40 explains that a speaker is said to violate a maxim when he delivers

Wu and Chen aims to explore how the characters in the situation comedy create humor by violating Grice‟s Cooperative Principle as their humor strategies. On the other hand, the present study aims to explore how the characters in the situation comedy create humorous situations by not only violating but also flouting Grice‟s Cooperative Principle as their humor strategies. Thus, the present study applies humor theory on both of the violations and the floutings of conversational maxims done by the characters in order to explore how the humorous situations are built in the situation comedy. The second study is “An Analysis of Humor Types and Grice‟s Maxim in the Situation Comedy Friends Episode of “The One that Could Have Been” a Pragmatic Approach by Sri Retno Palupi. The aims of this study are, first, to find out the types of humor which appear in this episode, and second, to define whether those humors obey or disobey Grice‟s conversational maxims as the standard conversational norms. This study uses pragmatic approach to analyze the problem formulations. The data are all the humor utterances which are able to create laughter found in Friends comedy series in the episode of “The One with That Could Have Been ”. To analyze the types of the humor, the data are classified by applying humor theory by Anthony L. Audrieth‟s, and further, they are analyzed by Grice‟s conversational maxims theory. The result of this study reveals that there are eight types of humor which are found in that episode, which are, banter, blunder, chain, Freudian Slip, irony, mistaken identity, relapse, and repartee. Hence, related to the maxims theory, it is found that the humors in that episode of situation comedy, which appear in every utterance, fail to obey at least one of the conversational maxims. Related to Palupi‟s study, the present study‟s aim is also to examine humorous situations in a situation comedy. The present study is conducted in order to analyze how the humorous situations are created by violations and floutings of conversational maxims done by the characters. In here, the result from humor analysis in Palupi‟s study contributes evidence that humorous situations which appear in every utterance in the situation comedy are the results of not obeying at least one of conversational maxims of Grice‟s Cooperative Principles. Besides the similarity and the contribution, differences are also found between Palupi‟s study and the present study. First, on one hand, Palupi‟s study does not stop in analyzing humor in the situation comedy. It goes further in finding out the types of humor found in the data source. On the other hand, the present study fo cuses on the contribution of conversational maxims of Grice‟s Cooperative Principle in creating humorous situations in How I Met Your Mother season 2, episode 1 to 5. This present study examines more closely how violating and flouting a conversational maxim of Cooperative Principle can create humorous situations in the situation comedy. It does not go further in analyzing the types of humor. Thus, theory of humor types is not applied in the present study like it is applied in Palupi‟s study in order to analyze the data. Second, the data from both of Palupi‟s study and the present study are not from the same data source. While Palupi‟s data are obtained from Friends: The One with That Could Have Been, the data of the present study are obtained from How I Met Your Mother, season 2, episodes 1 to 5.

B. Review of Related Theories

1. Pragmatics To this day, a number of theories of language have been developed by linguists. One of these theories is pragmatics. Thomas 1995: 22-23 defines pragmatics as meaning in interaction. It takes not only the contributions from the speakers in saying utterances, but also from the hearers in understanding the utterances from their point of view. Besides the contributions from the interlocutors, contexts of utterance, such as physical, social, and linguistic contexts, and the meaning potential of utterance are taken into account in producing meaning. Thus, pragmatics is context-dependent. An utterance cannot be understood separately from the context it is uttered. Related to pragmatics‟ nature of context-dependent, Levinson 1983: 21 suggests that pragmatics is “the study of relations between language and context that are basic to an account of language understanding”. The meaning of “language understanding” is that understanding an utterance does not only involve knowing the meaning of the words and the grammatical relations between them, but most importantly, it involves the ability to make inferences in order to connect what is said to what is assumed in a certain context. Yule 1996: 3-4 also states another definition of pragmatics. He suggests that pragmatics is concerned with four areas explained as follow. First, pragmatics is “the study of speaker meaning”. It means that pragmatics is more concerned