86
5. Multiple maxims
In HIMYM, the characters spoke with various intention. Also, the speaker’s personality and the situation she faced determined the way the speaker spoke.
Consequently, the speaker, sometimes, violated more than one maxims in an utterances. Remarkably, violation viz. flouting, violating, infringing, suspending
multiple maxims brought out script opposition as a resource of humor.
a. Flouting
In HIMYM, multiple maxims were flouted when the speakers expected the hearers to grasp the conversational implicature. The combination of maxims flouted
in a situation could be a recipe to create humorous effect, supposed the example went as follows:
EXCERPT SE02E20QN-MNFL6
SI Back when both Ted and Marshall were roommate in college.
NA Conversation
1 Marshall: Hey. I’m driving my Fiero back over break. I know we see
enough of each other as it is, but if you want a ride, I could use the gas money. You live in Ohio, right? I could swing through and pick you up.
2
Ted: All right, first of all, my parents live in Ohio. I live in the moment. -- Plus Karen and I haven’t seen each other since Thanksgiving. We’re
both really invested in making this long-distance thing work, so…” SO
Flouting maxim LM
Implicit parallelism TA
Ted’s response to Marshall’s inquiry LA
Indirect and vague
As appeared in the conversation between Marshall and Ted NA, the humor sprang up from Ted’s punchline. In the situation SI, the plot teold the story back
when Marshall and Ted were roommate in college. Marshall offered Ted a ride to Ohio and would pick him up during summer break under one condition: Marshall
asked for gasoline money in return. In exchange to Marshall’s inquiry, Ted indirectly responded to the offer, neither refusing nor accepting. Rather, he jumped
to other information which prolonged the exact amount of answer. Also, his first
87 utterance was obscure. Nonetheless, Ted did not mean to mislead Marshall, he
expected Marshall to infer the point of his utterance that he refused Marshall’s offer. In terms of CP, the fashion of language he used LA constituted flouting maxim of
manner and quantity. Accordingly, this given conversation disclosed an overlapping script SO which then processes logical mechanism LM: implicit
parallelism. For that reason, logically, Ted’s utterance, at the level of surface meaning, did not exactly answer Marshall’s inquiry. However, at the implied
meaning, Ted’s utterance had similar meaning to a refuse. The humor was generated when Ted’s last punchline resolved the obscurity conflict he made from his first
utterance. This element, as said by Latta 1998 that humor had a punchline which resolved the conflict p. 106.
b. Violating
The following excerpt illustrated the violation multiple maxims which were proven to be fruitful in creating humorous effect, described as follows:
EXCERPT SE02EP09QL-MNVL6
SI Lily, Ted and Robin were having breakfast at the restaurant. Robin was still
drunk when the waiter served the menu. NA
Conversation 1
Barney: Fine. Do you wanna know what Robin’s secret is? 2
Ted: You know? 3
Barney: Of course I know. She couldn’t look at us, her face got flushed, that shame, my friend. Our friend Robin used to do porn, what for it…
ography. 4
Ted: Yeah, we didn’t really need to wait for that.
SO Violating maxims of quality and manner
LM Reasoning from false premises
TA Barney’s key answer
LA Obscure
As appeared in the conversation between Ted and Barney NA, in the situation SI, Barney tried to solve the Robin’s puzzle about her past life. Barney
came out with his hypothesis that Robin used to do pornography. The indication
88 which Barney exposed to prove him right about Robin’s past life, however, was
insufficient. If somebody got flushed with embarrassment, the closest perception upon it did not always signify pornography. Personal references might affect his or
her perception. In this case, Barney’s perception was affected by his most personal interest which was sex. In the time, Barney was trying to build other’s belief.
However, the truth about Robin’s puzzle was she used to be a pop star in Canada. Accordingly, Barney’s utterance constituted the violation maxim of quality and
manner as Barney uttered his own hypothesis without sufficient evidences in order to build his friends’ belief and used initiation LA “wait for it” within the word
“Pornography”. The humor sprang from Barney’s jab line, sourced from actual vs. non-actual script opposition in the conversation. Logically, the violation maxim of
quality and manner aimed to resolve the puzzle. However, it conflicted to understood knowledge about ‘got flushed’ since he reasoned from the false
premises Attardo et al, 2002 and Morreal, 1987. Besides, obscure initiation “wait for it” within the word “Pornography” was fruitful to create humorous effect.
Accordingly, the resources above were productive to create humor.
c. Infringement
It was unfair to put aside this way of failing maxim regarding the frequency of the occurrence. Therefore, one of humorous conversations was described as
follows:
EXCERPT S02E20QN-MNFL
SI Barney came at surprise by demonstrating how he would appear in TPIR.
Rather than telling Marshall and Ted what he was going to do, he left them clueless.