نقض اصول همیاری گرایس در شعر روسی با تأکید بر پیش انگاشت و تضمن

Introduction: This research examines the pragmatic dimension of Russian poetry through Grice’s Cooperative Principle. Although Grice’s four maxims—Quantity, Quality, Relation, and Manner—were introduced to explain cooperative conversation, poetic discourse deliberately violates them. In poetry, such violations are not communicative failures but strategic devices that enrich expression, creating implicit meanings, presuppositions, and multiple interpretations. Russian poetry, from classicism to the avant-garde, offers a rich field for observing how these deviations from conversational norms function as aesthetic and rhetorical mechanisms. The study aims to reveal how violating Grice’s principles contributes to the expressive, ambiguous, and ideological depth of Russian verse. This study draws on Grice’s (1975) theory of implicature and the Cooperative Principle, further developed by Levinson (1983) and Yule (1996). These frameworks emphasize that presuppositions and implicatures determine discourse interpretability. Building on this theoretical base, several scholars have extended Gricean pragmatics to various discourses. Yureva (2017) studied presupposition in social advertising, showing how existential, propositional, and evaluative presuppositions create implicit persuasion. Rahmani (2022) applied similar analysis to Persian drama, revealing that social hierarchies govern the use of structural vs. lexical presuppositions for control and interrogation. Meghdari and Ezaddost (2017) identified pragmatic effects—irony, metaphor, concealment, emphasis, ambiguity, contradiction, humor—stemming from Gricean violations in Persian interaction. Similarly, Piran Kashani and Modarreszadeh (2024) demonstrated that poetic dialogue length does not reduce aesthetic value but highlights creative deviation; breaches of the Maxim of Quality mirror inner emotion and intuition. Rashidi (2021) traced such violations in Hafez’s ghazals, linking them to deliberate departures from linguistic norms. In political pragmatics, Bots (2021) analyzed Putin and Obama’s discourse, where ambiguous or indirect strategies embody “disruptive communication” and enact rhetorical power. Collectively, these studies affirm that Gricean violations and the manipulation of presuppositions extend beyond conversation, permeating literary, cultural, and political texts. The present research builds upon this body of work by situating Russian poetry within this pragmatic framework, showing that deviation operates as a rhetorical and aesthetic principle. Alimohammad Mohammadi and Morteza Abdali (2023), through a comparative analysis of The School Principal and The Old Man and the Sea, argue that literary analysis at the level of discourse requires an understanding of linguistic, cultural, and metalinguistic cohesion. From this perspective, the literary text, viewed as a dynamic linguistic event, serves as the medium for realizing interconnected and implicit relations of meaning. Similarly, the study by Alavi and Mohajer (2025), analyzing the prison poetry of Naser Khosrow and François Villon, transcends historicism by exploring shared discursive patterns. Drawing on Mengneau’s framework, they demonstrate how the interaction between “discourse staging” and “linguistic context” generates meaning, presenting the prison experience as a space of resistance and linguistic implicature.
Methodology: The study applies a descriptive–analytical approach. Canonical Russian poems were examined to identify specific maxim violations. Each excerpt was analyzed to determine which maxim(s) were flouted and how resulting presuppositions or implicatures shaped meaning. Integrating close reading with pragmatic theory, this method situates each instance within its dialogic or narrative context, revealing how poets manipulate linguistic norms to achieve expressive effects.
Conclusion: Findings reveal systematic and purposeful violation of Grice’s maxims across Russian poetry. Pushkin often breaches the Maxims of Relation and Quantity through digressive imagery and abrupt thematic shifts, prompting readers to infer omitted meanings. Akhmatova ubverts Manner, embracing ambiguity and fragmentation that transform dialogue into interpretive struggle. Mayakovsky radically flouts all four maxims, fusing irony, hyperbole, and semantic rupture; his colloquial speech becomes a revolutionary linguistic act. Overall, these poets use Gricean violations as creative strategies rather than communicative failures. Such pragmatic manipulation generates polysemy, amplifies affective and ideological depth, and exposes identity conflicts within Russian poetic discourse.