Non-Observance of Gricean Maxims in The Dialogues of 'The Nanny' TV Series.

iv Maranatha Christian University

ABSTRACT

Dalam tugas akhir ini, saya akan membahas tentang ketidaktaatan pada aturan-aturan maksim dalam dialog di sebuah serial televisi The Nanny, yang diperankan oleh Fran Descher. Film The Nanny merupakan serial televisi yang cukup terkenal di tahun 1996.

Dalam menganalisis ketidaktaatan pada aturan maksim ini, saya menggunakan teori H.P. Grice yang terdapat dalam buku karangan Jenny Thomas. Tugas akhir ini menyoroti jenis-jenis ketidaktaatan pada prinsip kerjasama dan aturan maksim dalam 7 adegan di serial televisi The Nanny yang saya ambil dari seri ke satu sampai dengan seri ke lima. Aspek kebahasaan yang terdapat dalam kajian saya berfokus pada bidang Pragmatik. Selain itu, saya menggunakan teori humor yang dikemukakan oleh Jerry Suls untuk mengetahui bagaimana penonton mengapresiasi humor yang terdapat dalam serial ini.

Bentuk ketidaktaatan pada aturan maksim yang saya temukan dalam serial televisi ini hanyamencakup dua jenis aturan, yaitu: flouting dan violating. Ketidaktaatan muncul dalam tindak tutur karakter-karakter dalam serial televisi ini ketika berinteraksi satu sama lain. Saya juga menemukan bahwa pada saat salah satu karakter sedang berusaha menutupi kebohongan atau mengkritik karakter lain, ketidaktaatan sering kali terjadi. Hal ini membuat para penonton merasa terhibur dengan kesengajaan pada ketidaktaatan aturan maksim tersebut yang biasanya menimbulkan efek kelucuan/humor.

v Maranatha Christian University Jika penutur maupun mitra tuturnya tidak bekerjasama dalam bekomunikasi, berinteraksi, maupun dalam memberikan tanggapan, maka ketidaktaatan pun terjadi. Bahkan hal ini mungkin akan menyebabkan mitra tutur tidak mengerti apa maksud dari ujaran penutur, khususnya jika ujaran penutur memiliki lebih dari satu makna. Hal ini adalah yang paling sering ditemui apabila terjadi ketidaktaatan pada aturan maksim yang dilakukan oleh karakter-karakter dalam film ini. Oleh sebab itu, setiap penutur harus memperhatikan tuturannya, maksud dari tuturannya, serta harus memperhatikan prinsip kerjasama dalam berkomunikasi.

ii Maranatha Christian University

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... ii

ABSTRACT ... iv

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study ... 1

1.2 Statement of the Problem ... 4

1.3 Purpose of the Study ... 4

1.4 Methods of Research ... 4

1.5 Organization of the Thesis ... 5

CHAPTER TWO: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 2.1 Pragmatics ... 6

2.2 Implicature ... 7

2.3 Cooperative Principle ... 8

2.4 Conversational Maxims ... 8

2.4.1 The Maxim of Quantity ... 8

2.4.2 The Maxim of Quality ... 9

2.4.3 The Maxim of Relation ... 9

2.4.4 The Maxim of Manner ... 9

2.5 Non-Observance ... 10

2.5.1 Flouting ... 10

2.5.2 Violating ... 11

2.5.3 Infringing a maxim ... 11

2.5.4 Opting Out ... 12

2.5.5 Suspending a maxim ... 12

2.6 Theory of Humor ... 13

2.6.1 Definition of Humor ... 13

2.6.2 Process of Humor Appreciation ... 13

CHAPTER THREE: ANALYSIS OF NON-OBSERVANCE OF GRICEAN MAXIMS IN THE DIALOGUES OF THE NANNY TV SERIES ... 15

iii Maranatha Christian University BIBLIOGRAPHY ... 31 APPENDICES:

Table of Types of Non-Observance of

33

APPENDIXS

Types of Non-Observance of Gricean Maxims of The Nanny Television Series

Scene Dialogue Types of maxims flouted

1

Mr. Sheffield : Yes, Niles. What is it? Niles : Sorry to interrupt, sir. I

see you’re working hard as always, Miss Babcock. (1)

C.C. : Theater has always been a passion of mine. (2) Niles : Yes and I can’t wait to

see what you’ll be mounting next. (3) I just thought I’d inform you, sir, that the new nanny’s gone.

(1) Flouting the maxim of manner

(2) Flouting the maxim of quality

(3) Flouting the maxim of manner

2 Fran : Hello, I'm Fran Fine, your ― Niles : Yes, come in, We've been expecting you.

34 Fran : You have?

Niles : You are here for the Nanny position?

Fran : I could be (4) ... Wow, this place is nicer than my Uncle Jack's condo in Boca and ya know he bought the model. (5)

(4) Flouting the maxim of quantity and manner

(5) Flouting the maxim of relation

3 Niles : Well?

Fran : Honestly, Niles. What’s the point of having a nanny if she can’t handle these things herself. (6)

(6) Flouting the maxim of manner

4 Marsha: You call your husband “Mr. Sheffield?”

Fran : It’s a pet name. You know, Sheff, Sheffie… (7)

(7) Violating the maxim of Quantity

5 Jack : I thought it was his day off. Fran : It is. But it’s, you know… (TO NILES) what’s it called again? (8)

Niles: I can’t wait to hear. (9)

(8) Flouting the maxim of quality and manner

35

6 C.C. : Nanny Fine, a synthetic fur. How very p.c. of you!

Fran : What?

C.C. : p.c. as in politically correct. Fran : Oh. Well, actually, it’s j.c., as in Penney. (10) Your outfit is nice too.

C.C. : Of course, dear. It’s an Adolfo.

Niles : As in Hitler? (11)

(10) Flouting the maxim of quantity

(11) Flouting the maxim of relation

7 C.C. : Who's he talking to? Niles : What's it worth to

you? (12)

Mr. Sheffield: It's my sister, from London.

C.C. : I didn't know Maxwell had a sister.

Niles : Now we know what you're worth to him. (13)

Fran : Was that your sister?

(12) Flouting the maxim of relation

36

I hope you said "Hi" for me.

C.C. : Why does Miss Fine know about her? Niles : He talks in his sleep. (14)

1 Maranatha Christian University

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study

In a daily conversation, a speaker and a hearer will operate under the cooperative principle, which means that both the speaker and the hearer converse with a good intention. Sometimes people mean much more than they actually want to say. When communicating, speakers frequently produce utterances the meaning of which are not clear for the hearers. In a conversation, for example, a speaker may give an untrue answer to make a false assumption to the hearer. The fact is that people are not always good and kind or cooperative in a conversation. This shows their non-cooperation of the cooperative principle.

The theory of cooperative principle includes four conversational maxims, namely the maxims of Quantity, Quality, Relation, and Manner (Thomas 56). The non-cooperation of the cooperative principle generates a certain implicature. The context of the conversation helps us establish what an implicature might be. However, a speaker might fail to observe a maxim, because the speaker is incapable of speaking clearly, or because they deliberately choose to lie. In my opinion, people can be non-observant of the maxims for some reasons, such as the hearer is not smart or the hearer does not respond to the speaker’s question appropriately. By doing the non-observance of the maxims, the meaning of the

2 Maranatha Christian University utterance is not directly stated in the words uttered. Thus, it can create a gap between the speaker and the hearer which can result in the occurrence of humor. When a conversation is conducted by a speaker who is trying to deliver a message to the hearer who draws a conclusion from the utterance, they may have different interpretations. In addition, a conversation also depends on its context. It is important to realize that maxims function to support verbal communication. Non-observance of the Gricean maxims can refer to the style of the speaker when deceiving, misleading, even showing imperfect linguistic performance to the hearer so that the hearer gets a different meaning. It becomes worth studying since the utterance of a speaker might have two intentions of meaning: a) the literal meaning, which is the expressed meaning that can be obtained by interpreting the words based only on the information from the utterance, b) the implied meaning, which is what the speaker means on a specific occasion (Thomas 56).

Because of those reasons, I would like to analyze the non-observance of the Gricean maxims in television series which creates humor. The topic of my thesis is Non-Observance of Gricean Maxims in the Dialogues of The Nanny TV Series. It is interesting to analyze how the non-observance of Gricean maxims in The Nanny television series occurs. This topic is significant for both speaker and hearer in a communication that people are supposed to tell the truth, be relevant, and inform anything as clearly as they can. Besides, this topic seems very challenging since it is difficult to identify which maxims that occurs in non-observance of Gricean maxims. I choose this topic because the main character in this series often shows non-observance of the maxims to save her status when she is in an uncomfortable situation, and because I want to show that the use of non-observance of the maxims in the television series is very important to create humor.

3 Maranatha Christian University In terms of linguistic area, the topic I choose belongs to Pragmatics. Pragmatics, according to Jenny Thomas, is the study of speaker’s meaning. In particular, it is “the study of the contextual meaning and is concerned with the speaker’s utterance and the interpretation of the utterance” (2). I use specific theories of maxims by H.P. Grice since these theories enclose an attempt at explaining how a hearer gets the information or the idea from what is said to what is meant from the level of expressed (literal) meaning to the level of implicature (implied) meaning. Therefore, Grice’s theory is suitable for my topic in which the humor in the television series is triggered by dialogues which have implicatures.

I hope by writing this thesis, people will understand that they often do non-observance of the Gricean’s maxims in a daily conversation. This will help them as a hearer, to be more aware of people who fail to observe the maxims in one’s communication. Moreover, the awareness may help the hearers to understand or interpret the speaker’s utterances which have an implicature.

The data of this study are taken from a television series entitled The

Nanny from the episodes in the first until fifth seasons. The Nanny is a story

about Fran Fine, who becomes the nanny for a single-parent family in Manhattan, the Sheffields. Fran has to take care of Maxwell Sheffield’s children, Maggie, Bryan, and Gracie. The Sheffields have a butler, Niles, whose father has worked for them since he and Maxwell Sheffield were boys. Maxwell Sheffield has a business partner, C.C. Babcock.

In their interaction, the characters, especially Fran, Niles and C.C. often use offensive words which deliver some implied meaning within their conversation. When the characters are being witty, deliberately choose to lie or even trying to tease each other, they often misunderstand others. As a result, the non-observance of the maxims occurs when they interact; in addition, those factors create humor in each episode.

4 Maranatha Christian University (864 Words)

1.2 Statement of the Problem

From the background of the study presented previously, the problems of this study are stated as follows:

1) What type of non-observance of Gricean maxim occurs in the utterance?

2) What type of Gricean maxims does the speaker fail to observe? 3) What is the implicature of the speaker’s utterance?

4) How does the speakers’ failure to observe a maxim create humor?

1.3 Purpose of the Study

Based on the statement of the problem above, the purposes of the study are formulated in the following points:

1) To find the type of non-observance of Gricean maxim which occurs in the utterance

2) To identify the type of Gricean maxim the speaker fails to observe 3) To reveal the implicature of the speaker’s utterance

4) To find how the speaker’s failure to observe a maxim creates humor

1.4 Method of Research

I started my research by studying the theories from several sources and then I watched The Nanny’s DVD the first until fifth seasons to collect the data. With the theory of Gricean maxims, I analyzed the data, classified the findings and discussed the results. Finally, I concluded what I have done in this study.

5 Maranatha Christian University

1.5 Organization of the Thesis

The thesis is divided into four chapters. Chapter One is the Introduction, which contains the Background of the Study, Statement of the Problem, the Purpose of the Study, Method of Research and the Organization of the Thesis. Chapter Two is the Theoretical Framework, which contains the theories used to analyze the data. Chapter Three presents the analysis of the non-observance of the Gricean maxims in the dialogues of The Nanny television series. Finally in Chapter Four, this thesis puts forward the conclusion of the study. After the conclusion, there is Bibliography and Appendices which are considered the end of this thesis.

27 Maranatha Christian University

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION

According to the findings in the all fourteen data which mainly focus on the non-observance of Gricean maxims, I would like to present some concluding points. The first concerns with the kind of non-observance found in the data. Based on the findings, I can find that there are two kinds of non-observance used in the data namely, flouting and violating the maxim. Mostly, flouting the maxim happens when the characters involved in the conversation do not have an equal status, for example, in the conversation between Niles and C.C. or C.C. and Fran. Thus, I can conclude that in situations when the speaker and hearer are of different statuses and the speaker wants to tease the hearer, they can use flouting in order not to be straight forward in the conversation.

The next point is about the kinds of maxim that are being non-observed. I find the four maxims: manner, quantity, quality, and relation are flouted. However, concerning maxim violation there is only one kind of maxim violated, the maxim of quantity. The non-observance of Gricean maxims that mostly emerges in the fourteen data is flouting the maxim of manner, in which flouting the maxim of manner encloses six data. While, the other four data related to flouting the maxim of quantity. Furthermore, there are three data consist of flouting the maxim of relation. In addition, the other two data refers to flouting the maxim of quality.

28 Maranatha Christian University There is only one data which refers to violating the maxim of quantity. In my data analysis, flouting of manner happens because the characters’ utterance is not to the point as in data (1), (3), (4), (6), (8) and (9). On the other hand, the maxim of quantity is not obeyed because there is a situation in which it is difficult to give the right amount of information, especially when the speaker tries to conceal information or deliberately choose to lie as found in data (4), (10), (13), (14). I can see that flouting the maxim of manner may occur at the same time with flouting the maxim of quantity and quality like in data (4) and (8).

In addition, in data (5), (11), and (12) since the character gives irrelevant response to other, the maxim of relation comes out as the last non-observance of the maxims which mostly appears in this television series. The flouting of the maxim of relation is done when the speaker wants to mock or to criticize the hearer, but do not do it straight-forwardly.

On the other hand, there is only one data of violating the maxim of quantity. It happens when the speaker intends to mislead the hearer. The speaker speaks the truth but implies what is false as in data (7).

Concerning the implicatures in the data, I find that in some data the hearer does not recognize the implicature. This happens because the hearer is not smart or the speaker deliberately chooses to lie, as in scene (2), (4), (6) and (7). However, when the implicature is understood, sometimes the hearer keeps being non-observant to the maxim especially when he or she produces an utterance which contains satirical words to reply to the speaker, as in scene (1) or (7). When the hearer gives a response in a satirical way, it may be assumed that the hearer hates the person he or she is talking to, for example, in the conversation between Niles and C.C. who do not like each other like in the scene (1) and (8). As a result, the implicature is used to tease or even to deceive and mislead each other.

29 Maranatha Christian University In this thesis, the humorous effect in each scene analyzed is caused by the non-cooperation between the characters. The non-cooperation is found surprising by the audience, as it violates the cooperative principles. In this case, the humor in all the analyzed scenes is in accordance with the Incongruity resolution theory. However, the scene may not be considered funny by some audience since people can have different sense of humor. Another thing that can make the audience think that the scene is not funny is the condition when the element of surprise cannot be found within the scene. In this case, the rule of the incongruity cannot be found and the context of the humor is still confusing. Thus, I can say that the audience’s background knowledge is important to understand the humor.

After doing the analysis, I do believe that the non-observance of Gricean maxims is tricky to recognize. It is because sometimes people do maxim non-observance accidentally. It happens when people do not have any implied meaning in their utterance, but their response to an utterance does not seem to obey the maxim. Occasionally, an utterance may have one or more types of the non-observance. This usually happens in certain situation, for example when the speaker wants to conceal a lie or the speaker and the hearer have an unequal status. Besides, when people try to criticize other in a more polite way, they also tend to be non-observant to the maxim.

Indeed, the awareness of the hearer may help him or her to interpret the same context with the speaker’s utterance. As a hearer, one has to understand what the speaker means first even if it is not explicitly stated. In other words, when the speaker try to contribute a meaningful or productive utterance in a conversation, then it should be followed with the hearer’s proper response. In this case, we assume that the conversational partners are being cooperative and

30 Maranatha Christian University observant to the maxims. Generally, it is safe to assume that the speaker and the hearer are trying to be cooperative.

However, a hearer does not always understand what the speaker means. It can be seen when they are not cooperating in giving a response to the speaker’s utterance. When this happens, the conversation can end in a misunderstanding because there is a gap between the speaker and the hearer. The ability to understand the implied meaning in an utterance is important to make people able to react properly to the speaker. It is interesting to find out that in the television series, inability to understand implicature is often exploited to create humorous scenes.

The non-observance is not only found in the dialogues of a film. Actually, it is common for us to find in daily situations. There are some circumstances when the speaker and the hearer do not want to cooperate. It happens when the speaker does want to hurt someone’s feeling, states a lie, and deliberately mocks the hearer. In other words, the speaker is in a situation where he or she cannot give clear and accurate information.

Personally, I consider that my thesis is still imperfect. The study of the non-observance of Gricean maxims in The Nanny television series can be developed for a better finding. In most scenes that I analyze, I provide data in which the characters have unequal status. I suggest that further researchers can find the non-observance of Gricean maxims of the other characters that have an equal status. Besides, some other theories of humor may also be applied to analyze other data from this television series.

Maranatha Christian University 31

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Text

Amazon Twiztv. Amazon-Style Review Script,1993. Web. 13 March 2010.

References

History of J.C Penny. History of Business, 3 March, 2007. Web. 30 August 2011. Hornby, A.S. Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary of Current English. UK:

Oxford University Press, 1974. Print.

Juez, Laura Alba. “Verbal Irony and The Maxims of Grice’s Cooperative Principle”. Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 8 (1995): 25-30.Web. 26 March 2010.

Leech, Geoffrey. Principles of Pragmatics. New York: Longman Inc., 1983. Print. Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics. England: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

Print.

McGhee, P.E and Jeffrey H.G. Handbook of Humor Research. New York: Springer-Verlag,1983. Print.

Mooney, Anabelle. 2004. Co-operation, Violation and Making Sense. Journal of Pragmatics. 33:1601-1623. Print.

“Politically Correct.” Business Online Dictionary. Business Online Dictionary, 2010. Web. 30 August 2011.

Maranatha Christian University 32

Shaughnessy, Madeline Zima, Lauren Lane, Daniel Davis, Nicholle Tom, and Benjamin Salisbury. 1993. CBS Paramount Network Television. 1993. DVD.

Thomas Jenny. Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. London and New York: Longman, 1995. Print.

27 Maranatha Christian University

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION

According to the findings in the all fourteen data which mainly focus on the non-observance of Gricean maxims, I would like to present some concluding points. The first concerns with the kind of non-observance found in the data. Based on the findings, I can find that there are two kinds of non-observance used in the data namely, flouting and violating the maxim. Mostly, flouting the maxim happens when the characters involved in the conversation do not have an equal status, for example, in the conversation between Niles and C.C. or C.C. and Fran. Thus, I can conclude that in situations when the speaker and hearer are of different statuses and the speaker wants to tease the hearer, they can use flouting in order not to be straight forward in the conversation.

The next point is about the kinds of maxim that are being non-observed. I find the four maxims: manner, quantity, quality, and relation are flouted. However, concerning maxim violation there is only one kind of maxim violated, the maxim of quantity. The non-observance of Gricean maxims that mostly emerges in the fourteen data is flouting the maxim of manner, in which flouting the maxim of manner encloses six data. While, the other four data related to flouting the maxim of quantity. Furthermore, there are three data consist of flouting the maxim of relation. In addition, the other two data refers to flouting the maxim of quality.

28 Maranatha Christian University There is only one data which refers to violating the maxim of quantity. In my data analysis, flouting of manner happens because the characters’ utterance is not to the point as in data (1), (3), (4), (6), (8) and (9). On the other hand, the maxim of quantity is not obeyed because there is a situation in which it is difficult to give the right amount of information, especially when the speaker tries to conceal information or deliberately choose to lie as found in data (4), (10), (13), (14). I can see that flouting the maxim of manner may occur at the same time with flouting the maxim of quantity and quality like in data (4) and (8).

In addition, in data (5), (11), and (12) since the character gives irrelevant response to other, the maxim of relation comes out as the last non-observance of the maxims which mostly appears in this television series. The flouting of the maxim of relation is done when the speaker wants to mock or to criticize the hearer, but do not do it straight-forwardly.

On the other hand, there is only one data of violating the maxim of quantity. It happens when the speaker intends to mislead the hearer. The speaker speaks the truth but implies what is false as in data (7).

Concerning the implicatures in the data, I find that in some data the hearer does not recognize the implicature. This happens because the hearer is not smart or the speaker deliberately chooses to lie, as in scene (2), (4), (6) and (7). However, when the implicature is understood, sometimes the hearer keeps being non-observant to the maxim especially when he or she produces an utterance which contains satirical words to reply to the speaker, as in scene (1) or (7). When the hearer gives a response in a satirical way, it may be assumed that the hearer hates the person he or she is talking to, for example, in the conversation between Niles and C.C. who do not like each other like in the scene (1) and (8). As a result, the implicature is used to tease or even to deceive and mislead each other.

29 Maranatha Christian University In this thesis, the humorous effect in each scene analyzed is caused by the non-cooperation between the characters. The non-cooperation is found surprising by the audience, as it violates the cooperative principles. In this case, the humor in all the analyzed scenes is in accordance with the Incongruity resolution theory. However, the scene may not be considered funny by some audience since people can have different sense of humor. Another thing that can make the audience think that the scene is not funny is the condition when the element of surprise cannot be found within the scene. In this case, the rule of the incongruity cannot be found and the context of the humor is still confusing. Thus, I can say that the audience’s background knowledge is important to understand the humor.

After doing the analysis, I do believe that the non-observance of Gricean maxims is tricky to recognize. It is because sometimes people do maxim non-observance accidentally. It happens when people do not have any implied meaning in their utterance, but their response to an utterance does not seem to obey the maxim. Occasionally, an utterance may have one or more types of the non-observance. This usually happens in certain situation, for example when the speaker wants to conceal a lie or the speaker and the hearer have an unequal status. Besides, when people try to criticize other in a more polite way, they also tend to be non-observant to the maxim.

Indeed, the awareness of the hearer may help him or her to interpret the same context with the speaker’s utterance. As a hearer, one has to understand what the speaker means first even if it is not explicitly stated. In other words, when the speaker try to contribute a meaningful or productive utterance in a conversation, then it should be followed with the hearer’s proper response. In this case, we assume that the conversational partners are being cooperative and

30 Maranatha Christian University observant to the maxims. Generally, it is safe to assume that the speaker and the hearer are trying to be cooperative.

However, a hearer does not always understand what the speaker means. It can be seen when they are not cooperating in giving a response to the speaker’s utterance. When this happens, the conversation can end in a misunderstanding because there is a gap between the speaker and the hearer. The ability to understand the implied meaning in an utterance is important to make people able to react properly to the speaker. It is interesting to find out that in the television series, inability to understand implicature is often exploited to create humorous scenes.

The non-observance is not only found in the dialogues of a film. Actually, it is common for us to find in daily situations. There are some circumstances when the speaker and the hearer do not want to cooperate. It happens when the speaker does want to hurt someone’s feeling, states a lie, and deliberately mocks the hearer. In other words, the speaker is in a situation where he or she cannot give clear and accurate information.

Personally, I consider that my thesis is still imperfect. The study of the non-observance of Gricean maxims in The Nanny television series can be developed for a better finding. In most scenes that I analyze, I provide data in which the characters have unequal status. I suggest that further researchers can find the non-observance of Gricean maxims of the other characters that have an equal status. Besides, some other theories of humor may also be applied to analyze other data from this television series.

Maranatha Christian University 31

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Text

Amazon Twiztv. Amazon-Style Review Script,1993. Web. 13 March 2010.

References

History of J.C Penny. History of Business, 3 March, 2007. Web. 30 August 2011. Hornby, A.S. Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary of Current English. UK:

Oxford University Press, 1974. Print.

Juez, Laura Alba. “Verbal Irony and The Maxims of Grice’s Cooperative Principle”. Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 8 (1995): 25-30.Web. 26 March 2010.

Leech, Geoffrey. Principles of Pragmatics. New York: Longman Inc., 1983. Print. Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics. England: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

Print.

McGhee, P.E and Jeffrey H.G. Handbook of Humor Research. New York: Springer-Verlag,1983. Print.

Mooney, Anabelle. 2004. Co-operation, Violation and Making Sense. Journal of Pragmatics. 33:1601-1623. Print.

“Politically Correct.” Business Online Dictionary. Business Online Dictionary, 2010. Web. 30 August 2011.

Maranatha Christian University 32

Shaughnessy, Madeline Zima, Lauren Lane, Daniel Davis, Nicholle Tom, and Benjamin Salisbury. 1993. CBS Paramount Network Television. 1993. DVD.

Thomas Jenny. Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. London and New York: Longman, 1995. Print.