Purposes of Sarcasm Review of Related Theories

12 cannot be understood as easy as literal language. Thus, the use of pragmatics is needed in this study. In his paper Logic and Conversation, Grice discusses about how to analyze ironic language by creating a new model in which the literal interpretation of an utterance is inverted to find its intended meaning. Two major theories which appears are “mention and pretense theory”. Mention theory, also called echoic theory, states that a sarcastic utterance does not use language but rather echoes a belief that is not hold by the speaker at the time of the utterance Kreuz Glucksberg, 1989; Sperber Wilson, 1981; Wilson Sperber, 2002. Meanwhile, pretense theory, which attempts to modify Grice’s account, argues that the speaker pretends to be an unwise person by speaking sarcastically and addressing a naive audience but intends that the hearer will see through the pretense to understand the speaker’s true attitude toward the fictional speaker and the belief expressed H. H. Clark Gerrig, 1984. According to Grice 1975, the cooperative principle can be divided into four maxims. The maxims are maxim quality do not say things that are false or for which you lack evidence, maxim quantity do not give too much or too little information, maxim relation say things that are relevant to the conversation at hand, and maxim of manner avoid obscurity and ambiguity; be brief and orderly. Speakers are said to be flouting a maxim when they choose not to follow the rules in order to cue the listener in to a hidden meaning, called an implicature. This theory proves that sarcasm commonly used by violating maxim quality since sarcasm often express the opposite of what has been said or happens. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI 13 One of the areas that pragmatics concerns about is the contextual meaning 1996: 3. To dig the contextual meaning of a linguistic expression, some pragmatic tools are needed. Since sarcasm is mostly contextual, it is necessary to know about context and co-text to reveal the meaning behind. Co- text is any linguistic material that accompanies the referent expression. For example, “Chelsea plays in Champion Cup 2012”. The word Chelsea above is the referring expression and the co- text is “plays in Champion Cup 2012.” This co-text will limit the range of possible interpretation for the phrase Chelsea, making it easier to result a proper interpretation. Co-text is part of the broader environment where the referring expression is used. This environment is called context , which is “perhaps more easily recognized as having powerful impact on how referring expressions are to be interpreted” 1996: 21. As the source data is taken from conversations in TV series, it is important to relate sarcasm with speech acts which still a part of pragmatics. Mc Donald stated that sarcasm is an indirect form of speech intentionally used to produce a particular dramatic effect on the listener or sometimes it is used to convey implicit criticism with a particular victim as a target. 1999: 486 However in sarcasm, the action that the speaker wants to show is performed through utterances that generally called as speech acts. Even though the speaker wants the listener to do something or have the effect of something, it PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI 14 is not by the speaker’s force but it is understood through the utterance that the speaker produces. According to Krikmann 2005, the incongruity theory presupposes an inconsistency or contradiction in a humorous text. It is said that the interpreter of a joke will first tackle the discourse on the basis of the most salient or accessible. After solving the problem successfully, the interpreter experiences emotions of surprise and satisfaction that lead to laughter. Kant 1790 considered that the element of surprise was necessary to induce laughter. He claimed that laughter occurred when something that we did not expect happened. However, one of the drawbacks of this theory is that it does not explain other cases of incongruity which do not invoke humour. Other rhetorical figures, such as metaphors or sarcasm are also considered as instances of incongruity but, unlike jokes, they do not seem to generate humorous effects. It does not account for other cases of incongruity beyond the realm of humour and, as a result, it needs to be reinforced.

C. Theoretical Framework

The mentioned theory is used as the theoretical background in the data and to solve the problems which has shared in the problem formulations. The mention and pretense theory is used as the pre-theory and pre-analysis before the researcher collects the data. After the data is collected, the theory of six purposes of sarcasm by Attardo is used to categorize the collected data. After classifying the purposes, the response from the hearer of sarcastic utterances will be analyzed helps by the theory of pragmatics. 15 It is indeed undeniable that sarcasm is naturally related to irony, since both of it are figurative language ’s devices. John Haiman 1998: 20 gives two distinctive characteristics to identify irony and sarcasm and to prove that it is not exactly the same. First, situation may be ironic, but only human can be sarcastic. Second, irony can occur naturally, but sarcasm only occurs with the presence of an intention from the speaker. Singh with his perspective states that Irony differs from sarcasm in greater subtlety and wit. In sarcasm, ridicule or mockery is used harshly, often crudely and contemptuously, for destructive purposes. It may be used in an indirect manner, and have the form of irony, as in What a fine musician you turned out to be or it may be used in the form of a direct statement, You couldnt play one piece correctly if you had two assistants. The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflection. Singh, 2012: 66 Briefly, sarcasm and irony is distinctive yet still related. Sarcasm involves both people and intention while irony is more naturally. Sarcasm is more likely use with rude expression to mock someone, but sarcasm can also be delivered in the form of irony, which is more contrast between reality and what is stated. There is a common misunderstanding about sarcasm which is between sarcasm and irony. Some argue that sarcasm is an expression which means the opposite of what the speaker intends to deliver. Meanwhile, some define irony as a rhetorical device, literary technique, or contrast, between reality what is and appearance what seems to be Singh, 2012: 1. These make sarcasm and irony become similar as a figure of speech. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI