Analysis of Misinterpretation of Illocutions in 'Friends' Movie Series.

ii Maranatha Christian University

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... i

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... ii

ABSTRACT ... iii

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

Statement of the Problem ... 4

Purpose of the Study ... 4

Method of Research ... 4

Organization of the Thesis ... 4

CHAPTER TWO : THEORY OF SPEECH ACTS ... 5

CHAPTER THREE: ANALYSIS OF MISINTERPRETATION OF ILLOCUTIONS IN FRIENDS MOVIE SERIES ... 11

CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSION ... 27

iii Maranatha Christian University

ABSTRACT

Dalam tugas akhir ini saya ingin membahas tentang kesalahpahaman seseorang terhadap mitra tuturnya akibat penggunaan bahasa yang tidak langsung. Saya meneliti kesalahpahaman dalam berbicara dalam komedi situasi Amerika berjudul Friends.

Teori yang saya gunakan dalam tugas akhir saya meliputi bidang linguistik dengan menggunakan teori pragmatik pada umumnya dan khususnya teori situasi tutur dan situasi tutur tidak langsung. Dalam penelitian, saya mendapati bahwa cara berkomunikasi tidak langsung dapat menimbulkan kesalahpahaman makna ucapan penutur kepada mitra tutur.

Dalam tugas akhir ini saya meneliti kesalahpahaman dalam tataran ilokusi yang terjadi di antara karakter dalam komedi situasi Friends. Kesalahpahaman terjadi karena karakter yang menjadi mitra tutur salah mengartikan makna yang dimaksud penutur. Misalnya, penutur ingin menyampaikan sebuah permintaan tetapi menyampaikannya dalam bentuk pertanyaan sehingga mitra tutur tidak mengerti apa ilokusi yang ingin disampaikan penutur sehingga terjadi kesalahpahaman.

iv Maranatha Christian University Dalam serial Friends, banyak kesalahpahaman ilokusi antara penutur dan mitra tutur. Bahasa tidak langsung yang digunakan penutur adalah untuk menyembunyikan suatu pesan yang penutur ingin orang lain tahu tetapi penutur tidak mengungkapkannya secara langsung.

1 Maranatha Christian University

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Language is an important part in communication. Language and communication are two things that cannot be separated. By using language, communication can be carried out easily. J. L. Austin states that “an act of communication succeeds if it is taken as intended”.

(http://online.sfsu.edu/~kbach/spchacts.html)

In daily interaction people need language to communicate with one another. Communication is the process when a message is given or received through talking, writing, or making gestures. It can be revealed through speaking, singing and sometimes tone of voice, and nonverbal, physical means, such as body language, sign language, touch, and eye contact. It is the act of passing information and the process by which meanings are exchanged so as to produce understanding. However, sometimes when people talk with others in some situations, they do not receive the same information conveyed by the speaker. This condition causes misinterpretation.

2 Maranatha Christian University Kent Bach states that there are many things we can do with words. We can make requests, ask questions, give orders, make promises, give thanks, offer apologies, and so on. Moreover, speech acts are performed in several acts at the same time, distinguished by different aspects of the speaker's intention, such as: the act of saying something, what the speaker wants to say, for example requesting or promising. Another aspect is how the speaker is trying to affect the listener from what the speaker says. “In general, speech acts are acts of communication. To communicate is to express a certain attitude, and the type of speech act being performed corresponds to the type of attitude being expressed.” (http://online.sfsu.edu/~kbach/spchacts.html)

The general theory which I use for my thesis is Pragmatics, specifically Speech Acts theory, which focuses on the theory of illocutions from the speech acts. In daily conversations, speech act is usually used, and speech act itself performs an action through what we say and showed our attitude (Yule 47). For example, if a referee says you’re out! to a player in a game, it means the referee does not only say it but also implies the act of ending a game for the player.

The process of someone’s utterance starts from the locutionary act and then followed by the illocutionary act. The illocutionary act consists of the meaning of the locutionary act. In some utterances which are uttered by a speaker can be misinterpreted by a hearer. Misinterpretation happens after the locutionary act. In this act, a speaker says something which is replied by a hearer through an utterance or an action (perlocutionary act).

Sometimes the hearer does not get the illocutionary act, which is the act that contains the intention of the speaker. For that reason the intention does not

3 Maranatha Christian University appear directly. The subject of misunderstanding is interesting to discuss because it is something that commonly happens, regardless of time, place and participants of the conversation. In addition, it gives me such a big curiosity to find out some factors affecting misunderstanding and the various emotional effects on the participants appearing in a certain conversation. In addition, it gives me such a big curiosity to participants to find out some factors affecting misunderstanding and various emotional effects on the participants appearing in a certain conversation.

When someone requests something but the hearer does not understand the speaker’s indirect request, it may cause misinterpretation because the hearer does not get what the speaker means. In addition, the misunderstanding can also happen because the hearer’s characteristic, for example when someone has a short thinking or someone has to focus on another subject, emotion, surrounding situation and condition of a person.

The reason why I choose this topic is that in our daily life the misinterpretation ussualy happens and sometimes it makes us as the hearer who is misinterpret the speaker utterance feel offended. Beside that I want to find out how the characters in Friends movie series misinterpret other characters’ utterances which create the funny atmosphere.

4 Maranatha Christian University

1.2 Statement of the Problem

1. What is the illocutionary act of the characters’ utterances in Friends?

2. How does the hearer misinterprets the speaker’s

utterance/illocutions?

1.3 Purpose of the Study

In this thesis I would like to show:

1. To present the illocutionary act of the characters’ utterances in Friends. 2. To explain how the hearer misinterpres the speaker’s utterance.

1.4 Methods of Research

I observed a film entitled Friends and collected some conversation from the film. Then I wrote down the subtitles of the film. Afterwards, I chose the relevant data which belong to my topic. I analysed the data and wrote my thesis.

1.5 Organization of Thesis

This thesis consists of four chapters. Chapter One is the Introduction. It contains Background of the Study, Statement of the Problem, Purpose of Study, Methods of Research, and Organization of the Thesis. Chapter Two provides Theoretical Framework. Chapter Three provides the analysis of misinterpretation of illocutions in Friends Movie Series. Chapter Four is the Conclusion. The thesis ends with the Bibliography.

27 Maranatha Christian University

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION

In this chapter, I would like to draw some conclusions based on the analysis that I have carried out in the previous chapter. After doing the analysis of misinterpretation of illocutions in Friends movie series, I find out that there are some misunderstandings resulted from the indirect speech act. In this case, an illocutionary act of utterance which is conveyed by a speaker can be differently interpreted by a hearer.

It is common that in our daily conversation, misunderstanding often occurs between a speaker and a hearer. It happens through a direct or an indirect speech act, and the meaning of the utterance. Sometimes, the direct speech act which is intended by the speaker is wrongly interpreted by the hearer. It depends on how the speaker conveys the utterance and whether the words are used in the appropriate context or not.

From the 13 data, I find that most of the data show that misunderstandings happen because the speaker and the hearer have

28 Maranatha Christian University different interpretations of illocutionary acts. There are 8 data which shows the misunderstanding from requesting directively to informating declaratively. In addition, there are 2 data which show the misunderstanding from requesting directively to accepting expresively and 3 data which show the misunderstanding from request directively to asking declaratively.

It is clear that most of the misunderstandings happen because the hearer has misinterpreted the meaning of the speaker’s utterance. For example, when the speaker wants to request something but the utterance is not directly said, the speaker conveys the utterance in the form of information or accepting. For that reason, what the hearer gets from the speaker’s utterance is either information or accepting, not a request which is expected by the speaker. There are some factors which may cause misunderstanding, such as the hearer does not concentrate, the hearer has a slow thinking, and condition of a person does not support the hearer to catch the speaker’s meaning.

These above factors are proven in data 2. In this data, Phoebe, who is very slow in thinking, has misinterpreted Rachel’s utterance. As a result, Phoebe replies Rachel’s utterance that she has helped Rachel by singing a song. In data 7, Phoebe thinks that Chandler does not want to give her any deposit for the wedding. In data 3, 5, 6, and 11 people’s condition makes the illocutionary act is misinterpreted by the hearer. In this situation, Janice as the hearer misinterprets Monica’s utterance because it is supported by Janice’s characteristic which is very enthusiastic. Data 6 shows that Chandler misinterprets Joey’s utterance because Chandler feels happy when he gets closed with Janice. In data 11, Monica, who

29 Maranatha Christian University misinterprets Rachel’s utterance, keeps smiling because she feels very happy at that time.

Data 12 and 13 show that the surrounding situation can make the hearer misinterpret the speaker’s utterance. In data 12, Ross, as the hearer, misinterprets Rachel’s utterance considering that the surrounding situation does not support Ross to catch Rachel’s utterance. Similar with data 13, Phoebe misinterprets Rachel’s utterance because at that time the situation does not support Phoebe to catch the meaning of Rachel’s utterance. Phoebe just wants Rachel to choose the guy that she takes so as to make her look great in front of Rachel.

Data 8 and data 10 show misinterpretation of illocutions from requesting directively to accepting expresively. It happens on account of the people’s condition. In data 8, the waiter misinterprets Joey’s utterance which asks the waiter to leave the table. On the other hand, the waiter does not leave. He stays for a second as he follows Joey’s utterance that he must leave the table only for a second. This misinterpretation happens for the simple reason that the waiter’s condition is very glad to serve Joey and Rachel. Similar to data 8, data 10 shows that people’s condition can make the hearer misinterpret the speaker’s utterance. In this case, Ross who misinterprets Rachel’s utterance, who is jealous to Ross. Rachel wants Ross to explain about his relationship with Julie. The misinterpretation appears considering that Ross is confused to explain his situation and then he misinterprets Rachel’s utterance.

In addition, in data 1, data 4, and data 9, misinterpretation happens because the requesting directively is interpreted as asking declaratively. The meaning changes for the simple reason that the hearer has to focus on another

30 Maranatha Christian University subject. For example, in data 1, Monica misinterprets Rachel’s utterance because she focuses on another subject. The subject is Rachel’s untidiness. Therefore, if Monica comes to Rachel’s apartment, she wants to look a little bit untidy owing to the fact that her behaviour is very neat. In data 4, Gary misinterprets Monica’s utterance because he is focused on the candy. He forgets that at four a.m. people are still sleeping. As a result, Gary does not get the meaning of Monica’s utterance. Data 9 shows another misinterpretation. It happens because the hearer focuses on another subject. In this situation, Phoebe misinterprets Rachel’s utterance which asks for help to find her engagement ring. Phoebe only focuses on Rachel’s ring because it is beautiful. She does not focus on what Rachel means by her utterance.

The data that I have analyzed contain funny situation. The funny situation appears when the characters misinterpret the utterances. It becomes funny to the audience because they do not expect that the characters will misinterpret the utterance conveyed by the speaker.

I conclude that what the speaker means can give different interpretation to the hearer. People’s characteristic can be a factor to cause misinterpretation, such as emotion, slow-thinking, or someone has to focus on another subject, surrounding situation or condition of a person. Sometimes the misinterpretation itself becomes a funny situation, especially in the movie. The funny elements in these movie series can also be built because of the characters’ misinterpretation. The funny situation appears because there is misunderstanding or misinterpretation happened between the hearer and the speaker. I hope after

31 Maranatha Christian University completing this thesis, I will be more aware of someone’s intention, which is not revealed directly within his or her utterance.

As a closing remark, I would like to say that Friends movie series, is not only entertaining us through their comedy situation, but they also have many elements which are worth being analyzed through linguistic area.

32 Maranatha Christian University

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Reference:

Yule, George. Pragmatics. Oxford University Press, 1996.

Electronic Publication:

Kent Bach, Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry. 20 August 2007. http://online.sfsu.edu/~kbach/spchacts.html

Primary Source:

27 Maranatha Christian University

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION

In this chapter, I would like to draw some conclusions based on the analysis that I have carried out in the previous chapter. After doing the analysis of misinterpretation of illocutions in Friends movie series, I find out that there are some misunderstandings resulted from the indirect speech act. In this case, an illocutionary act of utterance which is conveyed by a speaker can be differently interpreted by a hearer.

It is common that in our daily conversation, misunderstanding often occurs between a speaker and a hearer. It happens through a direct or an indirect speech act, and the meaning of the utterance. Sometimes, the direct speech act which is intended by the speaker is wrongly interpreted by the hearer. It depends on how the speaker conveys the utterance and whether the words are used in the appropriate context or not.

From the 13 data, I find that most of the data show that misunderstandings happen because the speaker and the hearer have

28 Maranatha Christian University different interpretations of illocutionary acts. There are 8 data which shows the misunderstanding from requesting directively to informating declaratively. In addition, there are 2 data which show the misunderstanding from requesting directively to accepting expresively and 3 data which show the misunderstanding from request directively to asking declaratively.

It is clear that most of the misunderstandings happen because the hearer has misinterpreted the meaning of the speaker’s utterance. For example, when the speaker wants to request something but the utterance is not directly said, the speaker conveys the utterance in the form of information or accepting. For that reason, what the hearer gets from the speaker’s utterance is either information or accepting, not a request which is expected by the speaker. There are some factors which may cause misunderstanding, such as the hearer does not concentrate, the hearer has a slow thinking, and condition of a person does not support the hearer to catch the speaker’s meaning.

These above factors are proven in data 2. In this data, Phoebe, who is very slow in thinking, has misinterpreted Rachel’s utterance. As a result, Phoebe replies Rachel’s utterance that she has helped Rachel by singing a song. In data 7, Phoebe thinks that Chandler does not want to give her any deposit for the wedding. In data 3, 5, 6, and 11 people’s condition makes the illocutionary act is misinterpreted by the hearer. In this situation, Janice as the hearer misinterprets Monica’s utterance because it is supported by Janice’s characteristic which is very enthusiastic. Data 6 shows that Chandler misinterprets Joey’s utterance because Chandler feels happy when he gets closed with Janice. In data 11, Monica, who

29 Maranatha Christian University misinterprets Rachel’s utterance, keeps smiling because she feels very happy at that time.

Data 12 and 13 show that the surrounding situation can make the hearer misinterpret the speaker’s utterance. In data 12, Ross, as the hearer, misinterprets Rachel’s utterance considering that the surrounding situation does not support Ross to catch Rachel’s utterance. Similar with data 13, Phoebe misinterprets Rachel’s utterance because at that time the situation does not support Phoebe to catch the meaning of Rachel’s utterance. Phoebe just wants Rachel to choose the guy that she takes so as to make her look great in front of Rachel.

Data 8 and data 10 show misinterpretation of illocutions from requesting directively to accepting expresively. It happens on account of the people’s condition. In data 8, the waiter misinterprets Joey’s utterance which asks the waiter to leave the table. On the other hand, the waiter does not leave. He stays for a second as he follows Joey’s utterance that he must leave the table only for a second. This misinterpretation happens for the simple reason that the waiter’s condition is very glad to serve Joey and Rachel. Similar to data 8, data 10 shows that people’s condition can make the hearer misinterpret the speaker’s utterance. In this case, Ross who misinterprets Rachel’s utterance, who is jealous to Ross. Rachel wants Ross to explain about his relationship with Julie. The misinterpretation appears considering that Ross is confused to explain his situation and then he misinterprets Rachel’s utterance.

In addition, in data 1, data 4, and data 9, misinterpretation happens because the requesting directively is interpreted as asking declaratively. The meaning changes for the simple reason that the hearer has to focus on another

30 Maranatha Christian University subject. For example, in data 1, Monica misinterprets Rachel’s utterance because she focuses on another subject. The subject is Rachel’s untidiness. Therefore, if Monica comes to Rachel’s apartment, she wants to look a little bit untidy owing to the fact that her behaviour is very neat. In data 4, Gary misinterprets Monica’s utterance because he is focused on the candy. He forgets that at four a.m. people are still sleeping. As a result, Gary does not get the meaning of Monica’s utterance. Data 9 shows another misinterpretation. It happens because the hearer focuses on another subject. In this situation, Phoebe misinterprets Rachel’s utterance which asks for help to find her engagement ring. Phoebe only focuses on Rachel’s ring because it is beautiful. She does not focus on what Rachel means by her utterance.

The data that I have analyzed contain funny situation. The funny situation appears when the characters misinterpret the utterances. It becomes funny to the audience because they do not expect that the characters will misinterpret the utterance conveyed by the speaker.

I conclude that what the speaker means can give different interpretation to the hearer. People’s characteristic can be a factor to cause misinterpretation, such as emotion, slow-thinking, or someone has to focus on another subject, surrounding situation or condition of a person. Sometimes the misinterpretation itself becomes a funny situation, especially in the movie. The funny elements in these movie series can also be built because of the characters’ misinterpretation. The funny situation appears because there is misunderstanding or misinterpretation happened between the hearer and the speaker. I hope after

31 Maranatha Christian University completing this thesis, I will be more aware of someone’s intention, which is not revealed directly within his or her utterance.

As a closing remark, I would like to say that Friends movie series, is not only entertaining us through their comedy situation, but they also have many elements which are worth being analyzed through linguistic area.

32 Maranatha Christian University

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Reference:

Yule, George. Pragmatics. Oxford University Press, 1996.

Electronic Publication:

Kent Bach, Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry. 20 August 2007. http://online.sfsu.edu/~kbach/spchacts.html

Primary Source: