61 to have summon-answer sequence. Ted summoned Robin to chat in a private. The
interesting point from Ted’s request on his third turn was that its nonverbal request which was effortlessly understandable for Robin to grasp. Through his nonverbal
expression, Ted was asking for a sex to kill the time. On the sixth turn, Robin opened a new question-answer sequence, it was the initiation sequence before
summon was answered. Ted’s answer to Robin’s inquiry was not as informative as was expected. Through his utterance on the seventh turn, Ted covered the truth by
misrepresenting the false information so that Robin believed that it was not because of T-shirt’s picture. However, his utterance did not suffice, the word “No” and “A
little” carried each on different meaning. In the terms of CP, Ted’s utterance
constituted the violation sub maxim of quantity. 2
Providing more information Besides providing more information, the research discovered that
intentionally giving more information than it was required could violate maxim of quantity as transpired in the following excerpts:
S02E16QNVL7
In the Mc’Laren, bar, Both Ted and Robin agreed that they should be honest each other about exes’ things.
1
Ted: See that girl over there? Three years ago, I totally made out with her.
2 Robin: I don’t wanna hear that
.
The violation maxim of quantity could be done by giving the information
which the hearer unnecessarily heard as appeared in the excerpt above. The conversation between Ted and Robin occurred in Mac’Laren Bar. Ted on initiated
turn was considered uncooperative because he informed the unnecessary information for Robin Khosravizadeh Sadehvandi, 2011, p. 123. Ted blatantly
62 hit Robin through his utterance which was founded to be offensive. In terms of CP,
Ted violated the sub maxim of quantity.
b. Violating Maxim of Relevance
Violation of maxim of relevance occurred when the speaker blatantly uttered an irrelevant topic. In the excerpt, the speaker’s answer or response was by
no means relevant to another speaker’s question. One reason for this answer could be the fact that the speaker was trying to evade current topic possessed by the other
speakers. 1
Uttering other topic to evade current situation The following excerpt would suffice to present the violation maxim of
relevance:
S02E12MNVL9 At the apartment. Robin, Barney and Ted. There is a spider in the living room.
1 Robin: Spider Spider
2
Barney: I left something in the hallway.
As appeared in the excerpt above, the conversation occurred when Robin exclaimed in fear upon knowing there was a spider near the couch. She exclaimed
to call for a help from anyone around. She did not select a next specific speaker so that anyone could contribute the expected response. However, the quickest response
which she received in return was not as she expected. Barney selected himself to be on the floor to hint Robin that he could not help her out of it. Barney’s utterance
was not cooperative by misrepresenting different topic. In fact, Barney was afraid of spider but he covered the truth with such utterance. In the terms of CP, Barney
violated the maxim of relevance to exclude himself from current situation Khosravizadeh Sadehvandi, 2011, p. 123.
63
S02E01MNVL1 The year 2030, the narrator, ted was telling his kids about how he met their mother.
1 Ted: Okay, where were we? It was June of 200six and life had just taken an unexpected
turn. 2
Daughter: Dad, can’t you just skip ahead to the part where you meet Mom? I feel like you’ve been talking for like a year.
3 Ted: Honey, all this stuff I’m telling you is important. It’s all part of the story.
4
Son: Could I go to the bathroom?
5 Ted: No.
The excerpt above supported the previous presented result in which the
situation constituted the violation maxim of relevance as well. Ted opened the talk with an invitation for his children to listen the story how he met his wife.
Structurally, the sequence for the first party was invitation-refusal. The refusal which occurred to flout maxim of quality was uttered by the daughter. However,
both of his children seemed to be unexcited to listen the long story. Both children were considered uncooperative. In the second party, the fourth turn, which was
taken by the son of Ted, was irrelevant to the topic being discussed in the current conversation. The son was trying to evade the long story from his father by uttering
the irrelevant topic which was untruthful Khosravizadeh Sadehvandi, 2011, p. 123. In terms of CP, the son violated maxim of relevant.
c. Violating Maxim of Manner
Maxim of manner was violated when the speaker intentionally refrained to be cooperative in their conversation by constructing obscure, ambiguous,
unordered, and undirected information to cause the hearer misunderstood or achieve some purposes. The analysis resulted the findings that maxim of manner could be
violated by some ways.
64 1
Uttering obscure sentences Firstly, the following excerpt illustrated the violation of the first sub maxim
of maxim manner by constructing obscure utterance:
S02E18MNVL15 In apartment, Barney doesn’t want Ted and Robin living together. He tried to convince
them by asking made-up questions. 1
Barney: So? We all agree? We move Ted’s stuff back up here? 2
Ted: Mm... No. we’re still moving in together. 3
Barney: Why? This is crazy. Ted, you’re throwing your life away. This girl is blinding you. With her shinny hair and her boob shaped boobs. This is bad for you, too, you
know.
The conversation above which constituted the violation sub maxim of manner occurred when Ted was about moving together in Robin’s apartment.
Barney suddenly felt that he was about to lose his best friend, and he was the one who disagreed Ted and Robin moving together. The interesting party was occurred
when Barney initiated an offer to open an offer-refusal sequence with Ted. He offered to move all Ted’s stuff from the lorry back to the apartment. However, Ted
gave a refusal to Barney as the exchange. Ted’s utterance used the dispreffered token “mmm” as the delay before completing his utterance. In the exchange to Ted’s
remark, Barney refrained from talking cooperatively. He obscured the expression by uttering “With her shinny hair and her boob shaped boobs.” to stop Ted moving
together. It was obscure to convince Ted that he was appealed and blinded by Robin’s physical appearance. However, the remark “boob shaped boobs” was
obscure. Therefore, in terms of CP, Barney violated maxim of manner since he did not construct his utterance clearly and obviously Tupan and Natalia, 2008, p. 66.
