4
Maranatha Christian University
maxims and to know what makes it funny in terms of non-observance of the Gricean maxims. It is also significant for people in general as they will understand
how to grasp the humor through non-observance of the Gricean maxims. Word count: 794
1.2. Statement of the Problem
Based on the topic, I will analyze these three problems: 1.
What type of non-observance of maxims is there in each of the characters’ utterances analyzed?
2. What is the implicature within each utterance?
3. How does the non-observance of the Gricean maxims lead to humor?
1.3. Purpose of the Study
By analyzing those problems in this thesis, I want to show 1.
the type of non-observance occurring in each of the characters’ utterances analyzed.
2. the implicature within each utterance.
3. how the non-observance of the Gricean maxims leads to humor in Roommates
comedy TV series.
1.4. Method of Research
The method used in this thesis is divided into five steps. First, I searched for the source of the data that I am going to analyze. Second, I searched for the
linguistic features that contain non-observance of the maxims in Roommates
5
Maranatha Christian University
comedy TV series. Third, I analyzed the type of the non-observance of the maxim and its implicature in the utterance of the characters. Fourth, I analyzed the way
the non-observance of the maxims leads to humor. Finally, I wrote the research report.
1.5. Organization of the Thesis
This thesis consists of four chapters. Chapter I is the Introduction that contains Background of the Study, Statement of the Problem, Purpose of the
Study, Method of Research, and Organization of the Thesis. Chapter II, Theoretical Framework, provides the linguistic theories used to discuss the non-
observance of the maxims. Chapter III contains the discussion on non-observance of the maxims in Roommates comedy TV series. Chapter IV is the Conclusion in
which I present my personal opinions and comments on the discussion. This thesis ends with the Bibliography and the Appendix.
32
Maranatha Christian University
CHAPTER FOUR
CONCLUSION
From the analysis in Roommates TV series that I have made, I can draw a conclusion which contains of my findings. Firstly, the humor occurs in all
conversation by the major characters. As we can see, when the characters do not observe maxims in a conversation, this condition creates a funny atmosphere.
After analyzing them, I find that all kinds of non-observance of Gricean maxims emerge in these data.
In flouting the maxims, all kinds of maxim are not observed in this analysis. Flouting of maxim which mostly appears in nine data analyzed is
flouting the maxim of quality. Flouting the maxim of quantity only emerges in one data. It is because the characters in this TV series are quite open to one
another so whenever engaging in a conversation, they try to give full information as completely as they can. While, flouting the maxim of manner and relation
emerge in two data for each type. This is because most of the characters tend to be straight forward to one another.
33
Maranatha Christian University
From data analyzed, flouting the maxim of quality occurs because the characters on the whole say something which is untrue without intention of
misleading. This kind of flouting appears in several data, like in data 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, and 9. This occurrence usually happens because the speakers are in the
difficult situation in which they have no option to say the truth and wish that people will look for another interpretation. Besides, flouting the maxim of
quantity in data 6 emerges because the character on the whole cannot give full information in which she feels embarrassed to tell something. Flouting the maxim
of manner that occurs in data 1 and 8 is because the character on the whole has hidden purpose and does not say to the point to others. Whereas, flouting the
maxim of relation in data 5 and 9 occurs because the character on the whole gives irrelevant response to others. Therefore, all in all, maxim is flouted in this
TV series is when the characters are in a position they cannot say the truth because of difficult situation, feel ashamed to others, have hidden intention, and
want to change the topic of discussion. In addition, violating maxim emerges in two data; data 2 and 3. This
happens because the characters on the whole are lying to the others so that he or she cannot tell the truth and the other is misled by him or her. And, suspending
maxim in data 6 happens because the character feels ashamed to say the real word based on her gender. The others are opting out maxim that occurs in data 4
because the character refuses to corporate in the conversation and infringing maxim that occurs in data 7 because the character feels nervous to respond
other’s question. Therefore, violation in this TV series happens when the character happens to lie to others. While, suspending happens when the character feels
34
Maranatha Christian University
embarrassed to other’s question related to the gender. Opting out happens when
the character refuses to answer other’s question due to her inconvenience; and Infringing happens whe
n there is nervousness to respond other’s question. Finishing analysis the data that contains of the non-observance Gricean
maxims, I, as the audience, find that this non-cooperation happened between the characters in the conversation is as a surprise because I do not expect that the
character will utter such utterances that may create something else. In fact, this surprise causes humor effect. So, our surprise is to emphasize how the humor
emerges in a speech event. To prove the data analyzed is really humor, I relate the analysis of the non-observance maxim with Incongruity Script and Superiority
theory. In relation to Incongruity Script, it can be concluded that when it comes to
satirizing each other, the characters in the film tend to come up with a script superficially. For example: in data 1, 2, and 3 superficially they discuss about
the show script. And yet, actually they have different script within. That is, about revealing the secret script. The same thing also occurs in data 9 in which the
character superficially comes up with a childhood script but actually the reality script, which is about dating script. What is also interesting to conclude is that the
use of words that superficially centers on one script but communicatively different as seen in data 9.
In relation to Superiority, it can be concluded that we as the audience tend to laugh at the ch
aracter’s misfortune because he or she has hidden something. We feel superior because of it.
35
Maranatha Christian University
To feel or understand the funny part in the scene would not be easy though by some people who watch film since people may have different sense of humor.
Besides, the situation when the audience finds the surprise within the scene can influence it. For this case, people cannot find the incongruity case and the humor
’s context is confusing. That is why; the important thing to understand or get the
humor is the audience’s background knowledge. Through this analysis, I also discover that the non-observance of Gricean
maxims seems quite difficult to acknowledge by some people. This is because sometimes people do maxim non-observance accidentally. I can find when the
speakers’ utterances do not have any implicature in their utterances, but their response t
o the interlocutor’s utterance does not seem that they observe the maxim. In certain cases, an utterance may have one or more types of the non-
observance maxim. For example, when the speaker cannot tell the truth, usually the response is by obscuring the reality.
Actually, the hearer should be aware of the spe aker’s utterance so that the
hearer can understand the context which is talking about. When a person becomes a hearer, he or she has to understand what a speaker means through the
speaker’s utterance even implicitly said. On the other hand, a speaker also has to produce an
understandable and clear utterance to the hearer so that they can cooperate well in a conversation. In other words, if the speaker and the hearer are able to do it, they
have been cooperative and already observed the maxim. However, through this film as the example, I find that this condition does
not always happen in a conversation. There are some hearers who have difficulties in catching and understanding what a speaker utters and some speakers who
36
Maranatha Christian University
cannot be cooperative because of some reasons. So, when it happens, the conversation cannot run well as it should be and cause misunderstanding among
the speaker and the hearer so that it will create a distance between them and we see this condition and find it funny. Thus, based on the comedy TV series I
analyze, to create humorous scenes, it uses the dialogue which shows the failure to understand implicature.
The non-observance maxims can also be found in the normal life, not only in the dialogues in a film. There are many factors that influence the speaker and
the hearer to do that. Therefore, it depends on both speaker and hearer whether they want to cooperate or not in a conversation.
For other researchers, I believe that my thesis is still imperfect. But I hope my thesis can be useful as a reference for making a research. The study of the
occurrence of humor caused by the non-observance of Gricean maxims in Roommates comedy TV series still can be developed for a better result by
applying it to other comedy TV series to find out whether the result would be somehow similar or not. Furthermore, the other data which come from this film
can be analyzed by applying some other theories of humor as well. Word count: 1280
37
Maranatha Christian University
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Primary Texts:
Roommates. Dir. Jack Kenny and Andrew D. Weyman. Perf. Dorian Brown, Tamera Mowry, David Weidoff, and Tyler Francavilla. American
Broadcasting Company, 2009. DVD
References:
Cook, Guy. Language Play, Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Print
Grice, H.Paul. Logic and Conversation. Berkeley: University of California, 2004. Print
McGhee, Paul E. and Jeffrey H. Goldstein. Handbook of Humor Research. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1983. Print
Mey, Jacob L. Pragmatics: An introduction. Blackwell, 2001. Print Thomas, Jenny. Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. London
and New York: Longman Group Limited, 1995. Print Yule, George. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. Print
38
Maranatha Christian University
Electronic Publications:
“Humour.” Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Online Dictionary. Cambridge
Advance Learner’s Online, 2008. Web. 11 Apr. 2011
Monro, D. H. “Theories of Humor.” Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum:
349-355. 1988. Web. 7 Sept. 2011 Mooney, Annabelle. “Co-operation, Violation and Making Sense.” Journal of
Pragmatics 33:1601-1623. 2004. Web. 5 Oct. 2011 The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. N.p, 2009. Web. 7 Sept. 2011
Yuyun, Ignasia. “A Speech Acts Analysis of the Misunderstanding in Abbott and Costello
.” Scribd Inc. 2012. Web. 11 Apr. 2011
