The Analysis of Couple Jokes Using The Non-Observance of The Gricean Maxims in 'www.getfrank.com'.

(1)

ii

Maranatha Christian University

ABSTRACT

Skripsi ini membahas pelanggaran bidal yang ditemukan di dalam situs Getfrank, yang merupakan situs majalah pria.

Pelanggaran – pelanggaran bidal tersebut akan dikaji menggunakan teori pelanggaran bidal yang dicetuskan oleh H.P. Grice. Teori pelanggaran bidal terdiri dari beberapa jenis, di antaranya, flouting the maxim, yang lebih jauh lagi dibagi menjadi: flouts maxim of quality, flouts maxim of quantity, flouts maxim of relation, dan flouts maxim of manner dan, diikuti violating a maxim, infringing a maxim, opting out a maxim, dan suspending a maxim.

Untuk mempertegas analisis humor ini, saya menggunakan juga theory of incongruity dari Victor Raskin. Teori Raskin sendiri umumnya berbicara mengenai bagaimana perpindahan konteks cerita, atau dalam hal ini disebut script, dapat menyebabkan efek humor yang memicu tawa.

(2)

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

As human beings, it is undeniable that we need to communicate with each other. Aristotle says that man is by nature a social animal. Humans always need to talk to other human beings, like friends or parents, or sometimes we even talk to themselves. When we talk to other people, we are involved in a conversation process. Conversation is an ‘oral exchange of sentiments, observations, opinion, or ideas’ (“Conversation,” def. 2). In this process, we say things: it could be news about our cousin’s wedding, our new shoes, our problem and its solution, or maybe we just want to say ‘Hi’.

(4)

with a humorous intention. The key word here is humorous. Furthermore, humorous means ‘causing laughter and amusement’ (“Humorous,” def. 1). Thus, a joke is something which makes us laugh or causes amusement.

This is an example of the joke taken from Richardwiseman.com which is said to be the joke which received the highest rating than other jokes:

“Two hunters are out in the woods when one of them collapses. He doesn't seem to be breathing and his eyes are glazed. The other guy whips out his phone and calls the emergency services. He gasps, "My friend is dead! What can I do?". The operator says "Calm down. I can help. First, let's make sure he's dead." There is a silence, then a shot is heard. Back on the phone, the guy says "OK, now what?"

Most of us may always deal with this kind of story, which is usually used to ‘refresh’ a conversation. Some people may use this to give color to a conversation so it would not be too assertive, for example, as an opening to a speech.

(5)

3

Maranatha Christian University In the Semantic-Script Theory of Humor, or, as it is sometimes called, theory of incongruity, it is assumed that a joke contains two different scripts and it becomes funny when there is a change between these two scripts. One of the ways these scripts can change is when someone does not observe the set of rules of conversation, which we know as the Gricean maxims.

The non-observance of the principles includes adding more or less information when speaking, saying something that is believed to be false or untrue, saying something that is unrelated to what is required, and also saying something in an obscure way or not in a brief way, etcetera.

When we talk with other people, we sometimes do not say what we intend directly because we want to be polite or to reduce harshness. Some people violate the principles also to mislead another person or to hide what they really want to say. These forms of non-observance is said to trigger the scripts to change from one script to a different script.

(6)

a great number of data I need and all of them are compatible with what I want to discuss.

(702 words)

Statement of the Problem

I will discuss some problems in this thesis:

1. What type of non-observance of Gricean maxims is found in the joke?

2. How does the non-observance of the Gricean maxims lead to the incongruity process and create the humorous effect?

Purpose of the Study

1. To find out what non-observance of Gricean maxims is found in the text. 2. To explain how the non-observances create incongruity and how they create a humorous effect.

Method of Research

(7)

5

Maranatha Christian University that are related to the scripts and explain how they shift and create the incongruity.

Organization of the Thesis

(8)

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION

There are fifteen data I have gathered and analyzed in the Chapter Three. From those data, it is found that there is one datum which flouts maxim of quality: Data 1; there are five data which flouts maxim of quantity : Data 2, Data 3, Data 5, Data 7, Data 9; there are three data which flouts maxim of relation : Data 4, Data 12, Data 13; there are six data which flouts maxim of manner : Data 8, Data 10, Data 11, Data 12, Data 14, and Data 15; there is one data with infringed maxim: Data 6.

(9)

42

Maranatha Christian University In my opinion, this may be related to the ‘fact’ that women are hard to be understood. Probably, one of the reasons of why they are considered to be hard to understand is because they mostly talk in a not-brief way. Or, women flouts maxim of manner the most probably to soften what they are about to say, for example, like in Data 11, the woman can be said to soften her expression of hatred to her mother in-law.

The second most prominent non-observance found in the data is the flouting the maxim of quantity. This shows that adding information is apparently also potential to create humorous effect.

The third most prominent trigger of the scripts shifts is flouting maxim of relation. The flouting maxim of relation is just another effective way to make a joke a joke. This type of non-observance creates such humorous effect from its ‘weirdness’. The ‘weirdness’ itself refers to disconnection-like connection. If we look at some jokes which depend on flouting maxim of relation to be the trigger of incongruity, we will see a disconnection between the speakers in the story. Still, at the same time we know that, a connection does exist and the speaker is not impaired. This connection matter is proven to be another way to create humorous effect.

(10)

43

in a long-winded or not brief or ambiguous in responding to someone’s utterance, adding information or giving unrelated response to what someone is required instead of lying, in form of sarcasm, or be ambiguous when responding to someone. Infringing the maxim itself is also the least prominent in this website. It is simply because there are only a few data which involve drunkenness of someone, children who still have imperfect linguistics performance, or misunderstanding between a native speaker of a place and a foreigner. There are only a few jokes which are based on those things; it may be because those jokes could not always be understood by all joke readers. Some jokes based on infringing a maxim might also need certain knowledge. In Data 6, however, infringing a maxim happens because of drunkenness.

(11)

44

Maranatha Christian University Refusal to cooperate with the speaker here is proven to be another ‘No’ for making a joke.

Another thing I find from the analysis is about the scripts. The scripts’ change in a joke is said to be the trigger of laughter, and it does. I’d like to say that script change is like a speed hump which is built to limit the speed of any kind of transportation which passes through it. Let us imagine ourselves driving a car. We follow the road smoothly and unconsciously fast. However, as we drive the car faster and faster, and become less aware, we pass the speed hump and we are surprised because of it. We finally go back to our awareness and probably say, “I didn’t see it coming!”

Reading jokes is the same thing. Script change can be also referred to be a limit. It is a limit for our expectation, or, for our imagination. A story has this component, which I would address as ‘fence’. When we follow a story, we are actually made to, as I mention before, drive our car in a road with fence on its left and right side. When we read a joke, we follow the story, until we reach one point when every of our expectation of the story fails. This is the sense of incongruity that is somehow ‘ticklish’ and makes you us want to laugh. The ‘ticklish’ sense here can be said to be the result of unexpected ‘movement’ of the story. In other words, the main key to incongruous effect is the fact that there is an unexpected truth; what we read is not as what we think to be.

(12)

45

knowledge of a person. Person A, who rarely reads jokes will have greater chance to acquire the ‘ticklish’ effect than person B who has already read many jokes before. Let’s say that person B reads many jokes which are based on the change of the scripts, a certain mindset is unconsciously created in person B’s mind. The mind of the person somehow would learn the pattern of the jokes and in the end, it will decrease the effect of incongruity and furthermore, the ‘ticklish’ effect, since the unexpected truth has now become expected regardless of the person’s will. It is like entering a haunted house in a playground. The more often we enter the house, the less scared we would be for we already know what we will see.

Not only background knowledge of a person, sense of humor is something that is also important to be the indicator of how ‘ticklish’ a change of scripts would be. Personally, I think that everybody has different sense of humour. What is funny for one may be different to what is funny for the other one. One laughs at slapstick comedy while one may find it boring and choose dark comedy instead. Even without reading many jokes before, a person could see a joke merely just as a usual story. Thus, another thing that can be concluded here is that to decide whether a joke is a joke or not is subjective matter.

(13)

46

Maranatha Christian University maxim – to see if there is really a possibility for these two types of non-observance to be used as jokes base.

(14)

47

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Texts

Getfrank: Laughs. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 March 2014.

References

Attardo, Salvatore. Linguistic Theory of Humor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1962. Print.

“Conversation.” Def. 2a. Webster’s New Explorer Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2006. Print.

Cook, Guy. Language Play, Language Learning. Oxford: OVP, 2000. Print.

Krikmann, Arvo. Contemporary Linguistic Theories of Humour. Web. 1 March. 2014.

(15)

48

Maranatha Christian University “Nymphomaniac” Def 1. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. 2006. Print.

Veale, Tony. Incongruity in Humour: Root Cause or Epiphenomenon. University College Dublin. Web. 15 May 2014.

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