Thefirst lecturer, who is well spoken but lacks to back up hisstatements with evidence, violates Grice’s maxim of quality.According to the maxim’s definition, false statements must never beincluded in a statement. The rule emphasizes on the need to evaluate,assess, and use evidence to support every statement. Although thefirst lecturer is well spoken, his statements are unfolded and heuses wrong information to back up what he says. The secondlecturer, whose statements are hard to understand, violates the maximof manner. According to the maxim’s definition, one of the rules isto avoid obscurity of expression. The lecturer uses incomprehensiblestatements that prove hard to understand among the students. Althoughshe is confident with what she says, her lectures are full ofobscurity. Additionally, she uses many words to explain a simpleactivity, or ordeal. She is never brief and uses complicated words inher lectures.
Thethird lecturer, who makes classes hard to follow, violates maxim ofrelation. According to its definition, the maxim of relation expectsall speakers to be relevant. In the lecturer’s case, he goes off onso many tangents and interrupts himself severally by moving from onetopic to another without the slightest indication of change. He doesnot understand how to focus on a topic to the end, elaborate on areasof concern, and prepare the students for another new topic. His stylecauses confusion among the listeners.
Thefourth lecturer, who fails to offer comprehensive statements,violates the maxim of quantity. According to its definition, themaxim of quantity addresses the scope of contributions. The lectureroffers non-informative and incomprehensive answers to studyquestions. The maxim expects the speaker to understand the limit ofstatements based on the level of understanding, and satisfactorylevels of students.
Wherewas your house located? Our house was located on the corner of MainStreet and Minor Road.
Inwhich town did you grow up? I grew up in the town of Dayton
Wheredid you spend your childhood? I spent my childhood in Dayton, Ohio.
Describethe location of your house while growing up. Our house was in Dayton,Ohio, on the corner of Main Street and Minor Road
Inwhich state did you grow up? I grew up in the state of Ohio.
Inwhich region of the country did you grow up? I grew up in theMidwest.
Inwhich country did you grow up? I grew up in the United States
InGrice statement on the maxim of manner, she violates two other ruleswithin the same maxim. The first violation is on the rule ofobscurity of expression and the other violation is on the rule ofbeing brief. The statement violates itself, since it extends thedescriptions rather than being brief. It violates the rule ofobscurity, due to the use of the word, prolixity, which is hard amongbasic learners.
Inthe conversation, Sophie violates the maxim of quantity when shetells Josh about her encounter with Jessica and her duck. Thestatement is confusing and contradictory, since she later claims thatJessica does not have a duck, but a pony. Sophie should not haveterminated the statement on Jessica’s duck without providinginformative statements to make Josh understand the associationbetween Jessica and the Duck. The statement could have made Joshassume that Jessica has a duck, were it not for Sophie’selaboration.