AN ANALYSIS OF CONVERSATIONAL MAXIMS FLOUTED BY THE CHARACTERS OF CARRIE MOVIE (2013).

(1)

AN ANALYSIS OF CONVERSATIONAL MAXIMS FLOUTED BY THE CHARACTERS OF CARRIE MOVIE (2013)

A THESIS

Submitted as Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Sarjana Degree of English Department Faculty of Letters and Humanities

State Islamic University of Sunan Ampel Surabaya

By

NAILUL ROHMA Reg. Number: A83211169

ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LETTERS AND HUMANITIES STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY OF SUNAN AMPEL

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

ABSTRACT

Title : An Analysis of Conversational Maxims Flouted by the Characters of “Carrie” Movie (2013)

Key words: conversational maxims, flouting, Carrie movie.

(7)

INTISARI

Judul : An Analysis of Conversational Maxims Flouted by the Characters of “Carrie” Movie (2013)

Kata kunci: conversational maxims, flouting, Carrie movie.

(8)

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This introduction chapter presents the background of study, statement of

the problems, the objective of the study, significance of the study, scope and

limitation of the study, and definition of key terms.

1.1Background of the Study

The most important aspect in human life which is used as their

communication is language. Language is a system to transfer and to inform

something through communication (Addler, Rodman, 1991:110). Human uses

language to interact with other people around them. As a human, we are all

relating to each other in a communication right from when we were born. We

cannot live by ourselves. We should have to interact and communicate with

other people around us. People usually use language to inform, to express their

idea, and to build up their social relationship. So, language is the most

important thing to human beings to maintain their life.

Language usage in communication needs two important mediums;

those are linguistic medium and pragmatic medium. Linguistic medium is

related to form of accuracy and language structure , while pragmatic medium

is related to form of accuracy and structure of the context. Pragmatic is the

study of relation between language and context that are gramaticalized in

(11)

2

study of the use of context to make inferences about meaning (Fasold,

1990:119). Human is the only creature that uses words intentionally and

habitually. They use words to tell someone about something, to express their

intention and feelings, and above all, to communicate with others (Boulton,

1960:3). When we interact with other people, it means that we are

communicating with them. A good communication is very important in

establishing and maintaining good relation with other people. In a

conversation could end with both good and/or bad resolution, an argument or

even misunderstanding things. The most common form of communication

between each people is conversation which has participants in it. The speaker

and the hearer are supposed to give respond to each other in their turn and

exchange and in order to requiring some information. By giving some

requiring information, they can easily understand each other‟s utterances and

so the conversation can going smoothly and there is no misunderstanding.

There are four agreements that every people should follow in order

to make a good communication. It relates with the truth,the briefness, the

relevance, and the clearness of what they say, and these agreements are called

cooperative principle (Grice‟s theory of maxims, 1975 in Cook, 1989). The

co-operative principle is stated in the following way: “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”. Supporting this principle are four maxims, often called the „Gricean

(12)

3

suggested principle that we need in a conversation in order to achieve a good

conversation so there is no misunderstanding. If they cannot fulfill the rule of

using cooperative principle in a conversation, the miscommunication and

misunderstanding also the conversational breaker will occur between the

speaker and the hearer. We said it as a flouting of cooperative principle when

the speaker does not fulfill the cooperative principle characteristic. For the

example, when the speaker does not give the relevant answer to the hearer in a

conversation. They may intend that they are not interested with the

conversation or maybe they did not want to share anything to the hearer, so

they say something irrelevant.

Grice suggested that people interpret indirectness by orienting to a

set of broad shared conventions about what to expect from others in

conversation (Johnstone, 2008:234). Therefore, to make a conversation goes

smoothly, each participant should obey the cooperative principle, which has a

significant function in conversation. Grice (1975) proposes that people should

use Cooperative Principles if they want to make the communication

successful. The cooperative principle reflects four maxims of conversation,

they are: Maxim of Quality, Do not lie; do not make unsupported claims

(Frumkin, Rodman, Hyams, 2007:205), is when the speaker is required to the

truth and should only say what they believe to be true; Maxim of Quantity, say

neither more nor less tha the discourse requires (Frumkin, Rodman, Hyams,

2007:205), is when the speaker should say the informative sentence to the

(13)

4

be relevant (Frumkin, Rodman, Hyams, 2007:205), is when the speaker

requires being relevant with the topic of conversation; and Maxim of Manner,

be brief and orderly; avoid ambiguity and obscurity (Frumkin, Rodman,

Hyams, 2007:205), is when the speaker should be clear in what they say,

avoiding ambiguity and obscurity, and the speakers should be brief and

orderly say. These principles can make the conversation work effectively and

run smoothly.

In conversation we sometimes infer or conclude based not only on

what was said, but also on assumption about what the speaker is trying to

achieve (Frumkin, Rodman, Hyams, 2007:205). When people are “flouting” a

maxim happens when he or she has to flout because he or she wants the hearer

to know what are they intended to (Johnstone, 2008:235). However,

sometimes people flout the maxims definitely for some certain reasons. For

instance, people sometimes answer a question by giving unclear or ambiguos

statement and sometimes answer with the irrelevant answer that is not related

with the topic of conversation. In a conversation there may be one or more

maxims which are being flouted by the speaker. Of course, the speaker who

flouted a maxim in a conversation, they may have some reasons why they

flouting those maxims of conversation which are important to do in a

conversation. Therefore, the writer is interested in conducting a research to

find out what is the maxims which appear in the conversations and the reasons

behind the flouting maxims, how the characters of the object flouted the

(14)

5

If one tells a lie in English, once breaks one of Grice‟s maxims (the

maxim of quality, quantity, relation and manner) and it could also caused

some consequences, but this does not mean that person fails to speak the

English language (Leech, 1983:8-9). We should not say something not real to

another person which cause misunderstanding and make that person confuse

or maybe hurt or maybe there are some consequences. The consequence of

flouting a maxim can be seen on the occurance of understanding or

misunderstanding of the addresse through verbal and nonverbal clues refer to

either written or spoken language. Nevertheless, nonverbal clues come from

eyes expression, body language, touching and voice. Nonverbal clues are not

written nor spoken language. For example, the communication which happens

in a restaurant between the customer and the waiter. When the customer

comes inside the restaurant, the waiter immediately offers the tea and coffee to

the customer, but then the customer gives nonverbal clues by waving his/her

hand which means he/she wants the other menu. The customer here does not

speak, he/she only gives a signal to the waiter and automatically the waiter

understand it. That is the example of nonverbal clues.

The writer is interested in analyzing the “Carrie” Movie. It is one of

2013 American supernatural horror movie which produced by

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and Screen Gems and it is the third movie adaption of

Stephen King‟s 1974 novel under the same title, “Carrie” (en.wikipedia.org,

retrieved in May, 2015). The first Carrie movie was produced in 1976 with the

(15)

6

and the third adaptation was produced in 2013, produced as a movie again like

the first adaptation. The third movie also use the same title as the previous

one. Those three movies actually have the same storylines but in each

adaptations, the producers and directors changed its characters. They also

subtracted and even added the story. So, the writer decided the third

adaptation movie as her research object because it is the newest movie

adaptation. Besides, here the writer tends to find if there maybe some

commotions caused by flouting a maxim in a thriller movie such as Carrie

movie, since she ever found two previous studies which tend to find humor

caused by flouting the conversational maxims. It is also interesting to be

analyzed because “Carrie” movie is the third adaption of the first published

novel by Stephen King. The writer found out that all the characters in the

“Carrie” movie have the same range of dialogue. That is why the writer tried

to find the flouting maxims by all the characters on the “Carrie” movie. There

are about thirteen casts in the “Carrie” movie: Carrie White, Margareth White,

Sue Snell, Miss Desjardin, Chris Hargensen, Tommy Ross, Billy Nolan, and

the other supporting casts.

Carrie is a 2013 American supernatural horror movie produced by

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and Screen Gems. It is the third movie adaptation of

Stephen King‟s 1974 novel under the same title. The third adaptations of

“Carrie” Movie tells about a young-beautiful-shy girl named Carrie White

(played by Chloe Grace Moretz) who lives with her religious yet disturbed

(16)

7

experiences her first menstrual period, Carrie naively thinks that she is

bleeding to death and her mother, Margareth (played by Julianne Moore) hits

her using a bible and locks Carrie in the “Prayer Closet” inside their house.

Carrie‟s mother such have a special personality. When Carrie talked

everything about her school life, for example from the movie is when Tommy

Ross (played by Ansel Elgort) asked Carrie to go to the prom night with him,

Margareth will always utters some prays based on the holy bible which is not

relevant with what Carrie said. This movie ended up by a big accident when

the Prom was held, caused by Chris Hargensen (played by Portia Doubleday)

that make the school burns to the ground. Carrie walks away out of the prom

venue with the blood pouring all over her body and gown. She is leaving trail

of fire and destruction in her wake. At home, Margareth attacks Carrie, who

attempts to flee but her mother tries to kill her using several sharp tools, such

as knifes, scissors, needles, etc. At the end Carrie unconsciously using her

supernatural power and kills her mother. She becomes hysterical and makes

stones rain from the sky to crush the house down. The duration of “Carrie”

Movie is about one hour, forty minutes and fifty six second.

The writer also finds some works which are also discussed about

co-operative principles and flouting the Gricean Maxims. One of its thesis by

Handayani in 2005 “The Flouting of Conversational Maxim in Javanese Short

Story Pacarku Ngandheg”. She was trying to find out the most frequently flouted maxim and the reasons behind the flouting maxims. The writer also

(17)

8

by the Main Male Characters in Wedding Crashers Movie”. She stated that

flouting of conversational maxims could cause some humorous conversations.

Another thesis which is focus on flouting the conversational maxims could

cause some humorous conversation is Agusliani‟s thesis (2012) “Flouting of

Maxims Which Provokes Humor in The Big Bang Theory and Office Boy

Shift 2 Movies Series”. She argues that in conversations there are some

conditions that the participants have to flout the maxims.

Therefore, the writer focused on finding the flouted of four maxims

(maxims of quality, maxims of quantity, maxims of relation and maxims of

manner) spoken by all the characters of the “Carrie” movie and the reason

behind the flouted maxims, on how the characters of the “Carrie” movie

flouted the maxims inside their dialogue, and what is the maxim that mostly

flouted by the characters of “Carrie” movie, in this case, using Grice‟s theory

of conversational maxims.

1.2Statements of the Problems

Based on the background of this study, the problems that appear in this

research are:

1. How are the maxims being flouted by the characters‟ conversations of

“Carrie” movie?

2. What is the maxim that mostly flouted in the characters‟ conversations of

(18)

9

1.3Objective of the Study

After looking at the statements of the problems above, the writer has the

following research purposes:

1. To identify how the characters of “Carrie” movie flouted the conversational

maxims.

2. To identify what maxim that mostly flouted in the characters‟ dialogue of

“Carrie” movie.

1.4Significance of the Study

This research is expected to give some significances, they are:

1. To enlarge the reader‟s knowledge about Grice‟s theory of maxims and it

contains.

2. To give the reader information about how to find and describe some kind of

flouting maxims in a movie script.

3. To add more references for other researches that will going to discuss the

same object in the future research.

4. To give the reader some benefits who have interest in Grice‟s theory of

maxims.

1.5Scope and Limitation

In conducting the study, the writer used all the characters of “Carrie”

Movie as her source of finding the data. The writer used all the characters‟

(19)

10

leading the conversation even the main character, Carrie White. The theory

that use in this study is Grice‟s theory of maxims. In this study, the writer

limits the discussion only on finding of flouting of four cooperative principles

and the maxims (maxims of quality, maxims of quantity, maxims of relation

and maxims of manner) and then analyze the language and utterances

produced by all the characters of “Carrie” Movie on their dialogue with each

other casts.

1.6Definition of Key Terms

1. Cooperative Principle and the Maxims

The cooperative principle or CP is the overarching principle which Grice

suggested that people interpret indirectness by orienting to a set of broad

shared conventions about what to expect from others in conversation, and four

“maxims” describe the particular expectations that shape how efficient,

co-operative meaning-making is achieved (Johnstone, 2008:234). Consist of:

 Be true (the maxim of quality)

 Be brief (the maxim of quantity)

 Be relevant (the maxim of relation)

(20)

11

2. Flouting a Maxim

People are flouting a maxim happens when he or she has to flout because

he or she wants the hearer of the conversation to know what are they (the

speaker) intended to (Khosravizade & Sadehvandi, 2011:123).

3. “Carrie” Movie (2013)

Carrie is a 2013 American supernatural horror movie which produced by

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and Screen Gems and it is the third movie adaption of

Stephen King‟s 1974 novel under the same title, “Carrie”. The first Carrie

movie was produced in 1976 with the same title as the third, and the second

adaptation was produced in the 2002, and the third adaptation was produced in

2013, produced as a movie again like the first adaptation. The third movie also

(21)

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

This chapter consist of many important aspects in finishing this thesis. They

are cooperative principle and the maxims (maxim of quantity, quality, relation and

manner), the concept of flouting maxims, synopsis of “Carrie” movie and some

previous studies which are similar to the research.

2.1THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

2.1.1 Cooperative Principle and the Maxims

An underlying assumption in most conversational exchanges seems

to be that the participants are co-operating with each other. This principle,

together with four maxims that we expect our conversational partners to

obey, was first described by the philosopher Paul Grice (Yule, 2006:129).

The philosopher Paul Grice (1975) has proposed that when people

converse they tacitly subscribe to what he calls the cooperative principle

although he has conversation in mind, one can, as we shall see later, apply

the same principle to all kinds of communication, whether this takes the

form of conversation or not. Grice suggests that the cooperative principle

can be expressed in terms of four maxims that parties in an interaction will

subscribe to, on condition that both of them also recognize the purpose for

(22)

13

The co-operative principle is stated in the following way: “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”. Supporting this principle are four maxims, often

called the „Gricean maxims‟ (Grice, 1975:45, in Yule, 2006:129). There

are theories of “conversational implicature” associated with H. P. Grice

(1975). Grice suggested that people interpret indirectness by orienting to a

set of broad shared conversations about what to expect from others in

conversation. The overarching principle is the cooperative principle (CP)

and four maxims describe the particular expectations that shape how

efficient, cooperative meaning-making is achieved. Grice‟s cooperative

principle and the four maxims are maxims of quantity, maxims of quality,

maxims of relation, and maxims of manner. (Johnstone, 2008:234). H. P.

Grice (1975) defines implicature as a term to account for what a speaker

can imply, suggest or mean as distinct from what the speaker literally says.

Of much greatest interest to discourse analysis is the notion of

conversation implicature, which is derived from a general principle of

conversational plus a number of maxims, which the normally obeyed by

the speakers. The general principles are called Cooperative Principle. In

Grice‟s observation, the sender of a language obeys the four maxims:

quantity, quality, relation and manner.

The cooperative principle makes the relation between the speaker

(23)

14

of conversational such as is required, by the accepted purpose or direction

of the talk exchange in which you are engaged. Conversation is a social

activity, which always involves two or more participants. Conversation

cannot emerge if one is talking to oneself and once the conversation has

emerged, it needs some efforts from the participants to make it working

good and running smoothly.

2.1.1.1The Maxim of Quantity

Maxim of Quantity means that the participants‟ contribution

in a corversation is as informative as it is required (for the current

purposes of the exchange). In this case, the participants should not

contribute on saying something to the hearer more tha its required.

For example:

Obeying case of a maxim of quantity:

A: How did Harry fare in court the other day?

B: Oh, he got fine.

(Levinson, 1983)

If later transpirates that Harry got a live sentence too, then

B would certainly be guilty of misleading A, for he has failed to

provide all the information that might reasonably be required. Then

here is the example of disobeying (flouting) case of a maxim of

quantity:

(24)

15

B: Well, Julie was wearing one this morning.

(Leech, 1983, p. 93)

By using indefinite article, B refuses to commit himself to

whether the ring be sees in the same one that A loses. B, in this

case is not being informative at all.

2.1.1.2The Maxim of Quality

Maxim of Quality indicates that participants should not say

what they believe to be false. And of course they may not say that

for which they lack adequate evidence.

For example:

Obeying case of a maxim of quality:

A: Does your farm contain 400 acres?

B: I do not know that it does.

(Levinson, 1983. P. 105)

This example simply extends the scope of quality by

viewing the truth as a special sub-case of sincerety applied to

assertions. And here is the example of disobeying (flouting) case of

a maxim of quality:

A: Teheran’s in Turkey isn’t it, teacher?

B: And London’s in America I supposed.

(25)

16

B‟s utterance serves to suggest that A is absurdly incorrect

or flouting the maxim of quality.

2.1.1.3The Maxim of Relation

Maxim of relation is used when the participants just the

convey in a relevant information. The participant should not reply or

saying something that does not relevant from the other participants‟

dialogue.

For example:

Obeying case of a maxim of relation:

A: Where is my box of chocolate?

B: It is in your room.

(Leech, 1983, p. 94)

B‟s remark is relevant to A‟s question since B knows the

answer and his answer relates to the question, not talking about

something else that does not relevant with A‟s question. And here

is the example of disobeying (flouting) case of a maxim of relation:

Johnny: Hay Sally, lets play marbles.

Mother: How is your homework getting along, John?

(26)

17

Johnny‟s mother can remind him that he may not yet be free

to play. She should be relevant, tell to Johnny to not going to play

yet till his homework is getting done.

2.1.1.4The Maxim of Manner

Maxim of manner means that the participants have to be

perspicuous and also they have to avoid obscurity of expression and

also avoid the ambiguity when reacted to the other participants. The

utterances of the participant produces are brief (Avoid unnecessary

prolixity) and must be orderly.

For example:

Obeying case of a maxim of manner:

Friend: Where was Alfred yesterday?

Mother: Alfred went to the store and bought some whisky.

(Levinson, 1983. p. 108)

The mother‟s answer is obeying the maxim of manner. She is

being orderly when she answered Alfred‟s friend question since

she gives a clear explanation where alfred was. And here is the

example of disobeying (flouting) case of a maxim of manner:

A: Lets get the kids something.

B: OK, but I veto I-C-E-C-R-E-A-M-S

(27)

18

B obviously breaks the maxim of manner (be perspicuous) by

spelling out the word ice cream. B tells A that B would rather not

say the word ice cream directly in front of the children, in case the

kids will ask them (to A and B) to buy some ice cream, that is why

B does not answer it perspicuously and spell it.

To summarize, Grice claimed that, in the default case, people

expect one another to cooperate in conversation rather than

contributing random utterances, and to say thing that are true,

relevant to the ongoing conversation, clear and as concise as

possible. When speakers do not follow one or more of these rules,

then they are inviting hearers to figure out why. The elements of an

utterance‟s meaning that are determined with reference to these

principles are called “implicatures.” Even when someone is

following the default rules, implicature is required. For example, if

A says “I don‟t have anything to write with,” and B responds “I

have a pen.” A should be able to assume, based on the CP

(cooperative principle) and maxims, that B‟s contribution is

relevant to what A has said. A might conclude, on this basis, that B

is offering to lend A the pen. (Johnstone, 2008. P. 234-235).

2.1.2 The Concept of Flouting a Maxim

The flouting of maxims takes place when individual deliberately

cease to apply the maxims to persuade their listeners to infer the hidden

(28)

19

C. Levinson, 1983). If one tells a lie in English, once breaks one of Grice‟s

maxims (the maxim of quality, quantity, relation and manner), but this

does not mean that person fails to speak the English language (Leech,

1983:8-9). People conscious that they should follow those maxims of

Cooperative Principle (CP) to make a good communication, but they may

violate them. However, they violate the maxims sometimes because of

some reasons.

The flouting of the conversational maxims can happen is some

situations or occasions for some purposes. There are some occasions

which do not represent the obeying of maxims. Firstly, when the speaker

decides to quietly and simply flouting the maxim (flouting the maxim of

quantity):

A: I’ve lost a diamond ring.

B: Well, Julie was wearing one this morning.

(Leech, 1983, p. 93)

In this case, B thinks that Julie used the same ring as A‟s. He

simply flouts the maxim of quantity, because he is not being informative at

all. Secondly, when a speaker faces a clash between two maxims (flouting

maxim of quantity and manner):

A: My neighbor who is woman gets pregnant.

(29)

20

In this case, everybody must know that the person who gets

pregnant must be a woman. Actually, the word „woman‟ in A‟s utterance

should be eliminated. Here, A gives explanation that has been clear, the

clash appears when he tries to give informative information, but he is not

brief to say. Lastly, when a speaker has chosen to flout a maxim that is he

may conspicuous fail to fulfill the maxim (flouting the maxim of manner):

A: Lets get the kids something.

B: OK, but I veto I-C-E-C-R-E-A-M-S

(Levinson, 1983. p. 104)

The flouting of maxim of manner here is on purpose. The parents

do not want their children to ask to buy ice cream. By spelling each letter

of ice cream, the children will not understand well so they do not want the

food.

In the case of flouting (exploitation) of cooperative maxims, the

speaker desires the greatest understanding in his/her recipient because it is

expected that the interlocutor is able to uncover the hidden meaning

behind the utterances. People may flout the maxim of quality so as to

deliver implicitly a sarcastic tone in what they state. As in: teacher to a

student who arrives late more than ten minutes to the class meeting:

Teacher: Wow! You are such a punctual fellow! Welcome to the

(30)

21

Student: Sorry sir! It won’t happen again.

It is obvious from what the teacher says that he is teasing the

student and his purpose is, by no means, praising him. He exploits the

maxim of quality (being truthful) to be sarcastic. Likewise, the student

seems to notice the purpose behind the teacher‟s compliment and offers an

apology in return. (Khosravizadeh and Sadehvandi, 2011)

Another example of flouting a maxim:

A: What an amazing football player Edric is!

This can be either a:

- Positive comment on Edric‟s ability in playing football (maxim of

quality obeyed).

- Negative comment on Edric‟s ability through irony (maxim of

quality disobeyed, clear to hearer, e.g. When said right after Edric

cannot operate the ball well. (Khosravizadeh and Sadehvandi,

2011)

2.2RELATED STUDIES

2.2.1 “Carrie” Movie (2013)

Carrie is a 2013 American supernatural horror movie produced by

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and Screen Gems. It is the third movie adaptation

(31)

22

was produced in 1976 with the same title; the iconic classis 1976 movie

version directed by Brian De Palma, starring Sissy Spacek in the lead role

and Piper Laurie as a supporting actress, Carrie‟s look is slightly change

on the screen. Unlike Stephen King‟s envision of Carrie, in the movie she

is not fat or chunky. Sissy is very skinny with long strawberry-blonde hair.

Also in this movie only Carrie get pig‟s blood dumped on her. Tommy

Ross however, whos was enraged because of this, does get hit in the head

and knockes unconscious, maybe even killed with the empty bucket, but

by Carrie‟s swinging bucket above, instead of two buckets with one as hiw

own. Carrie does not destroy the entire town in this movie, but while

Carrie is slowly walking home and in a catatonic state. But the last scene

of the movie, it shows the viewer that Sue is forever haunted by Carrie in

her nightmares and probably will never be the same again.

The second adaptation was produced in the 2002 also using the

same title with the previous one. In this second adaptation, is made for TV

movie starring Angela Bettis in the lead role was not remake in a sense,

but a far more faithful adaption of the novel. The theme of the school

prom is kept “Spring Time in Venice” like Stephen King envisioned.

Carrie was kept alive in this TV movie version because the movie was

meant to have a Television series follow it, where Carrie helps other

teenagers who are also have a telekinetic skill. The Television show pilot

was never shot due to the TV movie having low ratings and the series was

(32)

23

The third adaptations of “Carrie” Movie tells about a

young-beautiful-shy girl named Carrie White (played by Chloe G. Moretz) who

lives with her religious yet disturbed mother that almost of her life is

depends on the holy bible. When Carrie experiences her first menstrual

period, Carrie naively thinks that she is bleeding to death and her mother,

Margareth (played by Julianne Moore) hits her using a bible and locks

Carrie in the “Prayer Closet” inside their house. This movie ended up by a

big accident when the Prom was held, caused by Chris Hargensen (played

by Portia Doubleday) that make the school burns to the ground. Carrie

walks away out of the prom venue with the blood pouring all over her

body and gown. She is leaving trail of fire and destruction in her wake. At

home, Margaret attacks Carrie, who attempts to flee but her mother tries to

kill her using several sharp tools, such as knifes, scissors, needles, etc. At

the end Carrie unconsciously using her supernatural power and kills her

mother. She becomes hysterical and makes stones rain from the sky to

crush the house down. The duration of “Carrie” Movie is about one hour,

forty minutes and fifty sixth seconds.

2.2.2 Previous Studies

1. The Flouting of Conversational Maxim in Javanese Short Story “Pacarku

Ngandheg” by Veronica Erly Dwi Handayani (2005)

A thesis done by Veronica Erly Dwi Handayani in 2005, The Flouting of

(33)

24

Handayani (2005) was trying to find out the most frequently flouted maxim

and the reasons behind the flouting by two main characters in “Pacarku

Ngandheg” to shows that maxims are important in a conversation. The study

has shown one sample of how the cooperative principles are flouted in the

conversations.

In analyzing data, Handayani used descriptive approach to describe the

reasons of flouting the maxim and uses table to make an easier analysis of

the most frequent flouted maxim. After all of the analysis, she found out that

the maxim of relevance is the most frequently flouted in the story. The

characters have some reasons why they tend to flout some maxims, but she

realized that the flouting of maxim does not bother and bring to an end of the

conversation. For her, it makes a variation in the conversation, so the

conversation will going smoothly and not boring. However, the characters

try to ignore it, and just continue the conversation. They want to make some

variations in their conversation, so the conversation will not be boring as the

writer said.

2. The Flouting of Conversational Maxims by the Main Male Characters in

Wedding Crashers Movie by Silvia Indra Dewi Susilo (2011)

The second thesis done by Silvia Indra Dewi Susilo in 2011, under the

title: The Flouting of Conversational Maxims by the Main Male Characters

in Wedding Crashers Movie. in this study, the writer found that Susilo had

purposes to find out about the flouting of conversational maxims included in

(34)

25

in the “Wedding Crashers” movie, and she also aim to find out which maxim

is mostly flouted. In analyzing the data, Susilo used Grice‟s theory of

conversational maxims. Susilo used qualitative approach to describe the

flouting of conversational maxims by the male main characters in the

“Wedding Crashers” movie.

From the analysis and findings, Susilo concluded that in conversations

there are some conditions that the participants have to flout the maxims. Of

course they have reasons on doing this, for instance, the speaker flouts the

Maxim of Quality when he or she lies about something in order to hide

something from the other person. Moreover, if the participants on the

conversation flout the maxims, it does not mean that they fail to

communicate with others or they have miscommunication.the fact is the

conversation can still run well in the movie.

3. Flouting of Maxims Which Provokes Humor in The Big Bang Theory and

Office Boy Shift 2 Movies Series by Eka Agusliani (2012)

The third thesis done by Eka Agusliani in 2012, Flouting of Maxims

Which Provokes Humor in The Big Bang Theory and Office Boy Shift 2

Movies Series. In this research, Agusliani observed the differences and/or the

similarities between the maxims flouted by the characters in “Big Bang

Theory” and those flouted by the characters in “Office Boy” which provoke

humor. The data were from the dialogue lines flouted by the characters in

(35)

26

Furthermore, Agusliani conducted this research in qualitative approach

supported by quantitative data.

The writer gets some benefits from the previous studies, such as the

research design that the other researchers used and there are many of

previous studies found by the writer that has the same analysis with the

writer‟s object of the research so it will make and help the writer do her

(36)

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the following subtopics are going to be discussed: (1)

research design (2) research subject (3) research instrument (4) technique of data

collection and (5) technique of data analysis.

3.1Research Design

In this study, the writer used the descriptive qualitative approach use

data as a part of this study to know how language works. The writer applied

the qualitative research in this study because it was focused on the data which

was taken from a movie. Denzin and Lincoln, in their book The Sage

Handbook of Qualitative Research (2005), say that qualitative research belongs to a situated activity that locates the observer in the world. It consist

of a set of interpretive, material practices that makes the world visible. These

practices transform the world. They turn the world into a series of

representations, including field notes, interviews, conversations, photographs,

recordings and memos to the self. At this level, qualitative research involves

an interpretive, naturalistic approach to the world. This means that qualitative

researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of,

(37)

28

Qualitative method approached use data as a part of this study to get

a conclusion. The use of descriptive qualitative research design in this study is

intends to find some new evidences and attempts to find out the pragmatics

phenomena that found in the “Carrie” movie. It can be said that descriptive qualitative research design takes from the patterning of talk-in-interaction

from the object. This study focused on all the characters of “Carrie” Movie dialogues which are contain of flouting conversational maxims based on the Grice’s theory of maxims.

3.2Research Subject

The subject of this study focused on all the characters’ dialogues of “Carrie” movie. The writer found out that all the characters of “Carrie” movie

have the same range of dialogue that is why the researcher decided to use all the characters’ dialogue. There is no one that leading the conversation even

the main character, Carrie White. The writer focused on all the characters’ utterances that include in flouting Grice’s conversatioanl maxims (maxim of quantity, quality, relation and manner).

3.3Research Instrument

This study used descriptive qualitative research design which had

person as the instrument. Therefore, in this research, the exact instrument to

acquire and analyze the data collection is the writer herself, some notes,

(38)

29

Grice’s conversational maxims. In other words, the writer watched and

understood the movie, selected, analyzed and took some utterances which included in flouting of Grice’s maxims (maxim of quantity, quality, relation

and manner) and also took notes which connect with the theory that used in

this research.

3.4Technique of Data Collection

The data of this research are those utterances that include in flouting of Grice’s conversational maxims spoken by all the characters of “Carrie”

movie. The writer started to collecting the data right after she found the

appropriate character to be the object of this research. In collecting the data,

the writer did several steps such as:

1. The writer watched the movie for many times while understanding

which character that appropriate to be analyzed.

2. The writer determined all the characters of “Carrie” movie as the object of her study, the researcher re-watched the movie to match and

transcribe all of the dialogues from the original movie with the original script of “Carrie” Movie taken from internet

www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk.

3. The writer determined and took note on which utterance that include

in flouting of Grice’s conversational maxims. She has divided the movie into 70 scenes, and 12 scenes have divided as the data of her

(39)

30

4. The writer made such a narrative or a point which was the chronology

of each scenes of the movie to make the data analysis easier.

3.5Technique of Data Analysis

After collected the data, the writer started to analyze them using the

following steps. Firstly, the writer categorized dialogues spoken by all the

characters of “Carrie” movie which contain flouting maxims to be analyzed into 12 scenes. Then the writer identified each scenes one by one to get the

second research problem answered, on what the maxim that the mostly flouted

in the movie. The analysis was carried out using the following table below.

[image:39.595.126.516.254.764.2]

Lastly, the writer made conclusion as the result of analysis and findings.

Table 3.1 Types of Occurence of the Flouted Maxims

Conversation

Flouted Maxim

Quality Quantity Relation Manner Scene 5

Scene 7

Scene 11

Scene 18

Scene 22

Scene 28

Scene 31

(40)

31

Scene 36

Scene 48

Scene 54

Scene 67

(41)

CHAPTER IV

FINDING

The focus of the study are all the characters in the movie “Carrie” Movie,

what maxims are flouted and which maxim is flouted the most. The main purpose

of this chapter is to answer the statement of the problems which are presented in

the chapter I. In this chapter, the data collected from the script that has been

divided into some scenes by the writer. She divided the movie into 70 scenes, but

not all scenes can be the data. The scenes which were being the data must be

correlated to the research questions. The writer made a description for each scene

of the data to make it easier to be understood.

4.1 The Flouting of Conversational Maxims

Carrie is a movie on which the writer found out some disobeyed maxims

by all the characters. In this movie, the writer found all the maxims (Maxim of

Quality, Quantity, Relation and Manner) were being flouted. Here are the data:

Data 1

Scene 5 (minutes 04.54 – 06.38)

Participants: Carrie, Sue, Miss Desjardin, Chris and Girls classmate.

(42)

33

Context: Carrie and all of her girls classmate were on a gym class. They were

going to play volleyball inside the swimming pool. Carrie seems know nothing to

what to do here. And when the ball went in front of her, Miss Desjardin, the gym

teacher, asked Carrie to serve the ball but all girls were laughing over Carrie.

They knew that Carrie would not be able to serve the ball.

(BLOWS WHISTLE)

[Miss Desjardin] Let's go, ladies! In the water! Caps on, please! Chris and Sue, let's go!

(GIRL GRUNTS) (WHISTLE BLOWING)

[Miss Desjardin] I want you to keep it in the air three times. All right? (INDISTINCT CHATTER)

[Chris] We are graduating, Ms. Desjardin. Yeah, Sue! (ALL CHEERING)

[Miss Desjardin] Get that. Don't be afraid of the ball, ladies. All right, here we go.

(WHISTLE BLOWING)

[Miss Derjardin] All right, Carrie White. Let's get Carrie into the game. You can't stand on the sidelines all the time. Come on.

[Girls Classmate] Whoo! Carrie's serve.

[Chris] Yeah, Carrie White! Do it, Carrie! Yeah, yeah. Throw it. Do it. Serve it.

[Sue] - Oh. Ow. (GASPS) (BOTH GASP)

(ALL LAUGHING)

[Chris] What the hell? (LAUGHS SARCASTICALLY) [Sue] It's so funny, Chris.

[Chris] Are you okay?

[Sue] Yeah.

(LAUGHING)

[Chris] Oh, my God. (CHUCKLES)

[Chris] You eat shit. (ALL LAUGHING)

In this scene, the writer found three maxims were being flouted. The first

(43)

34

on the gym class and it was the time to train the students‟ skill but Chris‟ answer

is not relevant with what already said by Miss Desjardin. The writer thought that

Chris should answer with „Yes, Miss‟, it should be the relevant answer. The

second maxim which being flouted is Maxim of Quantity. Still with the same

conversation between Miss Desjardin and Chris, Chris is being not informative at

all. The writer thought that without Chris‟ answer, Miss Desjardin already knew

that they are graduating.

The third maxim which being flouted in this scene is Maxim of Quality. It

shows when Chris laughed over Sue who got a smash by Carrie‟s serve. When

Sue said „It‟s so funny, Chris‟, the writer knew that it is not funny at all. Sue was

saying something that she believe to be false towards Chris.

Data 2

Scene 7 (minutes 08.11 – 10.06)

Participants: Carrie, Sue, Miss Desjardin, Girls classmate

Setting: Women bathing place at school

Context: After the gym class ended, all the girls were going to take a bath and

change their clothes. In this scene, Carrie seems unusual to being naked and take a

bath together with other girls. She slowly puts her towel down and starts

(44)

35

first period. After realizing that there are blood all over her hand, Carrie begins to

screams unconditionally asking for the others help.

[Carrie] (SOBBING) Help me! [Chris] God, just plug it up!

[Carrie] Help!

[Girls Classmate] (CHANTING) Plug it up! [Carrie] I'm sorry. No!

(CHANTING CONTINUES)

[Carrie] No!

[Girls Classmate] Plug it up! (SCREAMING)

(WHIMPERING)

(CHANTING CONTINUES) (WHIMPERING)

[Miss Desjardin] Girls, come on! Move! Ladies. Oh, my God. Okay. All right.

[Carrie] Help me.

[Miss Desjardin] Okay, honey, stand up. Let's get you cleaned up. [Carrie] Help me, help me.

[Miss Desjardin] Oh, Carrie, come on. Stand up. Come on, can you stand up?

[Carrie] It hurts! It hurts! It hurts! Something's not right. Something's not right.

[Miss Desjardin] Okay, okay. What are you talking about?

[Sue] Ms. Desjardin, I don't think she knows it's her period.

[Carrie] No!

[Miss Desjardin] All right, Sue. Get out of here! You're not helping.

In this scene, the writer found that Carrie flouted both Maxim of Relation

and Manner. Carrie flouted the maxim of relation shows when she said something

irrelevant. Miss Desjardin asks her to stand up and go clean up herself but Carrie

keeps saying that she needs help and something is weird on her, which is not

relevant. Actually Miss Desjardin knows that it is normally happen when a girl is

on her period. The writer also found that Carrie flouted the maxim of manner in

(45)

36

which is should be avoided. Even she says that she needs help hundred times,

Miss Desjardin and the other girls already knew about it.

Data 3

Scene 11 (minutes 13.11 – 14.18)

Participants: Carrie and her mother, Margareth

Setting: On their way back to home

Context: After the bloody incident at the bathing place, Mr. Morton, the

headmaster, called Carrie‟s mother, Margareth, to pick up Carrie because she still

shocked by the bloody incident. On their way back to home, Carrie is saying her

apology to her mother about the embarrassing incident. Carrie knows that her

mother is getting disappointed because of it.

[Carrie] I'm sorry you had to come to school today, Mom. (BRAKES SQUEAK)

(ENGINE RATTLES)

[Margareth] Let's go inside, little girl. You need to come inside with me.

[Carrie] Mama, why didn't you tell me? I was so scared, Mama. I thought I was going to die. Mama, they laughed at me and they threw things at me.

[Margareth] We'll talk about this inside, Carrie.

[Carrie] No. I want to talk about it right here. I don't want to go inside with you.

(DOOR CREAKS OPEN)

In this conversation, the writer found that Carrie flouted the Maxim of

(46)

37

and talk about the incident inside, Carrie answered with something irrelevant. She

answered with asking why her mother did not tell her anything about menstrual

period happens to every girl which is not relevant when Margareth invited her to

go inside their house.

Data 4

Scene 18 (minutes 24.48 – 25.10)

Setting: Inside the car, arriving at school

Context: The day after bloody incident, Margareth felt so worry about Carrie. She

accompanied Carrie to go to the school and she said she would pick up Carrie

right after school ends.

(SCHOOL BELL RINGING)

[Carrie] I'll be okay, Mama.

[Margareth] I'm going to leave work early today and pick you up after school.

In this scene, Margareth flouted the Maxim of Relation. The writer found

„I'm going to leave work early today and pick you up after school‟ dialogue

seemed like Margareth was ignoring Carrie and being irrelevant with what Carrie

said. Margareth kept feeling worry towards Carrie although Carrie said she would

(47)

38

Data 5

Scene 22 (minutes 29.03 – 30.49)

Participants: Carrie, Tommy Ross, Mr. Ulmann, Students

Context: When the literature class began, Mr. Ulmann, the literature teacher,

asked the students to come in front of the class to read their favourite poem, and it

was Carrie‟s turn. Carrie went in front of the class with a poem read by herself

while the other student kept laughing over her poem, even Mr. Ulmann thought

that Carrie‟s poem is disturbing.

[Mr. Ulmann] All right, who's next? Uh, Carrie. Favorite poem. Did you bring one?

(CHUCKLING)

[Carrie] Yeah.

[Mr. Ulmann] Why don't you come to the front of the class and share it with us all?

(GIRLS CHUCKLING)

[Carrie] "This unfrequented place to find some ease" "Ease to the body some, none to the mind"

"Times past,

and what once I was and what am now" "O wherefore was my birth

from Heaven foretold"

"Twice by an Angel, who at last in sight" "Of both my Parents all in flames... " "... ascended. "

[Mr. Ulmann] (SIGHS) Okay, uh, that was, uh...disturbing. (ALL CHUCKLE)

[Mr. Ulmann] That is the most you've said in class all year. Is there anything else you'd like to share or are you done scaring us for the day?

[Tommy] Asshole.

(ALL GASP)

[Mr. Ulmann] Excuse me, Mr. Ross. Did you say something?

[Tommy] I said, "Awesome." I just thought what Carrie read was awesome. Didn't you, Mr. Ulmann?

(48)

39

In this scene, the writer found out that Tommy Ross flouted the Maxim of

Quality. He was saying something that he believes to be false. Actually Tommy

said something rude towards Mr. Ulmann‟s bad attitude as a teacher which is not

appreciate what Carrie did at all, but after Mr. Ulmann asked Tommy what did he

say, Tommy was disobeying the characteristic of Maxim of Quality by said

„Awesome‟.

Data 6

Scene 28 (minutes 38.23 – 39.42)

Participants: Tommy Ross and Sue

Setting: At the school yard

Context: Sue realized that she was going too bad to Carrie White for the bloody

incident at the bathing place. After she knew that Carrie is adoring Tommy Ross

because of the literature class event, she had a thought that sending Tommy to the

prom with Carrie, and of course without her, is a good idea as her apology

towards Carrie. She told Tommy about she was feeling sorry towards Carrie and

also told him about her plan that she does not want to go to the prom.

(INDISTINCT CHATTER)

[Tommy] Got it. Hey. How are you doing? [Sue] (CHUCKLES) Good.

[Tommy] Good?

[Sue] Yeah.

[Tommy] What's up?

(49)

40

[Tommy] (LAUGHS) Good one, babe. Come on. Are you serious? [Sue] I'm just trying to fix what I did.

[Tommy] (STAMMERING) Yeah. I get that, but this is... Sue, it's nuts.

[Sue] Okay, so it's nuts. But after what we did to her, I have to do something. I have to do something that counts.

[Tommy] Uh... (CHUCKLING) What even makes you think that she would say yes to me?

[Sue] She'd say yes.

[Tommy] We've barely even spoken.

[Sue] I saw how she looked at you in class when you rescued her. What girl doesn't want to go to prom? What girl doesn't want one magical night? Maybe I can give that up for her.

[Tommy] No. Babe, I want you to have that magic night. I don't want to go to prom with Carrie White. I want to go to prom with you.

[Sue] I can't go.

In this conversation between Sue and her boyfriend, Tommy Ross, the

writer found that Tommy Ross flouted the Maxim of Quality. He said something

which he knew that he believes to be false. Actually Tommy ignored to go to the

prom with Carrie White but the writer found that Tommy said „Good one, babe‟.

He disobeyed the characteristic of Maxim of Quality.

Data 7

Scene 31 (minutes 41.46 – 43.41)

Participants: Carrie and Miss Desjardin

Setting: Women bathing place at school

Context: Like finally, Tommy Ross granted Sue‟s wish, he asked Carrie to go to

the prom along with him. He was looking for Carrie at the library and then

(50)

41

questions inside her head „isn‟t Tommy Ross with Sue Snell and why did he invite

me to go to the prom together‟. Carrie met Miss Desjardin at the bathing place and

told her that she was invited by Tommy.

(SCHOOL BELL RINGING) (WHIMPERING)

[Miss Desjardin] Did one of the girls try something again? [Carrie] I got invited to prom.

[Miss Desjardin] Really? (GASPS) That's great news. With who? [Carrie] It's Tommy Ross.

[Miss Desjardin] Wow. Tommy Ross? He is pretty dreamy, huh? (CHUCKLES)

[Carrie] Yeah. I know who he goes around with. They're just going to trick me again. Right?

[Miss Desjardin] Maybe he really meant it.

[Carrie] No.

[Miss Desjardin] Yes, of course he did.

[Carrie] Why? Why would he want to go with me?

[Miss Desjardin] Come here. Do you know what I see? I see a beautiful young woman. Maybe wear a little make-up. Pinch your cheeks a little bit, put some color in there. Curl your hair. Stand up straight. There you go.

In this scene, Carrie flouted the Maxim of Relation. It shows when Miss

Desjardin saw Carrie sit alone in the bathing place and she asked to Carrie „Did

one of the girls try something again?‟, but actually Carrie‟s respond was not

relevant. It was may be Miss Desjardin worried that Carrie‟s being hurt by the

girls classmate like they did in the bloody incident, Miss Desjardin just want to

make sure if Carrie is not being annoyed again but Carrie answered that she

(51)

42

Data 8

Scene 35 (minutes 47.24 – 51.01)

Settings: At Carrie‟s home

Context: After accepting Tommy‟s invitation to the prom, the next day Carrie

went to the drapery to buy some fabric and she would conjure it into a beautiful

dress which she wear for the prom. When Carrie arrived at home, her mother was

waiting her in front of it and pulled her to come inside home. Then, Carrie told her

mother that someone invited her to the prom and she will be going.

(THUNDER RUMBLING)

[Margareth] Where have you been? I was worried sick. Come on. Come inside.

[Carrie] I'm sorry I'm late, Mama.

[Margareth] Just get inside. Your supper's cold. I'm going to have to heat it up. I didn't know... You're immodest. I didn't know where you were. I didn't know.

[Carrie] No, Mama. I took a bus to Main Street and I bought cloth for a dress.

[Margareth] You are not to go anywhere but to school and back. You know that.

[Carrie] Mama, before you say anything else, I've been asked to prom.

(CLATTERING)

[Carrie] Mama, I've been asked to prom. [Margareth] Oh, God, why?

[Carrie] It's next Saturday and he's a very nice boy. And he'll come and meet you before and he promised to have me home by 10:30.

[Margareth] No, no, no.

[Carrie] I already accepted. I know this scares you. It scares me, too. The other kids, they think I'm weird. But I don't want to be. I have to try to be a whole person.

[Margareth] Before it's too late. He'll hurt you.

(52)

43

[Margareth] Boys, boys. After the blood, comes the boys sniffing, slobbering like dogs.

[Carrie] Stop it, Mama.

In this conversation, there are three maxims are being flouted, they are

Maxim of Relation, Quantity and also Manner. The first one shows when

Margareth asked where did Carrie from, but Carrie answered with something

irrelevant. Margareth asked „where‟, but Carrie answered asking for apology of

being late. Here, Carrie flouted the Maxim of Relation, she was not being relevant

to her mother‟s question.

The second is, still from the „I'm sorry I'm late, Mama‟ dialogue, Carrie

also flouted the Maxim of Quantity. Carrie was not being informative at all.

Margareth hope that Carrie would answer where did she go, but the fact, Carrie

was asking for apology. Although at the end she said that she was going to the

drapery. The third maxim which is being flouted in this scene is Maxim of

Manner. It shows when Margareth said „Boys, boys. After the blood, comes the

boys sniffing, slobbering like dogs‟, she kept saying something ambiguous and

unecessary which made Carrie confuse.

Data 9

Scene 36 (minutes 51.02 – 53.09)

Participants: Chris, Billy, Kenny and Jackie (Billy‟s friends)

(53)

44

Context: For taking the revenge to Carrie White, Billy, Chris‟ boyfriend, brought

Chris to a pigpen and ask Chris to kill one of the pig and get its blood. They had a

plan to take the revenge for Carrie when the prom begin. They want to showering

Carrie White with the pig‟s blood.

(MUSIC PLAYING ON STEREO)

[Chris] What are we doing? What does this have to do with Carrie White?

[Billy] Baby, you said you wanted us to do something about her. (BOTH LAUGHING)

(SNORTING) (LAUGHING)

[Billy] It's a piggy! (INDISTINCT CHATTER) [Billy] Here, piggy, piggy. [Kenny] Here, piggy, piggy. [Jackie] It smells like shit in here.

[Billy] Chris, pick one. Pick one that looks like her. Pig's blood for a pig. (CHUCKLES)

(BOYS IMITATING PIGS GRUNTING) [Chris] That one.

[Billy] Go on.

[Billy] One quick swing, all right?

[Jackie] I got this. Don't worry, little piggy, Uncle Jack is going to bash your head right in. You're not going to feel one...

[Billy] Shut up! Do it already. Jesus. (PIG SNORTING)

(WHIMPERS) (PANTING)

[Jackie] I can't.

[Chris] God, you guys are such goddamn pussies. [Billy] Shut up!

[Jackie] I'm sorry, Billy. (GRUNTS)

(PIG SQUEALS) (WHISTLES)

[Billy] Come on, you got this. All right, it's just one quick slice and... [Jackie] Oh, my God.

(GROANS) (PANTS)

(54)

45

In this scene, Billy flouted the Maxim of Manner. He was avoid to be brief

and also said something ambiguous to Chris which made Chris confused why

suddenly Billy brought her to the pigpen. Although at the end Chris realized that it

was for her revenge to Carrie, but at first Billy flouted the Maxim of Manner.

Data 10

Scene 48 (minutes 56.34 – 1.00.16)

Participants: Carrie, Margareth and Tommy Ross

Setting: At Carrie‟s home, about to go to the prom

Context: Although Margareth told Carrie to not go to the prom, Carrie was still on

her desire to go, she was even accepting Tommy‟s invitation to come together. On

the day of prom, when Carrie was about to go, her mother keeps on saying that

Tommy is not a good boy and they would be something bad happened to Carrie.

After arguing for awhile between Carrie and her mother, finally Tommy came

over Carrie house and Carrie decided to go to the prom and locked her mother

inside the closet using her telekinetic power.

(EXHALES)

[Carrie] Will you pin it on me, Mama?

[Margareth] Red. I might have known it would be red. [Carrie] It's pink.

[Margareth] I can see your dirty pillows.

[Carrie] Everyone will. Breasts, Mama. Breasts. You have them and every woman has them.

(55)

46

[Margareth] Take it off and we'll burn it together and pray for forgiveness. [Carrie] Mama, it's modest.

[Margareth] Call that boy and tell him you're not going. You just tell him you're sick. I don't want you to get hurt.

[Carrie] Or you could just be happy for me. Mama, stop hurting yourself. You know it's not going to make me stay.

(HORN HONKING)

[Margareth] He's not coming. It's a trick. Same as always. [Carrie] He's going to come.

[Margareth] They're going to laugh at you. They're all going to laugh at you. [Carrie] Mama, stop it. I'm nervous enough as it is.

(CAR DOOR OPENS)

[Tommy] Thank you, sir.

[Carrie] You see, Mama? You see, it's all going to be okay.

In this scene, Margareth flouted two maxims. As it shows in the first

dialogue of 48th scene, Margareth flouted the Maxim of Relation. Actually Carrie

wanted her mother‟s help to pin the floral accessory on her dress but Margareth

answered with something which was not relate at all with Carrie‟s hope. And also,

in the same dialogue, Margareth flouted the Maxim of Manner. She keeps telling

something ambiguous „Red. I might have known it would be red‟ which means

there would be something bad happened to Carrie at the prom, something which

have relation with blood because she said „Red‟.

Data 11

Scene 54 (minutes 1.04.03 – 1.07.04)

Participants: Carrie White and Tommy Ross

(56)

47

Context: At the prom event, Carrie and Tommy enjoyed it so much although, at

the first, it felt so hard for Carrie to come to such modest event like the prom. In

the middle of enjoying the prom while sitting, Tommy asked Carrie to go dancing

together when the slow song played. Honestly, Carrie was still asking to herself

why did Tommy Ross invite her to go together when he had Sue Snell as his

girlfriend.

(SLOW MUSIC PLAYING) [Tommy] It's a slow song. [Carrie] No.

[Tommy] Yeah. Come on.

[Carrie] No, Tommy. I've never danced before. [Tommy] It's okay.

[Carrie] No, I can't. I can't do it.

[Tommy] You can't go to prom and not have at least one dance. [Carrie] I can't.

[Tommy] Carrie White, will you have this dance with me? Come on. Come on.

(MUSIC CONTINUES PLAYING)

[Tommy] It's so easy. Take this hand in my hand. Like this, see? You're going to put this hand on my shoulder. And I put my hand on your hip. Then we sway. See, it's easy. You've got nothing to worry about. And you're good, you're a good learner. And then, if you want to get fancy with it, we can do the Dancing With The Stars. Yeah.

[Carrie] No.

[Tommy] Yeah. Ready? Look. (BOTH CHUCKLING)

[Tommy] To the first one. This is fun, right? (BOTH CHUCKLING)

[Carrie] Tommy, why am I here? [Tommy] Because I invited you. [Carrie] But why?

[Tommy] Carrie, we're here. We're at prom. I'm having such a great time with you.

[Carrie] You are?

[Tommy] (CHUCKLING) Yeah. And I hope that you're having a good time with me.

[Carrie] Yeah.

(57)

48

(BOTH CHUCKLE)

[Tommy] And I'll have you home by 10:30. How does that sound to you? [Carrie] Yeah.

[Tommy] Yeah?

[Carrie] Maybe 11:00. [Tommy] Whatever you want. (CARRIE CHUCKLES)

[Carrie] Eleven.

In this conversation, the writer found that Tommy Ross flouted the Maxim

of Relation. He was being disobeyed the rule of its maxim. When Carrie asked

why did Tommy invite her to the prom, it should be Tommy answer with the clear

reason, but here, Tommy seemed like he distracted Carrie‟s question with

something good eventhough he knew that it was not relevant to the question.

Data 12

Scene 67 (minutes 1.25.19 – 1.33.36)

Participants: Carrie, Margareth and Sue Snell

Setting: At Carrie house

Context: As her mother said and estimated, there would be something bad

happened to Carrie at the prom. It was because Chris and Billy‟s revenge to

Carrie, poured the pig‟s blood all over Carrie‟s body when she had her crown

together with Tommy Ross as the Queen and King of the year. Carrie was mad

crazily seeing Tommy died right beside her, she burned the school down and

killed everyone who treated Carrie badly at school, and also she killed Chris and

(58)

49

mother was right, she was coming home and asking apology towards her mother

but suddenly her mother stabbed her back using knife. They were arguing and

Margareth still trying to kill Carrie but Carrie beat her back using her telekinetic

power, at the end she killed her own mother. Sue Snell‟s coming to help Carrie,

but Carrie refused it and decided to die together with her mother.

[Carrie] Mama!

(SHRIEKS) (GROANS)

[Carrie] Mama, please. No, Mama. Mama, please. [Margareth] This isn't your fault, Carrie. It's mine. [Carrie] Mommy, this isn't right.

[Margareth] You know the devil never dies. He ke

AN ANALYSIS OF CONVERSATIONAL MAXIMS FLOUTED BY THE CHARACTERS OF CARRIE MOVIE (2013).