Analysis of Occupational Jokes in Relation to Non-Observance of the Gricean Maxims in “Laugh It Up” Section in Cool ‘N Smart Magazine.

ABSTRACT

Di dalam tugas akhir ini, saya menganalisis data yang berupa occupational

jokes, yaitu cerita humor di seputar dunia kerja. Saya menganalisis beberapa cerita

humor dengan menggunakan teori bidal dari Herbert Paul Grice. Pelanggaran bidal dikategorikan dalam lima jenis pelanggaran, yaitu: flouting maxim of

manner, violating a maxim, infringing a maxim, suspending a maxim, dan opting out of a maxim.

Data yang saya gunakan berasal dari sumber majalah remaja Cool ‘n

Smart. Dari seluruh data yang sudah saya kumpulkan, pelanggaran bidal flouting a maxim adalah kasus yang paling banyak ditemukan. Hal ini disebabkan karena

adanya implikatur dalam suatu ujaran, sang pembicara tidak menyampaikan maksudnya secara langsung sehingga dapat menimbulkan humor.

Untuk memperdalam pembahasan, selain menggunakan teori bidal, saya juga menggunakan Script Incongruity oleh Victor Raskin. Teori ini mengemukakan tentang adanya dua skrip berbeda dalam satu teks. Teori Script

Incongruity inilah yang memperlihatkan perubahan skrip diluar ekspektasi

pembaca sebelumnya, perubahan skrip inilah yang akan menyebabkan kelucuan dalam lelucon tersebut.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... i

ABSTRACT ... ii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Background of the Study ... 1

Statement of the Problem ... 4

Purpose of the Study ... 4

Methods of Research ... 5

Organization of the Thesis ... 5

CHAPTER TWO: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Implicature ... 6

Non-Observance of the Maxims ... 9

Theory of Script Incongruity ... 14

CHAPTER THREE: ANALYSIS OF OCCUPATIONAL JOKES IN RELATION TO NON-OBSERVANCE OF THE GRICEAN MAXIMS IN “LAUGH IT UP” SECTION IN COOL ‘N SMART MAGAZINE ... 16

CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSION ... 33

BIBLIOGRAPHY ... 37

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Everybody needs to communicate with one another because we are social beings. It is a must for us to communicate. Communication is the key to express our feelings, emotions, and thoughts. On top of that, people can socialize and connect with each other through communication. Therefore, it is really important to deliver our message through communication.

People usually utter something directly. However, in reality, when a speaker communicates, his message is sometimes not delivered explicitly. It creates an implicature, which in Pragmatics, is a hidden meaning that occurs in an utterance.

In order to avoid misinterpretation between the speaker and the hearer, Grice established the Cooperative Principle (1975). The principles should be obeyed by the participants by following the rules of speaking, which consist of four maxims. They are quantity, quality, relation and manner. However, when

people are engaged in a conversation, they usually do not obey the rules. Moreover, according to Grice, people do not always say what they actually mean. This can produce an implicature.

Basically, people like funny things in order to reduce their stress in life. There are a lot of things to make people laugh, such as situation comedy, stand up comedies, and also jokes. Commonly, people like jokes a lot.

Jokes lead to laughter and help our mind relax and it recharges our spirit. Laughter can reduce the level of stress hormones. (Laughter and Health, n.d.). Some people find it difficult to express their emotions, especially the negative ones such as anger, sadness, and fear. In the research of American Association for

Therapeutic Humor, these emotions can be released harmlessly by laughter

(Brain, n.d.). Based on the explanation above, it can be said that people need to laugh.

According to Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary 8th edition, joke is “something that you say or do to make people laugh” (2010). Jokes are necessarry and have many benefits for life. In many kinds of jokes, it is possible for implicature to exist and the implicature makes the jokes funny.

Jokes can be found in magazines, newspapers or other media.We can read many jokes in our free time. However, when we read some jokes we sometimes do not understand which part of the joke makes us laugh. The writer of the jokes sometimes gives an implied meaning in their jokes to make their jokes funny. However, the readers may not understand the implied meaning. Thus, we do not laugh at all.Instead, we become confused.

The explanation above is the reason why I choose Pragmatics for my thesis topic. Pragmatics is the branch of linguistics which studies speaker’s meaning or contextual meaning. Pragmatics is appropriate to be used to analyze jokes. In this thesis, I will give an explanation of each joke and how they become funny by relating it to the Gricean maxims.

My source of data for this thesis is “Laugh It Up” section in the Cool ‘n

Smart Magazine the years of 2001-2010. The C ‘n S magazine is published once per four months. I will focus on occupational jokes.

The Cool ‘n Smart Magazine or called C n’ S Mag for short, is published in East Jakarta. It is aimed for teenagers. Updated info, tips, and articles are included to make teens interested in reading this magazine. The articles themselves contain some funny stories and jokes that make us laugh. Usually, the writer gives the story or conversation happening in our daily life, so that the humor makes sense.

I choose The Analysis of Occupational Jokes in Relation to Non-Observance of the Gricean Maxims in “Laugh It Up” Section in The Cool ‘n Smart Magazine for my thesis title. The jokes do not always give the messages explicitly; they also come implicitly. The reason for me choosing this topic is because jokes are fun to be read.

The implied meaning in the conversation is sometimes difficult to guess, thus I would like to discuss it in jokes and analyze using the Gricean maxims. I also use the theory of incongruity to strengthen my analysis.

My analysis is significant because it is useful for people to be more aware to find out the implicit meanings in jokes. I hope my analysis will increase the capability of the readers to enjoy jokes even more understandable.

(Word count : 720)

1.2 Statement of the Problem

The problems that will be analyzed in this thesis are :

1. What types of non-observance of the Gricean maxim are found in the joke?

2. How does the non-observance of the Gricean maxim lead to the occurrence of humor?

3. In relation to Raskin’s theory Script of Incongruity, how does the script incongruity help the jokes become funny?

1.3 Purpose of the Study The purpose of the study are:

1. To know types of non-observance of the Gricean maxim found in the joke.

2. To find out how non-observance of the Griceanmaxim leads to the occurrence of humor.

3. To explain how the script incongruity help the jokes become funny.

1.4 Method of Research

There are some steps that I used in writing this thesis. First, I learned the theories of Non-Observance of the Gricean maxims, especially flouting a maxim, and then the Theory of Incongruity to support my analysis. I collected the jokes “Laugh It Up” section in Cool ‘n Smart Magazine. Next, I analyzed the role of conversational implicature in each joke. After analyzing the humor by using theory of Incongruity, I wrote the research report.

1.5 Organization of the Thesis

This thesis consists of four chapters. Chapter One is Introduction, which is divided into five parts: Background of the Study, Statement of the Problem, Purpose of the Study, Method of Research, and Organization of the Thesis. Chapter Two contains Theoretical Framework, which is the elaboration of the theories that will be used in analyzing the data. Chapter Three presents the analysis of the data. The last chapter, Chapter Four, is Conclusion. At the end of the thesis, there are Bibliography and Appendix.

33

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION

In this chapter, based on all my data and analysis, I would like to draw the conclusion. In the beginning, I collect all jokes and focus on occupational jokes that I take from Cool n’ Smart magazine. In C ‘nS magazine, I analyze eleven data for my thesis. I find various types of non-observance of the Gricean maxims.

Besides the Gricean maxim theory, the other theory that I use to analyze the data is the theory of humor using script incongruity by Raskin. It is an additional theory to strengthen my analysis. The Gricean theory helps me identify the non-observance of the maxims. I identify the scripts in each data using Raskin’s theory of Incongruity. By using those theories, the jokes are proven to be funny.

There are eleven data I use for my analysis. Seven of them concern flouting the maxims and five of them involve violating the maxim. Only in data 1, I can see that flouting a maxim of manner occurs at the same time with violating a maxim. From the eleven data, I find eighteen utterances. Seven out of the eighteen utterances show flouting maxim of manner, which is the most common type of flouting found in the data. The same number goes with violates a maxim, which

flouting found in the data. The same number of occurences goes with violates a maxim; seven utterances show violating the maxim. As for flouting the maxim of quality and quantity, I find two utterances which show flouting the two maxims.

In occupational area, conversations between colleagues does not always go smoothly according to the cooperative principle based on the Gricean maxim theory. People do not always say what they want, they feel or they think explicitly. Commonly, people do this because they are too shy to say them or because they do not want to offend the other participant of the conversation. Thus, sometimes the speaker says something in an indirect way because he or she wants the hearer to interpret the meaning within the utterance by himself.

As stated before, flouting the maxim of manner is the type of flouting with the most number of case. It happens when the speaker makes a long winded respond or an unclear statement. The speaker does that because he or she wants to make other people think what the speaker actually wants to say by themselves. In my data, it usually occurs when the speaker does not say something clearly such as making a long winded response or not being straight forward. Therefore, it makes the joke funny.

Violating a maxim is present in data 1, 2, 8, 10, 11. It happens when the speaker tries to mislead the hearer. It usually happens when the speaker do not give complete information or try to hide something from the hearer because he or she does not want the hearer to know about his or her real intention. This is clearly observed in data eleven, which is a story about a clever farmer. The farmer misleads the sheriff and deputies into thinking that there are guns buried in his

deputies to dig the field and make it nicely plowed for the farmer’s wife to plant some potatoes.

Flouting the maxim of quantity happens when the speaker gives more or less information than he or she is supposed to. If someone gives more information, the speaker’s first utterance is actually enough, but then he or she adds more information, which is not really necessary in the situation. However, the speaker wants the hearer to interpret the speaker’s utterance by themselves.

Flouting the maxim of quality also happens in some jokes I have analyzed. It is when the speaker says something wrong or lacking in evidences. An example is in data three, when the guide says “Yes I am” which is obviously wrong that he is the best guide in US and also his utterance “but I think we may have wandered into Canada.” the guide is not actually sure whether they are really in Canada. The word “may” shows the speaker has no of evidence.

There are some types of non-observance of the Gricean maxims that are not found in my thesis. They are flouting the maxim of relation, infringing a maxim, opting out of a maxim, and suspending a maxim. The first one is flouting the maxim of relation. The reason why flouting the maxim of relation is not found is because all the speakers in my data give relevant utterances. The second one is infringing a maxim. It is not found because the speakers in my data are all native speakers and they do not show any symptoms of drunkeness, nervousness or excitement. The third one is opting out of a maxim. Based on my data, opting out of a maxim is also not found because the speaker and the hearer of the conversation in my data are well cooperative with each other. The last one is suspending a maxim. It is not found in my data because there is no case in which

the speaker uses any different name as a code in any event or culture. Based on those reasons, some types of non-observance are not present in my data.

Script incongruity happens when two different scripts are present in a text. There are some triggering words that can help us identify the scripts. The readers initially lead to one script, then suddenly the script changes to another script. This new script creates a surprise and the humor that make the readers laugh. It is how incongruous script occurs in a joke. It appears that all my data are analyzed using script incongruity by Raskin.

A few semesters ago, I took Metodologi Penelitian Linguistik subject as the basic of all my thesis writing. The difficulty was to find the thesis topic. In the beginning, I determined what kind of theory I master which I could use to analyze my data. And then I decided to choose non-observance of the maxim as my theory. I searched in many sources like magazines, websites, films, and many more. But in the end, I choose Cool n’ Smart Magazine as my data source. After gathering enough data, I started to analyze them using non-observance of maxims by Grice and analyzing the humor using script Incongruity.

For future researchers who are interested to take non-observance of the maxims theory in jokes, I suggest that at the very beginning, there should be more than one possible options of sources to make it easier to decide the thesis topic. For me, taking occupational topic will make my thesis different from others, because as people know, occupational category can be rather boring. However, since it is about jokes, I personally believe that it will make my thesis unique and interesting to read.As the writer of this thesis, I hope this thesis can help people to

37

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Texts

Laugh It Up: Apprentice. (2009, January/February). Cool ‘n Smart, 8(61), 36.

Laugh It Up: Aspiring Writer. (2002, August/September). Cool ‘n Smart, 2(10),

17.

Laugh It Up: Best in the Land. (2005, February/March). Cool ‘n Smart, 4(30), 38.

Laugh It Up: Clever farmer. (2005, July/August). Cool ‘n Smart, 5(33), 38.

Laugh It Up: Delightful Story. (2002, August/September). Cool ‘n Smart, 2(10),

17.

Laugh It Up: Fighting Mood. (2010, January/February). Cool ‘n Smart, 9(69), 36.

Laugh It Up: No Paperwork. (2002, August/September). Cool ‘n Smart, 2(10), 17.

Laugh It Up: Patriotic Ascent. (2001, August/September). Cool ‘n Smart, 1(2), 38.

Laugh It Up: Repairs. (2005, January/February). Cool ‘n Smart, (4)29, 39.

Laugh It Up: The Broken-down Train. (2005, February/March). Cool ‘n Smart,

(4)30, 38.

References

Brain, Marshall. (n.d.). How Laughter Works: Laughter and Health. Retrieved from How Stuff Works http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/emotions/laughter7.htm

Cook, Guy. (2000). Language Play, Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dornerus, Emma. (2006). Breaking Maxims in Conversation (Dissertation Online). UK Essays.

Hornby, A.S. (2010). Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. (8th Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thomas, Jenny. (1995). Meaning in Interaction: an Introduction to Pragmatics. London and New York: Longman Group Limited.

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION

In this chapter, based on all my data and analysis, I would like to draw the conclusion. In the beginning, I collect all jokes and focus on occupational jokes that I take from Cool n’ Smart magazine. In C ‘nS magazine, I analyze eleven data for my thesis. I find various types of non-observance of the Gricean maxims.

Besides the Gricean maxim theory, the other theory that I use to analyze the data is the theory of humor using script incongruity by Raskin. It is an additional theory to strengthen my analysis. The Gricean theory helps me identify the non-observance of the maxims. I identify the scripts in each data using Raskin’s theory of Incongruity. By using those theories, the jokes are proven to be funny.

There are eleven data I use for my analysis. Seven of them concern flouting the maxims and five of them involve violating the maxim. Only in data 1, I can see that flouting a maxim of manner occurs at the same time with violating a maxim. From the eleven data, I find eighteen utterances. Seven out of the eighteen utterances show flouting maxim of manner, which is the most common type of flouting found in the data. The same number goes with violates a maxim, which

flouting found in the data. The same number of occurences goes with violates a maxim; seven utterances show violating the maxim. As for flouting the maxim of quality and quantity, I find two utterances which show flouting the two maxims.

In occupational area, conversations between colleagues does not always go smoothly according to the cooperative principle based on the Gricean maxim theory. People do not always say what they want, they feel or they think explicitly. Commonly, people do this because they are too shy to say them or because they do not want to offend the other participant of the conversation. Thus, sometimes the speaker says something in an indirect way because he or she wants the hearer to interpret the meaning within the utterance by himself.

As stated before, flouting the maxim of manner is the type of flouting with the most number of case. It happens when the speaker makes a long winded respond or an unclear statement. The speaker does that because he or she wants to make other people think what the speaker actually wants to say by themselves. In my data, it usually occurs when the speaker does not say something clearly such as making a long winded response or not being straight forward. Therefore, it makes the joke funny.

Violating a maxim is present in data 1, 2, 8, 10, 11. It happens when the speaker tries to mislead the hearer. It usually happens when the speaker do not give complete information or try to hide something from the hearer because he or she does not want the hearer to know about his or her real intention. This is clearly observed in data eleven, which is a story about a clever farmer. The farmer misleads the sheriff and deputies into thinking that there are guns buried in his field. In the end, his real intention is revealed, which is tricking the sheriff and

deputies to dig the field and make it nicely plowed for the farmer’s wife to plant some potatoes.

Flouting the maxim of quantity happens when the speaker gives more or less information than he or she is supposed to. If someone gives more information, the speaker’s first utterance is actually enough, but then he or she adds more information, which is not really necessary in the situation. However, the speaker wants the hearer to interpret the speaker’s utterance by themselves.

Flouting the maxim of quality also happens in some jokes I have analyzed. It is when the speaker says something wrong or lacking in evidences. An example is in data three, when the guide says “Yes I am” which is obviously wrong that he

is the best guide in US and also his utterance “but I think we may have wandered into Canada.” the guide is not actually sure whether they are really in Canada. The word “may” shows the speaker has no of evidence.

There are some types of non-observance of the Gricean maxims that are not found in my thesis. They are flouting the maxim of relation, infringing a maxim, opting out of a maxim, and suspending a maxim. The first one is flouting the maxim of relation. The reason why flouting the maxim of relation is not found is because all the speakers in my data give relevant utterances. The second one is infringing a maxim. It is not found because the speakers in my data are all native speakers and they do not show any symptoms of drunkeness, nervousness or excitement. The third one is opting out of a maxim. Based on my data, opting out of a maxim is also not found because the speaker and the hearer of the conversation in my data are well cooperative with each other. The last one is suspending a maxim. It is not found in my data because there is no case in which

the speaker uses any different name as a code in any event or culture. Based on those reasons, some types of non-observance are not present in my data.

Script incongruity happens when two different scripts are present in a text. There are some triggering words that can help us identify the scripts. The readers initially lead to one script, then suddenly the script changes to another script. This new script creates a surprise and the humor that make the readers laugh. It is how incongruous script occurs in a joke. It appears that all my data are analyzed using script incongruity by Raskin.

A few semesters ago, I took Metodologi Penelitian Linguistik subject as the basic of all my thesis writing. The difficulty was to find the thesis topic. In the beginning, I determined what kind of theory I master which I could use to analyze my data. And then I decided to choose non-observance of the maxim as my theory. I searched in many sources like magazines, websites, films, and many more. But in the end, I choose Cool n’ Smart Magazine as my data source. After gathering enough data, I started to analyze them using non-observance of maxims by Grice and analyzing the humor using script Incongruity.

For future researchers who are interested to take non-observance of the maxims theory in jokes, I suggest that at the very beginning, there should be more than one possible options of sources to make it easier to decide the thesis topic. For me, taking occupational topic will make my thesis different from others, because as people know, occupational category can be rather boring. However, since it is about jokes, I personally believe that it will make my thesis unique and interesting to read. As the writer of this thesis, I hope this thesis can help people to

37

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Texts

Laugh It Up: Apprentice. (2009, January/February). Cool ‘n Smart, 8(61), 36. Laugh It Up: Aspiring Writer. (2002, August/September). Cool ‘n Smart, 2(10),

17.

Laugh It Up: Best in the Land. (2005, February/March). Cool ‘n Smart, 4(30), 38. Laugh It Up: Clever farmer. (2005, July/August). Cool ‘n Smart, 5(33), 38.

Laugh It Up: Delightful Story. (2002, August/September). Cool ‘n Smart, 2(10), 17.

Laugh It Up: Fighting Mood. (2010, January/February). Cool ‘n Smart, 9(69), 36. Laugh It Up: No Paperwork. (2002, August/September). Cool ‘n Smart, 2(10), 17. Laugh It Up: Patriotic Ascent. (2001, August/September). Cool ‘n Smart, 1(2), 38. Laugh It Up: Repairs. (2005, January/February). Cool ‘n Smart, (4)29, 39.

Laugh It Up: The Broken-down Train. (2005, February/March). Cool ‘n Smart, (4)30, 38.

References

Brain, Marshall. (n.d.). How Laughter Works: Laughter and Health. Retrieved from How Stuff Works http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/emotions/laughter7.htm

Cook, Guy. (2000). Language Play, Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dornerus, Emma. (2006). Breaking Maxims in Conversation (Dissertation Online). UK Essays.

Hornby, A.S. (2010). Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. (8th Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thomas, Jenny. (1995). Meaning in Interaction: an Introduction to Pragmatics. London and New York: Longman Group Limited.