1. Violations of Conversational Maxims of Quality
Based on the analysis, there are eight violations of maxim of quality found in this TV-series. Here, the writer highlights some of them, while the rest of data can be
seen in the appendix 1:
Based on the datum above, Dawkins violates the maxim of quality. It can
seen in the datum above. Her utterance is the response
from Fowler’s previous utterance “Hello, darling trying to stand up. I hope I didnt wake you”. Here,
Dawkins does not tell the truth that Fowler disturbs her sleep by shaking her bed.
In fact, she says that in implied meaning Its the first time youve made my headboard rattle this year. I wouldnt have wanted to miss that
. She says that implicitly because she wants to mock Fowler indirectly. However, Fowler does
not realize Dawkins’ implied meaning in her utterance. In this case, Dawkins violates the maxim of quality because she does not tell the truth that she feels
disturbed. As a consequence, Fowler does not realize her feeling.
Data Nu.
Line Nu.
Name Dialogue
1 2.
FOWLER Hello, darling trying to stand up. I hope I didnt wake you
3. DAWKINS
Not at all. Its the first time youve made my headboard rattle this year. I wouldnt have wanted to miss that
. Whereve you been?
4. FOWLER
You know where Ive been, my petal. At my pub quiz night.
Data Nu.
Line Nu.
Name Dialogue
5. 19.
DAWKINS jealous, with the flat sound So you kissed Maggie Habib.
20. FOWLER
Yes. I cant tell you how wonderful she was
21. DAWKINS
staring to Fowlerjealous Well, dont
As seen in the datum above, Dawkins violates the maxim of quality.Her utterance is the answer to Fowler’s question “Darling, what? Whats the matter?”
Here, Dawkins tells a lie. She says that it is nothing Nothing. Really, its nothing
. In fact, she is jealous because Fowler still admires Habib. Her lie causes Fowler misunderstands Dawkins’ utterance. It can be seen in Fowler’s reply “Oh,
thats all right then. I thought you were upset or something. Im going to brush my teeth”. Fowler’s reply shows that he thinks Dawkins is fine. In this case, Habib
violates the maxim of quality since she does not tell the truth that she cries and feels jealous because Fowler admires Habib. Her lie causes Fowler
misunderstands with Dawkins’ feeling. He thinks that she is allright.
Data Nu.
Line Nu.
Name Dialogue
24. 122.
GLADSTONE I must say this er will look very well up on the wall.
123. KRAY
Tell you what, Frank, you need a big hat to pin that badge on.
Gladstone looks at Kray confusedly. Then, Gladstone and Goody look up at each other with confused face.
22. FOWLER
He feels enthusiasm to continue the story It was all down to the last question, you see? Id been stumped on the name of the
chancellor In the Israelis second administration..........Would you believe it? Mr. Thickey or what? That oaf Kray had gone
completely to pieces over the 1932 soviet discus team. Frankly, things were looking pretty bleak....until Habib, dear, beautiful,
admiring with rising intonation clever little constable Habib pulled off a stunning coup by knowing the names of all a
gorillas vertebrae. admiring What a woman, what a woman
23. FOWLER
Patricia Dawkins starts crying slowly, but she turns away her face from Raymond
astonished Darling, what? Whats the matter?
24. DAWKINS
crying Nothing. Really, its nothing.
25. FOWLER
Oh, thats all right then. I thought you were upset or something. Im going to brush my teeth.
In this datum, Kray violates the maxim of quality. It can be seen in the datum above. His utterance is the reply
to Gladstone’s utterance “I must say this “er” will look very well up on the wall”. Here, Kray gives the wrong statement
that Gladstone needs a big hat to pin the badge on. The right statement is the crest should be put on the wall. The uniformed policemen use smaller pin to be badged
on the hat. Kray says that only as a joke to mock their new royal crest. However, Goody and Gladstone do not understand Kray’s joke. It is seen in their response
that they are confused. In this case, Kray violates the maxim of quality because he gives the information which is not true and causes Gladstone and Goody
confused about Kray’s utterance.
Data Nu.
Line Nu.
Name Dialogue
26. 153.
FOWLER You didnt drink? Tell me you didnt drink.
154. KRAY
Course not, sir. I never drink on duty. Only had three pints.
155. FOWLER
shocked, with rising intonation Three pints? Have you any idea how many brain cells one unit of alcohol destroys? Who won the
F.A. Cup final in 1953?
Based on the datum above, Kray violates the maxim of quality. His
utterance is the answer to Fowler’s question “You didnt drink? Tell me you didnt drink”. Here, Kray is inconsistent with his words. He says that he does not drink
on duty first. Then, he says that he only drinks 3 pints. It means that Kray has just drunk although he is on duty. In this case, the violation of quality happens since
Kray tells a lie in his speech that he does not drink. It makes Fowler confused.
2. Violations of Conversational Maxims of Relation
Kategori