70
S02E09QLVL7
1 Barney: Fine. Do you wanna know what Robin’s secret is?
2
Ted: You know?
3
Barney: Of course I know. She couldn’t look at us, her face got flushed, that’s shame, my friend. Our friend Robin used to do porn, what for it… ography.
4 Ted: Yeah, we didn’t really need to wait for that.
The conversation above arouse when the friends found that Ted’s girlfriend, Robin, had been keeping her past life underground before she went to New York.
Her friends and even her boyfriend got clueless about her past. Barney, Ted, Marshall and Lily tried to solve the Robin’s puzzle. Barney came out with his
hypothesis that Robin used to do pornography. The indication which Barney exposed to prove him right about Robin’s past, however, was insufficient. If
somebody got flushed with embarrassment, the closest perception upon it did not always signify pornography. In this case, Barney’s perception was affected by his
most interest which was sex. However, the truth about Robin’s puzzle was she used to be a pop star in Canada. In this excerpt, the violation maxim of quality occurred
when Barney uttered his own hypothesis without sufficient evidences to build his friends belief. Furthermore, maxim of manner was violated when Barney used
initiation “wait for it” within the word “Pornography”.
3. Analysis on a Situation which Infringes Maxims
The analysis resulted the minorities. One of which was the infringement. This one of ways of failing maxims was described as follows:
S02E02IF01 Lily, Ted and Robin were having breakfast at the restaurant. Robin was still drunk when
the waiter served the menu. 1
Robin talking to the waiter: I’d take you with gravy. If my boyfriend wasn’t sitting right here. – Just kidding. I’m good.
2 Lily: What are you so chirpy about?
3 Ted: She’s still drunk from last night.
4
Robin: I don’t think so. Whoo
71 As appeared in the excerpt above, Robin’s drunkenness at the time affected the
ways she spoke. In given situation, Robin failed to observed maxim of quality as she denied his state of condition at the time. Her utterance, however, was nor to
mislead or deceive the hearers. In terms of CP, Robin’s utterances constituted the infringement maxim Thomas, 1995, p. 74.
4. Analysis on a Situation which Suspends maxims
Another way of failing maxims which was discovered from the data was suspension of maxim. The situation in which the speaker suspended the maxim
transpired from the following excerpt:
S02E14SP01 They were at the apartment and ready for Mark’s funeral.
1 Marshall: Okay, that’s great, but just to make sure it records, maybe we should bow our
heads and say a quiet prayer to the TiVo gods.
2
Ted: Almighty TiVo, we thank you for all the gifts you have given us: the power to freeze live TV to go take a leak is nothing short of Godlike. Let’s not forget fast-
forwarding through commercials. It seems greedy to ask anything more from you, O Magic bos, but if you malfunction and miss the Super Bowl, we will destroy you in the
alley with baseball bats.
As appeared in the excerpt above, the conversation appeared to be humorous with the situation in which the suspension maxim occurred. In the case of praying,
Ted’s utterances needed to be praiseworthy and excluded from potential unfavorable disruption. Although the fashion of his utterance was obscure and
incongruous as he praised the Tivo, neither maxim to be observed nor implicature to be inferred. Thus, Ted suspended maxim Thomas, 1995, p. 76.
72
B. Contributions of Non-observance Maxims in Creating Humorous Effects
in Sitcom How I Met Your Mother Season 2.
After analyzing the selected data for each. The result would be discussed in the connection with the humor mechanism. The research focused on the language
humor, because the process of social activities mostly takes place through conversation, thus humor likely comes out from people’s daily language
communication. The second layer discussion of research discusses how those five of failing
maxims contribute in creating humorous effect. The talk of the non-observance of four maxims is the same whether these maxims located in flouting or other non-
observance. The difference is in the kind of non-observance. By using the 6 parameters of GTVH, current layer of discussion analyze how creation humorous
effects were contributable to violation viz. flouting, violating of maxims. The discussion was deductively organized from the view of maxim as the kinds of non-
observance maxims converge at the same target maxims.
1. Maxim of Quality
The findings showed, there were only three of five kinds of non-observance maxims which exploited maxims of quality in order to create humorous effects:
flouting, violating, and infringing.
a. Flouting
Targeting maxim quality by implementing this kind of non-observances resulted to be contributable in creating humorous effects. The following excerpt
exemplified the contribution:
