CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURE ON ABC INTERVIEW BETWEEN BARBARA WALTERS AND SYRIAN PRESIDENT BASHAR AL- ASSAD

A Thesis

Submitted to Letters and Humanities Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for

The Degree of Strata One

DEBI NOVIANINGRUM NIM. 1110026000018

ENGLISH LETTERS DEPARTMENT LETTERS AND HUMANITIES FACULTY

STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY OF SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH JAKARTA

ABSTRACT

Debi Novianingrum, Conversational Implicature on ABC Interview between Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad. Thesis: English Letters Department, Letters and Humanities Faculty, State Islamic University of Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, February2015.

The purpose of this research is to analyze the non-observance maxims of co-operative principle theory on ABC Interview between Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, which non-observance maxims are mostly found in formal or informal interview. In this case, the aims of this research are: (1) to discover the non-observance maxims on ABC Interview between Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad interviews script (2) to find the implied meaning of the utterance by observing the non-observance maxims on ABC Interview between Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad interviews script.

The method of this research is using qualitative case study. The research questions will be answered in analytical description. The object study is picked up by official website media online then the writer classified the non-observance maxim based on the operative principle maxim. The non-observance of co-operative principle maxim is analyzed using Gricean Theory which observing non-observance maxims can discover the implied meaning of utterance.

The result of this research shows that there are sixteen data collected from two interview scripts, those collected data resulted the non-observance maxim which mostly found the flouting maxim of quantity. The non-observance maxims of co-operative principle consist of four types, but only three types of non-observance maxim found in those interviews. By flouting maxim of quantity, the speaker tries to say his statement carefully and clearly, because speaker does not want to make misleading to other people considering he have interview to seek some support for their mission.

Keywords: Co-operative principle, P.H Grice, Conversational Implicature, Interviews

APPROVAL SHEET

CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURE ON ABC INTERVIEW BETWEEN BARBARA WALTERS AND SYRIAN PRESIDENT BASHAR AL-ASSAD

A Thesis

Submitted to Letters and Humanities Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for

The Degree of Strata One

DEBI NOVIANINGRUM NIM. 1110026000018

Approved by:

Advisor I Advisor II

Dr. M. Farkhan, M.Pd. Moh. Iqbal Firdaus, M.Hum. NIP. 19650919 200003 1 002

ENGLISH LETTERS DEPARTMENT LETTERS AND HUMANITIES FACULTY

STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY OF SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH JAKARTA

LEGALIZATION

Name : Debi Novianingrum Nim : 1110026000018

Title : Conversational Implicature on ABC Interview between Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad

The thesis has been defended before The Faculty of Letters and Humanities‟ Examination Committee on February 16th, 2015. It has been accepted as a partial fulfillment of the degree of strata one.

Jakarta, February 16th, 2015

The Examination Committee

Signature Date

Drs. A. Saefuddin, M. Pd. (Chair Person) __________ _________ NIP. 19640710 199303 1 006

Elve Oktafiyani, M. Hum. (Secretary) __________ _________ NIP. 19781003 200112 2 002

Dr. M. Farkhan, M. Pd (Advisor I) __________ _________ NIP. 19650919 200003 1 002

M. Iqbal Firdaus, M. Hum (Advisor II) __________ _________

Hilmi Akmal, M. Hum (Examiner I) __________ _________ NIP. 19760918 200801 1 009

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person nor material which to a substantial extent has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma of the university or other institute of higher learning, except where due acknowledgement has been made in the text.

Jakarta, February 16th, 2015

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim

In the name of Allah, the most Beneficent and the most Merciful.

All praises be to Allah SWT, the Lord of universe, who had blessed the writer in finishing this research. May peace and salutation be upon the honorable prophet Muhammad SAW and all of his family, companions and adherents.

The writer‟s deep gratitude goes to her beloved parents, Subagio Utomo

and Retno Dwi Larasati for all their great love, patience, support and prayer. Thanks for being the strength and the best supporter of her life. The writer also want to give her gratitude to Mr. Dr. H. Muhammad Farkhan, M.Pd, as the Assistant of Dean of Letters and Humanities Faculty and her first advisor; Mr. Moh. Iqbal Firdaus, M.Hum, as her second advisor for their time, help, patience and motivation from the first to the final level of this research.

The gratitude is also dedicated to Prof. Dr. Oman Fathurahman, M.Hum, the Dean of Letters and Humanities Faculty; Mr. Drs. Saefuddin, M.Pd, the Head of English Letters Department; Mrs. Elve Oktafiyani, M.Hum, the Secretary of English Letters Department; and all the lecturers of English Letters Department who had taught her during her study at UIN Jakarta.

In addition, the writer would like to give appreciation to the following friends and people, namely:

1. Tenri‟s Family. Thank you for the love,support, facilities that given to the writer.

2. Hwang Chansung. Thanks for the positive energy that he gives to pass the hardest time.

3. HAHA Family. Thanks for always bring the laugh and happiness during these four years.

4. Yuliana Kuslambangningrum. Thanks for being the best for these four years, from first until last fighting.

5. Akram Husni Kamal. Thanks for teach her how to be understanding patient lovely girl.

6. With all due respect, especially to all friends and people who cannot be mentioned one by one.

May Allah always bless and protect them wherever they are, Aamiin. Hopefully, this research will be useful for the people who read it.

Jakarta, February 2015

LIST OF TABLE

Table 1 : The types of The non-observance maxims on ABC Interview between Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar

Al-Assad…...27 Table II : The unobserved of maxims on ABC Interview between Barbara

Walters and Syrian President Bashar

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...i

APPROVAL SHEET...ii

LEGATIZATION...iii

DECLARATION...iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...v

LIST OF TABLE...vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS...viii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION...1

A. Background of the Study... 1

B. Focus of the Research... 4

C. Research Question... 5

D. Significance of the Research...5

E. Research Methodology...5

1. Objective of the Study...6

2. Technique Collecting Data and Data Analysis...6

3. Instrument of the Research...7

4. Unit of Analysis...7

CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...8

A. Previous Research...8

B. Concept ...11

1. Discourse Analysis ...11

2. Pragmatics…...…...13

3. Co-operative Principle ...14

4. Implicature... 16

CHAPTER III DATA ANALYSIS... 25

A. Data Description ...25

B. Data Analysis ...26

CHAPTER IV CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION... 41

A. CONCLUSION... 41

B. SUGGESTION... 42

REFERENCES.... ...44

A. Background of the Study

In social life, the function of language is as communication tool1. In communication, language is used to express the argument, request, promise, and soon. There are many ways to communicate, one of them is conversation. Conversation occurs between the speaker and the listener, where the listener

understands the speaker‟s message. Conversation is one of the most popular uses of human language2. It can deliver the message to each other in the form of idea, feeling, thought, and emotion easily.

In conversation, the speaker and listener produce utterances and exchange information, therefore both of speaker and listener should cooperative each other in order to avoid misunderstanding and make an ideal conversation. In pragmatics, the way to understand how to make a perfect conversation can be seen in Cooperative Principle theory proposed by Grice. Based on Grice in Yule

(1996), “Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engage3.” To make a good conversation, the speaker and listener should have one interpretation in order to avoid misunderstanding. Misunderstanding often occurs when the listener does not understand the meaning

1

Abdul, Chaer, Linguistik Umum. (Jakarta:PT.Rineka Cipta, 2012). p.30

2

Anthony J. Liddicoat, An Introduction to Conversation Analysis. (London: Continuum, 2007). p.1

3

of the speaker‟s utterance. Consequently, the listener makes a misinterpretation of the speaker utterance. Sometimes, the speaker is not just talking or communicating but the speaker delivers an implicit meaning to other person. The speaker usually put an implicit meaning in a utterance which different with the speaker says. It is an additional conveyed meaning, called an implicature4. Implicature is a component of speaker meaning that constitutes an aspect of what is meant in a speaker‟s utterance without being part of what is said5. In other hand, the speaker intends to communicate is more invisible than the speaker directly expresses.

As Grice states that what people say and what people mean are often different matters. So that the listener need to understand a knowledge of four

maxim that allows listener to draw inferences about the speaker‟s intention and implied meaning. The meaning conveyed by speaker and recovered as a result of the listener inferences, is known as conversational implicature6. There are cooperative principle of conversation and elaborated in four sub-principle called maxim which defined by Grice such as maxim of quality, maxim of quantity, maxim of relevance, and maxim of manner7. In the using of language every day, people often use conversational implicature to express a specific purpose8. Conversational implicture appears not only in every day talk but also in formal interview. Interview is a conversation between a journalist or radio or television

4

Ibid. p.35

5_{Horn, Laurence R. “Implicature”.}

The Handbook of Pragmatics. (Australia: Blackwell Publishing, 2005). p.3

6

Joan Cutting, Pragmatics and Discourse: A Source Book of Student, (London: Routledge,2002). p.36

7

Ibid, p.37

8

presenter and a person of public interest used as the basis of a broadcast or publication9.

For this research focused on the transcript ABC interview bwtween Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad interview. And this research will be analyzed with discourse analysis because it studies of the meaning of words in context, analyzing the parts of meaning that can be explained by knowledge of the physical and social world, and the socio-psychological factors influencing communication, as well as the knowledge of the time and place in which the words uttered or written10.

Barbara Walters is an American broadcast journalist, author and television personality. She has hosted morning television show Today and The View, the television news magazine 20/20, co-anchored at ABC Evening News, and was contributor to ABC News11. She is the only American journalist who was able to interview Syrian President since the Syrian crisis. Meanwhile, Bashar al- Assad is the president of Syrian who has an authoritarian regime. It is inherited to him since his father Hafez Assad be a president at that time. Syrian President Bashar al- Assad required to step down because Assad family has lead the country over 20 years. His people assume that Assad will make the dynasty to control Syria but he refuses to change his position as president. So that, he becomes a controversial Middle East country president and United Nation has given a warning solve the issue in his country. In his interview, Assad has a defense to stand on his position and he does not say it explicitly. This reason quite interest to

9

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/interview

10

Joan Cutting, Op. Cit, p.2

11

analyze because there are many non-observance maxim of cooperative principle on verbal interaction in these interview. For example:

Walters : Do you feel now that you still have the support of your people?

Assad : if you don‟t have the support of the people you cannot be in this position.

The conversation above, Assad seems does non-observance maxim of cooperative principle because he does flouting maxim of relation by not

answering the question relevantly. Walter‟s question needs „yes‟ or „no‟ answer

but Assad replay it with a sentence which contain „yes‟ or „no‟ answer. By

answering „if you don‘t have the people...be in this position‟ Assad justifies

that he has people to support him as President but he does not say it directly.

The example of conversation above clearly indicates that implicit meaning often found in this interview transcript. Therefore, this research quite attract to discuss because involved influential people who have a great passion to achieve their aims even though the world claim that he is a dictator. He also has good accomplishment to persuade people for some support to raise their goals. B.Focus of the Research

This research focused on discourse and exceedingly on maxim of Cooperative Principle that are not observed to induce conversational implicatures and to describe the intended meaning in dialogue on Bashar Al-Assad and Barbara

Walters “ABC‟s Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar Al- Assad” which

posted on official ABC News website

http://abcnews.go.com/International/transcript-abcs-barbara-walters-interview-syrian-president-bashar/story?id=15099152

C.Research Question

Regarding to the background of study above, the research questions may be formulated as follows:

1. What kind of non-observance maxim of cooperative principle that induce conversational implicature in the dialogue?

2. How is the non-observance of maxim generating conversational implicatures in ABC‟s Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad interview?

3. What are the meanings of conversational implicatures describe in the dialogue?

D.Significance of the research

This research is expected to contribute some advantages for society especially the student who will do the same research to expand the knowledge about analysis implied meaning. In addition, this research is practically expected to one of useful references for the reader who want to perform a further study related to pragmatics study especially in the use of conversational implicature. E.Research Methodology

This research uses the qualitative case study. According to Merriam (1998), as quoted by Nunan, this method used to define intensively, holistic description and analysis of a single entity, phenomenon, or social unit. Case studies are particularistic, descriptive, and heuristic and rely heavily on inductive

reasoning in handling multiple data sources12. Data will be analyzed of the Cooperative Principle that is not observance maxims to draw conversational implicature in the dialogue ABC Interview between Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad interview on ABC, Dec 27 2011.

1. Objective of the study

Based on the research questions above, the purposes of this research are: a. To know the types of non-observance maxims of Cooperative

Principle that generate conversational implicature in the dialogue

ABC‟s Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad interview.

b. To find the reason why the utterances can be said as the implicatures. c. To describe the meaning of the conversational implicatures.

2. Technique of Data Collecting and Data Analysis

This research uses bibliography research method. Bibliography is using written sources to gain the data.13 Data gained by using data card which to the Grice Cooperative Principle. In this research the data are collected by following steps:

a. Read the transcript text.

b. Give mark the utterances that might be conceived conversational implicatures.

c. Write the data gained and numbered into data card.

12

David Nunan, Research Method in Language Learning. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). p.77

13

Edi Subroto, Pengantar Metoda Penelitian Linguistik Struktural. (Surakarta:Sebelas Maret University Press, 1992). p. 77

After the data have been collected, the next step is data analysis. it is to get specific data that focused to analyzed. The steps are taken as follows:

a. Classify and descripting the utterances to maxim of Cooperative Principle.

b. Descripting the intended meaning of the conversational implicature.

c. Make the conclusion based on the description analysis. 3. Instrument of the research

This research uses data card as instrument of the research to classify and identify the data which gained from interview transcript. Then, the data which contained non-observance maxims of Grice‟s Cooperative Principle are analyzed.

4. Unit of Analysis

The unit of analysis of this research is the transcript an interview of Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad entitled “ABC‘s Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad” that downloaded from ABC News official website.

A. Previous Research

This analysis has been conducted by some writers in the previous research. The writer discuss the same topic and theory with previous research belongs to

Deni Iskandar‟s thesis (2010) from English Letters Department State Islamic

University Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta entitled “The Gricean Maxim Analysis in the Script of the Simpsons Season 5” which is related to this research. The thesis

identifies the conversational maxim in the scope of Pragmatics study especially of the Gricean Maxim on Simpsons Season 5 movie script. The purpose of the thesis is to discover the types of the maxims which were written in the script and to categorize the violation or deviation toward Gricean maxims. The writer uses a qualitative method by collecting and studying the data. The data was analyzed through descriptive analysis technique14.

Secondly, a similar study is also made by Haiyan Wang from College of Foreign Languages Qingdao University of Science and Technology China (2011),

in his journal entitled “Conversational Implicature in English Listening Comprehension”15

. This journal focuses on learning listening comprehension using conversational implicature. Haiyan uses Grice theory of co-operative principle to improve the listening ability both in the non-English learning major

14_{Deni, Iskandar, “The Gricean Maxim Analysis in the script of the Simpsons Season 5”,}

unpublished undergraduate thesis (Jakarta: English Letters Department, State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah, 2010)

15 _{Wang, Haiyan, “Conversational Implicature in English Listening Comprehension”,}

(China: College of Foreign Languages, Qingdao University of Science and Technology, 2011), vol.2

and the English major. Mostly, English learners are hard to understand the implied meaning in a sentence when they are given a piece of listening material although they have mastered vocabulary and grammatical rules. Hence, he thought that learning such pragmatics study especially Gricean theory is help the learners better understand implicated meaning in English listening.

The next previous research is made by Nuur Alfi Laelah‟s thesis (2012) from English Letters Department State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah

Jakarta entitled “The Humor and Non-Humor of Grice‟s Conversational

Implicature in the Transcript of Bridesmaids Movie”. This thesis is aimed at knowing the non-observance maxims, the humor and non-humor implicature in Bridesmaids movie transcript based on Grice Cooperative Principle and theory humor of Salvatore Attardo. The writer uses descriptive qualitative method to describe and identify the conversational maxim. From the research, the writer can classify humor and non humor effect by finding non-observance of maxims on the Bridesmaids Movie transcript16.

The fourth previous research is made by Noviani‟s thesis (2012) from

English Letters Department State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

entitled “Conversational Implicature in The Boy in the Striped Pajamas Movie”.

The goal of this research is to find the implied meaning by analyzing non-observance maxim of conversation on The Boy in the Striped Pajamas movie. The writer uses descriptive qualitative as method of this research. The conclusion, the

16_{Nur, Alfi Laela, “The Humor and Non}

-Humor of Grice‟s Conversational Implicature in

the transcript of Brides maids Movie”, unpublished undergraduate thesis (Jakarta: English Letters

writer identifies the Gricean maxim were applied and violated in the The Boy in the Striped Pajamas Movie transcript17.

Besides, a same topic was described by Ahmed Muhammed Saleh Alduais jounal (2012) from Department of English Language King Saud University

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia entitled “Conversational Implicature (Flouting the Maxim):

Applying Conversational Maxim on Example Taken Non-Standard Arabic Language, Yemeni Dialect, an Idiolect Spoken at IBB city. The purpose of this journal is to investigate the fact that conversational implicature theory by Grice can be universal and applied to all languages of the world, especially in idiolect from Arabic 18Language. The writer uses descriptive qualitative method to describe the data in this research. He recorded the interview between the writer and the interviewee who speaks non-standard Arabic idiolect and transcript it into English. Then, the writer analyzes the data using Grice‟s theory of co-operative principle. The writer found that implicature theory can be applied in universal language especially Arabic language.

The five topics above explain the similarities with the topic of this research, which discuss about conversational implicature using Grice theory of co-operative principle. Some writers use movie transcript as their object study and the rest of writer uses an interview as object study. In this research, the writer uses an interview transcripts as the object study, but it will be different with the

17 _{Noviani, “Conversational Implicature in the Boy in the Striped Pajamas Movie”,}

unpublished undergraduate thesis ( Jakarta: English Letters Department, State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah, 2012)

18

Ahmed, Mohammad Saleh Alduais, “Conversational Implicature (Flouting the maxims): Applying Conversational Maxims on Examples Taken from Non-Standard Arabic Language,

Yemeni Dialect, an Idiolect Spoken at IBB City‖, (Riyadh: Department of English Language, King Saud University (KSU), 2012), Vol.3

interview of the example above because it uses a formal interview transcript

ABC‟s Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad published by ABC News official website. Meanwhile, the example of A. Muhammed Saleh Alduais uses standard daily activity interview that obtained from recording the interviewee.

Therefore, this research is needed to discuss because it uses an interview transcript involve influential people that claimed as a dictator. As we know, Bashar Al-Assad is claimed as a dictator by Western goverment who led his country over 10 years but overall Assad family have led Syria over 20 years. In the interview, Assad tries to convey some message about a reason to maintain his position even though there are an uprising around the country. Besides his regime, Assad also has power to cover his country to against the rebel who oppose him. The writer hopes that the reader will know the character of Bashar Al-Assad who have a great spirit to struggle for their purpose on their life by analyzing the interview transcript.

B. Concept

1. Discourse Analysis

For many particular linguist, “discourse” has generaly been defined as anything “beyond the sentence”. And for others discourse is the study of language use19. Discourse has contextual meaning, it is to identify, interpret meaning, such: interwords, intersentence, interparagraph, those are must be coherent for

19

Deborah Schiffrin, et.al, The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. (Massachusette: Blackwell, 2001). p.1

understood by the reader or listener20. There are definitions of discourse in many linguistics books on the subject now open with a survey of definition. For example Jaworski and Coupland (1999: 1-3) include ten definition from a wide range of sources. They all, fall into the three main categories noted: 1) anything beyond the sentence, 2) language use, and 3) a broader range of social practice that includes nonlinguistics and nonspecific instances of language21. The other source states discourse is a connected strecth of language (especially spoken language) usually bigger than a sentence, and particularly viewed as interaction between speakers or between writer and reader22.

Stubbs refers the term discourse analysis as the attempts to study the organization of language above the sentence or above the clause; and therefore to study large linguistic unit such as conversational exchanges or written text23. In the other hand, discourse analysis is the study of the higher level organization of sentences which coherent to interpret contextual meaning of the text.

A discourse can be analyzed by using pragmatics as tools because of both of them has a context as the focuse of the study. Context is analysing part of meaning that can be explained by knowledge of the physical and social world, and the socio-psychological factors influencing communication, as well as the knowledge of the time and place in which the words are uttered or written24. The second feature that pragmatics and discourse analysis have in common is that they

20

Eriyanto. “Analisis Wacana.” (Yogyakarta: LKiS Yogyakarta, 2001). p.5

21

Deborah Schiffrin, et. Al, Op, Cit. p.1

22

Sylvia Chalker and Edmund Weiner, Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), p.118

23

Paul Baker, Key Term in Discourse Analysis, (New York: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2011), p.32

24

both look at discourse, or the use of language, and text, or pieces of spoken or written discourse, concentrating on how stretches of language become meaningful and unified for their users25. From the relations above, discourse can be applied in analyzing Grice Cooperative Principle theory because both of them using context to interpret meaning in a utterance.

2. Pragmatics

Semantic and pragmatics are two parts of linguistic study which discuss about meaning of the utterance what we say or hear, and what we speak or write. In linguistics, there is a distinction between two of them. Leench states that semantics is defined purely as property of expression in a given language, in abstraction from particular situation, speakers, or hearers26. While pragmatics

approaches to studying language‟s relation to the contextual background

features27.

Austin in Hickey defines pragmatics has focused on the condition which permit speakers and writers to achieve what they want to achieve by bringing about certain modifications in the behaviour, knowledge, attitudes or beliefs of others28. It means that pragmatics studies what language users mean.

Pragmatics is branch of linguistic study which explores the role that context plays in the interpretation of what people say29. According to Verhaar in Kunjana, Pragmatics learns about anything that includes the language structure as a media

25

ibid

26

Geoffrey N.Leech, Principles of Pragmatics ( London: Longman,1983). p.6

27

Joan Cutting, Op, Cit. p.1

28

Leo Hickey, Pragmatics of Translation Topic in Translation 12 (England: Multilingual Matters, 1998) p. 4

29

Charles, F. Mayer, Introducing English Lingustics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2010). p.48

of communication between the speaker and the listener as well as an extra- linguistic sign language reference30. Mey states Pragmatic is a study about the use of language in human communication as determined by the condition of society31. The basic concentration of pragmatics is how the people interpret and understand what others said in a particular context. Sometimes sentences or utterances cannot be understood word by word, but altogether within their context or circumstances. Levinson states the term pragmatics covers both context dependent aspects of language structure and principle of language usage and understanding that have nothing or little to do with linguistics structure.32 It means pragmatics tries to convey the intended meaning of sentences or utterances through context. So that, understanding the sentences or utterances requires a great deal more than knowing the words uttered and the linguistics structure between them, but understanding sentences or utterances must have relation with the context.

3. Co-operative Principle

The speaker and the listener in making conversation should have cooperation each other. It needs a collaboration to avoid a misleading conversation. However, this kind of cooperation is simply one way to make a conversation successful. When the speaker and the listener are cooperative, they intend to communicate something which is more than just what the words mean but there is an additional meaning. Then, it is what we call as an implicature.33 The notion of implicature both conversation and conventional was originated by the Oxford philosopher

30

Kunjana Rahardi, Pragmatik : Kesantunan Imperatif Bahasa Indonesia (Jakarta: Erlangga,2005). p.47

31

Jacob, L. Mey, Op. Cit,. p.6

32

Stepen C.Levinson, Pragmatics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1983). p.9

33

H.P. Grice.34 According to Mey, a conversational implicature is something which is implied in conversation or something which is left implicit meaning in actual language use.35 Conversational implicature is derived from a general principle of conversation and a number of maxim which must be fulfilled by the speaker in order to make a good communication. The general principle also known as co-operative principle.36

The definition of co-operative principle, Grice proposes

―The co-operative principle: make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engage.”37

It means that by obeying co-operative principle, the utterances will be as it needed in conversation. The fulfilment of co-operative principle in a speaker‟s utterance will make the utterance easy to be understood because both of the speaker and the listener get a same assumption in conversation. The co-operative principle consists of four maxim, such as:

a) Maxim of Quantity

To fulfil maxim of quantity, the speaker should make the utterances as required for the topic being discuss. The speaker not allowed to make his utterances more informative than is required. This maxim relates to the amount of information to be provided38.

34

Yan Huang, Pragmatics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007). p.23

35

Jacob, L. Mey, Op. Cit, p. 45

36

Gillian Brown and George Yule, Discourse Analysis (Cmabridge: Cmabridge University Press, 1983), p.31

37

Ibid

38 Paul Grice, The Studies in the Way of Words, (United States of America: Harvard University Press, 1989), p.26

b) Maxim of Quality

To accomplish maxim of quality, the speaker is required to tell the truth. The speaker is not allowed to say something he knows it is false. c) Maxim of relation

To observe this maxim, the speaker is assumed to be saying something that is relevant to what has been said before.39

d) Maxim of Manner

The speaker should be brief, orderly, avoid obscurity and ambiguity to fulfil this maxim.40

Grice said that the listeners assume which speakers observe the co-operative principle, that it is the knowledge of the four maxim that allows the listeners to

draw inferences about the speaker‟s intention and implied meaning.

4. Implicature

People may break the Co-operative principle for some reasons. One of them is that the speakers want to imply something beyond what they say. According to Grice, the participant in a talk exchange may fail to fulfill a maxim in various ways. They may flouting a maxim, violating a maxim, opting out, or infringing.41 So that, the Implicature occurs because the speakers cannot fulfill a maxim of Co-operative Principle.

39

Joan Cutting, Op. Cit, p. 35

40

Ibid, p.36

41

a) Flouting

A flout comes out when a speaker blatantly fails to observe a maxim, without any intention of deceiving or misleading, but only look for a meaning which different from the expressed meaning.42

The speaker who flouts the maxim of quantity seems to give less or too much information.43

For example:

(1) A: well, what do you think about this restaurant? B: the beverage are delicious....

B does not say that the dessert and main food are delicious, but B knows that A will understand that implication, because A asks about the restaurant and only gets told part of it.

Another example:

(2) X: Have any of the supervisors been in?

Y: Oh yeah, I‘ve had a lot of visitors lately um I went downstairs to get something to eat and somebody was waiting at the door today

X: Who was it?

Y: John Wood, do you know him?...

Speaker Y for instance, directly answers X‟s question about whether

any supervisors had come in. Y provides slightly more information than necessary, saying that may visitor had come in. But this extra information does not exceed the amount of detail that would be provided in a conversation of this nature.44 The speaker Y gives more information

42Ibid

43 Joan Cutting, Op. Cit, p.37 44 Charles F. Mayer, Op.Cit, p.57

about X‟s question may be, Y want to tell the X that his event is

successful because he find the supervisor which he looks for.

The speaker may flout the maxim of quality. They may say something which they do not have enough evidence. The most important to indicate a flouting maxim of quality is using of inaccurate expression in utterance.45

For example:

(3) Dio : As far as I know, Chan has graduated from college. Kai : I may be mistaken, but I thought i saw him working

at this restaurant.

Sehun : I‘m not sure if this is right, but I heard that he celebrated the graduation in a great hotel in this town.

Dio : what is wrong with him? He did not invite us.

Here, the speaker does not say something totally accurate. It is proof

that Kai says „I may be mistaken‟ and Sehun says „I‘m not sure‘. It shows that the conversation above flouting a maxim of quality because they are talking about something may not be totally accurate.

Another example:

(4) Chen : what do you think about my shirt? Lay : hmmm, it is great.

As the role of the maxim of quality, to fulfill this maxim the speaker has to tell the truth, but for some reasons people chose to say untruth than something truth. For instance, based on the example above Chen asks

45

Lay about his new shirt. It would be inappropriate in most contexts to

replay “No.” since this could result in hurt feelings because Chen like his

new shirt. Therefore, in most communicative contexts, many people

would replay “Yes” or “It‟s great,” even their replies are untruthful.46 Moreover, the speaker may also flout the maxim by exaggerating the word, as in hyperboles; or by using metaphors; or arise from irony.

If speakers flout the maxim of relation, they expect that the hearers will be able to imagine what the utterance did not say, and make the connection between the utterance and the preceding one (s).47 Thus, in:

(5) Kai : Hey, do you want to join with us tonight? Fanny : I have a scary examination tomorrow.

In the dialogue above, Fanny is flouting maxim of relation because

Fany‟s answer is not relevant to Kai‟s question. Kai‟s question needs “yes” or “No”answer, but Fanny‟s answer is “I have a scary examination tomorrow”. The inference drawn from the utterance is that Fanny will study hard tonight for the examination, therefore she does not come to the party.

Similarly in the next, Noel Coward said to have had this exchange, after his play Sirocco (1927) was booed:

(6) Heckler : We expected a better play. Coward : I expected a better manners.

46

Charles F Mayer, Op. Cit, p.58

47

We can say that the second comment seems irrelevant to the first: the heckler in the audience talking about the play, and Coward comments about manners. However, Coward intends the Heckler to infer that he expected better manners than booing and shouting about his play. The Heckler will have understood that Coward found him as well as the others not just bad-mannered, but rude and offensive.48

The last is the example of flouting maxim of manner. Those who flout the maxim of manner, appearing to be obscure, are often tying to exclude a third party, as in this short exchange between college students who will celebrate their friend birthday:

(7) A: Where are you going?

B: I am going to take something make somebody surprise.

A: well, don‘t get any single noise then.

B speaks in an ambiguous way, saying ‗take something‘ and

„somebody‟, because he is avoiding saying „birthday cake‘ and ‗C (their

friend)‘, so that C does not notice that C will have a surprise birthday party from her friends. Sometimes writers play words to heighten the ambiguity, in order to make a point.49

Another example:

(8) ―A pancake should have a good texture: sieve the flour

and salt into a large bowl and make well in the mixture; break the egg and stir to make breadcrumby mix; fried it for 5 mints; preheat the pan to medium level; and add a glass of milk and the water mix bit by bit (this makes a

lovely light batter), beating constantly to avoid lumps.‖

48

Ibid, p.39

49

The recipe above is odd as it is not written orderly. The speaker normally follows a chronological order of events to describe a process, in

this case, cooking. One of the principle maxim of manner is „be orderly‟,

because the recipe above is written in wrong order; it means that the writer of recipe is flouting the maxim. The right step should be as follow: (9) “ A pancake should have a good texture; sieve the flour and salt into a large bowl and make well in the mixture; break egg and stir to make bread crumby mix; add a glass of milk and the water mix bit by bit (this makes a lovely light batter); preheat the pan to medium level; fried them

for 5 mints.‖

b) Violating

Speakers can be said „violate‟ a maxim when they know that hearer

will not know the truth and will only understand the surface meaning of words. They intentionally generate misleading implicature.50 Grice stated that violating a maxim is the unostentatious violate a maxim, and if the speaker violates a maxim he/she will be liable to mislead.51 The speaker may supply insufficient information, saying something that is insincere, irrelevant or ambiguous, and the hearers wrongly assume that they are cooperating.52

If the speakers violate maxim of quantity, they do not give the hearer enough information to understand what is being talking about. The speakers do not want to the hearers know the full situation or inference.

50

Ibid, p.40

51

Paul Grice, Op. Cit, p.30

52

The speaker is not implying anything; they are „being economical with

the truth‟. For example:

(10) Porter : what color is your car? Sica : White.

Porter : OK. (Raise the travel bag and put it in the white car)

Old lady : hey, what are doing with my car?!! Porter : she said her car is white.

Sica : my car is behind this building.

Sica says only „white‟ when the porter asked about her car. She does

not give more information which one exactly her car. So that, the porter gets a wrong information because he does not have same inference with

Sica and put Sica‟s travel bag in other car. Sica has not an implied

meaning, but she just being economical with the truth may be she has another travel bag and the porter has to waiting for that.

Another example:

(11) Husband : How much did that new dress cost, darling? Wife : Less than last one.

Based on the example above, the wife tries to cover up the price of the dress by not saying how much less than her last dress. The wife, when

asked „how much did that new dress cost, darling?‟ she does not tell the price, and say „less than last one‟. She may violate maxim of quality

because she does not tell the price explicitly.

The wife, when asked „how much did that new dress cost, darling?‟

could have violated a maxim of quality by not being honest. She gives wrong information about the price because she does not want the husband disappointed about the price. Needless to say, not all violations

of the maxim of quality are blameworthy.53 In many cultures, it is acceptable to tell untruth. For example: in Indonesia, when Indonesian

visit their friend‟s house and have a dinner, they always say that the meal

is delicious, even the meal is not delicious because they keep their manner to be polite. Nevertheless, they have violated a maxim of quality. Violating maxim of relation is about irrelevant answer in order to imply something. Based on the example husband-wife above, when the

husband asks the price of wife‟s dress, the wife distracts him and changes the topic by saying ‗i know, let‘s go to somewhere tonight, where do you

want to go?‘ expecting that the husband does not know the price of the dress, but she answers with irrelevant answer.

In this example below, a couple conversation may show the violating maxim of manner:

(12) A: what was your parent saying to me?

B: ah well I don‘t know, I couldn‘t repeat it, because I don‘t

really believe a half what they are saying. They just get something in their mind.

B says „a half what they are saying‟ is an obscure reference to the other opinion, and ‗something‘ contains a general noun containing vague reference. B may use this expression to avoid giving a brief and orderly

answer because B‟s parent do not like the B‟s girlfriend.

c) Infringing a maxim

53

Infringing a maxim is a kind of non-observance maxim because the

speaker‟s imperfect linguistics performance.54

This can happen if the speaker has an imperfect command of the language. It is found in a child

or a foreign learner. If the speaker‟s utterance influenced by nervousness, drunkenness, or excitement; they have cognitive impairment, or they have simply incapable to speak. For example; there are some people in front of bar and they have a simply conversation but they speak under control, ambiguous, and also not relevant with their topic. It can say as non-observance maxim because it fails to fulfill the observance of maxim.

d) Opting out

A speaker may opt out the maxim because he/ she may indicate the unwillingness to co-operate fulfill the maxim.55 The speakers do not want to appear unco-operative, so that they cannot replay in the way expected. Sometimes, the speakers do that for legal or ethical reasons.56 For example: the lawyer who handle the chairman‟s case usually say „I don‟t

know the result is, we better look forward‟. He does not want tell the

truth what the case is because some private reasons, and a police refusing to release the victim name of accident until the relative have been informed.

54

ibid

55

Paul Grice, Op. Cit, p.31

56

A. Data Description

Bibliography study is used as data collecting technique in this research. It is using written sources to gain the data. The steps to collect run as follows:

1. Download the transcript of on ABC‟s Barbara Walters and Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad interview on December 27, 2011 at ABC channel. It is taken from official website http://abcnews.go.com/International/transcript-abcs-barbara-walters-interview-syrian-president-bashar.

2. Give mark on every utterance that contain non-observance maxim (implicature).

3. Then write the data into data cards, e.g on page 1, data 1: flouting maxim of quantity, page data 2: flouting maxim of relation, and so on. Total data gained on data cards are 16 corpus data. The details are shown on the tables below:

Table I

The types of non-observance maxim on ABC‟s Barbara Walters and Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad on December 27, 2011 at ABC channel.

No Types of Non-Observance Maxim

Total

2 Violating a maxim 1

3 Opting out a maxim 5

TOTAL 16

Table II: The maxims that unobserved on ABC‟s Barbara Walters and Syrian

president Bashar Al-Assad on December 27, 2011 at ABC channel:

No Unobserve of maxim Total

1 Maxim of quantity 7

2 Maxim of quality 2

3 Maxim of relation 4

4 Maxim of Manner 3

TOTAL 16

B.Data Analysis

For the further, the 15 data are analyzed as below: Data 1

Walters asks about the condition of Syria because there are a lot of conflict related

to Assad‟s position.

Walters: Tell me what the reality here is your country is. What is the reality? Assad: it‘s too complicated, it takes hours to talk about...so let‘s be specific.

This dialogue indicates that Assad does an opting out a maxim of quality because he said ‗it‘s too complicated, it takes hours to talk about...‘ which means

unco-operative to answer the question and tend to lying. It is impossible that President does not understand the condition in his country but he does not want to tell Walters because it waste much time. So that, he prefers to replace another question to drawing his country. In the other words, Assad does not want to describe quite detail about his country. It is very vulnerable if everybody knows what happened in his country for this time because it will make a public opinion related to his position as president.

Data 2

Walters talks about people who support Assad to lead Syria.

Walters: but you talk about the support of your people. You did have the support of your people, and then began these demonstration, which i will discuss in more

detail and crack down, and you have people now who don‟t want you to lead. You

don‘t have the support of your people.

Assad: You always—

Walters: Of all your people.

Assad: you always have people that don‘t want you to be in that position, that‘s self-evident, that‘s normal, you cannot say that having the support of the people. All the people support you means something absolute. You are talking about the majority, and people are against you, they‘re not majority, when they are majority

you don‘t have to stay in that position.

From the dialogue, the writer finds that Assad flouts maxim of quantity by

answer must be „yes‟ or „no‟, but Assad replies with his explanation that flout the

maxim of quantity. On the conversation above, Walters said “you talk about the support of your people. You did have support of your people...and you have

people now who don‘t want you to lead. You don‘t have the support of your people.‖ It means that Walters thought Assad does not have to lead the country because some people do not support him to lead the country but Assad tries to tell

that he has people who support him. He said “you always have people that don‘t want you to be in that position, it is normal. You are talking the majority, and people against you are not the majority if they are the majority you cannot stay in

your position‖. In fact, Assad still stay in his position, it means Assad has people who support him.

Data 3

Walters asks about the participation of opposition parties which do not allowed to enroll in president election.

Walters: In 2014, when there are presidential election, will you allow opposition parties?

Assad: that‘s why we are changing the constitution.

The statement above has flouted maxim of relation because his answer irrelevant with the question. Walters asked Assad about involvement opposition

party in next president election, then Assad answered with “that‘s why we are changing the constitution‖ which irrelevant with the question. Based on that statement, Assad implies that he agrees with the involvement of opposition party for next president election. It proofs with conversion of the constitution. Syria will

do a reformation which changes the constitution and law. For the reformation, Syria makes a constitution which allows the opposition party to enroll next president election.

Data 4

Walters asks Assad‟s opinion about President Obama because President Obama push President Assad to step down from his position.

Walters: Mr. President, you once had positive things to say about President

Obama. Now President Obama says, and I quote, “President Assad has lost his legitimacy to rule, he should step down.” What do you say to President Obama? Assad: I‘m not a political commentator. I—I comment more on action rather than word. At the same time if I want to care about something like this I would care, I would care about what the Syrian people wants. Nobody else outside Syria is part

of our political map, so whatever they say we support, we don‘t, he‘s legitimate, or he‘s not, it‘s the same for me. For me what the Syrian people want, this is the

popular legitimacy that put me in that position, and this is the only thought that can make me outside, so anyone could have his own opinion, whether president, official or any citizen, it is the same for me outside our border.

In this conversation, Assad does an opting out maxim of quantity by not being co-operative and give more information with Walters‟s question. By said

―I‘m not a political commentator. I comment more on action than word..” indicates that he does not want to say something about Obama‟s word. He tries to

avoid a public opinion about him and Obama. If he makes public opinion and does not accurate, it will create another problem. As reported by media online

RedState, Bashar Al-Assad and America have an adverse relation because Obama tries to overthrow Assad as Syrian president57. Therefore, Assad does not want to

respond everything related to America‟s opinion about Syria because he will not make any deal with America.

Data 5

Walters talks about supporting people that gives to Assad.

Walters: do you feel now that you still have support of your people?

Assad: if you don‘t have the support of the people you cannot be in this position. In this case, Assad flouts maxim of quantity by giving more information as required. Assad should give an answer yes or no but he does not. He replies the question with a sentence which contains yes or no answers. On his statement “if

you don‘t have the support, you cannot be in this position‖, Assad implies that he still has a support by his people to lead Syria. If he does not have a support, he cannot stay in his position right now.

Data 6

Walters asks about people who support Assad.

Walters: you feel the majority of the people in this country support you?

Assad: I say the majority are in the middle and the majority are not against—to be precise.

This dialogue between Walters and Assad indicates that Assad flouts maxim

of quantity because he gives more information that it‟s required. When Walters

57

www.redstate.com014/09/16/obama-uses-war-isis-overthrow-syrias-assad/acess 16 Oct 14

asked him “you feel the majority of people in this country support you?‖ Assad

can give a simple answer by saying „yes‘ or „no‘ but he does not answer it. He replied it with a sentence by saying ― I say the majority are not against – to be

precise.‖ He implies that he still has a lot of supporters by saying “the majority”

besides the protesters. So that, public don‟t have to worry about his expedience to

lead his country.

Data 7

Walters talks about the forces that attack protesters because it involves women and children.

Walters: well in the beginning these protests, the women were marching with children carrying olive branches nobody at that point was asking for you to step down.it has escalated. Do you think that your forces cracked down too hard? Assad: they are not my forces, they are military forces belong to the government. Walters: OK, but you are the government.

Assad: I don‘t know them. I am president. I don‘t own the country, so they are not my forces.

Walters: No, but you have to give the order?

Assad: No, no, no. We have, in the constitution, in the law, the mission of the institution to protect the people to stand against any chaos or any terrorist, that their job, according to the constitution to their—to the law of the institution.

From the conversation above, Assad does a violating maxim of manner. It indicates that Assad does not answer the question briefly. Walters asked ―do you

think that your forces cracked down too hard?”. Assad should answer it simple and clear but Assad responds with statement which he does not want to take responsibility about this crack down. He said the crackdown is not his force, because he is a president who does not take care of security system. It means that

Assad know this hard crack down to his people by saying “they are not my forces,

they are military forces belong to government‖ but he does not want to hook this incident to him then he replays the question with his refutation which states he does not know about this crackdown. The writer thinks it is impossible if president does not know the activity conducted by his military forces.

Data 8

Walters asks about an issue which posted by United Nation. United Nation has

reported that Syria‟s government did a violence toward the demonstrans.

Walters: last week an independent United Nations Commission who interviewed more than two hundred and twenty five people issued a report what it said was that your government committed crimes against humanity and they went on torture, rape and other forms of sexual violence against protesters including against children, what do you say to them, I mean what I am saying again and again is that protesters were, were beaten, things happened to them, um, do you acknowledge that, do you acknowledge what the U.N said?

Assad: very simply I would say send us the documents and the concrete evidences that you have and we will see if that is true or not, you have not offered allegations now.

In this dialogue, Assad indicates that he flouts maxim of relation and maxim

of quantity. Based on the answer, Assad‟s sentence is not irrelevant with the

question. Walters asked about the issues which United Nation posted and asked

whether he knows or not. But Assad answered with “I would say send us the

document and the concrete evidences..‖ which if someone read this sentence and do not have a particular context, they do not know what the meaning is about the document or evidence. Consequently, the reader should have a particular context to know the meaning of this sentence. This sentence also flout maxim of quantity because it gives more information as required. Assad has to answer it with brief answer but he choose to answer with a sentence. He implies that he actually does not look some issues as his issues without any evidence showed to him (government). Even though United Nation posts that issues, and he does not receive the valid evidence, he does not take the issues as crime. Assad also try to

tell that he is not believe with United Nation‟s posting if they cannot give a proof

related to Syrian issue by saying ―..send us the documents and the evidence, and we will see if it is true or not...”, and Assad thinks that people outside Syria do not know what exactly happened in Syria.

Data 9

Walters inquires Assad about Syria‟s relation with neighborhood. Because of the

conflict, Syria gets criticized from some country to solve its crisis.

Walters: but what is the agenda, for example, of Turkey or Jordan or the Arab League, why?

Walters: OK.

Assad: they will tell you they have an agenda.

From this statement, Assad has opted out the maxim of quality because of

some legal and ethical reason. He does not answer Walters‟s question which he

may know information that Walters need. Assad implies that he does not want to

interfere his neighbors business by saying “I‘d rather ask them, i wouldn‘t on their behalf‖ because it relates to their individual interests. If he says something and it is not appropriate with the fact, it can make misconception between Syrian and the neighbors.

Data 10

Walters talks about a license to visit Syria in the conflict situation since there are some issues that Syria does not allow other people to visit Syria especially foreign correspondent.

Walters: we have not heard this, you will say yes?

Assad: you have to hear; to hear the truth, you have to look for the truth, the truth—

Walters: well I‘m, I‘m asking you now.

Assad: but doesn‘t mean they can come without a visa. We are a country where they have to take visa. We give visa to people, maybe we don‘t give visa to—we are like any other country against our sovereignty.

Walters: OK, but in—

The dialogue above has flouted maxim of manner. Assad does not say the answer briefly. Walters stressed the question “we have not heard this, you will say yes?” but Assad said ―you have to hear the truth, but doesn‘t mean they can come without visa..” which not answered Walters‟s question. From his answer, Assad tries to imply that everyone can go to Syrian with visa. If they take visa means everybody has protection from the government. So that, it can refuse some issues that Syria is not stable and unsafe country to visit. Based on the VOA Indonesia media online, the crime is being increase in Syria and the condition was not stable58. But Syrian president says that everyone can come to Syria, it means that not all of Syria is unsafe, but only part of it.

Data 11

Walters asks question about the beginning Assad replace his brother as president and the news of making Assad dynasty.

Walters: your father asked you to come back?

Assad: my brother had no position when my father was there and I had no

position. I wasn‘t, I was nothing in the party, I was only, I was in the military

since I was a doctor, nothing else.

On the conversation above, Walters asked “your father asked you to come

back?‖ and Assad replied something irrelevant with the question. It indicates that Assad flout maxim of relation. He implies that his father never to ask him and his brother to change his father position as president. So, he answered ―my bother

58

http://www.voaindonesia.com/content/kekerasan-di-suriah-meningkat-rusia-tolak-penggulingan-assad/1211818.html

and i had no position when my father was there...‖ means that Assad take his position as president is not because of his father, likewise his brother. He will tell the people that he does his own effort to replace his brother position after shooting incident by being a military doctor. Then he takes a place to his party and being a president. So that, it can refuse the news which claim that his family want make Assad Dynasty in Syria.

Data 12

Walters talks the reaction of Assad‟s children about Syria‟s conflict.

Walters: pay attention?

Assad: they are very curious to know.

In this conversation, Assad has flouted maxim of relation to replay

Walters‟s question. Walters asked Assad‟s children pay attention what‟s

happening in their country or not and Assad gave an irrelevant answer by saying

“they are very curious to know.” To get this implied meaning, the reader needs a

particular context. In this situation, Assad and Walters are talking about Assad‟s

children. Assad has 3 child; the eldest is 14 years old, the middle is 12 years old, and the younger is 11 years old. Since they have grown up as well, they can understand the situation of their country. So that, Assad tries to tell the people that his children know the condition of Syria as well and Assad does not cover the Syria issues currently to his children. It means that Assad is being transparent person for his family about Syrian conflict.

Data 13

Walters asks about misconception between Assad and President Obama because president Obama is very ambitious to replace Assad‟s position.

Walters: what do you think is the biggest misconception that my country has of

what‘s happening here, if indeed there is a misconception?

Assad: misconception about a lot of things. I cannot tell you, because it‘s so many facts, distorted facts, you have them in the media. But the most important thing, as

accumulation of these facts, you don‘t have vision. The problem with the west in general, especially in United States, they don‘t have vision about—at least my

region, I wouldn‘t talk about the rest of the world—failing in Iraq, failing in Afghanistan, failing in fighting terrorism.

Assad: the situation is getting worse and worse in the rest of the world. The question you ask as American, what did you get? Well, where did you win? Well, you spent trillions, where you could spend few hundreds of millions, and get the terrorists out. So that will—you—it harms your interest but at the same time, it

harms others‘, interest. So this is the misconception I think.

This explanation flouts maxim of manner and opts out the maxim because Assad does not say the answer briefly. When Walters asked about American misconception to the Syria, Assad did not say the answer clearly. He responds it with explanation which confirmed that there was misconception. He also opts out the maxim by not being co-operative to answer the question. Assad has said ―I can tell you” that indicates opting out the maxim because he cannot tell what kind of misconception. Once more, he is quite detail about his critical about America

because it can make misunderstanding if he says something wrong. In Assad‟s

explanation, he implies that America does not know the situation of middle east

country by saying “they (United States) don‘t have vision about at least my

region, I wouldn‘t talk about the rest of the world...failing in fighting

terrorism....”. Assad also impeach United States to make a worsen situation in the middle east by spoil their economic sectors and United states assessed fails to create conciliation between Middle East country.

Data 14

Walters asks about brutal reaction which discourses as order of government. Walters: OK. Our view is there are peaceful protesters, they were killed, and some were torture. It was a brutal reaction. Are we wrong in thinking that?

Assad: every single—every brute reaction, was by individual. Not by institution.

That‘s what you have to know.

Assad: we don‘t have institution that kill people, or give to—for brute reaction. This is individual—and that‘s what I call—what I describe as—individual mistakes.

From the conversation above, Assad flouts maxim of quantity. He replies

the question more than it‟s required. Walters question is “ are we wrong in thinking that the peaceful protesters being torture and killed were a brutal reaction?” this question needs „yes‟ or „no‟ answer, but Assad answers with a

sentence which gives more information than its required. Assad said “every brutal reaction was by individual not by institution” from that statement, Assad implies that the government does not take responsibility of any brutal reaction because it

is not from the government institution. So that, if someone says that the peaceful protesters killed and tortured were a brutal reaction from government, they are quite wrong because the government does not have the institution to kill the people.

Data 15

Walters is talking about the brutality that happened in Syria while the demonstration.

Walters: The crackdown in the beginning, the brutality. Do you think it went too far?

Assad: I cannot tell you this, without the evidence. You ask me to tell you

according to rumor, or to reports. It‘s not enough for me, as president. For me,

when there is policy, I could say yes, or no, when there is individuals with concrete evidence, who committed mistake, I will say yes or no.

From the dialogue above Assad has opted out maxim of quantity, because

he does not want to cooperate to answer Walters‟s question by saying i cannot tell you, that is the indicator if Assad does not want to cooperate with Walters and being informative than its required. Actually, Walters question needs a short answer, but Assad answer with an explanation. Here, Assad tries to tell that he does not believe about the brutality that government doing to the citizen in his country because there is no a concrete evidence. He thinks that there is no brutality since there is no official reports to the government. With condition of Syria nowadays, Assad tries to avoid some negative issues in order to make Syria under control. So that, he does not answer Walters‟s question carelessly.

Data 16

Walters ask about Assad‟s leadership in Syria

Walters: You have said often that you don‟t see yourself doing this job for life.

You‟ve said you‟re doing it for your country. With all the turmoil in your country is it perhaps better for Syria that you no longer remain its leader?

Assad: i don‘t have problem. For me Syria as a project, project of success, if you

don‘t succeed you don‘t have to stay in that position and that success again depends on the public support without public support you cannot, whether you are

elected or not, it‘s not about the election, now it‘s about public support. This is

the most important thing. So when i feel that the public support declined, i won‘t

be here even if they say, if they ask or not i shouldn‘t be here if there is no public

support.

In this explanation, Assad flouts maxim of manner, because he said the answer with ambiguous answer. When Walters ask about his leadership and the turmoil that happened in Syria, Assad does not answer strictly by saying I don‘t have problem.... it depends on public support.. It does not answer Walters‟s question clearly. In this case, he tries to be wise to respond about his overthrow issue as Syrian president. He want to change the views of people of him better than in the issue. He will step down when there is no support of Syrian people for him. In fact, he still stay in his position even if the Syria condition is not fully secure.

A.Conclusion

In studying the transcript “ABC‟S Barbara Walters and Syrian President

Bashar Al- Assad” by using Gricean Theory of Conversational Implicature, the writer has found from the dialogue on the transcript, the speaker have done non- observance towards maxim of quality, maxim of quantity, maxim of relation, and maxim of manner. Especially, the speakers flout, violate, and opt out of those maxim.

By observing non-observance maxim that generate conversational implicature, the writer discovers that most of the non-observance maxim is a flouting maxim of quantity. It may a bit different from the thesis which uses movie script as an object of study because the interview script has one context, whereas a movie script has many contexts of situation cause of implicature. The speaker does a flouting maxim of quantity in order to avoid misleading towards the listener because his goal in this interview is looking for support to achieve

speaker‟s mission. The speaker tends to give more information even though the

interviewer‟s question need a short answer. It is because the speaker wants every question to be answered clearly and does not cause ambiguity. As we know, Assad wants other people to trust him because of his issues which make a dynasty in Syria. So that, he answers every single question by an explanation and clearly.

On the other hand by flouting maxim of quantity, the writer concludes that the speaker seems not to be brave in justifying a statement whether his utterance is true especially when he talks about someone else. That is because the speaker does not want to make an issue by his respond considering the speaker is the influencing people to others. Consequently, the speaker replies the question very carefully.

B.Suggestion

In interaction with others, people always relate to communication. Communication always relate to language. Language is the best way for people to change information with others. But in language, there are rules applied in forming communication especially in speaking. It depends on the culture and every language has a different culture in this world. By observing the maxim, a communication in two speakers can be known their characteristic of language, culture and their view. Due to it, the writer would give some suggestions for the Linguistic researchers and for English Letters student as well, especially the students who focus their study on Pragmatics scope.

1. For the Linguistic researcher, in analyzing the language phenomena, there are various thing that can be investigated because language is dynamic and

always developed. It means we study people‟s culture which never become

extinct unless the human does not exist. For example in Pragmatics, one

language may assume that one‟s expression is defy maxim, however in

Walters: Some people say that it's not the protests that may bring you down, but the economic sanctions, uh, now. Not just the West, but your, as we said, your former allies having imposed economic sanctions on your country.

Walters: Shell Oil for example, which is the largest oil production in Syria, has stopped production. How much are the economic sanctions are going to hurt Syria?

Assad: How much, it's difficult to tell. But it-- it will hurt from us, one aspect, but from another aspect, it will have positive effects because of course this is surprising. But actually, we were under sanctions, strong sanction, in the second half of the '80s, and we built our industry in that period of time. So you can use sanctions for example the-- agreement between Syria and Turkey, wasn't fair. Assad: It was against our interest. Many industrialists in Syria, many business men, most of the economic sector were against it, and they asked our government many times, to stop working with this treaty. They sent to see-- I think two folds, export, something like this, I don't have the numbers now, so, you have-- if you-- if you are smart enough, if you are creative enough. You know, every cloud has silver lining, and we have a lot of political clout in this region. So we have lot of silver lining, but you have to see the silver lining to know how to-- to have the positive. So it will affect you badly, from one side, but you can decrease the harm. I wouldn't say you can win now, let's not exaggerate, but you can decrease this harm and get some benefits from it.

Walters: How can you get benefits from economic sanctions?

Assad: First of all we are not oil producing country, we are not like Iraq. Iraq was depend-- oil dependent. We are not oil dependent, we produce. We can leave the-- we export the food. We eat our food.

Walters: So you were saying that it would take more maybe creativity, more industry.

Assad: Exactly.

Walters: In this whole country to become independent.

Assad: Exactly. And we can. We don't have problems if-- and this could be the strong point of Syria. That's why I said they cannot isolate Syria.

Walters: They cannot isolate you? Assad: No.

Walters: I have seen the markets filled with food so I, you are able to-- to keep feeding your people.

Assad: Of course, no, we don't have trouble. We can-- we can eat two years without, with full embargo. We export wheat to many countries.

Walters: Your wife was raised and went to school in England. It has been said that she is a force for moderation. I'd like to know, when you and she discuss things, um, what has she said about what's happening in your country?

Assad: We are used to live as one family in Syria, because Syria is small country. Whenever you have one crime, the whole country will hear about it. It's very safe country. Of course it's still the same pain, to feel-- we feel sorry about what's happening, but at the end-- the-- the, the discussion-- is always and I think everywhere in Syria is part-- what can we do to have to prevent more blood shedding in Syria.

Walters: Your wife has her own projects in the country. Assad: Yes. Development project. Charity of course. Walters: But do you discuss the situation?

Assad: Of course yes. That's what I said, part of the solution is how to make life better in different aspects. Development is part of the solution. It's not only about demonstrations and militants and terrorists and things like that.

Walters: Is your wife a source of support for you? Assad: Of course, all my family.

Walters: Let me ask about the children. Because you have three young children, 9, 8 and 6.

Assad: Yes.

Walters: What have you told them about what's happening in this country? Assad: The reality.

Walters: Which is what? Assad: What-- what I told you. Walters: What do you say to them? Assad: I told them all.

Walters: Especially the older boy?

Assad: I told them about terrorists, I told them about people-- innocent people being killed. About investigation we have to know who-- who helped looked for the reason. Everything.

Walters: You've told them about innocent people getting killed? Assad: Of course.

Walters: Some of whom are children.

Assad: Uh we didn't talk about whether-- innocent is innocent. Whether it's children or-- is innocent.

Walters: Do they see pictures? Do they have Facebook? Assad: Of course.

Walters: Or YouTube? Assad: Of course. Of course. Walters: Do they ask questions?

Assad: They can watch the Internet every day. Of course. They ask a lot. Walters: Pay attention?

Assad: They are very curious to know. Walters: What do they say?

Assad: About the question-- about what's happening? Why-- why do you have militants, why do you have evil people? Why do the-- why do those people want to kill?

Walters: I want to hear the answers, what do you say?

Assad: I told them a lot of things. Sometimes people commit mistakes, sometimes you have bad people. In every society you have bad people. So they kill more to undermine the government, that's what you explain to the children.

Walters: How does this all end? How do you restore peace? Assad: By reform and facing the terrorists.

Walters: Is the reform, too little too late?

Assad: No, because anyway, the reform will not have direct impact on the terrorists, because most of the terrorists, and I would say, all the terrorists, they don't have political agenda. They don't care about reforming. The reform is for the majority in the middle that I told you about and the people who support you, and the people who are against you. But terrorists don't care about this.

Walters: Will you allow freedom of expression, freedom of press? Assad: We already have it.

Assad: We have in every-- every society, you have a, like-- I wouldn't call taboo? You have a limit.

Walters: Taboo? Not in mine. We have freedom of press. Walters: How do you hope that you will be remembered?

Assad: By doing the best I can, can for, for this country. Whether you agree, or whether the people agree or don't, don't agree, but at-- at the end, I was not a puppet. I care a lot about being independent president for independent Syria. And do my best, according to my convictions. That's the most important thing. At the end, even if they disagree with you, they will respect you.

Walters: What do you think is the biggest misconception that my country has of what's happening here, if indeed there is a misconception?

Assad: Misconception about a lot of things. I cannot tell you, because it's so many facts, distorted facts, you have them in the media. But the most important thing, as accumulation of these facts, you don't have vision. The problem with the West in general, especially the United States, They don't have vision about-- at least my region, I wouldn't talk about the rest of the world -- failing in Iraq, failing in Afghanistan, failing in fighting terrorism.

Assad: The situation is getting worse and worse in the rest of the world. The question you ask as American, what did you get? Well, where did you win? Well, you spent trillions, where you could spend few hundred of millions, and get the terrorists out. So that will-- you-- it harms your interest, but at the same time, it harms others', interest. So this is the misconception I think.

Walters: Dealing with the protest-- with the protesters. What is the misconception, if there is any?

Assad: About this situation?

Walters: About the protests, that's what is being focused on now.

Assad: OK, we don't kill our people, nobody kill. No government in the world kill its people, unless it's led by crazy person. For me, as president, I became president because of the public support. It's impossible for anyone, in this state, to give order to kill people.

Assad: We have militants, those militants killing-- soldiers and killing civilians. This morning, we lost nine civilians, killed in Homs, in the middle of Syria, and they are supporters. Most of the victims are support government supporters. That's something they don't know, they think every civilian is demonstrator, and every civilian is against the government, which is not true.

Walters: But the protesters in the beginning, who were killed... Assad: Yeah.

Walters: What about them? Assad: What do you mean?

Walters: OK. Our view is there are peaceful protesters, they were killed, some were tortured. It was a brutal reaction. Are we wrong in thinking that?

Assad: Every single-- every brute reaction, was by individual. Not by institution. That's what you have to know.

Assad: We don't have institution that kill people, or give order to-- for brute reaction. This is individual-- and that's what I call-- what I describe as-- individual mistakes.

Walters: OK. Done by the military, or done by whom?

Assad: We don't know everything. In some cases done by the police. In some cases done by civilians.

Walters: But not by your command?

Assad: No, no, no. We don't have-- nobody-- no one's command. There was no command, to kill or to be brutal.

Walters: So that was individual people? Assad: Of course.

Walters: Are you remorseful? (side chat)

Assad: What do you mean remorseful? You mean being sad or-- or regret? Walters: Regret.

Assad: No, a regret-- you regret when you do-- when you do mistakes, when you commit a mistake. I always try to protect my people. How can I feel remorseful if I try to protect the Syrian people?

Walters: Yeah, do you feel guilty? Guilty. Guilt.

Assad: Because if you mean guilty, it means you made the mistake. That's why I have be precise. So if you can change the term just for me to--

(side chat)

Walters: And then I'm done. Do you feel guilty?

Assad: I did my best to protect the people, so I cannot feel guilty, when you do your best. You feel sorry for the lives that has been lost, but you don't feel guilty -- when you don't kill people.

Walters: Thank you, Mr. President. Assad: Thank you.

© 2015 ABC News Internet Ventures. All rights reserved.

 http://abcnews.go.com/International/transcript-abcs-barbara-walters-interview-syrian-president-bashar