Flouting the Maxim of Relation

4.3.2.1.3 Flouting the Maxim of Relation

The maxim of relation ‘be relevant’ was exploited by making a response or observation which was very obviously irrelevant to the topic in hand e.g. by abruptly changing the subject, or by overtly failing to address the other person’s goal in asking a question. 1 E.1 : I think this is very special for me I think, to talk with a foreigner, I think YEAH?... what - what the plans you do in here? I : My plans here? E.1 : YEAH I : I’m ++ WELL tomorrow I will be leaving for Surabaya and I’m accompanying a girl of - a girl, a friend of mine, a journalist, which going to interview mm ++ people, Indo Dutch people – and since it’s the first time for her in Indonesia, I’m accompanying her and while she is interviewing people, - I do what I want to do, and what I have seen first, that I passed this building of the RRI, the Radio Republik Indonesia, which I remembered from years ago The example above involved the data from Appendix 6 numbers T.84C.103; T.84C.104; T.85C.105; T.86C.106; T.87C.107 and T.87C.108. Edi asked about Ingrid’s plans while she was in Indonesia. Ingrid then answered Edi’s question by telling her plan to go to Surabaya. However, in this case, the writer assumed that Ingrid mentioned too much things which was not really necessary and was not really related to the question. Ingrid’s answer flouted the maxim of relation. 2 R : Is there any special act control or rule the action of being gay or lesbian special bill? I : NO NO - I think that gay people act very politely when in public - and, I mean mm ++ I have gay friends and I say I like them very much because they are very +++ I think they are very nice people, that I think it’s important are you good inside The example was taken from the data on Appendix 6 number T.176C.207 and T.177C.208. Rosalind asked Ingrid about certain bill which rule homosexual’s life. What she meant here, a bill which tightly ruled homosexual for what may or may not be done by them. Later, Ingrid answered Rosalind’s question about legal law which reserved homosexual in Holland. Instead of telling Rosalind about the related legal law, Ingrid telling Rosalind about her experience of having gay friend. Here, Ingrid’s answer implied that homosexual was well accepted in Holland, yet she did not mention it directly. She mentioned something which was not relevant with the question and she flouted maxim of relation.

4.3.2.1.4 Flouting the Maxim of Manner