PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

AN ANALYSIS OF NON-OBSERVANCE MAXIMS IN HUMOROUS CONVERSATION IN HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER SEASON 2

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree in English Language Education

By Caesilia Carolina 101214142

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2015 PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

AN ANALYSIS OF NON-OBSERVANCE MAXIMS IN HUMOROUS CONVERSATION IN HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER SEASON 2

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree in English Language Education

By Caesilia Carolina 101214142

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2015 PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

AN ANALYSIS OF NON-OBSERVANCE MAXIMS IN HUMOROUS CONVERSATION IN HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER SEASON 2

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree in English Language Education

By Caesilia Carolina 101214142

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2015 i

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY

I honestly declare that this thesis, which I have written, does not contain the work or the parts of the work of other people, except those cited in the quotations and the references, as a scientific paper should.

Yogyakarta, September 10, 2015

The writer

Caesilia Carolina

101214142

iv

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN

PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS

Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:

Nama : Caesilia Carolina Nomor Mahasiswa : 101214142

Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:

AN ANALYSIS OF NON-OBSERVANCE MAXIMS IN HUMOROUS CONVERSATION IN HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER SEASON 2 beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam bentuk lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di Internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan royalty kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.

Demikian pernyataan ini yang saya buat dengan sebenarnya.

Dibuat di Yogyakarta Pada tanggal: 10 September 2015

Yang menyatakan,

Caesilia Carolina

v

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

ABSTRACT

Carolina, Caesilia, 2015. An Analysis of Non-Observance Maxims in Humorous Conversation in How I Met Your Mother Season 2. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University.

Linguistically, humor in TV-shows often arises from the verbal interaction that often emerges in daily life conversation. The humorous fragments are often found in the characters’ utterances when the conversation technically does not work as is supposed to be. The similar cases can be found in sitcom How I Met Your Mother season 2. In this case, humor was attributable to violation of normal conversation, also the comic characters. As is known, Grice’s Cooperative Principle governs the daily conversation based on principle of cooperation. Accordingly, this research aims to gain the sight of the language humor process in perspective of Grice’s CP and describe the involvement of the non-observances of CP in creating humorous effects. The research focus was framed within two questions: 1) What are kinds of the non-observance maxims employed in humorous conversations in the sitcom How I Met Your Mother season 2? And 2) How do the violations maxim take place in creating humorous effects in sitcom How I Met Your Mother season 2? To discover the findings, qualitative research was conducted with the pragmatic understanding by employing discourse analysis as a method. The research data are taken from the situation comedy How I Met Your Mother season 2. To gain the findings of the first focus, the humorous utterances in How I Met Your Mother season 2 were identified and classified according to the four categories of non-observance maxims, namely flouting, violating, infringing and suspending; without an exclusion of basic conversational structure theory. The second focus findings were gained with the guidance of the GTVH associated with the incongruity theory. The analysis resulted two main findings. First, there were four kinds of non-observances maxim of CP employed in humorous conversation: flouting, violating, infringing and suspending. Furthermore, exploiting multiple maxims were discovered as well. Second, humor was attributable to violation of four maxims. Violation maxims done by employing the non-observance maxims became script opposition as knowledge resource for humor production -- when the violation conflicted to the audiences’ normal conceptual patterns. However, violation maxims were insufficient in the context of audiovisual humor. It needed to be combined with other resources knowledge to be perceived that the situation is supposed to be funny in the context given.

Keywords: non-observance, humorous effects, How I Met Your Mother season 2

vi

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

ABSTRAK

Carolina, Caesilia, 2015. An Analysis of Non-Observance Maxims in Humorous Conversation in How I Met Your Mother Season 2. Yogyakarta: Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Secara linguistik, humor di sitkom sering muncul dari interaksi lisan dalam percakapan sehari-hari. Humor sering ditemukan pada ungkapan- ungkapan yang diucapkan oleh tokoh ketika secara teknis percakapan tersebut tidak berjalan semestinya. Kasus serupa dapat ditemukan di sitkom How I Met Your Mother season 2. Dalam kasus ini, humor berasal dari pemain sitkom dan percakapan yang dilanggar. Seperti yang diketahui, prinsip kerjasama oleh Grice mengatur mekanisme percakapan sehari-hari berdasarkan asas kerjasama. Sesuai hal tersebut, penelitian ini ditujukan untuk menganalis proses bahasa humor dari perspektif prinsip kerjasama oleh Grice dan mendiskripsikan keterlibatan cara-cara penyimpangan maksim dalam menciptakan efek humor. Penelitian ini fokus pada dua perumusan masalah: 1) Macam cara-cara penyimpangan apakah yang diterapkan dalam percakapan humor di sitkom How I Met Your Mother season 2? Dan 2) Bagaimanakah penyimpangan- penyimpangan maxim tersebut berperan dalam menciptakan efek humor di sitkom How I Met Your Mother season 2? Untuk menemukan hasil, penelitian kualitatif dilakukan melalui pendekatan pragmatik dengan menerapkan analisis percakapan sebagai metode. Data penelitian diambil dari sitkom How I Met Your Mother season 2. Rumusan masalah pertama dijawab dengan mengidentifikasi dan mengklasifikasi ungkapan-ungkapan lucu di sitkom How I Met Your Mother season 2 dengan arahan teori struktur dasar percakapan dan 4 macam cara penyimpangan: ‘flouting’, ‘violating’, ‘infringing’ dan ‘suspending’. Rumusan masalah kedua dijawab dengan mendiskripsikan hasil penyimpangan maksim dengan berpedoman pada teori humor verbal secara umum yang dikaitkan dengan teori humor. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan 2 penemuan utama. Pertama, 4 macam cara penyimpangan diterapkan dalam percakapan humor: ‘flouting’, ‘violating’, ‘infringing’ dan ‘suspending’. Selain itu, penyimpangan maksim bersamaan juga ditemukan. Kedua, humor muncul dari penyimpangam maksim. Penyimpangan maksim dari penerapan cara penyimpangan menjadi teks oposisi, yakni sebagai element sumber untuk pembuatan humor -- humor muncul ketika terjadi ketidakserasian antara penyimpangan dengan konsep sehari-hari penonton. Namun, penyimpangan-penyimpangan maksim tersebut tidak cukup dalam konteks humor secara audiovisual. Suatu kombinasi tertentu perlu ditambahkan agar humor dalam situasi yang diberikan dapat tangkap oleh penonton.

Kata kunci: non-observance, humorous effects, How I Met Your Mother season 2

vii

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

“Every time you find some humor in a difficult situation, you win.”

DEDICATED TO: The man upstairs, myself, big families, PBI C 2010, readers.

ix

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Praise to Jesus, begotten Son of God. I truly thank God for every second of breath I breathe. Uneven for not leading me into temptation but lessons learnt. For me, everything may fail but Him. Even most rhymed, most beautiful, most meaningful sentence in any language would fail to describe my gratitude.

The great gratitude goes to Carla Sih Pribandari, S.Pd., M.Hum. Her favor, her patience support me during the process of accomplishing this thesis.

Moreover, her advice, comments, suggestions, and corrections were very valuable for me. I also thank all lecturers, especially Henny Herawati, S.Pd., M.Hum. as my academic advisor and Drs. Barli Bram, M.Ed., Ph.D. for spreading smile in

PBI district. I thank to my big families who always make me feel blessed. For every support and companion, I favorably thank PBI C 2010 for being the living hilarity and relentless supporters.

For the irresistible moments, I thank Ginger and Alto. For the amusing and incongruous behavior, I thank Sendi. For the pleasurable timeline, I thank

Pandhu for the weeks of cinema and being annoying. I thank Disa, Mega, Ijah,

Kapuk, and Doci for being inside the time glasses with. I also thank Nut-nut,

Amel and Tiwi for the hilarious chats and engaging disturbing pictures. Last but not least, I thank all friends around who met me for reasons.

Caesilia Carolina

x

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page TITLE PAGE ...... i APPROVAL PAGE ...... ii STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ...... iv PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ...... v ABSTRACT ...... vi ABSTRAK ...... vii DEDICATION PAGE ...... viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...... ix TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... x LIST OF FIGURES ...... xiv LIST OF TABLES ...... xv LIST OF APPENDICES ...... xvi CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 A. Research Background ...... 1 B. Research Problems ...... 4 C. Problem Limitation ...... 4 D. Research Objectives ...... x E. Research Benefits ...... 6 F. Definition of Terms ...... 7 CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ...... 10 A. Theoretical description ...... 10 1. Humor Theory ...... 10 a. General Theory of Verbal Humor (GTVH) ...... 14 b. Pragmatic of Humor ...... 16 2. Conversation Theory ...... 16 a. Basic Structure of Conversation ...... 17 b. Grice’s Cooperative Principle ...... 21 1) Types of Maxims ...... 22 2) Non-observance Maxims ...... 25 B. Theoretical Framework ...... 28 CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...... 32 A. Research Method ...... 32 B. Research Setting ...... 34 C. Objective of Study ...... 34 D. Instrument and Data Gathering Technique ...... 35 E. Data Analysis Technique ...... 36 F. Research Procedures ...... 37

CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ...... 40 A. Non-Observance Maxims of CP in Humorous Conversations Taken from Sitcom How I Met Your Mother Season 2 ...... 40 x

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

1. The Analysis on a Situation which Flouts Maxims ...... 42 a. Flouting maxim of quality ...... 42 b. Flouting maxim of quantity ...... 46 c. Flouting maxim of relevance ...... 49 d. Flouting maxim of manner ...... 51 e. Flouting multiple maxims ...... 54 2. The Analysis on a Situation which Violates Maxims ...... xi5 a. Violating maxim of quality ...... 55 b. Violating maxim of quantity ...... 59 c. Violating maxim of relevance ...... 62 d. Violating maxim of manner ...... 63 e. Violating multiple maxims ...... 68 3. The Analysis on a Situation which Infringe Maxims ...... 69 4. The Analysis on a Situation which Suspend Maxims ...... 71 B. Contribution of Non-observance Maxims in Creating Humorous Effects in Sitcom How I Met Your Mother Season 2...... 72 1. Maxim of quality ...... 72 a. Flouting ...... 72 b. Violating ...... 74 c. Infringing ...... 75 2. Maxim of quantity ...... 76 a. Flouting ...... 76 b. Violating ...... 78 3. Maxim of relevance ...... 79 a. Flouting ...... 79 b. Violating ...... 80 c. Infringing ...... 81 4. Maxim of manner ...... 82 a. Flouting ...... 82 b. Violating ...... 83 c. Infringing ...... 84 5. Multiple maxims ...... 86 a. Flouting ...... 86 b. Violating ...... 87 c. Infringing ...... 88 d. Suspending ...... 90 CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 92 A. Conclusions ...... 92 B. Implications ...... 95 C. Recommendations ...... 95 REFERENCES ...... 96 APPENDICES ...... 102

xi

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

2.1 Correlation of Content and Format in Adjacency Pair Sequences ...... 19

2.2 Variety of response tokens ...... 21

4.1 Distribution of violations based on the non-observance maxims’ types ..... 41

xii

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page

A 4.1 Table of Flouting Maxim of Quality ...... 102

B 4.2 Table of Flouting Maxim of Quantity ...... 105

C 4.3 Table of Flouting Maxim of Relevance ...... 108

D 4.4 Table of Flouting Maxim of Manner ...... 110

E 4.5 Table of Flouting Multiple Maxims ...... 112

F 4.6 Table of Violating Maxim of Quality ...... 113

G 4.7 Table of Violating Maxim of Quantity ...... 118

H 4.8 Table of Violating Maxim of Relevance ...... 120

I 4.9 Table of Violating Maxim of Manner ...... 122

J 4.10 Table of Violating Multiple Maxims ...... 126

K 4.11 Table of Infringing Maxim ...... 127

L 4.12 Table of Suspending Maxims ...... 129

xiii

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the introduction of the research is deliberated into six parts, namely the research background, the research problems, the problem limitations, the research objectives, the research benefits, and the definition of terms. The research background discusses the underlying reasons why the topic is chosen by the researcher. As well as an introduction of an analysis of the non-observance of cooperative principle in humorous conversation from the situation comedy How I

Met Your Mother season 2.

A. Research Background

Humor is a universal phenomenon which represents an important part of human experiences (Raskin, 1985, p. 47). Humor, especially verbal humor often happens in everyday interactions. Sometimes, people interact and express their opinion and ideas either in written or spoken form with concise, humorous, dramatic, exaggerating and sarcastic way to successfully get certain aimed effects, as the consequences some people find it funny, and even get enlightenment. People laugh at something pleasurable. However,

“different people will not necessarily find the same things funny – many things which will strike one group as funny may bore another group; some jokes are private or individual [but] the ability to appreciate humor is universal and shared by all people” (Raskin, 1985, p. 2).

In addition, humor has its features of practicability which reflect intrinsic rules (e.g. techniques, mechanism, types, function) and characters of English language from various aspects and different points (Pan, 2012). It is no wonder that

1 PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

2 it has been the subject of various disciplines such as psychology, philosophy, aesthetic and linguistics. For that reason, this research have an attempt to appreciate humor.

There are many forms and sources of humor which can meet people’s sense of humor, current popular audiovisual humor such as stand-up comedy, comedy films, and TV comedy series. One of the most popular humorous genres in television, situation comedy is often shortened to sitcom. It is a form of humor which attracts many people and also researcher. Sitcom has continuous storyline and interesting composition technique, beside its joke content and audiovisual form.

Besides, sitcom has factors of humor generally: participants (speaker and hearer), stimulus, life experience of individual, psychological type of individual, certain physical environment and/or situation (context provided), and society (cultural context). Apart from this, there are some remarkable and unusual humorous phenomena in sitcoms. Besides, the conversations of sitcom often show contradiction with the environment, action and common sense which elicits humor.

Verbal humor in situation comedy is the most important feature of sitcoms and also the main mechanism to proceed. Characters interaction is one of the key functions to build comedy in a sitcom which this research is interested in.

In this research, the characters’ interaction explicitly, the conversations in

How I Met Your Mother season 2 were preferred as the source data. How I Met Your

Mother season 2 has a humor which is not too long, not too short, and not too hard to understand; has an element of surprise; adequate amount of detail situation; and accompanied by gestures and facial expression. Accordingly, the research intends

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

3 to analyze the conversations which are humorous. Thus, the research places pragmatic understanding as the baseboard of the research with the method of discourse analysis.

In an attempt to build up the background, communicative theories are the closest approach to discuss the conversation. Conversations that trigger audience’s laughter will be alert, since situation comedy involves the same characters in various day-to-day situations. There are many humor theories such as Semantic

Script Theory of Humor (SSTH) by Raskin (1985), General Theory of Verbal

Humor (GTVH) by Attardo and Raskin (1991) and violation theory by Veatch which give insight into what lies beneath the surface of humor behavior, such as an in-depth look at the resource elements of humor. Communicative theories such as local organization within conversation (turn-taking, adjacency pairs), cooperative principle by Paul Grice (1975) in which they are interrelated especially within conversation are essentially considerable to screen verbal interaction, in the circumstance of conversation, which source funny conversational scene. It is assumed that in exchanging information via conversation, the participants are following certain principles. Grice’s Cooperative Principle is proved to be effective in many instances of analysis of conversation. In the connection with humor,

Hancher (1980) states that humor comes out by violating speech act in appropriate condition or related conversational implicature theory. Attardo (1994) argues, the violation of Cooperative Principle can give rise to humorous instances. He states the assumption that “large number of jokes involves violations of one or more

Grice’s maxims” (p. 355). Holmes and Marra (2002) suggest and complete

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

4

Attardo’s explanation that humor which resulted from the violation maxims of cooperative principle often occurs in the conversation among friends and colleagues. By the same token, this research tries to discover humor which is elicited from the violations of cooperative principle maxims by inspecting the employment of non-observance maxims, and how the violations take part in creating humorous effects.

B. Research Problems

The formulated problems of the research are:

1. What are kinds of the non-observance maxims employed in humorous

conversations in the sitcom How I Met Your Mother season 2?

2. How the non-observance maxims of CP take place in creating humorous

effects in sitcom How I Met Your Mother season 2?

C. Problem Limitation

The research examines and underlines the indication of violation maxims of cooperative principle which is performed by employing the non-observance maxims in humorous conversation in How I Met Your Mother season 2. The discussion of which will be the first layer of the operation for the research findings with the guidance of basic structure of conversation theory, cooperative maxims and categories of the non-observance. Accordingly, the function of the conversation among friends, conversational implicatures, and humor which is not governed by cooperative principle will not be alert as the object discussion. Next stage, the second layer will profoundly explore and analyze the contribution of non-

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

5 observance maxims employed in conversation in the episodes of How I Met Your

Mother season 2. Grice’s Cooperative Principles proposed by Paul Grice (1975) is considered as the closest reference to limit the discussion, without an exclusion from the most related theory of humor, namely incongruity theory and General

Theory of Verbal Humor.

D. Research Objectives

For the reason that there is a room to capture the answers of sort based on the formulation of the problems, the research focuses on analyzing examples after examples of the humorous conversation appeared in the humorous scenes of the episodes. With the intention of examining the systematic properties of the sequential organization of talk, the data, explicitly humorous conversations, shall be firstly concerned with the guidance of the theory of basic structure of conversation. Subsequently, four maxims which are failed to be observed within conversation are identified and categorized by using non-observance maxims of CP terms of reference. In order to capture the obvious regularities of sort which answers the second problem, those humorous conversations employing the non-observance maxims of Grice’s Cooperative Principle (CP) will be a room to figure out how the violations maxims of CP take place as a knowledge resource for humorous conversations. The data will be taken from American sitcom episodes How I Met

Your Mother season 2.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

6

E. Research Benefits

Some research has been conducted to analyze the language. Since this research applies linguistic theory especially pragmatic theory, this research analyzes language in relation to the speakers, conversation and context based on the humor theories. The research is expected to have benefits for some parts.

Academic Benefits:

1. This research will contribute to pragmatics study, especially related to

Cooperative Principle and verbal humor.

2. The research findings will enrich the theories of pragmatics related to

Cooperative Principle.

3. This research can be used as an academic reference about a pragmatic analysis

in the language based on comedy movies.

Practical Benefits:

1. The students would be able to learn how pragmatic theories take part in the

creation of verbal humor in TV-sitcoms / comedy movies.

2. The teachers would know better about the implementation of Grice

Cooperative Principle maxims in creating verbal humor on purpose.

3. For both teachers and students, the introduction of American sitcoms will also

promote the understanding of American cultures and help to cultivate the

interest in English.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

7

F. Definition of Terms

For perceiving a clear understanding upon the discussion, it is better to know the meaning of terms used throughout the discussion:

1. Verbal humor

Verbal humor is when an aspect of language, such as structural ambiguity, is exploited in order to achieve humorous effects (Jensen, 2009, p. 1).

2. Humorous conversation

In this research, a humorous conversation refers to a conversation which the humorous situation occurs for the reason that one or more logical maxims of CP are violated.

3. Grice’s Cooperative Principle

The basic description of Grice’s cooperative principle governs how people ordinarily react in conversation: be true, be brief, be relevant and be clear.

Cooperative Principle according to Grice is to ‘make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged’ (Mooney,

2003, p. 1)

4. Conversational maxims

The maxims are the sub-principles of the cooperative principle. According to Grice’s theory, the conversational maxims try to explain how listener might get from the level of expressed meaning to the level of implied meaning (Asher, 1994, p. 754). Grice proposed four maxims that are maxim of quality, maxim of quantity,

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

8 maxim of relation, and maxim of manner. Usually the maxims are regarded as unstated assumption in the conversation (Yule, 1996, p. 37).

5. Non-observance conversational maxim

According to Grice, non-observance is defined as either blatant or unostentatious failing to observe the maxims i.e. corresponding to ‘flouting’ or

‘violating’ of maxims (Brumark, 2004, p. 13). The rest of which are infringing, opting-out and suspending. Non-observances are ways that the participants use to make a distinction between what is said and what is meant which then generate implicature (Kalliomaki, 2005, p. 24).

6. General Theory of Verbal Humor

Shortened to GTVH, a humor theory which is proposed by Victor Raskin and Salvatore Attardo in the article “Script theory revis(it)ed: joke similarity and joke representation model” (Raskin & Attardo, 1991, p. 293). It integrated Raskin’s ideas of Script Opposition (SO), developed in his Script-based Semantic Theory of

Humor [SSTH], into the GTVH as one of six levels of independent Knowledge

Resources (KRs): Script Opposition (SO), Logical Mechanism (LM), Situation

(SI), Target (TA), Narrative strategy (NS), Language (LA) (Attardo, 1991).

7. American sitcoms

How I Met Your Mother

Based on IMDb, How I Met Your Mother (HIMYM) is one of the finest late comedy series in United States, admittedly when there are not many great ones around. HIMYM first aired on September 19th, 2005, created by David Letterman.

The 30-minute CBS sitcom How I Met Your Mother was entirely in the flashback

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

9 from the vantage point of 2030. The genre of this sitcom is romantic-comedy with narrative format in the past tense. HIMYM is well-known for its unique structure and eccentric humor.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter explores a set of well-developed concepts related through statements of relationship, which together constitute interrelated theories which can be used to explain and predict phenomena. The theories, which constitute the research, include the theory of humor which can be used in the view of pragmatics and theory of conversation are discussed in theoretical description. The theoretical framework depicts the links among the concepts of theories which are used to discover the findings from research problems.

A. Theoretical Description

In the sub chapter, some theories are sketched out in order to expose the territory of the discussion. The first discussed theories are humor theories, pragmatic of humor and the General Theory of Verbal Humor (GTVH). The first set theory is used jointly to answer the second question of research. The second theories will concern on the local organization within a conversation and

Cooperative Principle by Herbert Paul Grice which are used to answer the first question stated in the problem formulation.

1. Humor Theory

Dozens of different definitions of humor arouse from time to time. In wide- ranging term, humor is whatever evokes laughter or felt to be funny (Spanakaki,

2007). The following are two representative ones. Crawford (1994) defines humor as any communication that generates a ‘positive cognitive or affective response

10 PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

11 from listeners’ (p. 57). Romero and Cruthirds (2006, p. 59) define humor as

‘amusing communications that produce positive emotions and cognitions in the individual, group, or organization.’ There is no single universally accepted and all- encompassing theory of humor. The following theory is the most commonly discussed. The research comes to an agreement which states “humor primarily consists of jokes (spoken or written words) and actions (describable through words) which elicit laughter or generate merriment.” (Critchley, 2002; Ritchie, 2004).

Attardo (1997) is increasingly explicit to define humor, he states “laughter arises from the view of two or more inconsistent, unsuitable or incongruous parts or circumstances, considered as united in one complex object or assemblage (p. 396).

Another humor theory which highlight and meet this research focus and previous theory comes from Audrieth. According to Audrieth (1998, p. 5), humor is defined as ‘the mental faculty of discovering, expressing, or appreciating the ludicrous absurdly incongruous. Ludicrous is an adjective, meaning amusing or laughable through obvious absurdity, incongruity, exaggeration, or eccentricity (Anthony,

1998). Traditionally, there are three traditional notions of humor theory which define what humor is:

1) Superiority Theory

Superiority theory of humor was originally proposed by the British philosopher, Thomas Hobbes in 1651. It states that what makes the people laugh is the sudden glory of realizing or imagining the misfortunes of disagreeable attributes of others, which make ourselves seem superior to them although people especially the speaker is aware of his own defect (Smuts, n.d). Within this theory, people

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

12 possess the fun parts by pointing out their perceived weaknesses, misfortunes, or defects, such as the fun from joking people who have different social classes, or social groups. Typically, the humor is generated from ethnic jokes, sexist jokes, and mother-in-law jokes. In this research, this theory is not matched with the humorous characteristic possessed from the research data since the data contains the exploitation aspect of language.

2) Relief theory

In this theory, humor is perceived when someone faces a situation where the tensions are created within the perceiver (Smuts, n.d). This theory is also used in the movie, especially plots that deal with thriller and adventure. It is as a technique used when the audience in a movie is experiencing a high tensions which include the comic relief at the right times. The tension or the suspense is built up as much as possible and then breaks it down slightly with a side comment, allowing the viewer to relieve himself from the high-tension emotions. In this research, this theory is not exactly relevant for the analysis since it is a generally psychological scope to discuss the plot of humorous story rather than the mechanism within the humorous utterances.

3) The Incongruity Theory

According to Cooper (2008), incongruity theory focuses on the object that is the source of the humor, for example joke and cartoon. This theory is the leading approach. It sees humor as a response to an incongruity, a broadly term used to include ambiguity and inconsistence. It focuses on the element of surprise. It states that humor is created out of a conflict between what is expected and what actually

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

13 occurs in humor. This gives detail for the most obvious feature of much humor: an ambiguity, or double meaning, which deliberately misleads the audience, followed by punch line. Incongruity theory is the dominant theory of humor, since it seems to work in most cases of humor, which is partly because “incongruity” is something of an umbrella term (Latta, 1998, p. 106). Humor is said to have the following elements:

• A conflict between what is expected and what actually occurs in the joke

• An ambiguity at some level of language with semantic or pragmatic

meaning or both.

• A punchline which resolves the conflict.

According to Morreal (1987), the incongruity theory creates humor from the violation of an expectation. For humor resulted from the unexpected results, the event must have an appropriate emotional climate, comprised of setting the characters, prior discourse, relationship of the characters, and topic. Morreal (1987) gives sort of incongruities under incongruity theory:

• Moral shortcoming, a violation of an understood social code;

• Ignorance, a violation of understood knowledge;

• Impersonation, pretending to be someone or something that you are not;

• Physical deformities, a violation of how we view the way in which we ought

to appear;

• Failed actions, a violation of the successful completion of an action.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

14

a. The General Theory of Verbal Humor (GTVH)

The General Theory of Verbal Humor (GTVH) is a tool for analyzing and explaining humorous text (both spoken and written) formulated by Salvatore

Attardo and Victor Raskin. This theory explain that verbal humor is a construction of knowledge resources. Raskin and Attardo (1991) jointly combined Semantic

Script Theory of Humor proposed by Raskin with five levels of joke representation

(developed by Attardo, 1987), turning them into the six-hierarchical representation model of verbal jokes, described as follows:

1. Script opposition (SI)

Seen as the incongruity of the SSTH (Attardo, 2008). The one parameter

that every joke will contain (Attardo, 1994). In this research, the script

opposition is seen as the violation of Grice’ maxims (Attardo, 1997, p.

108)

2. Logical mechanism (LA)

The parameter that brings the two opposing scripts together (Attardo,

1994).

3. Situation (SI)

Includes all the “‘props’ of the joke: the objects, the participants,

instruments, and activities.” (Attardo, 1994, p. 24). In this data of research,

the data emphasize humorous effects (Attardo, 1994).

4. Target (TA)

The individual/object/idea being made fun of – the “butt of the joke”

(Attardo 1994, p. 224)

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

15

5. Narrative strategy (NA)

Divided into three general types: descriptive, dialogue, combination

(combination of first two types (Aromaa, 2011))

6. Language (LA)

Linguistic choices supporting the decisions made in other Knowledge

Resources (Attardo, 2008). The parameter which is in charge of not only

the wording and syntax but also how the different elements are arranged

(Attardo, 1994).

The GTVH posits script opposition as the necessary condition for humor. It is necessary to note the definition of script. Attardo (1997) partly altered the definition of script:

[Scripts are]… collections of semantic information pertaining to a given subject… [embodying] the sum total of the cultural knowledge of a society, which can be represented as a set of expectation and/or weighted choices. (p. 402)

This research has a motivation to use this knowledge resources to inspect and examine the violation of cooperative maxims as the knowledge resource contained in humorous conversation. LM, NS, LA are groups which is tool-oriented and the others are “content oriented” (SO, TA, SI). Specifically, “tool-oriented” groups helps to analyze the analytic construct within the incongruity resolution.

Language (LA) and logical mechanism (LM) are accounts for manner. Attardo stressed, the production of a joke can be triggered by any knowledge resource, with the rest of them being filled in and the levels presented here ‘do not correspondent to the consecutive stages of actual production’ (Attardo and Raskin, 1991, p. 327).

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

16

b. Pragmatic of Humor

The pragmatic constituent of humor in this research is constructed when there is a violation of Grice’s cooperative maxims. Humor can be seen as conversational implicature (Hassan, 2013). Conversational implicature is a type of pragmatic inference in which the meaning is conveyed through non-conventional means (Grice, 1975). Humor in linguistic level has three levels, derived from linguistic devices: vocalization, lexis, syntax. Those devices are important to construct humor. The linguistic levels of humor are phonetic levels, lexical level, discourse level (He, 2008). This research has a tendency for humor at discourse level since it focuses on humor which resulted from rule-breaking, explicit or implicit meaning conveyed through the speakers’ utterances in conversation. As

Dolitsky (1992) said humor is based on the bending and breaking of rules. Thus, it is necessary to understand some basic underlying theories of conversation.

2. Conversation Theory

According to Brown and Yule (1983) there are two main forms of conversation which are transactional and interactional. However the discussion in this research zooms in the theory of interactional conversation to meet the research finding as founded in the subject data. Interactional conversation, according to

Brown and Yule (1983), refers to a form of spoken language used to allow people to interact with each other – which features a phatic use of language whose purpose is to establish an atmosphere and allow people to socialize.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

17 a. Basic Structure of Conversation

In a conversation, there is always local management organization operating within every conversation. Sequence and structure within conversation can be summarized below.

1) Opening Conversations

Opening takes place in the first slice of conversation which most common example of opening usually chances in telephone conversation. For example, first expression to utter is a summons (i.e. call by name), the second is an answer to the summons in return. The pair establishes an opening channel for talk.

(1) Child: Mommy summons Mom: Yes, dear. answer Child: Can I have chocolate? reason for summons

In the telephone conversations, the ringing of the telephone acts as the summons.

Additional potential problems are identification or recognition.

(2) A: (call B) summons B: Hello answer + display for recognition A: Hi greeting 1 claim that A has recognized B + claim that B can recognize A B: Oh hi! greeting 2 + claim that B has recognized A

2) Closing Conversations

Closing conversation can be done by saying, ‘ok, bye, anyway, or other parting phrase like see you, bye.’

3) Turn Taking

Turn taking is a basic finding which characterizes conversation at where one participant, A, talks, stops; another, B, starts, talks, stops; and it will be obtained A-

B-A-B-A-B distribution talk across two participants (Levinson, 1983, p. 296).

Every time the participant has the right to speak, they are called as having the floor

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

18 and can attempt to get the floor. Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson (1974), proposed basic rules about turn-taking, includes:

(1) If current speaker selects next speaker, he’s obliged to take the next turn

(2) Otherwise, any speaker may self-select the next turn

(3) Otherwise, the current speaker may continue

In having the conversation, there are two possible phenomena which sometimes the participants try to speak at the same time, which is called overlap

(Yule, 1996, p. 72). As the reverse of overlap, sometimes there is an absence of vocalization between the participants which is called as silence or gaps (Cutting,

2002). Silence is an absence of vocalization between the participants. It is a lengthened transition space results in a silence in the talk. If any speaker actually turns over the floor to another and the other does not speak, which produce a silence, intending to carry meaning, the silence is called as an attributable silence (Cutting,

2002, p. 29). When a silence occurs at the end of a completed action in the talk, such as after the answer to a question, the silence is not attributable to any particular speaker. Some others may interpret it as ignorance. Silence is sometimes interpreted as distance, or the absence of familiarity.

(3) A: Is this seat taken? (2 seconds) A: Excuse me, is this seat taken? B: Oh, no. (Grab her bag) You may sit here.

For many (younger) speakers, overlapping the utterances appears to function like an expression of solidarity or closeness or excitement in expressing similar opinions. Also, overlap can communicate competition.

(4) Joe: When they were in // power las -- wait CAN I FINISH? Jerry: // that’s my point I said –

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

19

4) Adjacency Pairs

According to Paltridge (2008), adjacency pairs are utterances produced by two successive speakers in a way that the second utterance is identified as related to the first one as an expected follow-up to that distance. The pairs of utterances normally occur together automatically and help to structure a conversation. There is a consistent match between format and content found across a number of adjacency pair seconds which is described in the following table:

Table 2.1 Correlation of content and format in adjacency pair sequences

Second pairs First pairs Preferred Dispreferred

Request Acceptance Refusal

Offer/invite Acceptance Refusal

Assessment Agreement Disagreement

Question Expected answer Unexpected answer / no answer

Blame Denial Admission

(Levinson, 1984, p.336)

Based on the table, therefore, when a speaker makes a request, as the first part of a whole sequence of conversation, a listener can give two possible response upon the request. This response is the second part of the sequence in which the listener can give the response either in a preferred structure, which is by accepting the request or complementing the question with an expected answer. Another responses which in dispreferred structure, which is by refusing the request (opt out maxim), not answering the question, or to answer at inappropriate length, either too short or too excessive length, or to answer the question with another question and tend to interrupt the smooth flow of a conversation. These pairs can be repeated in

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

20 the sequence. A pair can also initiated with statements, complaints, greetings, introductions. The preferred responses for these utterances respectively are: recognition, replies and exchange of greeting. If the rules are ignored, these patterns are broken by means of flouting which it immediately call forth a response. There are some ways to provide dispreferred second parts:

Table 2.2 Variety of response tokens

Variation Tokens

Delay/hesitate pause; err; em; ah

Preface well; oh

Express doubt I’m not sure; I don’t know

Token acceptance that’s great; I’d love to

Apology I’m sorry; what a pity

Mention obligation I must do X; I’m expected in Y

Appeal for understanding you see; you know

Make it non-personal everybody else; out there

Give an account too much work; no time left

Use mitigators really; mostly; sort of; kind of

Hedge the negative I guess not; not possible

5) Feedback (Backchannels)

Feedback or backchannels is the way speakers show that they are attending what being said. It indicates that they are understanding, listening, or simply following the other speakers’ utterances. This can be done by the use of ‘response tokens’ such as ‘mmm’ and ‘yeah’, by paraphrasing what the interlocutor has just said or through body position and the use of eye contact. Backchannel gestures offer

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

21 feedback to the speaker that the message is being received, they indicate that the listener or following and not objecting.

6) Repair

Repair is the way the speakers correct things which has been said, and check what they have understood in a conversation (Schegloff, Jefferson, and Sacks,

1977). There are two types of repair:

a) Self-repair

(5) Charlotte: I saw her with a man yesterday. I mean, I saw her with a middle aged man who looks like her uncle.

b) Other-repair

(6) Miranda: But you have to introspect yourself! Cintya: Excuse me? Shouldn’t it be you?

b. Grice’s Cooperative Principle

In the field of linguistics, even more specifically in the area of pragmatics, an important concept was introduced: maxims of conversation. It is unwritten rules that govern people to make an appropriate conversation. The Cooperative Principle were first formulated by Herbert Paul Grice which refers to the assumption of a basic conversation which is made when the speaker speaks to one another that are trying to cooperate with one another to construct meaningful conversations. As stated in H.P. Grice’s “Logic and Conversation” (1975):

Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at

which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange

in which you are engaged (p. 45).

In the other words, the speakers try to contribute meaningful, productive utterances to further the conversation. It then follows that, as listeners, interlocutors

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

22 assume that the conversational partners are doing the same. There will be times when speakers operate the same conversational norms as the interlocutors deliberately mislead the speakers’ utterances and cause the occurrences of the mistakes and misunderstandings (Thomas, 1995, p. 62). Some reasons why someone might be uncooperative in conversation. Some assume that participants conceal the interrogated information they do not want to give up. Speakers become uncooperative to person they hate. Another of some cases is the participants are just being crazy.

1). Types of Maxims

Grice came up with the maxims of conversation. Maxims is kind of a rule of thumb which is general rules the speakers follow in conversation. Those maxims are:

1. Maxim of Quality: try to make your contribution one that is true, specifically:

1) do not say what you believe to be false 2) do not say that for which you lack

of adequate evidence. This maxim states that one’s contribution to a

conversation should be truthful and that the speaker should have adequate and

sufficient evidence to back up what is being said. For example:

Andi’s mom expect a truthful answer from his son, after she noticed Andi’s

bad mark.

(7) Mom: Did you study last night? Andi: I did not study last night.

In linguistic term, the maxim truthfulness refers to the importance of making

only statements we believe to be true. The reason is that if we get caught

making false statements we lose our credibility, which is the important social

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

23

assets a person can hold. In real life, this maxim is often violated in order to

deceive the addressee. In less serious context, it can be violated in obvious

manner when the speaker tries to be humorous or teases the addressee. Grice

shows four examples to illustrate how the first maxim of quality is flouted:

irony, metaphor, hyperbole (Martinich, 1984).

2. Maxim of Quantity: 1) make your contribution as informative as is required for

the current purpose of the exchange 2) do not make your contribution more

informative than is required. The meaning of this maxim is that the speaker

should avoid including unnecessary, redundant information in the contribution.

For example:

(8) Lius: Do you know where Alto is? Linda: He’s sunbathing in the sandbox.

According to Thomas Ritter, if the speaker rambles on without saying anything

new or informative, the addressee will lose interest in the discourse very

quickly and stop paying attention (Davies, 2000). In multi-agents conversation

process in which the social relationship between participants is, to some extent,

intimate, such as relatives, lovers, good friends, if someone says something

other persons do not need and are not interested in, this redundant information

will disturb the path the communication will develop, which is one of the

sources of humor production in sitcom.

3. Maxim of Relevance: make your contribution relevant. “In the context of H.P.

Grice’s Cooperative Principle, the demand for relevance simply means that the

speaker should only include information in his communication that is relevant

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

24

to the topic under discussion” (Davies, 2000). For example, Mom asks if her

daughter knows who she is talking to in the telephone:

(9) Mom: Who you’re talking to? Lita: Umm, my new friend Ana.

In the purpose of creating humor, Giora (1991) states that “The joke’s marked

constituent is least relevant but not irrelevant, that is, not entire distant or

unrelated” (p. 470).

4. Maxim of Manner: be perspicuous, and specifically, 1) avoid obscurity, 2)

avoid ambiguity, 3) be brief, 4) be orderly. (Grice 1989, p. 26). For example, a

teacher ask about how to replace the:

(10) A: Can you show me where the common room is? B: Yes. It is next to K.12.

Under this category, the general idea is what is said should be expressed in a

direct, clear, brief and orderly way without any other communicative intention

involved and without thinking whether our behaviors will affect other person’s

feeling. If we put this kind communicative way into the coordinate, it will

possess the zero position. Different direction and different distance from this

zero point will make the communication achieve different effect. Actually,

people usually communicate in an “ambiguous” way, which violates manner

maxim. The speaker provides only some information hints for the hearer to

infer all what the speaker should say. Violations of the maxim of manner can

take many forms: order of presentation of information; vagueness and

ambiguity; volume and pace; choice of words; attitude; even facial/gestural

expressions (Cheung and Winnie, 2009).

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

25

2) Non-Observance Maxims

Maxims of CP can be exploited for communicative purpose. There are many occasions which the conversational interaction between speakers do not happen as what expected. In certain situation, people fail to observe the maxims for some purpose. As the example, the speakers observe the maxim but pretend to fail rather than cooperate. Other examples, they are incapable of speaking clearly or because they deliberately choose to lie. According to Grice in Thomas (1995), there are five ways of failing to observe a maxim which are flouting, violating, opting out, infringing and suspending maxim. However, the territory of the discussion is narrowed down explicitly into four ways of failing maxims discovered in this research, described as follows:

1) Flouting Maxims

A flout occurs when a speaker obviously fails to observe a maxim at the level what is said, with the deliberate intention of generating implicature (Thomas,

1995, p. 65). According to Grice (1975), this additional meaning is called

Conversational Implicature and the way by which such implicature is called flouting a Maxim (p. 71). For example:

A lecturer speaks to a student who arrives late more than ten minutes to the class:

(11) A: Terrific! You’re such a punctual fellow! Welcome to the class. B: Sorry, Miss! It won’t happen again.

The lecturer flouts maxim of quality to deliver implicitly a sarcastic tone.

Furthermore, speaker may flouts maxim of quantity when s/he intends to be humorous.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

26

(12) A: Where are you now? B: I’m in my clothes.

Or, the speaker may flout maxim of relevance to avoid hurting someone’s feeling:

(13) A: What are you and C talking about? B: Oh well… why don’t we go get something to drink?

Moreover, the speaker flouts maxim of relevance when s/he utters slang or ambiguous utterance:

(14) A: Let’s play emoji tennis. B: Ok.

The word ‘emoji tennis’ is ambiguous. However, it is a slang, meaning texting nothing but emoticon back and forth between a friend or partner.

2) Violating Maxims

According to Grice (1975), the speaker violates a maxim when the speaker will liable to mislead the hearer to have such implicature. The speaker deliberately tries to make the hearer misunderstanding the truth meaning of speaking. The hearer is misled to look for the surface meaning. This make the hearer infers an implicature. People in real life tend to tell lies for different reasons, hide the truth, save face, feel jealous, satisfying the hearer, cheer the hearer, building one’s belief, avoid hurting the hearer, and convincing the hearer (as cited in “Non Observance of Grice Maxims”, 2013). As said by Tupan and Natalia (2008), people believe that a lying is the natural tool to survive and to avoid from anything that may put the speaker in an inappropriate condition (p. 64-66).

A speaker violate maxim quality when s/he lies to cover the truth:

(15) A: Who was with you last night? B: He’s my cousin.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

27

Furthermore, a speaker violates maxim of quantity to limit the exposure of a truth:

(16) A: Where have you been? I called you thirty times. B: I wasn’t around. What’s the big deal?

Or, the speaker violates maxim of relevance to evade current situation or topic being discussed:

(17) A: Why did you not come to class today? B: (pointing away) Is that Mr. Carla?

3) Opting out Maxims

Thomas (1995, p. 73), defines opting out as a situation when a speaker

“chooses not to observe a maxim and states an unwillingness to do so”. For example, a new friend asks about personal life:

(18) A: I heard your boyfriend ran away and dumped you, is it true? B: I’m sorry I can’t say it to you. Privacy area.

There are some conversations in How I Met Your Mother season 2 which the speakers opted out certain maxim and stated her unwillingness to do so clearly.

(19) Robin was hiding the reason why she does not go to the Mall. Robin: Sorry, I just don’t like Malls. Barney: Why not? Robin: I’d rather not say.

However, the above example in the situated condition does not appear to be humorous. Rather it appeared to be a disappointment or curiosity for the hearer.

4) Suspending Maxims

This condition occurs when there is a certain circumstances or as part of certain event which does not expect the participant or any participant to observe one or several maxim (and no fulfillment does not generate any implicatures)

(Thomas, 1995, p. 76). For example:

A: Yo mama is so dumb, when she wear a yellow raincoat everyone will yell, Taxi!

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

28

Discovered data has the suspension of maxim within a joke uttered by Ted in the following excerpt:

S0208/SP01 (20) Barney: A cougar. An older woman, usually in her 40s or fifties, single and on the prowl for a younger man, Ted: What’s a women in her sixties or 70s—a turtle?

5) Infringing Maxims

Infringement occurs when a speaker fails to observe the maxim, although the speaker has no intention of generating an implicature and deceiving the hearer.

Thomas (1995, p. 74) explains that generally infringing rooted from imperfect linguistic performance (in the case of a young child or foreigner) or from impaired linguistic performance triggered by nervousness, drunkenness, excitement, disability. The following excerpt exemplifies an account of infringement triggered by nervousness:

(21) A: Do you have any difficulties in conducting the research? B: Emm… a little. But there is a when understand, I mean when I try understand the meaning of words.

Moreover, drunkenness infringes maxim of manner as appeared in the following humorous conversation:

(22) Robin (talking to the waiter): I’d take you with gravy. If my boyfriend wasn’t sitting right here. – Just kidding. I’m good. Lily: What are you so chirpy about? Ted: She’s still drunk from last night. Robin: I don’t think so. Whoo!

B. Theoretical Framework

The research lays the emphasis on the contribution of the non-observances maxim in connection with humor -- fashioning the humorous situation as seemed in TV-series How I Met Your Mother Season 2. Although, not all humorous

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

29 phenomena can be explained by the cooperative principle (e.g. humor from physical behavior) and even when we are dealing with the conversational jokes (e.g. humor at lexical or phonetic levels). Nevertheless, several linguists (Attardo, 1997;

Norrick, 1993; Raskin, 1985) have been trying to make a general pragmatic explanation on humor with reference to Grice’s theory. Raskin (1985) suggested that joke-telling mode of communication (non bona fide) is still governed by the cooperative principle because he believed that humor is communicative functions.

This research takes the pragmatic view to discuss humorous conversational interaction. Thus, conversation is to be the model of interpretation. Fundamentally, this research put the language into a context-through with a more full contextual analysis of humor which the context of conversation is given. Although, the built characters in recorded data of conversation vary in characterization, background knowledge, interests and concerns, still, conversation is a flexible text negotiated between the various participants in a conversation as found in the data. In this research, laughter serves as the most identifiable signal for identifying humor in the text (cf. Archakis & Tsakona, 2005). Hay (2001, p. 56) adds that the presence of laughter is used to characterize an utterance or a text as humorous.

Since the humor in situation comedy lays on its narration, the script is styled and fashioned to be so much alike with natural language in order to illustrate daily life conversation. The amusement itself is found from conversational interaction among the characters. Accordingly, it is necessary to hire conversation theories: cooperative principle from Paul Grice and basic structure of conversation. The cooperative principle, which derived into four maxims principle, helps to evaluate

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

30 the conversations that is humorous. In this research, the conversation will be placed and situated at the basic rules within conversation and how the characters negotiate and exchange the information which give arise to humor in form of comedy and intend to amuse the audience. This involves noting the role of joking regarding 1) language games: turn taking, intruding, parting, greeting, closing, questioning, bridging uncomfortable gaps, “winding down the conversation”, encouragement, warning, etc. 2) intention of the speaker, e.g. to relieve embarrassment, save face, etc. With the knowledge of Grice maxims, the humorous conversations are evaluated by using known building blocks: adjacency pairs, turns and other standpoints from basic structure of conversation. Since the research focuses its concern in humorous conversation resulted from the violation of cooperative maxims, it is oblique to examine how the speakers violate those maxim. Here, the categories of the non-observance maxims take place. Those set of theories are helpful to explain phenomena of violation maxims in humorous conversation and answer the first research question.

It is noted that humor depends on the interactants’ negotiation of values in a similar to Veatch’s description of verbal humor. Veatch (1998) determines a funny violation of normal situation (or a subject moral order) by incorporating an affective component into his theory. One important vehicle for humor production is the generation of conversational implicature originating in some form of flouting or violation of maxims (Grice, 1978): in humorous talk, speakers code and decode messages and publicly display their knowledge of what is going on. This complex interactional work (or, as Grice calls it, “Conversational game”) is also visible on

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

31 the level of exchange structure. In usual events, the conversational moves are usually concurrently predicted, and or, paired between the inquiry and the exchange boundaries. In conversational humor, however, results to blurred exchange boundaries. Explicitly, the humorous effects resulted from flouting of basic formal language rules (Vandaele, 2002, p. 150).

Standing under a concept of incongruity theory, the humorous conversations are appreciated. Humor which arises from the violation of maxims resulting from unusual conversation is still a dependent idea of humor production (Raskin, 1985;

Morreal, 1987 and Attardo, 2007, p. 108). In sitcom, there are some ‘props’ supporting the idea of humor (the violation maxims) which help the audiences to understand that the text is supposed to be funny such as visualization of current situation (Morreal, 1987 and Trizenberg, 2008, p. 536). By using the GTVH, the elements (knowledge resources) are inspected. This theory later will shows the contribution of the non-observance maxims as the idea for condition of humor production in creating humorous effects. Attardo (1997) compares the GTVH with the incongruity-resolution theories and points out that LM (one of the knowledge resources) is in fact the resolution of the incongruity.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the methodology helps the researcher to conduct the designed research. The research is to discuss how maxims are violated (viz. flouting, violating, infringing, suspending) by the characters of sitcom in the conversation with the reference of cooperative maxims principle, and how the violation maxims took place in creating humorous effects. The scope of this chapter includes research methodology, object of study, instruments and data gathering technique, data analysis technique, and research procedures.

A. Research Method

Humor analysis is also in the same kind of conventional qualitative research in other respects, which is characterized by a naturalistic orientation to the investigation. The instance or setting in which the data is collected is expected to be as close to the natural state as possible. Sen (2012) conveys, the analysis of humor can also be naturalistic in its orientation. If the specific instances of humor which mostly are jokes are gathered from regular conversations (i.e. spontaneous and unscripted), then the data can be classified as those from naturalistic setting.

Sen adds, if the jokes are embedded in the script of movies, as the research does, then there is still an air of quasi-naturalness about them and that can provide insightful information about humor that is publicly acceptable in the society. Humor analysis can follow the same method of inductive analysis. Instances of humor are

32

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

33 mined from conversations or printed matter such as movie scripts and then analyzed for common themes or pattern.

This research observed how the humorous utterances occurred by discovering the violations of cooperative maxims principle, which later were linked to incongruity theory and the GTVH. Discussing how humor was built up in the movie, this research identified conversations among characters at the discourse level. The research employed the approach of discourse analysis (a spoken discourse analysis) in relation to disobedience maxims using non-observances of

CP terms of framework to create humorous effects.

According to brown and yule (1983) in general, a tape-recording of an event is the data to work on, from which then it is transformed into a written transcription, annotated according to the research interests on a particular occasion. However, since this research took the data from movie series, which then the verbal interaction is presented using normal orthographic conventions; any details of intonation, non- verbal interaction (setting) and rhythm which supports the analysis would be verbalized as well. In discourse analysis, the data is treated as the record (text) of a dynamic process in which language was used as an instrument of communication in a context by a speaker to express meanings and achieve intentions (discourse).

Then, the researcher seeks to describe the regularities in the linguistic realizations used by people to communicate those meanings and intentions.

Discourse analysis takes the communicative function of language as its primary area of investigation and consequently seeks to describe linguistic from, not as a static object, but as a dynamic means of expressing intended meaning. In

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

34 this research, the discourse was treated as a process view (Widdowson, 1979, p. 71,

Brown and Yule, p. 24). The words, the phrases and the sentences which appear in the textual record of a discourse to be the evidences of an attempt by a producer

(speaker) to communicate his message to a recipient (hearer). This research focused on the productions of utterances which logically elicited humorous effects. The data then experienced the process interpreting. These involve computing the communicative function (how to take the meaning, message), using general socio- cultural knowledge (facts about the world) and determining the inferences to be made.

B. Research Setting

The setting of the research refers to the setting in which the research was conducted. The researcher conducted this research during the period of August

2014 to July 2015. The research experienced the process: analyzing the scripts; categorizing the utterances into each proper type of maxims; identifying and describing the utterances with the references of local management within conversation theory and non-observance maxim theory; describing the role of disobedience maxims in creating humorous effects; and the last was summing up the findings.

C. Objective of Study

The object of the research was the episodes of sitcom How I Met Your

Mother season 2. Season 2 of How I Met Your Mother aired from 18 September,

2006 to May 14, 2007 and contained 22 episodes. The subject was selected because

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

35 the series was a comedy TV-show, also it was popular. Importantly, the series had many unexpected situations which led to the even more unexpected reactions of other characters and thus not only entertained but at the same time offered a great data for this research. The data as the primary sources of the research were the script obtained from the conversations among the characters which appeared to be humorous.

D. Instrument and Data Gathering Technique

The research employed two instruments, human instrument and document instrument. Human instrument functioned as the primary agent to collect the data in qualitative research (Merriam, 2002; Berg and Galls, 2007; Ary, et.al, 2010).

Human instrument was the researcher who conducted the analysis the document instrument employed to answer both research problems was the printed-out movie script from the episodes of movie series How I Met Your Mother season 2. In collecting the data, this research experienced some steps. First, the researcher did close watching the selected episodes for several times with the help of English subtitles available on http://www.tvsubtitles.net. Second, the researcher listened the conversations and observed them. Third, after watching, listening, and observing the movie, the writer made documentation of the data. The data were transcribed orthographically from the episodes which then the transcribed data was compared with the script provided in the internet. Thus, the prepared data could be accessed at a time convenient to the researcher and an unobtrusive source of information

(Creswell, 2003:187). Some dissimilarities between the movie and the script obtained from the internet befell during the transcription process. The

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

36 dissimilarities, then, were accorded with the movie. To the extent of analyzing, supplementary extracts were necessary to describe the situation in own words because there were little of none verbal communication extracts available.

The researcher selected the humorous conversations were carefully by using criteria: occurrence of laughter track; humorous effects in form of conversation; and detection of one or more maxims of cooperative principles violated by the characters. The indication of humorous conversations were detected and pinpointed by the sign of canned laughter in the scenes which might come from the speaker while producing his/her utterance or from the audiences as a reaction to what is being uttered.

E. Data Analysis Technique

According to Miles and Huberman (1994), qualitative research is outlined in three flows of activity: data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing or verification. This research hired those three flows.

a. Data reduction

In this research, the data reduction refers to selecting, focusing, simplifying, abstracting and transforming the humorous conversation from the transcriptions.

The transcription of the movie conversations, which was compiled from data from internet and movie itself, was printed. Afterward, the humorous conversations were detected by using laugh tracks as the indicators of the occurrence of humorous effects. Further, this research experienced to code and make the clusters and partition (Miles & Huberman, 1994). A numbers of collected humorous conversation was coded by using conversational maxims proposed by Paul Grice

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

37

(1975) with an assistance of basic structure of conversation theory in order to sort the data into some categories in which four maxims as the categories. Then, the proceeding coded data were clustered into proper kinds of non-observance maxim and collected into partitions. At this stream, the researcher noted the regularities, patterns and explanation transpired from the humorous conversation in order to solve the research problems.

b. Data display

After reduction of data, the clustered data in this research was displayed into tables (see appendices). It was aimed to assemble the information needed to analyze the analytic construct of humor resulting from conversations and draw the conclusions.

c. Conclusion drawing

In this research, the vague conclusion was prefigured during the analysis.

However, the final conclusion was verified from the elaboration of discussion after it was over. This research sum up the violation (viz. flouting, violating, infringing, suspending) of maxims occurred in humorous conversation and the general analytic construct of humor which was increasingly grounded and explicit.

F. Research Procedures

The research took some ordered steps in conducting the research. The steps were as follow:

1. The Steps of Segmenting the Transcription Based on Its Speech Events.

By using the theory of basic structure of conversation and the cooperative principle, the maxims used in conversation which reflected humorous effects were

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

38 identified. The identification was seen when ‘any turns which are breaking one or more of the Gricean maxims’ (Brumark, 2004:13).

2. Classifying the Conversations

After identifying the existence of maxim, the conversations which indicated to have humorous effects were classified and analyzed further. The conversations, which violated the maxims of cooperative principles were coded such as

[S02/EP01/QL/VL1], meaning the excerpt was taken from the episode 01 which indicated to violate maxim quality.

3. The Steps of Categorizing the Violation Maxims

The data were organized by placing each conversation into its category in the references with four (4) kinds of non-observance maxims, it might belong to category of flouting, violating, infringing or suspending.

4. The Steps of Dividing the Excerpts

After collecting the data, the researcher put the humorous conversations consisting of violation maxims into tables. The table were preceded by the text of conversations, so that the context of humor could be seen. These texts were called as excerpts. The following table were analyzed to answer the first research problem which was what kinds of non-observance maxims employed in humorous conversations.

2.1 Non-observance of maxims distribution based on types of maxims

No. Code Excerpt Maxims Indication QL QN RL MN

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

39

Note: QL: Quality QN: Quantity RL: Relevance MN: Manner

5. Analyzing Non-observance Maxims in the Connection with the GTVH and

Incongruity theory

This step was used to answer the second research problem, which how the violation maxims took place to elicit humor. After all the dialogues, which consisted of breaking maxims in the verbal humor, were inspected the six elements of knowledge resources contained in humorous conversation. Types of maxims used to create humorous effects were analyzed (Viz. quantity, quality, relevance, and manner).

6. Drawing Conclusions

The last stage of the steps, which after the steps of segmenting, categorizing, data gathering, analyzing the humorous conversations, and finding the results, the conclusions were drawn. The conclusions sum up how the non-observance maxims were applied and how the violation maxims created humorous effects in sitcom

How I Met Your Mother season 2.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

CHAPTER IV

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This research only analyzes those which have the same characteristics with the theory of humor and in the relation to the theory of maxims by Grice. Therefore in this chapter, the classified data will be analyzed to discover the findings concerning the statement of the problems.

This chapter will be divided into two sub chapters. The first will be the analysis of how maxims violated (viz. flouted, violated, infringed, and suspended) in the humorous conversation and the second will discuss the analytic construct of the humorous effects resulting from the violation in the references of incongruity theory and the GTVH.

A. Non-Observance Maxims of CP in Humorous Conversations Taken from

Sitcom How I Met Your Mother Season 2

Before diving into an in-depth analysis on humor elicited from the violation maxims, the researcher discovered types of the non-observance maxims employed in the humorous conversations explicitly flouting, violation, infringing, and suspending. From a hundred-twenty-two (122) excerpts, the findings were discovered to have: a hundred-nine (109) cases in which the characters did not observed one of four maxims and another thirteen (13) in the point of multiple violations (flouting, violating, suspending) in How I Met Your Mother season 2.

Those excerpts were found in 22 episodes of season 2, casted by five main

40

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

41 characters. The distribution of those types of maxims are described in the following chart:

4.1 Chart of distribution of violation maxims based on the non- observance maxims' types

30 27 25 20 15 15 11 10 10 6 4 4 5 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Quality Quantity Relevance Manner Multiple

Flouting Violating Infringing Suspending

In the chart above, each of clusters described the maxims of CP which were violated by the way of non-observance maxims. In the clusters, violating maxim of quality was the most frequent above all and infringing maxim of quality was the least, occurred in humorous conversations. As it appeared in the chart, all maxims were violated. However, only four of five types of non-observance maxims employed in humorous conversations (Viz. flouting, violation, infringing, and suspending).

In this section, the researcher discussed and analyzed the violated maxims discovered from the episodes of How I Met Your Mother season 2 in accordance with the non-observance maxims of CP and the theory of basic structure within conversations. Each of excerpts was exclusively presented based on its category of non-observance: flouting maxim, violating maxim, infringing maxim and suspending maxim. PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

42

1. The Analysis on a Situation which Flouts Maxims

Flouting a maxim occurred when a participant in a conversation chose to ignore one or more of the maxims by using a conversational implicature (Thomas

1995, p. 65). In this research, the all four maxims of CP were discovered to be flouted by the characters. a. Flouting Maxim of Quality

This category chanced when the speaker blatantly intended to say something untrue or lied and denied something. The speaker misrepresented his information in order to make the hearer understand the intended meaning of an utterance

(Levinson, 1983, p. 110). Its implicature could be drawn when the contribution was untrue or lack of adequate evidences. Flouting maxim of quality discovered from the excerpts were done by exaggerating, using metaphor and delivering sarcastic tone (Essay, 2013).

1) Using Exaggeration

The following excerpts illustrated the example of the situation in which maxim of quantity was flouted:

S02E01/QL/FL1 The year 2030, the narrator, Ted was telling his kids a very long story about how he met their mother. (1) Ted: Okay, where were we? It was June of 2006 and life had just taken an unexpected turn. (2) Daughter: Dad, can’t you just skip ahead to the part where you meet Mom? I feel like you’ve been talking for like a year.

S02E11/QL/FL6 At Lily’s apartment, Barney was smoking facing over the opened window while he was sick and it was winter. (1) Robin: Barney. What the hell are you doing? Get in here, it’s freezing outside. Are you insane? (2) Barney: Hey, blame Lily and her oppressive ‘no cigars in the apartment rule.’ God, it’s like Marshall’s marrying the Taliban.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

43

As appear in the excerpt S02E01/QL/FL1, Ted’s enthusiasm did not meet his daughter’s interest, which consequently bored the daughter, in this conversation as the second speaker. The followed-up question produced by Ted’s daughter indicated that she was bored to listen to father’s talking rather than being excited to listen out for his father’s long story. In exchange to his father’s utterance, she misrepresented the duration by laying it on thick with utterance (1) “I feel like you’ve been talking for like a year.” It was plainly on the earth that somebody cannot be talking in a year length. Thus, Ted’s daughter’s utterance was unreal. The occurrence of the same account was in the excerpt S02E11/QL/FL6. In the excerpt

S02E11/QL/FL6, Robin cared about Barney’s condition by asking him to get inside. However, Barney threw the guilt on Lily’s ‘No cigar’ rule in return. He fashioned his utterance by hyperbolizing the situation, explicitly the rule literally was impossible. In Barney’s utterance, he uttered that Marshall was marrying

Taliban. It was fictitious to witness that somebody literally married to an organization.

However, both utterances above were not expected to be inferred literally.

Purposefully, the speakers aimed the implicature to be inferred without the intention of misleading the hearer (Levinson, 1983, p. 110). That at some points, the situations had the equivalent of the literal meaning. In the excerpt S02E11/QL/FL5,

Barney expressed the impact of ‘No cigar’ rule on him as if it was in the situation of Taliban issues in Afghanistan in the 1990s (“Taliban”). While in the excerpt

S02E01/QL/FL1, Ted’s daughter wanted to be noticeable that it was boring to be awaited on the point when her father met the mother. The fashion of bolded PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

44 utterances above, however, were exaggerated (Levinson, 1983, p. 110). In terms of

CP, those were hyperbolic, thus it flouted the maxim of quality (Essay, 2013).

2) Using metaphor

The following analysis preferably was the figure of speech metaphor which in the situation transpired to be a result of flouting maxim of quality as appeared in the following excerpt:

S02E05/QL/FL3 In an apartment, Marshall expostulated in a form of question about why two male friends could not go to brunch. (1) Marshall: Girly? Breakfast isn’t girly. Lunch isn’t girly. What makes brunch girly? (2) Ted: I don’t know. There’s nothing girly about a horse. Nothing girly about a horn, but put them together and you get a unicorn.

S02E04/QL/FL2 At the bar, knowing that Ted was meeting up kickboxing instructor, Robin as Ted’s girlfriend seemed not to freak out because she thought she didn’t have to listen Ted’s boring stuff. (1) Robin: It’s awesome. It’s win-win. Ted got to vent and I don’t have to hear it. Maybe after he’s done with the talkie-talk, he’ll come over and I’ll get the fun part. (2) Lily: What is wrong with you? God, I felt like I’m teaching love as a second language here.

As appeared in the excerpt S02E05/QL/FL3, according to Robin, “Girly” was a fine word to describe although it seemed to be unreasoningly and irrationally.

To bear out Marshall’s understanding, Ted metaphorically uttered “I don’t know.

There’s nothing girly about a horse. Nothing girly about a horn, but put them together and you get a unicorn.” The use of qualifiers “I don’t know” was uttered by Ted as a dispreferred response upon Marshall’s perception of having brunch. It signaled that Ted was not sure. As was known, in the time, there was a wide-held social stigma that two males walking together was a lover. By exemplifying two male friends as a horse and a corn, and the unicorn as the effeminacy, he expected

Marshall to grasp the inference. The same account occurred in the excerpt PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

45

S02E04/QL/FL2. In the situation, Robin who was supposed to get panic after hearing the bad news about his boyfriend behaving oppositely as if nothing occurred. From Lily’s view, Robin seemed to know less about how to be in a relationship. To express her emotion, Lily exaggerated that teaching Robin a love had the same obstacle with teaching a second language. Besides, in that situation,

Lily implied that love had some similar characteristics of second language. In another word, Lily took the metaphor a second language to a love.

However, those utterances were not intended to mislead the hearer. The speakers expected the hearers to infer the implied meaning (Levinson, 1983, p.

110). With his metaphor to effeminate behavior of Marshall’s brunch invitation,

Ted was trying to tell that Marshall and his male friend would look similar to a cute couple if they went to brunch. Ted did not assure pretty well, yet he felt uncertain.

The fashion of Ted’s utterance to response Marshall’s inquiry, however, in terms of CP, constituted flouting maxim of quality (Essay, 2013).

3) Delivering sarcastic tone

Delivering sarcastic tone in the collected data was discovered to be the case of flouting maxim of quality, described as follows:

S02E09/QL/FL4 (1) Marshall: She’s pretty a private person. (2) Lily: Except when she’s talking about… (visualization about Robin telling her friend’s marriage stuff) (3) Ted: So you don’t think there’s any ‘friend’ from Canada? (4) Marshall: Oh, I’m sure there is. Just like I have a ‘friend’ who wet his bed till he was ten. Use your brain Ted.

As appeared in the excerpt above, Marshall flouted maxim of quality by delivering sarcastic tone (Essay, 2013). The occurrence of the account was expressed not apart from the situation which Ted was facing at the time. The privacy PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

46 issues about Robin’s past life in Canada brought out some presumptions from her friends. In the view of Ted’s perspective, it was abstruse situation. Some of friends casted their premature judgment about Robin’s past life which might be possible as the underlying reasons why she did not want to go to a mall. Marshall suggested

Ted a hint that Robin was married at the mall. Ted with his incredulous feeling, then, clarified the possibility that Robin casted ‘friend’ to tell her past life in

Canada. Subsequently, Marshall uttered (4) “Oh, I’m sure there is. Just like I have a ‘friend’ who wet his bed till he was ten. Use your brain Ted.” The dispreferred token “Oh, I’m sure there is.” in his utterance proceeded dispreffered turn of

Marshall. In his utterance, Marshall expected Ted to draw the inference that ‘friend’ was Robin herself. The fashion of Marshall uttering the exchange was intended to deliver sarcastic tone which required to be inferred oppositely (Levinson, 183, p.

110). b. Flouting Maxim of Quantity

This category chanced when the speaker blatantly gave more or less information than was required in the situation, the speaker usually flouted this maxim as the speaker provided insufficient words in the conversation. In other words, the speaker gave incomplete words when the speaker was speaking (Leech,

1983, p. 140). The utterance at the level of face value was non informative, but it was informative at the level of what was implicated. Its implicature was implied when the speaker or the writer conveyed messages that were less informative or the information which was too much and unnecessary. PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

47

There were nineteen (19) excerpts in which the flouting located at this maxim. Two sub maxims of quantity were discovered to be flouted. Firstly, maxim of quantity was flouted by contributing less informative information.

1) Providing less information

S02E09/QN/FL6 In Ted’s room, Robin and Ted was having a chat before they slept. (1) Robin: And who gets trapped under a fake boulder at the mall? (2) Ted: Not me in Ohio when I was nine, that’s for sure.

In the excerpt S02E09/QN/FL6, the conversation occurred when Robin and

Ted were going to sleep in Ted’s bed. In the middle of their talk, Robin changed the topic which Ted allowed the transition. As apparent in the excerpt above, Robin questioned Ted about who got trapped under a fake boulder at the mall (“Fake boulder”). Ted’s response to Robin’s inquiry was subsequently defensive. Robin’s question might be a trap for Ted to answer, yet she expected her partner to take the question as a genuine question. By the false presupposition, Ted had the exchange boundaries. Rather than answering “I don’t know”, he followed Robin’s inquiry with “Not me in Ohio when I was nine, that’s for sure.” Through his utterance, Ted expected Robin to grasp the additional meaning beyond than his utterance. At the time when he was nine, he knew somebody got trapped under a fake boulder at the mall in Ohio, but he got no idea who exactly the person was. He also emphasized that he was not the person who carelessly got trapped. Ted’s utterance from the level of what he uttered was non informative, but it was informative at the level of what Ted tried to imply (Leech, 1983, p. 140). Ted’s utterances, in terms of CP, however, constituted flouting of the maxim of quantity.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

48

2) Giving other information

Furthermore, the situation in which the speaker gave other information than required resulted to flout maxim of quantity.

S02E07/QN/FL7 Robin found out that her favorite look of Ted was unfortunately made-up and aimed to appealed people. (1) Robin: I love that look, I think I slept with you because of that look. -- And it’s fake? (2) Ted: Oh, and you biting your lower lip, shyly looking away and thrusting your chest out is natural?

The excerpt above illustrated Ted flouted maxim of quantity. In the exchange of Robin’s inquiry, Ted did not give the information exactly as was required. However, he did not evade current topic or to make new topic. He aimed to place Robin at the same situation and position so that Robin could infer what he tried to imply. Ted’s utterance was not informative at the level of face value but it was informative at the level of what Ted implied (Leech, 1983, p. 140).

3) Giving more information

In addition, the maxim of quantity in this research was resulted from the situation in which the speaker gave more information than it was required (Leech,

1983, p. 140). The following excerpt would suffice to explain how the maxim of quality was flouted by the character.

S02E22/QN/FL16 Ted and Robin were in a confusion whether or not to tell Marshall due to the fact that Lily moved on. (1) Robin: He’s just starting to get better, going out with Barney. I mean, how do you think he’s going to feel when he hears Lily’s moved on? (2) Ted: She’s moved on? (3) Robin: It happens. I’ve fallen out of love faster than that before, sometimes, boom, with no warning whatsoever. One day we’re in love, the next day, he’s dead to me. -- But we’re great, honey.

In the conversation above Robin failed to observe the maxim of quantity.

The conversation occurred when Robin and Ted were talking about the fact that PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

49

Lily moved on, they were talking how Lily and Marshall might get along after breakup. Robin took the invitation turn from Ted and uttered the information which in the purpose of its exchange was unnecessary. In the current purpose of exchange, she laid out the information possible in such situation based on her personal experiences without making prior judgment to be important for Ted. Consequently, the unnecessary exchange impacted on the second speaker, Ted, who has been in a relationship with her for years. Regardless of Robin’s utterance, she did not deliberately arranged Ted to feel upset. She expected Ted to grasp the meaning that a women could overcome the broken heart soon they wanted to. Unfortunately, Ted took the information oppositely, in spite Robin uttered the afterthought to repair her utterance. Robin’s utterance, however, contributed too much information than it was required for current purpose (Leech, 1983, p. 140). Thus, she flouted maxim of quantity. c. Flouting Maxim of Relevance

The maxim of relevance was flouted when a speaker was giving a response or making an observation that was deliberately not relevant to the topic which was being discussed. Its implicature arouse when the speaker deviated from the particular topic being asked and discussed. The example of which could be illustrated by changing the subject or failing to keep to the topic (Thomas 1995, p.70).

The following excerpts would suffice to present how the characters flouted maxim of relevance with the purpose: avoiding topic discussed and giving a hint.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

50

1) Initiating a new topic to avoid current discussion

The occurrence of the situation in which maxim of relevance was flouted appeared in the following excerpt:

S02E03/RL/FL5 Mr. and Mrs. Mosby, Ted’s parents were visiting him in the apartment, while Lily and Marshall just being single after broke up (1) Lily: Hi, Mr. and Mrs. Mosby. (2) Mr. Mosby: Oh Lily! Hey, Marshall. (3) Marshall: Good to see you. (4) Lily: I was just stopping by to pick up some of my things. (5) Mrs. Mosby: yes we were so sorry to hear about your….you know, the, the…well. (6) Marshall: Lily calling off the wedding and dumping me? (7) Lily: Me begging Marshall to take me back and him rejecting me? (8) Mrs. Mosby: I love your hair.

The conversation above occurred when Lily came by to take the rest of her stuff left at the apartment. The opening line from the first turn of Lily was initiated on the floor. Structurally, there were neither overlap nor silence chanced within the conversation and the turns among the speakers were well distributed. It means the speakers were considered cooperative so far. At the beginning, the opening line was going pretty well. Then, Lily’s turn at the fourth turn was to inform that she came by for picking up her stuff. Her utterance, then, invited another sympathy which was expressed by Mrs. Mosby. However, Mrs. Mosby’s utterance was incomplete, which in terms of CP she flouted maxim of manner. The focus of the humorous effects occurred within the sequence of assessment from Lily-Marshall and the remark of Mrs. Mosby. In this excerpt the last turn of Mrs. Mosby was discovered to flout maxim of relevance. Being at the floor, she blatantly refused to make what she said relevant to the previous remarks uttered by Marshall and Lily (Thomas

1995, p.70). Her remark “I love your hair” was aired to imply that she did not want to talk about the unpleasant situation between Lily and Marshall. PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

51

2) Initiating new topic to hint the hearer

Also, the research discovered the character flouted maxim of relevance on account of giving hint, as appeared from the following excerpt:

S02E04/RL/FL4 Carl wished lily trade sex for beer. Robin: Hey, Carl, is Ted still here? Carl: No. – Hey, Lily. You still single? Lily: Yes. Carl: You know... I’ve poured a lot of free drinks for you over the years. A lot.

The conversation chanced when Robin and Lily swung by at the Mac’ Laren bar to find Ted. Structurally, at the beginning, everybody involved in the conversation were cooperative. It was indicated by the adjacency pair which patterned well. Until Carl uttered “You know... I’ve poured a lot of free drinks for you over the years. A lot.” Carl refused to make his utterance relevant to chance of a new topic (Thomas 1995, p.70). Through his utterance, he implied a sex invitation for Lily. d. Flouting Maxim of Manner

The maxim of manner was flouted when a speaker deliberately failed to observe the maxim by not being brief, not being orderly, using obscure language or ambiguous language. In humorous-expressive contexts, what the speaker really intended to point was implicitly expressed in a changing manner (Langacker, 1993, p. 30). This created an implicature which made the participants look for an additional set of meaning (Thomas, 1995, p. 71). Its implicature occured when the utterances were not brief, ambiguous, and obscure.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

52

1) Using slang

The following excerpts would suffice to represent how the characters flouted maxim of relevance by using slang.

S02/E12/MN11 In the station Robin and Lily pick up Katie. They miss how cute Katie was but surprisingly, Katie grow up “fast”, she got her boyfriend and kissing in the station. (1) Katie: Hey, Robin. How are you? (2) Robin: Oh, good. Good. (3) Robin: So, who is this….tongue person? (4) Katie: Oh, Robin. This is my boyfriend Kyle.

The excerpt above showed the situation when Katie touched down in New

York by a train in order to visit her sister, Robin. Structurally, the opening sequence was uttered by Katie which was followed up by Robin. The play of Katie kissing her boyfriend in the station drew her attention which led her to jump to another question-answer sequence about who the boyfriend of Katie was. Robin uttered

“So, who is this….tongue person?” to call for Katie’s clarification about the guy.

Robin failed to mention the guy. Regardless, she did not intend to mislead Katie with the faced-value sentence. The implicature was expected to be drawn through the noun phrase “tongue person” which in this case was Kyle. According to

Levinson (1983), if the speaker uses slang, the speaker flouts maxim of manner (p.

104). Robin’s utterance was obscure to mention Kyle as “tongue person”, which in terms of CP, constituted the flouting of maxim of manner.

2) Uttering ambiguous sentences

Flouting the maxim of manner occurred when the speaker said ambiguous language or used another language which made the utterance incomprehensible for the hearer. Moreover, if the speaker used slang or his voice was not loud enough, PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

53 the speaker flouted this maxim (Levinson, 1983, p. 104). The following excerpt explained the account of using other language, described as follows:

S02E22/MN/FL19 Barney: No es possible. – Nobody moves to Argentina. The Argentinean peso has dropped two-thirds in five years, the government is opposed to free market reforms, and the railroad has been a mess since the breakup of Ferrocarriles Argentinos.

By the sign of the laughter track, uttering other languages by no mean to mislead the hearer was potential to create humorous effects as appeared in the above excerpt. In the situation, Barney flouted maxim of manner because he used

Argentinean by no mean to make the hearer misunderstood his utterance (Levinson,

1983, p. 104). However, in terms of CP, the fashion of his utterance constituted flouting maxim of manner.

3) Being not brief

Flouting maxim of manner in this research was done by proceeding the fashion of constructing the utterances, as transpired from the following utterance:

S02E06/MN/FL4 Druthers: Now, as most of you know, my Pete Rose, Pete Rose, Pete Rose baseball has been stolen.

The above utterance presented how the character, Druthers, uttered that his baseball which was signed by the athlete Pete Rose three times. He fashioned his utterance by mentioning “Pete Rose” three times to emphasize how valuable the baseball for him was. However, in terms of CP, the fashion of Druthers’ utterance was unnecessary which constituted the flouting maxim of manner (Thomas, 1995).

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

54 e. Flouting Multiple Maxims

The speaker flouted more than one maxim when the speaker wanted to imply a certain meaning or purpose.

1) Flouting maxim quality and quantity

S02E06/QN-QL/FL4 At Big Wave Luau (1) Ted: Robin, nothing to add? (2) Robin: No. Lily is my friend and I’m not going to make fun of her trying to follow her dreams. (3) Lily: thank you. Robin: -- Although, you might want to bring out big Hawaiian drum because I’m pretty sure today’s my birthday.

In the excerpt above, Robin flouted both maxims of quantity and quality at the same time. In the situation, Lily was trying to figure out and catch her dreams -

- without the exception of becoming a waitress in a restaurant. Rather than supporting, her friends made fun of her current job. At the first place, Robin raised

Lily’s feeling by giving the false support. The maxim was flouted soon after the false supports were uttered. Robin blatantly spelled out the unnecessary information in current purpose by uttering “Although, you might want to bring out big Hawaiian drum because I’m pretty sure today’s my birthday.” Robin was considered uncooperative from Lily’s perspective because she meant her utterance to insult. In the restaurant Big Wave Luau where Lily worked, the waitress would bring out the drum to celebrate when the customers’ birthday. The maxim of quality was flouted as Robin lied that it was Robin’s birthday. Besides, she added information about special features offered in that restaurant which was meant to insult Lily. From the point of Lily’s perspective, Robin’s utterance was unnecessary. Moreover, Robin PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

55 did not expect Lily and the others to grasp the meaning at the face value. Robin aimed to convey a sense of humor (Langacker, 1993, p. 30).

2. Analysis on a Situation which Violates Maxims

Violating a maxim occurred when someone in a conversation failed to observe one or more maxims with the intention to deceive the recipient, often using an implicature with the intention to mislead (Thomas, 1995, p. 73). The research discovered fifty (550) violations of four maxims. a. Violating Maxim of Quality

Tupan and Natalia (2008, p. 64) said that the violation maxim of quality occurred when the speaker deliberately spelling out untruthful utterances for different reasons: hiding the truth, saving face, feeling jealous, satisfying the hearer, cheering the hearer, building one’s belief, avoiding hurting the hearer, and convincing the hearer (as cited in “Non Observance of Grice Maxims”, 2013). The research discovered 24 excerpts which indicated to violate maxim of quality. They added, the violation maxim of quality was executed by saying untruth or lying, overstating, understating, contradiction, irony, lacking of evidence.

1) Providing falsehood

The following excerpt discovered to be a situation in which the speaker violated maxim of quality. The research discovered that uttering falsehood with the intention to mislead the hearer resulted a violation maxim of quality.

S02E03/QL/VL2 In restaurant, all have a meet-up dinner with Ted’s parents, Lily in stunning dress. (1) Lily: Are you all right? You’re kind of sweating. (2) Marshall: No, I’m fine. It’s just this roll is really spicy.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

56

As appeared to be humorous indicated by canned laughter in the excerpt above, Lily successfully seduced Marshall as she looked hot in her stunning dress.

Despite she had good reason to ask a question, she tested him under her guise of friendship. Hence, she would expect Marshall to provide adequate response to her face-valued question. However, Marshall owned the exchange boundaries. He could obey the maxim by spelling out truthfully what he was feeling towards Lily’s dinner outfit which clued to embarrassment or he lied to save his face. Structurally, both Lily and Marshall happened to have a common question-answer sequence in conversation, yet Marshall’s response to Lily’s inquiry was liable to mislead by untruthfully putting the blame on the roll in the table. Marshall expected Lily to take the face value meaning from his utterance because he wanted to hide the truth

(Thomas, 1995, p. 73). In terms of the CP, the followed-up move produced by

Marshall constituted a violation of the maxim of quality.

2) Uttering ironical sentences

Violating maxim of quality discovered from the data was irony as transpired in the following excerpt:

S02E06/QL/VL5 (1) Druthers: what do you think, Ted? It just let itself out of its plastic case and rolled away? - - Somebody stole it. (2) Ted: Well, um I better get back to these Styrofoam trees. (3) Druthers: Oh, who cares about the trees? It’s just busy work to make you feel like you’re contributing. (4) Ted: Inspiring as always, sir.

The excerpt above was discovered to be a result of violating maxim of quality. The conversation happened when Hammond Druthers, a manager of a company where Ted hired, got mad because he lost his baseball. In the earlier time,

Ted was in charged to do a project from Druthers, which was to make a set of trees PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

57 from Styrofoam. When Ted showed Druthers the result, rather than appreciating it,

Druthers seemed to depreciate it. As the exchange, Ted said insincere utterance

“Inspiring as always, sir.” Structurally, the conversation happened to have a question-answer sequence at first. Druthers drew the supposition that somebody must have stolen the baseball. For current purpose exchange, Ted was supposed to concern it, otherwise he rather spelled out dispreffered with the prefaces “well” and the initial hesitation “umm” to delay his disregarding sentence. Subsequently, it was followed by Druthers’ insensitive response upon Ted’s project. In view of the fact that Druthers was the manager, Ted confronted him with a compliment. The compliment, however, was not sent from the bottom of the hurt but the lip. Ted expected the utterance to be taken at its surface value. Ted made up the compliment to satisfy Druthers by deluding Druthers a false compliment. The turn taken by Ted resulted an utterance which in terms of CP constituted the violation maxim of quality (Tupan and Natalia, 2008, p. 64).

3) Providing less assured information

As was transpired, the speaker from the following excerpt was known to violate maxim of quality. It showed that maxim of quality was done by simply concealing the truth to safe face which in terms of CP, the speaker violated the first sub maxim of quality.

S02E09/QL/VL8 Marshall got three slaps. One because he lied and two for being prematurely slapped. (1) Barney: Oh, my God. Are you gonna cry? (2) Marshall: No. – You’re gonna cry.

From the above excerpt, the conversation structurally occurred shortly after

Marshall got three slaps from Barney since he failed the gamble. The adjacency pair PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

58 of the conversation was question-answer sequence. The turns were well distributed without silence or overlap chanced between the speakers. Barney’s inquiry was reasonable since he saw Marshall suffering the pain. Inappropriately, Barney received what he did not expect in return. Marshall refused to be cooperative by uttering the dispreffered token as the exchange of Barney’s inquiry. In terms of CP,

Marshall violated maxim of quality (Tupan and Natalia, 2008, p. 64-66).

4) Providing less evidences

Furthermore, violating maxim of quality could done by uttering the information which was lacking of adequate evidences. The following excerpt discovered to be the violation the second sub maxim of quality.

S02E22/QL/VL24 (1) Ted: Hey, kiddo. (2) Barney: You are going to miss out on a lot of awesome stuff. You’ll be at home with kid while I am out awesome-ing all over the place. And you’re going to get fat.

The excerpt above showed the humorous conversation occurred between the speakers, Ted and Barney. Ted came close to Barney and opened the conversation with summon. Structurally, Barney strayed from the summon-answer sequence offered by Ted. His disappointment utterance twisted Ted’s expectation of response from Barney. In his exchange to Ted’s summon, Barney uttered “You are going to miss out on a lot of awesome stuff. You’ll be at home with kid while I am out awesome-ing all over the place. And you’re going to get fat.” Through his utterances, Barney intended to continue the previous topic which was discussed in the earlier time. In this situation, Barney held a premature supposition that Robin became pregnant, impregnated by Ted. In his utterance, Barney casted a premature guesstimate about how Ted’s life was going to be with a family without adequate PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

59 proves (Tupan and Natalia, 2008, p. 64). Accordingly, Barney was considered to violate maxim of quality. b. Violating Maxim of Quantity

The maxim of quality was violated when the speaker deliberately provided insufficient information so that the hearer will not fully understand the situation.

Likewise, the speaker deliberately conveyed more information which the hearer unnecessarily needed to know. The research discovered ten (10) cases in the point of violation maxim of quality.

1) Providing only part of required information

The following excerpt would suffice to describe how the speaker deliberately violated maxim of quantity by giving less information than it was required with the intention to make the hearer not fully understood the actual situation.

S02E08/QN/VL3 Atlantic City, all down at casino. (1) Barney: Ah, A.C. always decline, never hitting bottom. It’s good to be back, old friend. (2) Ted: you been here before? (3) Barney: Oh, uh, once or twice. (4) Chinese Guy: Barney! (speak with Chinese accent) (5) Barney: Good to see you. -- Three times, maybe.

The excerpt above displayed the conversation which constituted the violation maxim of quantity. Structurally, the conversation was initiated by

Barney’s remark about the casino he used to visit in Atlantic City. The followed-up move was the sequence of question-answer between the first and the second speaker. Ted’s question “you been here before?” was to be taken as genuine question. However, in return, Ted received an unsatisfying answer from Barney.

Barney’s exchange was initiated with dispreferred tokens “Oh,” as the preface and PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

60

“uh,” as the hesitation/ delay before he uttered the point “once or twice.” Anchored from the given situation and Barney’s remark, there were two possibilities which could be traced down, he either rightly forgot the frequency or diminished the frequency. In a sudden, a Chinese guy initiated a possible turn and called out

“Barney” while approaching Barney and Ted. The summons of a Chinese guy opened a new channel for a talk which called for Barney’s response. In Barney’s point, he was obliged to respond to summon and repair his previous utterance on the third turn in the exchange of Ted’s inquiry. After responding his Chinese old friend’s summon, he straightly selected Ted as the specific hearer for current purpose of exchange. He repaired his utterance into “Three times, maybe” which would not suffice. He intended to cover the frequency so that Ted did not fully understand about Barney’s past life in Atlantic City. In the terms of CP, Barney violated maxim of quantity because he gave insufficient information as was required with the intention to mislead (Khosravizadeh & Sadehvandi, 2011, p. 123).

Furthermore, the following excerpt illustrated the violation of the same sub maxim as appeared in the following conversation:

S02E08/QN/VL4 In a Courthouse, Ted asked Robin to have sexual intercourse in a public place. (1) Ted: Psssstttt.. (2) Robin: What? (3) Ted: (pervy look) (4) Robin: Here? (5) Ted: yeah. Got a little time to kill. (6) Robin: Oh, my God, it’s the T-shirt, isn’t it? (7) Ted: No. --- A little.

The conversation occurred when Lily and Marshall were eloping in

Atlantic City convoyed by their best friends. At that time, they were in a long queue in a courthouse to ask for a marriage license. Structurally, the conversation occurred PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

61 to have summon-answer sequence. Ted summoned Robin to chat in a private. The interesting point from Ted’s request on his third turn was that its nonverbal request which was effortlessly understandable for Robin to grasp. Through his nonverbal expression, Ted was asking for a sex to kill the time. On the sixth turn, Robin opened a new question-answer sequence, it was the initiation sequence before summon was answered. Ted’s answer to Robin’s inquiry was not as informative as was expected. Through his utterance on the seventh turn, Ted covered the truth by misrepresenting the false information so that Robin believed that it was not because of T-shirt’s picture. However, his utterance did not suffice, the word “No” and “A little” carried each on different meaning. In the terms of CP, Ted’s utterance constituted the violation sub maxim of quantity.

2) Providing more information

Besides providing more information, the research discovered that intentionally giving more information than it was required could violate maxim of quantity as transpired in the following excerpts:

S02E16/QN/VL7 In the Mc’Laren, bar, Both Ted and Robin agreed that they should be honest each other about exes’ things. (1) Ted: See that girl over there? Three years ago, I totally made out with her. (2) Robin: I don’t wanna hear that.

The violation maxim of quantity could be done by giving the information which the hearer unnecessarily heard as appeared in the excerpt above. The conversation between Ted and Robin occurred in Mac’Laren Bar. Ted on initiated turn was considered uncooperative because he informed the unnecessary information for Robin (Khosravizadeh & Sadehvandi, 2011, p. 123). Ted blatantly PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

62 hit Robin through his utterance which was founded to be offensive. In terms of CP,

Ted violated the sub maxim of quantity. b. Violating Maxim of Relevance

Violation of maxim of relevance occurred when the speaker blatantly uttered an irrelevant topic. In the excerpt, the speaker’s answer or response was by no means relevant to another speaker’s question. One reason for this answer could be the fact that the speaker was trying to evade current topic possessed by the other speakers.

1) Uttering other topic to evade current situation

The following excerpt would suffice to present the violation maxim of relevance:

S02E12/MN/VL9 At the apartment. Robin, Barney and Ted. There is a spider in the living room. (1) Robin: Spider! Spider! (2) Barney: I left something in the hallway.

As appeared in the excerpt above, the conversation occurred when Robin exclaimed in fear upon knowing there was a spider near the couch. She exclaimed to call for a help from anyone around. She did not select a next specific speaker so that anyone could contribute the expected response. However, the quickest response which she received in return was not as she expected. Barney selected himself to be on the floor to hint Robin that he could not help her out of it. Barney’s utterance was not cooperative by misrepresenting different topic. In fact, Barney was afraid of spider but he covered the truth with such utterance. In the terms of CP, Barney violated the maxim of relevance to exclude himself from current situation

(Khosravizadeh & Sadehvandi, 2011, p. 123). PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

63

S02E01/MN/VL1 The year 2030, the narrator, ted was telling his kids about how he met their mother. (1) Ted: Okay, where were we? It was June of 200six) and life had just taken an unexpected turn. (2) Daughter: Dad, can’t you just skip ahead to the part where you meet Mom? I feel like you’ve been talking for like a year. (3) Ted: Honey, all this stuff I’m telling you is important. It’s all part of the story. (4) Son: Could I go to the bathroom? (5) Ted: No.

The excerpt above supported the previous presented result in which the situation constituted the violation maxim of relevance as well. Ted opened the talk with an invitation for his children to listen the story how he met his wife.

Structurally, the sequence for the first party was invitation-refusal. The refusal which occurred to flout maxim of quality was uttered by the daughter. However, both of his children seemed to be unexcited to listen the long story. Both children were considered uncooperative. In the second party, the fourth turn, which was taken by the son of Ted, was irrelevant to the topic being discussed in the current conversation. The son was trying to evade the long story from his father by uttering the irrelevant topic which was untruthful (Khosravizadeh & Sadehvandi, 2011, p.

123). In terms of CP, the son violated maxim of relevant. c. Violating Maxim of Manner

Maxim of manner was violated when the speaker intentionally refrained to be cooperative in their conversation by constructing obscure, ambiguous, unordered, and undirected information to cause the hearer misunderstood or achieve some purposes. The analysis resulted the findings that maxim of manner could be violated by some ways.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

64

1) Uttering obscure sentences

Firstly, the following excerpt illustrated the violation of the first sub maxim of maxim manner by constructing obscure utterance:

S02E18/MN/VL15 In apartment, Barney doesn’t want Ted and Robin living together. He tried to convince them by asking made-up questions. (1) Barney: So? We all agree? We move Ted’s stuff back up here? (2) Ted: Mm... No. we’re still moving in together. (3) Barney: Why? This is crazy. Ted, you’re throwing your life away. This girl is blinding you. With her shinny hair and her boob shaped boobs. This is bad for you, too, you know.

The conversation above which constituted the violation sub maxim of manner occurred when Ted was about moving together in Robin’s apartment.

Barney suddenly felt that he was about to lose his best friend, and he was the one who disagreed Ted and Robin moving together. The interesting party was occurred when Barney initiated an offer to open an offer-refusal sequence with Ted. He offered to move all Ted’s stuff from the lorry back to the apartment. However, Ted gave a refusal to Barney as the exchange. Ted’s utterance used the dispreffered token “mmm” as the delay before completing his utterance. In the exchange to Ted’s remark, Barney refrained from talking cooperatively. He obscured the expression by uttering “With her shinny hair and her boob shaped boobs.” to stop Ted moving together. It was obscure to convince Ted that he was appealed and blinded by

Robin’s physical appearance. However, the remark “boob shaped boobs” was obscure. Therefore, in terms of CP, Barney violated maxim of manner since he did not construct his utterance clearly and obviously (Tupan and Natalia, 2008, p. 66).

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

65

2) Uttering ambiguous sentences

Secondly, the following excerpt illustrated the violation of the first sub maxim of maxim manner by using ambiguous utterance.

S02E12/MN/VL10 Down at the bar, Barney drops some knowledge that according to him relationships are like a freeway. In fact, in previous month, he told Marshall that relationships are like a travelling circus. (1) Barney: Freeways have exits. So do relationships. The first exit, my personal favorite, is six hours in. you meet, you talk you have sex, you exit when she’s in the shower. (2) Robin: So every girl you have sex with feels the immediate need to shower? Actually yeah I get that.

The excerpt above illustrated the utterances which were ambiguous in two different meaning. The conversation chanced when Barney took the floor to drop the knowledge of relationships. He did not select specifically the next speaker to take the turn. Afterward, Robin took a chance to speak and to give a feedback. In her utterance “So every girl you have sex with feels the immediate need to shower?

Actually yeah I get that.” however turned out to be ambiguous. Although she intended the hearers to infer the faced-value meaning, her construction was ambiguous. In her utterance, she possibly had ever had sex with Barney, so it was reasonable to infer that she felt the immediate need to shower, or she possibly understood face-to-face that the girl whom Barney had sex with felt the immediate need to have shower after sex. Consequently, in terms of CP, she violated maxim of manner (Khosravizadeh & Sadehvandi, 2011, p. 123).

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

66

3) Being not brief

Third, the maxim of manner was violated by not being brief as appeared in the following excerpt:

S02E05/MN/VL3 Barney’s apartment, after his one-night stand. (1) Barney: That was close. That hippie chick wouldn’t leave. She was ready to squat here. (2) Lily: Well, she’d have to with your spring-loaded toilet seat, wouldn’t she? (3) Barney: She was freakishly immune to everything in my apartment…except you. You’re better than porn. (4) Lily: Thank you. (5) Barney: How would you like to extend your stay here? All you’d have to do is pretend to be my wife, and scare off the occasional one-night stand. I know, I know. You’ve got your ethics. You’ve got your principles…. (6) Lily: I’ll do it. (7) Barney: really? (8) Lily: Barney, you’ve clearly got some serious mother issues that have left you the emotional equivalent of a scavenging sewer rat. But in other my apartment I would be living with an actual scavenging sewer rat, so you win. (9) Barney: I’ll take it.

The conversation occurred after Barney was released from a girl he slept with the night before. Barney was used to have one night stand which was his favorite. At the time, he got a situation that the particular girl would not leave his apartment. In other situation, Lily got her own situation in her apartment where many rats living. Regarding, Lily was the effective weapon to expel the one-night- stand girl. The interesting focus of the current conversation was when Barney initiated to get the floor to open a talk with Lily with an offer-acceptance sequence.

On her eighth turn, Lily responded to Barney’s inquiry. Through her utterance, she expected Barney to infer the intention at the face value that his current issues were equivalent with the scavenging sewer rats’ issues existing in Lily’s apartment. Besides, Barney was expected to infer that Lily agreed to prolong the stay because she wanted to help. However, Lily indeed wanted to stay out of her own apartment because there were actual sewer rats in her apartment which was PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

67 unsettling for her and yet she sheltered the truth for herself. Constructively, Lily’s utterance was extremely long and unnecessary. It was obviously no accident nor through any inability to speak clearly. Therefore, the speaker failed to observe the maxim of manner (Tupan and Natalia, 2008, p. 66).

4) Uttering unordered information

Fourth, maxim of manner could be violated by failing the utterance with unordered information. In consequence, the hearer might be misunderstood and confused.

S02E15/MN/VL14 The gang are down at the bar. Marshall came with broken leg, (1) Barney: Here’s how you run a marathon. Step one, you start running. (pausing) there is no step two.

The excerpt above described the violation maxim of manner done by

Barney. Structurally, there was a pause within Barney’s utterance because he got no idea what to be the next steps. In his utterance, Barney informed the step how to run the marathon. Informing step-by-step should be in a well order and clear instruction, it should begin with the very first sequence followed up with the further sequences or from the start to the finish in order to construct a well-ordered instruction. In contrary, Barney did not inform in the way it was supposed to be, yet he seemed to master less information. In terms of CP, Barney violated maxim of manner because he did not construct his utterance in a good order which confused the hearers (Khosravizadeh & Sadehvandi, 2011, p. 123).

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

68 d. Violating Multiple maxims

In addition, one excerpt can also be a case of a multiple violation. A multiple violation occurred when the speaker violated more than one maxim simultaneously

(Tupan and Natalia, 2008, p. 64).

1) Violating maxims of quality and relevance

S02E11/QL-RL/VL (At the bar, Robin, Ted and Barney. Barney got fever but he denied) (1) Ted: Are you sick? (2) Barney: Is it sick to find maturity and experience sexy? (3) Ted: No, I meant do you have a cold? (4) Barney: I’m fine. – I’m fine. My nose is just overflowing with awesome and I had to get some of it out. – Now, if you’ll excuse me, the holidays are a time when people are lonely and desperate. It’s the most wonderful time of the year.

The excerpt above showed the violation multiple maxims of quality and relevance. The conversation chanced when Ted noticed that Barney got fever.

Incongruously, Barney uttered an irrelevant response in return. Barney was trying to mislead Ted by altering the meaning of ‘sick’ into another meaning. Sourcing from the www.urbandictionary.com, the word ‘sick’ in US is usually used when something is cool or exciting (“Sick”). The meaning of which has allied meaning with Barney’s definition. Through his utterance, Barney was trying to evade the question by altering the topic. Being aware of the misunderstanding, Ted recomposed the more simply comprehensible question. As the exchange to Ted’s inquiry, Barney blatantly hid the truth by uttering “I’m fine. – I’m fine.”

Accordingly, he violated maxim of quality. His utterance “My nose is just overflowing with awesome and I had to get some of it out.” in terms of CP was obscure. Besides, he tried to evade current topic and a question by uttering “Now, if you’ll excuse me, the holidays are a time when people are lonely and desperate. PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

69

It’s the most wonderful time of the year.” It which was ironic to depict his own contradictory situation, that he was single and circled by a coupled friend.

Consequently, he violated multiple maxims.

2) Violating maxims of quality and quantity

S02E12/QL-QN/VL (1) Barney: The next exits are four days, three weeks, seven months – that’s when you guys are gonna break up, mark your calendars. (talk to both Robin and Ted) (2) Ted: Hey! (3) Robin: What? (talk in the same time)

The humorous excerpt above apparently illustrated the violation of maxim of quality. This happens when the friends were down at the bar and Barney drops some knowledge that according to him relationships were like a freeway.

Structurally, the overlap chanced when Ted and Robin react verbally to Barney’s assertion at the same time. The interest in the excerpt lays on a pair initiated by

Barney with his statement about when the relationship would over and the tokens of Ted and Robin as the exchange. When someone was telling information which was universal for audiences, the teller was supposed to deliver it neutrally and impersonally. However, in his above utterance, Barney blatantly added an information which in current purpose of communication was unnecessary to the hearers, explicitly Ted and Robin as a couple. Barney was also lacking of adequate and sufficient evidences to prove him right, that Ted and Robin would end their relationship within seven months. Accordingly, Barney deliberately violated maxim of quantity and quality (Tupan and Natalia, 2008, p. 64).

3) Violating maxim quality and manner

The last variant of multiple violation discovered in this research was the violation maxims of quality and manner. PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

70

S02E09/QL/VL7 (1) Barney: Fine. Do you wanna know what Robin’s secret is? (2) Ted: You know? (3) Barney: Of course I know. She couldn’t look at us, her face got flushed, that’s shame, my friend. Our friend Robin used to do porn, what for it… ography. (4) Ted: Yeah, we didn’t really need to wait for that.

The conversation above arouse when the friends found that Ted’s girlfriend,

Robin, had been keeping her past life underground before she went to New York.

Her friends and even her boyfriend got clueless about her past. Barney, Ted,

Marshall and Lily tried to solve the Robin’s puzzle. Barney came out with his hypothesis that Robin used to do pornography. The indication which Barney exposed to prove him right about Robin’s past, however, was insufficient. If somebody got flushed with embarrassment, the closest perception upon it did not always signify pornography. In this case, Barney’s perception was affected by his most interest which was sex. However, the truth about Robin’s puzzle was she used to be a pop star in Canada. In this excerpt, the violation maxim of quality occurred when Barney uttered his own hypothesis without sufficient evidences to build his friends belief. Furthermore, maxim of manner was violated when Barney used initiation “wait for it” within the word “Pornography”.

3. Analysis on a Situation which Infringes Maxims

The analysis resulted the minorities. One of which was the infringement.

This one of ways of failing maxims was described as follows:

S02E02/IF01 Lily, Ted and Robin were having breakfast at the restaurant. Robin was still drunk when the waiter served the menu. (1) Robin (talking to the waiter): I’d take you with gravy. If my boyfriend wasn’t sitting right here. – Just kidding. I’m good. (2) Lily: What are you so chirpy about? (3) Ted: She’s still drunk from last night. (4) Robin: I don’t think so. Whoo!

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

71

As appeared in the excerpt above, Robin’s drunkenness at the time affected the ways she spoke. In given situation, Robin failed to observed maxim of quality as she denied his state of condition at the time. Her utterance, however, was nor to mislead or deceive the hearers. In terms of CP, Robin’s utterances constituted the infringement maxim (Thomas, 1995, p. 74).

4. Analysis on a Situation which Suspends maxims

Another way of failing maxims which was discovered from the data was suspension of maxim. The situation in which the speaker suspended the maxim transpired from the following excerpt:

S02E14/SP01 They were at the apartment and ready for Mark’s funeral. (1) Marshall: Okay, that’s great, but just to make sure it records, maybe we should bow our heads and say a quiet prayer to the TiVo gods. (2) Ted: Almighty TiVo, we thank you for all the gifts you have given us: the power to freeze live TV to go take a leak is nothing short of Godlike. Let’s not forget fast- forwarding through commercials. It seems greedy to ask anything more from you, O Magic bos, but if you malfunction and miss the Super Bowl, we will destroy you in the alley with baseball bats.

As appeared in the excerpt above, the conversation appeared to be humorous with the situation in which the suspension maxim occurred. In the case of praying,

Ted’s utterances needed to be praiseworthy and excluded from potential unfavorable disruption. Although the fashion of his utterance was obscure and incongruous as he praised the Tivo, neither maxim to be observed nor implicature to be inferred. Thus, Ted suspended maxim (Thomas, 1995, p. 76).

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

72

B. Contributions of Non-observance Maxims in Creating Humorous Effects

in Sitcom How I Met Your Mother Season 2.

After analyzing the selected data for each. The result would be discussed in the connection with the humor mechanism. The research focused on the language humor, because the process of social activities mostly takes place through conversation, thus humor likely comes out from people’s daily language communication.

The second layer discussion of research discusses how those five of failing maxims contribute in creating humorous effect. The talk of the non-observance of four maxims is the same whether these maxims located in flouting or other non- observance. The difference is in the kind of non-observance. By using the 6 parameters of GTVH, current layer of discussion analyze how creation humorous effects were contributable to violation (viz. flouting, violating of maxims. The discussion was deductively organized from the view of maxim as the kinds of non- observance maxims converge at the same target maxims.

1. Maxim of Quality

The findings showed, there were only three of five kinds of non-observance maxims which exploited maxims of quality in order to create humorous effects: flouting, violating, and infringing.

a. Flouting

Targeting maxim quality by implementing this kind of non-observances resulted to be contributable in creating humorous effects. The following excerpt exemplified the contribution: PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

73

EXCERPT S02E11/QL/FL6 SI At Lily’s apartment, Barney was smoking facing over the opened window while he was sick and it was winter. NA (1) Robin: Barney. What the hell are you doing? Get in here, it’s freezing (Conversation) outside. Are you insane? (2) Barney: Hey, blame Lily and her oppressive ‘no cigars in the apartment rule.’ God, it’s like Marshall’s marrying the Taliban. SO Flouting maxim of quality LM Exaggeration TA Lily’s ‘No Cigar’s rule’ LA Using word ‘Taliban’

As appeared in the excerpt S02E11/QL/FL6, Barney’s utterance was the punchline where the humor appeared. The humor arouse within a narrative strategy

(NA): conversation. The conversation was situated (SI) when Robin cared about

Barney’s condition by asking him to get inside. As Barney threw the guilt on Lily’s

‘No cigar’ rule in return (TA), his utterance constituted flouting maxim of quality

(in form of exaggeration) by using word (LA) ‘Taliban’. Thus, the flouted maxim of quality, in terms of GTVH characterized as the Script Opposition (SO) as was explained by Attardo (1994). Barney’s utterance “God, it’s like Marshall’s marrying the Taliban.” was seen as an incongruity in that script opposition, since his utterance was fictitious that somebody literally married to an Islamic organization (“Taliban”). Equipped with above resource knowledge, the humorous effects was expected to be generated within the logical mechanism (LM). The logical mechanism (LM) started to run as the exaggeration occurred in the conversation. In other words, the exaggeration represented impossibility which in terms of incongruity theory was incongruous. The occurrence of the incongruous situation logically violated the audiences’ normal viewpoint of responses of certain kinds of statement in such situation. Thus, the violation (flouting maxim of quality) was contributable to create humorous effect. PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

74

b. Violating

The following excerpt illustrated the conversation in which humor was attributable to the violating maxim of quality. As stated in chapter 2, utterances demanded to obey the maxim of quality. One should try to be truthful, and does give information that was false or that was not supported evidence.

EXCERPT S02E02/QL/VL1 SI In the apartment, Marshall was aggrieved because Barney twice in a row took the girl he approached at the bar. NA (1) Marshall: I hate you. (Conversation) (2) Barney: I am so sorry. It’s a sickness. I’m the real victim here. (3) Marshall: Twice. Twice in a row, you took my candy. That was my candy. SO Violating maxim of quality LM Exaggeration TA Barney’s concoction LA Using hyperbolic sentence

In the conversation above, humor from the jab line uttered by Barney which occurred within a conversation between Barney and Marshall (NA). In the situation

(SI), Marshall seemed so crestfallen at what Barney did to him. He was aggrieved at the unfair deal. Barney, the one who was supposed to be the wingman, handed over the deal twice. The humor sprang up from Barney’s exchange to Marshall’s utterance. In Barney’s utterance, pretended to be sorry for what he did, instead, he deliberately took the girl twice. He concocted (TA) a reason of what he did, that it was a sickness. His language (LA) was hyperbolic. He reasoned out that the sickness could not be helped, and he was the victim of which. As was known, there never such sickness exists in the world. Obviously, Barney uttered untruthful words which in terms of CP, he violated the first sub maxim of quality (SO). Accordingly, the humorous effects were generated (LM) from Barney’s utterance for disobeying the objectivity. He attributed the cause of his behavior to the sickness. Logically, he violated the conceptual patterns held by the audiences. Barney’s performance in PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

75 this conversation was incongruous for the reason of being ill-treated by irrational sickness. Combined with Barney’s apologetic facial expression, the incongruous event triggered by his utterance was sufficient for amusement.

c. Infringing

In this sitcom, infringement was possible to bring out the humorous effect.

An excerpt exemplifies that infringing maxim of quality contributed to create humorous effect, described as follows:

EXCERPT S02E02/IF1 SI Lily, Ted and Robin were having breakfast at the restaurant. Robin was still drunk when the waiter served the menu. NA (1) Lily: What are you so chirpy about? (Conversation) (2) Ted: She’s still drunk from last night. (3) Robin: I don’t think so. Whoo! SO Infringing maxim of quality LM Ignoring the obvious TA Robin’s drunkenness LA Vague language

Humorous effects sprang up within the conversation (NA) among Robin,

Lily and Ted, specifically at Robin’s utterance as the punchline. The conversation was situated (SI) when three of them went to have breakfast in a restaurant while

Robin was still drunk after the previous night party. Her drunkenness (TA) drove the way she spoke to a waiter at the time. Robin’s fashion of utterance (LA), in terms of CP constituted the infringement maxim of quality as she denied her the obvious fact of her condition at the time. Thus, the script opposition (SO) was sourced from the infringement. In other words, the infringement contributed to create humorous effects. Consequently, the logical response boundary within current situation of conversation was conflicted as Robin ignored the obvious truth of her condition at the time (LM). The humor was generated when the audience’s normal view of certain kind of response (what Robin ought to appear) opposed to PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

76 what Robin actually said (Latta, 1998, p. 106). This conflict, thus, evidently created humorous effects.

Those three ways of failing maxims above evidently produced humorous effects. Although they were different in the ways, they converged at the same point.

The fashion of speakers’ utterances aimed for the certain purpose: inferring the implicatures, covering the truth or just unintentionally violate the truth. Generally, the aims of speakers came into the same surface of humor elements seen in the view of incongruity theory as said by Latta (1998), that a conflict between what was expected and what actually occurred in the joke ascertains to bring out humor (p.

106). In other words, those various form of violations maxim of CP gave a basic condition as a resource of producing humorous effect.

2. Maxim of quantity

There were four ways of five ways of non-observance maxims which were employed in order to create humorous effects from the violation maxim of quantity in HIMYM season 2. Those were flouting, violating, infringing, and suspending; described as follows:

a. Flouting

Characteristically, flouting maxim of quantity occurred when the speakers spoke either to little or too much amount of information for current purpose of conversation. The following excerpts would suffice to explain how the humorous effects created by flouting the maxim of quantity.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

77

EXCERPT S02E15/QN/FL12 SI On the sale, wedding dress store, robin and lily. Lily has been wanting to buy wedding dress on sale but she didn’t knew the place. NA (1) Robin: This is the place. (Conversation) (2) Lily: Oh, wow. Badgley Mischka! Melissa Sweet! Vera Wang! Oh, Robin, do you have any idea what you guys stumbled onto here? (3) Robin: (giggling) You said Wang. SO Flouting maxim of quantity LM Missing link TA Family name of a designer LA Natural (do not correspondent to the production of humor)

As appeared in the excerpt above, the punchline came out from Robin within a conversation (NA) between Robin and Lily. The conversation occurred

(SI) when Lily was delirious to run into a wedding dress on sale in a store. Lily’s question was considered as part of speech figure which to make a point rather than to elicit an answer. At this point, Robin’s follow-up utterance was not necessarily aired. The humor laid on Robin’s utterance because she uttered other informative utterance for current purpose of conversation. Consequently, she flouted maxim of quantity. In terms of script opposition (SO) it constituted an abnormal behavior.

The logical mechanism (LM) then follows as ground reversal since the expected situation in current conversation changes into unexpected one as in Robin’s utterance. The humorous effects were created when the perceivers, explicitly audiences, have the conceptual patterns which formed variable expectation of what might be Robin’s responses in exchange to Lily’s inquiry. The formed expectation was based on, in this given situation: topic discussed, Lily’s tone of voice, and

Lily’s gesture. Those factors formed the expectation that Robin would be as delirious as Lily was. Unpredictably, Robin’s conflicting utterance violated the audiences’ concept (Morreal, 1987). As a result, it gave a rise to amusement.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

78 b. Violating

Violating maxim of quantity was produced when the speaker blatantly deceived the hearer by uttering either too little or too much amount of information.

The following excerpt would suffice to explain how the utterances discovered to be humorous:

EXCERPT S02E22/QN/VL9 SI Empire State Building with Katy, Robin’s younger sister. NA (1) Barney: Oh, like First Corinthians? That Bible verse? They do that at every (Conversation) wedding. (2) Robin: How’s it go? (Everyone starting to listen to Marshall) (3) Marshall: “Love is patient and kind. Love does not envy or boast. It is not arrogant or rude. Love does not insist on its own way. It is not irritable or resentful. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things… endures all things.” (4) Robin: Lame. (5) Lily: Going on the list. SO Violating maxim of quantity LM Ground-role reversal TA Bible Verse LA Understating: ‘lame’

The humorous situation above sprang up within a conversation (NA) among

Barney, Lily, Marshall and Robin. The situation (SI) occurred when Lily was listing things a couple of marriage usually do in a wedding. Barney initiated a turn to suggest a Bible verse to be on the list. The script opposition (SO) occurred as Robin understate (LA) that Bible verse as ‘lame’. In terms of CP, her utterance constituted the violation maxim of quantity. Subsequently, the logical mechanism (LM) came across soon after maxim of quantity was violated. In this situation, the characters especially Robin typically had a behavior of modern realistic citizen which strayed from the norm. The Bible verse usually cited in a wedding was supposed to be valued, it was not to be grasped as a cliché. Such behavior then conflicted to what audiences’ had in mind about how the characters in the conversation ought to PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

79 behave (Morreal, 1987). This moral violation of such behavior was considered as acceptably normal to the perceivers (audiences), since Robin’s utterance does not poked a certain culture or religious issues (Attardo, 1994, P. 224). More, Robin’s utterance was not aimed to a certain group of people. Hence, it still became humorous.

3. Maxim of relevance

Maxim of relevance is a frame of topic discussed in a conversation. The utterances must be relevant to the inquiry of a topic discussed. As discovered in the first layer of research findings, the violation (viz. flouting, violating, infringing, suspending) maxim of relevance was discovered to be fruitful in creating humorous effects, described as follows:

a. Flouting

Humorous effects were created by flouting maxim of relevance, done by initiating a new topic within an utterance to imply a certain meaning. The following excerpt explained how flouted maxim of relevance contributed in creating humorous effects.

EXCERPT S02E03/RL/FL2 SI Apartment, Ted’s mother didn’t like to talk about things that were uncomfortable, emotional, or in any way. NA (1) Ted’s mom: Oh, I forgot to tell you, your cousin Jimmy had a wonderful (Conversation) time at the spa he visited. (2) Ted: You mean the spa the judge ordered him to go to, to quit cocaine? (3) Ted’s mom: Coffee? SO Script opposition: Good vs. bad LM Implicit parallelism TA How Ted’s mom evade from current question. LA Natural

Humor sprang up from the conversation (NA) between Ted and his mom in his apartment. It occurred (SI) when Ted’s mom told Ted a bad news about his PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

80 cousin that Jimmy had to stay as a detainee in a prison for consuming illegal drug.

Typically, Ted’s mother did not like to talk about something uncomfortable for both hearer and herself, and Ted understood that. Ted’s mom fashioned her utterance by using word ‘spa’ in order to construct a less uncomfortable or distressing information to hear. When Ted responded her utterance by clarifying in clearer manner, Ted’s mom initiated a new topic as she offered a cup of tea which she had been holding during the conversation. Consequently, she flouted maxim of relevance (SO). The humorous effects sprang up from Ted’s mother punchline

(LM). In normal situation, she ought to utter relevant topic in exchange to Ted’s inquiry. However, she refused to make her utterance relevant to the topic. This situation, thus, conflicted to audiences’ normal perspective and created humorous effects (Morreal, 1987).

b. Violating

Violating maxim of manner occurred when the speaker intentionally misled the hearer by uttering other topic with the intention to evade current discussion or giving hints, described as follows:

EXCERPT S02E12/QN/FL11 SI At the apartment. Robin and Ted. There is a spider in the living room when Barney opened the door. NA (1) Robin: Spider! Spider! (Conversation) (2) Barney: (open the door) I left something in the hallway. SO Normal and abnormal LM Role reversal TA Barney’s reason LA Natural

In the conversation above (NA), Barney’s punchline was shown to be humorous indicated by the laughter track. This humor occurred within a situation

(SI) when Robin exclaimed in fear upon knowing there was a spider near the couch. PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

81

She exclaimed to call for a help from anyone around. However, the quickest response which she received in return was not as she expected. Barney selected himself to be on the floor to hint Robin that he could not help her out of it. In fact,

Barney was afraid of spider but he covered the truth. In the terms of CP, Barney violated the maxim of relevance to exclude himself from current situation. In this humor, Barney’s behavior was the incongruity (Raskin, 1985). The logical mechanism of this humor occurred exactly when Barney open the door and aired his utterance. In this given situation, Barney was the nearest person who could have helped Robin. Physically, his appearance seemed to be a gentleman who somebody could count on. However, it turned out that he was as terrified as Robin was at the time. Consequently, Barney’s behavior violated the perception of how he ought to behave (Morreal, 1987). In this situation, combined with Barney’s facial expression, the incongruous event triggered by his utterance was sufficient for amusement.

c. Infringing

The following infringement maxim of relevance described how humor was created:

EXCERPT S02E09/RL/IF5 SI Empire State Building with Katy, Robin’s younger sister. NA (1) Lily: I don’t know. He could be right. She does have the fake orgasm noises (Conversation) down. (2) Ted: Hey! (3) Lily: What? The walls were thin. (4) Ted: That’s not what I’m hey-ing you about. SO Infringing maxim of relevance LM Missing link TA Lily’s lack of knowledge of the topic LA Idiomatic

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

82

The excerpt above showed a conversation (NA) between Lily and Ted. The humor appeared from the jab line uttered by Lily. In the situation (SI), Barney casted a premature guess at Robin’s past life in Canada that she used to do porn.

The normal conversation still occurred until Lily missed the link of what Ted meant.

In terms of CP, Lily’s utterance constituted the infringement maxim of relevance

(SO). This given knowledge so far, provides a conflicting situation. Lily was lacking of the information towards Ted’s inquiry (TA) and her utterance came at surprise which opposed to what she ought to appear in the view of Ted (Morreal,

1987). Logically (LM), her supporting evidence to previous ideas (from Barney) was based on what she heard. She assumed what Ted yelled at was her statement about Robin’s fake orgasm voice. Accordingly, Lily’s jab line was irrelevant in the given situation. Thus, it created humorous effects (Latta, 1998, 106).

4. Maxim of manner

Maxim of manner relates to how the speaker constructs the utterance. There were three ways of failing maxims discovered in this research: flouting, violating and infringing.

a. Flouting

Without the intention to mislead the hearer, flouting maxim of manner was aimed to create humorous effects, described as follows:

EXCERPT S02E02/MN/FL1 SI At the bar, Marshall and Barney. Marshall felt he wasn’t good at being single that he was good at being in a couple as Lily’s boyfriend. NA (1) Barney: Come on, you can’t give up now. What if I told you that you could (Conversation) relive that night with the exact same conversations, the exact same jokes, only this time, you get her and I don’t. (2) Marshall: It is not possible. (3) Barney: But it is. She has…wait for it…here it comes…almost there... an identical twin. (banging Marshall’s chest) Yes! SO Flouting maxim of manner PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

83

LM Almost situation TA Barney’s manner in saying identical twins LA Obscure

The excerpt above illustrated a conversation between Marshall and Barney

(NA). The humor appeared from Barney’s punchline. In the situation (SI), Barney was cheering Marshall up after his failure of appealing a twin. The interesting point of Barney’s utterance was his fashion in constructing the utterance. His utterance was not brief as he uttered some proxility within. Besides, the language used (LA), was allusive. In terms of CP, he flouted maxim of manner which as the seed of the script opposition. This script provided a knowledge to be interpreted logically (LM) as humor within given situation. The language of Barney’s utterance led to an opposition of sense (Attardo, Hempelmann and Maio, 2002). Besides, his utterance was intriguing to the hearer. The manner of his utterance gave an almost situation as if it was an ejaculation process. Those knowledge resources, thus, were contributable to create humor (Morreal, 1987).

b. Violating

Violating maxim of manner appeared in Barney’s two opposing expression, described as follows:

EXCERPT S02E08/MN/VL5 SI There are the gang but Barney seems could not read the situation. He should’ve not said that to Marshall while there is Lily next to him. NA (1) Lily: We’re going to Atlantic City to Elope right now! (Conversation) (2) Barney: Oh, congratulations, Lily. Marshall, you’re getting married? What the hell? SO Violating maxim of manner LM Ground reversal TA Barney’s congratulation LA Opposing expression

The excerpt above illustrated a conversation (NA) between Lily, Marshall and Barney. The humor sprang up from Barney’s punchline in exchange to Lily’s PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

84 utterance. In the situation, Lily told the friends that she was going to elope with

Marshall. Everyone seemed so happy to hear the news. However, the happy responses did not come all the way in return. Barney’s contradicting response came as surprise. In his utterance, he deliberately used two opposing utterances which separately aimed for Lily and Marshall. Consequently, he violated maxim of manner. The violation brought out a script opposition (SO) to be interpreted as humor. The interpretation through the logical mechanism (LM) came across, what

Barney ought to say to both Lily and Marshall should not be different. In such manner, although he already addressed the specific hearers, Barney still appeared to be incongruous since both Marshall and Lily could still hear all the utterances

(Morreal, 1987 and Audrieth, 1998). This given condition was fruitful to create humorous effect.

c. Infringing

The drunkenness could affect speaker’s way of speaking. Consequently, it resulted to an obscure expression as appeared in the following excerpt:

EXCERPT S02E08/MN/VL5 SI Lily, Ted and Robin were having breakfast at the restaurant. Robin was still drunk when the waiter served the menu. NA (1) Waiter: (writing the order) (Conversation) (2) Robin (talking to the waiter): I’d take you with gravy. If my boyfriend wasn’t sitting right here. – Just kidding. I’m good. (3) Lily: What are you so chirpy about? SO Infringing maxim of manner LM Consequences TA Robin’s drunkenness LA Obscure

The above excerpt illustrated a conversation between Robin, Lily and the waitress (NA). Humor sprang up from Robin’s jab lines. In the situation (SI), Ted,

Robin and Lily were having breakfast in a restaurant. Last night, they drank alcohol PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

85 too much and they are still hangover in the morning. Ted and Lily could handle it well, but Robin was not that sober. The drunkenness affected Robin a lot that she could not manner the way she spoke. The manner she spoke, in terms of CP constituted the infringement maxim of manner (SO). The infringement, then provided a script which opposed to a normal perception. The opposition resulted from the infringement, logically, conflicted to a normal view of such kind of situation. In other word, the infringement violated the normal expectation of how

Barney ought to behave in such situation (Morreal, 1987). This given condition was expectedly become humorous to the perceiver.

Either intentionally or unintentionally, violations maxim of manner occurred when the utterances were failed in construction. Accordingly, the indirect, obscure, vague utterances referred to the overlapping script which was the standpoint of humor production. Those various utterances provided sources incongruity. Besides, violations (viz. flouting, violating, infringing, suspending) of multiple maxims converged at the same point which to was the script opposition

(Raskin 1985 and Attardo, 2007, p. 108). The script opposition was necessary in verbal humor, but it did not provide sufficient condition for humor. Script opposition needed other knowledge resources such as situation and language (at least) to provide a condition for humor before the incongruity was processed by the logical mechanism (Morreal, 1987).

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

86

5. Multiple maxims

In HIMYM, the characters spoke with various intention. Also, the speaker’s personality and the situation s/he faced determined the way the speaker spoke.

Consequently, the speaker, sometimes, violated more than one maxims in an utterances. Remarkably, violation (viz. flouting, violating, infringing, suspending) multiple maxims brought out script opposition as a resource of humor.

a. Flouting

In HIMYM, multiple maxims were flouted when the speakers expected the hearers to grasp the conversational implicature. The combination of maxims flouted in a situation could be a recipe to create humorous effect, supposed the example went as follows:

EXCERPT SE02E20/QN-MN/FL6 SI Back when both Ted and Marshall were roommate in college. NA (1) Marshall: Hey. I’m driving my Fiero back over break. I know we see (Conversation) enough of each other as it is, but if you want a ride, I could use the gas money. You live in Ohio, right? I could swing through and pick you up. (2) Ted: All right, first of all, my parents live in Ohio. I live in the moment. -- Plus Karen and I haven’t seen each other since Thanksgiving. We’re both really invested in making this long-distance thing work, so…” SO Flouting maxim LM Implicit parallelism TA Ted’s response to Marshall’s inquiry LA Indirect and vague

As appeared in the conversation between Marshall and Ted (NA), the humor sprang up from Ted’s punchline. In the situation (SI), the plot teold the story back when Marshall and Ted were roommate in college. Marshall offered Ted a ride to

Ohio and would pick him up during summer break under one condition: Marshall asked for gasoline money in return. In exchange to Marshall’s inquiry, Ted indirectly responded to the offer, neither refusing nor accepting. Rather, he jumped to other information which prolonged the exact amount of answer. Also, his first PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

87 utterance was obscure. Nonetheless, Ted did not mean to mislead Marshall, he expected Marshall to infer the point of his utterance that he refused Marshall’s offer.

In terms of CP, the fashion of language he used (LA) constituted flouting maxim of manner and quantity. Accordingly, this given conversation disclosed an overlapping script (SO) which then processes logical mechanism (LM): implicit parallelism. For that reason, logically, Ted’s utterance, at the level of surface meaning, did not exactly answer Marshall’s inquiry. However, at the implied meaning, Ted’s utterance had similar meaning to a refuse. The humor was generated when Ted’s last punchline resolved the obscurity conflict he made from his first utterance. This element, as said by Latta (1998) that humor had a punchline which resolved the conflict (p. 106).

b. Violating

The following excerpt illustrated the violation multiple maxims which were proven to be fruitful in creating humorous effect, described as follows:

EXCERPT SE02EP09/QL-MN/VL6 SI Lily, Ted and Robin were having breakfast at the restaurant. Robin was still drunk when the waiter served the menu. NA (1) Barney: Fine. Do you wanna know what Robin’s secret is? (Conversation) (2) Ted: You know? (3) Barney: Of course I know. She couldn’t look at us, her face got flushed, that shame, my friend. Our friend Robin used to do porn, what for it… ography. (4) Ted: Yeah, we didn’t really need to wait for that. SO Violating maxims of quality and manner LM Reasoning from false premises TA Barney’s key answer LA Obscure

As appeared in the conversation between Ted and Barney (NA), in the situation (SI), Barney tried to solve the Robin’s puzzle about her past life. Barney came out with his hypothesis that Robin used to do pornography. The indication PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

88 which Barney exposed to prove him right about Robin’s past life, however, was insufficient. If somebody got flushed with embarrassment, the closest perception upon it did not always signify pornography. Personal references might affect his or her perception. In this case, Barney’s perception was affected by his most personal interest which was sex. In the time, Barney was trying to build other’s belief.

However, the truth about Robin’s puzzle was she used to be a pop star in Canada.

Accordingly, Barney’s utterance constituted the violation maxim of quality and manner as Barney uttered his own hypothesis without sufficient evidences in order to build his friends’ belief and used initiation (LA) “wait for it” within the word

“Pornography”. The humor sprang from Barney’s jab line, sourced from actual vs. non-actual script opposition in the conversation. Logically, the violation maxim of quality and manner aimed to resolve the puzzle. However, it conflicted to understood knowledge about ‘got flushed’ since he reasoned from the false premises (Attardo et al, 2002 and Morreal, 1987). Besides, obscure initiation “wait for it” within the word “Pornography” was fruitful to create humorous effect.

Accordingly, the resources above were productive to create humor.

c. Infringement

It was unfair to put aside this way of failing maxim regarding the frequency of the occurrence. Therefore, one of humorous conversations was described as follows:

EXCERPT S02E20/QN-MN/FL SI Barney came at surprise by demonstrating how he would appear in TPIR. Rather than telling Marshall and Ted what he was going to do, he left them clueless. PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

89

NA (1) Ted, Marshall: (sitting and reading in a couch) (Conversation) (2) Barney: (coming in-out apartment and demonstrating “A”) (3) Ted, Marshall: (jaw-dropping) (4) Barney: (coming in-out apartment and demonstrating “B”) (5) Barney: So which one, “A” or “B”? (6) Marshall: What was that? SO Infringing maxim of manner and quantity LM Inferring the consequences of excitement TA Barney’s demonstration LA Vague

As appeared in the excerpt above, humor occurred in a conversation between Barney, Ted and Marshall (NA). In the situation (SI), Barney infringed maxim of manner as his excitement influenced his manner. Barney came in the apartment, he intended to ask suggestion on how he would appear in TV show.

Before he demonstrated how, neither Marshall nor Ted were apprised about what

Barney was going to show. Then, Barney came in a sudden and demonstrated it in a straight line. Consequently, they were jaw-dropping and clueless and proceeded the responses uttered by Marshall and Ted. Barney’s utterance, in terms of CP was less informative for the hearer. Besides, it was not orderly and unclear (LA). He was supposed to apprise Marshall and Ted then showed them afterwards. Yet, he did not. Although the utterance was not intended to mislead the hearer, he failed to make his friend infer his information. Therefore, he infringed maxim of manner and quantity (SO). This was the seed of the script opposition for humor production.

Here, Barney’s action (TA) described a situation which significantly takes part in creating humor without the exclusion of his jab line (TA). In this humor, humorous effects were triggered when Barney violated how he ought to appear in the scene, besides his failed action violated completion of action. As Moreall (1987) gave sort of incongruities that humor could come from a violation of how the audiences viewed the way in which the speaker ought to appear and a failed actions. PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

90

d. Suspending

Suspending maxim occurred when the speaker aimed his utterance for a joke in the situation, described as follows:

EXCERPT S02E09/SP4 SI Barney proposed a ‘Slap bet’ to Marshall and offered Lily to be a slap bet commissioner. NA (1) Lily: Ooh, I love it. What are my powers? (Conversation (2) Barney: Um, if a problem arises and we need a ruling, that's your job. -- But you have to be unbiased and put the integrity of slap bet above all else. This is an honor you will take with you to your grave. On your tombstone, it will read, "Lily Aldrin, caring wife, loving friend, Slap Bet Commissioner." (3) Marshall (talking to Barney): And your tombstone will read "Got slapped by Marshall, so hard he died." SO Suspending maxims of quality and manner LM Coincidence TA Marshall’s joke LA Obscure

As appeared in the excerpt above, Marshall’s utterance was aimed to joke around. Humor sprang up from Marshall’s punchline. The conversation (NA) occurred among Lily, Barney and Marshall. In the situation (SI), Barney proposed a ‘Slap bet’ to Marshall and offered Lily to be a slap bet commissioner. Barney overstated his utterance by putting ‘slap bet’ as an important and serious kind of bet. In terms of CP, Barney violated maxim of quality. In other side, in this situation,

Marshall’s utterance (TA) did expect neither maxim to be obeyed nor implicature to be inferred. In terms of CP, he suspended maxim of quality and manner.

Accordingly, the humorous effects sprang up soon after Marshall uttered the joke.

In this humor, Language (LA) in the way Marshall fashioned his utterance brought out and overlapping script (SO). Here, the language, situation and the script opposition were the knowledge resources which contributable for humor production. Marshall put his joke in the same situation as what Barney’s said about

Lily’s tombstone. In the future if they passed away each of them would have their PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

91 wording on their tombstone. Sadly, Marshall joked that Barney would die because of hard slap from Marshall. Humor occurred as Moreall (1987) gave sort of incongruities that humor could come from a violation of understood knowledge.

Marshall’s utterance violated the understood knowledge about writing in someone’s tombstone. Besides, slap bet causing somebody lost his life was incongruous as well (Audrieth, 1998).

The various purposes of utterances determined how the speaker constructed the utterances. Accordingly, the indirect, obscure, vague utterances referred to the violations of maxims and provided resources of incongruity which was the standpoint of humor production (Attardo, 2008). The violation maxims then converged at the same point which was the script opposition. The script opposition was necessary in verbal humor as a prior discourse (Morreal, 1987), but it did not provide sufficient condition for humor. Script opposition needed other knowledge resources such as situation and language (at least) to provide a condition for humor before the incongruity was proceeded by the logical mechanism. PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter consists of three parts, namely conclusions, implications, and recommendations. Conclusions summarize the research findings and highlight the main aspects, implications carry out the contribution of research findings for

ELESP, while recommendations consist of recommendations for the current study and the further research.

A. Conclusions

In conclusion, there are two main findings grounded from the focus of this research. The first is the employment of the non-observance maxims in the humorous conversation taken from sitcom How I Met Your Mother season 2 and the second is the how the violation (viz. flouting, violating, infringing, suspending) maxims to create humorous effects.

Based on the first research finding, the researcher concluded that although cooperative principle described best practices in conversation in order to facilitate the process of conversation to be smoother for both the listener and the speaker, people frequently disobeyed these maxims in order to achieve certain purposes.

Regarding the first objective, there are a hundred-twenty-two (122) humorous conversation which employed four kinds of the non-observance maxims of CP: flouting, violating, infringing, and suspending. Forty-six (46) data of which discovered to be flouted and sixty-seven (67) discovered to be violated by the characters. Five (5) data was transpired to be the case of infringing maxim. More,

92

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

93 there were four (4) situation in which the suspension occurred. In addition, there are thirteen (13) cases of multiple violation (flouting, violating, suspending).

First, the research revealed that maxim quality was flouted by the way of exaggerating, using metaphor and delivering sarcastic tone (Essay, 2013). The maxim of quantity could be flouted by providing less or more information than it was required without the intention of deceiving (Leech, 1983, p. 140). The maxim of relevance could be flouted by chancing new topic with implicature to be inferred

(Thomas 1995, p.70). The last, maxim of manner could be flouted by constructing obscure language, using other language, using slang (Langacker, 1993; Levinson,

1983; Thomas, 1995).

The second way of failing the maxim was violation. The finding of the research exposed the way of violating the maxims. The maxim of quality could be violated by sincerely lying to hide the truth or informing without adequate proof

(Tupan and Natalia, 2008, p. 64). The maxim of quantity could be violated by giving less or more information with the intention of deceiving. The maxim of relevance could be violated by straying from the subject being discussed with the intention to exclude from current conversation (Khosravizadeh & Sadehvandi, 2011, p. 123).

Lastly, the maxim of manner could be violated by the way of intentional obscure, ambiguous and unordered (Tupan and Natalia, 2008, p. 66).

Third, the result discovered that the speaker infringed the maxims under the conditions. It occurred when the speaker was drunk or too excited (Thomas, 1995, p. 74). The fourth ways of failing was suspending. The result discovered that there were neither maxim to be observed nor implicature to be inferred in suspending

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

94 maxims. In this research the speakers suspended two maxims in order to joke around (Thomas, 1995, p. 76).

In the connection with humor, the creation of humor was considered attributable to four types of non-observance maxims. The non-observance chanced the links to humorous effects from the characters’ utterances. The humorous effects chanced when the characters’ utterances came as complete surprises which were unexpected, odd and or irrational. Similar to the perspective of the incongruity theory, people laugh at what surprises them, is unexpected, or is odd in a nonthreatening way (Berger, 1976; Deckers & Devine, 1981; McGhee, 1983). At this point, an accepted pattern is violated, or a difference is noted-close enough to the norm to be nonthreatening, but different enough from the norm to be remarkable. In this difference, neither too shocking not too mundane, that provokes humor in the mind of the receiver, according to the incongruity theory.

In this research, the characters with unique characteristics contributed interesting ways of speaking to carry on the conversation. The characters in the collected data used meanderings, unexpected responses and blurred exchange boundaries which opposed the normal and strayed the subject. As the instance,

Barney was used to declaim something or his ideas. The absurdity, incongruity, exaggeration, eccentricity resulting from the employment of non-observance maxims provide a condition as knowledge resource (script opposition) for humor production (Raskin, 1985; Attardo, 2007). Noting that How I Met Your Mother is an audiovisual humor; the inconsistency, unsuitable, or incongruous part or circumstances resulting from only script opposition as a provided condition cannot

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

95 be sufficient to be a resource of humor production without other knowledge resources (Morreal, 1987; Trizenberg, 2008). For example, a script opposition is insufficient without a situation which depicts the information needed to build a tense and direct the audience that the text is supposed to be funny before humor is expected to be perceived.

B. Implications

Based on the findings of this research, there are some implications of this research that can contribute to ELESP. The findings of this research can contribute to sociolinguistic course especially pragmatics in ELESP, as they provide examples on how the conversations among friends are carried on. Besides, the findings provide a material for students to learn how language works especially for humor production. Furthermore, students can discover the meaning in text which are not obvious on the surface (e.g. conversational implicature).

C. Recommendations

Based on the research findings, there are some recommendations proposed for current study and further research. For current study, humor, explicitly humorous conversations in sitcom can be interesting field in the scope of pragmatics. In addition, type of humor can be studied from the application of conversational maxim of CP. Furthermore, the non-observances maxims can be applied in another layer of research focus to infer the conversational implicatures.

Since there were only 4 ways of failing to observe the maxims of CP exclusively discussed in the research; thus, only those 4 ways were analyzed which in accordance with the theory of humor, those potentially elicited humor.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

96

Accordingly, it is expected that the findings about the rest of five ways of failing maxims (viz. opting out maxims) will be discovered in the future research.

For linguists, the findings of this research about the non-observance maxims and humor provide additional knowledge and consideration of how the employment of the non-observance maxims of CP in the conversation elicit humorous effect.

Finally, this research is expected to become a reference for linguists to study humor.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

REFERENCES

Archakis, A., & Tsakona, V. (2005). Analyzing conversational data in GTVH terms: A new approach to the issue of identity construction via humor. Humor, 18(1), 41- 68. Aromaa, R. (2011). Humor in Terry Pratchett’s discworld series-application of psychological and linguistic theories of humor. Tampere: University of Tampere Ary, D., Jacons, L. C., Sorensen, C., & Razavieh, A. (2010). Introduction to research in education (8th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Asher, R. E. (1994). The encyclopedia of language and linguistics (1st ed.). New York: Pergamon Press Attardo, S. (1993). Violation of conversational maxims and cooperation: The case of jokes. Journal of Pragmatics, 537. Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic theories of humor. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Attardo, S. (1997). The semantic foundations of cognitive theories of humor. Humor-International Journal of Humor Research, 10, 395-420. Attardo, S. (2007). A Primer for the linguistics of humor. In Victor Raskin (ed.), Primer of humor research, 101–156. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Attardo, S., Hempelmann, C.F., & Maio S.D. (2002). Script oppositions and logical mechanisms: Modelling incongruities and their resoulitions. In: Humor. International Journal of Humor Research, 15(1), 3-46. Attardo, S. (2008). A primer for linguistics of humor. Berlin, New York: Mouten de Gruyer. Berger, A. A. (1987). Humour: An introduction. American Behavioral Scientist, 30, 6-15. Brock, A. (2008). Humor, jokes and irony versus mocking, gossip and black humor (A. Gerd & E. Ventola, Eds.). New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press. Brumark, A. (2004). Non-observance of Gricean maxim: In family dinner table conversations. Sweden: University Sodetorns.

97 PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

98

Cheung, L. W., & Winnie, H.Y. (2009). An animated and narrated glosarry of terms used in Linguistics. Retrieved August 2015, from http//hkbu.edu.hk/library Cooper, C. (2008). Elucidating the bonds of workplace humour: A relational process model. Human Relations, 61, 1087-1115. Crawford, C. (1994). Theory and implications regarding the utilization of strategic humour by leaders. The Journal of Leadership Studies, 1(4), 53-67. Cresswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Creswell, J. (2006). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication, Inc. Critchley, S. (2002). On humour. London: Routledge. Cutting, J. (2002). Pragmatics and discourse. London: Routledge. Davies, B. (2000). Grice’s cooperative principle: Getting the meaning across. In Nelson, D., & P. Foulkes (Ed.), Leeds Working Papers in Linguistics (pp. 1-26). Leeds: University of Leeds. Deckers, L., & Devine, J. (1981). Humor by violating an existing expectancy. The Journal of Psychology, 108(1), 107-110. Dolitsky, M. (1992). Aspects of the unsaid in humor. In: HUMOR, the International Journal of Humor Research, 5(2), 33-44. Essays. (November 2013). Humour in conversations of teenage boys English language essay. Retrieved from http://www.ukessays.com/essays/english- language/humour-in-conversations-of-teenage-boys-english-language- essay.php?cref=1 Freud, S. (1960). Jokes and their relation to the unconscious. New York, W.W: Norton. Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., & Hyams, N. (2003). An introduction to linguistics. Boston: Wadsworth. Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (2007). Educational research: An introduction (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education. Giora, R. 1991, On the cognitive aspects of the joke. Journal of Pragmatics, 16, 465-485.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

99

Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic in conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Speech Acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press. Grice, H.P. (1978). "Further Notes on Logic and Conversation," Syntax and Semantics, vol.9 edited by P. Cole, Academic Press. Reprinted as ch.3 of Grice 1989, 41–57. Grice, H. P. (1989). Studies in the ways of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hancher, M. (1980). How to play games with words: Speech-act jokes. Journal of Literary Semantics, 9, 20-29. Hassan, B. A. (2013, May ). The Pragmatic of humor: January 25th revolution and occupy Wall Street. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 4(2), 551- 562. Hay, J. (2001). The pragmatics of humor support. In HUMOR: International Journal of Humour Research, 14, 55-82. Hey, J. (2000). Functions of humor in the conversations of men and women. Journal of Pragmatics, 6(32), 709-742. Holmes, J., & Marra, M. (2002). Over the edge? Subversive humor between colleagues and friends. Humor, 15, 65-87. IMDb Incorporated. (2015). How I Met Your Mother season 2. Retrieved July 11th, 2015, from Internet Movie Database: http://www.imdb.com/title /tt0460 649/?ref_=nv_sr_1 Jensen, K. E. (2009). Humor. Modern world, 1. Kalliomaki, L. (2005). Ink and incapability, verbal humor in the TV sitcom Blackladder: A pragmatic and rhetoric analysis. A pro Gradu Thesis in English.

Khosravizadeh, P. & Sadehvandi, N. (2011). Some instances of violation and flouting of the maxim of quantity by the main characters (Barry & Tim) in Dinner for Schmucks. International Proceedings of Economics Development and Research, Proceedings of International Conference of Languages, Literature, and Linguistics, 26, 122-127. Langacker, R. W. (1993). Reference-point constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 4(1), 1-38. Latta, R. L. (1998). The basic humor process. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Leech, G. (1983). Principle of pragmatics. London: Longman. Levinson, S. C. (1984). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

100

Liddicoat, A. (2007). Introduction to conversation analysis. New York: Continuum, 5, 79. Martinich, A. P. (1984). Communication and reference. New York: De Gruyter. McGhee, P. E. (1983). The role of arousal and hemispheric lateralization in humor. In Handbook of humor research (pp. 13-37). Springer New York. Merriam, S. B., & Associates. (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.), (R. Holand, Ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publication, Inc. Mooney, A. (2003). Co-operation, violations and making sense. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 899-920. Morreal, J. (1987). The Philosophy of Laughter and Humor. Albany: State University of New York Press. Norrick, N. R. (1993). Repetition in canned jokes and spontaneous conversational joking. Humor. The International Journal of Humor Research (Vols. 6-4), 385-402. Mouton de Gruyter. Palmer, J. (1994). Taking humor seriously. London: Routledge.

Paltridge, B. (2008). Discourse analysis (3rd ed.). Maiden: Continuum 115. Pan, W. (2012, July). Linguistic Basis of Humor: In Uses of Grice's Cooperative Principle. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 1(6). Retrieved from URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/ ijalel.v.1 n6p.20 Psathas, G. (1995). Conversation analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z. (1999). Towards a theory of metonymy. In: K-U Panther &G. Radden (eds.), Metonym in Language and Thought. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 17-60. Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic mechanism of humor. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company. Ritchie, G. (2004). The linguistic analysis of jokes. London: Routledge. Romero, E. J., & Cruthirds. K.W. (2006). The use of humour in the Workplace. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(2), 58-69. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696-735.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

101

Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G. & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self- correction in the organisation of repair in conversation. Language, 53, 361- 382. Sen, A. (2012). Humour analysis and qualitative research. Social Research Update, 63, 1-4. Spanakaki, K. (2007). Translating humor for subtitling. Retrieved October 31, 2014, from http://translationjournal.net/journal/40humor.htm Smuts, A. (n.d.). The internet encyclopedia of philosophy: “Humor”. ISSN 2161- 0002. http://www.iep.utm.edu/, August 2015. Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. Harlow: Pearson Education. Tupan, A. H., & Natalia, H. (2008). The multiple violations of conversational maxims in lying done by the characters in some episodes of Desperate Housewives. 10(1), 63-78. Triezenberg, K. E. (2008). "Humor in Literature", pg. 536. In Primer of Humor Research, ed. Victor Raskin. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Vandaele, J. (2002). Introduction: (re-) constructing humor: Meanings and means. In: Vandaele, J. (ed.), Special Issues of the Translator, 8(2), 49-172. Veatch, T. C. (1998). A theory of humor. In: HUMOR, the International Journal of Humor Research, 11-2, 161-215. Raskin, V., & Attardo, S. (1991). “Script theory revis(it)ed: joke similarity and joke representation model”. In Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 4(3-4), 293–348. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Widdowson, H.G. (1979). ‘Rules and Procedures in discourse analysis’ (T. Myers Ed.). The Development of Conversation and Discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press He, Yi. (2008). Humor in discourse: A linguistic study of the Chinese dialect film, Crazy Stone, 2, 989-998. Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University. Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

APPENDICES PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

APPENDIX A 4.1 Table of Flouting Maxim of Quality in How I Met Your Mother Season 2

TYPE OF MAXIMS NO CODE EXCERPT INDICATION QL QN RL MN The year 2030, the narrator, ted is telling his kids about how he met their mother. Ted: Okay, where were we? It was June of 2006) and life had just taken an unexpected turn. 1. S02E01/QL/FL1 √ Exaggerating Daughter: Dad, can’t you just skip ahead to the part where you meet Mom? I feel like you’ve been talking for like a year. At the bar. knowing ted meet kickboxing instructor, Robin seems not to freak out cause she think she doesn’t have to listen ted’s boring stuff Robin: Okay? It’s awesome. It’s win-win. Ted got to vent and I don’t have to hear it. Maybe after Exaggerating, 2. S02E04/QL/FL2 he’s done with the talkie-talk, he’ll come over and I’ll get the fun part. √ Metaphor Lily: What is wrong with you? God, I felt like I’m teaching love as a second language here. Okay, you know how when he tells you boring work stories you’re supposed to listen? Well, when he picks up some random girl at a bar, you’re supposed to freak out. At the apartment Ted: You invited him to brunch? Marshall: Yeah, I invited him to brunch. Why is that weird? Ted: Yes. That’s why I was all, ‘you invited him to brunch?’ Marshall: why can’t two guys who are friends go to brunch? 3. S02E05/QL/FL3 √ Metaphor Ted: Because brunch is kind of…. Robin: Girly. Marshall: Girly? Breakfast isn’t girly. Lunch isn’t girly. What makes brunch girly? Ted: I don’t know. There’s nothing girly about a horse. Nothing girly about a horn, but put them together and you get a unicorn. Marshall: She’s pretty a private person. Lily: Except when she’s talking about… (visualization about Robin telling her friend’s marriage stuff) Delivering sarcastic 4. S02E09/QL/FL4 √ Ted: So you don’t think there’s any ‘friend’ from Canada? tone Marshall: Oh, I’m sure there is. Just like I have a ‘friend’ who wet his bed till he was ten. Use your brain Ted.

102

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

103

In a bar, talking about Barney’s the Oh moment. Lily: Yeah, I agree with Ted. In a real relationship, you share everything. That’s why Marshall Delivering sarcastic 5. S02E09/QL/FL5 √ and I don’t keep any secrets. tone Barney: You’re such a cutie pie. Here’s a quarter. Go play a song on the jukebox. Barney are outside while he’s sick and it’s winter. Robin: Barney. What the hell are you doing? Get in here, it’s freezing outside. Are you insane? 6. S02E11/QL/FL6 √ Exaggerating Barney: Hey, blame Lily and her oppressive ‘no cigars in the apartment rule.’ God, it’s like Marshall’s marrying the Taliban.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

104

APPENDIX B 4.2 Table of Flouting Maxim of Quantity in How I Met Your Mother Television Season 2

TYPE OF MAXIMS NO CODE EXCERPT INDICATION QL QN RL MN Ted and Robin are in confusion whether or not to tell Marshall that Lily moved on. Robin: He’s just starting to get better, going out with Barney. I mean, how do you think he’s going to feel when he hears Lily’s moved on? Giving too much 1. S02E02/QN/FL1 Ted: she’s moved on? √ information Robin: It happens. I’ve fallen out of love faster than that before, sometimes, boom, with no warning whatsoever. One day we’re in love, the next day, he’s dead to me. – but we’re great, honey. Robin: I’m not freaking out because in my mind, she’s fat. Giving other 2. S02E04/QN/FL2 Girl: She’s a kickboxing instructor. Her ass looks better than my face. √ information Robin: All right, we’ll swinging by the party. Marshall: All skyscrapers kinda look like … (nonverbal move, shaping a penis) Ted: Marshall, it’s a 78-story pink marble tower with a rounded top and two spherical entryways at the front. Marshall: Wow, so it’s the whole package. Giving more 3. S02E04/QN/FL3 Barney: (Laughing) Yeah, you did. √ information Marshall: Had to. Barney: Oh, dud, if they’re selling condos, you got to get me in. and don’t give me the shaft. Marshall: Yeah, you did. Barney: Had to. Robin’s apartment Robin: I love that look, I think I slept with you because of that look. -- And it’s fake? Giving less 4. S02E07/QN/FL4 Ted: Oh, and you biting your lower lip, shyly looking away and thrusting your chest out is √ information natural? Robin: Yeah, I hear you. Salon, Robin, Lily, Marshall, Ted came by to swap Barney out together Giving other 5. S02E08/QN/FL5 Barney: Hey, guys. √ information Ted: Wow. A pedicure.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

105

Barney: Uh, if there were any shame in a dude getting a pedicure I don’t think there would have been a feature about it in Details magazine. Ted’s room Giving other 6. S02E09/QN/FL6 Barney: And who gets trapped under a fake boulder at the mall? √ information Ted: Not me in Ohio when I was nine, that’s for sure. Marshall: I won the bet. Why are you still searching? Barney: Just because you were right doesn’t mean I’m wrong. Lily: Oh, right, like you need an excuse to watch porn. Giving less 7. S02E09/MN/FL7 √ Barney: Canadian porn. Trust me when I tell you their universal health care system doesn’t information cover breast implants. If I have to sit through one more flat-chested Nova Scotian riding a Mountie on the back of a Zamboni I’ll go out of my mind. Empire State Building with Katy, Robin’s younger sister. Katy: You told them? Robin: Oh, okay yes, I told them. But only because I think you should hear it from other grownups, Giving more 8. S02E09/QN/FL8 √ too. Everyone thinks you should wait. Right, guys? information Ted, Marshall, Lily: Totally, you should wait. Barney: Sex is fun. On the sale, wedding dress store, robin and lily. Lily has been wanting to buy wedding dress on sale but she didn’t knew the place. Robin: This is the place. Giving other 9. S02E12/QN/FL9 √ Lily: Oh, wow. Badgley Mischka! Melissa Sweet! Vera Wang! Oh, Robin, do you have any idea information what you guys stumbled onto here? Robin: (hehehe) You said Wang. At the airport, Ted and Robin. He told Robin that he found a penny from 1939. (flashback) Giving other 10. S02E15/QN/FL10 At the bar √ information Ted: A sixtyseven-year-old penny. Do you realize this penny was minted during World War II? Robin: Oh, so was my grandfather, but that doesn’t make him interesting. Marshall: I can’t get married like this! There’s no way! Barney: Ah, let me see what I can do. Giving more 11. S02E21/QN/FL11 √ Ted: What? What can you do? information Barney: I have a superpower. Ted: Remember, the place where I stole the blue French horn for robin? Giving other 12. S02E21/QN/FL12 √ Barney: Oh, Alright, that was you. – I knew that was somebody I knew. information

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

106

Ted: What? Dude, you were there. That was like a big iconic moment in all of our lives. Marshall: Uh, driver. Ranjit: Hello. Marshall: Ranjit. Giving more 13. S02E22/QN/FL13 Lily: Oooow √ information Marshall: Hey, can we make a stop before we had back to the hotel? Ranjit: You do not have to stop. You can be together as man and wife back there, and because we are friends... I will not watch. Barney: No. robin, you’re not…. – No, say the story’s not over. Robin: Come on, they’re cutting the cake. Giving other 14. S02E22/QN/FL14 √ Barney: Say the story’s not over! – Oh God, this is the 12th most worried I’ve ever been that information someone’s pregnant. Barney: No es possible. – Nobody moves to Argentina. The Argentinean peso has dropped two- thirds in five years, the government is opposed to free market reforms, and the railroad has been a Giving other 15. S02E22/QN/FL15 √ mess since the breakup of Ferrocarriles Argentinos. – I hooked up with an Argentinean information exchange student in a Porta-John outside Yankee Stadium. – Man, she was chatty. At the Apartment Giving more 16. S02E22/QN/FL16 Lily: Are you as terrified as I am? √ information Marshall: I don’t want to get slap again.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

107

APPENDIX C 4.3 Table of Flouting Maxim of Relevance in How I Met Your Mother Television Season 2

TYPE OF MAXIMS NO CODE EXCERPT INDICATION QL QN RL MN 1. S02E03/RL/FL1 Outside the restaurant, after Ted’s parents explained and tell them their past  ted supposed robin √ Uttering ‘wow’ on how his parents’ family story they hide from their kids just to not to make ted’s and his different topic sister upset. The fact, robin surprised that ted’s parents love her, Robin: wow. Ted: I know. Robin: They love me. 2. S02E03/RL/FL2 Apartment, Ted’s mother didn’t like to talk about things that were uncomfortable, emotional, or in √ Uttering any way. different topic Ted’s mom: Oh, I forgot to tell you, your cousin Jimmy had a wonderful time at the spa he visited. Ted: You mean the spa the judge ordered him to go to, to quit cocaine? Ted’s mom: Coffee? 3. S02E03/RL/FL3 Lily: Hi, Mr. and Mrs. Mosby. √ Uttering Mr. Mosby: Oh Lily! Hey, Marshall. different topic Marshall: Good to see you. Lily: I was just stopping by to pick up some of my things. Mrs. Mosby: yes we were so sorry to hear about your….you know, the, the…well. Marshall: Lily calling off the wedding and dumping me? Lily: Me begging Marshall to take me back and him rejecting me? Mrs. Mosby: I love your hair. 4. S02E04/RL/FL4 (Carl wished lily trade sex for beer) √ Uttering Robin: Hey, Carl, is Ted still here? different topic Carl: No. – Hey, Lily. You still single? Lily: Yes. Carl: You know... I’ve poured a lot of free drinks for you over the years. A lot. 5. S02E11/RL/FL5 (Robin, Ted and Barney are down at the bar. Ted is telling what he said to Lily.) √ Uttering Barney: Ted Vivian Mosby! different topic Ted: That’s not my middle name.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

108

Barney: You kiss your mother with that mouth? Ted: Like you’ve never said that word. Barney: I don’t kiss your mother with mouth. –yet. 6. S02E11/RL/FL6 (At the bar, Robin, Ted and Barney. Barney got fever but he denied.) √ Uttering Ted: Are you sick? different topic Barney: Is it sick to find maturity and experience sexy? Ted: No, I meant do you have a cold? 7. S02E18/RL/FL7 Ted: But wouldn't we miss my TV? √ Uttering Robin: Would we? different topic Ted: Yes, we would. We've had that TV for a long time and we would feel more at home if it were setup in our bedroom. Robin: We need wine, don't we? Ted: Yes, we do.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

109

APPENDIX D 4.4 Table of Flouting Maxim of Manner in How I Met Your Mother Television Season 2

TYPE OF MAXIMS NO CODE EXCERPT R INDICATION QL QN MN L 1. S02E02/MN/FL At the bar, Marshall and Barney. Marshall felt he wasn’t good at being single that he was good 1 at being in a couple, Lily’s boyfriend Barney: come on, you can’t give up now. What if I told you that you could relive that night with Obscure the exact same conversations, the exact same jokes, only this time, you get her and I don’t. √ language Marshall: it is not possible. Barney: But it is. She has…wait for it…here it comes…almost there.. an identical twin. (banged Marshall’s chest) Yes! 2. S02E04/MN/FL Lawyer-wanna-be party 2 Ted: hey, Marshall. You up for some super loud, repetitive music that hasn’t change since the mid-90s? √ Tone of voice Marshall: um…. Only always. (hesitation tone) Ted: let’s go. 3. S02E06/MN/FL Druthers: Now, as most of you know, my Pete Rose, Pete Rose, Pete Rose baseball has been √ Being not brief 3 stolen. 4. S02E06//MN/F Barney: Oh, my God. Incredible. L4 Professor: hmm… C-minus. Barney: C-minus? What are you talking about? – I just pulled the all-nighter! √ Language style Professor: You didn’t budget your time well. You glossed over some of the most important points, and your oral presentation was sloppy and inconclusive. 5. S02EMN08/FL In a courthouse 5 Marshall: Hi. Hello. Uh, we need a marriage license, but we need to skip the waiting period because we’re in love. Being indirect Stewardess: Aw. I’m gonna waive this waiting period right now. √ and not brief Lily: Oh really?! Stewardess: Is what I would say if I could waive the waiting period, but unfortunately, only a judge can do that.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

110

Lily: Oh. Well, so can we see a judge? Stewardess: Absolutely. Lily: Really?! Stewardess: Is what I would say if there was any chance of you seeing a judge today, which there isn’t. 6. S02E11/MN/FL Apartment, when Ted Robin and Barney got Lily stole the decoration, ted calls Lily. 6 Ted: Lily! Lily: Merry Christmas, ass-face. √ Using slang Ted: Umm Lily. Where are the Christmas decorations? Lily: At my apartment. 7. S02E11/MN/FL Robin: You have to go home and get to bed. 7 Barney: Oh, Robin, my simple friend from the untamed north, let me tell you about a little √ Using slang thing I like to call mind over body. You see, whenever I start feeling sick, I just stop being sick and be awesome instead. True story. 8. S02E12/MN/FL All down at the bar. Robin drank beers ‘cause she mad. 8 Robin: I can’t believe my baby sister is planning to lose her virginity to a douche guy with faux √ Using slang haw. This can’t happen. You guys have to help me talk her out of it. 9. S02E17/MN/FL Lily and Robin in a apartment. 9 Robin: An hour and a half delivery. We can’t wait that long. Obscure Lily: I wish we could take the Fiero, but Marshall has this insane no-food rule, √ expression Robin: But Thai food, Lily. Pad Yum Mao. Tom Kai Gah. Thai See Ran. Lily: Oh! You’re just saying random syllables, and it still sounds delicious. 10. S02E22/MN/FL Lily: Mini quiches. You’re a mega-douche. 10 Barney: Oh, that’s right, they moved that table back toward the kitchen, because that’s where √ Using slang they’re setting up a surprise chocolate fountain. Oh, no, I gave it away. 11. S02E12/MN/FL Barney: No es possible. – Nobody moves to Argentina. The Argentinean peso has dropped two- 11 thirds in five years, the government is opposed to free market reforms, and the railroad has been Using other √ a mess since the breakup of Ferrocarriles Argentinos. – I hooked up with an Argentinean exchange language student in a Porta-John outside Yankee Stadium. – Man, she was chatty. 12 S02E09/MN/FL At the Bar 12 Barney: Come on! It’s on me. I’m buying three of you foot massagers and one of you a nose hair √ Vague language trimmer. You know who you are, -- come on let’s go, Robin: Hey, I’m in.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

111

APPENDIX E 4.5 Table of Flouting Multiple Maxims in How I Met Your Mother Television Season 2

TYPE OF MAXIMS NO CODE EXCERPT INDICATION QL QN RL MN Barney was telling how he met the one-night-stand woman by borrowing Ted’s identity. Informing SE02E20/QN- 1. Barney: and that led to a couple of hours that I cannot, as a gentleman, divulge to you. We did √ √ unnecessarily and MN/FL6 it right here, and here and here. (pointing the spot where he banged) changeable expression At Big Wave Luau, everyone made a fun of Lily’s job. Ted: Robin, nothing to add? Telling untruth and SE02E06/QL- Robin: No. Lily is my friend and I’m not going to make fun of her trying to follow her dreams. 2. √ √ adding information to QN/FL6 Lily: thank you. be humorous Robin: Although, you might want to bring out big Hawaiian drum because I’m pretty sure today’s my birthday. Back when both Ted and Marshall were roommate in college. Marshall: Hey. I’m driving my Fiero back over break. I know we see enough of each other as it is, but if you want a ride, I could use the gas money. You live in Ohio, right? I could swing Telling indirectly and SE02E20/QN- 3. through and pick you up. √ √ adding information MN/FL6 Ted: All right, first of all, my parents live in Ohio. I live in the moment. -- Plus Karen and unnecessarily I haven’t seen each other since Thanksgiving. We’re both really invested in making this long-distance thing work, so…” In the outside wedding building Adding information SE02E20/QN- Lily: Marshall… 4. √ √ unnecessarily at not the MN/FL6 Marshall: Lily, you’re not supposed to see me. right time Robin: Holy crap, I don’t think anyone’s supposed to see you. It was unbelievable that Barney was a fan of TPIR. Robin: Barney, I didn’t know you were such a fan of The Price Is Right. Barney: Are you kidding? T.P.I.R is not just an indescribably entertaining hour of SE02E20/QL- Overstate and the 5. television, it’s a microcosm of our entire economic system – a capitalist utopia, where √ √ MN/FL6 fashion of language consumers are awarded for their persistence, market acumen and intrepid spirit. – I gaze upon the glory of The Price Is Right, I see the face of America and it is divine. Plus, you know, hot chicks on sport cars.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

112

APPENDIX F 4.6 Table of Violating Maxim of Quality in How I Met Your Mother Television Season 2

TYPE OF MAXIMS NO CODE EXCERPT INDICATION QL QN RL MN 1. S02E02/QL/VL1 Apartment √ Saying untruth Marshall: I hate you. information Barney: I am so sorry. It’s a sickness. I’m the real victim here. Marshall: Twice. Twice in a row, you took my candy. That was my candy. 2. S02E03/QL/VL2 Restaurant, all have a meet-up dinner with Ted’s parents, Lily in stunning dress √ Saying untruth Lily: Are you all right? You’re kind of sweating. information Marshall: No, I’m fine. It’s just this roll is really spicy. 3. S02E03/QL/VL3 Apartment √ Contradiction Ted: You lucked out with mom last night, huh? What a relief, right? Robin: Oh, Absolutely. Whew, what a relief it is to know I’m the one girlfriend your mom doesn’t want you to have kids with. Ted: Hooray? (disappointed expression) 4. S02E06/QL/VL4 On the phone in her apartment. √ Saying untruth Robin: Her newest lifelong dream? Singing in a punk rock band. information Ted: what is she doing for money through all this? Robin: Oh, she’s been waiting tables at Big Wave Luau. Ted: Wait, you mean that Hawaiian place where they wear those embarrassing outfits? Robin: No. 5. S02E06/QL/VL Druthers: What do you think, Ted? It just let itself out of its plastic case and rolled away? -- √ Saying untruth Somebody stole it. information Ted: Well, um I better get back to these Styrofoam trees. Druthers: Oh, who cares about the trees? It’s just busy work to make you feel like you’re contributing. Ted: Inspiring as always, sir. 6. S02E06/QL/VL In a café √ Telling untruth Ted: Man, what’s that? Marshall: What?

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

113

Ted: That cute coffee girl wrote a heart by your name. – (singing tone) somebody has a crush on you. Barney: Somebody thinks you’re me. 7. S02E09/QL/VL8 Ted: Hey. √ Saying untruth Lily: Hey, Guys. Are you free tomorrow night? I was thinking of having a wine tasting slash information “help me catch the rat in my apartment” party. Ted: That’s a great idea you can put out the cheese for both. 8. S02E09/QL/VL9 Marshall got three slaps. One because he lied and two for being prematurely slapped. √ Saying untruth Barney: Oh, my God. Are you gonna cry? information Marshall: No. – You’re gonna cry. 9. S02E09/QL/VL10 James: Believe me, I fought this for a long time. Come on, it’s embarrassing. Look, this felt √ Saying untruth unnatural to me, too, at first. But I fell in love. And Tom and I realized you can’t fight love. information Barney: Oh, God. Is that you two do together? You sit around the house and talk about love? I think… I’m gonna sick. 10. S02E12/QL/VL Barney: Wow. Okay. Seattle. √ Saying untruth Lily: Trick question. Marshall’s never been to Pasific Northwest because he’s afraid of information Sasquatch. Barney: Damn, you’re good. Marshall: I’m not afraid of Sasquatch, I just think we should all be on alert. 11. S02E17/QL/VL12 All down at the bar. Robin drank beers ‘cause she mad. √ Saying untruth Robin: I can’t believe my baby sister is planning to lose her virginity to a douche guy with information faux haw. This can’t happen. You guys have to help me talk her out of it. Marshall: speech to talk a girl out of having sex, Ted: Yeah, I don’t have any of those. Barney: Discouraging premarital sex is against my religion. 12. S02E19/QL/VL13 Carl: Get out of here! I never want to see your face in this bar again! (talking to a guy) √ Saying unsure Carl: (talking to the gang) This soulless bastard just told me he can’t come to Mark’s funeral information because he wants to watch the Super Bowl. Could you believe that? Carl: You guys are coming, right? The gang (Faking the expression): Yes… wouldn’t miss for the world. 13. S02E19/QL/VL14 On a road trip, Marshall and Ted. √ Saying untruth Ted: So,,, this song, information Marshall: Oh, it’s the best song in the world. It’s the only song I like. – Just kidding. Tape’s been stuck in the player for, like, two years. Better than nothing though.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

114

Ted: Maybe. (the fact is that Marshall really like that song, he never ever get sick of the song) 14. S02E20/ MN /VL Ted: Now say it without winking. √ Saying untruth Barney: No strippers. (winking) information Ted: You just winked. Barney: No, I didn’t. (winking) 15. S02E20/QL/VL17 Room hotel. There’s a stripper named Treasure already in the room. √ Saying untruth Marshall: I can’t believe that you did this. information Barney: I had to. I’m your bestman. Marshall: Ted’s my best man. Barney: You’ve yet to make a decision and that’s fine. But as your best-man-to-be, it’s my job to make sure at your bachelor party you see a woman take her clothes off while dancing to White snake’s “Here I Go Again.” 16. S02E20/QL/VL18 Ted and Robin just came from dinner covered with sauce while Lily stressed out because of √ Giving less evidences the wedding music. Lily: Okay, sauce, go. Ted: Long story. I’ll tell you later. Robin: Yeah. Barney: It’s dirty story, isn’t it? You guys went out to dinner, did it in the kitchen and got caught. Scherbatsky reeks of someone who likes to get caught. Robin: Okay, now I have to wash up for two reasons. 17. S02E21/QL/VL20 In the apartment, Barney was excited to tell the friends that he was going to be on The Price √ Saying untruth Is Right. information Barney: Ted, Robin get in here! – You guys know how it’s hard to be friends with me ‘cause I’m so awesome? Ted: Eee Yes, it’s hard to be friends with you. Go on. 18. S02E21/QL/VL21 Ted: Marshall, what are you doing? √ Saying untruth Marshall: Going to the bathroom. information Ted: In the hall? Marshall: Sleepwalking? Ted: You’re wide awake. Marshall: Robbing us? Ted: Dude.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

115

19. S02E22/QL/VL22 Ted was telling his bestman toast to Marshall. √ Saying untruth Marshall: You cannot tell that story at my wedding. My entire family’s gonna be there. My information little cousins, my mom, my grandma, my grandpa the minister. Ted: That grandpa died three years ago. Marshall: His favorite grandson is getting married, Ted. I think he can take a day off from haunting the barn to make an appearance. 20. EXCERPT At the wedding √ Saying untruth Barney: Hey. information A women: Hey. Barney: Can I have your phone number? A women: No. Barney: It’s for the bride. A women: Oh. Hold on. Let me go get a pen. Barney: The bride wants you to walk slower. 21. S02E07/QL/VL6 Robin: Oh, wow. √ Saying untruth Lily: Oh, Robin… My makeup looks perfect right now, and I’m about to cry. Do something. information Robin: I have hairy nipples. Lily: Really? Robin: No, but it worked, didn’t it? 22. S02E09/QL/VL7 Lily’s aunt, grammie: Oh, there you are. My dear, you look so beautiful. And------√ Saying untruth Lily: Thanks, Grammie, but we really need to… information Grammie: --- and you… you look like a 1940s movie star. Marshall: And you look like a pepper-crusted rack of lamb with mint jelly. 23. S02E12/QL/VL16 Lily: Mini quiches. You’re a mega-douche. √ Saying untruth Barney: Oh, that’s right, they moved that table back toward the kitchen, because that’s information where they’re setting up a surprise chocolate fountain. Oh, no, I gave it away. 24. S02E22/QL/VL23 At Robin’s apartment √ Saying untruth Robin: Wait, wait, wait, wait. information Ted: What? Robin: I don’t know if I can do this to you. Ted: Do what? Robin: Well, you say you want to move to Argentina, but you want to have kids. Ted: Oh, right. Cause there are no kids there. On Santa’s map of the world, there’s a big black “X” over Argentina.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

116

Robin: You know what I mean. 25.. S02E22/QL/VL24 Ted: Hey, kiddo. √ Giving less evidences Barney: You are going to miss out on a lot of awesome stuff. You’ll be at home with kid while I am out awesome-ing all over the place. And you’re going to get fat. 26. Marshall: a twin isn’t the same person. √ Saying untruth Barney: Of course it is. What do you think identical means? ‘ident’ – same, ‘ical’ – person. information Same person. 27. S02E09/QL/VL Barney: You can be Slap Bet Commissioner. √ Overstating and Lily: Ooh, I love it. What are my powers? saying untruth Barney: Um, if a problem arises and we need a ruling, that's your job. -- But you have to be information unbiased and put the integrity of slap bet above all else. This is an honor you will take with you to your grave. On your tombstone, it will read, "Lily Aldrin, caring wife, loving friend, Slap Bet Commissioner."

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

117

APPENDIX G 4.7 Table of Violating Maxim of Quantity in How I Met Your Mother Television Season 2

TYPE OF MAXIMS NO CODE EXCERPT INDICATION QL QN RL MN 1. S02E04/QN/VL1 Marshall: Your job’s not boring. √ Giving other information Ted: Robin thinks so. Barney: Lots of chicks think architect are hot. Think about it, you create something out of nothing. You’re like God. There’s nobody hotter than God. Ted: I love it when you quote scripture. 2. S02E06/QL/VL2 Lily: So, I quit my job. I just couldn’t take it anymore. Approximately fifty time a day, some √ Giving less Giving guy asks me for a lei…(laid) information not as Marshall: Classic. required 3. S02E20/QL/VL3 Ted: What? Dude, you were there. That was like a big iconic moment in all of our lives. √ Giving other information Barney: Maybe in your life – I got a lot of stuff going on. 4. S02E06/QN/VL4 Barney: I think I’m falling in love with you. √ Giving other information Cougar: Oh, God. That wasn’t your first time, was it? Although that would explain a lot. Barney: What? No. We had sex yesterday. Cougar: Oh, right. That. – Well, you had sex yesterday. I revised my syllabus for the spring semester. 5. S02E07/QN/VL5 Apartment √ Giving more information Lily: Where’s Marshall? Ted: Oh, he’s getting a haircut. Lily: Oh. For his date. Good for him. Hope he has a good time tonight. Barney: Relax, you’ve got nothing to worry about. The girl’s crazy. Lily: Thanks! Barney: He’ll just have wild monkey sex with her five times, max, and be done with her. Lily: Thanks again. 6. S02E08/QN/VL6 Atlantic city, all down at casino √ Giving less information Barney: Ah, A.C. always decline, never hitting bottom. It’s good to be back, old friend. Ted: you been here before?

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

118

Barney: Oh, uh, once or twice. Guy: Barney!...(speak Chinese) Barney: Good to see you. ----- Three times, maybe. 7. S02E08/QN/VL7 Courthouse, Ted ask Robin to sex in a public place. √ Giving less information Robin: What? Here? Ted: (pervy look) yeah. Got a little time to kill. Robin: Oh, my God, it’s the T-shirt, isn’t it? Ted: No. --- A little. 8. S02E08/QN/VL8 Judge: What’s going on? √ Giving more information Barney: They broke up over the summer. Lily totally ran off to San Fransisco and these two just had sex in the closet. All: (surprised look) Barney: What? We’re under oath. Ted: No. we’re not. Barney: Yeah, we are. He’s a judge. Ted: Wh--- did we take an oath? Do you even know what an oath is? 9. S02E16/QN/VL9 ( At the bar, both Ted and Robin agreed that they should be honest each other about exes’ √ Giving more information things) Ted: See that girl over there? Three years ago, I totally made out with her. Robin: I don’t wanna hear that. 10. S02E17/QN/VL9 (Car repairmen. Ted tried to make Marshall feel better.) √ Giving more information Ted: Hey, your car’s going to be fine. This is the best auto shop around. Look at this certificate. One of the mechanics here… finished a sixty four-ounce steak. 11. S02E22/QN/VL9 Barney: Oh, like First Corinthians? That Bible verse? They do that at every wedding. √ Giving information not as Robin: How’s it go? required (everyone starting to listen to Marshall) Marshall: “Love is patient and kind. Love does not envy or boast. It is not arrogant or rude. Love does not insist on it’s own way. It is not irritable or resentful. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things… endures all things.” Robin: Lame. Lily: Going on the list.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

119

APPENDIX H 4.8 Table of Violating Maxim of Relevance in How I Met Your Mother Television Season 2

TYPE OF MAXIMS NO CODE EXCERPT INDICATION QL QN RL MN 1. S02E01/RL/VL1 Ted: Honey, all this stuff I’m telling you is important. It’s all part of the story. √ Uttering different Son: Could I go to the bathroom? topic Ted: No. 2. S02E01/RL/VL2 (In the bar, Ted, Robin and Barney. Robin complained over Marshall) √ Uttering different Robin: This has to stop. Ted, we just started dating. We agreed we don’t want to move too fast, topic and yet somehow, we have a baby. He can’t feed himself. He cries a lot, he keeps us up all night. Barney: Have you tried breast-feeding? Nailed it! 3. S02E02/RL/VL3 Ted: She's miserable. She's realized she's made a huge mistake. Her and Marshall will be back √ Uttering different together in a week. I love it! topic Robin: Umm, no, you just want her to be miserable. The truth is, she's happy. Ted: Trust me, I've known Lily for nine years. Robin: Trust me, I'm a girl! Ted: Yeah, but you're Canadian. 4. S02E09/RL/VL4 Imagining the Oh moment, √ Uttering different Priest: I now pronounce you, man and wife. topic Ted: I love you. Robin: I used to be a dude. 5. S02E09/RL/VL5 Barney: Guys there’s no way Robin’s married. It’s ludicrous to even suggest it. √ Uttering different Ted: Thank you, Barney. topic Barney: ‘Cause it is porn. Ted: I need another beer. 6. S02E12/RL/VL6 At the apartment. Robin, Barney and Ted. There is a spider in the living room. √ Uttering different Robin: Spider! Spider! topic Barney: I left something in the hallway. 7. S02E19/RL/VL7 When Lily and Marshall were broken up. The men were up at the bar. √ Uttering different Barney: Hey. What you guys talking about? topic Marshall: Lily. (mimbik2)

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

120

Barney: I got to go. 8. S02E22/RL/VL8 Barney: Anyway, guys, we’re kind of in the middle of something, so if you could go bicker or √ Uttering different share a tense, sexless silence or whatever married people do somewhere else, that’d be great. topic Lily: No, Barney, this is my wedding, and I will sit wherever I damn well… Barney: Are those mini quiches? 9. S02E22/RL/VL9 Ted: So... Argentina. √ Uttering different Robin: Argentina. topic Ted: Why is this first I’ve heard of Argentina? Robin: Mmmm, American schools suck at geography. -- What would be the point in telling you that I want to live in Argentina? You don’t want to live there. 10. S02E08/QN/VL10 Judge: What’s going on? √ Uttering different Barney: They broke up over the summer. Lily totally ran off to San Fransisco and these two just topic had sex in the closet. All: (surprised look) Barney: What? We’re under oath. Ted: No. we’re not. Barney: Yeah, we are. He’s a judge. Ted: Wh--- did we take an oath? Do you even know what an oath is? Barney: Uh, yeah. Courthouse. Oath. We’re under it. (knows everything look)

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

121

APPENDIX I 4.9 Table of Violating Maxim of Manner in How I Met Your Mother Television Season 2

TYPE OF MAXIMS NO CODE EXCERPT INDICATION QL QN RL MN (At the apartment, Ted told Marshal if he be okay when both Ted and Robin are away for a while) Marshall: yeah, absolutely. Dude, I’m doing much better. Ted: Oh. Marshall: In fact take my car. 1. S02E01/MN/VL1 √ Being indirect Ted: Really? Marshall: Yeah. Ted: Hey, thanks…and hey, if you need anything day or night, just call me--- you know what, please don’t call me. (Barney apartment, after his) Barney: That was close. That hippie chick wouldn’t leave. She was ready to squat here. Lily: well, she’d have to with your spring-loaded toilet seat, wouldn’t she? Barney: She was freakishly immune to everything in my apartment…except you. You’re better than porn. Lily: Thank you. Barney: How would you like to extend your stay here? All you’d have to do is pretend to be my 2. S02E05/MN/VL2 wife, and scare off the occasional one-night stand. I know, I know. You’ve got your ethics. You’ve √ Being not brief got your principles…. Lily: I’ll do it. Barney: Really? Lily: Barney, you’ve clearly got some serious mother issues that have left you the emotional equivalent of a scavenging sewer rat. But in other my apartment I would be living with an actual scavenging sewer rat, so you win. Barney: I’ll take it. Druthers: Can you picture it, Ted? Fashion of 3. S02E06/MN/VL3 Ted: I can’t un-picture it. √ language Druthers: Good.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

122

Druthers: Normally, I would scream at everyone until my voice goes, but maybe that’s the wrong reaction here. Lily: (low voice to Ted) Interesting. Druthers: Instead, I’m giving my baseball until the end of the day to decide he’s homesick, or, 4. S02E07/MN/VL4 Being not brief tomorrow morning, I’ll begin firing three people an hour. And if the thief doesn’t believe me, well, then you are gambling more than Pete Rose – major league baseball’s all-time hit leader, a man whose absence from the Hall of Fame is a travesty to the entire sports world – ever “allegedly” did! There are the gang but Barney seems could not read the situation. He should’ve not said that to Marshall while there is Lily next to him. Obscure 5. S02E08/MN/VL5 √ Lily: We’re going to Atlantic City to Elope right now! expression Barney: Oh, congratulations, Lily. Marshall, you’re getting married? What the hell? Barney was talking to his nephew. Barney: hey, buddy. Your parents are married. Now you listen. Just because you’re being raised by married people doesn’t mean you have to choose that lifestyle. High-five. – Luckily you got Obscure 6. S02E10/MN/VL6 √ me. In 20 and a half years you’ll be 21, and I will be…. Well, I haven’t decided how old I’ll expression be yet. But we are gonna bro out, uncle and nephew style. Stick with me kid. I am gonna teach you how to live. Down at the bar, Barney drops some knowledge that according to him relationships are like a freeway. In fact, in previous month, he told Marshall that relationships are like a travelling circus. Barney: Freeways have exits. So do relationships. The first exit, my personal favorite, is six hours Ambiguous 7. S02E12/MN/VL7 √ in. you meet, you talk you have sex, you exit when she’s in the shower. language Robin: So every girl you have sex with feels the immediate need to shower? Actually yeah I get that. (Robin never been this longer in the relationship and she never felt so in love like she feel with Ted. It turns out that she choked to say I Love you to Ted in ‘falafel’. And lily, though she dumped Marshall over summer, they get back together eventually.) 8. S02E12/MN/VL8 Robin: So I’ve never been on the freeway this long before. I mean, usually by now I find out the √ Being indirect guy has some weird personality thing that makes me want to take the next exit. Lily: Yeah, been there. I once dated a guy who could only go to the bathroom when classical music was playing. --- Okay it was Marshall. Superbowl in 2006, apartment, annual inner party, Robin get invited. Obscure 9. S02E14/MN/VL13 √ Ted: How cool is Robin? expression

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

123

Marshall: I can’t believe you invited this girl we’ve only known for a few months to our sacred day. Now, she’s gonna be in all the pictures. Barney: Yeah, yeah, whatever. I’ll give you the Seahawks plus six points for five hundred bucks. Marshall: Are you crazy? Maybe for fifty. Barney: Fifty $! What fun is fifty $! Why don’t we just bet air?! God, Marshall! (rapid changeable expression) Okay, fifty. The gang are down at the bar. Marshall came with broken leg 10. S02E15/MN/VL10 Barney: Here’s how you run a marathon. Step one, you start running. (pause) there is no step √ Being unordered two. In apartment, barney doesn’t want Ted and Robin living together. He tried to convince them by asking made-up questions.) Barney: So? We all agree? We move Ted’s stuff back up here? Obscuring 11. S02E18/MN/VL11 Ted: Mm.. no. we’re still moving in together. expression Barney: Why? This is crazy. Ted, you’re throwing your life away. This girl is blinding you. With her shinny hair and her boobed shaped boobs. This is bad for you, too, you know. (On the way to bachelor party) Barney: Hi. Ted: Hi, Obscuring 12. S02E19/MN/VL12 Barney: we’re still going to Atlantic City, right? √ expression Ted: Oh, did I not tell you? Yeah, we switched it. We’re going to Foxwoods. Barney: Foxwoods? But I’ve got an ipperstray waiting in tlanticaay itycay. What the heck’s in Foxwoods? In a bar, friends has been sitting even before he came. Obscuring 13. S02E14/MN/VL12 Ted: What is ruined? Why, why is this such a big deal? √ expression Barney: Okay guys…sit down, I’ve got to tell you something. Robin: Do you have a brother? Barney: Yes, He’s the “awesome-est,” most best “looking-est, “greatest guy ever. Obscuring 14. S02E10/MN/VL14 √ Lily: He’s exactly like Barney. expression Barney: That’s what I just said. When Lily listed the horrible wedding clichés they won’t touch with a ten-foot limbo pole during the wedding with Marshall, Robin and Ted. Suddenly, Barney came by. Obscuring 15. S02E20/MN/VL15 √ Barney: What list? language Lily: Horrible wedding clichés we are not going to touch with a ten-foot limbo pole.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

124

APPENDIX J 4.10 Table of Violating Multiple Maxims in How I Met Your Mother Television Season 2

TYPE OF MAXIMS NO EXCERPT EXCERPT INDICATION QL QN RL MN 1. SE02EP09/QL- Barney: Fine. Do you wanna know what Robin’s secret is? √ √ Giving less evidence and MN/VL6 Ted: you know? obscuring expression Barney: Of course I know. She couldn’t look at us, her face got flushed, that shame, my friend. Our friend Robin used to do porn, what for it… ography. Ted: Yeah, we didn’t really need to wait for that. 2. SE02EP11/MN- At the bar, Robin, Ted and Barney. Barney got fever but he denied. √ √ Obscuring expression and RL/VL6 Ted: No, I meant do you have a cold? uttering irrelevant topic Barney: I’m fine. – I’m fine. My nose is just overflowing with awesome and I had to get some of it out. – Now, if you’ll excuse me, the holidays are a time when people are lonely and desperate. It’s the most wonderful time of the year. 3. SE02EP12/QL- Barney: The next exits are four days, three weeks, seven months – that’s when you √ √ Giving less evidences and QN/VL6 guys are gonna break up, mark your calendars. (talk to both Robin and Ted) giving more information Ted: hey! Robin: what? (talk in the same time) 4. SE02EP19/QL- Ted: Look, I know you have some stuff planned for Marshall’s bachelor party, but he √ √ Obscuring expression and MN/VL6 really doesn’t want strippers. uttering untruth Barney: Yes, he does. Ted: Uh, well, he told me he doesn’t. Barney: Uh, well, he told me he does. Ted: When? Barney: Every minute of every day as his inner animal thrashes against the cage of his own puritanical upbringing. – Or do you guys not like naked girls.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

125

APPENDIX K 4.11 Table of Infringing Maxims in How I Met Your Mother Television Season 2

TYPE OF MAXIMS NO CODE EXCERPT INDICATION QL QN RL MN Lily, Ted and Robin were having breakfast at the restaurant. Robin was still drunk when the waiter served the menu. Robin (talking to the waiter): I’d take you with gravy. If my boyfriend wasn’t sitting right here. – S02E02/QL/IF1 1. Just kidding. I’m good. √ Drunkenness

Lily: What are you so chirpy about? Ted: She’s still drunk from last night. Robin: I don’t think so. Whoo! Barney was demonstrating how he would appear in TPIR. Rather telling Marshall and Ted what he is going to do, he left them clueless. Barney: So which one, “A” or “B”? S02E20/MN/IF2 Marshall: What was that? 2. √ Excitement Barney: I have to decide how to run to contestant’s tow when they say, “Barney Stinson, come on down!” Oh, I didn’t realize that’s what it was. Can you do them again? Barney: Yeah, of course. Lily, Ted and Robin were having breakfast at the restaurant. Robin was still drunk when the waiter served the menu. S02E02/MN/IF3 3. Robin (talking to the waiter): I’d take you with gravy. If my boyfriend wasn’t sitting right here. – √ Drunkenness

Just kidding. I’m good. Lily: What are you so chirpy about? Lily agreed to what Barney’s presumption about Robin’s past life. Lily: I don’t know. He could be right. She does have the fake orgasm noises down. 4. S02E09/RL/IF4 Ted: Hey! √ Lily: What? The walls are thin. Ted: That’s not what I’m hey-ing you about. 5. S02E12/RL/FL5 Empire State Building—what robin wish is that Katie wasn’t in such a rush to grow up. √

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

126

Robin: Katie, I’ll admit, maybe I’m not in any place to lecture you on romantic relationships, but – but I just don’t want you to make the same mistakes that I’ve made. Katie: Oh, believe me, Kyle is not gay. Robin: That’s not what I meant.

PLAGIATPLAGIAT MERUPAKAN MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TIDAK TERPUJI TERPUJI

127

APPENDIX L 4.12 Table of Suspending Maxims in How I Met Your Mother Season 2

TYPE OF MAXIMS NO CODE EXCERPT INDICATION QL QN RL MN At the bar Robin: A what? S02E06/SP1 √ √ 1. Barney: A cougar. An older woman, usually in her 40s or fifties, single and on the prowl for a younger Joking

man, Ted: What’s a women in her sixties or 70s—a turtle? Lily get ambitious to get married today. Marshall: Baby, anyplace we go, we’re gonna need a marriage license. √ √ 2. S02E06/SP2 Lily: Except international waters. So-so let’s find a ship captain. A ship captain can marry us. There’s boats Joking

all over this place. Ted: Oh, is that what those wooden things are floating between the garbage? At the apartment, ready for funeral. Ted: Okay here’s the plan: record the game, go to the funeral, pay our respects to Matt… Lily: Mark. Ted: Mark, and start watching only an hour late. Marshall: Okay, that’s great, but just to make sure it records, maybe we should bow our heads and say a S02E14/SP3 √ √ 3. quiet prayer to the TiVo gods. Praying

Ted: Almighty TiVo, we thank you for all the gifts you have given us: the power to freeze live TV to go take a leak is nothing short of Godlike. Let’s not forget fast-forwarding through commercials. It seems greedy to ask anything more from you, O Magic bos, but if you malfunction and miss the Super Bowl, we will destroy you in the alley with baseball bats. Marshall, Ted: Amen. Barney: You can be Slap Bet Commissioner. Lily: Ooh, I love it. What are my powers? S02E09/SP4 Barney: Um, if a problem arises and we need a ruling, that's your job. -- But you have to be unbiased and √ √ 4. Joking put the integrity of slap bet above all else. This is an honor you will take with you to your grave. On your tombstone, it will read, "Lily Aldrin, caring wife, loving friend, Slap Bet Commissioner." Marshall: And your tombstone will read "Got slapped by Marshall, so hard he died."