Floutings of Cooperative Principle Maxims in the Movie “College Road Trip”

perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

FLOUTINGS OF COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE MAXIMS IN

THE MOVIE “COLLEGE ROAD TRIP”

THESIS

Submitted as a Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for the Sarjana Sastra Degree of the English Department Faculty of Letters and Fine Arts

Sebelas Maret University

By:

ENDAH BUDI KARYATI

C0306025

ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LETTERS AND FINE ARTS

SEBELAS MARET UNIVERSITY

SURAKARTA 2011 commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

commit to user

ii perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

commit to user

iii perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

PRONOUNCEMENT

Name : Endah Budi Karyati Number : C0306025

I hereby state that I myself write this thesis entitled “Floutings of Cooperative Principle Maxims in the Movie “College Road Trip”. It is neither a plagiarism nor written by others. All theories and materials taken from other sources are put in direct quotation and paraphrased citations. I am fully responsible for the pronouncement and if this is proven to be wrong, I am willing to take any responsible actions given by Faculty of Letters and Fine Arts, Sebelas Maret University, including the withdrawal of the degree.

Surakarta, 24th November 2011

Endah Budi Karyati

commit to user

iv perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

MOTTO

Then which of the blessings of your

Lord you would deny?

(Q.S Ar-Rahman)

Dream, believe, and make it happen.

(Agnes Monica)

commit to user

v perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

DEDICATION

Wholeheartedly, I dedicate my thesis to:

. My beloved mother and father

. My grandfather (late)

. My lovely sister and brother

commit to user

vi perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

All praises for Allah, the Most Gracious, and the Most Merciful One. I

would like to express my gratitude to Allah SWT, for the blessings in completing

this thesis. I realize that this thesis would not have been completed without the

guidance, support, and the help from many people. Therefore, I would like to

present my gratitude to those who have given valuable contribution to this thesis.

I would like to express my gratitude to the dean of Faculty of Letters and

Fine Arts, Sebelas Maret University, Drs. Riyadi Santosa, M.Ed., Ph.D who gave

me the opportunity to study in the faculty. I also would like to express my

gratitude to him as my academic consultant for the support and guidance in my

academic period. I am deeply grateful to Prof. Dr. Djatmika, M.A., the head of

English Department who provides the chance to write this thesis. His kindness,

and his patience, gave me wonderful memories during my study in English

Department. Then, a huge gratitude is for all the lecturers in English Department

for the precious time and knowledge given to me.

I would like to express my huge gratitude to my best thesis consultant,

Agus Dwi Priyanto, S.S., M.CALL, for his patience, advice, and guidance from

the very first step of this thesis. A thank-you is for lending the books, sharing

knowledge, and helping in completing my thesis. I am indebted to him much for

his guidance in more than one year. This thesis instills me everything, including

the process of doing something is more important than the result. It is beyond

words of „thanks you, Sir‟.

commit to user

vii perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

My beloved parents deserve the great and special gratitude for their love,

prayers, patience, care, and support. I would like to give my enormous thanks to

my mother who taught me how to survive in the hardest time of my life. I promise

to make her proud of me. Even, I am sorry for missing the target. I love my great

Mom. My huge thanks belong to my father who taught me how to be a strong girl

since I was kid. I also convey my gratitude to my sister „Indri‟ and my brother

„Bowo‟, for all of their support and help. I will try my best to prove that I can be a

good sister as they wish in my twenties. I always miss the love and laughter that

we spend together.

I owe my loving thanks to my best-companion „Montastic 4‟, Hisyam,

Mika, Afik and Mbak Liz. Hisyam (for every single help and kindness) deserves

to have my big gratitude for the friendship since we were in high school. My

special gratitude belongs to Mika for her cheering and support. I have no idea of

Afik‟s voice. It is so incredible which relieves my hard day. I pass on my huge

thanks to Mbak Liz who allows me to transit in her palace and supply all the

beautiful music for me. It helps me much in refreshing my mind.

I would like to convey my special acknowledgement to my besties

Queelinary (Chandra, Mbak Nita, Ata, Rini, Farida) for all of their motivation,

advice, and care. I give my enormous thanks to Mbak Nita, my savior. My words

fail to depict her kindness, patience and help. Chandra, thanks for checking my

freaky structure. It is a pleasure having her as my friend since my first day at

English Department. My huge gratitude goes to Ata, Rini, and Farida for their

help, support, and words of encouragements. I believe that the universe will be commit to user

viii perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

with us who have a dream and believe to make it happen. I do convey my special

gratitude to Ikha and Ima (for their motivation and help). We have a real

sisterhood traveling shirt. My special thanks-you goes to my lovely „sister‟, Endah

Citra Pratiwi (for precious sharing and reminding to finish my thesis).

Then, I convey my thanks to English Department family especially

Linguistics‟ 06 for the sweet moments and kindness in completing my thesis. I

owe the valuable sharing to my friend, Susi Anjarsari (for her advice, suggestion,

motivation, and constructive criticism). Yuni, Ruri, Nhia, and Vadila thanks for

supporting each other and discussion. I owe a special debt to Mimi (for her

kindness and valuable criticism) in finishing my thesis. I also convey my thanks to

Vanda for courage to strengthen me in finishing my thesis.

In the last part, I want to present my enormous gratitude to everyone who

wants me to finish my undergraduate study. I cannot mention all of them here, but

their names are written in the deepest of my heart.

Finally, I realize that this thesis is not perfect. Therefore, the suggestion

and criticism are needed to make it better. Hopefully, this thesis will be beneficial

for the readers.

th Surakarta, 24 November 2011

Endah Budi Karyati

commit to user

ix perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

TABLE OF CONTENTS

COVER PAGE ...... i

APPROVAL BY THESIS CONSULTANT ...... ii

APPROVAL BY BOARD OF EXAMINERS ...... iii

PRONOUNCEMENT ...... iv MOTTO ...... v DEDICATION ...... vi ACKNOWLEDGMENT ...... vii TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... x LIST OF TABLES ...... xii ABSTRACT ...... xiii

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION A. Research Background ...... 1 B. Problem Statement ...... 3 C. Scope of Research ...... 3 D. Research Objectives ...... 4

E. Research Benefits ...... 4

F. Research Methodology ...... 5

G. Thesis Organization ...... 5

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW

A. Definitions of Pragmatics ...... 7

B. Conversational Implicature ...... 10

C. The Cooperative Principle ...... 12

D. The Four Conversational Maxims ...... 13

E. The Flouting of Maxims ...... 15

F. Context ...... 19

G. Review of Related Studies . . .commit ...... to. . user...... 23

x perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

H. Synopsis of The Film ...... 25

I. The Characters in The Film ...... 26

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY

A. Research Methodology ...... 31

B. Data and Source of Data ...... 31

C. Technique of Collecting Data ...... 32 D. Technique of Coding Data ...... 32 E. Technique of Analyzing Data ...... 33

CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION A. Introduction ...... 34 B. Data Analysis ...... 36 C. Discussion ...... 76

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion ...... 93 B. Suggestion ...... 97

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDIX

commit to user

xi perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1.1 Percentage of the Flouting the Maxim(s) ...... 76

Table 4.1.2 The strategies of Flouting the Maxim(s) ...... 77

Table 4.2.1 The situation in which the maxim of Quantity is flouted ...... 80

Table 4.2.2 The situation in which the maxim of Quality is flouted ...... 82

Table 4.2.3 The situation in which the maxim of Relation is flouted ...... 83

Table 4.2.4 The situation in which the maxim of Quantity and Relation

overlap ...... 84

Table 4.3.1 The intention of the speaker in flouting the maxim(s)...... 85

Table 4.3.2 The same intention in different flouting of maxims ...... 86

Table4.3.3 The intention used by the speaker in flouting of maxims

related to the relation among the characters ...... 87

Table 5.1 The intention of flouting the maxims ...... 95

commit to user

xii perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

ABSTRACT

Endah Budi Karyati. C0306025. Floutings of Cooperative Principle Maxims

in the Movie “College Road Trip”. Thesis: English Department of Faculty of Letters and Fine Arts. Sebelas Maret University.

The research is conducted to find out the strategies of flouting the maxims employed by the characters in the film entitled College Road Trip, the situation when the maxims are flouted in the conversation, and the intention of the speakers in flouting the maxims in their utterance. In analyzing the Cooperative Principle, the research uses pragmatics study. I applied descriptive qualitative research to achieve the goals. All of the family dialogues containing the flouting of maxims in the movie entitled College Road Trip are taken as the data. There are 23 data which have been analyzed using Grice‟s theory of Cooperative Principle. The findings of the analysis can be seen as follows: First, there are three maxims flouted in the movie entitled College Road Trip. They are the Quantity maxim, the Quality maxim, and the Relation maxim. Most of the characters flout the maxim of Quantity in the movie College Road Trip by giving more or less information than is required. There are 10 data which show that the characters flout the maxim of Quantity. The flouts of Quality maxims are found in eight data. Most characters flout the maxim of Quality by saying something untrue and using hyperbole. Then, the maxim of Relation is flouted twice by the characters. They flout the maxim of Relation by giving irrelevant response. Second, most speakers

flout the maxim of Quantity when they are worrying about someone. The flouting of Quality maxim occurs when the speakers get angry, be afraid of, and dislike

something. The maxim of Relation is flouted by the speakers when they worry about someone, get afraid of being scolded, and get someone‟s opinion. Third, there are several intentions of the speakers in flouting the maxims. The intention

can be achieved by flouting and overlapping different maxims. It is found that most of the speakers intend to refuse, to show their feeling, to convince, and to

ask for doing something by flouting the maxims. The intention of flouting maxims is influenced by the relation among the characters. Referring to the conclusion above, this research is expected to give a contribution for the readers in studying

the flouting of maxims. It is suggested that other researchers conduct further research about the non-observance of maxims concerned in the superior-inferior

status.

commit to user

xiii

perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

FLOUTINGS OF COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE MAXIMS IN get angry, be afraid of, and dislike something. The maxim of THE MOVIE “COLLEGE ROAD TRIP” Relation is flouted by the speakers when they worry about someone, get afraid of being scolded, and get someone’s opinion. Endah Budi Karyati1 Third, there are several intentions of the speakers in flouting the 2 Agus Dwi Priyanto, S.S., M.CALL maxims. The intention can be achieved by flouting and overlapping different maxims. It is found that most of the speakers intend to refuse, to show their feeling, to convince, and to ask for doing ABSTRACT something by flouting the maxims. The intention of flouting maxims is influenced by the relation among the characters. 2011.. Thesis: English Department of Faculty of Letters and Fine Referring to the conclusion above, this research is expected to give Arts. Sebelas Maret University. a contribution for the readers in studying the flouting of maxims. It The research is conducted to find out the strategies of flouting the is suggested that other researchers conduct further research about maxims employed by the characters in the film entitled College the non-observance of maxims concerned in the superior-inferior Road Trip, the situation when the maxims are flouted in the status. conversation, and the intention of the speakers in flouting the maxims in their utterance. In analyzing the Cooperative Principle, the research uses pragmatics study. I applied descriptive qualitative research to achieve the goals. All of the family dialogues containing the flouting of maxims in the movie entitled College Road Trip are taken as the data. There are 23 data which have been analyzed using Grice’s theory of Cooperative Principle. The findings of the analysis can be seen as follows: First, there are three maxims flouted in the movie entitled College Road Trip. They are the Quantity maxim, the Quality maxim, and the Relation maxim. Most of the characters flout the maxim of Quantity in the movie College Road Trip by giving more or less information than is required. There are 10 data which show that the characters flout the maxim of Quantity. The flouts of Quality maxims are found in eight data. Most characters flout the maxim of Quality by saying something untrue and using hyperbole. Then, the maxim of Relation is flouted twice by the characters. They flout the maxim of Relation by giving irrelevant response. Second, most speakers flout the maxim of Quantity when they are worrying about someone. The flouting of Quality maxim occurs when the speakers

1 Mahasiswa Jurusan Sastra Inggris dengan NIM C0306025 2 Dosen Pembimbing

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Research Background

Communication happens in every part of daily life. Language as a mean of

communication has an important role in daily life. People can interact to another by

using language. By having communication, they can enrich their information and

knowledge. Besides, they can also express their ideas, thoughts, and feelings.

In order to create conversation running well Grice (in Thomas, 1995, p. 51)

introduces four conversational maxims and the Cooperative Principle (CP). The four

conversational maxims are maxims of Quantity, Quality, Relation and Manner. Yet,

not all maxims are obeyed at all times. There are times when people may disobey

them. Grice proposes that there are five types of disobedience of the maxims i.e.

Flouting a maxim, Violating a maxim, Infringing a maxim, Opting out a maxim, and

Suspending a maxim (Thomas, 1995, p. 64).

As people disobey the maxims, their utterance may contain hidden meaning.

A flout occurs when a speaker disobey the maxim at the level of what is said, with the

intention of generating implicature (Thomas, 1995, p. 65). This hidden meaning in

the conversation is called implicature. Implicature is an additional conveyed meaning

(Yule, 1996: 35). It leads the hearer to look for the meaning which is different from

the expressed meaning. Dealing with that occurrence, this study analyzes the maxim commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

flouts strategies, the situation when people flout the maxim, and the intention of the

speaker in flouting the maxims. This is a case study by taking a movie College Road

Trip as the source of data.

This research analyzes the flouted maxims. The reason why people flout the

maxims is analyzed because people do not always say what they mean directly. It

may have hidden meaning in the utterance of speaker in conversation. Thomas (1995,

p. 56) says that there are times when people say exactly what they mean, but

generally they are not totally explicit. The example of a flout of a maxim can be seen

in the utterance, “we must remember your telephone bill”, it can be interpreted as a

hint to close the telephone conversation.

The movie College Road Trip is choosen as the source of data also with some

reasons. The first reason is because the language of the movie represents natural

conversations in family domain in U.S. The second reason is because the movie

shows how Cooperative Principle (CP) is applied in the family conversation

especially the use of flouted maxims. It can be seen in the speaker’s utterance that

generates implicature.

The movie is directed by Roger Kumble that takes place in U.S. The movie is

about Melanie Porter (Raven-Symoné), a 17-year-old college-bound girl who is

getting ready to graduate from high school and really wants to go to Georgetown

University. The most important and exciting time of a young woman life is choosing

college. As Melanie is about 17 years old and the only one daughter in her family, it

becomes the hardest time for her to keep her own choice. Yet, her over-protective commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

father, police chief James Porter (Martin Lawrence) is not ready for her to leave and

to study so far away from home.

They are arguing because of their different opinions in choosing university.

Hence, it is interesting to analyze the flouted maxims in this film.

Flouting of maxims is a part of pragmatic study. Consequently, pragmatics

approach is employed to analyze it. Thus, I am interested to conduct a research

entitled: Floutings of Cooperative Principle Maxims in the Movie “College Road

Trip”.

B. Problem Statement

Based on the research background, the problem statements are proposed as

follows:

1. How do people flout the Cooperative Principle (CP)?

2. In what situation do people flout the Cooperative Principle (CP)?

3. What is the intention of the speakers in flouting the maxims?

C. Scope of Research

This research focuses on Grice’s cooperative principle especially flout of

maxim in the film entitled College Road Trip. The limitation of problem is to find out

the kinds of maxim/s that speaker flouts since there are other categories of non-

observances of the conversational maxim. The movie College Road Trip directed by

Roger Kumble is chosen as the source of data.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

D. Research Objectives

1. To find out the strategies of the flouting maxims used by the characters in

the film entitled College Road Trip.

2. To find out the situation when the maxims are flouted in conversation.

3. To find out the intention of the speaker in flouting the maxims in their

utterance in the film entitled College Road Trip.

E. Research Benefits

This research tries to give contributions as follows:

1. English Department students

The research is expected to give more understanding about Pragmatics. I also

expect that this research will help English Department students to study the flout of

maxim more comprehensively in daily conversation or in the movie dialogue. As a

result, they can apply the Cooperative Principle (CP) well in their daily conversation.

2. Other researchers

This research is expected to be a reference for other researchers to conduct

more comprehensive research on Pragmatics, related to maxim flouts especially in the

conversation of family domain in U.S.

3. The public

The research is expected to make the public awareness with the flouted

maxims in conversation of family domain in U.S. so they will understand the

implicatures implied in the film dialogue.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

F. Research Methodology

This research is a descriptive qualitative research. It covers several steps, they

are collecting data, classifying data, analyzing data, and drawing conclusion. The

further discussion will be discussed in Chapter III.

G. Thesis Organization

This thesis is organized by some chapters and items, which are arranged as

follows:

Chapter I : INTRODUCTION, consists of Research Background,

Problem Statement, Scope of Research, Research

Objectives, Research Benefits, Research Methodology,

and Thesis Organization.

Chapter II : LITERATURE REVIEW, consists of Definitions of

Pragmatics, Conversational Implicature, The

Cooperative Principle, The Four Conversational

Maxims, The Flouting of Maxims, Context, Review of

Related Study, Synopsis of the Film, and The

Characters in the Film.

Chapter III : METHODOLOGY, consists of Research Methodology,

Data and Source of Data, Technique of Collecting Data,

Technique of Coding Data, and Technique of

Analyzing Data.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

Chapter IV : ANALYSIS and DISCUSSION, consists of

Introduction, Data Analysis, and Discussion.

Chapter V : CONCLUSION and SUGGESTION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

A. Definitions of Pragmatics

According to Levinson (1983, p. 21), pragmatics is the study of language and

context, mainly in understanding language. He also states that pragmatics is the study

of the role of context which plays in speaker of utterance in meaning (ibid: 24).

It is supported by Thomas (1995) who states that pragmatics deals with

meaning in use or meaning in context. Further, Thomas defines pragmatics as

follows:

a. Pragmatics as speaker meaning

The term speaker meaning tends to be favored by writers who take a broadly

social view of the discipline; it puts the focus of attention firmly on the producer of

the message, but at the same time obscures the fact that the process of interpreting

what we hear involves moving between several levels of meaning.

b. Pragmatics as utterance interpretation

The term utterance interpretation is favored by those who take a broadly

cognitive approach, but at the cost of focusing too much on the receiver of the

message, which in practice means largely ignoring the social constraints on utterance

production. It focuses almost exclusively on the process of interpretation from the

point of view of the hearer. It is clearly more difficult to interpret the force of a

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

person‟s utterance, if you are not interested in why he or she is speaking in a

particular way.

c. Pragmatics as meaning interaction

This reflects the view that meaning is not something which is inherent in the

words alone, nor is it produced by the speaker alone, nor by the hearer alone. Making

meaning is a dynamic process, involving the negotiation of meaning between speaker

and hearer, the context of utterance (physical, social, and linguistic) and the potential

meaning of an utterance.

It can be drawn that pragmatics is a study of utterance meaning produced by

the speaker and interpreted by the hearer. Thus, it is necessary for the speaker and the

hearer to negotiate each other in order to find out the meaning of the speaker‟s

utterance based on the context of situation when the utterances happen.

Meanwhile, Yule (1996, p. 3) defines that pragmatics is the study of meaning

as communicated by a speaker and interpreted by a listener. Using pragmatics, one

can talk about people‟s intended meaning, their assumptions, purposes or goals, and

the actions performed when the conversation occurs. Further, Yule proposes four

definitions of pragmatics:

a. Pragmatics is the study of speaker meaning.

Pragmatics is concerned with the study of meaning as communicated by a

speaker (or writer) and interpreted by a listener (or reader). Further, it explores the

analysis of people‟s meaning by their utterances than what the words or phrases in

those utterances might mean by themselves. commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

b. Pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning.

The study of contextual meaning involves the interpretation of what people

mean in a particular context and how the context influences what is said. It requires a

consideration of how speakers organize what they want to say in accordance with

whom they are talking to, where, when, and under what circumstances.

c. Pragmatics is the study of how more gets communicated than is said

This study explores how listeners can make influences about what is said in

order to arrive at an interpretation of the speaker‟s intended meaning. It also explores

how a great deal of the unsaid words is recognized as a part of what is communicated.

In the other words, it is the investigation of invisible meaning.

d. Pragmatics is the study of the expression of relative distance.

This perspective then raises the question of what determines the choice

between the said and the unsaid. The basic answer is tied to the notion of distance.

Closeness, whether it is physical, social, or conceptual, implies shared experience. On

the assumption of how close or distant the listener is, speakers determine how much

needs to be said.

In short, pragmatics is a study focused on meaning utterances. The hearer has

to look for the hidden meaning because it is not expressed explicitly in the speaker‟s

utterance.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

B. Conversational Implicature

Implicature can be defined as something that is more than what the words

mean. The implicatures theory was first introduced by Grice in 1967. As stated in

Thomas (1995, p. 56), Grice‟s theory is an attempt to explain how a hearer gets from

what is said to what is meant, from the level of expressed meaning to the level of

implied meaning.

In additional, there are two different sorts of implicature namely conventional

implicature and conversational implicature. Both implicatures convey an additional

level of meaning, beyond the semantic meaning of the words uttered. However, they

differ in that in the case of conventional implicature the same implicature is always

conveyed, regardless of context, whereas in the case of conversational implicature,

what is implied varies according to the context of utterance. In this subchapter, I will

only focus on conversational implicature which is related to the research.

According to Yule (1996), there are two kinds of conversational implicatures.

They are:

1. Generalized conversational implicatures

Generalized conversational implicatures arises when no special knowledge is

required in the context to calculate the additional conveyed meaning. Hence, the

hearers do not require the special background knowledge in understanding what is

meant by the speaker.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

Example:

A. Doobie : Did you invited Bella and Cathy?

B. Mary : I invited Bella.

(Yule, 1996)

In the example above, Mary disobeys the maxim of Quantity. She does not

give the right amount of information by her utterance “I invited Bella”. Thus, she

flouts the maxim of Quantity. It shows clearly that Mary does not invite Cathy, she

only invites Bella. The hearer can easily understand the meaning of the speaker‟s

utterance although there is no special context of situation.

2. Particularized conversational implicatures

Conversations generally happen in very specific context in which locally

recognized inferences are assumed. Such inferences are required in calculating the

conveyed meaning resulted from particularized conversational implicature. Therefore,

particularized conversational implicature happens when there is special knowledge of

context required by the hearer in understanding what is meant by the speaker in the

conversation.

Example:

Rick: Hey, coming to the wild party tonight?

Tom: My parents are visiting.

(Yule, 1996)

By his utterance “My parents are visiting”, Tom flouts the maxim of Quantity

and Relation and Manner. He flouts the maxim of Quantity since his response is not commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

informative as is required. His irrelevant response shows the flout of Relation maxim.

A simply relevant answer would be „Yes‟ or „No‟. Those who do not understand the

context of situation might be confused in understanding the conversation above.

C. The Cooperative Principle

In order to explain the mechanisms by which people interpret the

conversational implicature, Grice in Thomas (1995) introduces four conversational

maxims and the Cooperative Principle. The CP runs as follows:

Make your contribution such as required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged. In conversation people are not always cooperative; they may make a mistake

and misunderstand about the meaning of speaker‟s utterance. Therefore, people must

be good on interpreting the meaning of speaker‟s utterance.

For example:

The speaker has accidentally locked herself out of her house. It is winter, the

middle of the night and she is stark naked.

A: Do you want a coat?

B: No, I really want to stand out here in the freezing cold with no clothes on.

According Thomas (1995, p. 63), B‟s answer looks untrue and

uncooperative. B‟s answer can be said as sarcastic reply towards A‟s question. Thus,

B flouts the maxim of Quality. Her response can be easily interpreted that she needs

the coat offered by A.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

People (the hearer) obey the Cooperative Principle when he or she just gives

the right amount of information, relevant to the question, truthful, and clear. Consider

the following example:

X. Do you find the place is warm enough?

Y. Yes, oh yes. Very comfortable I think. It‟s all that you need really, you don‟t

need any more.

(Wilson and Murie in Cutting, 2000)

In the example above, X is the interviewer and Y is a lady living in sheltered

housing. X asks question and the lady answers that it just the right amount of

information. She is being honest, relevant to the topic in hand, and not ambiguous.

Consequently, she is following the conversational maxims of the cooperative

principle.

D. The Four Conversational Maxims

Grice in Thomas (1995) proposes the four conversational maxims. They are

the maxim of Quality, the maxim of Quantity, the maxim of Relation, and the maxim

of Manner. The four conversational maxims will be elaborated as below:

1. Maxim of Quality

. Do not say what you believe to be false.

. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.

2. Maxim of Quantity

. Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purpose

of the exchange) commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

. Do not make your contribution more informative than is required

3. Maxim of Relation

. Be relevant

4. Maxim of Manner

. Avoid obscurity of expression

. Avoid ambiguity

. Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity)

. Be orderly

Consider the following example in observing the entire maxim:

Husband : Where are the car keys?

Wife : They‟re on the table in the hall.

(Thomas, 1995, p. 64)

In the dialog above, the wife has answered clearly (Manner), truthfully

(Quality), has given the right amount of information (Quantity) and has directly

addressed her husband‟s goal in asking the question (Relation). She has said precisely

what she meant, no more and no less, and has generated no implicature.

Grice in Cutting (2002) also states that the four maxims allows hearers to

draw inferences about the speaker‟s intentions and implied meaning. On the other

word, the hearer is helped to find out what the implicature might be by four

conversational maxims.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

E. The Flouting of Maxims

. Grice in Thomas (1995, p. 65) states that a flout occurs when a speaker

blatantly fails to observe a maxim at the level of what is said, with the deliberate

intention of generating an implicature. It means that a flout occurs when the speaker

expects the hearer to observe the implicature in the speaker‟s utterances without any

intention of lying. There are four kinds of flout of maxim, they are:

1. The Flouting of Quality Maxim

When a speaker says something which is blatantly untrue or for which he or

she lacks adequate evidence, it says as „a flout of Maxim of Quality‟. According to

Cutting (2002) there are several ways of the speaker in flouting the maxim of quality.

First, they may quite simply say something that obviously does not represent what

they think.

For example:

When Sir Maurice Bowra was Warden of Wadham College, Oxford, he was

interviewing a young man for a place at the college. He eventually came to the

conclusion that the young man would not do. Helpfully, however, he let him

down gently by advising the young man, „I think you would be happier in a

larger-or smaller-college‟.

(Rees in Cutting, 2002, p. 36)

In the dialog above, Sir Maurice was not adhering to the maxim of quality,

since he was not really saying what he thought. It is more likely that the young man

did know that Sir Maurice was trying to tell him he had failed the interview. commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

Obviously, if Sir Maurice had said, „You won‟t do‟, or even „Unfortunately you‟re

not quite good enough for this college‟, he might have hurt him. He implies

implicature by saying that the college is both too small and too large for the young

man.

The speaker may flout the maxim of quality by exaggerating as in the

hyperbole „I could eat a horse‟ (Cutting, 2002, p. 37).

It is obviously untrue that the speaker can eat a horse when he is starving. The

hearer would be expected to know that the speaker were really hungry.

A speaker can flout the maxim of quality by using metaphor.

For example:

In 1979, Mrs. Margaret Thatcher was elected as the first woman Prime Minister

in Britain. She was called the “Iron Lady”.

(Li Juan, 2007)

It is not true that Mrs. Margaret Thatcher is made of iron or having a lot of

iron properties. She merely had some of the incidental properties like hardness,

resilience, non-flexibility, or durability.

The other categories are conventional euphemisms, irony, and banter.

Consider the following example of each:

„She‟s got a bun in the oven‟

(Cutting, 2002, p. 38)

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

It is not true that „She‟ in the utterance above really gets a bun. It has a

meaning that „She‟s pregnant‟.

„This is a lovely undercooked egg you‟ve given me here, as usual. Yum!‟

(ibid.)

It is not true that the egg is really undercooked. The speaker hints that the food

is not delicious. He/she also intends to hurt the hearer.

You‟re nasty, mean and stingy. How can you only give me one kiss?

(ibid.)

The utterance „You‟re nasty, mean and stingy‟ is obviously an offensive way

of being friendly (mock – impoliteness). It has a meaning that he/she does not want to

get closer to him/her.

2. The Flouting of Quantity Maxim

A flouting of quantity maxim of occurs when a speaker blatantly gives more

or less information than the situation requires.

Consider the following example:

I (Nick) told her (Daisy) how I had stopped in Chicago for a day on my way East,

and how a dozen people had sent their love through me.

“Do they miss me?” she cried ecstatically.

“The whole town is desolate. All the cars have the left rear wheel painted black

as a mourning wreath, and there‟s persistent wail all night along the north

shore.”

(Li Juan, 2007)

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

In the dialog above, Nick blatantly gives more information than Daisy needs.

One word “Yes” is enough to answer Daisy‟s question. But by flouting the maxim of

Quantity, Nick satisfies Daisy‟s vanity with his redundancy and hyperbole.

Thus, the speaker who flouts the maxim of quantity is likely to give too little

or too much information than it is required.

3. The Flouting of Relation Maxim

A flouting of relation maxim occurs when a speaker makes a response or an

observation which is very obviously irrelevant to the topic in hand (e.g. by abruptly

changing the subject, or by overtly failing to address the other person‟s goal in asking

a question).

For example:

James : Where‟s Trey?

Michelle : He left an hour ago for his science club.

It‟s an all-day field trip.

I‟ll pick him up after work.

James : For Christmas, that boy gets a karate suit, and nothing else.

(Taken from the movie College Road Trip, CD1, 00: 17: 00)

In the example above, James gives irrelevant response to Michelle. By his

utterance “For Christmas, that boy gets a karate suit, and nothing else”, he flouts the

maxim of Relation since his answer is irrelevant to the topic in hand.

Hence, those who say something which is irrelevant to the topic in hand must

be flouting the maxim of Relation. commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

4. The Flouting of Manner Maxim

A flouting of Manner maxim occurs when a speaker makes a response

ambiguously, long-winded (not brief) and unable to speak orderly.

Consider the following example:

“I don‟t want you to do anything that you don‟t want to do...”

“Nor that isn‟t good for me,” she said, “I know. Could we have another beer?”

“All right. But you‟ve got to realize...”

“I realize,” the girl said. “Can‟t we maybe stop talking?”

They sat down on at the table and the girl looked across at the hills on the dry

side of the valley and the man looked at her and at the table.

“You‟ve got to realize,” he said, “that I don‟t want you to do it if you don‟t

want to....”

(Li Juan, 2007)

From the dialog above, the utterance „I don‟t want you to do anything that you

don‟t want to do...‟ implicates the opposite meaning since it is long-winded. If the

man really does not want the girl to do anything that she does not want to do, he

mentions it once and it should be enough. Yet, he persists on mentioning it once

again even after he is interrupted on purpose, which actually means that he does want

the girl to do it (abortion) although she does not want to.

F. Context

Context has important role in studying Pragmatics. It is significant to concern

context when interprets the meaning of utterance. Hymes (1973) proposes the commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

framework for describing context. It covers several various factors that are involved

in speaking. The various factors are abbreviated into SPEAKING, they are:

a. Situation (S)

Situation refers to the setting and the scene. The setting relates to the physical

circumstances of speech event; it includes the time and place. The scene relates to the

psychological setting, or cultural definition of an occasion.

b. Participant (P)

Participant refers to speaker (sender or addressor) and hearer (receiver,

audience, and addressee). Background information has to be concerned in describing

participants. It covers some aspects such as age, gender, occupation, social class,

status, background, etc. For example, people will talk more formally and politely to

the boss because s/he has higher occupation than other.

c. Ends (E)

Ends can be classified into outcome and goal. Outcome is the purpose of the

event from a cultural point of view. Meanwhile, goal is the purpose of the individual

participant.

d. Act Sequence (A)

Act sequence refers to the messages of an event. It is composed of message

form and message content. Message form refers to how thing is said by the

participants. While, message content refers to what is said by the participants.

Communicative skills are involved in both message form and message content. It

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

even may be vary from one culture to another. Therefore, participants should know

how to create speech events and speech acts based on their culture properly.

e. Key (K)

Key refers to the tone, manner, or spirit in which an act is done.

f. Instrumentalities (I)

Instrumentalities refer to channels and forms of speech. Channels deal with

the way of delivering message from one person to another by oral or written. The

transmission of speech can be telegraphic, semaphore or other medium. The forms of

speech deal with languages and their subdivision, dialect, codes, varieties, and

g. Norms (N)

Norms are composed of norms of interaction and norms of interpretation.

Norms of interaction implicate analysis of social structure, and social relationship

generally, in a community. Norms of interpretation implicate the belief system of a

community.

h. Genre (G)

Genre refers to the categories of communicative event such as poems, myths,

tale, proverb, riddle, curse, prayer, oration, lecture, commercial, form letter, editorial,

jokes, sermons, etc.

It is supported by Levinson (1983, p. 24) who states that context is needed in

pragmatics because pragmatics is the study of the role context plays in speaker (or

utterance) meaning. commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

Meanwhile, Mey (1993) states that context is dynamic, not a static concept. It

deals with the surroundings. Thus, the participants enable to interact with others in

communication. It also makes the linguistic expressions of the interaction intelligible.

In addition, Yule (1996, p. 21) defines that context is a linguistic part of the

environment in which referring expression is used. The physical environment, or

context, is more easily recognized as having a powerful impact on how referring

expressions are interpreted.

This is also in line with the proposition stated by Huang (2007, pp. 13-14),

context refers to any relevant features of the dynamic setting or environment in which

a linguistic unit is systematically used. Furthermore, he proposed three sources in

composing context, they are:

a. The physical context

It refers to the physical setting of the utterance. Thus, the interpretation

depends on the knowledge computable of the utterance, that is the spatio-temporal

location of the utterance.

b. The linguistic context

It refers to the surrounding utterances in the same discourse. It has crucial role

in understanding the elliptical construction.

c. The general knowledge context

It involves a set of background assumptions shared by the speaker and the

addressee. Former, it refers to the set of background assumptions shared by members

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

of a community, and the later, it refers to the body of background knowledge of two

members of a community share from their past experience of each other.

From all the definition above, it can be concluded that context is physical and

social surrounding that helps the speaker and hearer in interpreting the meaning of the

utterance.

G. Review of Related Studies

There are some related studies of flouting the maxims and implicature. The

previous research has been done by Febriani (2008). The results of analyzing the

movie Les Miserable show that almost all of the dialogues disobey the maxim of

Quantity. The characters tend to give more or less information than situation requires.

It means that by flouting the maxim of Quantity the characters have a preference to

express the affective (the implicature of their utterance) rather than the information of

their utterance (what is actually said by the characters). Febriani finds some overlaps

of the Cooperative Principles (CP), they are the flouting of Quality and Quantity

maxims resulting in giving more or less information than required which is untrue,

the flouting of Quality and Relation maxims resulting in the utterances which are

believed to be false and irrelevant to the topic in hand, the flouting of Quality and

Manner maxims resulting in the utterances of the characters which are not only untrue

but also obscure, the flouting of Quantity and Relation maxims resulting in giving

inadequate amount of information and creating irrelevant response by the character,

the flouting of Quantity and Manner maxims resulting in uttering long-winded,

obscure expression, and do not give right amount of information, and the flouting of commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

Relation and Manner maxims resulting in generating irrelevant and long-winded

responses by the characters.

The other study is done by Kusnani (2010). She finds that all the maxims are

flouted by the characters in the movie entitled The Queen, they are the maxims of

Quality, Quantity, Relation and Manner. There are four same intentions which can be

achieved by different flout and overlap of maxims. Those are: showing the speaker‟s

feeling, assuring someone about something, giving extra information, and expressing

the speaker‟s opinion. The overlapping between maxims are the flouting of Quality

and Relation maxims, the flouting of Quantity and Relation maxims, the flouting of

Quantity and Manner maxims, the flouting of Quantity and Relation and Manner

maxims. There are some similar overlapping maxims in the movie The Queen related

to the previous research that has been done by Febriani (2008). Those are: the

flouting of Quality and Relation maxims, the flouting of Quantity and Relation

maxims and the flouting of Quantity and Manner maxims. In addition, one category

of the maxim flouted may convey more than one intention. It is because such factors

as the social stratum, the closeness of the relation between the speakers and the

hearers, the level of age of the speakers and the hearers, and the information

contained in the speaker‟s utterance itself.

Chen (1996) finds that implicatures resulted by the violation of Quality

Maxim intends to insult, to satirize, and to attack personally. Thus, the character

personalities and ideologies can be seen in their violations of particular

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

conversational maxims, the motivation for such violations, and the implicatures

produced.

H. Synopsis of The Film

The film is about Melanie Porter, a high school student who wants to study at

Georgetown University. However, her domineering father, police chief James Porter

does not want her to study far away from home. They have different opinions in

choosing university. James wants Melanie to study at Northwestern University which

is just 28 minutes away from their home. On the contrary, Mrs. Michelle Porter and

Trey (the son) disagree with James‟s plan. One day, Melanie gets invited to an

interview at Georgetown. She is very happy and interested because her noble dreams

will come true. Melanie and her two best friends (Nancy and Katie), then set a college

road trip to Pittsburgh and Georgetown. Seeing her daughter going to have college

road trip with her friends, James sets his own college road trip to Washington D.C. It

becomes a big surprise for Melanie.

On their way, James takes Melanie to visit Northwestern. They meet a very

happy father and daughter, Doug and Wendy, who are also on their own college road

trip in Northwestern. Porter has set the entire things in Northwestern in making good

image of Northwestern and persuading Melanie. Unfortunately, it is over when

Melanie knows what actually has happened and she is really upset.

Melanie does not want to have any conversation with her father in the car. She

spends the time with talking to her two best friends by phone. The problem starts

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

when their car breaks down and they find Trey and Albert (Trey‟s pig) in a case with

supply of oxygen. They decide to walk and to look for hotel. Then, they stop at Deer

Creek hotel. They get a bigger problem when Albert becomes hyperactive caused by

eating coffee beans in the bin. In short, they meet Doug and Wendy at coffee shop.

They offer a ride for them. Melanie, her father, and Trey continue their trip by riding

a tour bus. Melanie and her father talk each other, later James understands what

Melanie‟s dream is. Nancy and Katie pick Melanie up at grandmother‟s house. They

go to a sorority house for girl‟s time.

James made a mistake at sorority that makes him jailed. Once again, it makes

Melanie very disappointed of her father. Melanie misses the plane caused by solving

her father‟s problem. They end up their problem by forgiving each other at the

airport. They look for another flight to Washington. Fortunately, they get a ride in a

plane of skydive. They have to skydive in landing at Georgetown. Just in time they

reach Georgetown for the interview.

In the end of the story, Melanie is accepted in Georgetown, Wendy too. They

become roommates.

I. The Characters in The Film

It is necessary to understand the characters of the movie and the relation of

each other due to the different of the way they speak when applying the flout of

maxim. The further explanation of each character‟s profile and the relation of each

other in the movie College Road Trip are explained as follow: commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

1. The Profiles of the Characters

The main character of the movie College Road Trip is Porter family. They are

Melanie Porter, James Porter, Michelle Porter, Trey Porter, and Grandma Porter. The

supporting characters are Nancy, Katie, Dough Greenhut and Wendy Greenhut. Each

character has different profile and personality. The detail profile and personality of

the characters are explained as below:

a. Melanie Porter

Melanie Porter is a 17-year-old college bound girl. She has a noble dream to

study at Georgetown University. Melanie is a smart girl. It is proved by her success in

court practice in high school. Hence, she is mentioned by the jury to have interview in

Georgetown University. She is also friendly and funny girl. However, she often lies

to her father in order to hanging out with her best friends, Nancy and Katie.

b. James Porter

James Porter is a police chief. He is Melanie‟s father. He is a typical of

overprotective father. He will do anything to protect his only one daughter including

setting up drama in Northwestern Universtity when he is in college road trip with

Melanie.

c. Trey Porter

Trey Porter is a kid who get obsessed in science. He is Melanie‟s little brother.

He often does science experiment. He has a pig named Albert which he usually

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

spends the time with. Trey is smart boy since he succeed in teaching Albert filling the

bathub, playing chess, and using tissue after poop. He also makes air ventilation

system which is used in his joining college road trip cryptically.

d. Michelle Porter

Michelle Porter is a property agent. She is Melanie‟s mother. Michelle cares

and handles her family well even she is a carier woman. She is also kind and lovely

mom. She always supports her daughter and son to get their dream.

e. Grandma Porter

Grandma Porter is an old active woman who lives near University of

Pittsburgh. She has many friends since she is kind. Grandma Porter loves gathering

with her friends. She likes dancing in her old age.

f. Nancy and Katie

Nancy and Katie are high school students. They are Melanie‟s best friends.

They seem to have intuition because they often speak similarly in the same time.

Nancy is an Asian kind girl while Katie is an ordinary girl wearing sunglasses.

Melanie and her two best friends like hanging out and having party. Melanie tends to

have closer relation with Katie than Nancy. It can be seen by their intimate

conversation when they are staying in the sorority of University of Pittsburgh.

2. The Relation among the Characters

The relation among the characters needs to be concerned since it influences commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

the choice of words when they speak to others. The way people speak to the elder, the

younger and the same age must be different. The detail of their relation will be

explained as below:

a. Melanie-James

Melanie and James are listed as daughter and father. However, they have

different opinion in choosing college. Melanie wants to study at Georgetown but her

father wants her to study at Northwestern University. Their different opinion often

makes them fight. Melanie wants to be free and independent. However, James is not

ready yet for letting his daughter study far away. They end up each other when they

are joining the tour bus. James understands Melanie‟s dream and Melanie

understands that her father is overprotective because he loves her very much.

b. Melanie, James – Trey

Melanie and Trey are unfriendly. Melanie feels annoyed by Trey‟s behaviour

because he takes care of pig. Knowing that Melanie will study at Georgetown, Trey is

very excited. He will change Melanie‟s room into science lab.

James loves Trey as well as he loves Melanie. Meanwhile, James does not act

overprotectively to Trey since Trey is a boy. On the other hand, James feels very

annoyed by Albert (the pig, Trey‟s pet). He feels that Albert always keeps eyeballing

on him.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

c. Melanie, James – Michelle

Melanie and Michelle is a couple of compact daughter and mother. They

dance together when they are incredibly happy. Michelle wants the best for Melanie.

Thus, she helps Melanie fill the application for Georgetown University.

James and Michelle are husband-wife spouse. They have harmonious family

completed with smart daughter and son. Unfortunately, their relation becomes

inharmonious because the difference choice in choosing college for Melanie.

Michelle sometime feels annoyed by James‟s act which is very overprotective.

d. Melanie, James – Grandma

Melanie loves her grandma so much because she is very kind and wise old

woman who supports everything done by Melanie. They have good relationship

although they are far away.

Just like Melanie and Michelle, Grandma does not like James‟ overprotective

act which is overprotective. She feels like living in a jail since James sets many kinds

of security tools in her house. James and Grandma have not good relation because of

James‟ over controlling to Melanie. Grandma wants James to trust Melanie as what

she did when James joined the army.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

A. Research Methodology

This research is descriptive qualitative research, since it aims to describe the

descriptive data. Bogdan and Taylor in Moleong (2001) defines that qualitative

research refers to research procedure which produces descriptive data in the form of

spoken and written of the people and behavior which can be observed. Meanwhile,

Surakhmad (2004, p. 139) states that the implementation of descriptive method is not

only in collecting and composing the data, but also covering data analysis and

interpretation. Furthermore, in a descriptive method, the data collected are in the form

of words and/ or pictures, not numbers. As Sutopo (2006) states that in qualitative

method, data are collected in the form of words, sentences or pictures having meaning

rather than merely numbers.

B. Data and Source of Data

According to Arikunto (2006), data are all facts and numbers which can be

made into materials to find information, and source of data is the subject in which

data can be obtained.

The source of data in this research is the movie College Road Trip. The data

in this research are the dialogues of family member containing the flout of maxim

employed by the characters in the movie College Road Trip.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

In the movie College Road Trip, I find some interesting phenomena related to

the topic of this research. The first phenomenon is the language of the movie

representing natural conversations in family domain in U.S. The second phenomenon

is the movie showing how Cooperative Principles (CP) applied in the family

conversation especially the use of maxim flouts. Thus, the movie College Road Trip

is chosen as the source of data.

C. Technique of Collecting Data

The data of the research are collected based on several steps as follows:

1. Watching the movie entitled College Road Trip.

2. Finding and copying the script of the movie from the internet on

http://subscene.com.

3. Identifying all the utterances in the dialogue which flouts the maxim.

4. Giving a code for each datum.

D. Technique of Coding Data

The aim of coding data is to make easy the classification and analysis of the

data. Below is the example of data coding of this research:

08 / CRT/CD1 / TP / 00.31.59

08 : The number of datum

CRT : The movie College Road Trip

CD1 : The disc number of the movie (the first disc)

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

The name of the speaker who flouts the maxim is abbreviated into an initial as

follow:

TP : refers to Trey Porter.

JP : refers to James Porter

MelP : refers to Melanie Porter

MichP : refers to Michelle Porter

Gran : refers to Grandma Porter

00.31.59 : The exact time when the utterance containing the maxim flouts

occurred.

E. Technique of Analyzing Data

Followings are the procedures of analyzing the data:

1. Describing the context of situation in which the speaker flouts the maxim.

2. Analyzing the data based on Grice’s Cooperative Principles to find out the

speaker’s utterance implicature and the strategy used.

3. Analyzing the intention of the speakers in flouting of maxims.

4. Drawing conclusion.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

A. Introduction

This chapter is the significance of the research since it contains the data

analysis and the discussion of the result of it. This chapter is conducted based on

the theories presented in Chapter II to reveal the problem statements as stated

previously in Chapter I. To make it easy, this chapter is divided in three

subchapter. They are: Introduction, Data Analysis and Discussion.

As stated in Chapter I, the objectives of this research are to find out the

strategies of flouting the maxims used by the characters in the film entitled

College Road Trip, to find out the situation when the maxim flouted occurs in the

conversation of the film entitled College Road Trip, and to find out the intention

of the characters in flouting of the maxims in the film entitled College Road Trip.

The data analysis is conducted based on three steps as follows:

1. Data Description

It presents the dialogue between the family member containing the

flouted maxims.

2. Context of Situation

It contains the description of the situation of the dialogue where the

flout of maxims happens. It covers the participants, setting, and some

features which support the dialogue where the flout of maxims happens.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

3. Data Analysis

This part analyzes the utterance of the speaker to reveal the

problem statements. First, I analyze how the speakers flout the maxims

based on Grice’s Cooperative Principle since there are times when the

characters fail to observe maxims. In the next part, I analyze the situation

in which the maxims are disobeyed by the speakers because the

significance role of the situation in interpreting the meaning of the

utterance. Last, I identify the intention of the speakers in flouting the

maxims since the speakers flout the maxims with different intention based

on the certain context of situation.

In the last subchapter, I discuss the result of the data analysis. I

elaborate the whole result of the data analysis based on the problem

statements. In the previous chapter, it is stated that the problem statements

are how do the characters flout the Cooperative Principle (CP), in what

situation do the characters flout the Cooperative Principle (CP), and what

is the intention of the speakers in flouting of the maxims.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

B. Data Analysis

01 / CRT/CD1 / TP / 00.10.20

1. Data Description

Melanie : Little bro, what are you so excited about?

Trey : I’m going to turn your room into a science lab!

2. Context of Situation

The conversation occurs in the morning, in the living room of

Porter family’s house. The conversation is conducted by Melanie and

Trey. Melanie is a seventeen years old college student. She is smart; it is

proved by her win in her school trial practice. She has a big dream to study

at Georgetown University. Whereas Trey, Melanie’s little brother, is a

genius kid who has great obsession in science. He takes care of a pig

named Albert. Trey teaches him well. In this case, Melanie and Trey do

not have a good relationship because Melanie does not like her little

brother freak activity with the pig, Albert. On the other side, Trey also

hates Melanie because he wants to invade Melanie’s room, then turn it into

science laboratory.

The dialog occurs when Melanie gets a message from the

answering machine. It is a call from Judge Mahagian, the Georgetown

admission committee. He says that Melanie is a chosen student in the

waiting list to have an interview in Georgetown. Melanie calls her father

and mother loudly because of her exciting. James and Michelle, Melanie’s

father and mother, run in commithurry to to theuser living room. James brings the bat perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

while Michelle is still wearing pyjamas. Trey is there too. Melanie turns

off the answering machine and announces the good news to her parents.

Then, Melanie and Michelle dance together to express their feeling toward

Melanie’s success. Trey also dances and screams enthusiastically.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the dialog above, Trey gives less information blatantly than it is

required by saying, “I’m going to turn your room into a science lab!”,

towards Melanie’s question, “Little bro, what are you so excited about?”.

His utterance implicates that he will make his dream come true by having

his own science laboratory. Trey dances and screams enthusiastically

when he hears the message for Melanie. Thus, she gets curious about

Trey’s happiness for her success since they do not have a good

relationship before. As a result, Trey flouts the maxim of Quantity by

giving less information through his answer.

b. The Intention

Knowing that Melanie would study in Georgetown, Trey cannot

hide his happiness. Trey flouts the maxim of Quantity on his utterance to

show his enormous happiness because of the news. Consequently, he takes

over Melanie’s room and turns it into science laboratory because Melanie

will study in Georgetown which is 700 miles away from their home and

absolutely she will stay at the sorority house. He really wants to have his

own science laboratory because of his obsession in science. commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim

Trey knows that Quantity Trey will make his Giving less To show Melanie will study 700 dream comes true by information happiness miles far away having his own than is

because his sister gets science laboratory required a call from the through taking over Georgetown admission Melanie’s room. committee to have an interview.

02 / CRT/CD1 / MichP / 00.12.15

1. Data Description

James : Did you even know she applied to Georgetown? Michelle : I helped her fill out the application. James : What? Whose side are you on? (still bringing the bat) Michelle : Both of yours. And put down that bat.

2. Context of Situation

The conversation takes place in the living room. The conversation

occurs between Michelle and her husband, James. Michelle is an agent

property but she still takes care of her family. She wants the best education

for her daughter, Melanie, and her son, Trey. She helps her daughter to

reach the dream by filling the application letter. Meanwhile, James is a

chief police. He is overprotective to his children. His big love to his

children and his family often makes him in trouble.

The dialog occurs in the morning when James and Michelle leave

the living room to their bedroom after expressing Melanie’s success.

Michelle is very happy because Melanie is in the waiting list for students

who will be interviewed atcommit Georgetown. to user On the other hand, James does perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

not like it because he wants Melanie to study at Northwestern which is

only 28 minutes from their house. James gets confused with his wife’s

decision for supporting Melanie’s study at Georgetown. Whereas, they

have planned to send Melanie to Northwestern University after finishing

her high school. Thus, James asks his wife about her decision.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the conversation above, Michelle has answered James’s

question. However, she gives more information than it is required by

saying, “I helped her fill out the application”. Her utterance generates an

implicature which has an implied meaning that she supports Melanie to

study at Georgetown. Thus, Michelle does not obey the Cooperative

Principle by giving more information than it is required. Consequently,

Michelle flouts the maxim of Quantity.

b. The Intention

Eventhough Michelle and James have planned to send Melanie to

study at Northwestern University, Michelle still wants the better college

for Melanie by helping Melanie to fill the application letter of Georgetown

without James’ permission. Michelle flouts the maxim of Quantity in her

utterance to show her support of Melanie study at Georgetown.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim

James feels confuse Quantity Michelle wants Giving To show with his wife’s decision Melanie to study more support since Michelle allows at Georgetown information

Melanie to go to University than is Washington for the because she required. interview at Georgetown thinks that University. Georgetown is better than Northwestern University.

03 / CRT/CD1 / MichP / 00.12.32

1. Data Description

James : How will she begin to take care of herself? Michelle : Because you’re an amazing father, and you showed her right and wrong and you taught her how to think for herself and be strong. She’s ready for this because of you.

2. Context of Situation

The conversation above takes place in front of the bedroom at the

morning. The dialog happens between James Porter, and his wife,

Michelle. They have a small talk after their daughter, Melanie, goes to

school. The Porter family has got together in the living room when

Melanie gets a message from Judge Mahagian, the Georgetown admission

committee. He says that Melanie is a chosen student in the waiting list to

have an interview in Georgetown. Michelle feels happy to Melanie.

Meanwhile, James is unhappy because he dislikes it. He is not ready yet to

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

be left by Melanie to study in Georgetown which is 700 miles away from

their house.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the conversation above, Michelle Porter has answered James’s

question; yet, her answer is more informative than it is required. She

generates an implicature by her utterance,” Because you’re an amazing

father, and you showed her right and wrong and you taught her how to

think for herself and be strong. She’s ready for this because of you.” This

utterance implies that Michelle wants to say that Melanie can take care of

herself. Michelle hopes that James has to be ready left by Melanie since he

has taught her daughter everything that makes her becomes strong.

Therefore, by giving more information in the conversation above,

Michelle flouts the maxim of Quantity.

b. The Intention

As mentioned above, Michelle flouts the maxim of Quantity by

giving more information than it is required. She flouts the maxim of

Quantity with the intention to convince James about his afraid if Melanie

studies at Georgetown since he does not know anyone there. His big love

to Melanie makes him want to stay close with her so he can control and

protect her.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim

James does not like Quantity Melanie can Giving more To that Melanie will take care of information convince study at Georgetown herself since than is

which is 700 miles James has required. away from their taught her to house because he be strong. wants her to study at the college near their house.

04 / CRT/CD1 / MelP / 00.14.16

1. Data Description

James : Surprise! Road trip, road trip! Yeah! Melanie : Mom, this is crazy! Have you seen the thing that we’re driving in? It’s gonna be like a thousand-mile ride-along. No, no. My life is a thousand-mile ride-along. Why is he doing this to me?

Michelle : Because he loves you and he wants to spend time with you.

2. Context of Situation

The conversation occurs at noon when Melanie arrives at home.

She is surprised by her father, James, who has set his police car to have

college road trip. James wants to have college road trip with Melanie in

order to keep her safe because he is not ready to let her go. The dialog

takes place in Trey’s room. Trey and Michelle use glasses; they are doing

science experiment. The participants of the conversation are Melanie and

her mother, Michelle. Melaniecommit who to userstill wears uniform complains to her perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

mother about her father’s plan to have college road trip with her. It is very

surprising since Michelle has given Melanie permission to have a college

road trip with her best friends, Katie and Nancy.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the conversation above, Melanie says something which is

untrue. She uses metaphor in her statement, “No, no. My life is a

thousand-mile ride-along”. Her statement shows clearly that she compares

her life with something else like a thousand-mile ride-along. Thus, by

using metaphor in her statement, Melanie disobeys the maxim of Quality.

Her statement implicates that her trip would be so boring and unpleasant.

b. The Intention

As stated above, Melanie has flouted the maxim of Quality in her

utterance, “No, no. My life is a thousand-mile ride-along”. She flouts the

maxim of Quality to show clearly that she refuses the college road trip set

by her father, James, since they do not have a good relationship. The

relationship between Melanie and James becomes rocky because James

disagrees with Melanie’s plan to study at Georgetown University. James is

an overprotective father so that he wants Melanie to study at the college

near their house.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim Melanie is surprised Quality Melanie does not Using To

by James’ plan to want to have metaphor. refuse have college road trip college road trip to Georgetown. Yet, with her father, she dislikes it because James, since they they do not have a do not have a good relationship. good relationship.

05 / CRT/CD1 / MichP / 00.14.45

1. Data Description

James : You said she could stay at the sorority house? Michelle : Her friends are gonna be with Katie’s sister at Pitt. Baby, that’s right near your mama’s house, where you’re planning on staying tomorrow, anyway.

2. Context of Situation

The conversation between Michelle and James occurs at night

when they are washing their hand before sleeping. James feels confuse

because Michelle allows him to have a college road trip with Melanie with

a deal that Melanie can stay a night at the sorority house of Pittsburgh. The

deal is made by Melanie and Michelle when Melanie complains to her

mother that she does not want to have a college road trip with her father

since it will be so boring. On the other hand, James does not want to share

the daddy-daughter time because he gets many plans for his college road

trip with Melanie. commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the dialog above, Michelle gives more information than

required. It is simple for her to answer “Yes/No” towards James’s

question. By her utterance, “Her friends are gonna be with Katie’s sister

at Pitt. Baby, that’s right near your mama’s house, where you’re planning

on staying tomorrow, anyway.”, she generates an implicature that she

gives permission to Melanie to stay at the sorority house of Pittsburgh with

her friends so that James does not need to be afraid of Melanie. Thus, the

maxim of Quantity is not fulfilled by Michelle on her utterance since she

gives more information than is required.

b. The Intention

As mentioned above, Michelle flouts the maxim of Quantity. She

flouts the maxim of Quantity with the intention of convincing James that

Melanie will be fine at the sorority house because she stays with her

friends. By giving clear information, Michelle hopes that James does not

need to be afraid if Melanie stays at the sorority house. Moreover, Melanie

stays at the sorority house of Pittsburgh which is near Grandma’s house

where James plans to stay a night.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim

James dislikes Quantity Michelle gives Giving more To Michelle’s plan for permission to information convince allowing Melanie to Melanie to stay than is

stay one night at the at the sorority required. sorority house of house. Pittsburgh University.

06 / CRT/CD1 / JP / 00.17.00

1. Data Description

James : Where’s Trey? Michelle : He left an hour ago for his science club. It’s an all-day field trip. I’ll pick him up after work.

2. Context of Situation of datum 6 & 7

The conversation takes place in front of the house. The dialog

happens in the morning, between James Porter and his wife, Michelle.

James will go for a college road trip with his daughter, Melanie, while

Michelle will go to work. James is looking around for his son, Trey,

because he had not seeing him since morning. He feels worried since Trey

is a little bit freak kid.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the conversation above, by saying “It’s an all-day field trip. I’ll

pick him up after work.” Michelle has given more information than is commit to user required by mentioning something which is unnecessary. Therefore, her perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

utterance implicates that James does not need to be worry about Trey. By

giving more information to James, it can be said that Michelle has flouted

the maxim of Quantity.

b. The Intention

James gets worry about Trey because Trey is obsessed much in

science. Trey also has a pig named Albert which is teached to behave like

a human by him. In this case, Michelle has flouted the maxim of Quantity

with the intention to comfort James that Trey is fine. Hence, James does

not need to be worried about Trey.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim James worries Quantity James does Giving more To about Trey since not need to be information comfort he does not worried about than is appear in the Trey. required.

morning.

07 / CRT/CD1 / JP / 00.17.00

1. Data Description

James : Where’s Trey? Michelle : He left an hour ago for his science club. It’s an all-day field trip.

I’ll pick him up after work. James : For Christmas, that boy gets a karate suit, and nothing else.

2. Data Analysis commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the conversation above, James’ utterance, “For Christmas, that

boy gets a karate suit, and nothing else”, implies an implied meaning that

he does not like Trey joining the science club. James feels afraid if Trey

will be a science freak. Moreover, Trey takes care of a pig named Albert

and teaches him to behave like a human. James does not like Trey’s pig

because he feels that the pig always pay attention on him. James wants

Trey to become an ordinary boy who likes karate in order to show his

masculinity. Thus, the maxim of Relation is flouted by James. He flouts

the maxim of Relation since his utterance is irrelevant to the topic in hand.

b. The Intention

As stated above, James has flouted the maxim of Relation in his

utterance by giving irrelevant response. He flouts the maxim of Relation in

order to show his dislike towards Trey’s activity. James does not like

Trey’s activity because Trey leaves the house in the early morning to join

science club. James does not want Trey to be obsessed by science;

moreover Albert (Trey’s pig) acts freakily to him. James wants Trey to

behave like a man who can take care and protect himself by joining karate

club.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim

James worries about Relation James does not Giving To show Trey since he does like Trey joining irrelevant dislike not appear in the the science club. response. morning. commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

08 / CRT/CD1 / MelP / 00.23.34

1. Data Description

Melanie : Dad! Dad!

James : Looks like somebody’s having a good time. Melanie : Not a good time, Daddy. A great time!

It was awesome! It was off the chain! 2. Context of Situation

The conversation takes place in Northwestern University at noon

when some people have college trip including James and his daughter,

Melanie. The participants of the dialog are James and Melanie. James is

talking with security guard of Northwestern University when Melanie

comes in a sudden. Melanie tells her campus tour enthusiastically after she

had it with Nick, a student of Northwestern. During the tour, Nick was

talking much about the benefit of studying near home and giving

compliment to chief police, James.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the dialog above, by saying, “Not a good time, Daddy. A great

time! It was awesome! It was off the chain!”, Melanie has said something

untrue. She did it because she has known that her father, James, tricks her

when they are having college trip at Northwestern University. James has

set the entire things in Northwestern in order to make Melanie loves it.

Melanie knows that her father has tricked her when Nick gives

compliment to James eventhough they have not met yet. Thus, her commit to user utterance implies that she does not like the college trip at Northwestern perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

University because it is unpleasant for her. Therefore, Melanie disobeys

the maxim of Quality by saying something untrue.

b. The Intention

In the conversation above, James is talking to the security guard of

Northwestern. Melanie comes in sudden while calling her father loudly,

James guesses that she has a good time in her campus trip with Nick.

Melanie responds James by flouting the maxim of Quality. She flouts the

maxim of Quality in order to show her dislike of campus tour at

Northwestern University because James has tricked her by setting the

entire things in the campus.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Maxim Implicature Strategies Intention Flouted Melanie knows that Quality Melanie dislikes Saying To show her father has tricked her campus tour something dislike her at Northwestern. as it is untrue. unpleasant.

09 / CRT/CD1 / JP / 00.25.04

1. Data Description

Melanie : Phone. James : If that’s your mother, tell her we’re having a good

time. All right? (winking his eyes) Melanie : Okay. Hello?

2. Context of Situation

The conversation happens between Melanie and her father, James. commit to user It takes place in the car when they are leaving Northwestern University. perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

Melanie and James are on their way to Grandma’s house at Pittsburgh

before continuing their trip to Washington. Along their way to Grandma’s

house, Melanie complains to James. Melanie gets angry for James because

of tricking at Northwestern University. She is really disappointed.

Suddenly, Melanie’s phone rings. It is a call from Nancy, Melanie’s

friend. Yet, James does not know that it is a call from Nancy.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the conversation above, James has said something untrue.

Through his utterance, “If that’s your mother, tell her we’re having a good

time. All right?”, he implies that his college road trip with Melanie is so

good and so much fun. In the context of the story, James thinks that it is a

call from his wife, Michelle. James is afraid of being scolded by his wife,

Michelle, if she knows that they have problem in Northwestern University.

Yet, it is a call from Nancy, Melanie’s friend, not Michelle. By saying

something untrue, James flouts the maxim of Quality.

b. The Intention

In the conversation above, Melanie gets a call from Nancy but

James does not know that it is Nancy. When James knows that Melanie

gets a call, he asks Melanie to tell her mother that they have a good time.

James is very afraid of being scolded by his wife if she knows that they

have a problem when they are in Northwestern University. Before leaving

the house for college trip, commitMichelle to has user warned James to do not do strange perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

things to Melanie. Therefore, James asks Melanie to tell her mother that

there is nothing happened on their college road trip. Moreover, James

winks his eye when saying his utterance to Melanie. It means that James

wants Melanie to do as what he said. Through his utterance, James flouts

the maxim of Quality in asking Melanie to lie that they have a good time

to her mother.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim James is afraid Quality James and Saying To ask for of Michelle’s Melanie do not something doing angry. have a good untrue. something time on their college road trip.

10 / CRT/CD1 / JP / 00.26.23

1. Data Description

Melanie : Construction? (looking at the warning board) We’re off-schedule as it is. We’re never gonna be able to make it to Pitt in time. We’re gonna have to use the siren.

James : Absolutely not. No one touches my siren.

2. Context of Situation

The conversation above happens between Melanie and her father,

James. It takes place in the car when they get a traffic jam because of road

construction. They are heading to Grandma’s house after having trip at

Northwestern University. Melanie wants to reach Grandma’s house

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

quickly because she has plan with her friends, Nancy and Katie, to stay a

night at the sorority house of Pittsburgh University.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

On the conversation above, James has respond Melanie; yet, his

response is more informative than is required. By his response,

“Absolutely not. No one touches my siren”, he implicates that he does not

want to use siren because he wants to have a longer daddy-daughter time

with Melanie. James loves her daughter much so that he does not want to

miss any single minute with Melanie. By getting a traffing jam due to the

road construction, James feels happy because he gets a longer time with

Melanie. Thus, the maxim of Quantity is flouted by James since he gives

more information through his utterance.

b. The Intention

In the conversation above, Melanie tries to turn on the siren

because of a traffic jam. Yet, James forbids her to turn on the siren

because he thinks that the road construction is not an emergency. On the

other hand, Melanie wants to reach Pittsburgh as soon as she has planned.

In responding Melanie’s request, James flouts the maxim of Quantity. He

flouts the maxim of Quantity with the intention of refusing Melanie’s

request to turn on the siren.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim

Melanie and James Quantity James does Giving more To are trapped in a not want to information refuse traffic jam because turn on the than is

of road construction. siren. required. Whereas, Melanie wants to reach Pittsburgh on time.

11 / CRT/CD1 / JP / 00.27.50

1. Data Description

Melanie : Dad, I think P-GPS is broken, because my map says that we’re supposed to be going the other way. James : Are you gonna believe in a piece of paper or a $40- million satellite?

2. Context of Situation Datum 11 & 12

The conversation happens between Melanie and her father, James

Porter. It occurs in the car when they are heading to Grandma’s house at

Pittsburgh. Unfortunately, they are trapped in a traffic jam because of road

construction. Then, James decides to go to their destination by having the

alternative way. He uses P-GPS (Police Global Positioning System) as the

guidance. It rises a problem when the P-GPS voice gets blur and they go

deeper into the forest. Melanie thinks that the P-GPS is broken. Thus, she

complains to her father because she is afraid of being lost in the forest.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the dialogue above, James responds Melanie’s utterance

irrelevantly. Through his utterance, he implies that he disagrees with

Melanie’s opinion that the P-GPS is broken. He also implies that he does

not want to go to the other way as stated in the map. Therefore, the maxim

of Relation is not fulfilled by James in the conversation above by giving

irrelevant response.

b. The Intention

As mentioned before, James has flouted the maxim of Relation in

the dialog above. Melanie guesses that the P-GPS is broken because the

voice gets blur and they go deeper into the forest. James responds Melanie

by saying, “Are you gonna believe in a piece of paper or a $40-million

satellite?”. He flouts the maxim of Relation on his response to show that

he refuses to go to the other way because the P-GPS is more expensive

than the map. Hence, he thinks that the P-GPS must be more sophisticated

and it is not broken.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim Melanie gives her Relation James does not Giving To refuse

opinion that the P- want to go to irrelevant GPS may be broken the other way as response.

since the voice gets Melanie said. blur.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

12 / CRT/CD1 / JP / 00.27.50

1. Data Description

Melanie : Dad, I think P-GPS is broken, because my map says that

we’re supposed to be going the other way. James : Are you gonna believe in a piece of paper or a $40-

million satellite? Bet Grandma’s right around the corner. (there is a voice of flat tire) Melanie : Love what Grandma’s done with the place.

2. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the conversation above, Melanie says something which is untrue

and it does not represent her thought. She generates an implicature by her

utterance, “Love what Grandma’s done with the place”, that she really

dislikes the situation happened. They get flat tire in the forest of nowhere.

Melanie gets more annoyed to James because they already get problem in

college trip at Northwestern University. Thus, through her utterance,

Melanie flouts the maxim of Quality by saying something which does not

represent her thought.

b. The Intention

In the conversation above, Melanie and James get flat tire in the

middle of the forest. Melanie expresses her feeling by flouting the maxim

of Quality since she is annoyed by her father who refuses to go the other

way as she said. Then, they get flat tire. By flouting the maxim of Quality,

Melanie wants to satire James because he says that Grandma’s right

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

around in his utterance. Yet, it is impossible that Grandma’s house in the

forest.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention

Maxim James and Melanie Quality Melanie Saying To get flat tire in the dislikes getting something satire middle of the flat tire in the untrue. forest. middle of the forest.

13 / CRT/CD1 / TP / 00.28.26

1. Data Description

James : Trey, what are you doing? Trey : Going to DC. You told me to take the note to the Secretary myself. James : Have you been hiding here in the whole time? You could have suffocated. Trey : I built an air ventilation system. I could have survived for weeks.

I mean, “we” could have survived.

2. Context of Situation

The conversation above happens between James Porter and his son,

Trey Porter. It occurs in the forest when James opens the case to take the

tool kit to fix the flat tire. James is surprised by Trey who uses oxygen

masker when he opens the case. It is very surprising because James knows

that Trey leaves home in the early morning to join the science club.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the conversation above, Trey blatantly gives more information

than is required through his answer, “I built an air ventilation system. I

could have survived for weeks. I mean, “we” could have survived.”,

towards James’ question, “Have you been hiding here in the whole time?

You could have suffocated.” Through his answer, Trey implicates that he

and his pig, Albert, are fine because he has built an air ventilation system.

By giving more information than is required, Trey flouts the maxim of

Quantity.

b. The Intention

In the conversation above, Trey has flouted the maxim of Quantity

as he had given more information than it is required. He flouts the maxim

of Quantity in his utterance with the intention to convince his father that

he is fine so that James does not need to be worried about him. Trey needs

to convince James by giving more information about his hiding in the case

because James is very worry about.

The result of the analysis can be seen in table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim James worries Quantity Trey is fine so Giving more To

about Trey that James does information convince because he finds not need to be than is

Trey in the case worry for him. required. using supply oxygen.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

14 / CRT/CD1 / MelP / 00.29.06

1. Data Description

Trey : Come on, Albert.

(observing worm by using magnifying glass) Melanie : Dad, what are we gonna do with him?

I have the most important interview of my life, and I don’t want Einstein and Porky along for the ride. James : What do you want me to do, Mel? We’re in the middle of nowhere.

2. Context of Situation datum 14 & 15

The conversation above happens between Melanie and her father,

James. It takes place in the middle of the forest when James fixes the car

and Melanie pays attention on Trey who is observing worm using

magnifying glass. James and Melanie are on their way to Grandma’s house

at Pittsburgh. Unfortunately, they get flat tire and James has to fix it soon.

James is surprised by Trey when he opens the case to take the tool kit

because Trey is hiding in the case along the trip. Melanie feels that her trip

will be worse if Trey goes with them along the ride. Melanie thinks that

Trey will be a trouble maker for her trip since Trey is a little bit freak kid.

Moreover, Trey also takes Albert in his trip.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the conversation above, Melanie says something which is

untrue. She uses metaphor in her utterance by saying, “Dad, what are we

gonna do with him? I have the most important interview of my life, and I

don’t want Einstein and Porky along for the ride.” Through her utterance, commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

she compares Trey with Einstein since they have similarity, obsessed in

science. Melanie’s utterance implicates that she dislikes Trey and Albert

go along for the ride because she feels burdened. Thus, by using metaphor,

Melanie disobeys the maxim of Quality.

b. The Intention

Bad relationship between Melanie and Trey, makes Melanie does

not want Trey and Albert to go along for the ride with her. Thereby, she

flouts the maxim of Quality to express her dislike toward Trey’s presence

since Trey joins the trip secretly by hiding in the case. Trey’s presence is

unwelcomed by Melanie because she is afraid that Trey will stir up

problem in her trip to Georgetown.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim Melanie pays Quality Melanie does not Using To show attention on Trey want Trey and metaphor. dislike

who is observing Albert, Trey’s pig, to worm using go along for her magnifying glass. college road trip

because she dislikes Trey as he seems to be freak kid.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

15 / CRT/CD1 / MelP / 00.29.06

1. Data Description

Trey : Come on, Albert.

(observing worm by using magnifying glass) Melanie : Dad, what are we gonna do with him?

I have the most important interview of my life, and I don’t want Einstein and Porky along for the ride. James : What do you want me to do, Mel? We’re in the middle of nowhere. Melanie : We could leave him in the woods and a nice family of wolves will adopt him. 2. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the conversation above, Melanie uses hyperbole to say

something untrue. Through her utterance, Melanie says that the wolves is a

nice family for Trey. It is clearly not true that wolves is a nice family

because they are known as wild animal. Her utterance, “We could leave

him in the woods and a nice family of wolves will adopt him”, implicates

that she does not want Trey to go along in her trip because they do not

have a good relationship. Moreover, Trey is a little bit freak kid since he is

much obsessed in science. Thus, Melanie is afraid if she misses the

interview at Georgetown that makes her big dream comes true by being

student at Georgetown. She will do anything to reach Georgetown on time.

By saying something untrue and using hyperbole in her utterance, she

disobeys the maxim of Quality.

b. The Intention

In the conversation above, Melanie pays attention on Trey who is

observing worm using magnifyingcommit to glass. user Melanie feels that Trey is a real perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

Einstein because he keeps observing animal while they are getting flat tire

in the middle of the forest. Thereby, Melanie disobeys the maxim of

Quality to express her opinion about Trey. Melanie expresses her opinion

that they could leave Trey in the forest in order to get her college road trip

running well and she gets Georgetown on time.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Maxim Implicature Strategies Intention Flouted Melanie pays Quality Melanie does not Using To give attention on Trey want Trey and hyperbole. opinion who is observing Albert, Trey’s pig, worm using to go along for her magnifying college road trip glass. because she dislikes Trey as he seems to be freak kid.

16 / CRT/CD1 / JP / 00.30.57

1. Data Description

Melanie : Oh, no pets allowed. Looks like Albert has a problem. Trey : But, Dad, Albert’s a member of this family.

James : Not by blood. Now, this is the only hotel for 30 miles.

We don’t have a car, and I’m tired. (Trey is going to cry)

2. Context of Situation

The conversation above takes place in front of the Deer Creek

Hotel. The participants of the dialogue are James Porter, Melanie, and

Trey. They are on their way to Grandma’s house at Pittsburgh but their car

breaks down in the middle of the forest. Therefore, they look for hotel to commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

stay a night and to get some help so they can continue their trip. After

walking for a while, finally they find a hotel named Deer Creek Hotel.

Yet, there is a notice that “no pets allowed”. It means that Trey’s pig,

Albert, cannot stay at the hotel. Trey feels worry; he does not want to be

part from Albert. Trey tries to persuade his father, James, in order to help

him so that Albert can stay at the hotel with him.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the conversation above, James gives additional information in

his answer, “Now, this is the only hotel for 30 miles. We don’t have a car,

and I’m tired.” His answer implicates that he refuses to help Trey and he

does not care about Albert which is not allowed to enter the hotel.

Moreover, he gets sprained when fixing the car. Here, by giving more

information required by Trey, James flouts the maxim of Quantity.

b. The Intention

In the conversation above, Trey asks his father , James, indirectly

to do something in order to make Albert allowed entering the hotel.

Through his utterance, James flouts the maxim of Quantity to refuse in

helping Trey takes care of Albert. James does not want to do anything for

Albert, and he does not care whether Albert is allowed or not allowed to

enter the hotel. Moreover, Trey joins the trip secretly and takes Albert with

him. In the story of the film, James really dislikes Albert since Albert

often keeps an eye-balling at him and acts freakily. commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

The result of the analysis can be seen in table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim

A notice that Quantity James does not Giving more To there is no pet want to help Trey information refuse allowed at the in order to make than is

hotel. Albert, Trey’s pig, required. allowed to enter the hotel.

17 / CRT/CD1 / TP / 00.32.06

1. Data Description

Michelle : Put him on the phone! James : It’s for you. (giving his phone) Trey : Could you take a message? 2. Context of Situation datum 17 & 18

The conversation occurs in a room of Deer Creek Hotel. The

conversation happens between James Porter and his son, Trey Porter. The

dialog occurs when James makes a telephone call for his wife, Michelle

Porter. James wants to inform Michelle that Trey is with him. It is

important for Michelle to know where Trey is since he joins the trip

without her permission. Therefore, Michelle asks James to give the phone

to Trey because she wants to talk with Trey.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the conversation above, Trey has respond James’ utterance. Yet, commit to user his response is less informative than is required by James. Trey supposed perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

to accept the phone given by James and directly talks to his mother,

Michelle, by phone. Through his utterance “Could you take a message?”,

which is less informative than is required, Trey flouts the maxim of

Quantity. His utterance hints that he does not want to talk to his mother,

Michelle. He is afraid of being scolded by his mother since he joins the

trip without Michelle’s permission.

b. The Intention

Based on the analysis above, Trey has flouted the maxim of

Quantity by giving less information needed by James. Trey flouts the

maxim of Quantity with the intention to refuse a talk with his mother by

phone in order to not being scolded by his mother. He gets rid it because

he knows that his mother, Michelle, must be angry to him since he joins

the college road trip to Washington secretly. Moreover, he has lied to

Michelle by saying that he leaves the house in the early morning for his

science club.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim

Trey is afraid of Quantity Trey does not want Giving less To his mother’s angry to talk with his information refuse

since he joins the mother by phone. than is trip without her required. permission.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

18 / CRT/CD1 / MichP / 00.32.13

1. Data Description

Trey : Hello?

Michelle : You are in big trouble, mister. I hope you know how to build a time machine, because

you are not coming out of the house until the year 3000.

2. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

In the dialog above, Michelle uses hyperbole blatantly by saying,

“You are in big trouble, mister. I hope you know how to build a time

machine, because you are not coming out of the house until the year

3000.” Through her utterance, Michelle implies that she is really angry to

Trey because he joins the trip without her permission. Moreover, Trey has

lied to her by saying that he goes to science club in the early morning.

Thereby, the maxim of Quality is not fulfilled by Michelle in the dialog

above since she uses hyperbole.

b. The Intention

In the conversation above, Michelle talks to his son, Trey, by

phone. James tells Michelle that Trey stays with him because he has hide

in the case of tool kit. Thereby, Michelle really gets angry and also afraid

of Trey since he joins the trip secretly. As mentioned before, Michelle

flouts the maxim of Quality since she uses hyperbole in her utterance. She

flouts the maxim of Quality to threat Trey personally. Michelle tries to

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

threat him by forbidding him to come out of the house because Trey joins

the trip secretly and hides in the case of tool kit using supply oxygen.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Maxim Implicature Strategies Intention

Flouted Michelle gets angry Quality Michelle is Using To threat of Trey since he really angry to hyperbole personally joins the college Trey as he comes road trip secretly.. out the house secretly.

19 / CRT/CD2 / JP / 00.10.50

1. Data Description

Melanie : Dad, do you think that Grandma still knows we’re coming? James : Well, I didn’t call her. But it’s not like she is going anywhere. Just remember, she’s an old woman now. She’s not as light on her feet.

2. Context of Situation

The conversation takes place in the bus. James, Melanie, and Trey

are heading to Grandma’s house. The dialog occurs when the bus is

entering the blocks of Grandma’s house. It means that they will get there

in minutes. Melanie asks her father, James, if Grandma knows their

coming since she knows that James does not call her.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

On the conversation above, James gives extra information towards commit to user Melanie’s question. Melanie seems confused so she asks whether perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

Grandma knows their coming or not. Melanie is getting confused can be

seen in her facial expression when asking to James. James answers

Melanie’s question by giving more information than is needed. Through

his answer, James implicates that Grandma must be at home because she is

an old woman. Thus, James flouts the maxim of Quantity in the

conversation above by giving more information than is required.

b. The Intention

In the conversation above, James, Melanie, and Trey will get

Grandma’s house in minutes. Melanie wants to know whether Grandma is

at home or not because James does not call her. As seen in the analysis

above, James has flouted the maxim of Quantity. He flouts the maxim of

Quantity on his utterance with the intention to assure that Grandma must

be at home because she is an old woman. Through his answer, James

hopes that Melanie will not get confused anymore by asking whether

Grandma is at home or not.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim

Melanie seems Quantity Grandma must Giving To assure confused whether be at home more

Grandma at home because she is information or not because an old woman. than is James, Trey and required.

herself will get Grandma’s house in

minutes but James does not call Grandma.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

20 / CRT/CD2 / Gran / 00.13.36

1. Data Description

Grandma : Good night, James.

James : You sure don’t want to wait for me to finish this? Grandma : I think I’ll survive the night.

2. Context of Situation

The conversation is between Grandma Porter and James. It takes

place in the living room of Grandma’s house at night. James is fixing the

security system at Grandma’s house. Grandma comes to say goodnight to

him because she is going to bed first.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

Although Grandma has answered James’ question, her answer does

not contain information which is required by James. Through her answer,

she hints that she will go to bed first. Her answer implicates that she will

be fine without the security system so she does not want to wait James

fixing it. Thus, the conversation above has disobeyed the maxim of

Quantity shown by Grandma’s answer which does not contain any

information required by James.

In the conversation above, Grandma’s answer shows irrelevant

response toward James’ question. Thereby, she is said to flout the maxim

of Relation. By her answer, Grandma implicates that she will go to bed

first and she will be fine without the security system.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

b. The Intention

The conversation above occurs when James is fixing the security

system in Grandma’s house at night. On her utterance, Grandma flouts the

maxim of Quantity and Relation to refuse James’ asking to wait for him

fixing the security system at her house. It is because actually Grandma

does not like the security system put by James at her house. On the other

hand, James’ big love to his mother makes him become an overprotective

man. His background as a police influences his daily life to keep

everybody safe especially his family. Thus, he puts many security systems

at Grandma’s house.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim Grandma dislikes a. Quantity Grandma does not Giving less To James fixing the b. Relation want to wait for information refuse security system at James fixing the than is her house. security system. required and

giving irrelevant response

21 / CRT/CD2 /Gran / 00.21.44

1. Data Description

James : Mama, what’s going on? And where’s Melanie and Trey?

Grandma : Trey’s taking Albert for a walk, and Melanie’s trying to catch her plane.

James : And you let her go without me? Grandma : Sit down, James.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

2. Context of Situation

The conversation takes place in Pittsburgh University at morning.

It happens between Grandma Porter and James. James runs out of the

security of Pittsburgh because Grandma assures him. He looks for his

daughter, Melanie, since she does not want to confess that James is her

father due to many problems appearing caused by James. Grandma waits

for James in the outside the custody.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

On the conversation above, Grandma’s response is less informative

than is needed by James. Through her utterance, “Sit down, James.”, she

implicates that she lets Melanie go to Washington alone. She gives her

permission to Melanie to catch the flight to Washington because she

already knew that James made trouble during the college road trip with

Melanie. As a result, Grandma flouts the maxim of Quantity because her

response does not contain any information needed.

By her irrelevant utterance towards James’ question, Grandma

flouts the maxim of Relation. Her utterance hints that she will answer

James’ question clearly if he sit down first because he asks her while

standing up.

b. The Intention

As mentioned above, Grandma has flouted the maxim of Quantity

and Relation. She flouts the maxim of Quantity and Relation in her commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

utterance to ask James to sit down first and she will answer James’

question in detail then. It is done by Grandma because James has just out

of the custody so he needs to cooling down his mind first.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim James and Grandma a. Quantity Grandma lets Giving less To ask for have different points b. Relation Melanie go information doing of view about to than is something Melanie who goes to Washington required and Washington alone. alone. giving irrelevant response

22 / CRT/CD2 /Gran / 00.22.08

1. Data Description

Grandma : Melanie told me what happened at Northwestern. James : I can explain that. Grandma : You didn’t want her to go to Georgetown, so you

concocted some ridiculous plan. James : I’m just trying to keep everybody safe.

Grandma : James. You took my home and you turn it into a high-security prison.

2. Context of Situation datum 22 & 23

The conversation takes place in Pittsburgh University at morning.

It happens between Grandma Porter and James. They are talking about

Melanie who goes to Washington alone by plane. James blames Grandma

since she lets Melanie go without him. Meanwhile, Grandma has some

reasons why she gives permission to Melanie. Grandma thinks that James commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

does not want Melanie to go to Washington because he wants her to study

near home.

3. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

On her statement, Grandma Porter uses hyperbole in her utterance,

“You took my home and turned it into a high-security prison”. It is

obviously untrue that James could turn a home into a high-security prison.

Through her utterance, Grandma implicates that she dislikes what James

has done to her house. It is because James has put some security systems

in his mother’s house in order to keep her safe. Thus, Grandma is said to

disobey the maxim of Quality through her utterance.

b. The Intention

In the conversation above, by flouting the maxim of Quality,

Grandma wants to show her dislike to the security system idea. She

dislikes the security system put by James because she feels like living in a

prison in which she cannot do anything freely.

The result of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim

Grandma judges Quality Grandma Using To show that James does not dislikes the hyperbole dislike want Melanie to go security system

to Washington by put by James on doing ridiculous her house.

plan.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

23 / CRT/CD2 /Gran / 00.22.08

1. Data Description

James : How am I supposed to know she’s safe if she goes all the

way to Washington? Grandma : James, how do you think I felt when you left to join

the army? 2. Data Analysis

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

On the conversation above, Grandma irrelevantly responds James’

question. Instead of answering James’ question, Grandma tells James

about her feeling when he left her for joining army. On her utterance, she

implicates that she has the same feeling with James because left by

someone that they love so much. Giving irrelevant response, Grandma is

said to flout the maxim of Relation.

Through her utterance, Grandma also gives less information than is

needed by James. James asks, “How am I supposed to know she’s safe if

she goes all the way to Washington?”, and has been answered by

Grandma by saying, “James, how do you think I felt when you left to join

the army?”. Her answer implicates that she feels the same feeling like

James’ feeling, left by someone. Hence, Grandma fails to observe the

maxim of Quantity in the dialogue above by giving less information than

is required through her utterance.

b. The Intention

In the conversation above, James and Grandma are talking about

Melanie who goes to Washington.commit to Jamesuser worries about Melanie because perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

she goes alone. James blames Grandma for giving her permission to go

alone. On the other hand, Grandma does not want to be blamed of since

she does so for the good of Melanie. She does not want James to make

problem anymore. On her conversation with James, Grandma flouts the

maxim of Relation and Quantity. She flouts the maxim of Relation and

Quantity by asking back to James in order to deny James’ question

because she was ever in the same position like James. She worried about

James when he joined the army because James is her only one son.

Consequently, she wants James to trust Melanie as she did to him last

time.

The results of the analysis can be seen in the table below:

Situation Flouted Implicature Strategies Intention Maxim James worries a. Relation Grandma Giving less To deny about Melanie b. Quantity ever felt the information other’s who goes to same feeling than is required opinion Washington like James’ and giving

alone. feeling. irrelevant response

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

C. Discussion

This subchapter concerns in discussing the result of the data analysis to

find out the whole result of the analysis. The discussion is compiled based on the

problem statement as stated in Chapter I. It covers how the characters flout the

Cooperative Principle (CP), the situation in which the characters flout the

Cooperative Principle (CP), and the intention of the speakers in flouting of the

maxims. The findings of the data analysis will be elaborated as follows:

1. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

Referring to the 23 data that have been analyzed, there are times when the

characters flout the Cooperative Principle (CP). In percentage, the following table

shows the number of data in which the maxims are flouted:

Table 4.1.1 Percentage of Flouting the Maxim(s)

No. Flouted Maxim(s) Number of data Percentage 1. Quality 8 34.78

2. Quantity 10 43.48 3. Relation 2 8.70

4. Quantity and Relation 3 13.04

Total 23 100%

Based on the findings, it is clearly seen that the Maxims of Quantity are

flouted mostly by the speakers in their utterances. The flouting of Quality Maxim

is in the second rank. The overlap of maxim Quantity and Relation is in the third

rank. The flouting of Relation maxim places the fourth rank.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

In flouting the maxims, the characters use different strategies. The table

below shows the stragies used by the characters in the movie College Road Trip in

flouting the maxims:

Table 4.1.2 The Strategies of Flouting the Maxim(s)

No. Flouted Strategies Datum Number Maxim(s) No. of Data 1. Quantity a. Giving more information 2, 3, 5, 6, 8 than is required. 10, 13, 16, 19 b. Giving less information 1, 17 2 than is required. 2. Quality a. Saying something untrue. 8, 9, 12, 3 b. Using hyperbole. 15, 18, 22 3 c. Using metaphor. 4, 14 2 3. Relation Giving irrelevant response. 7, 11 2 4. Quantity and Giving less information 20, 21, 23 3 Relation than is required and giving irrelevant response.

From the table above, there are 10 data in which the maxim of Quantity is

flouted. They can be found in the data number 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 10, 13, 16, 17, and 19.

The maxim of Quantity is not fulfilled by the characters since their utterance

mostly more or less informative and may not contain any information required. In

the movie College Road trip, the characters tend to flout the maxim of Quantity

by giving more information than is required. There are eight ocuurences in which

the characters flout the maxim of Quantity by giving extra information. On datum

6, James asks to Michelle where Trey is, and Michelle has answered it by giving

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

more information required by James. It is because she tries to comfort James who

worries about Trey because he does not see his son since morning.

Meanwhile, there are only two occurences in which the characters flout the

maxim of Quantity by giving less information than is required. For example in the

datum number 2, James asks whether Michelle knows that Melanie applies to

Georgetown or not. Instead of answering the information required by James,

Michelle says that she helps Melanie fill out the application. It can be seen that

Michelle’s utterance is less informative than is required by James.

There are eight dialogues which flout the maxim of Quality. They can be

found in the data number 4, 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, 18, and 22. The strategies used by the

characters in flouting the maxim of Quality are saying something untrue that he or

she lacks adequate evidence, using hyperbole, and using metaphor. Most

characters in the movie College Road Trip fail to observe the maxim of Quality by

saying something untrue and using hyperbole. The example of flouting the maxim

of Quality by saying something untrue can be found in datum number 8; Melanie

says to his father, James, that she has a good time and awesome trip at

Northwestern University. Actually, it is not true that Melanie has a good time and

awesome trip at Northwestern because her trip is unpleasant. Moreover, she

knows that James has tricked her at Northwestern by setting the entire things

there. The example of using hyperbole in flouting the maxim of Quality can be

seen in datum number 22 , Grandma Porter says that her son, James, has turned

her house into a high-security prison. As a matter of fact, it is not true that

Grandma’s house turn into a high-security prison. She says so because James put commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

many security systems at her house in order to keep her safe. Yet, she does not

like it.

There are only two data which flout the maxim of Relation. It can be found

in data number 7 and 11. The characters disobey the maxim of Relation by giving

irrelevant response and changing the topic in hand.

As stated above, the speakers also overlap the maxims of Quantity and the

maxims of Relation even there are only three occurrences. The overlap between

the maxim of Quantity and the maxim of Relation can be found in the data

number 20, 21, and 23. On the datum number 20, by not giving the right amount

of information and giving irrelevant answer, Grandma is said to overlap the

maxim of Quantity and Relation in her utterance. Grandma overlaps those two

maxims to show her refusal towards her son, James, as he asks her to wait him

fixing the security system. In sum, the overlap of maxim Quantity and Relation

occurs when the speakers fail to observe more than one maxim in their utterance

by not giving the right amount of information and giving irrelevant response.

To conclude, I found that there are only three maxims flouted in the family

conversation. They are the flouting of maxim Quantity, the flouting of maxim

Quality and the flouting of maxim Relation. Yet, I also found the overlap between

maxims of Quantity and maxims of Relation.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

2. The Situation in which the Maxims are Flouted

a. The Situation in which the Maxim of Quantity is Flouted

From the 23 data that have been analyzed, there are nine data in which the

maxim of Quantity is flouted. The table below shows the situation in which the

maxim of Quantity is flouted.

Table 4.2.1 The Situation in which the Maxim of Quantity is Flouted

Datum No. Situation Implicature Datum 1 Trey knows that Melanie will Trey will make his dream to study far away because she gets have his own science call from the Georgetown laboratory come true by admission committee to have taking over Melanie’s room. interview. Datum 2 James feels confused with his Michelle wants Melanie to wife’s choice since Michelle study at Georgetown as allows Melanie to go to Georgetown is better than Washington for the interview at Northwestern University. Georgetown University. Datum 3 James dislikes that Melanie will Melanie can take care of study far away. herself since James has taught her to be strong.

Datum 5 James dislikes Michelle’s plan Michelle gives permission to for allowing Melanie to stay a Melanie to stay at the sorority

night at the sorority house of house. Pittsburgh University.

Datum 6 James worries about Trey since James does not need to be

he does not appear in the afraid of Trey. morning.

Datum 10 Melanie and James are trapped James does not want to use

in a jam because of road the siren. construction whereas Melanie wants to get Pittsburgh in time.

Datum 13 James worries about Trey Trey is fine so James does not because he finds Trey in the need to be afraid of him. case using supply oxygen.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

Datum No. Situation Implicature

Datum 16 Melanie, Trey, and James know James does not want to help that no pet allowed at the hotel. Trey in order Albert (Trey’s

pig) is allowed to enter the hotel.

Datum 17 Trey is afraid of his mother’s Trey does not want to talk to

angry since he goes without his mother by phone. permission. Datum 19 Melanie feels confused whether Grandma must be at home Grandma at home or not since because she is an old woman. her father, James, does not call her whereas they will get Grandma’s house in minutes.

From the findings, it can be seen that most characters flouts the maxim of

Quantity when they worry about someone. There are two data from nine data

maxim of Quantity is flouted, in which has the similar situation that is being

worried. They can be found in data number 6 and 13. In datum 6, James worries

about Trey because he does not appear in the morning. Her wife, Michelle, tries to

comfort him that Trey is fine by giving more information that is required by

James. Thus, Michelle is said to disobey the maxim of Quantity when James is in

the situation of worrying about someone. Another example is in the datum

number 13 that James is surprised by Trey when he opens the case to take the tool

kit to fix the flat tire. James worries about Trey because he has hidden in the case

for hours. Thus, Trey wants to convince James that he is fine so his father does

not need to be afraid of him by giving extra information than is required by James.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

b. The Situation in which the Maxim of Quality is Flouted

Referring to the 23 data that have been analyzed, there are eight data in

which the maxim of Quality is flouted. The table below shows the situation in

which the maxim of Quality is flouted.

Table 4.2.1 The Situation in which the Maxim of Quality is Flouted

Datum No. Situation Implicature Datum 4 Melanie is surprised by James’ Melanie does not want to have plan to have college road trip to college road trip with her Georgetown. Yet, she dislikes it father, James, since they do because they do not have a good not have a good relationship. relationship. Datum 8 Melanie knows that her father Melanie dislikes her campus has tricked her. tour as it is unpleasant. Datum 9 James is afraid of Michelle’s James and Melanie do not angry. have a good time on their college road trip. Datum 12 James and Melanie get flat tire Melanie dislikes getting flat in the center of the forest. tire in the middle of the forest. Datum 14 Melanie pays attention on Trey Melanie does not want Trey who is observing worm using and Albert (Trey’s pig) to go magnifying glass. along for her college road trip

because she dislikes Trey as he seems to be a freak kid. Datum 15 Melanie pays attention on Trey Melanie does not want Trey

who is observing worm using and Albert (Trey’s pig) to go magnifying glass. along for her college road trip

because she dislikes Trey as he seems to be a freak kid. Datum 18 Michelle gets angry of Trey Michelle is really angry to

since he joins the college road Trey as he comes out the house trip secretly. secretly.

Datum 22 Grandma judges that James does Grandma dislikes the security

not want Melanie to go to system put by James on her Washington by doing ridiculous house. plan.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

The table above points out that the flouted maxim of Quality is chosen by

the characters when they get angry, be afraid of, and dislike something. There are

3 data which have the same situation of dislike something. They can be found in

data number 12, 14, and 15. For example, datum 14 in which Melanie flouts the

maxim of Quality when she sees something that she dislikes. Disliking Trey,

Melanie uses metaphor in her utterance to compare Trey with Einstein and Albert

(Trey’s pig) with Porky. In the context of the story, Melanie pays attention on

Trey who is observing worm using a magnifying glass. Melanie dislikes Trey’s

act since he is like a freak kid with great obsession in science. Melanie does not

want Trey to join her trip since she is afraid that Trey will be a trouble maker.

c. The Situation in which the Maxim of Relation is Flouted

As can be seen, there are three data of the flout of maxims Relation. The

following table shows the situation when the flout of maxim Relation happens.

Table 4.2.3 The Situation in which the Maxim of Relation is Flouted

Datum Situation Implicature No.

Datum 7 James worries about Trey since he James does not like Trey does not appear in the morning. joining the science club.

Datum 11 Melanie gives her opinion that the James does not want to go to P-GPS may be broken since the another way as Melanie said.

voice gets blur.

Based on the data analysis, the characters only flout the maxim of Relation

in three dialogues. The characters flout the maxim of Relation when they worry

about someone, get afraid of being scolded, and refuse other’s opinion. In this

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

case, the characters tend to give their responses irrelevantly in order to show their

dislike and denial, and to get rid of other people’s anger.

d. The Situation in which the Maxim of Quantity and Relation Overlap

The following table shows the situation of three data in which the maxim

of Quantity and Relation overlap.

Table 4.2.4 The Situation in which The Maxim of Quantity

and Relation Overlap

Datum Situation Implicature No. Datum 20 Grandma dislikes James fixing the Grandma does not want to security system at her house. wait James fixing the security system. Datum 21 James and Grandma have different Grandma lets Melanie go to point of view about Melanie who Washington alone. goes to Washington alone. Datum 23 James worries about Melanie who Grandma ever felt the same goes to Washington alone. feeling like James’ feeling.

The table above shows that the overlap between maxim of Quantity and

maxim of Relation happens when the characters dislike something, have different

point of view, and worry about someone. In that kind of situation, the characters

convey their meaning by not giving right amount of information and giving

irrelevant response.

These results support Levinson’ theory (1983, p. 24) who states that

context is needed in pragmatics because pragmatics is the study of the role context

plays in speaker (or utterance) meaning. From the discussion, it can be concluded

that characters flout the maxim of Quantity when they are in the situation of commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

worrying about someone. Then, the flouting of the maxims Quality happens when

the speaker get angry, be afraid of, and dislike something. The speakers flout the

maxim of Relation when they worry about someone, get afraid of being scolded,

and refuse other’s opinion. The last, the speakers overlap between maxim of

Quantity and Relation when they dislike something, have different points of view,

and worry about someone. Therefore, the situation influences the speaker in

flouting of the maxims and the hearers in interpreting the meaning of the

speakers’ utterance.

3. The Intention of the speaker in flouting of the maxims

Based on the analysis, the speakers flout the maxims with any intention.

The intention of flouting the maxims relates to the context of situation that I have

presented above. The following part shows the intention of the speaker in flouting

each maxim.

Table 4.3.1 The intention of the speaker in flouting the maxim(s)

No. Flouted Maxim (s) Data No. Intention

1. Quantity 1 To show happiness 2 To show support 3, 5, 13 To convince 6 To comfort

10, 16 To refuse 19 To assure 2. Quality 4 To refuse

8, 14, 22 To show dislike 9 To ask for doing something 12 To satire 15 To give opinion

18 To threat personally 3. Relation 7 To show dislike

11, 17 To refuse 4. Quantity and Relation 20 To refuse 21 To ask for doing something 23 commit to userTo deny other’s opinion perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

The table above points out that in flouting the maxim the speaker may

express the same intention by flouting different maxims and overlapping between

maxims. To make it easy, the following table shows the same intention that is

found in different flouting of maxims.

Table 4.3.2 The same intention in different flouting of maxims.

No. The Intentions The Flouted Maxim(s) Data Number No. of Data 1. To refuse Quality 4 6 Quantity 10 Relation 11 Quantity 16 Quantity 17 Quantity and Relation 20

2. To show feeling Quantity 1 6 Quantity 2 Relation 7 Quality 8 Quality 14 Quality 22 3. To convince Quantity 3 3 Quantity 5 Quantity 15

4. To ask for doing Quality 9 2 Quantity and Relation 21 something

5. To comfort Quantity 6 1

6. To satire Quality 12 1

7. To give opinion Quality 15 1

8. To threat personally Quality 18 1

9. To assure Quantity 19 1

10. To deny other’s opinion Quantity and Relation 23 1

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

Based on the table above, it is clear that most characters flout the maxim

with the intention to refuse and to show their feeling. The intention of convincing

is in the second rank and the intention of asking to do something is in the third

rank. Another intention is used once by the speaker in flouting of maxims. They

are to comfort, to satire, to give opinion, to threaten personally, to assure, and to

deny other’s opinion.

To make it clear, I present the following table of intention used by the

speaker in flouting of maxims related to the relation among the characters. Then,

the elaboration of the outstanding intention used by the speaker will be discussed

in the next part.

Table 4.3.3 The intention used by the speaker in flouting of maxims related

to the relation among the characters

No. The Flouted Participants Relation Intentions Maxim(s) Speaker Hearer 1. To refuse Quality Melanie Michelle Melanie has a rocky relationship with the third

person, James.

Quantity James Melanie James and Melanie has a rocky relationship.

Relation James Melanie James and Melanie has a rocky relationship. Quantity James Trey James and Trey does not

have a good relationship. Relation Trey James Trey does not have a

good relationship with the third person, Michelle.

Quantity Grandma James Grandma and James does and not have a good Relation relationship.

2. To show Quantity Michelle James Michelle and James does feeling commit to user not have a good perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

No. The Flouted Participants Relation Intentions Maxim(s) Speaker Hearer relationship.

Relation James Michelle James does not have a

good relationship with the third person, Trey. Quantity Trey Melanie Trey and Melanie does

not have a good relationship.

Quality Melanie James Melanie and James has a rocky relationship. Quality Melanie James Melanie does not have a good relationship with the third person, Trey. Quality Grandma James Grandma and James does not have a good relationship. 3. To Quantity Michelle James James has a rocky convince relationship with the third person, Melanie. Quantity Michelle James Michelle and James does not have a good relationship. Quantity Trey James Trey and James does not have a good relationship. 4. To ask for Quality James Melanie James does not have a

doing good relationship with something the third person, Michelle.

Quantity Grandma James Grandma and James does

and not have a good Relation relationship.

5. To Quantity Michelle James Michelle and James have comfort a good relationship.

6. To satire Quality Melanie James Melanie and James has a rocky relationship.

7. To give Quality Melanie James Melanie does not have a opinion good relationship with the third person, Trey.

8. To threat Quality Michelle Trey Michelle and Trey does personally not have a good

relationship. commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

No. The Flouted Participants Relation Intentions Maxim(s) Speaker Hearer 9. To assure Quantity James Melanie James and Melanie have

a good relationship. 10. To deny Quantity Grandma James James has a rocky other’s and relationship with the third

opinion Relation person, Melanie.

a. To refuse

Table 4.3.3 shows that the intention of refusal is used by the speakers in

flouting different maxims. In this case, the maxims flouted are Quality, Quantity,

Relation, and the overlap between maxim of Quantity and Relation. The speakers

flout the maxim with the intention to refuse due to the relation among the

characters. The speakers who do not have a good relationship tend to flout the

maxims with the intention to refuse. In addition, the relationship between the

speaker and the third person (object of the conversation) also influences the

speaker in flouting the maxims with the intention to refuse.

In the context of the movie, James Porter is a chief police who loves his

family much. His background as the chief police influences his daily life that is to

keep everybody safe. As a result, he becomes an overprotective father. Actually

Porter family is harmonious family but James’ act towards his family often causes

trouble. Most family members have not a good relationship with James due to his

overprotective act. His wife, Michelle, dislikes him because he does not allow

their daughter, Melanie, studying at Georgetown. Melanie has a rocky relationship

with James because he does not agree with Melanie’s plan to study at

Georgetown. Meanwhile, Trey does not have a good relationship with James commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

because James dislikes Albert (Trey’s pig) and Trey’s obsession in science. For

example in the datum 4, Melanie is surprised by James’ plan to have college road

trip to Georgetown. Melanie then complains to her mother, Michelle, that she

does not want to have college road trip with James since they have a rocky

relationship. As a consequent, Melanie flouts the maxim of Quality with the

intention to refuse James’ plan.

To conclude, the intention of refusal used by the speaker in flouting the

maxim is influenced by the relationship among the characters. The speaker who

does not have a good relationship with the hearer and the third person will have an

intention to refuse when they flout the maxims.

b. To show feeling

Based on the table, the speakers intend to show their feeling in flouting the

maxims. The maxims which are flouted in this intention are Quantity, Relation,

and Quality. In this case, there three kinds of feeling which are shown by the

speaker in flouting the maxims. They are dislike, happiness, and support. Mostly

the characters disobey the maxims with the intention to show their dislike,

happiness, and support because they do not have a good relationship with the

hearer or the third person of the conversation.

Referring to the six data which has the intention to show feeling in

flouting the maxims, there are four data in which the speakers flout the maxims to

show their dislike. They are data 7, 8, 14, and 22. In the datum 14, Melanie flouts

the maxim of Quality by using metaphor. She compares her younger brother

(Trey) with Einstein and Albert (Trey’s pig) with porky. By flouting the maxim of commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

Quality, Melanie wants to show her dislike towards Trey since he joins her trip to

Georgetown. As a matter of fact, Melanie does not have a good relationship with

Trey because she thinks that Trey is a freak kid with great obsession in science.

This finding has the same result with the previous research which was

done by Kusnani (2010) who argues that speakers tend to show their feeling by

flouting different maxims based on the social stratum and the closeness of the

relation between the speakers and the hearers.

To sum up, the speaker flouting the maxims with the intention of showing

feeling is influenced by having not good relationship with the hearer and the third

person.

c. To convince

As seen, there are three occurrences of the speaker in flouting the maxim

with the intention of convincing. The maxim of Quantity is the only one maxim

flouted by the speaker with the intention to convince. In this case, the speakers

who do not have a good relationship flout the maxim of Quantity with the

intention to convince.

In the context of the movie, James is not ready left by Melanie to study at

Georgetown which is 700 miles away from home. James wants Melanie to study

at the college near home so he can take care and control her. Therefore, in the data

3, 5, and 13 all the speakers flout the maxim of Quantity by giving extra

information. In the data number 3 and 5 Michelle convinces James that Melanie

will be fine when she is far from their house by giving extra information. Michelle

tends to give extra information because James worries about Melanie. Another commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id

example is in the datum 13, James worries about Trey since he knows that Trey

has been hiding in the case of tool kit for hours. Knowing that James worries

about him, Trey wants to convince James that he is fine by giving more

information. By doing so, Trey hopes that his father will not afraid of him

anymore. In short, the speaker tends to flout the maxim with the intention of

convincing by giving extra information needed by the hearer.

From the discussion, it can be deduced that the speaker flouts the maxims

in family conversation with the intention of refusal, showing feeling, and

convincing. The relation among the characters influences the intention of the

speaker in flouting the maxims.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id 34

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id 90

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id 93

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

A. Conclusion

In the final chapter of this research, I present the conclusion based on

the results of the data analysis and discussion in chapter IV. It deals with the

flouting of maxim in the film entitled College Road Trip. Particularly, it covers

the strategies of flouting the maxims; the situations when maxims are flouted

and the intention of flouting the maxims.

Based on the problem statements and the data, the conclusion can be

drawn as follows:

1. The Strategies of Flouting the Maxims

The characters in the film College Road Trip fail to fulfill the

Cooperative Principle since they flout the maxims in the dialogues by

using some strategies. There are three maxims flouted by the characters,

they are the Quantity maxim, the Quality maxim, and the Relation

maxim.

a. The Strategies of Flouting the Quantity Maxim

The speakers flout the maxim of Quantity by giving more or less

information than is required through their utterance. It is proved by the

eight occurences in which the speaker gives more information in

flouting the maxim of Quantity. Despite of giving more information,

the speaker also gives less information than is required eventhough commit to user there are only two occurences. perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id 94

b. The Strategies of Flouting the Quality Maxim

Most characters flout the maxim of Quality by saying something

untrue and using hyperbole. Yet, the characters also use metaphor in

flouting the Quality maxim.

c. The Strategies of Flouting the Relation Maxim

The speakers flout the maxim of Relation by giving irrelevant

response and changing the topic in hand. It is because the speakers do

not have a good relationship with the hearers.

2. The Situations when maxims are flouted

The characters in the film College Road Trip flout the maxims in

different and certain situation.

a. The Situation in which the maxim of Quantity is flouted

The characters disobey the maxim of Quantity when they worry

about someone. Knowing that the speaker worries about someone, the

hearer then responds the speaker by giving more information.

b. The Situation in which the maxim of Quality is flouted

The flouting of Quality maxims occurs when the characters get

angry, be afraid of, and dislike something.

c. The Situation in which the maxim of Relation is flouted

The characters flout the maxim of Relation when they worry

about someone, get afraid of being scolded, and get other’s advice.

Thereby, the speakers respond the hearers irrelevantly and change the

topic in hand. commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id 95

d. The situation in which the maxim of Quantity and Relation overlap

The characters overlap between the maxim of Quantity and

Relation when they dislike something, have different points of view,

and worry about someone.

3. The Intention of Flouting the Maxims

There are several intentions that are used by the speaker in

flouting the maxims. The complete results are presented in the table

5.1:

Table 5.1 The intention of flouting the maxims

No. Flouted Maxim (s) Intention 1. Quantity To show happiness To show support To convince To comfort To refuse To assure

2. Quality To refuse To show dislike

To ask for doing something To satire To give opinion

To threaten personally 3. Relation To show dislike

To refuse 4. Quantity and Relation To refuse To ask for doing something

To deny other’s opinion

Table 5.1 shows that most characters flout the maxims with the

intention to refuse, to show their feeling and to convince. These intentions can

be achieved by the speaker in flouting different maxims.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id 96

In flouting the Quantity maxim, the Quality maxim, the Relation

maxim, and the overlapping between Quantity and Relation maxim, the

speakers intend to refuse other’s want because they do not have a good

relationship.

By flouting the maxim of Quantity, Relation, and Quality, the speaker

tends to show his or her feeling. There are three kinds of feeling shown by the

speaker in flouting the maxims. They are the feeling of dislike, happiness, and

support.

Then, the speaker flout the maxim of Quantity to convince someone.

The speaker tries to convince the hearer by providing more information

required. By convincing the hearer about something, the speaker tries to make

the hearer do not feel worry anymore.

However, by flouting various maxims, the speaker also have some other

intentions. They are asking for doing something, comforting, satiring, giving

opinion, threating personally, assuring, and denying other’s opinion.

On the other hand, the relation among the characters gives contribution

in constructing the intentions of the speaker in flouting the maxims. It is

because the relation among the characters influences the speaker in conveying

their meaning.

This findings supports the previous research which was conducted by

Kusnani (2010) who states that there are four same intentions in flouting and

overlapping maxims. They are showing the speaker’s feeling, assuring

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id 97

someone about something, giving extra information, and expressing the

speaker’s opinion.

B. Suggestion

The last subchapter of this research provides suggestions for the students

of English Department and other researchers.

1. The students of English

Cooperative Principle is always interesting to observe since there are

some occasions when people do not cooperate and fail to address other’s goal

when they are doing conversation. Hence, it is suggested that the students

concern about the Cooperative Principle in order that the conversation runs

well. In addition, the students also have to concern on the context of situation

that plays important role in constructing the utterance meaning. When the

students are worrying, it is suggested that they obey the Quantity maxim by

giving information as informative as required so that there will be no

misleading between the speaker and the hearer. Then, if the students are getting

angry, being afraid of, and disliking something, it is better for them to fulfill

Quality maxim by being honest. Last, it is suggested to the students to apply

the Relation maxim when they worry about someone, get afraid of being

scolded, and get someone’s advice. Besides, it is important for the students to

pay attention on the relation among the participants and hearer’s face when

applying the flouting of maxims.

commit to user perpustakaan.uns.ac.id digilib.uns.ac.id 98

2. Other researchers

This research that studies the maxim flouted in family dialogues

stimulates other researchers to conduct the further research in the same topic.

In other words, I suggest other researchers to conduct further research about

the non-observance of Cooperative Principle maxims concerned in the

superior-inferior status since there are different strategies used by the

characters in the non-observance maxim which is influenced by the power and

social status. The non-observance of maxims can be in the form of violating of

maxim, infringing of maxim, opting out of maxim, and suspending of maxim.

By doing the further research, there will be additional understanding about the

non-observance of maxims.

Finally, it is also recommended to conduct further research by exploring

another source of data such as talk show, film series, speech, and specific

conversation. As a result, there will be additional input in revealing the

existence of non-observance maxims in today’s communiscation.

commit to user