可。要简短。保持秩序。
• 相关性：相关性。

关于合作原则的意见

以下是一些公认来源对合作原则的一些看法：

"We might then formulate a rough general principle which participants will be expected (ceteris paribus) to observe, namely: Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged. One might label this the Cooperative Principle." (From "Logic and Conversation" by H. Paul Grice) "[T]he sum and substance of the Cooperative Principle might be put this way: Do whatever is necessary to achieve the purpose of your talk; don't do anything that will frustrate that purpose." (From "Communication and Reference" by Aloysius Martinich) "People undoubtedly can be tight-lipped, long-winded, mendacious, cavalier, obscure, ambiguous, verbose, rambling, or off-topic. But on closer examination, they are far less so than they could be, given the possibilities. . . Because human hearers can count on some degree of adherence to the maxims, they can read between the lines, weed out unintended ambiguities, and connect the dots when they listen and read." (From "The Stuff of Thought" by Steven Pinker)

合作与宜人

根据《跨文化语用学》一书的作者伊斯特万·凯斯克斯（Istvan Kecskes）的观点，合作交流和社会层面的合作是有区别的。Kecskes认为，合作原则不是要“积极”或在社交上“流畅或令人愉快”，而是一种假设，当有人说话时，他们既有期望，也有沟通的意图。同样地，他们希望与他们交谈的人能够促进这项工作。

这就是为什么即使当人们争论或不同意谈话中的人不愉快或不合作时，合作原则仍能让谈话继续下去。Kecskes解释说：“即使个人具有攻击性、自私、利己主义等特点，Kecskes坚持认为，这一意图的核心原则对于沟通至关重要。

例子：杰克·雷彻的电话交谈

"The operator answered and I asked for Shoemaker and I got transferred, maybe elsewhere in the building, or the country, or the world, and after a bunch of clicks and hisses and some long minutes of dead air Shoemaker came on the line and said 'Yes?' "'This is Jack Reacher,' I said. "'Where are you?' "'Don't you have all kinds of automatic machines to tell you that?' "'Yes,' he said. 'You're in Seattle, on a payphone down by the fish market. But we prefer it when people volunteer the information themselves. We find that makes the subsequent conversation go better. Because they're already cooperating. They're invested.' "'In what?' "The conversation.' "'Are we having a conversation?' "'Not really.'" (From "Personal" by Lee Child.)

合作原则较轻的一面

Sheldon Cooper: "I've been giving the matter some thought, and I think I'd be willing to be a house pet to a race of superintelligent aliens.​" Leonard Hofstadter: "Interesting.​" Sheldon Cooper: "Ask me why?​" Leonard Hofstadter: "Do I have to?​" Sheldon Cooper: "Of course. That's how you move a conversation forward." (From an exchange between Jim Parsons and Johnny Galecki, "The Financial Permeability" episode of The Big Bang Theory, 2009)

来源

• 格赖斯，H.保罗。《逻辑与对话》，《语法与语义》，1975年。再版于《文字研究》，哈佛大学出版社，1989年
• 《交流与参考》，沃尔特·德·格吕特，1984年
• 平克，史蒂文。“思想的东西”，维京，2007年
• 凯克斯，伊斯特万。《跨文化语用学》，牛津大学出版社，2014年