There are five cookies in the cookie jar. Imagine that you asked your roommate if they ate any of the cookies, and they answered "Yeah, I ate some." Later, you find out that your roommate actually ate not just some but all of the cookies. Which maxim is this a violation of?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

The scenario involves a statement about a roommate’s cookie consumption and a later discovery that contradicts what was said, which ties into how much information is being conveyed. 
Option 1: Maxim of Relation. This maxim concerns relevance—information should be pertinent to the ongoing topic. The roommate’s reply about eating cookies could be seen as relevant to the topic of whether they ate any cookies, so this maxim is not the primary issue here. The problem isn’t about relevance, but about the amount of information disclosed. 
Option 2: Maxim of Quantity. This maxim requires providing as much information as is needed, and no more than necessary. Saying “Yeah, I ate some” when the roommate actually ate all five cookies is underinformative relative to the truth. The speaker failed to convey the full extent of their consumption, which is a violation of the expectation to be as informative as required by the context. 
Option 3: Maxim of Manner. This concerns clarity and avoiding ambiguity, such as using obscure phrasing or being unnecessarily convoluted. The statement “I ate some” is somewhat vague, but the central issue here is not the form or clarity of expression so much as the completeness of the information about what was eaten. So this is not the primary violation. 
Option 4: Maxim of Quality. This maxim deals with truthfulness and evidence—do not say what you believe is false or that you lack evidence for. The roommate’s claim could be true or false; in this case, it is not accurate, since they ate all the cookies. However, the case emphasizes how much information was disclosed (the quantity) rather than whether the statement itself is true or false. Thus, the primary violation is better attributed to Quantity, not necessarily to a breach of truthfulness alone. 
In summary, the central concern is that the roommate provided insufficient information about the extent of their consumption, which points to a breach of the Maxim of Quantity rather than the others as the primary issue in this scenario.

There are five cookies in the cookie jar. Imagine that you asked your roommate if they ate any of the cookies, and they answered "Yeah, I ate some." Later, you find out that your roommate actually ate not just some but all of the cookies. Which maxim is this a violation of?单项选择题

类似问题

Which Gricean maxim is most closely related to the idea that AI explanations should only provide information relevant to the user’s question?

Consider the following exchange. Lisi: Who were you out with last night? Wang: Someone. (Implicature: Wang does not wish to tell Lisi who he was out with.) Wang's reply to Lisi flouts one of Grice's maxims in order to create this particular implicature. Which maxim is it?

A 62.9 kg lady is standing on a weighing scale in an elevator as shown in the diagram below. Assume gravitational acceleration = 15 ms-2 Given that the elevator is accelerating upwards at 3.7 ms-2 , determine the magnitude of the normal force on the lady.

An object is fired from ground level at an angle of 31.9 degrees to the horizontal. Taking acceleration due to gravity = 7.65 ms-2 If the initial speed is 5.6 ms-1, how far from the starting point will it hit the ground? Assume air resistance is negligible.

Which of the following equations of motion would be used to calculate the displacement given the initial and final velocities as well as the acceleration?

更多留学生实用工具

智能学习助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单