VietTESOL International Convention 2026

The rapid development of large-scale language models is blurring the lines of communication between humans and machines. Although AI today is capable of communicating like humans, its pragmatic capacity, particularly its natural communication abilities, remains a topic requiring clarification. Previous studies have often applied Grice's (1975) Principles of Cooperation theory in a normative way, considering strict adherence to conversational maxims as the goal of successful communication. However, they have overlooked and failed to understand how excessive adherence to these principles affects the reader's perception of the authenticity of the conversation. Therefore, this study aims to compare the pragmatic characteristics and the level of adherence to Grice's four maxims between human and AI conversations, and to analyze the reader's perception of authenticity. To achieve this goal, This study adopts both quantitative and qualitative approaches. A total of 50 everyday conversations, including 25 Human and Human pairs and 25 Human andAI interactions, are analyzed using a pre-designed theoretical framework. In addition, readers’ perceptions are explored through an online survey of 95 participants aged between 20 and 30. The analysis results show that AI maintains a formulaic communication style by strictly adhering to core principles such as Quality and Relevance (100%), leading to the majority of readers perceiving it as artificial and inauthentic. Conversely, humans know how to flexibly apply the rules in communication, typically intentionally violating the principle of Relevance 80% of the time and the principle of Manner 60% of the time. From these results, the study concludes that authenticity in communication does not lie in perfection, but is shaped by how people intentionally violate the rules. This finding provides a crucial practical basis for innovating statement design thinking and optimizing user experience and engagement.