The Use of Misunderstanding in Creating Jokes.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE .........................................................................................................
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................
ii
LIST OF TREE DIAGRAMS .........................................................................
v
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................... vi
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ...................................................................
Background of the Study ...........................................................................
Statement of the Problem ..........................................................................
Purpose of the Study .................................................................................
Method of Research ..................................................................................
Organization of the Thesis ........................................................................
1
1
4
5
5
5
CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .......................................
7
CHAPTER III: DISCUSSION ON THE MISUNDERSTANDING
FOUND IN JOKES .................................................................................
1. Semantic Misunderstanding .............................................................
1.1. Misunderstanding Caused by Homonyms ...............................
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
Joke 2 ...........................................................................................
Joke 3 ...........................................................................................
Joke 4 ...........................................................................................
Joke 5 ...........................................................................................
1.2. Misunderstanding Caused by Homophones ............................
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
Joke 2 ...........................................................................................
Joke 3 ...........................................................................................
15
15
16
16
17
18
19
19
20
20
21
23
ii
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
1.3. Misunderstanding Caused by Lexical Ambiguity ...................
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
1.4. Misunderstanding Caused by Denotative and
Connotative Meanings ...............................................................
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
Joke 2 ...........................................................................................
1.5. Misunderstanding Caused by Idiomatic Expressions .............
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
Joke 2 ...........................................................................................
Joke 3 ...........................................................................................
2. Syntactic Misunderstanding .............................................................
Joke 1 ..................................................................................................
Joke 2 ..................................................................................................
Joke 3 ..................................................................................................
Joke 4 ..................................................................................................
3. Phonological Misunderstanding ......................................................
Joke 1 ..................................................................................................
Joke 2 ..................................................................................................
4. Pragmatic Misunderstanding ...........................................................
4.1. Misunderstanding Caused by the Violations of Maxims of
Conversation ..............................................................................
4.1.1. Misunderstanding caused by the Violation of
Maxim Quantity ...........................................................
Joke 1 .............................................................................
Joke 2 .............................................................................
Joke 3 .............................................................................
Joke 4 .............................................................................
Joke 5 .............................................................................
4.1.2. Misunderstanding Caused by the Violations of
Maxims of Relation and Quantity ..............................
Joke 1 .............................................................................
4.1.3. Misunderstanding Caused by the Violations of
Maxims of Manner and Quantity ..............................
Joke 1 .............................................................................
Joke 2 .............................................................................
Joke 3 .............................................................................
4.2. Misunderstanding Caused by Off and On Record
Statements ...................................................................................
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
Joke 2 ...........................................................................................
4.3. Misunderstanding Caused by Deictic Expressions .................
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
Joke 2 ...........................................................................................
iii
24
24
25
25
26
27
27
28
29
30
30
32
33
34
35
35
36
37
38
38
38
39
40
41
42
43
43
44
44
46
47
48
48
48
49
49
50
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
CHAPTER IV: CONCLUSION ..................................................................... 52
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................ 57
APPENDIX ....................................................................................................... 60
iv
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
LIST OF TREE DIAGRAMS
Diagram 1 ........................................................................................................... 10
Diagram 2 ........................................................................................................... 10
Diagram 3 ........................................................................................................... 31
Diagram 4 ........................................................................................................... 31
Diagram 5 ........................................................................................................... 33
Diagram 6 ........................................................................................................... 33
v
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
ABSTRACT
Dalam skripsi ini penulis membahas tentang penggunaan kesalahpahaman
(misunderstanding) di dalam membuat cerita lucu (jokes) yang digunakan sebagai
salah satu elemen yang membuat cerita lucu menjadi lucu.
Kesalahpahaman yang ada dalam cerita lucu yang dibahas pada Bab III
dapat dikelompokkan ke dalam empat bagian, yakni semantic misunderstanding,
syntactic misunderstanding, phonological misunderstanding, dan pragmatic
misunderstanding.
Penyebab kesalahpahaman yang terdapat dalam cerita lucu meliputi empat
bidang linguistik, yaitu semantik, sintaks, fonologi, dan pragmatik. Dari diskusi
semantik dapat ditemukan bahwa para penulis cerita lucu banyak menggunakan
elemen-elemen seperti homonim, homofon, lexical ambiguity, arti harafiah dan
arti konotasi, serta ekspresi-ekspresi idiomatik (idiomatic expressions). Dari
diskusi sintaks terlihat bahwa para penulis cerita lucu menggunakan structural
ambiguity sebagai penyebab kesalahpahaman dalam cerita lucu. Sedangkan dari
diskusi fonologi para penulis cerita lucu menggunakan pasangan minimal
(minimal pairs) dalam membuat kesalahpahaman dalam cerita lucu mereka.
vi
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
Dari diskusi pragmatik disimpulkan bahwa para penulis cerita lucu menggunakan
maxims of conversation, off and on record statements, serta ekspresi-ekspresi
deictic (deictic expression).
Jika dilihat lebih lanjut, kesalahpahaman yang menjadi salah satu elemen
yang membuat cerita lucu menjadi lucu ternyata hampir sama dengan
kesalahpahaman yang sering terjadi pada kehidupan sehari-hari. Hal ini dapat
dimengerti karena banyak cerita lucu diambil dari cerita nyata dalam kehidupan
sehari-hari. Selain itu, kesalahpahaman yang terdapat di dalam cerita lucu ternyata
dapat mengajarkan sesuatu, bahwa dalam berkomunikasi kita tidak boleh hanya
mengandalkan bahasa tetapi kita juga harus memperhatikan hal-hal lain sehingga
kita dapat berkomunikasi dengan baik dan terhindar dari kesalahpahaman dalam
berkomunikasi.
vii
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
APPENDIX
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
1.
One day, an English grammar teacher was looking ill. A student asked, “What’s the
matter?”
“Tense,” answered the teacher, describing how he felt. The student paused, then
continued, “What was the matter? What has been the matter? What had been the
matter…?”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homonyms
2.
A woman was driving in her car on a narrow road. She was knitting at the same time,
so she was driving very slowly.
A man came up from behind and he wanted to pass her. He opened the window and
yelled, “Pull over! Pull over!”
The lady yelled back, “No, it’s a hat!”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homonyms
60
No.
3.
Jokes
Teacher :
Rumiko :
Teacher :
Rumiko :
Rumiko, be careful; your purse is open. Someone may take your
money!
Oh, no. I left it open so I can get more money.
How can you get more money?
The weather report said we would have some change in our weather!
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homonyms
4.
Teacher : Vicky, why are you doing your math sums on the floor?
Vicky
: You told me to do it without using table!
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homonyms
5.
Two ducks go on their honeymoon and stay in a hotel. As they are about to make
love, the male duck says, “Oh, we haven’t got any condoms. I’ll ring down to room
service.” He calls and asks for some condoms. The woman says, “OK sir, would you
like to put them on your bill?”
“No,” he says, “I’ll suffocate!”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homonyms
6.
When a waitress brought the customer the soup du jour, he was a bit dismayed.
“Good heavens,” he said, “What’s this?”
“It’s bean soup,” she replied.
“I don’t care what it’s been,” he sputtered. “What is it now?”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homophones
61
No.
7.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
Mr. Knott was a teacher. He taught in a big school in London. He lived a long way Semantic
from the school, so he was usually quite tired when he got home. At nine o’clock one Misunderstanding
evening, when he was in bed, the telephone bell rang in the hall of his small house,
so he went downstairs, picked up the telephone and said, ‘This is Whitebridge 3165.
Who’s speaking, please?’
‘Watt,’ a man answered.
‘What’s your name, please?’ said Mr. Knott.
‘Watt’s my name,’ was the answer.
‘Yes, I asked you that. What’s your name?’ Mr. Knott said again. ‘I told you Watt’s
my name,’ said the other man. ‘Are you Jack Smith?’
‘No, I’m Knott,’ answered Mr. Knott.
‘Will you give me your name, please?’ said Mr. Watt.
‘Will Knott,’ answered Mr. Knott.
Both Mr. Watt and Mr. Will Knott put their telephones down angrily and thought,
‘That was a rude, stupid man!’
62
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
Homophones
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
8.
Once there was a blond who really needed some money. She saw an ad in the
newspaper for a job at an Elmo factory. She went down and applied, but the manager
told her that she wouldn’t want the job because it was so boring. The blond begged
him and told him she would do anything because she needed the money really bad.
After a long consideration the manager hired her. After a few hours the manager
looked at the video-monitor showing the factory floor and saw that the conveyer belt
was backed up. The manager went downstairs to find out what the problem was.
When he arrived there the blonde was sewing to marbles into the crotch of every
Elmo.
The manager said, “I said to give each Elmo two test tickles; not two testicles!”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homophones
9.
A woman went into a pet shop and said, “I’d like a parrot for my husband.”
“I’m sorry,” the proprietor replied, “but we don’t do swaps.” “I don’t care what it’s
been,” he sputtered. “What is it now?”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Lexical ambiguity
10.
Judge to accused : “Have you anything to offer before I pass sentence on you?”
Accused
: “No, Your Honour. My lawyer took my last dollar.”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Connotative and
denotative meanings
63
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
11.
One day, when Jack was still young, his mother would have something to do outside.
Before leaving, she said to Jack, “Jack, since you are at home alone, you have to
watch the door carefully. Don’t let anyone in. There have been many thieves
recently.” Jack, therefore, sat by the door. An hour later, his uncle came. “Where is
your mother?” he asked. “She’s out”, Jack answered.
“My family will be here all together this evening. Go and tell your mother not to be
away this evening.” As his uncle left, Jack started thinking,
“Mother told me to watch the door. Uncle asked me to find her and tell her that he
would be here with the whole family.”
Having thought over and over, he finally made a decision. He pulled the door up,
carried it, and went to meet his mother.
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Connotative and
denotative meanings
12.
Working as a clerk reporter, I listen to a lot of testimony that you won’t hear on
“Law and Order,” including the following give-and-take between the judge and a
mother during a paternity suit.
Judge : Was your child born out of wedlock?
Mother : No sir, just outside of Louisville.
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Idiomatic
expression
64
No.
Jokes
13.
“Morning, Danny. Er … Danny, you’re wearing a glove on one hand and none on the
other. Did you know?”
“Yes, well I heard the weather forecast this morning, you see.”
“The weather forecast?”
“Yes, the weather forecast. The forecast said on the one hand it might be fine but
on the other hand there might be some rain.”
14.
Judge to Accused
Accused
: “Is this the first time you’ve been up before me?”
: “I really don’t know, your honour. What time do you
usually get up?”
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Idiomatic
expression
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Idiomatic
expression
15.
A lady goes into a clothing store and asks, “May I try on that lovely blouse in the
window?”
The clerk: “What are you, an exhibitionist?”
Syntactic
Misunderstanding
Structural ambiguity
16.
A lady was going to the airport she saw a sign saying “airport turn left” so she
turned round and went home.
Syntactic
Misunderstanding
Structural ambiguity
17.
Teacher : How can you prevent disease caused by biting insects?
Balgobin : Don’t bite any.
Syntactic
Misunderstanding
Structural ambiguity
65
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
18.
“Somebody complemented me on my driving today” Selma told her friend yesterday. Syntactic
“I found a note on my windscreen that read ‘Parking fine’.”
Misunderstanding
Structural ambiguity
19.
Jack hadn’t been to a class union in decades. When he walked in, he thought he
recognized a woman over in the corner, so he approached her and extended his hand
in greeting. “You look like Helen Brown,” he said.
“Well,” the woman snapped back, “You don’t look so great in blue either.”
Phonological
Misunderstanding
Minimal pairs
20.
While visiting the Olympics, a man noticed an athlete carrying a long pole. “Are you
a pole vaulter?” the tourist asked.
“No, I’m German,” the athlete replied. “But how do you know my name is Walter?”
Phonological
Misunderstanding
Minimal pairs
21.
There was a man who has two dogs, named ‘commonsense’ and ‘trouble’. He always
brought his dogs to the park every evening. One day, he only brought ‘trouble’ to the
park, and left ‘commonsense’ at home. While the man was so happy playing a game
with his friends, ‘trouble’ disappeared. The man was so sad and panicky. He looked
for his dog everywhere but could not find it. A lady realized it and asked the man,
“What are you looking for?”. The man replied “I’m looking for ‘trouble’…”.
“Pardon..” , said the lady. The man replied in a higher tone “I am looking for
‘TROUBLE’ ”. The lady was annoyed and asked “Where’s your
COMMONSENSE?”. The man whose mind was only about his dogs, answered “At
home…”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxim of quantity
66
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
22.
Teacher : If I give you two rabbits and two rabbits and another two rabbits, how
many rabbits have you got?
Patty
: Seven!
Teacher : No, listen carefully again. If I give you two rabbits and two rabbits and
another two rabbits, how many rabbits have you got?
Patty
: Seven!
Teacher : Let’s try another way. If I give you two apples and two apples and
another two apples, how many apples have you got?
Patty
: Six.
Teacher : Good. Now if I give you two rabbits and two rabbits and another two
rabbits, how many rabbits have you got?
Patty
: Seven!
Teacher : How on earth do you work out that three lots of two rabbits is seven?
Patty
: I’ve already got one rabbit at home now!
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxim of quantity
23.
One morning, a mother was preparing pancakes for her sons, five-year-old Kevin and
three-year-old Ryan. The boys began to argue over who would get the first pancake.
Seeing an opportunity to teach them a moral lesson, the mother said, “If Jesus were
sitting here, He would say, ‘Let my brother have the first pancake. I can wait.’”
Quick as a flash, Kevin turned to his younger brother and said, “Ryan, you can be
Jesus.”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxim of quantity
67
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
24.
A man inserted an ‘ad’ in the classifieds: “Wife wanted.”
The next day he received a hundreds letters. They all said the same thing: “you can
have mine.”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxim of quantity
25.
A 12-year-old boy, busily working on a homework project asked his mother, “Where
did I come from?”
“The stork brought you, son,” she told him.
“Where did Daddy come from,” was his next question.
“The stork brought him too,” he was told.
“What about Granddad?” the boy said.
“Oh, he was found under a gooseberry bush.”
The lad nodded and continued working on the assignment. Later, his rather intrigued
mother sneaked a look at his work. He had written: “I have ascertained that there has
been no sexual activity in this family for three generations.
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxim of quantity
68
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
26.
One night, Jack came home very late. Whereas his wife was waiting for him
restlessly. When he came his wife got angry.
She said, ”I have been cooking for you all afternoon but you come home very late.
Now the food is stale. We cannot eat anything.”
She hit her husband’s chest several times because she was very annoyed, then she
pushed him backwards. Unfortunately he fell and rolled down the stairs. It made a
loud noise. The couple was quarrelling after that. His closest neighbor heard the
noise and came to their house. He knocked at the house strongly. “What’s wrong
with you. It’s late at night already and you keep making noises,” said the neighbor.
“My coat falls along the stairs,” answered Jack.
“It’s only a coat and you shouted as if you hurt yourself,” said the neighbor.
Jack answered quickly, “Of course I shouted loudly because I was inside the coat.
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxims of relation
and quantity
27.
Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson go on a camping trip, set up their tent, and fall
asleep. Some hours later, Holmes wakes his faithful friend. “Watson, look up at the
sky and tell me what you see.” Watson replies, “I see millions of stars.”
“What does that tell you?” Watson ponders for a minute. “Astronomically speaking,
it tells me that there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets.
Astrologically, it tells me that Saturn is in Leo. Time wise, it appears to be
approximately a quarter past three. Theologically, it’s evident that Lord is allpowerful and we are small and insignificant. Meteorologically, it seems we will have
a beautiful day tomorrow. What does it tell you?” Holmes is silent for a moment,
then speaks. “Watson, you idiot, someone has stolen our tent.”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxims of manner
and quantity
69
No.
Jokes
:
:
:
:
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxims of manner
and quantity
28.
Johnny
Father
Mother
Johnny
29.
Lost Balloonist : “Ahoy below! Where am I?”
Startled Farmer : “You can’t fool me. You’re up there in that basket.”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxims of manner
and quantity
30.
A guy was smoking a cigarette. Another guy comes up to him and asks, “Do you
have an extra cigarette?”
The first guy looks at the box and reads that it contains 20 cigarettes. He counts all
the cigarettes in his box and says, “Nope, don’t got any extra cigarettes.”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
Off and on record
statement
31.
Girl to her boyfriend : One kiss and I’ll be yours forever.
The guy replies
: Thanks for the warning.
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
Off and on record
statement
32.
A student, who is studying English as a foreign language, was confused when he saw
the words “open here” on a box of laundry soap, so he asks the clerk, “Can’t I wait
until I get home to open it?”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
Spatial deixis
Daddy, are caterpillars good to eat?
Have I not told you never to mention such things during meals!
Why did you say that, Junior? Why did you ask the question?
It's because I saw one on daddy's lettuce, but now it's gone.
70
No.
33.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
One day a guy goes to his doctor and says, “Doc, I have these real bad headaches. Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
What should I do?”
The doctor replies: “Well, to get rid of my headaches I just have sex with my wife.”
They both laugh. A week later the patient returns. The doctor asks, “How are you
feeling?” The patient smiles and replies: “You were right! I feel so much better. And
by the way, Doc, you have a lovely home.”
71
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
Person deixis
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Communication is very important for people since they cannot live alone
and they need help from others. People communicate in order to share knowledge
and experiences with others. According to John Lyons, communication is ‘the
activity or process of expressing ideas, feelings, moods and attitudes or of giving
people information’ (Lyons, 1977: 32). People communicate with each other in
many ways, such as by talking, writing, moving their hands, and even by making
faces. Without communication, people probably cannot survive because most of
their activities depend on their cooperation with others.
In communicating with others, people use language which is ‘the system
of communication in speech and writing that is used by people of a particular
country’ or ‘the use by humans of a system of sounds and words to communicate’
(Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary: 2000, 752). It is language that allows
people to talk to each other and express their thoughts and ideas.
1
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
Language is an important element in communication. Language and
communication are two things that cannot be separated. By using language, verbal
or non-verbal, communication can be done easily.
People can be said to have good communication when they share the same
message with the person whom they communicate with. In his book, Semantics 1,
Lyons claims that in the process of communication, what the speaker
communicates and the information received by the listener from the speaker are
assumed to be identical. However, there is a situation when the participant of a
conversation does not share the same message or information with the other
participant. Therefore, misunderstanding or ‘a situation in which a comment, an
instruction, etc. is not understood correctly’ (Oxford Advanced Learner’s
Dictionary: 2000, 852) sometimes occurs between the participants of a
conversation.
Under a fairly standard idealization of the process of
communication, what the sender communicates (the information
put into the signal, as it were, by the sender’s selection among
possible alternatives) and the information derived from the signal
by the receiver (which may be thought of as the receiver’s
selection from the same set of alternatives) are assumed to be
identical. But there are, in practice, frequent instance of
misunderstanding; and we must allow for this theoretically.
(Lyons, 1977: 33)
Apparently, joke writers find this situation interesting; as a result, they use
misunderstanding as one of the elements that make their jokes funny. A joke is ‘a
short series of words spoken or communicated with the intention of being laughed
2
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
at
or
found
humorous
by
the
listeners
or
readers’
. Besides functioning as a common
system of communication, language can also be used as an element in creating
humor in jokes. Therefore, joke writers sometimes play with language in order to
make their jokes funny. As it is mentioned before, another thing that makes jokes
funny is the element of misunderstanding in jokes. Joke writers use language and
the elements of language to make misunderstanding in jokes funny.
I am interested in discussing misunderstanding in jokes because it is one of
the elements that make jokes funny and it can amuse the readers as well as making
them laugh. In addition, I am also curious to know how joke writers use the
elements of language in creating funny misunderstanding in jokes.
The reason why I choose to discuss misunderstanding in jokes rather than
in novels or films is because it does not take time to read jokes for a joke is
relatively short. Furthermore, jokes are funny so that reading jokes can relieve the
tension after studying.
In the thesis, I will discuss misunderstanding in jokes by using four
linguistic approaches based on semantics, syntax, phonology, and pragmatics. I
choose to use semantics and pragmatics because both of them deal with the study
of the meanings of words and sentences in context. A theory in syntax helps me
recognize ambiguity in sentences, whereas phonology helps me analyze
misunderstanding in jokes which is caused by phonological problems. These
3
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
linguistic approaches are closely related to the misunderstanding in the jokes
which are discussed in the thesis.
Semantics covers five approaches: homonyms, homophones, lexical
ambiguity, denotative and connotative meanings, and idiomatic expressions.
Syntax will cover a theory related to structural ambiguity. Minimal pairs is the
approach which is used in phonology. Pragmatics covers three approaches namely
maxims of conversation, deixis and distance, and the theory of off and on record
statements.
The purpose of doing the discussion by using the kinds of approaches is to
reveal the misunderstanding in the jokes and its causes. Furthermore, these kinds
of approaches can help the readers understand the jokes much better. Besides,
they will add the readers’ enjoyment in reading the jokes.
The data used in the discussion is collected from printed sources which
provide jokes such as magazines, books of jokes and the Internet.
Statement of the Problem
In this thesis I would like to discuss the following problems:
1. What is the misunderstanding found in the jokes provided?
2. What are the causes of such misunderstanding?
4
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
Purpose of the Study
In this thesis I would like to show:
1. The misunderstanding found in the jokes provided.
2. The causes of such misunderstanding.
Method of Research
First, I read a series of jokes from different sources, such as books of
jokes, magazines, and the Internet. Then I collect, select and classify the data
based on semantic misunderstanding, syntactic misunderstanding, phonological
misunderstanding, and pragmatic misunderstanding. After that, I search and
gather some information which are related to the causes of the misunderstanding
found in the jokes from some reference books and the Internet. Based on some
books which deal with linguistic theories, I discuss the jokes by focusing on the
causes that trigger the misunderstanding found in the jokes. Finally, I draw a
conclusion based on the discussion.
Organization of the Thesis
This thesis, which consists of four chapters, is preceded by the Preface, the
Table of Contents, the List of Tree Diagrams, and the Abstract. Chapter I is the
Introduction. It contains the Background of the Study, the Statement of the
Problem, the Purpose of the Study, the Method of Research, and the Organization
of the Thesis. Chapter II provides the Theoretical Framework. Chapter III contains
5
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
the Discussion on the Use of Misunderstanding in Creating Jokes. Chapter IV is
the Conclusion, which contains my comments and my opinion about the
misunderstanding found in the jokes. The thesis ends with the Appendix, which
consists of the tables containing the data of the discussion.
6
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
CHAPTER IV
CONCLUSION
In this chapter, I would like to draw some conclusions based on the
discussion on the misunderstanding found in the jokes.
I am of the opinion that some jokes use misunderstanding as the element
of creating funny things in jokes. Thus, joke writers deliberately use language and
its elements to create misunderstanding in order to make their jokes funny and
enjoyable to read. Language and the elements of language in jokes play an
important role in making jokes funny.
In the jokes which I have discussed in Chapter III, I find out that the
causes of the misunderstanding in the jokes can be divided into four types: the
semantic misunderstanding, the syntactic misunderstanding, the phonological
misunderstanding, and the pragmatic misunderstanding. In the semantic
misunderstanding, there are five elements of semantics that are used to create the
misunderstanding. They are homonyms, homophones, lexical ambiguity,
denotative and connotative meanings, and idiomatic expressions. The syntactic
52
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
misunderstanding contains only one element and that is syntactic ambiguity.
Minimal pairs is the element used in the phonological misunderstanding, and in
the pragmatic misunderstanding, there are three elements of pragmatics used in
creating the misunderstanding: maxims of conversation, off and on record
statements, and deictic expressions.
In the semantic misunderstanding, I find five jokes use homonyms to
create the misunderstanding in the jokes, three jokes use homophones, one joke
uses lexical ambiguity, three jokes use idiomatic expressions, and two jokes use
denotative and connotative meanings to create the misunderstanding. In the
syntactic misunderstanding, there are four jokes using structural ambiguity as the
cause of the misunderstanding. In the phonological misunderstanding, there are
two jokes use minimal pairs as the causes of the misunderstanding. Three
elements that cause the pragmatic misunderstanding are the violations of maxims
of conversation, the different assumptions of the off and on record statements, and
the deictic expressions. I find five jokes contain the violation of maxim of
quantity, one joke contains the violations of maxims of relation and quantity, three
jokes contain the violations of maxims of manner and quantity, two jokes contain
the element of off and on record statements, and two jokes contain the element of
deictic expressions.
In my opinion, the misunderstanding in the jokes that is triggered by the
presence of homophones and minimal pairs are the most interesting thing to
analyze. These kinds of jokes are rarely found. The jokes with these elements not
53
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
only make the jokes funny but they also enable the readers to figure out the funny
things in the jokes they read. Besides, I think homophones, minimal pairs, and
phonetic similarities are good elements in creating the funny misunderstanding in
jokes.
From the jokes I have analyzed, I can see that semantics is the device that
is mostly used by the writers of jokes. The element of semantics that is mostly
used in the jokes is homonyms. In my opinion, the joke writers prefer using
semantics, especially homonyms, to other elements of language because semantics
deals with the meanings of words and homonyms are the easiest element in
creating funny misunderstanding. That is why jokes with homonyms as the cause
of misunderstanding are easy to find.
Despite the simplicity of collecting the data, I find some difficulties in
searching and collecting the jokes needed for the discussion. I find out that there
are not many jokes with misunderstanding caused by lexical ambiguity and the
violation of maxim relation and quantity. Thus, I conclude that jokes using lexical
ambiguity and the violation of maxim relation and quantity to trigger
misunderstanding are not easy to create. However, it is essential for joke writers to
be more creative in creating jokes and use more elements of language such as
lexical ambiguity, minimal pairs, phonetic similarities, and the other elements so
that the jokes they create will be more interesting and the readers will not feel
bored in reading the jokes.
54
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
After analyzing the jokes in Chapter III I conclude that the
misunderstanding used as the funny things in the jokes is almost the same as what
we have in our real life. When we communicate with others, misunderstanding
sometimes occurs, whether we realize it or not. Obviously, in order to maintain
good communication, we cannot rely only on language because even with the
existence of language – verbal and non verbal – we cannot guarantee that we can
communicate well with each other without having any misunderstanding.
Misunderstanding still can happen between the participants of a conversation.
From the elements of language which are used as the factors that trigger
the misunderstanding in the jokes I have analyzed, I learn that to maintain good
communication, the speaker and the listener must understand each other well.
They must share the same understanding of words, phrases, and sentences uttered,
tone of words, gesture, etc. In addition, how we interpret the meaning of an
utterance we hear is not the matter of a mental image (idea) produced in our mind
because a mental image seems to vary from one person to another. Furthermore, I
also want to conclude that we cannot always determine the precise meaning of a
word from what we hear or from the sound alone because this can cause
misunderstanding. In English we know the terms like homonyms, homophones,
minimal pairs, and phonetic similarities, all of which show pairs of words with
similar sounds or having exactly the same sounds and pronunciation. Therefore,
when we hear words or phrases, we must think whether they refer to the ideas we
have in mind or to other meanings. I also see that in communicating with others,
55
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
we have to try to maintain a good conversation by speaking as clearly as possible
and providing adequate, factual, accurate and relevant information with the
context of the conversation we are engaged in to avoid misunderstanding in the
conversation. Besides, avoiding unclear and ambiguous sentences is important so
that different interpretation which can lead to misunderstanding will not occur.
Above all, it is our knowledge of language that determines our ability to guess
various possible meanings of the words from the context.
56
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
BIBLIOGRAPHY
References:
Fromkin, Victoria, and Robert Rodman. An Introduction to Language. Canada:
CBS College Publishing, 1974.
---. An Introduction to Language. Canada: CBS College Publishing, 1983.
Hill, L.A. Elementary Stories for Reproduction. Jakarta: PT. Pustaka Ilmu, 1980.
Hornby. A.S., ed. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. 6th edition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2000.
Katamba, Francis. An Introduction to Phonology. London: Longman, 1989.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. June. 2005: 30, 32, 87.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. Dec. 2003: 42.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. Jan. 2001: 42.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. Apr. 2004: 54.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. Jan. 2003: 46.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. Jan. 2001: 42.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. May. 2000: 75.
57
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. Nov. 2000: 98.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. June. 2004: 24.
Lyons, John. Semantics 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977.
Nash, Walter. The Language of Humour. New York: Longman, 1985.
Ostler, George., ed. Little Oxford Dictionary. 6th edition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. 1989.
Schiffrin, Deborah. Approaches to Discourse. Cambridge: Blackwell Publisher,
1994.
The World Book Encyclopedia: L. Vol. 1. USA: World Book International, 1992.
The World Book Encyclopedia: I. Vol. 1. USA: World Book International, 1992.
Vadillo, Ricardo San Martin. Penggunaan Cerita Humor dalam Kelas Bahasa
Inggris. Yogyakarta: Zenith Publisher, 2004.
Yule, George. Pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
---. The Study of Language. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1996.
Internet Website:
A Guy Was Smoking Cigarette. 7. March. 2006
Are Caterpillars Good to Eat?. 21. Sep. 2005
Blonde Elmo Factory. 6. Feb. 2006
58
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
Elementary, My Dear Watson. 6. Feb. 2006
Harris,
Robert.
Semantics
2.
Vers.
8.
June.
2000.
5.
Apr.
2006
Jokes.
Wikipedia,
the
Free
Encyclopedia.
29.
Aug.
2005
Special Remedy. 7. March. 2006
The Duck and the Condoms. 6. Feb. 2006
6. Feb. 2006
7. March. 2006
59
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
PREFACE .........................................................................................................
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................
ii
LIST OF TREE DIAGRAMS .........................................................................
v
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................... vi
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ...................................................................
Background of the Study ...........................................................................
Statement of the Problem ..........................................................................
Purpose of the Study .................................................................................
Method of Research ..................................................................................
Organization of the Thesis ........................................................................
1
1
4
5
5
5
CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .......................................
7
CHAPTER III: DISCUSSION ON THE MISUNDERSTANDING
FOUND IN JOKES .................................................................................
1. Semantic Misunderstanding .............................................................
1.1. Misunderstanding Caused by Homonyms ...............................
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
Joke 2 ...........................................................................................
Joke 3 ...........................................................................................
Joke 4 ...........................................................................................
Joke 5 ...........................................................................................
1.2. Misunderstanding Caused by Homophones ............................
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
Joke 2 ...........................................................................................
Joke 3 ...........................................................................................
15
15
16
16
17
18
19
19
20
20
21
23
ii
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
1.3. Misunderstanding Caused by Lexical Ambiguity ...................
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
1.4. Misunderstanding Caused by Denotative and
Connotative Meanings ...............................................................
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
Joke 2 ...........................................................................................
1.5. Misunderstanding Caused by Idiomatic Expressions .............
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
Joke 2 ...........................................................................................
Joke 3 ...........................................................................................
2. Syntactic Misunderstanding .............................................................
Joke 1 ..................................................................................................
Joke 2 ..................................................................................................
Joke 3 ..................................................................................................
Joke 4 ..................................................................................................
3. Phonological Misunderstanding ......................................................
Joke 1 ..................................................................................................
Joke 2 ..................................................................................................
4. Pragmatic Misunderstanding ...........................................................
4.1. Misunderstanding Caused by the Violations of Maxims of
Conversation ..............................................................................
4.1.1. Misunderstanding caused by the Violation of
Maxim Quantity ...........................................................
Joke 1 .............................................................................
Joke 2 .............................................................................
Joke 3 .............................................................................
Joke 4 .............................................................................
Joke 5 .............................................................................
4.1.2. Misunderstanding Caused by the Violations of
Maxims of Relation and Quantity ..............................
Joke 1 .............................................................................
4.1.3. Misunderstanding Caused by the Violations of
Maxims of Manner and Quantity ..............................
Joke 1 .............................................................................
Joke 2 .............................................................................
Joke 3 .............................................................................
4.2. Misunderstanding Caused by Off and On Record
Statements ...................................................................................
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
Joke 2 ...........................................................................................
4.3. Misunderstanding Caused by Deictic Expressions .................
Joke 1 ...........................................................................................
Joke 2 ...........................................................................................
iii
24
24
25
25
26
27
27
28
29
30
30
32
33
34
35
35
36
37
38
38
38
39
40
41
42
43
43
44
44
46
47
48
48
48
49
49
50
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
CHAPTER IV: CONCLUSION ..................................................................... 52
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................ 57
APPENDIX ....................................................................................................... 60
iv
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
LIST OF TREE DIAGRAMS
Diagram 1 ........................................................................................................... 10
Diagram 2 ........................................................................................................... 10
Diagram 3 ........................................................................................................... 31
Diagram 4 ........................................................................................................... 31
Diagram 5 ........................................................................................................... 33
Diagram 6 ........................................................................................................... 33
v
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
ABSTRACT
Dalam skripsi ini penulis membahas tentang penggunaan kesalahpahaman
(misunderstanding) di dalam membuat cerita lucu (jokes) yang digunakan sebagai
salah satu elemen yang membuat cerita lucu menjadi lucu.
Kesalahpahaman yang ada dalam cerita lucu yang dibahas pada Bab III
dapat dikelompokkan ke dalam empat bagian, yakni semantic misunderstanding,
syntactic misunderstanding, phonological misunderstanding, dan pragmatic
misunderstanding.
Penyebab kesalahpahaman yang terdapat dalam cerita lucu meliputi empat
bidang linguistik, yaitu semantik, sintaks, fonologi, dan pragmatik. Dari diskusi
semantik dapat ditemukan bahwa para penulis cerita lucu banyak menggunakan
elemen-elemen seperti homonim, homofon, lexical ambiguity, arti harafiah dan
arti konotasi, serta ekspresi-ekspresi idiomatik (idiomatic expressions). Dari
diskusi sintaks terlihat bahwa para penulis cerita lucu menggunakan structural
ambiguity sebagai penyebab kesalahpahaman dalam cerita lucu. Sedangkan dari
diskusi fonologi para penulis cerita lucu menggunakan pasangan minimal
(minimal pairs) dalam membuat kesalahpahaman dalam cerita lucu mereka.
vi
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
Dari diskusi pragmatik disimpulkan bahwa para penulis cerita lucu menggunakan
maxims of conversation, off and on record statements, serta ekspresi-ekspresi
deictic (deictic expression).
Jika dilihat lebih lanjut, kesalahpahaman yang menjadi salah satu elemen
yang membuat cerita lucu menjadi lucu ternyata hampir sama dengan
kesalahpahaman yang sering terjadi pada kehidupan sehari-hari. Hal ini dapat
dimengerti karena banyak cerita lucu diambil dari cerita nyata dalam kehidupan
sehari-hari. Selain itu, kesalahpahaman yang terdapat di dalam cerita lucu ternyata
dapat mengajarkan sesuatu, bahwa dalam berkomunikasi kita tidak boleh hanya
mengandalkan bahasa tetapi kita juga harus memperhatikan hal-hal lain sehingga
kita dapat berkomunikasi dengan baik dan terhindar dari kesalahpahaman dalam
berkomunikasi.
vii
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
APPENDIX
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
1.
One day, an English grammar teacher was looking ill. A student asked, “What’s the
matter?”
“Tense,” answered the teacher, describing how he felt. The student paused, then
continued, “What was the matter? What has been the matter? What had been the
matter…?”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homonyms
2.
A woman was driving in her car on a narrow road. She was knitting at the same time,
so she was driving very slowly.
A man came up from behind and he wanted to pass her. He opened the window and
yelled, “Pull over! Pull over!”
The lady yelled back, “No, it’s a hat!”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homonyms
60
No.
3.
Jokes
Teacher :
Rumiko :
Teacher :
Rumiko :
Rumiko, be careful; your purse is open. Someone may take your
money!
Oh, no. I left it open so I can get more money.
How can you get more money?
The weather report said we would have some change in our weather!
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homonyms
4.
Teacher : Vicky, why are you doing your math sums on the floor?
Vicky
: You told me to do it without using table!
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homonyms
5.
Two ducks go on their honeymoon and stay in a hotel. As they are about to make
love, the male duck says, “Oh, we haven’t got any condoms. I’ll ring down to room
service.” He calls and asks for some condoms. The woman says, “OK sir, would you
like to put them on your bill?”
“No,” he says, “I’ll suffocate!”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homonyms
6.
When a waitress brought the customer the soup du jour, he was a bit dismayed.
“Good heavens,” he said, “What’s this?”
“It’s bean soup,” she replied.
“I don’t care what it’s been,” he sputtered. “What is it now?”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homophones
61
No.
7.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
Mr. Knott was a teacher. He taught in a big school in London. He lived a long way Semantic
from the school, so he was usually quite tired when he got home. At nine o’clock one Misunderstanding
evening, when he was in bed, the telephone bell rang in the hall of his small house,
so he went downstairs, picked up the telephone and said, ‘This is Whitebridge 3165.
Who’s speaking, please?’
‘Watt,’ a man answered.
‘What’s your name, please?’ said Mr. Knott.
‘Watt’s my name,’ was the answer.
‘Yes, I asked you that. What’s your name?’ Mr. Knott said again. ‘I told you Watt’s
my name,’ said the other man. ‘Are you Jack Smith?’
‘No, I’m Knott,’ answered Mr. Knott.
‘Will you give me your name, please?’ said Mr. Watt.
‘Will Knott,’ answered Mr. Knott.
Both Mr. Watt and Mr. Will Knott put their telephones down angrily and thought,
‘That was a rude, stupid man!’
62
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
Homophones
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
8.
Once there was a blond who really needed some money. She saw an ad in the
newspaper for a job at an Elmo factory. She went down and applied, but the manager
told her that she wouldn’t want the job because it was so boring. The blond begged
him and told him she would do anything because she needed the money really bad.
After a long consideration the manager hired her. After a few hours the manager
looked at the video-monitor showing the factory floor and saw that the conveyer belt
was backed up. The manager went downstairs to find out what the problem was.
When he arrived there the blonde was sewing to marbles into the crotch of every
Elmo.
The manager said, “I said to give each Elmo two test tickles; not two testicles!”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Homophones
9.
A woman went into a pet shop and said, “I’d like a parrot for my husband.”
“I’m sorry,” the proprietor replied, “but we don’t do swaps.” “I don’t care what it’s
been,” he sputtered. “What is it now?”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Lexical ambiguity
10.
Judge to accused : “Have you anything to offer before I pass sentence on you?”
Accused
: “No, Your Honour. My lawyer took my last dollar.”
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Connotative and
denotative meanings
63
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
11.
One day, when Jack was still young, his mother would have something to do outside.
Before leaving, she said to Jack, “Jack, since you are at home alone, you have to
watch the door carefully. Don’t let anyone in. There have been many thieves
recently.” Jack, therefore, sat by the door. An hour later, his uncle came. “Where is
your mother?” he asked. “She’s out”, Jack answered.
“My family will be here all together this evening. Go and tell your mother not to be
away this evening.” As his uncle left, Jack started thinking,
“Mother told me to watch the door. Uncle asked me to find her and tell her that he
would be here with the whole family.”
Having thought over and over, he finally made a decision. He pulled the door up,
carried it, and went to meet his mother.
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Connotative and
denotative meanings
12.
Working as a clerk reporter, I listen to a lot of testimony that you won’t hear on
“Law and Order,” including the following give-and-take between the judge and a
mother during a paternity suit.
Judge : Was your child born out of wedlock?
Mother : No sir, just outside of Louisville.
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Idiomatic
expression
64
No.
Jokes
13.
“Morning, Danny. Er … Danny, you’re wearing a glove on one hand and none on the
other. Did you know?”
“Yes, well I heard the weather forecast this morning, you see.”
“The weather forecast?”
“Yes, the weather forecast. The forecast said on the one hand it might be fine but
on the other hand there might be some rain.”
14.
Judge to Accused
Accused
: “Is this the first time you’ve been up before me?”
: “I really don’t know, your honour. What time do you
usually get up?”
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Idiomatic
expression
Semantic
Misunderstanding
Idiomatic
expression
15.
A lady goes into a clothing store and asks, “May I try on that lovely blouse in the
window?”
The clerk: “What are you, an exhibitionist?”
Syntactic
Misunderstanding
Structural ambiguity
16.
A lady was going to the airport she saw a sign saying “airport turn left” so she
turned round and went home.
Syntactic
Misunderstanding
Structural ambiguity
17.
Teacher : How can you prevent disease caused by biting insects?
Balgobin : Don’t bite any.
Syntactic
Misunderstanding
Structural ambiguity
65
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
18.
“Somebody complemented me on my driving today” Selma told her friend yesterday. Syntactic
“I found a note on my windscreen that read ‘Parking fine’.”
Misunderstanding
Structural ambiguity
19.
Jack hadn’t been to a class union in decades. When he walked in, he thought he
recognized a woman over in the corner, so he approached her and extended his hand
in greeting. “You look like Helen Brown,” he said.
“Well,” the woman snapped back, “You don’t look so great in blue either.”
Phonological
Misunderstanding
Minimal pairs
20.
While visiting the Olympics, a man noticed an athlete carrying a long pole. “Are you
a pole vaulter?” the tourist asked.
“No, I’m German,” the athlete replied. “But how do you know my name is Walter?”
Phonological
Misunderstanding
Minimal pairs
21.
There was a man who has two dogs, named ‘commonsense’ and ‘trouble’. He always
brought his dogs to the park every evening. One day, he only brought ‘trouble’ to the
park, and left ‘commonsense’ at home. While the man was so happy playing a game
with his friends, ‘trouble’ disappeared. The man was so sad and panicky. He looked
for his dog everywhere but could not find it. A lady realized it and asked the man,
“What are you looking for?”. The man replied “I’m looking for ‘trouble’…”.
“Pardon..” , said the lady. The man replied in a higher tone “I am looking for
‘TROUBLE’ ”. The lady was annoyed and asked “Where’s your
COMMONSENSE?”. The man whose mind was only about his dogs, answered “At
home…”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxim of quantity
66
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
22.
Teacher : If I give you two rabbits and two rabbits and another two rabbits, how
many rabbits have you got?
Patty
: Seven!
Teacher : No, listen carefully again. If I give you two rabbits and two rabbits and
another two rabbits, how many rabbits have you got?
Patty
: Seven!
Teacher : Let’s try another way. If I give you two apples and two apples and
another two apples, how many apples have you got?
Patty
: Six.
Teacher : Good. Now if I give you two rabbits and two rabbits and another two
rabbits, how many rabbits have you got?
Patty
: Seven!
Teacher : How on earth do you work out that three lots of two rabbits is seven?
Patty
: I’ve already got one rabbit at home now!
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxim of quantity
23.
One morning, a mother was preparing pancakes for her sons, five-year-old Kevin and
three-year-old Ryan. The boys began to argue over who would get the first pancake.
Seeing an opportunity to teach them a moral lesson, the mother said, “If Jesus were
sitting here, He would say, ‘Let my brother have the first pancake. I can wait.’”
Quick as a flash, Kevin turned to his younger brother and said, “Ryan, you can be
Jesus.”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxim of quantity
67
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
24.
A man inserted an ‘ad’ in the classifieds: “Wife wanted.”
The next day he received a hundreds letters. They all said the same thing: “you can
have mine.”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxim of quantity
25.
A 12-year-old boy, busily working on a homework project asked his mother, “Where
did I come from?”
“The stork brought you, son,” she told him.
“Where did Daddy come from,” was his next question.
“The stork brought him too,” he was told.
“What about Granddad?” the boy said.
“Oh, he was found under a gooseberry bush.”
The lad nodded and continued working on the assignment. Later, his rather intrigued
mother sneaked a look at his work. He had written: “I have ascertained that there has
been no sexual activity in this family for three generations.
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxim of quantity
68
No.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
26.
One night, Jack came home very late. Whereas his wife was waiting for him
restlessly. When he came his wife got angry.
She said, ”I have been cooking for you all afternoon but you come home very late.
Now the food is stale. We cannot eat anything.”
She hit her husband’s chest several times because she was very annoyed, then she
pushed him backwards. Unfortunately he fell and rolled down the stairs. It made a
loud noise. The couple was quarrelling after that. His closest neighbor heard the
noise and came to their house. He knocked at the house strongly. “What’s wrong
with you. It’s late at night already and you keep making noises,” said the neighbor.
“My coat falls along the stairs,” answered Jack.
“It’s only a coat and you shouted as if you hurt yourself,” said the neighbor.
Jack answered quickly, “Of course I shouted loudly because I was inside the coat.
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxims of relation
and quantity
27.
Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson go on a camping trip, set up their tent, and fall
asleep. Some hours later, Holmes wakes his faithful friend. “Watson, look up at the
sky and tell me what you see.” Watson replies, “I see millions of stars.”
“What does that tell you?” Watson ponders for a minute. “Astronomically speaking,
it tells me that there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets.
Astrologically, it tells me that Saturn is in Leo. Time wise, it appears to be
approximately a quarter past three. Theologically, it’s evident that Lord is allpowerful and we are small and insignificant. Meteorologically, it seems we will have
a beautiful day tomorrow. What does it tell you?” Holmes is silent for a moment,
then speaks. “Watson, you idiot, someone has stolen our tent.”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxims of manner
and quantity
69
No.
Jokes
:
:
:
:
Type of the
Misunderstanding
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxims of manner
and quantity
28.
Johnny
Father
Mother
Johnny
29.
Lost Balloonist : “Ahoy below! Where am I?”
Startled Farmer : “You can’t fool me. You’re up there in that basket.”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
The violation of
maxims of manner
and quantity
30.
A guy was smoking a cigarette. Another guy comes up to him and asks, “Do you
have an extra cigarette?”
The first guy looks at the box and reads that it contains 20 cigarettes. He counts all
the cigarettes in his box and says, “Nope, don’t got any extra cigarettes.”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
Off and on record
statement
31.
Girl to her boyfriend : One kiss and I’ll be yours forever.
The guy replies
: Thanks for the warning.
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
Off and on record
statement
32.
A student, who is studying English as a foreign language, was confused when he saw
the words “open here” on a box of laundry soap, so he asks the clerk, “Can’t I wait
until I get home to open it?”
Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
Spatial deixis
Daddy, are caterpillars good to eat?
Have I not told you never to mention such things during meals!
Why did you say that, Junior? Why did you ask the question?
It's because I saw one on daddy's lettuce, but now it's gone.
70
No.
33.
Jokes
Type of the
Misunderstanding
One day a guy goes to his doctor and says, “Doc, I have these real bad headaches. Pragmatic
Misunderstanding
What should I do?”
The doctor replies: “Well, to get rid of my headaches I just have sex with my wife.”
They both laugh. A week later the patient returns. The doctor asks, “How are you
feeling?” The patient smiles and replies: “You were right! I feel so much better. And
by the way, Doc, you have a lovely home.”
71
The Cause of the
Misunderstanding
Person deixis
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Communication is very important for people since they cannot live alone
and they need help from others. People communicate in order to share knowledge
and experiences with others. According to John Lyons, communication is ‘the
activity or process of expressing ideas, feelings, moods and attitudes or of giving
people information’ (Lyons, 1977: 32). People communicate with each other in
many ways, such as by talking, writing, moving their hands, and even by making
faces. Without communication, people probably cannot survive because most of
their activities depend on their cooperation with others.
In communicating with others, people use language which is ‘the system
of communication in speech and writing that is used by people of a particular
country’ or ‘the use by humans of a system of sounds and words to communicate’
(Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary: 2000, 752). It is language that allows
people to talk to each other and express their thoughts and ideas.
1
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
Language is an important element in communication. Language and
communication are two things that cannot be separated. By using language, verbal
or non-verbal, communication can be done easily.
People can be said to have good communication when they share the same
message with the person whom they communicate with. In his book, Semantics 1,
Lyons claims that in the process of communication, what the speaker
communicates and the information received by the listener from the speaker are
assumed to be identical. However, there is a situation when the participant of a
conversation does not share the same message or information with the other
participant. Therefore, misunderstanding or ‘a situation in which a comment, an
instruction, etc. is not understood correctly’ (Oxford Advanced Learner’s
Dictionary: 2000, 852) sometimes occurs between the participants of a
conversation.
Under a fairly standard idealization of the process of
communication, what the sender communicates (the information
put into the signal, as it were, by the sender’s selection among
possible alternatives) and the information derived from the signal
by the receiver (which may be thought of as the receiver’s
selection from the same set of alternatives) are assumed to be
identical. But there are, in practice, frequent instance of
misunderstanding; and we must allow for this theoretically.
(Lyons, 1977: 33)
Apparently, joke writers find this situation interesting; as a result, they use
misunderstanding as one of the elements that make their jokes funny. A joke is ‘a
short series of words spoken or communicated with the intention of being laughed
2
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
at
or
found
humorous
by
the
listeners
or
readers’
. Besides functioning as a common
system of communication, language can also be used as an element in creating
humor in jokes. Therefore, joke writers sometimes play with language in order to
make their jokes funny. As it is mentioned before, another thing that makes jokes
funny is the element of misunderstanding in jokes. Joke writers use language and
the elements of language to make misunderstanding in jokes funny.
I am interested in discussing misunderstanding in jokes because it is one of
the elements that make jokes funny and it can amuse the readers as well as making
them laugh. In addition, I am also curious to know how joke writers use the
elements of language in creating funny misunderstanding in jokes.
The reason why I choose to discuss misunderstanding in jokes rather than
in novels or films is because it does not take time to read jokes for a joke is
relatively short. Furthermore, jokes are funny so that reading jokes can relieve the
tension after studying.
In the thesis, I will discuss misunderstanding in jokes by using four
linguistic approaches based on semantics, syntax, phonology, and pragmatics. I
choose to use semantics and pragmatics because both of them deal with the study
of the meanings of words and sentences in context. A theory in syntax helps me
recognize ambiguity in sentences, whereas phonology helps me analyze
misunderstanding in jokes which is caused by phonological problems. These
3
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
linguistic approaches are closely related to the misunderstanding in the jokes
which are discussed in the thesis.
Semantics covers five approaches: homonyms, homophones, lexical
ambiguity, denotative and connotative meanings, and idiomatic expressions.
Syntax will cover a theory related to structural ambiguity. Minimal pairs is the
approach which is used in phonology. Pragmatics covers three approaches namely
maxims of conversation, deixis and distance, and the theory of off and on record
statements.
The purpose of doing the discussion by using the kinds of approaches is to
reveal the misunderstanding in the jokes and its causes. Furthermore, these kinds
of approaches can help the readers understand the jokes much better. Besides,
they will add the readers’ enjoyment in reading the jokes.
The data used in the discussion is collected from printed sources which
provide jokes such as magazines, books of jokes and the Internet.
Statement of the Problem
In this thesis I would like to discuss the following problems:
1. What is the misunderstanding found in the jokes provided?
2. What are the causes of such misunderstanding?
4
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
Purpose of the Study
In this thesis I would like to show:
1. The misunderstanding found in the jokes provided.
2. The causes of such misunderstanding.
Method of Research
First, I read a series of jokes from different sources, such as books of
jokes, magazines, and the Internet. Then I collect, select and classify the data
based on semantic misunderstanding, syntactic misunderstanding, phonological
misunderstanding, and pragmatic misunderstanding. After that, I search and
gather some information which are related to the causes of the misunderstanding
found in the jokes from some reference books and the Internet. Based on some
books which deal with linguistic theories, I discuss the jokes by focusing on the
causes that trigger the misunderstanding found in the jokes. Finally, I draw a
conclusion based on the discussion.
Organization of the Thesis
This thesis, which consists of four chapters, is preceded by the Preface, the
Table of Contents, the List of Tree Diagrams, and the Abstract. Chapter I is the
Introduction. It contains the Background of the Study, the Statement of the
Problem, the Purpose of the Study, the Method of Research, and the Organization
of the Thesis. Chapter II provides the Theoretical Framework. Chapter III contains
5
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
the Discussion on the Use of Misunderstanding in Creating Jokes. Chapter IV is
the Conclusion, which contains my comments and my opinion about the
misunderstanding found in the jokes. The thesis ends with the Appendix, which
consists of the tables containing the data of the discussion.
6
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
CHAPTER IV
CONCLUSION
In this chapter, I would like to draw some conclusions based on the
discussion on the misunderstanding found in the jokes.
I am of the opinion that some jokes use misunderstanding as the element
of creating funny things in jokes. Thus, joke writers deliberately use language and
its elements to create misunderstanding in order to make their jokes funny and
enjoyable to read. Language and the elements of language in jokes play an
important role in making jokes funny.
In the jokes which I have discussed in Chapter III, I find out that the
causes of the misunderstanding in the jokes can be divided into four types: the
semantic misunderstanding, the syntactic misunderstanding, the phonological
misunderstanding, and the pragmatic misunderstanding. In the semantic
misunderstanding, there are five elements of semantics that are used to create the
misunderstanding. They are homonyms, homophones, lexical ambiguity,
denotative and connotative meanings, and idiomatic expressions. The syntactic
52
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
misunderstanding contains only one element and that is syntactic ambiguity.
Minimal pairs is the element used in the phonological misunderstanding, and in
the pragmatic misunderstanding, there are three elements of pragmatics used in
creating the misunderstanding: maxims of conversation, off and on record
statements, and deictic expressions.
In the semantic misunderstanding, I find five jokes use homonyms to
create the misunderstanding in the jokes, three jokes use homophones, one joke
uses lexical ambiguity, three jokes use idiomatic expressions, and two jokes use
denotative and connotative meanings to create the misunderstanding. In the
syntactic misunderstanding, there are four jokes using structural ambiguity as the
cause of the misunderstanding. In the phonological misunderstanding, there are
two jokes use minimal pairs as the causes of the misunderstanding. Three
elements that cause the pragmatic misunderstanding are the violations of maxims
of conversation, the different assumptions of the off and on record statements, and
the deictic expressions. I find five jokes contain the violation of maxim of
quantity, one joke contains the violations of maxims of relation and quantity, three
jokes contain the violations of maxims of manner and quantity, two jokes contain
the element of off and on record statements, and two jokes contain the element of
deictic expressions.
In my opinion, the misunderstanding in the jokes that is triggered by the
presence of homophones and minimal pairs are the most interesting thing to
analyze. These kinds of jokes are rarely found. The jokes with these elements not
53
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
only make the jokes funny but they also enable the readers to figure out the funny
things in the jokes they read. Besides, I think homophones, minimal pairs, and
phonetic similarities are good elements in creating the funny misunderstanding in
jokes.
From the jokes I have analyzed, I can see that semantics is the device that
is mostly used by the writers of jokes. The element of semantics that is mostly
used in the jokes is homonyms. In my opinion, the joke writers prefer using
semantics, especially homonyms, to other elements of language because semantics
deals with the meanings of words and homonyms are the easiest element in
creating funny misunderstanding. That is why jokes with homonyms as the cause
of misunderstanding are easy to find.
Despite the simplicity of collecting the data, I find some difficulties in
searching and collecting the jokes needed for the discussion. I find out that there
are not many jokes with misunderstanding caused by lexical ambiguity and the
violation of maxim relation and quantity. Thus, I conclude that jokes using lexical
ambiguity and the violation of maxim relation and quantity to trigger
misunderstanding are not easy to create. However, it is essential for joke writers to
be more creative in creating jokes and use more elements of language such as
lexical ambiguity, minimal pairs, phonetic similarities, and the other elements so
that the jokes they create will be more interesting and the readers will not feel
bored in reading the jokes.
54
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
After analyzing the jokes in Chapter III I conclude that the
misunderstanding used as the funny things in the jokes is almost the same as what
we have in our real life. When we communicate with others, misunderstanding
sometimes occurs, whether we realize it or not. Obviously, in order to maintain
good communication, we cannot rely only on language because even with the
existence of language – verbal and non verbal – we cannot guarantee that we can
communicate well with each other without having any misunderstanding.
Misunderstanding still can happen between the participants of a conversation.
From the elements of language which are used as the factors that trigger
the misunderstanding in the jokes I have analyzed, I learn that to maintain good
communication, the speaker and the listener must understand each other well.
They must share the same understanding of words, phrases, and sentences uttered,
tone of words, gesture, etc. In addition, how we interpret the meaning of an
utterance we hear is not the matter of a mental image (idea) produced in our mind
because a mental image seems to vary from one person to another. Furthermore, I
also want to conclude that we cannot always determine the precise meaning of a
word from what we hear or from the sound alone because this can cause
misunderstanding. In English we know the terms like homonyms, homophones,
minimal pairs, and phonetic similarities, all of which show pairs of words with
similar sounds or having exactly the same sounds and pronunciation. Therefore,
when we hear words or phrases, we must think whether they refer to the ideas we
have in mind or to other meanings. I also see that in communicating with others,
55
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
we have to try to maintain a good conversation by speaking as clearly as possible
and providing adequate, factual, accurate and relevant information with the
context of the conversation we are engaged in to avoid misunderstanding in the
conversation. Besides, avoiding unclear and ambiguous sentences is important so
that different interpretation which can lead to misunderstanding will not occur.
Above all, it is our knowledge of language that determines our ability to guess
various possible meanings of the words from the context.
56
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
BIBLIOGRAPHY
References:
Fromkin, Victoria, and Robert Rodman. An Introduction to Language. Canada:
CBS College Publishing, 1974.
---. An Introduction to Language. Canada: CBS College Publishing, 1983.
Hill, L.A. Elementary Stories for Reproduction. Jakarta: PT. Pustaka Ilmu, 1980.
Hornby. A.S., ed. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. 6th edition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2000.
Katamba, Francis. An Introduction to Phonology. London: Longman, 1989.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. June. 2005: 30, 32, 87.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. Dec. 2003: 42.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. Jan. 2001: 42.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. Apr. 2004: 54.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. Jan. 2003: 46.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. Jan. 2001: 42.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. May. 2000: 75.
57
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. Nov. 2000: 98.
“Laughter, the Best Medicine”. Readers Digest. June. 2004: 24.
Lyons, John. Semantics 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977.
Nash, Walter. The Language of Humour. New York: Longman, 1985.
Ostler, George., ed. Little Oxford Dictionary. 6th edition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. 1989.
Schiffrin, Deborah. Approaches to Discourse. Cambridge: Blackwell Publisher,
1994.
The World Book Encyclopedia: L. Vol. 1. USA: World Book International, 1992.
The World Book Encyclopedia: I. Vol. 1. USA: World Book International, 1992.
Vadillo, Ricardo San Martin. Penggunaan Cerita Humor dalam Kelas Bahasa
Inggris. Yogyakarta: Zenith Publisher, 2004.
Yule, George. Pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
---. The Study of Language. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1996.
Internet Website:
A Guy Was Smoking Cigarette. 7. March. 2006
Are Caterpillars Good to Eat?. 21. Sep. 2005
Blonde Elmo Factory. 6. Feb. 2006
58
Universitas Kristen Maranatha
Elementary, My Dear Watson. 6. Feb. 2006
Harris,
Robert.
Semantics
2.
Vers.
8.
June.
2000.
5.
Apr.
2006
Jokes.
Wikipedia,
the
Free
Encyclopedia.
29.
Aug.
2005
Special Remedy. 7. March. 2006
The Duck and the Condoms. 6. Feb. 2006
6. Feb. 2006
7. March. 2006
59
Universitas Kristen Maranatha