نقش نظریۀ بازی‌ها در نقد کاربست اصل همکاری گرایس مبتنی بر زبان‌شناسی اقتصادی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری زبان‏شناسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد شاهرود، سمنان، ایران

2 2ـ استادیارگروه زبان‏شناسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد شاهرود، سمنان، ایران

3 استادیار سازمان پژوهش و برنامه‏ ریزی آموزشی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

در سال‌های اخیر، نظریة بازی به علوم مختلف مانند علوم سیاسی، علوم رایانه، زیست‏شناسی و علوم اجتماعی نفوذ کرده است و بسیاری از نظریه‏پردازان در این زمینه قادر به توضیح و تفسیر برخی از مفاهیم گیج‏کننده در این رشته‏ها بر اساس نظریة بازی هستند. تئوری نظریة بازی برای مطالعه طیف وسیعی از موضوعات مورد استفاده قرار می‏گیرد، از جمله چگونگی تصمیم‏گیری در یک محیط رقابتی که در آن نتیجه تصمیم هر عامل بر نتایج عوامل دیگر تأثیر می‏گذارد. در این مقاله با استفاده از نظریه بازی‌ (بازی علامت‌دهی به­طور خاص) و اصول مشارکت گرایس که مبتنی بر منظور و معناست، سعی شده است با اتخاذ روش تحلیل محتوای کرپیندورف (2004)، به تجزیه وتحلیل هریک از اصول چهارگانه گرایس بپردازیم و براساس رسم ماتریس و تحلیل ریاضی نشان دهیم که درمواردی که از نظر گرایس عدم هریک از قواعد باعث عدم برقراری ارتباط می‏شود، نظریة بازی‏ این خلاء و نقیضه را پوشش می‏دهد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Game Theory and Grice’s Cooperation Principle

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohsen Ghassemi 1
  • Roya Sedighi Ziabari 2
  • reza kheirabadi 3
1 Ph.D Student in Linguistics, Shahroud Islamic Azad University, Shahroud, Iran
2 Assistant Professor in Linguistics, Shahroud Islamic Azad University, Shahroud, Iran
3 Assistant Professor in Linguistics, Organization for Educational Research and Planning, Tehran, Iran;
چکیده [English]

In recent years, game theory has penetrated various sciences such as political science, computer science, biology and the social sciences. It has been used to explain and interpret some of the dumb concepts and to study a wide range of topics including how decision makers interact in a competitive environment, in which the outcome of each factor’s decision influences the outcomes of other factors. The present study, adopting Kerpindorff’s (2004) content analysis approach, sought to analyze the four principles of Grice’s Cooperation Principle (which is based on purpose and meaning) using game theory. The results of the study indicated that in the case of violation of any of the Grice’s principles which may result in communication breakdown, the game theory adequately compensates for it

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Cooperation Principles
  • violation of rules
  • Game Theory
  • applied critique
آقاگل‌زاده، فردوس، ارسلان گلفام و سیده نسترن عظیما. (1391).  بررسی تأثیر جنسیت بر رفتار کلامی فارسی‏زبانان بر اساس اصل همکاری گرایس. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی.

عبدلی، قهرمان. (۱۳۹۳). نظریۀ بازی‌ها و کاربردهای آن (بازی‌های اطلاعات ناقص، تکاملی و همکارانه). تهران: انتشارات جهاد دانشگاهی.

Asher, N. & A. Lascarides (2003). Logics of Conversation. Cambridge University Press.

Bacharach, M. (1993). “Variable universe games”. In K. Binmore, A. Kirman, and P. Tani. (eds.). Frontiers of Game Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Crawford, V. & Sobel, J. (1982). “Strategic information transmission”. Econometrica. 50. 1431–1451.

Ducrot, O. (1973). La preuve et le dire. Paris: Mame.

Ellison, G. (2000). “Basins of attraction, long run equilibria, and the speed of step-by-step evolution”. Review of Economic Studies. 67(1). 17–45.

Farrell, J. (1988). “Communication, coordination and nash equilibrium”. Economic Letters, 27. 209–214.

Farrell, J. (1993). “Meaning and credibility in cheap-talk games”. Games and Economic Behavior. 5. 514–531.

Fauconnier, G. (1975). “Pragmatic scales and logical structure”. Linguistic Inquiry. 6. 353–375.

Frege, G. (1918).“Der gedanke: Eine logische untersuchung”. Beitrage zur Philosophie des deutschen Idealismus. 1. 58–77.

Gibson, R. (1992). A Primer in Game Theory. Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hertfordshire. Good, I. (1950). Probability and the Weighing of Evidence. London: Griffin.

Grice, H. P. (1967). “Logic and conversation”. In William James Lectures. Harvard University. Reprinted in Studies in the Way of Words. 1989. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Groenendijk, J. & Stokhof, M. (1984). Studies on the Semantics of Questions and the Pragmatics of Answers. Ph.D. thesis. University of Amsterdam.

Harsanyi, J. C. (1967-1968). “Games with incomplete information played by ’Bayesian’ players”. Management Science. 14. 159–182, 320–334, 486–502.

Hirschberg, J. (1985). A Theory of Scalar Implicatures. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania.

Horn, L. (1991). “Given as new: When redundant affirmation isn’t”. Journal of Pragmatics. 15. 313–336.

Horn, L. (1993). “Economy and Redundancy in A Dualistic Model of Natural Language”. In S. Shore and M. Vilkuna, (eds.). Yearbook of the Linguistic Association of Finland. 33–72.

Jaegher, K. (2003). “A game-theoretical rationale for vagueness”. Linguistics and Philosophy. 26. 637–659.

Ja ̈ger, G. (2004). Evolutionary Game Theory and Typology: A Case Study. University of Potsdam and Stanford University.

Kandori, M., G. Mailath & R. Rob (1993). “Learning, mutation, and long-run equilibria in games”. Econometrica. 61. 29–56.

Kreps, D. and R. Wilson (1982). “Sequential equilibrium”. Econometrica. 50. 863–894.

Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.

Lewis, D. (1969). Convention. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Lipman, B. (2003). “Language and economics”. In M. Basili, N. Dimitri, and I.Gilboa, eds., Cognitive Processes and Rationality in Economics. Routledge, London.

Lipman, B. & D. Seppi (1995). “Robust inference in communication games with partial provability”. Journal of Economic Theory. 66. 370–405.

Maynard Smith, J. (1982). Evolution and the Theory of Games. Cambridge: University Press.

Merin, A. (1999a). Die Relevance der Relevance: Fallstudie Zur Formalen Semantik der Englischen Konjuktion but. Habilitationschrift: University Stuttgart.

Merin, A. (1999b). “Information, relevance, and social decision making: Some principles and results of decision-theoretic semantics”. In L. Moss, J. Ginzburg & M. de Rijke (eds.). Logic, Language, and Information (Volume 2). 179–221.

Nowak, M. A., Komarova N. L. and P. Niyogi (2002). “Computational and evolutionary aspects of language”. Nature. 417. 611–617.

Parikh, P. (1991). “communication and strategic inference”. Linguistics and Philosophy, 14. 473–513.

Parikh, P. (1992). “A game-theoretical account of implicature”. In Y. Vardi, ed., Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge. California:TARK IV, Monterey.

Parikh, P. (2001). The Use of Language. Stanford:CSLI Publications.

Parikh, R. (1994). “Vagueness and utility: The semantics of common nouns”. Linguistics and Philosophy, 17. 521–535.

Pratt, J., Raiffa, H. and Schlaifer, R. (1995).“Introduction to statistical decision theory”.Cambridge:MIT Press.

Rabin, M. (1990). “Communication between rational agents”. Journal of Economic Theory. 51. 144–170.

Van Rooij, R. (2003a). “Being polite is a handicap: Towards a game theoretical analysis of polite linguistic behavior”. In M. Tennenholtz (ed.). Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge. New York: ACM Press.

Van Rooij, R. (2003). “Questioning to resolve decision problems”. Linguistics and Philosophy. 26. 727–763.

Van Rooij, R. (2004). “Signaling games select horn strategies”. Linguistics and Philosophy. 27. 493–527.

Van Rooij, R. and Schulz, K. (2004). “Exhaustive interpretation of complex sentences”. Journal of Logic, Language and Information. 13. 491–519.

Rubinstein, A. (1989). “The electronic mail game: Strategic behavior under ‘almost common knowledge’”. American Economic Review. 79. 385–391.

Sally, D. (2003). “Risky speech: Behavioral game theory and pragmatics”. Journal of Pragmatics. 35. 1223–1245.

Schelling, T. (1960). The Strategy of Conflict. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

Selten, R. (1980). “A note on evolutionarily stable strategies in asymmetric animal conflicts”. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 84. 93–101.

Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. (1986). “Relevance”. Communication and Cognition.Oxford: Basil Black-well.

Taylor, P. & Jonker, L. (1978). “Evolutionarily stable strategies and game dynamics”. Mathematical Biosciences. 40. 145–156.

Traum, D. R. (1994). A Computational Theory of Grounding in Natural Language Conversation. Ph.D. thesis. University of Rochester.

Vega-Redondo, F. (1996). Evolution, Games, and Economic Behaviour. Oxford: University Press.

Von Neumann, J. & Morgenstern, O. (1944). The Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton:Princeton University Press.

Young, H. P. (1993). “The evolution of conventions”. Econometrica. 61. 57–84.

Young, H. P. (1998). Individual Strategy and Social Structure. An Evolutionary Theory of Institutions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Zahavi, A. (1975). “Mate selection — a selection for a handicap”. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 53. 205–213.

Zahavi, A. and Zahavi, A. (1997). The Handicap Principle. A Missing Piece of Darwin’s Puzzle.Oxford University Press.