A Politeness maxim analysis on the dialogue of date night movie

i

Date Night Movie. Thesis: Faculty of Adab and Humanities, State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, 2010.

This research is aimed to know the violation of maxims in the context of politeness principle based on the readably visible fact.

Moreover, the writer uses descriptive comparative method by analyzing the violation of maxims in politeness principles. It is analyzed descriptively based on related theory of maxim by Leech. After collecting the data, she identified and classified the data which are needed from the Dialogue of Date Night Movie.

This research explains about the violations of maxims related to politeness principles. The findings that the writer can get from the analysis are so many expressions which violated the maxims of politeness principles. Two data that violated tact maxim, seven data that violated approbation maxim, six data that violated the modesty maxim, two data that violated the sympathy maxim, four data that violated agreement maxim, while the violation of generosity maxim was not found in the dialogues.

In this case, the violations of maxims related to the politeness principles still occurred in many conversations. The violations of maxims may occur because of the desire of someone to give intention which implied in utterance, so the principles weren’t adhered.

ii

ON THE DIALOGUE OF “DATE NIGHT MOVIE”

A Thesis

Submitted to Faculty of Adab and Humanities In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

The Degree of Strata 1

Angraini Puspita Sandra 106026000977

Approved by:

Dr. Muhammad Farkhan, M.Pd NIP. 19650919 200003 1 002

ENGLISH LETTERS DEPARTMENT FACULTY OF ADAB AND HUMANITIES

STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH JAKARTA

iii NIM : 106026000977

Title : A Politeness Maxim Analysis on the dialogue of “Date Night Movie”. The thesis has been defended before the Faculty Letters and Humanities’ Examination Committee on February 14, 2011. It has been accepted as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of strata one.

Jakarta, February 14, 2011

The Examination Committee

Signature Date

1. Drs. Asep Saefuddin, M.Pd 19640710 199303 1 006

(Chair Person)

2. Elve Oktafiyani, M.Hum 19781003 200112 2 002

(Secretary)

3. Dr. Muhammad Farkhan, M.Pd 19650919 200003 1 002

(Advisor)

4. Drs. Asep Saefuddin, M.Pd 19640710 199303 1 006

(Examiner I)

iv

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 acknowledgment has been made in the text.

Jakarta, January 18, 2011

Angraini Puspita Sandra

v

to Allah SWT, the Lord of the universe for His help, affection and generosity in completing her study in the State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah, Jakarta. Then, peace and blessing are upon to our beloved prophet Muhammad SAW and all of his family, his disciplines, and his followers.

The thesis is submitted in partial accomplishment of the requirement for the Strata 1 Degree to the Faculty of Adab and Humanities, English Letters Department, State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.

In the terms of completing her study, the writer would like to express her deepest gratitude to the Dean of Faculty of Adab and Humanities, Dr. Abd. Wahid Hasyim, M.Ag; The Head of English Letters Department, Drs. A. Saefuddin, M.Pd; The Secretary of English Letters, Elve Oktafiyani, M. Hum; and to all lectures who have taught her a lot of things during my study.

The writer’s big family deserves her deepest esteem more than anyone else does; her lovely parents (Budiono and Mulyanah), her older sisters (Reni Iriani and their families) and her younger brothers (Aninda and Aditya), since they always support her financially, morally and spiritually.

In addition, the writer is deeply thankful to the individuals too numerous to mention who have sent her suggestions, corrections, and criticisms, especially Dr. M. Farkhan, M.Pd as her thesis advisor, whose every guidance, patience, support and encouragement from the first to the final level that enable her to develop an understanding of the subject.

vi

Galih, Indah, Jabbar, Jule, Kiky, Lazu, Mira, Nopita, Nuni, Ratna, Tirta, Yesika, Zhoya, Kasmir and whom cannot be voiced, for their memories, their laughs, their activities, their supports, their spirit, their souls, their love conveyed her into life-mature. Finally, the writer’s great thanks to the entire place that gave her pleasures within her study process.

Jakarta, January 18, 2011

vii

APPROVEMENT ……….. ii

LEGALIZATION ……….. iii

DECLARATION ……… iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT …….………. .. v

TABLE OF CONTENTS ……….. vii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ……….. 1

A. Background of the Study……….. 1

B. Focus of the Study ………... 4

C. Research Question ……… 4

D. Objective of the Study ……… 5

E. Significance of the Study………. … 5

F. Research Methodology ………..……….. 5

1. Method of the Study…….…………..……….5

2. Data Analysis ………..………. 6

3. Instrument of the Research ……….. 6

4. Unit of Analysis……….………6

CHAPTER II THEORETICAL FRAME WORK ……… 7

A. The Definition of Pragmatics ……….. 7

B. The Definition of Politeness ……… 8

C. Polite and Impolite Behavior ………... 9

viii

1. The Tact Maxim……… 12

2. The Generosity Maxim………. 13

3. The Approbation Maxim ……….. 14

4. The Modesty Maxim ……… 15

5. The Agreement Maxim ……… 15

6. The Sympathy Maxim ………. 16

• Cost Benefit Scale ………... 17

• Optionality Scale ………. 17

• Indirectness Scale ……… 18

• Authority Scale ……… 18

• Social Distance Scale ……….. 19

CHAPTER III RESEARCH FINDING ……….. 20

A. Data Description ……….. 20

B. Data Analysis ……… 26

CHAPTER IV CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ... 38

A. Conclusions ……….. 38

B. Suggestions ……….. 39

BIBLIOGRAPHY ……….. 40

45

In New York City, a case of mistaken identity turns a bored married couple's attempt at a glamorous and romantic evening into something more thrilling and dangerous.

Phil and Claire Foster (Steve Carell and Tina Fey) are a married couple from New Jersey with two children and whose domestic life has become boring and routine. Phil is a tax lawyer while Claire is a realtor. They are motivated to reignite their romance after learning that their best friends, Brad and Haley, are planning to divorce to escape the married-life routine and to have more excitement in their lives.

To avoid the routine that had become their weekly "date night", Phil decides that he will take Claire to a trendy Manhattan restaurant, but they cannot get a table. Phil takes a reservation from a no-show couple, the Tripplehorns, despite Claire's misgivings. While eating they are approached by two men, Collins and Armstrong, who question them about a flash drive they believe Phil and Claire stole from mobster boss Joe Miletto. Phil and Claire explain that they are not the Tripplehorns, but the men threaten them at gunpoint. Not seeing any other way out, Phil tells them it is in a boathouse in Central Park.

At the boathouse, Claire pretends to search; while Collins and Armstrong's backs are turned, Phil hits them with a paddle and escapes with Claire on a boat. At a police station, Phil and Claire talk with Detective Arroyo, but discover

Collins and Armstrong are also detectives, presumably on Miletto's payroll. Realizing they cannot trust the police, they decide to find the real Tripplehorns. They return to the restaurant and find their phone number.

Claire remembers a former client, Holbrooke Grant, is a security expert and James Bond-like action hero. At his apartment, Grant, whom Claire flirts with, traces the signal to an apartment owned by Tom Felton. Collins and Armstrong arrive, but Phil and Claire escape in Grant's Audi R8.

They arrive at Felton's apartment and break in. They question Felton, nicknamed "Taste", and his wife "Whippit" about the flash drive and Joe Miletto. It turns out that they went to the restaurant but left when they spotted Collins. Realizing they are in danger, the couple gives the flash drive to Phil and flees. When Phil and Claire get back in the Audi, Armstrong and Collins shoot at them. Phil and Claire crash the Audi head-on into a Ford Crown Victoria taxicab, resulting in their Audi and the Ford being attached at the bumpers. Phil and the cab driver decide to drive off to get away. Phil climbs into the Ford to navigate while Claire navigates the Audi. Phil checks the flash drive on the driver's Amazon Kindle and finds pictures of district attorney Frank Crenshaw with prostitutes (early in the film, a press conference shows Crenshaw highlighting his integrity platform). After evading Collins and Armstrong, they are eventually hit and separated by an SUV. The Ford falls into the river; Phil and the driver escape, but without the flash drive.

In a subway, Phil determines that Felton obtained the flash drive to blackmail Crenshaw. They return to Grant's apartment, and Grant is reluctant to

help after becoming exhausted by their incompetence, but Phil begs and he agrees. Phil and Claire go to an illegal strip club that Crenshaw frequents, with Claire under the guise of a new prostitute and Phil as her pimp. After doing a pole dance for Crenshaw, they confront him and tell him they are the Tripplehorns. Collins and Armstrong come in and hold them at gunpoint and take them up to the roof with Crenshaw. Miletto arrives with henchmen and it is revealed that Crenshaw has been paid by Miletto to keep him out of jail. When Phil mentions the photos, a feud escalates between the mobsters and Crenshaw, Collins and Armstrong. Phil asks Claire to count to three (her typical method of calming their children). When she does, a helicopter appears and Arroyo and the SWAT team come onto the roof to arrest Miletto, Crenshaw, and everyone else. It is revealed that Phil was wearing a wire courtesy of Grant, who informed Arroyo of the situation.

After being declared heroes, Phil and Claire enjoy breakfast at a diner, where Phil admits he would marry Claire and have their kids all over again if given the chance. When they return home, they kiss passionately on the front lawn.

1 A. Background of the Study

A social interaction will be well maintained if the conditions are completed. One of them is the awareness of the form of politeness.1 Courtesy is the procedure or the customs prevailing in society. This courtesy is specified or agreed together by a particular community so that courtesy as well as a prerequisite that is agreed by language community.

Courtesy can be viewed from various aspects in everyday life. One of them was the courtesy in communication or common is called politeness language. Politeness is reflected in the procedure to communicate verbally or speaking manner. According to Rahardi, this procedure of language includes the word choice, up to the level of sentences, grammar, choice of variety, and intonation.2 The procedure of language that purposed in this research is limited to the choice of words.

Language is system of sign which constitutes the verbal manifestation of ideas or the speaker ideas to convey the information to hearer and used as a tool of communication. 3 The communication involves two persons or more. The person who utters his idea or information is called the speaker and the person who hears

1 _{Kushartanti, Untung Yuwono dan Multamia RMT Lauder, Pesona Bahasa: Langkah} Awal Memahami Linguistik. (Jakarta: PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama, 2005 ), p. 105.

2 _{Rahardi, R. Kunjana, Pragmatik: Kesantunan Impertif Bahasa Indonesia. (Jakarta:} Erlangga, 2002), p. 19.

the speaker’s idea or information is called the hearer. Therefore, the language must contain the meaning that understood together by the speaker and the hearer. As well as in the utterances of courtesy that contains the meaning of politeness.

Generally speaking, politeness involves taking account of the feelings of others, as with linguistic politeness, it is the use of language to attend to face needs to maintain smooth interaction and good relationship.

In discussing the issue of politeness, Leech explained that politeness language basically have to pay attention to the six maxims of the politeness; there are Tact maxims, Generosity maxims, Approbation maxim, Modesty maxim, Agreement maxim, and Sympathy maxim.4

Violation of the principle of politeness is often violated by people thus resulting in losses to the other, among them in daily life when communication or there also found in the programs on television or comedy shows. Everyday interaction serves both affective or social, and referential or informative function. Being linguistically polite involves speaking to people appropriately in the light of their relationship.

Sometimes people do not notice that they are speaking impoliteness when they are joking and it results in losses to the other. Not only in daily life but also in the movie the writer finds the impoliteness words like in Date Night movie. Date Night is a 2010 is an action comedy film directed by Shawn Levy and starring Steve Carell and Tina Fey. It was released in the United States on April 9,

4

Leech, Goffrey dan M.D.D. Oka (penerjemah), Prinsip-Prinsip Pragmatik (Jakarta: UI Press, 1993), p. 206-207.

2010.5 The film has received generally positive reviews. Review aggregate Rotten Tomatoes reports that 67% of critics have given the film a positive review, based on 188 reviews, with an average score of 6.2/10.6 On its opening weekend, 20th Century Fox reported that Date Night grossed $27.1 million, about $200,000 more than Warner Bros. reported for Clash of the Titans. In a recount, Clash of the Titans retained the No. 1 spot for a second-straight weekend with $26.6 million.7 Date Night debuted in second-place with $25.2 million, nearly $2 million less than distributor 20th Century Fox had reported a day earlier.8 The film won the Teen Choice Award for Movie Comedy and Fey won the Teen Choice Award for Movie Actress: Comedy.9

Based on the explanation above, the writer is interested in analyzing the violation of maxim of politeness in dialog of Date Night movie. For the example from the dialogue:

Phil Foster: But you guys are happy! Brad Sullivan: No, Phil, we're not.

Phil Foster: No, no. No, you guys are *really* happy! Brad Sullivan: No, Phil, we're really not.10

The example above contains the aspect of impoliteness language that can be seen from the use of the word ‘no’. In this dialogue, Brad expresses disagreement to Phil statement. He maximizes disagreement with Phil’s statement

5 _{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_Night} 6 _{http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/date_night/} 7 _{Wikipedia, Op.cit. p.4}

8 _Ibid 9 _Ibid

because he said that he is not happy. So from this disagreement, Brad violates the Agreement Maxim. The agreement maxim the speaker should minimize disagreement between self and other and otherwise Maximize agreement between self and other. The communication is a process where the information exchanged between individuals, then, there are two persons or more involved in communication. The person who utters his idea or information is called the speaker and the person who hears the speaker’s idea or information is called the hearer.

The writer finds the sentence or the words that cause offense in the impoliteness language from the dialog. Therefore, the writer is interested to research the maxims of the politeness that is found on dialogue of Date Night movie. Then the writer is interested to analyze this topic because there are many impoliteness words actually can be analyzed through its language using pragmatics theory.

B. Focus of the Study

According to the background of the study, this research focuses on the study of pragmatics especially on politeness principle. The writer solely focuses her research to the violence to the maxims of politeness principle on the dialogue of Date Night movie. The writer uses the Geoffrey Leech theory of politeness, particularly on politeness maxims. Then the writer will find some violations of maxims on the dialogue.

C. Research Question

To make more convenient and simple in the research, the research question for this research:

1. Which maxims of the politeness are violated in the dialogues of Date Night movie?

2. What are the words that indicate the impoliteness language in the conversation?

D. Objective of the Study

The aims of this research are,

1. Identifying and explaining the maxims of the politeness which are being violated in the dialogues of Date Night movie.

2. Finding what are the words that indicated of impoliteness in the dialogues of Date Night movie.

E. Significances of the Study

The writer hopes this research may provide the benefit to analyze the insult of words based on pragmatics generally, especially concerning the politeness principle. The writer also hopes this research expectable to be the one of a very useful reference material for various purposes, especially in the field of pragmatics both for language researchers and readers.

F. Research Methodology 1. Method of the Study

This research uses qualitative method by collecting data from various sources related to research. The writer will describe the data which are violating the politeness principle.

2. Data Analysis

In this research, the researcher uses qualitative data analysis technique based on Geoffrey Leech theory. The writer is collecting the whole book that are relevant to theory of pragmatics and maxims of politeness, then reading and understanding a manuscript of Date Night movie. Identifying the dialogues of Date Night movie that are violated the politeness principle and concluding the data analysis.

3. Instrument of The Research

The writer uses herself as a main research instrument to obtain the data supported by the research theory. The process of collecting the data likes reading, understanding, identifying and analyzing the data by using pragmatic approach and theory of Geoffrey Leech.

4. Unit of the Analysis

The unit of analysis that the writer’s research is the dialogues of Date Night movie released on April 9, 2010 and produced by Sony Pictures.

5. Time and Place of the Research.

This research was conducted in the 8 semester of 2010 in English Language and Literature Department, Adab and Humanities Faculty, State Islamic

University of Jakarta and in selected libraries such as in Atma Jaya Catholic University library.

8 A. Definition of Pragmatics

Pragmatics is different from the study of grammar. Pragmatics is the study of language use which offers a complementary perspective on language, providing an insight into the linguistics choices that users make in social situations. It is not too important whether they observe a particular syntactic rule or not. Pragmatics is a branch of linguistics that studies the structure externally, That is, how the unit of language used in communication. 1 According to Yule, pragmatics is a concerned with the study of meaning as communicated by a speaker and interpreted by a listener. He defined there are four definition about pragmatics, i.e.;

1. Pragmatics is the study of the speaker meaning. 2. Pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning.

3. Pragmatics is the study of how more gets communicated than is said. 4. Pragmatics is the study of the expression of relative distance.2

According to Jacob L. Mey, “Pragmatics is the study of the condition of human language uses as these are determined by the context of society,3 while according to Levinson, Pragmatics is the study of those relations between

1 _{Wijana, I Dewa Putu, Dasar-Dasar Pragmatik. (Yogyakarta: ANDI Yogyakarta, 1996),} p. 2.

2 _{Yule, George, Pragmatics. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 3-4.} 3 _{Jacob l. Mey, Pragmatics an Introduction (Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell} publishers, 2001), p. 6.

language and context that are grammatically, or encoded in the structure of a language.4

Based on some definitions above, the writer assumes that pragmatics is the study of language in human communication and it has a relation with context of language.

B. Definition of Politeness

Etiquette can be viewed from various aspects of daily life. One of them is etiquette in communication or called politeness language. Politeness or etiquette is a custom that is prevailed in the society.5 According to Lakoff politeness is “A system of interpersonal relations designed to facilitate interaction by minimizing the potential for conflict and confrontation inherent in all human interchange”.6

As for politeness by Richard et al is quoted by Rahardi in his book, politeness can be understood as follows: "Politeness is how the language shows the social distance between the speakers and the relationship of their role in a society."7

Based on some definitions above, politeness can be interpreted as a particular concept, contained in a polite behavior or etiquette in a culture.

4 _{Stephen C. Levinson, Pragmatics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), p. 9.} 5 _{Jacob L Mey, (2001), Op.cit, p. 60.}

6 _{Eelen, Gino. A Critique of Politeness Theories. (Manchaster: St. Jerome Publishing,} 2001), p. 2.

7 _{Rahardi, R. Kunjana. Pragmatik: Kesantunan Imperatif Bahasa Indonesia. (Jakarta:} Erlangga, 2002), p. 6.

In study of pragmatics, Leech will be in favor of the study by means of conversational principles of the kind illustrated by H.P. Grice’s Cooperative Principle. Leech wants to introduce into pragmatics not only Cooperative principle, but other principles, such as a Politeness Principle. The kind of constraint on linguistic behavior exemplified by Grice’s Cooperative Principle differs from the kind of normally rules in linguistics, like “principles” and “maxim” usage, because according to Grice, maxim is manifestation of the former. In Searle’s terminology, conversational principles and maxims are regulative rather than constitutive. The rules of language normally count as an integral part of the definition of that language, but maxims do not.8

C. Polite and Impolite Behavior

There has been surprisingly little analysis of impoliteness itself, in research on politeness in general; perhaps this can be attributed to the fact that much of the research is dependent on a view of conversation which emphasis the harmonious aspect of social relations, because of an emphasis on conversational contracts and the implicit establishment of balance between interlocutors’ (Spencer Oatey, 2003: 3).9

Eelen (2001) points out, quite rightly, that theories of politeness have focused far more on politeness behavior than on impoliteness behavior. This is all the more surprising since commentators on and participants in verbal interaction are more likely to comment on behavior which they perceive to be ‘impolite’,

8 _{Geoffrey Leech, Principles of Pragmatics (London and New York: Longman, 1983),} pp. 7-9.

‘rude’, ‘discourteous’, etc, than on ‘polite’ behavior.10 Kienpointner (1997) has written on various types of ‘rude’ utterance displaying impoliteness.11 Baumann (1981) examines what he calls the ‘rhetoric of impoliteness’ among the early quakers in America. A small of researcher have examined the function of strategic or mock impoliteness, following on from labov’s work on ritual insult among black adolescent in the USA (1975).12

D. Modern American culture

The claim that successful social interaction among human beings depend upon the will of the participants to cooperate in localised forms of social endeavour does not prevent certain forms of human social interaction from being confrontational and competitive, with the result that success and failure will then be measured by who wins and who loses.13

Those who talked about politeness in the eighteenth century considered that the concept was formed around a meaningful core (the essence of politeness). But, those some people professed themselves unable to define that core.14

Nowadays the USA is home country for many citizens from all over the world. That’s why on the whole it is difficult to identify pure American culture and to divide it from other foreign cultures that had great influence on it.15 Apart from this, the USA is a huge country and inside of it one can find some cultural

10 _{Ricahard J Watts, Politeness (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), p.5.} 11 _Ibid

12 _{Ricahard J Watts, (2003), Op.cit, p.5.} 13 _{Ibid, P.42.}

14 _Ibid

divisions.16 They are called subcultures and practiced all around the country, but, for instance, in different states. Thus, culture of the southern part of the country differs from traditions in central or northern states.17

American culture is famous all over the world. People recognize it from movies and books. From one point of view, this is positive tendency. However, there is another side of the medal as well. Of course, American culture is well known around the world, but many people learn about it only from movies, books and magazines.18 There is an opinion that Americans want the world to believe that their life is something what they see on TV-screens and in cinemas. Nevertheless, such perception of American culture can be described as shallow. People create stereotypes and some of them might be false.19

The USA has moral values that were established thousands of years ago and new people coming to the U.S. should accept them or at least respect, because living in this country means following the rules and norms that already exist here. For the USA such values as individuality, equality, informality, hard work, time, privacy, achievements, hope of future are of great significance.20

American culture encompasses traditions, ideals, customs, beliefs, values, arts, folklore and innovations developed both domestically and imported via colonization and immigration from the British Isles.21

16 _Ibid

17 _Ibid 18 _Ibid 19 _Ibid 20 _Ibid

Tradition: An inherited, established, or customary pattern of thought, action, or behavior (as a religious practice or social custom). The handing down of information, beliefs, and customs by word of mouth or by example from one generation to another without written instruction. Cultural continuity in social attitudes, customs, and institutions. Characteristic manner, method, or style.22

Custom: A usage or practice common to many or to a particular place or class, or habitual with an individual. Long established practice considered as unwritten law. Repeated practice. The whole body of usages, practices, or conventions that regulate social life.23

Habit: A behavior pattern acquired by frequent repetition or physiologic exposure that shows itself in regularity or increased facility of performance. An acquired mode of behavior that has become nearly or completely involuntary.24

Ritual: The established form for a ceremony; the order of words prescribed for a religious ceremony. Ritual observance: system of rites, a ceremonial act or action or a customarily repeated often formal act or series of acts.25

American Values as Individuality, equality, informality, hard work, time, privacy, achievements, hope of future are of great significance.

The writer gives the explanation above to make her research easy to understand. Because the object research is American movie and the writer gives more explanation to related the object. The Date Night movie is an action comedy

22_{http://www.americanfamilytraditions.com/traditions_customs_rituals.htm.} 23 _Ibid

24 _Ibid 25 _Ibid

and it was released in the United States on April 9, 2010. The movie is a crude content throughout, language, some violence and a drug reference.

E. The Definition of Maxim

Maxim is a succinct formulation of a fundamental principle, general truth, or rule of conduct.26 Maxim also is a concisely expressed principle or rule of conduct, or a statement of a general truth.27

F. The Politeness Principles

Research on linguistic politeness has seen enormous in its development in line with the need to achieve an effective, cross cultural communication. In oxford dictionary use, ‘politeness’ refers to show good manners and respect for the feelings of other.28 Politeness as a pragmatic notion refers to ways in which linguistic action is carried out, more specifically, ways in which in relational function in linguistic action is expressed.

Leech sees cultural rules are at work in expressions of politeness and he attempts to categorize some of the underlying intent behind these forms in more detail by articulating a set of rules or “politeness maxims” in polite dialogues. The courtesy of communication reflected in the politeness language. Leech explains that politeness of language basically has to pay attention to the six maxims of politeness, namely tact Maxim, generosity Maxim, approbation Maxim, Modesty

26 _{http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Maxim.} 27 _{http://www.yourdictionary.com/maxim.}

28 _{A.S Hornby, Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, (Oxford: Oxford University} Press, 2000), p.1017.

Maxim, agreement Maxim, and Sympathy Maxim.29 The maxims of the politeness principle tend to go in pairs as follows:

1. The Tact Maxim

The tact maxim is the most important kind of politeness in English speaking society. The Tact maxim applies to Searle’s directive and commisive which is only applicable in illocutionary functions classified as ‘impositive’, e.g. ordering, requesting, commanding, advising, recommending, etc., and ‘commisive’, e.g. promosing, vowing, offering, etc. Tact maxim, according to Leech, involves minimizing the cost and maximizing the benefit speaker/hearer:30 The tact maxim focuses more on the hearer/recipient.

The tact maxim criteria are: a. Minimize cost to other b. Maximize benefit to other

[1] You know, I really do think you ought to sell that car. It’s costing more and more money in repairs and it uses up far too much fuel.31

The tact maxim is adhered to by the speaker minimizing the cost to addressee by using two discourse markers, one to appeal to solidarity, you know, and the other as a modifying hedge, really, one attitudinal predicate, I do think, and one modal verb, ought. On the other hand, the speaker maximizes the benefit to the addressee in the second part of the turn by indicating that s/he saves a lot of time and money by selling the car.

29_{Leech, Geoffrey dan M.D.D. Oka (penerjemah), Prinsip-Prinsip Pragmatik. (Jakarta:} UI Press, 1993), pp.206-207.

30 _{Ibid, p.107}

[2] Answer the phone! (Impolite)32

The tact maxim is not adhered, which suggests extreme irritation with others behavior, so it is impolite.

2. The Generosity Maxim

The generosity maxim involves minimizing the benefit and maximizing the cost to self. Generosity maxim only applicable in impositives and commissives:33 Generosity maxim focuses more on the speaker/sender.

The generosity maxim criteria are: a. Minimize benefit to self

b. Maximize cost to self For examples:

[3] You can land me your car (impolite) [4] I can lend you my car

[5] You must come and have dinner with us

[6] We must come and have dinner with you (impolite)34

The offer [4] and invitation [5] are presumed to be polite for two reasons: firstly, because they imply benefit to other, and secondly less crucially, because they imply cost to self. And in [3] and [6], the relation between self and other on both scales is reversed. Benefit to other but doesn’t imply any cost to self apart from the verbal effort to giving the advice itself.

3. The Approbation Maxim

32 _{Wijana, I Dewa Putu, Dasar-Dasar Pragmatik. (Yogyakarta: ANDIYogyakarta, 1996),} p.56.

33 _{Geoffrey Leech, (1983), Op.cit, p.133.} 34 _Ibid

The approbation maxim involves minimizing dispraise and maximizing praise to speaker/hearer. The approbation maxim is only applicable in illocutionary functions classified as ‘expressive’, e.g. thanking, congratulating, pardoning, blaming, praising, condoling, etc., and ‘assertives’ e.g. stating, boasting, complaining, claiming, reporting, etc.:35 Approbation maxim is closed to politeness strategy of avoiding disagreement.

The approbation maxim criteria are: a. Minimize dispraise of other

b. Maximize praise of other

The examples [7] and [8] will serve to illustrate the illocutionary functions of thanking and complaining, in which the speaker maximizes praise of the addressee in [7] and minimizes dispraise in [8]:

[7] Dear Aunt Mabel, I want to thank you so much for the Christmas present this year. It was so very thoughtful of you.

[8] I wonder if you could keep the noise from your Saturday parties down a bit. I’m finding it very hard to get enough sleep over the weekends.36

[9] Your food is not delicious!37

In [9], A fall of the approbation maxim, because A say unpleasant things to others. So, it is impolite.

4. The Modesty Maxim

35 _{Wijana, I Dewa Putu, (1996), Op.cit, pp.57-58.} 36 _{Ricahard J Watts, (2003). Op.cit, p.67.} 37 _{Wijana, I Dewa Putu, (1996), Op.cit, p.58.}

The modesty maxim involves minimizing praise and maximizing praise of self. The modesty maxim is only applicable in expressives and assertives:38 modesty maxim is found in self deprecating expression.

The modesty maxim criteria are: a. Minimize praise of self

b. Maximize dispraise of self For examples:

[10] A: They were so kind to us B: Yes, They were, weren’t they? [11] A: You were so kind to us (impolite) B: Yes, I was, wasn’t I?39

As [10] shows, it is felicitous to agree with another’s commendation except when it is a commendation of on self. But [11] fault maxim of modesty, it is to commit the social transgression of boasting.

5. The Agreement Maxim

The agreement maxim involves minimizing disagreement and maximizing agreement between self and other. The agreement maxim is only applicable in assertives:40 Agreement maxim seeks agreement and avoids disagreement.

The agreement maxim criteria are:

a. Minimize disagreement between self and other b. Maximize agreement between self and other

38 _{Geoffrey Leech, (1983), Op.cit, p.136.} 39 _{Wijana, I Dewa Putu, (1996), Op.cit, pp.58-59} 40 _{Geoffrey Leech, (1983), Op.cit, p.138.}

For examples:

[12] A: A referendum will satisfy everybody B: Yes, definitely

[13] A: It was an interesting exhibition, wasn’t it? B: No, it was very uninteresting

As [12] shows, it is agreement maxim because agreement was happened between self and other, in [13] partial disagreement happened so agreement maxim was fault but it is often preferable to complete disagreement.

6. The Sympathy Maxim

The sympathy maxim involves minimizing antipathy and maximizing sympathy between self and other. The sympathy maxim is only applicable in assertives:41 sympathy maxim can be found in polite speech acts as to congratulate, commiserate of express condolence.

The sympathy maxim criteria are:

a. Minimize antipathy between self and other b. Maximize sympathy between self and other For examples:

[14] I’m was sorry to hear about your father.

[15] I’m was sorry to hear about your father’s death (impolite)

Can be interpreted that [14] as a condolence, an expression of sympathy for misfortune, and it might be preferable to say, instead of [15].42

41 _{Cutting, Joan, Pragmatics and Discourse a resource book for student. (London and} New York, 2002), Routledge p. 50

In Leech politeness model, each of the six interpersonal maxims has an associated set of scales which help establish the requisite degree of tact, generosity, approbation, modesty, agreement and sympathy. The following scales obtain:

• Cost benefit scale: representing the cost or benefit of an act to speaker and

hearer.43

The cost or benefit scale made up of two distinct scales, cost/benefit to speaker and cost/benefit to hearer. In general, these two measures vary inversely, but it is possible for them to vary independently. For example, speaker may purpose a course of action which is, in speaker’s estimation, at a cost himself and beneficial to hearer. So, it is assumed polite. This is appropriately described as an offer.

(16) Would you like to use my electric drill?

In the other hand, the speaker may purpose a course of action which is beneficial himself will be assumed impolite,

(17) I’d use an electric drill if I were you.

This would be more appropriately described as a piece of advice.

• Optionality scale: Indicating the degree of choice permitted to speaker and / or

hearer by a specific linguistic act.44

The optionality scale on which illocutions are ordered according to the amount of choice which speaker allows to hearer. For example:

[18] You may go now, Smith

43 _Ibid 44 _Ibid

The speaker is apparently being polite in offering the hearer the choice of doing something.

• Indirectness scale: Indicating the amount of inferencing required of the hearer

in order to establish the intended speaker meaning.45

The indirectness scale on which, from speaker’s point of view, illocutions are ordered with respect to the length of the path connecting the illocutionary act to its illocutionary goal. The indirectness scale can also be formulated from hearer’s point of view, in terms of the length of the inferential path by which the force is derived from the sense.

This scale subjects to rank of direct/indirect meaning in conversation. Direct meaning is polite, indirect meaning is impolite. For example:

[19] Would you mind having another sandwich?

• Authority scale: representing the status relationship between speaker and

hearer.46

This is an asymmetric measure, so that someone in authority may use a familiar form of address to someone who, in return, uses the respectful form. For example:

[20] The Chief demanded that I lend him my phone.

• Social distance scale: Indicating the degree of familiarity between speaker and

hearer.47

45 _Ibid

46 _Ibid 47 _Ibid

The overall degree of respectfulness, for a given speech situation, depends largely on relatively permanent factors of status, age, degree of intimacy, etc., but also, to some extent, on the temporary role of one person relative to another. For example:

23 A. Data Description

This chapter will explain an analysis of the Dialogue of the Date Night movie with applying Politeness Principle theory by Geoffrey Leech as indicator in data analysis. The theory is used to know the violations of maxims of the analyzed transcript which is related to the politeness principle.

The data are collected from the Internet Movie Script Database (IMSDb). The data are collected by following steps: firstly, reading entire the dialogue on transcript. Secondly, the writer makes a group and mark the dialogue that related to the politeness principle and then copied into paper and given by number. The data that the writer has obtained can be presented below:

Table 1

The list of the violations of maxims dialogues

No Data Violated Maxim

Data 1 Ollie: Did you just call Mrs. Cardigan a bitch?

Clara: (remembering Ollie's in the back) No.

Ollie: Yeah you did.

Clara: I didn't. I really didn't. Clara quickly pulls out.

(Script p.14)

In this case, this text violates of Agreement Maxim. Despitefully, This dialogue violates Approbation Maxim.

is sloppy. He lacks motivation and tries to just "get by" on assignments. You know, this is a very competitive school, Mrs. Foster. In my opinion, maybe you should consider whether this is really the right environment for him.

Clara: (beat, stunned) Uh... wow. OK. (Script p.14)

Modesty Maxim.

Data 3 Mrs. Cardigan starts away. Clara climbs into the car, watching Mrs. Cardigan. Clara: (Cont'd) (under her breath) Wow. What a bitch.

(Script p.14)

This text violates the Approbation Maxim.

Data 4 Phil: Yeah, how about the fact that I have not woken up with our comforter over me once in those 10 years! You steal the whole thing away from me every night and mummify yourself. Clara: What? Phil, I do not "steal" the comforter. It just happens when we're- Phil: (points at her)

Bulls Bull-shit.

Clara: Don't you point that at me! (Script p.86)

Same as previous statement, this text violates the Approbation Maxim.

Data 5 Phil: That dress really wasn't playing fair, Clara.

With a smile, Clara watches Phil tie his tie.

(Script p.17)

This text violates the Approbation Maxim.

Data 6 Phil: Wow. Wizard of Oz. Don't you think that's a little scary for a 5 year old? Ruth: (not looking at him)

No, Phil, I don't. (Script p.17)

This dialogue violates the Agreement Maxim.

Data 7 Clara: What are you doing?

Phil: I'm just gonna take a shortcut.

This dialogue violates the Sympathy Maxim.

Clara: Phil, please don't. You think they're shortcuts but they always take longer. And we're already-

(Script p.21)

Data 8 Harry: Phil and Clara Foster. Phil: (BEAT)

That's what this is all about? Speakerphone: what else would it be about, Mr. Foster?

Phil: (BEAT)

Wait. This a joke, right? Some funny little bald guy's gonna jump out and scare us and say, "Gotcha!" or something OK, where is he? Where's that guy?

Speakerphone: You think this is a joke?

Phil looks at the faces of the two thugs. No one's joking.

Phil: (STUNNED)

No. Are you insane?!? You don't drug people and tie them up for that! This is- I just- I hope you know this is gonna go way beyond a shitty review in Zagat! I'm seriously pissed off!

(Script p.30)

This dialogue violates Agreement Maxim. Despitefully, This dialogue violates Approbation Maxim.

Data 9 Phil: You must be kidding! Like a million people don't do it every single night of the week! This is unbelievable! I'm just in shock here!

Harry and Frank look at each other, puzzled.

Speakerphone: I enjoy your humor, Mr. Foster. Now why don't you start by telling me how you got into the Rainbow to set it up-

Phil: "Into the Rainbow?" What the hell's that? Restaurant code?

(Script p.30)

This dialogue violates the Sympathy Maxim.

Data 10 Clara: (WHISPERS)

No. I was just trying to keep our knees for the time being.

Phil: (WHISPERS)

Well, if we end up in that car with them we're as good as dead.

Frank: Quiet! (Script p.34)

In this case, this text violates Tact Maxim.

Data 11 Clara: (WHISPERS)

Well, any time you want to help... Phil: (WHISPERS)

What's that supposed to mean? Frank: I said quiet!

(Script p.34)

Same as previous statement, this text violates the Tact Maxim.

Data 12 Clara: (CONT'D) (CATCHING ON)

You're diabetic! You never get the terms right, Phil! Oh no! This is bad, guys. Phil: I just can't... go any further.

Harry and Frank look at each other, not sure what to do.

Harry: Should we call Mr. Stockton? Frank: Don't say his name, you idiot! Harry: Sorry! I was just-

(Script p.35)

This statement violates Modesty Maxim.

Data 13 Large man: Hey! You just hit my The Large Man stomps toward them. Phil: Run!

Phil and Clara get out of the car and run away on foot.

The Large Man marches over and inspects his bumper, then yells after them.

Large man: Assholes! (Script p.44)

This statement violates Modesty Maxim.

so...I don't know... Clara: Old.

Phil: No, I was thinking numb. When did we become one of those couples that we used to look at in restaurants back then and think were so sad?

(Script p.58)

Agreement Maxim.

Data 15 Clara suddenly notices a POLICE CAR, lights off, drive past them over the bridge.

Clara (CONT'D): Shit!

Phil: I think we're OK. Just play cool and keep walking.

(Script p59)

This statement violates Modesty Maxim.

Data 16 They land - THUMP! - onto the top deck of the boat, both groaning as they roll back and forth while the Drunken Partiers CHEER and FLASH PHOTOS. Phil: Ow! I think I broke my butt. Clara: OW! OW! Dammit, Phil! What's our rule about tickling?

Phil: I'm sorry! I didn't do it for pleasure! What is our rule?

(Script p.60)

Same as previous statement, this text violates the Modesty Maxim.

Data 17 Black dude: Hey! HEY! What do you think you're doing?

The Black Dude chases after him, trying the driver's door, but Phil's LOCKED it. Phil yells to Clara.

Phil: PUT IT IN REVERSE AND GUN IT, CLARA!

Clara: What? That's insane! (Script p.76)

Same as previous statement, this text violates the Modesty Maxim.

Data 18 Phil: Unbelievable! You know, all you complain about is that I don't take risks anymore. Then the second I do, you get mad at me for doing it! I can't win with you!

This text violates the Approbation Maxim.

Clara: Poor Phil! You have it so bad, don't you!

Phil: Oh, you have no idea! Every single day from the moment we wake up you're bossy, disapproving, inconsiderate- Clara: I'm inconsiderate? I'M

INCONSIDERATE?!? Have you ever seen our bathroom in the morning after Tsunami Phil's blown through? The floor! The sink! You use my toothbrush (Script p.84)

Data 19 DOORMAN BUILDING - LATER THAT NIGHT

Phil and Clara walk into the lobby of the doorman building and start toward the elevator, straight past the NIGHT DOORMAN.

Doorman: Whoa whoa whoa. Where do you think you're going?

Clara: Oh, we're guests of Apartment 605 The Doorman picks up the phone to call the apartment.

Doorman: And you are? Clara looks at him in shock. Clara: Are you crazy? It's 4 in the morning! We were just out for dinner. Trust me.

(Script p.89)

This text violates the Approbation Maxim.

Data 20 Phil: Well, I can pick things up then. Phil notices Clara giving him a LOOK. Phil (CONT'D): What? Why are you looking at me like that?

Clara: (intensifying the look) I'm not looking at you like anything.

He doesn't pick up on it. Shrugs. (Script p.41)

This dialogue violates Agreement Maxim.

B. Data Analysis

In data analysis, the writer uses data from the Internet Movie Script Database (IMSDb). Firstly, the writer writes the text of dialogue and then explains the data what kinds the violation of maxim in the context of politeness and the words that indicates impoliteness on those dialogues. The reason in analysis, the writer uses Geoffrey Leech theory of maxim.

Data 1

Ollie : Did you just call Mrs. Cardigan a bitch? Clara : (remembering Ollie's in the back) No. Ollie : Yeah you did.

Clara : I didn't. I really didn't. Clara quickly pulls out. (Script p.14)

In this dialogue, there are two violations; firstly, Clara expresses disagreement to Ollie statement. She maximizes disagreement with Ollie’s statement about she said Mrs. Cardigan a bitch. So from this disagreement, Clara violates the Agreement Maxim. Clara says that Ollie’s statement is not true. The word that indicated the violation of the Agreement Maxim is “I didn’t. I really didn't”.

Secondly, in this dialogue, Clara violates Approbation Maxim because she dispraises other. She denied about Ollie’s statement. The word that indicated the violation of the Approbation Maxim is “a bitch”.

Data 2

Mrs. Cardigan : (Cont'd) His penmanship is sloppy. He lacks motivation and tries to just "get by" on assignments. You know, this is a very competitive school, Mrs. Foster. In my opinion, maybe you should consider whether this is really the right environment for him. Clara : (beat, stunned) Uh... wow. OK.

(Script p.14)

In the statement above, Mrs. Cardigans violates the Modesty Maxim, because she says unpleasant things to other, in this case Ollie. In Leech Theory, modesty maxim is minimizing praise of self and maximizing dispraise of self. Mrs. Cardigans says that she isn’t sure that Oliver is match to stay in competitive school. It shows that Mrs. Cardigans generosity to be quite normal and indeed. And dispraise other. The word that indicated the violation of the Modesty Maxim is “His penmanship is sloppy”.

Data 3

Mrs. Cardigan starts away. Clara climbs into the car, watching Mrs. Cardigan. Clara : (Cont'd) (under her breath) Wow. What a bitch.

(Script p.14)

In this case, Clara violates of Approbation Maxim, because she says unpleasant things about other, particularly about Mrs. Cardigans. In this dialogue, Clara maximize dispraise of other, he says unpleasant thing that Mrs. Cardigans is a bitch because Clara is angry. The word that indicated the violation of the Approbation Maxim is “What a bitch”.

Data 4

Phil : Yeah, how about the fact that I have not woken up with our comforter over me once in those 10 years! You steal the whole thing away from me every night and mummify yourself.

Clara : What? Phil, I do not "steal" the comforter. It just happens when we're- Phil : (points at her)

Bulls Bull-shit.

Clara : Don't you point that at me! (Script p.86)

In this case, Philfouls of Approbation Maxim, because he says unpleasant things about other, particularly about Clara. In this dialogue, Phil maximizes dispraise of other; he curses her with unpleasant things that Clara does not steal the comforter. The word that indicated the violation of the Approbation Maxim is “Bulls Bull-shit”.

Data 5

Phil: That dress really wasn't playing fair, Clara. With a smile, Clara watches Phil tie his tie. (Script p.17)

In this case, Phil violates of Approbation Maxim, because he says unpleasant things about other, particularly about Clara. Phil gives statement that dispraise other; he says unpleasant things that Clara’s dress is bad. Phil thinks that dress is not really good for Clara. The word that indicated the violation of the Approbation Maxim is “really wasn't playing fair”.

Data 6

Phil : Wow. Wizard of Oz. Don't you think that's a little scary for a 5 year old? Ruth : (not looking at him)

No, Phil, I don't. (Script p.17)

This dialogue is assertives sentence that the speaker commits to the truth of the expressed proposition. In this dialogue, there is disagreement statement, it appears at Ruth’s statement that she maximizes disagreement with Phil’s statement about Wizard of Oz, so based on Leech theory, Ruth violates the

Agreement Maxim. Ruth says that Phil’s statement is not true. The word that indicated the violation of the Agreement Maxim is “No, Phil, I don't”.

Data 7

Clara : What are you doing?

Phil : I'm just gonna take a shortcut.

Clara : Phil, please don't. You think they're shortcuts but they always take longer. And we're already-

(Script p.21)

This text above violates Sympathy Maxim, it appears at Clara’s statement that she maximizes antipathy with Phil’s statement about take a shortcut, so based on Leech theory, Clara violates the Sympathy Maxim. In this case Clara says that Phil always take longer if he take a shortcut. Necessarily Clara gives sympathy to Phil about his problem to help him or if she can not, she can reject it with subtle way. The word that indicated the violation of the Sympathy Maxim is “Phil, please don't”.

Data 8

Harry : Phil and Clara Foster.

Phi : (BEAT)

That's what this is all about?

Speakerphone : what else would it be about, Mr. Foster?

Phil : (BEAT)

Wait. This a joke, right? Some funny little bald guy's gonna jump out and scare us and say, "Gotcha!" or something OK, where is he? Where's that guy?

Speakerphone : You think this is a joke?

Phil looks at the faces of the two thugs. No one's joking.

Phil : (STUNNED)

No. Are you insane?!? You don't drug people and tie them up for that! This is- I just- I hope you know this is gonna go way beyond a shitty review in Zagat! I'm seriously pissed off!

In dialogue above, there are two violations; firstly, Phil expresses disagreement to Speakerphone’s statement that he can not treat them like drug him and tie him up in the chair’s restaurant. Phil maximizes disagreement with Speakerphone statement. So, Phil violates Agreement Maxim. The word that indicated the violation of the Sympathy Maxim is “No”.

Secondly, in this dialogue, Phil violates Approbation Maxim because she dispraises other. He curses the speakerphone because he is angry about the speakerphone’s statement. The word that indicated the violation of the Approbation Maxim is “Are you insane”.

Data9

Phil : You must be kidding! Like a million people don't do it every single night of the week! This is unbelievable! I'm just in shock here!

Harry and Frank look at each other, puzzled.

Speakerphone : I enjoy your humor, Mr. Foster. Now why don't you start by telling me how you got into the Rainbow to set it up-

Phil : "Into the Rainbow?" What the hell's that? Restaurant code? (Script p.30)

This text above violates Sympathy Maxim, it appears at Phil’s statement that he maximizes antipathy with speakerphone’s statement about Into the Rainbow, the picture that speakerphone thinks Phil has, so based on Leech theory, Phil violates the Sympathy Maxim. In this case Phil says that Speakerphone makes a joke with him. Necessarily Phil gives sympathy to Speakerphone. The word that indicated the violation of the Sympathy Maxim is “What the hell's that?”.

Data 10

Clara : (WHISPERS)

No. I was just trying to keep our knees for the time being. Phil : (WHISPERS)

Well, if we end up in that car with them we're as good as dead. Frank : Quiet!

(Script p.34)

In this case Frank violates Tact Maxim because he gives a cost to other. The tact maxim is not adhered, which suggests extreme irritation with others behavior, so it is impolite. Then based on Leech Theory, Frank violates the tact maxim. The word that indicated the violation of the Tact Maxim is “Quiet!”. Data 11

Clara: (WHISPERS)

Well, any time you want to help... Phil: (WHISPERS)

What's that supposed to mean? Frank: I said quiet!

(Script p.34)

In this case Frank violates Tact Maxim again because he gives a cost to other. The tact maxim is not adhered, which suggests extreme irritation with others behavior, so it is impolite. Then based on Leech Theory, Frank violates the tact maxim. The word that indicated the violation of the Tact Maxim is “I said quiet!”.

Data 12

Clara : (CONT'D) (CATCHING ON)

You're diabetic! You never get the terms right, Phil! Oh no! This is bad, guys.

Harry and Frank look at each other, not sure what to do. Harry : Should we call Mr. Stockton?

Frank : Don't say his name, you idiot! Harry : Sorry! I was just-

(Script p.35)

In this statement above, Frank violates Modesty Maxim, because she says unpleasant things to other, in this case Harry. Frank says that he does not like that Harry wants to call Mr. Stockton but Frank does not like Harry mentions Mr. Stockton name so he curses him. The word that indicated the violation of the Modesty Maxim is “you idiot!”.

Data 13

Large man: Hey! You just hit my The Large Man stomps toward them. Phil: Run!

Phil and Clara get out of the car and run away on foot.

The Large Man marches over and inspects his bumper, then yells after them. Large man: Assholes!

(Script p.44)

In this statement above, Large man violates Modesty Maxim, because he says unpleasant things to other, in this case Phil. Large man is angry because Phil and Clara hit his bumper while they drive. Then Large man calls them but they run away. The word that indicated the violation of the Modesty Maxim is “Assholes!”.

Data 14

Clara : Old.

Phil : No, I was thinking numb. When did we become one of those couples that we used to look at in restaurants back then and think were so sad?

(Script p.58)

This dialogue is assertives sentence also, in this dialogue, there is disagreement statement; it appears at Phil’s statement that she maximizes disagreement with Clara’s statement about the experience that happens to them. Clara think Phil talk about the age, so based on Leech theory Phil violates the Agreement Maxim. Phil says that Clara’s statement is not true. The word that indicated the violation of the Agreement Maxim is “No, I was thinking numb”. Data 15

Clara suddenly notices a POLICE CAR, lights off, drive past them over the bridge.

Clara (CONT'D): Shit!

Phil: I think we're OK. Just play cool and keep walking. (Script p59)

In this statement above, Clara violates Modesty Maxim, because she says unpleasant things to other, in this case the police. Clara says that she does not want the police to catch them. The word that indicated the violation of the Modesty Maxim is “Shit!”.

Data 16

They land - THUMP! - onto the top deck of the boat, both groaning as they roll back and forth while the Drunken Partiers CHEER and FLASH PHOTOS.

Phil : Ow! I think I broke my butt.

Clara : OW! OW! Dammit, Phil! What's our rule about tickling? Phil : I'm sorry! I didn't do it for pleasure!

What is our rule? (Script p.60)

In this statement above, Clara violates Modesty Maxim again, because she says unpleasant things to other, in this case Phil. Clara says that she does not want Phil to tickle her but Phil do not want to stop tickle her because he wants to make a joke with Clara. The word that indicated the violation of the Modesty Maxim is “Dammit”.

Data 17

Black dude: Hey! HEY! What do you think you're doing?

The Black Dude chases after him, trying the driver's door, but Phil's LOCKED it. Phil yells to Clara.

Phil : PUT IT IN REVERSE AND GUN IT, CLARA! Clara : What? That's insane!

(Script p.76)

In this statement above, Clara violates Modesty Maxim again, because she says unpleasant things to other, in this case Phil. Clara says Phil is insane because he wants Clara shoot the Black dude. The word that indicated the violation of the Modesty Maxim is “That's insane!”.

Data 18

Phil : Unbelievable! You know, all you complain about is that I don't take risks anymore. Then the second I do, you get mad at me for doing it! I can't win with you!

Clara : Poor Phil! You have it so bad, don't you!

Phil : Oh, you have no idea! Every single day from the moment we wake up you're bossy, disapproving, inconsiderate-

Clara : I'm inconsiderate? I'M INCONSIDERATE?!? Have you ever seen our bathroom in the morning after Tsunami Phil's blown through? The floor! The sink! You use my toothbrush

In this case, Phil violates of Approbation Maxim, because he says unpleasant things about other, particularly about Clara. Phil gives statement that dispraise other, he says unpleasant thing that Clara always behave bossy, disapproving, inconsiderate. The word that indicated the violation of the Approbation Maxim is “you're bossy, disapproving, and inconsiderate-”.

Data 19

DOORMAN BUILDING - LATER THAT NIGHT

Phil and Clara walk into the lobby of the doorman building and start toward the elevator, straight past the NIGHT DOORMAN.

Doorman : Whoa whoa whoa. Where do you think you're going?

Clara : Oh, we're guests of Apartment 605 The Doorman picks up the phone to call the apartment.

Doorman : And you are? Clara looks at him in shock.

Clara : Are you crazy? It's 4 in the morning! We were just out for dinner. Trust me.

In this case, Clara violates of Approbation Maxim, because he says unpleasant things about other, particularly about the doorman. Clara gives statement that dispraise other, he says unpleasant thing that the doorman is not in the right mind because the doorman brings them a dinner at 4 Am. The word that indicated the violation of the Approbation Maxim is “Are you crazy?”.

Data 20

Phil : Well, I can pick things up then. Phil notices Clara giving him a LOOK.

Phil (CONT'D): What? Why are you looking at me like that? Clara : (intensifying the look) I'm not looking at you like anything.

He doesn't pick up on it. Shrugs. (Script p.41)

This dialogue is assertives sentence also, in this dialogue, there is disagreement statement; it appears at Clara’s statement that she maximizes disagreement with Phil’s statement about he notices Clara giving him a look. Phil thinks Clara look at him, so based on Leech theory Clara violates the Agreement Maxim. Clara says that she is not looking at him. The word that indicated the violation of the Agreement Maxim is “I'm not looking at you like anything”.

From analyzing the data, the writer obtained the research findings that politeness is a universal in interpersonal communication and best expressed as the practical application of good manners or etiquette. The finding results in this analysis are many expressions which violated the maxims of politeness principle. In this case, the violations of maxim happened on the tact maxim, the approbation maxim, the modesty maxim, Sympathy maxims and the agreement maxim. While the violations of Generosity maxim was not found in the dialogues.

The violation of tact maxim happened when the speaker maximizes benefit to self and gives a cost to other. There is two data that violated tact maxim, this matter happened on Frank statement when he asked Phil and Clara to be quite and suggests extreme irritation with others behavior, so it is impolite.

The violations of Approbation maxim happened when the speaker maximizes dispraise to other. The violations happened on some dialogues, there are seven data that violated the approbation maxim.

The violations of modesty maxim happened in the dialogues also, this matter caused by the speaker who maximizes praise of self. In this analysis, there are six data that violated the modesty maxim.

The violations of Sympathy maxim happened in the dialogues also, this matter caused by the speaker maximizing antipathy and minimizing sympathy to other. In this analysis, there are two data that violated the Sympathy maxim.

And then the violations of agreement maxim happened in the dialogues, there are five data that violated the agreement maxim. They happened by the speaker who maximizes disagreement between self and other.

41 A. Conclusions

According to the purposes of this research, the writer explains on politeness maxims that violence to the maxims of politeness principle on the dialogue of Date Night movie.

The writer concludes In this case, the violations of maxim happened on the tact maxim, the approbation maxim, the modesty maxim, Sympathy maxims and the agreement maxim. While the violations of Generosity maxim was not found in the dialogues because the finding results in this analysis is not explained. Then there is not the result that contain utterance context occurred in the dialogues.

In communicating the role of politeness principle is reflected in the procedure to communicate verbally or speaking manner. Communications can be better if the speaker in its conversation try to relevant what said with the situation in conversation. To be the conversation by speaker and hearer easy to be understood, there are methods which must be adhered.

In this case, the violations of maxims related to the politeness principles still occurred in many conversations. The violations of maxims may occur because of the desire of someone to give intention which implied in utterance, so the principles weren’t adhered.

B. Suggestions

The writer suggests for understanding the definition of politeness principle. They are the most important elements to make easier to analyze the violation of maxim in the context of politeness principle and hope the reader will be easier to know the message.

The research uses Transcript of Date Night movie dialogue as the unit analysis. This research can be more developed for further researches, the writer hopes can analysis the politeness principles based on other theories. And the writer hopes that for further researches, the coverage can be more expanded and better as unit analysis in order to have an extra comprehensive research in analyzing the politeness principle theory.

43

A.S Hornby. (2000) Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cutting, J. (2002). “Pragmatics and Discourse”. London: Routledge.

Eelen, Gino. (2001). “A Critique of Politeness Theories”. Manchaster: St. Jerome Publishing.

Farkhan, M. “Proposal Penelitian Bahasa dan Sastra”.Jakarta: Cella Jakarta. George Yule. (1996). “Pragmatics”. New York: Oxford University Press.

Jacob L. Mey. (2001). “Pragmatics an Introduction”. Massachusetts: Blackwell Publisher.

Kushartanti. (2005). “Pesona Bahasa”, Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Leech, Geoffrey dan M.D.D. Oka (penerjemah). (1993). “Prinsip-Prinsip Pragmatik”. Jakarta: UI Press.

Leech, Geoffrey. (1983). “Principles of Pragmatics”. New York: Longman. Mills, Sara. (2003). “Gender and Politeness”. UK: University Press, Cambridge. Rahardi, R Kunjana. (2002). “Pragmatik Kesantunan Imperatif Bahasa

Indonesia”. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Stephen C. Levinson, (1983). “Pragmatics”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Watts, R. J. (2003) Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wijana, I Dewa Putu. (1996). “Dasar-Dasar Pragmatik”. Yogyakarta: ANDI Yogyakarta.

WEBSITES :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_Night

http://essaysreasy.com/content/modern-american-culture.html.

http://www.americanfamilytraditions.com/traditions_customs_rituals.htm. http://www.imsdb.com/scripts/Date-Night.html.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/date_night/ http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Maxim. http://www.yourdictionary.com/maxim.

He doesn't pick up on it. Shrugs. (Script p.41)

This dialogue is assertives sentence also, in this dialogue, there is disagreement statement; it appears at Clara’s statement that she maximizes disagreement with Phil’s statement about he notices Clara giving him a look. Phil thinks Clara look at him, so based on Leech theory Clara violates the Agreement Maxim. Clara says that she is not looking at him. The word that indicated the violation of the Agreement Maxim is “I'm not looking at you like anything”.

From analyzing the data, the writer obtained the research findings that politeness is a universal in interpersonal communication and best expressed as the practical application of good manners or etiquette. The finding results in this analysis are many expressions which violated the maxims of politeness principle. In this case, the violations of maxim happened on the tact maxim, the approbation maxim, the modesty maxim, Sympathy maxims and the agreement maxim. While the violations of Generosity maxim was not found in the dialogues.

The violation of tact maxim happened when the speaker maximizes benefit to self and gives a cost to other. There is two data that violated tact maxim, this matter happened on Frank statement when he asked Phil and Clara to be quite and suggests extreme irritation with others behavior, so it is impolite.

The violations of Approbation maxim happened when the speaker maximizes dispraise to other. The violations happened on some dialogues, there are seven data that violated the approbation maxim.

40

The violations of modesty maxim happened in the dialogues also, this matter caused by the speaker who maximizes praise of self. In this analysis, there are six data that violated the modesty maxim.

The violations of Sympathy maxim happened in the dialogues also, this matter caused by the speaker maximizing antipathy and minimizing sympathy to other. In this analysis, there are two data that violated the Sympathy maxim.

And then the violations of agreement maxim happened in the dialogues, there are five data that violated the agreement maxim. They happened by the speaker who maximizes disagreement between self and other.

41 A. Conclusions

According to the purposes of this research, the writer explains on politeness maxims that violence to the maxims of politeness principle on the dialogue of Date Night movie.

The writer concludes In this case, the violations of maxim happened on the tact maxim, the approbation maxim, the modesty maxim, Sympathy maxims and the agreement maxim. While the violations of Generosity maxim was not found in the dialogues because the finding results in this analysis is not explained. Then there is not the result that contain utterance context occurred in the dialogues.

In communicating the role of politeness principle is reflected in the procedure to communicate verbally or speaking manner. Communications can be better if the speaker in its conversation try to relevant what said with the situation in conversation. To be the conversation by speaker and hearer easy to be understood, there are methods which must be adhered.

In this case, the violations of maxims related to the politeness principles still occurred in many conversations. The violations of maxims may occur because of the desire of someone to give intention which implied in utterance, so the principles weren’t adhered.

42

B. Suggestions

The writer suggests for understanding the definition of politeness principle. They are the most important elements to make easier to analyze the violation of maxim in the context of politeness principle and hope the reader will be easier to know the message.

The research uses Transcript of Date Night movie dialogue as the unit analysis. This research can be more developed for further researches, the writer hopes can analysis the politeness principles based on other theories. And the writer hopes that for further researches, the coverage can be more expanded and better as unit analysis in order to have an extra comprehensive research in analyzing the politeness principle theory.

43

A.S Hornby. (2000) Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cutting, J. (2002). “Pragmatics and Discourse”. London: Routledge.

Eelen, Gino. (2001). “A Critique of Politeness Theories”. Manchaster: St. Jerome Publishing.

Farkhan, M. “Proposal Penelitian Bahasa dan Sastra”.Jakarta: Cella Jakarta. George Yule. (1996). “Pragmatics”. New York: Oxford University Press.

Jacob L. Mey. (2001). “Pragmatics an Introduction”. Massachusetts: Blackwell Publisher.

Kushartanti. (2005). “Pesona Bahasa”, Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Leech, Geoffrey dan M.D.D. Oka (penerjemah). (1993). “Prinsip-Prinsip Pragmatik”. Jakarta: UI Press.

Leech, Geoffrey. (1983). “Principles of Pragmatics”. New York: Longman. Mills, Sara. (2003). “Gender and Politeness”. UK: University Press, Cambridge. Rahardi, R Kunjana. (2002). “Pragmatik Kesantunan Imperatif Bahasa

Indonesia”. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Stephen C. Levinson, (1983). “Pragmatics”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Watts, R. J. (2003) Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wijana, I Dewa Putu. (1996). “Dasar-Dasar Pragmatik”. Yogyakarta: ANDI Yogyakarta.

44

WEBSITES :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_Night

http://essaysreasy.com/content/modern-american-culture.html.

http://www.americanfamilytraditions.com/traditions_customs_rituals.htm. http://www.imsdb.com/scripts/Date-Night.html.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/date_night/ http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Maxim. http://www.yourdictionary.com/maxim.