HUMOR GENERATION IN THE UTTERANCES OF HUMOROUS TALK SHOW.

(1)

HUMOR GENERATION IN THE UTTERANCES OF

HUMOROUS TALK SHOW

A Thesis

Submitted to English Applied Linguistics Study Program in

Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Magister Humaniora

By:

LUHETRI MUHDALIFA MANALU

Registration Number: 8106112012

ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM

POST GRADUATE SCHOOL

STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN

2016

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, the writer would like to express her sincere gratitude to the Heavenly Father, Son of God Jesus Christ, and Holy Spirit for His amazing grace in the completion of this thesis to obtain a Master Degree in Applied Linguistics. This thesis process is filled with people who challenge, support, love, listen and frankly tolerate the writer. The process is a rewarding learning experience and the writer has learned enough about it. This thesis would not have been possible without the support and input of numerous people to whom the writer expresses her deeply gratitude.

The writer would like to express the greatest thanks to Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing, M.Pd and Prof. Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M.Pd, as her advisers for their great ideas, guidance and patience that lead the writer to the end of completion of this thesis.

The writer also would like to extend her sincere gratitude to the Head of English Applied Linguistics Study Program, Dr. Rahmad Husein, M.Ed, the secretary of English Applied Linguistics Program, Prof. Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S and Farid Ma’ruf as an administrator for their assistance regarding the administrative procedures and support during the writer’s thesis completion process patiently.

The writer’s great thanks also go to her reviewers or examiners, Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd, Prof. Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S and Dr. Siti Aisyah Ginting, M.Pd for their suggestions, critiques, opinions, and improvements for this thesis. In addition, the writer would like to thank to all lecturers for their knowledge and character building during the process of teaching and learning.

(6)

Then, the writer’s great respect and heartfelt thanks go to all her lovely friends in the executive class B LTBI XVIII as well and especially for her best friends Julia Ratih, Hestika Ginting, Resty Wahyuni, K’ Eka Dessy, Mam Delfina, K’ Anastasia, Fitri Ayunisa and the group members of line, “ladies on top” for their love, encouragement, supports, and unforgettable experiences in this thesis accomplishment. Her colleagues have become a part of her life and their friendship has been an invaluable gift that extends well beyond any academic pursuits, even it makes these academic pursuits so much more meaningful. “Great friends make for a great life.”

Last and most importantly, the writer wishes to express her sincere thanks to her beloved parents, Mr. Tohap Manalu and Ms. Almaria br Nainggolan for their continued and unfailing love, patience, guidance, prayer and support over years and their endless faith in the writer’s ability to accomplish this thesis. Her huge thanks are also dedicated to her great sisters, Eva Juwita Manalu, S.E & Elsaria Manalu and brothers, Andri William Manalu, S.S and Toni Abser Manalu, S.Pd for their love, assistance, and support. “Family has been an integral part of this process”.

Finally, the writer’s special love goes to her loving husband, Amudi Siregar, S.E who made an arduous task a more enjoyable and fulfilling experience. Her husband’s love, support, patience and encouragement have seen her through uncertain times. For that, the writer can only say ‘thanks my soul mate’.

Medan, February 2016

(7)

ABSTRACT

Manalu, Luhetri Muhdalifa. Registration Number: 8106112012. Humor Generation in the Utterances of Humorous Talk Show Thesis. English Applied Linguistics Study Program, Post Graduate School, State University of Medan (UNIMED) 2016.

This study deals with the humor generation in utterances of humorous talk show. The objectives of the study are to find out the ways of humor generation in humorous talk show created and the reasons why the utterances generate in the way they do. This research was conducted by descriptive qualitative design. The data were obtained from the downloaded videos and then they were transcribed. The data were humorous talk show taken from Indonesia Lawak Klub (ILK) of Trans 7 and Sentilan Sentilun of Metro TV. The humorous talk show is regarding as the programs of television intended to amuse the television watchers so that the program is usually blended by humor as the main points to provoke laughter and entertain the audience by highlighting the funny, easy going and relaxed atmosphere. The idea behind the humorous talk show is to make the viewer feel comfortable and unwind them after the long day activities. The findings showed that ways of humor generation found in the humorous talk show are incongruity way and superiority way while relief way was not found. The superiority way is the dominant way of humor generation in humorous talk shows and the second one was incongruity way. Concerning to incongruity way, the result of the data analysis showed that there were two of the five levels of incongruity way were found in the study such as (1) incongruity of phonology (2) incongruity of graphology while incongruity of morphology, lexis and syntax were not found. In addition, another way of humor generation which was not found in the theory proposed was also found in the analysis namely incongruity of reference. The ways of humor generation in Indonesia Lawak Klub (ILK) talk show and Sentilan Sentilun (SS) talk show are slightly different. Humor in ILK is generated by 2 ways namely incongruity and superiority ways while humor in SS is generated by only superiority way. The underlying reasons for the ways of humor generation in humorous talk shows related to the function of humor itself. There are five functions of humor but in this humorous talk show, there are only two functions found such as aggressive function and social function. Furthermore, the topic discussion of each talk show also affects the reason for the ways of humor generation in humorous talk show. The topic of both humorous talk shows is different. ILK talk show provides widely varied issue (non-politics) while SS talk show provides dominantly politic issue.

(8)

ABSTRAK

Manalu, Luhetri Muhdalifa, Nomer Registrasi: 8106112012. Pembentukan Humor dalam Ujaran pada Acara Talk Show Humor. Program Studi Linguistik Terapan Bahasa Inggris, Pasca Sarjana Universitas Negeri Medan (UNIMED) 2016.

Penelitan ini berkaitan tentang pembentukan humor pada ujaran dalam acara talk show humor. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk menemukan cara pembentukan humor dan alasan mengapa ujaran terbentuk dalam talk show humor dengan cara seperti itu. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan dengan menggunakan desain deskriptif kualitatif. Data diambil dari video yang diunduh dan kemudian ditranskripsikan. Data tersebut merupakan talk show humor yang diambil dari acara Indonesia Lawak Klub (ILK) di Trans 7 dan Sentilan Sentilun di Metro TV. Talk show humor ini dikenal sebagai program televisi yang ditujukan untuk menarik perhatian penonton sehingga acaranya biasanya dipadukan dengan humor untuk menghibur para penonton dan mengedepankan nuansa yang lucu, asyik dan relax. Ide dibalik talk show humor ini adalah membuat penonton merasa nyaman dan terlepas dari kesibukannya setiap hari. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa ada dua cara pembentukan humor pada talk show humor yaitu cara incongruity dan superiority sementara cara relief tidak ditemukan. Cara superiority adalah cara yang paling dominan dalam pembentukan humor dan di posisi kedua adalah cara incongruity. Terkait dengan cara incongruity, hasil dari analisis data menunjukkan bahwa dua dari lima level incongruity pada tingkatan bahasa ditemukan yaitu (1) fonologi, (2) graphologi sementara level incongruity pada morfologi, lexis dan sintaks tidak ditemukan. Sebagai tambahan temuan, cara pembentukan humor lain yang tidak tercakup dalam teori yang dipakai telah ditemukan dalam analisis penelitian ini adalah incongruity referensi. Cara pembentukan humor di talk show Indonesia Lawak Klub (ILK) dan Sentilan Sentilun (SS) sedikit berbeda. Humor di ILK terbentuk dari 2 cara yaitu cara incongruity dan superiority sementara humor di SS terbentuk hanya dari cara superiority.Alasan yang mendasari cara pembentukan humor pada talk show humor berkaitan dengan fungsi dari humor itu sendiri. Fungsi humor terdiri dari lima fungsi, tetapi dalam talk show humor ini, hanya ditemukan 2 fungsi yaitu fungsi

aggressive dan fungsi social. Selanjutnya topik diskusi dari setiap talk show juga berperan

penting dalam cara pembentukan humor dalam talk show. Topik dari kedua talk show humor tersebut berbeda. Talk show ILK menyajikan topik yang bervariasi (di luar ranah politik) sementara talk show SS dominan menyajikan topik politik.

(9)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENTS PAGES

Acknowledgement... i

Abstract... iii

Abstrak... iv

Table of Contents... v

List of Figures... vii

List of Diagram... viii

List of Tables... ix

List of Appendices... x

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1Background of the Study... 1

1.2Problem of the Study... 6

1.3Objectives of the Study... 6

1.4Scope of the Study... 6

1.5Significance of the Study... 6

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 2.1 The Nature of Humor... 8

2.2 Humor Classification... 10

2.3 Linguistic Theories of Humor... 11

2.4 Ways of Humor Generation...…... 13

2.4.1 Incongruity Way... 14

2.4.1.1 Phonology... 17

2.4.1.2 Graphology... 20

2.4.1.3 Morphology... 21

2.4.1.4 Lexis... 22

2.4.1.5 Syntax... 23

2.4.2 Superiority Way... 24

2.4.3 Relief / Release Way... 26

2.5 Humorous Talk Shows... 27

(10)

2.7 Conceptual Framework... 31

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research Design... 34

3.2 Data and Data Source ... 34

3.3 Instrument of Data Collection... 34

3.4 Technique of Data Collection... 35

3.5 Technique of Data Analysis... 35

3.6 Trustworthiness... 37

CHAPTER IV DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS, DISCUSSION 4.1 Ways of Humor Generation... 39

4.1.1 Incongruity Way... 40

4.1.1.1 Incongruity of Phonology... 40

4.1.1.2 Incongruity of Graphology... 41

4.1.1.3 Incongruity of Reference... 42

4.1.2 Superiority Way... 43

4.2 Underlying Reason for Way of HG... 44

4.2.1 Summary of Humor Generation in ILK... 45

4.2.2. Additional Data ... 47

4.2.3 Comparison of Humorous Talk Show... 48

4.3 Findings... 49

4.4 Discussion... 50

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1 Conclusions... 53

5.2 Suggestions... 53

(11)

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 Humor Generation in Indonesia Lawak Klub... 45 Table 4.2 Humor Generation in Sentilan Sentilun... 47

(12)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Communication scheme... 3 Figure 3.1 Miles and Huberman’s Interaction Model... 35 Figure 4.1 Types of Humorous Talk Show... 48

(13)

LIST OF DIAGRAMS

(14)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1The Background of the Study

People absolutely communicate along his life. Communication is aimed to express desires, beliefs, attitudes, behavior in social interaction. Talk show is one of the social interactions held in an event organized deliberately between the host and the guest to share information for the audience. Talk show is a form of communication or conversation, highly popular form of information and entertainment through the institutions, practices and technologies of television. The aim of talk shows is to deliver useful information to the viewers and entertain them at the same time (Munson, 1993).

Talk shows can be divided into several types based on the characteristics of information shared and time scheduled. Ilie (2001:216) distinguishes three major subcategories of talk shows on television. They are categorized according to the time they are on the air such as early morning talk shows, daytime talk shows, and late night talk shows. The topics discussed in daytime talk shows are very challenging, problematic and controversial. They deal mostly with concerns about current issues in the public and private sphere, such as social and professional conflicts, marginalization, feminism etc.

Late night talk shows are, on the other hand, entertaining and have a relaxed atmosphere. The idea behind the show is to make the audience feel comfortable and unwind them after the long day. Therefore, the style and the contents of daytime talk show and late night talk show are different. The late night talk show definitely falls into the latter category. It is specifically a kind of comedy-oriented talk and variety show that airs late at night. A talk show which blends humor as the main point or central element of the program can be categorized as humorous talk show. Humorous talk show can be used to attract the

(15)

audience’s attention as what Mc. Ghee (1979) argued that any good instructional television program must have an element of humor in order to maintain a high level of motivation in large numbers of people to watch the program. Humor can be broadly identified as a form of communication in which a created stimulus may act to provide pleasure for an audience. The benefits of humor in communication can be encountered not only in talk show but also in social life. In fact, numerous organizations believe humor to be so beneficial in the work place. Teachers use humor to bridge the gap of reluctance in communication with their students. Integrating humor into teaching difficult subjects has proven to be beneficial to students. Another study found that students’ retention and comprehension is improved when humor is woven into class lectures.

Doctors use humor in their communication with patients which would otherwise be a strictly serious role. This practice helps build relationships with their patients and also aids in the patients’ recovery. Doctors have been using humor in their practice for quite some time now but this is not a new. Humor is often used to heal; not only emotional stress, but physical stress as well as the movement from laughter can aid in healing muscle tension, fight infections, and interrupt spasm-cycles. Even scientists have been known to use humor to relieve stressful situations.

According to Nuolijärvi and Tiittula (2000:17) communication or conversations in talk shows broadcasted on television differ from everyday life communication. Firstly, on television there is always a certain time reserved for the program. Therefore, it limits the duration of interaction. Secondly, talk shows are aimed at a “third party”, i.e. the audience. The viewer is the third participant even though if he or she may be not an active participant of television interaction. Humor used in talk show has been already accorded to the talk show characteristic itself. The talk show contains indirect communication since the audience is the third party who obtains the information shared in talk show. The

(16)

conversation is meant to be presented to the viewers and that makes the interaction of talk show special. Thus, it can be inferred that the communication in talk show is a unique-designed for entertaining purpose and far from its natural use in the real life. Otherwise, in the real life, the communication model shows that the speaker and hearer will use the direct-communication.

The elaboration of communication occurred in talk show and real life conversation can be simply illustrated as follows:

a. Communication in Real Life (Natural Conversation)

b. Communication in Talk Show

Notes:

Figure 1.1 Communication Scheme

Since humor in the real life and humor in talk show has different model of communication, the researcher was going to analyze how and why the utterances generate humor in humorous talk show. In analyzing the data, the researcher used three ways of humor generation.

Speaker _Hearer

Host Guest

Audience (Viewers)

Direct Communication

(17)

There were three ways categorized to know how the utterances generate the humor in humorous talk show and the reason why the utterances generate in the way they do. The first was known as incongruity way, it defined that humor could be generated when people's logical expectations didn't match up with the end of the situation or the joke. The second was superiority way, it defined that humor was generated when laughter risen at someone else's mistakes because feeling superior to them. The third was called relief way, it defined that humor as a method of releasing people from inner battles and torments, and thus humor was often generated when giving the sense of release from some threat that is being overcome, the use of bad language (taboo) was found in this way of humor generation.

The data were taken from humorous talk shows namely ILK of Trans7 and Sentilan Sentilun of Metro TV. Both of humorous talk shows were categorized as late night show because the program was blended by humor as the main points to provoke laughter and entertain the audience. Indonesia Lawak Klub (ILK) and Sentilan Sentilun (SS) had already been familiar for the audience and still existed until now. They were the popular talk shows which used humor to attract the audience’s attention. These backgrounds of humorous talk shows convinced and triggered the researcher to take them as the subjects of the research.

Indonesia Lawak Klub (ILK) is a parody talk show which imitates Indonesia Lawyers Club (ILC) on TVone but the way in sharing the information is different. The topic discussed in this talk show is widely varied issue. The schedule of ILK had ever been added for every day schedule broadcasting because of the audience’s request.

Sentilan sentilun is a popular humorous talk show broadcasted to give information of politics dominantly and criticize the government’s policy. The topic discussed is dominantly politic issue. It is one of excellent talk show known in MetroTV besides Mata

(18)

Najwa, Kick Andi, Just Alvin and Mario Golden Ways. Both of the humorous talk shows were the successful program to attract the audience’s interest to watch and still existed up to now. These humorous talk shows program provided the fresh entertainment for the audience.(http://www.kompasiana.com/jadwaltvindo/acara-tv-talkshow-2015).

The researcher would analyze the way of humor generation based on the three ways such as incongruity, superiority and relief. Then by using incongruity way, the researcher used the level of language such as phonology, graphology, morphology, lexis and syntax proposed by Ross (1998) to analyze the words, phrase and sentences which generate the humor.

The example of the humor generated by using incongruity way can be seen in conversation of humorists in ILK program on Trans7 TV (episode: Asli atau palsu, 23 Agustus 2015).

E.g 1:

R : Dari tadi saya perhatikan anteng-anteng aja padahal dia pakai barang palsu, artis loh.

D : Siapa? R : Ini.

D : Hah? Ini, pak Jarwo? Anda sembarangan menuduh, saya tahu kredibilitasnya pak Jarwo.

J : Terima kasih, bro.

D : Oh, sudah berapa kali dia dipanggil oleh polsek-polsek terdekat. [penonton

tertawa]

J : Loh kenapa, pak Denny ?

D : Nggak, ditanya aja, pak Jarwo apa kabar?

From the example above, it can be seen that J’s expectation does not match to what actually occurs in the conversation that evoke laughter from the audience. J assumed that D would support him otherwise D is trying to provoke the laughter by saying unpredictable answer or surprise element to be a response.

(19)

1.2 Problems of the Study

The problems of the study must be clearly stated so that the objectives of the study can be well determined. In line with the background above, the problems of the study were formulated as follows.

1) How do the utterances in humorous talk shows generate the humor?

2) Why do the utterances in humorous talk shows generate in the way they do? 1.3 Objectives of the Study

Based on the problems of study above, the objectives of the study were.

1) to describe and to elaborate how the utterances generate the humor in humorous talk shows.

2) to elaborate the reasons why the utterances generate in the way they do. 1.4 Scope of the Study

The study was concerned on investigating of the humor generation in utterances of humorous talk show entitled Indonesia Lawak Klub of Trans7 and Sentilan Sentilun of Metro TV. The study limited the analysis on the verbal humor which dealt to exploit some verbal elements such as words, phrases and sentences. In this case, it was important to describe and elaborate the way of humor generation and the realization of linguistic level in that context so the factors generating the humor could be analyzed.

1.5 Significance of the Study

There were two general significances which would be found theoretically and practically.

(20)

Theoretically, the results of this study were useful:

1) to enrich and develop readers’ knowledge of linguistic levels which was used in humor generation.

2) as the source of information and idea for other researchers who wanted to carry out further study on Language and Humor (LaH) in the other fields.

Practically, the results of this study were useful:

1) as the guiding information for readers to increase their sensitivity of finding socially appropriate humor in language use for the situation that they encountered in communication.

2) as the guidance for the readers that humor was necessary to enhance the quality relationship with others in different context and situation as it was a form of communication.

(21)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions

Based on the analysis, the conclusions were stated as the following.

1) Based on the data analysis, it was found that the utterances in humorous talk show in generating the humor consisted of two ways of the three ways namely (1) incongruity way and (2) superiority way while relief way was not found. By using incongruity way, there were two of five levels of incongruity found such as incongruity of (1) phonology and (2) graphology while morphology, lexis and syntax were not found.

2) The underlying reason for the ways of humor generation is the function of humor in the humorous talk show such as (a) aggressive function and (b) social function. The different topics of discussion in each humorous talk show and the characterictics of the talk show itself also affect the ways of humor generation.

5.2 Suggestions

In relation to the conclusions, suggestions were offered as the following.

1) Television watchers, to pay attention to the incongruity way so they will have better understanding in enjoying the humor.

2) Humorists, to give them more highlight on the incongruity way so that they can create humor in such a way.

3) Further research, to conduct other researches not only in talk show but also other different field in enriching the researchers and the readers’ knowledge of linguistic devices used in the ways of humor generation related to language and humor (LaH).

(22)

REFERENCES

Apte, M. (1985). Humor and Laughter: An Anthropological Approach. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Attardo, Salvatore. (1994). Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

_______________ (1997). The Semantic Foundations of Cognitive Theories of Humor.

Humor: International Journal of Humor Research. 20 (4) 278-367.

Audrieth, L.A. (1998). The Art of Using Humor in Public Speaking. Retrieved March 20, 2015, from http://www.squaresail.com/onhumor.html.

Bogdan, R. and Biklen, S. (1982). Qualitative Research for Education (2nd_{ed). Boston:}

Allan and Bacon.

Brock, A. (2008). Humor, jokes and irony versus mocking, gossip and black humor. In A. Gerd & E. Ventola (Eds.), Handbook of Interpersonal Communication (pp. 541-566). Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousnds Oaks; Sage.

Freud. (1976). Jokes and Their Relation to Unconscious. Ed. Angela Richards. London: Penguin Books.

Halliday, M.A.K. & R. Hasan (1994): Cohesion in English. London: Longman.

Hu, Shuqin. (2012). An Analysis of Humor in The Big Bang Theory from Pragmatics Perspectives. College of Foreign Languages, Qingdao University of Science and Technology.

Illie, C. 2001. Semi-Institutional Discourse: The Case of Talk Shows. Journal of Pragmatics. 31 (8), 489 -493.

______. 2006. Talk Shows. Journal of Pragmatics. 15 (10), 180 -232.

Keith-Spiegel, P. (1972). Early concepts of humor: Varieties and issues. In J.H.Goldstein & P.E. McGhee (Eds.), The Psychology of Humor (pp. 4-39). New York: Academic Press.

Koestler, A. (1993). Humor and Wit. Encyclopaedia Britannica. (vol. 20). Ed. Robert McHenry. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc, 684-685.

(23)

Kusproborini, Camellia. (2001). Analysis of Humor Types And Grice’s MaximFound In “Laughter, The Best Medicine” In Readers Digest. Surakarta Faculty of Letters.UNS.

Latta, Robert L. (1998). The Basic Humor Process:106, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. McGhee, Paul E. (1979). Humor Its Origin and Development. San Francisco: W. H.

Freeman and Company.

Meyer, John. (2000). Humor as a Double-Edged Sword: Four Functions of Humor in Communication: Communication Theory10, 310-331.

Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Morreall, J. (1983). Taking laughter seriously. New York: State University of New York Press.

________ (1997). Humor Works. Amherst, MA: HRD Press.

Munson, W. (1993). All Talk: The Talk Show In Media Culture. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Nanda, S., & Warms, R. L. (2011). Culture counts: A concise introduction to cultural anthropology. Belmont: Wadsworth.

Niven, D. 2003. The Political Content of Late Night Comedy. The Journal of Press / Politics.

8:118-133

Nuolijärvi. P, and Tiittula, L (2000). Television in the Discussion Stage:

TV Institutionalized in the Finnish and German

Conversation Culture. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15, 1-65. NurFajarini, Salasiyah. (2001). An Analysis of Humor Expression of the Situation

Comedy Friends Episode of The One With The Chicken Pox. Surakarta Faculty of Letters.UNS.

Ortega, M. Belen. (2013). An Approach to Verbal Humor in Interaction. University of Alicante.

Palmer, J. (1994). Taking Humor Seriously. New York: Routledge. Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Holland: Reidel. Ross, A. (1998). The Language of Humor. London: Routledge.

Rong Na. (2010). Research on the Effects of DM’s Use in Humorous Language. Changsha University of Science and Technology.

(24)

Humorous Pun Formation’, In: Dynel, Marta (ed.), The Pragmatics of Humor across Discourse Domains, John Benjamins Publishing Company,

Amsterdam/Philadephia, pp. 71-104.

Wenzhen, Wang. (2005). A Pragmatic Approach to the Understanding of Verbal Humor. Unpublished Dissertation.Anhui University.

Zou Haixia. (2012). A Study of Verbal Humor in Cross Talk Based on Adaptation-Relevance Model. Hunan Normal University.

Zulfiqar, Saidna. (2010). Humor in Bukan Empat Mata Talk Show. Unpublished Thesis. Iqra Buru University.

Website Materials:

(http://www.kompasiana.com/jadwaltvindo/acara-tv-talkshow-2015) (www.wikipedia.org)

(25)

(1)

Theoretically, the results of this study were useful:

1) to enrich and develop readers’ knowledge of linguistic levels which was used in humor generation.

2) as the source of information and idea for other researchers who wanted to carry out further study on Language and Humor (LaH) in the other fields.

Practically, the results of this study were useful:

1) as the guiding information for readers to increase their sensitivity of finding socially appropriate humor in language use for the situation that they encountered in communication.

2) as the guidance for the readers that humor was necessary to enhance the quality relationship with others in different context and situation as it was a form of communication.

(2)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions

Based on the analysis, the conclusions were stated as the following.

5.2 Suggestions

In relation to the conclusions, suggestions were offered as the following.

1) Television watchers, to pay attention to the incongruity way so they will have better understanding in enjoying the humor.

2) Humorists, to give them more highlight on the incongruity way so that they can create humor in such a way.

(3)

REFERENCES

Apte, M. (1985). Humor and Laughter: An Anthropological Approach. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Attardo, Salvatore. (1994). Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

_______________ (1997). The Semantic Foundations of Cognitive Theories of Humor. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research. 20 (4) 278-367.

Audrieth, L.A. (1998). The Art of Using Humor in Public Speaking. Retrieved March 20, 2015, from http://www.squaresail.com/onhumor.html.

Bogdan, R. and Biklen, S. (1982). Qualitative Research for Education (2nd_{ed). Boston:}

Allan and Bacon.

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousnds Oaks; Sage.

Freud. (1976). Jokes and Their Relation to Unconscious. Ed. Angela Richards. London: Penguin Books.

Halliday, M.A.K. & R. Hasan (1994): Cohesion in English. London: Longman.

Hu, Shuqin. (2012). An Analysis of Humor in The Big Bang Theory from Pragmatics Perspectives. College of Foreign Languages, Qingdao University of Science and Technology.

Illie, C. 2001. Semi-Institutional Discourse: The Case of Talk Shows. Journal of Pragmatics. 31 (8), 489 -493.

______. 2006. Talk Shows. Journal of Pragmatics. 15 (10), 180 -232.

Keith-Spiegel, P. (1972). Early concepts of humor: Varieties and issues. In J.H.Goldstein & P.E. McGhee (Eds.), The Psychology of Humor (pp. 4-39). New York: Academic Press.

Koestler, A. (1993). Humor and Wit. Encyclopaedia Britannica. (vol. 20). Ed. Robert McHenry. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc, 684-685.

(4)

Kusproborini, Camellia. (2001). Analysis of Humor Types And Grice’s MaximFound In “Laughter, The Best Medicine” In Readers Digest. Surakarta Faculty of Letters.UNS.

Latta, Robert L. (1998). The Basic Humor Process:106, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. McGhee, Paul E. (1979). Humor Its Origin and Development. San Francisco: W. H.

Freeman and Company.

Meyer, John. (2000). Humor as a Double-Edged Sword: Four Functions of Humor in Communication: Communication Theory10, 310-331.

Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Morreall, J. (1983). Taking laughter seriously. New York: State University of New York

Press.

________ (1997). Humor Works. Amherst, MA: HRD Press.

Munson, W. (1993). All Talk: The Talk Show In Media Culture. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Nanda, S., & Warms, R. L. (2011). Culture counts: A concise introduction to cultural anthropology. Belmont: Wadsworth.

Niven, D. 2003. The Political Content of Late Night Comedy. The Journal of Press / Politics.

8:118-133

Nuolijärvi. P, and Tiittula, L (2000). Television in the Discussion Stage: TV Institutionalized in the Finnish and German Conversation Culture. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15, 1-65. NurFajarini, Salasiyah. (2001). An Analysis of Humor Expression of the Situation

Comedy Friends Episode of The One With The Chicken Pox. Surakarta Faculty of Letters.UNS.

Ortega, M. Belen. (2013). An Approach to Verbal Humor in Interaction. University of Alicante.

Palmer, J. (1994). Taking Humor Seriously. New York: Routledge. Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Holland: Reidel. Ross, A. (1998). The Language of Humor. London: Routledge.

Rong Na. (2010). Research on the Effects of DM’s Use in Humorous Language. Changsha University of Science and Technology.

(5)

Humorous Pun Formation’, In: Dynel, Marta (ed.), The Pragmatics of Humor across Discourse Domains, John Benjamins Publishing Company,

Amsterdam/Philadephia, pp. 71-104.

Wenzhen, Wang. (2005). A Pragmatic Approach to the Understanding of Verbal Humor. Unpublished Dissertation.Anhui University.

Zou Haixia. (2012). A Study of Verbal Humor in Cross Talk Based on Adaptation-Relevance Model. Hunan Normal University.

Zulfiqar, Saidna. (2010). Humor in Bukan Empat Mata Talk Show. Unpublished Thesis. Iqra Buru University.

Website Materials:

(http://www.kompasiana.com/jadwaltvindo/acara-tv-talkshow-2015) (www.wikipedia.org)

(6)

HUMOR GENERATION IN THE UTTERANCES OF HUMOROUS TALK SHOW.