THESIS
Submitted as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Undergraduate Degree of English Department Faculty of Letters and Humanities UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya
By:
Delta Surya Ni Wahyu Subiyanti Reg. Number A53212092
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH
FACULTY OF LETTERS AND HUMANITIES
Wahyu, D.S.N. 2016. A Study of Flouting Maxims Found in Testimony on Dian Sidoarjo Online Shop Taken From Blackberry Messenger. Thesis. English Department, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, State Islamic University Sunan Ampel Surabaya
Key Terms: Cooperative Principle, Flouting Maxims, Testimony Dian Sidoarjo
This study is presented to know about flouting maxims. Flouting maxims is a form to brake maxims which is used by the speaker or writer to presenting another meaning by says untrue, says in less or more information than is required, says unclear and sometimes change the topic. Nowadays some of speaker never thought to make effective communication. So, this study showed to devise the types of maxims flouted in testimony Dian Sidoarjo, to describe the way of flouting maxims in testimony Dian Sidoarjo and to explain the reasons why testimony in Dian Sidoarjo flouting maxims.
This study is designed in descriptive qualitative. The data source in this study is texts of testimony which consist of some utterances in the conversation. The data is taken from the utterances which consisted of flouting maxims in testimony Dian Sidoarjo. The data was collected by printed out testimony from Dian’s BBM Group. In analyzing the data, the writer used Cooperative Principle Theory which developed by Grice.
Wahyu, D.S.N. 2016. A Study of Flouting Maxims Found in Testimony on Dian Sidoarjo Online Shop Taken From Blackberry Messenger. Thesis. English Department, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, State Islamic University Sunan Ampel Surabaya
Key Terms: Coopeartive Principle, Flouting Maxims, Testimony Dian Sidoarjo
Penelitian ini dihadirkan to mengetahui tentang flouting maxims.Flouting maxims adalah bentuk pelanggaran maksim yang digunakan pembicara atau penulis untuk menghadirkan makna lain; seperti berkata dengan tidak benar, berbicara tidak sesuai kebutuhan, berbicara tidak jelas dan berkata yang tidak berkaitan dengan topik pembicaraan. Saat ini, beberapa pembicara tidak pernah berfikir untuk membuat komunikasi yang efektif. Sehingga, kajian ini dihadirkan untuk menemukan tipe-tipe yang melanggar maksim di testimony Dian Sidoarjo, untuk mendeskripsikan cara melanggar maksims in testimony Dian Sidoarjo dan juga untuk menjelaskan alasan di testimony Dian Sidoarjo melanggar maxims.
Penelitian ini dirancang dengan menggunakan deskriptif kualitatif. Sumber data dari kajian ini adalah teks di testimony yang terdiri dari beberapa ujaran. Data di kajian ini diambil dari ujaran yang terdiri dari pelanggaran maksims di testimony Dian Sidoarjo. Data tersebut dikumpulkan dengan mencetak testimony dari grup BBMnya Dian Sidoarjo. Dalam menganalisis data, penulis menggunakan teoriCooperative Principleyang telah dikembangkan oleh Grice.
Inside Cover Page... i
Inside Title Page... ii
Declaration Page... iii
Motto... iv
Dedication Page...v
Thesis Advisor’s Approval Page...vi
Thesis Examiner’s Approval Page...vii
Acknowledgments...viii
Table of Contents... x
Abstract... xiv
Intisari... xv
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION...1
1.1 Background of the Study... ...1
1.2 Statement of the Problems... ..5
1.3 Objectives of the Study... 5
1.4 Significances of the Study...6
1.5 Scope and Limitation of the Study...6
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE...8
2.1 Pragmatics... 8
2.2 Presupposition... 10
2.3 Implicature... 11
2.4 Cooperative Principle... 13
2.4.1 Maxim of Quantity... 14
2.4.2 Maxim of Quality... 15
2.4.3 Maxim of Manner... 15
2.4.4 Maxim of Relation... 16
2.5 Flouting Maxim... 17
2.5.1 Flouting Maxim of Quality... 18
2.5.2 Flouting Maxim of Quantity... 19
2.5.3 Flouting Maxim of Manner... 20
2.5.4 Flouting Maxim of Relation... 21
2.6 Context... 22
2.7 Review of Related Studies... 23
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD...27
3.1 Research Approach... 27
3.2 Data Source... 28
3.3 Data... 28
3.5 Data Collection... 29
3.6 Data Analysis... 30
CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION...31
4.1 Findings... 32
4.1.1 Types of Flouting Maxims used in Testimony Dian Sidoarjo... 32
4.1.1.1 Maxim of Quality... 32
4.1.1.2 Maxim of Quantity... 40
4.1.1.3 Maxim of Manner... 52
4.1.1.4 Maxim of Relation... 55
4.1.2 The Way Maxims are Flouted in Testimony Dian Sidoarjo... 60
4.1.2.1 The Way of Flouting the Maxim of Quantity... 61
4.1.2.1.1 Flouting the Maxim of Quantity in Less Information.... 61
4.1.2.1.2 Flouting the Maxim of Quantity in Much Information.. 63
4.1.2.2 The Way of Flouting the Maxim of Quality... 66
4.1.2.3 The Way of Flouting the Maxim of Manner... 68
4.1.2.4 The Way of Flouting the Maxim of Relation... 70
4.1.2.4.1 Flouting the Maxim of Relation Change The Topic... 70
4.1.2.4.2 Flouting the Maxim of Relation Unnecessary Inform....71
4.1.3 The Reasons of Testimony in Dian Sidoarjo Flouted Maxims... 73
4.1.3.2 To Convey The Feeling... 76
4.1.3.3 To Make Sure The Reader...79
4.1.3.4 To Make The Customer Curious with The Product... 82
4.1.3.5 To Promote The Product... 83
4.2 Discussion... 86
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION... 90
5.1 Conclusion... 90
5.2 Suggestion... 91
REFERENCES...93
This chapter presents an introduction of the study related to the area of discussion. The discussion includes background of the study, statement of problems, objectives of the study, significance of the study, scope and limitation of the study, and definition of key terms.
1.1 Background of Study
Language is a tool for communication. Through communication, people can deliver wishes and commands, tell truths and lies, influence customer, express their emotion, and share ideas and information by uttering words and sentences to send their intention to make other person understand what they mean. It could probably never arise if we had no language (Moulton in Hawgen and Bloomfield 1998:3). The statement above clearly describes how language is really important for society.
Nowadays, language is not only for common communication such as telling truths or lies, express feeling, influencing hearer and expressing emotion but also becomes a commodity to earn money. Most of businessmen very clever in using language by choosing beautiful words in their commercial become beauty
occured because speaker and hearer or owner and customer disobey rules of conversation.
Meanwhile, conversation can be successful if people obey the rules of conversation. Such as saying clearly, saying truly, saying in relevant utterances and saying in enough information. If people obey the rules of conversation, the hearer can understand what they mean. Grice (1975) argues that “speakers intend to be cooperative when they talk and people will have a successful conversation if they fulfill the cooperative principles that are related in the four maxims of conversation”
Based on Cooperative Principle there are four maxims of conversation, they are: Maxim of Quantity, Maxim of Quality, Maxim of Manner and Maxim of Relevance. As Grice (cited by Grundy,2000:75) explains that the maxims of cooperative principle are maxim of quantity (be brief); this maxim is concern with the amount of information which we expect from any conversational exchange (Finch: 1998:165), maxim of quality (be true); this maxim expect us to say only what we believe to be true and have supported evidence (Grundy, 2000: 74), maxim of relation (be relevant); this maxim expect us to make relevant conversation (Grundy, 2000: 74), and maxim of manner (be clear); this maxim expect us to avoid obscurity, ambiguity, and unnecessary prolixity.
utterances. So, almost all testimony were found utterances which used
uninformative, too much information, disconnected conversation and sometimes
untrue. Testimony was made to persuade customers hoping that customer will buy
a products through testimony.
The writer uses Testimony in Dian Sidoarjo online shop taken from
Blackberry Messenger. The writer interested in analyzing testimony in this online
shop because marketing in Dian Online Shop always uses testimony to promote
products, such as bag, veil, shoes, dress, shirt and cosmetics besides that she has
many testimony in her Blackberry Messenger’s group. Each products has
testimony. She also has two kinds of testimony, they are statement by her
customer and conversation between Dian and her customer. Testimony purpose to
influence customer, even though the utterances often disobey the rule of
conversation
The writer was interested in using Testimony as the object of analysis because
of linguistically, the utterances in this testimony use beautiful words. Mostly, the
choice of words was excessive and each of sentences did not relate. So, the words
in testimony can be close to the flouting maxims. Testimony could be spoken and
written, but the writer only used written testimony in Dian Sidoarjo Online Shop
which was analyzed. The study about flouting maxims in testimony has never
done by other researchers. So, the writer took testimony as the data in this study.
has already known about it,when promoting their products they relied in
The writer was taking testimony from Blackberry Messenger, although
testimony in Dian Sidoarjo not only appear in BBM but also in Facebook,
Instagram and Whatsapp.Hence, Dian Online Shop puts many testimony in BBM
and a lot of conversation from Dian and customer in BBM that is always captured
by her then published in BBM.
This study has ever been done by some writers who are interested to take same
field, but the most interesting of this study than others stated on object of study. If
a lot of writers have ever taken their object from movie, newspaper and some
advertisement. This study takes testimony as the data because nowadays,
testimony is very outstanding. Testimony spreads in mass media such as
Facebook, Instagram, Blackberry Messenger and anothers. It means that everyone
has already known about testimony. Everyone knew about testimony but they did
not understand what the intended meaning in it. So that is why, the writer
presented this study in order to make the reader realize what the reason of
testimony was delivered.
The writer expected that discuss about flouting maxims can give important
contribution toward linguistic study because people certainly do some mistakes in
using their words when they inform the information or promote products in an
unexpected situation, while what they were saying was unclear, especially words
the rules of conversation mainly in making testimony. It was supposed if another
Online Shop made testimony based on the rules of converstation.
1.2 Statement of Problems
To analyze the flouting of maxims found in Testimony on Dian Sidoarjo
Online Shop, the writer formulates three problems :
1. What types of maxims are flouted in testimony Dian Sidoarjo
Online Shop taken from Blackberry Messenger?
2. How the maxims are flouted in testimony Dian Sidoarjo from
Blackberry Messenger?
3. What are the reasons of flouting maxims in testimony Dian
Sidoarjo from Blackberry Messenger?
1.3 Objectives of The Study
The writer has an objectives of the study to answer the problems that
analyzed in this study. They are:
1. To devise the types of maxims flouted in testimony Dian Sidoarjo
taken from Blackberry Messenger.
2. To describe the way of flouting maxims in testimony Dian Sidoarjo
taken from Blackberry Messenger.
3. To explain the reason why flouting maxims used in testimony of Dian
1.4 Significance of The Study
The writer hoped that this study is useful for the readers who are interested to
understand deeply about the rules of conversation, after the readers read this
study. The writer hoped that the readers can understand more about the rules of
conversation, how the maxims used in conversation, how to creat smooth
communication and how conversation created normally. This study is presented to
help the owner of Online Shop in order to make effective communication in
building testimony. Then, this study could be references to present the next
research. In Addition, the writer expected that this study is easy to understand in
developing knowledge and can creat the new data in flouting maxims.
1.5 Scope and Limitation
This study is limited to the utterances written in Testimony Dian Sidoarjo
Online Shop. The writer focused this study in utterances produced by Dian and
her customers, because testimony consists of owner or customer’s statement and
conversation. The utterances by Dian and her customers is important thing to
1.6 Definition of Key Terms
To make this study clearer, the writer gives more detailed explanations about
the source concepts :
Cooperative Principle is the basic principle which explained the way of people interact with one other normally and how effective communication in
conversation by society.
Flouting Maxims is a form to brake maxims which is used by the speaker or writer to presenting another meaning by says untrue, says in less or more
information than is required, says unclear and changed the topic of conversation.
Testimony is a witness or a statement by a consumer about their satisfaction with a product or service they have purchased.
This chapter gives explanation more about Grice’s theory of conversational maxims. Grice’s theory is related to this object research, such as devise types of flouting maxims, the ways of flouting maxims and the reason of
flouting maxims. This theory is taken from books and online references in
internet. The writer also took previous study conducted relevant with this study, in
order to make comparison with the other study.
2.1 Pragmatics
Pragmatics is concerned with the study of meaning as communicated by a
speaker or writer and interpreted by a listener or reader. According to Grundy
(2000: 3), pragmatics is about explaining how to produce and understand the
language which is used in communication everyday but apparently rather peculiar
uses of language. Watts in Sell (1991: 26) explains that pragmatics deals with the
study of meaning beyond that which is encoded in the linguistic structures
themselves. It thus involves the relationship between utterances (rather than
sentences) and their users and contexts of use. Pragmatics is a systematic way of
utterances (rather than sentences) and their users and contexts of use. Pragmatics
is a systematic way of explaining language use in context.
It is a way of investigating how sense can be made of certain texts even
when, from a semantic viewpoint, the text seems to be incomplete or to have a
different meaning to what is really intended. Leech (1983) stated pragmatics as a
study of discussing the speaker meaning linking with discourse situation. He also
adds the pragmatics is a study of linguistics communication according to
conversational principles.
Yule (1996:3) also adds four definitions of pragmatics. Firstly, pragmatics
is the study of speaker’s utterances and the effort of the hearer to interpret those utterances. Secondly, pragmatics is “study of a contextual meaning”. This definition concerns the interpretation of the speaker’s utterance each utterance related to a particular context and how the context influences what the speaker
said.In this case, both of the speaker and the hearer have to be aware of the
context that follows the speaker’s utterance. Thirdly, pragmatics is a study that explores how the unsaid is recognized as a part of what is communicated. It
explores how a hearer can make an assumption on the speaker’s utterances in order to gain at a correct interpretation. The last, pragmatics is a study of the
relationship between linguistic forms and the uses of those forms. Based on
explanation about definition of pragmatics given by Grundy, Leech, Watts and
Yule, it can be concluded that pragmatics deals with intended meaning which is
communicated by speaker or writer then interpreted by hearer or reader based on
facts of speaker’s intention and the way of speaker does the rules of conversation in order to get good conversation. Thereby , the writer used theory of pragmatics
because it relates with the conversational principle. Thus, Pragmatics is useful to
analyze data in this study related to the context.
2.2 Presupposition
Presupposition is information which is assumed by hearer about the
speaker’s talk. The hearer often catches what the speaker said by assumingwhat is being told by speaker based on the context of situation.
Stalnaker in Brown and Yule (1983:29) argued that presupposition is what
is taken by the speaker to be the common ground of the participants in the
conversation. Notice that, in both these quotations, the indicated source of
presuppositions is the speaker.
This is an example “My uncle will come from Canada tomorrow”. From the example, the hearer may assumed that (1) The speaker has uncle and (2)
his/her uncle in Canada now. The writer also illustrates by the following example:
Example:
A: Do you like ice cream?
B: Ice cream is really delicious. Strawberry is more delicious than chocolate.
Presupposition:1.B likes ice cream
2.Ice cream is delicious
5.Strawberry ice cream is more delicious than chocolate ice cream
6.B likes strawberry ice cream
7.B maybe likes chocolate ice cream
2.3 Implicature
Implicature is a term in the pragmatics subfield of linguistics, introduced
by H. P. Grice, which refers to what is suggested in an utterance, even though
neither expressed norstrictly implied (that is, entailed) by the utterance. It means,
that something in the speaker means but does not say. This explanation also
supported by Grace, Implicature is an inferred meaning, typically with a different
logical form from the original utterance. Implicature is something implied and
means from what is said. For example, "Mary had a baby and got married"
strongly suggests that Mary had the baby before the wedding, but the sentence
would still bestrictly trueif Mary had her baby after she got married.
Grice claimed that there were two types of implicature. They are
Conventional and conversational implicature. A conventional implicature according to Grice , determined by “the conventional meaning of the words used”(1975:44). It means that The conventional implicature happens when the conventional meaning of words used determine what is implicated.
Grice makes a similar point about ‘therefore’:If I say (smugly), He is an Englishman; he is, therefore, brave, I have certainly committed myself, by virtue
of the meaning of my words, to its being the case that his being brave is a
that he is an Englishman, and said that he is brave, I do not want to say that I have
said (in the favored sense) that it follows from his being an Englishman that he is
brave, though I have certainly indicated, and so implicated, that this is so. I do not
want to say that my utterance of this sentence would be, strictly speaking, false
should the consequence in question fail to hold (Grice 1989, p. 25).
‘Therefore’ is not the most convincing example, forit seems that the truth of the utterance doesrequire that the second proposition be a consequence of the
first. More plausible is Grice’s earlier example involving ‘but’. She is poor but she is honest. Where the putative contrast between being poor and being honest is,
he claims, “implied as distinct from being stated” (Grice 1961, p. 127).
WhileConversational Implicatureaccording Grice that is derived from a general principle of conversational plus a number of maxims which speakers will
normally obey. Then, this principle called Cooperative Principle which Grice
(1975:45) delivered “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”. Sometimes implicature is produced intentionally by speaker but can be understand or missunderstand from hearer.
The writer comes the following example :
Ann: Where does Grice live?
Bob: Somewhere in the Bay Area
live in. Thereby, the writer relates implicature to catch the messages if
sometimes the speaker or writer implied somtehing.
2.4 Cooperative Principle
Cooperative Principle is outstanding with Grice’s Maxim or Grice’s theory. Grice developed a theory designed to explain and predict conversational
implicatures. Through Cooperative Principle can identify how people normally
behave in conversation, how people interact with one another and how effective
communication in conversation. This principle is formulated by Grice (1975:45)
“Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage of the conversation at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose of direction of the talk
exchange in which you find yourself”.
Cooperative Principle are grouped together into four categories, called the
Maxims of Conversation: the maxim of quality (truthfulness), the maxim of
quantity (informativeness), the maxim of relation (relevance), and the maxim of
manner (be brief).According to Grice (1975) that speakers intend to be
cooperative when they talk and people will have a successful conversation if they
fulfill the cooperative principles that are related in the four maxims of
conversation. The categories are :
2.4.1 Maxim of Quantity
1. Make your contribution as informative as is required.
Both of clues should be done by speaker in order to say in brief. These
clue expects the speaker says based on the necessary or to contribute as
informative as is required and does not expected to say too much and too little
information than is required.
Thereby , the speaker supposed to be informativeness as is required. The
speaker could not talk in less or more information. If the speaker contributes in
maxim of quantity, the speaker and hearer will success in conversation. It’s mean that conversation between speaker and hearer will be understanding one anothers.
Example:
Andy : Do you have brother and sister?
Rani : Yes, I have brother and don’t have sister
The example above showed that Rani understand what is talking by Andy.
Therefore, Rani answerd informative as required.
2.4.2 Maxim of Quality
1. Do not say what you believe to be false.
2. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.
The speaker is supposed to say based on the clue above. It expects the
speaker says true. These mean that the speaker should say what she/he believes to
Thereby, the speaker must be true in conversation. The speaker must say
what he/she believes with the evidance. By saying in true one, the conversation
will be success. Example:
Antok : Drew, do you know where is the Big Ban Clock Tower is?
Andrew : It’s in London
The example above explained that Andrew fulfill maxim of quality
because Andrew does not say what he believes to be false. Factly, Big Ban is in
London.
2.4.3 Maxim of Manner
1. Be perspicuous.
2. Avoid obscurity of expression.
3. Avoid ambiguity.
4. Be brief.
5. Be orderly.
The speaker is recommended to say in accordance the contribution above.
The speaker are expected to say in easy understand for listeners, say clearly, say
the real intention, say briefly and say orderly. These contribution is helpful in
creating good communication, likes an example below :
Alika : I will buy an apple
Nisa : How price is it?
Alika : It is about ten thousand
These example, showed the good conversation, where Alika answerd in
easy to understand, clearly, briefly and orderly. So, this conversation work
perfectly.
2.4.4 Maxim of Relation
This maxim expected the speaker to say in relevant. It means that the
speaker’s say must relate and connect with one topic to another topic. It is helpfulin success conversation. Example :
Dony : Where are you now?
Gita : I am on the way.
Based on example above showed that Gita’s answerd is connection with Dony’s question. Gita makes her answerd relate with what is talking by Dony. Gita says on the way because when Dony ask her. She is on the way to see Dony.
It will be different if Gita says “sorry, I will come late”.
Thus, all of the explanation above has showed the way of maxims work in
Cooperative Principle. Cooperative Principle is useful for speaker or writer
2.5 Flouting Maxims
Based on the explanation about Cooperative Principle above, could be
concluded that some of hearer and reader usually catches the assumption about the
speaker intention when the conversation happens. Then, some of speakers break
Cooperative Principle. It is called Flouting Maxim.
Flouting maxims is done by uttering something absurdly false,
uninformative, completely irrelevant and obscurity. Flouting maxims are
produced about the speaker literally says is different with the speaker intention.
So that, flouting maxims force the reader to understand hard about what the
speaker intends to convey. Grundy (2000:78) states that flouting maxim is a
particularly salient way of getting an addressee to draw an inference and hence
recover an implicature thus there is a trade-off between abiding by maxims.
Flouting used always creat conversation become disconnected, too much
information, lies and unclear in habitual communication.
Grundy (2000) states that whenever a maxim is flouted there must be an
implicature to save the utterance from simply appearing to be a faulty contribution
to a conversation.
Another explanation also stated that unlike the violation of maxims, which
takes place to cause misunderstanding on the part of the listener,the flouting of
maxims takes place when individuals deliberately cease to apply the maxims to
persuade their listeners to infer the hidden meaning behind the utterances; that is,
Thereby, flouting maxim is an utterances that produced by speaker that
disobey cooperative principle. Through disobey cooperative principle the
conversation will failed. Here are the types of flouting maxim :
2.5.1 Flouting Quality
Flouting maxim of quality occurs when the speaker constributes in untrue
utterances. Sometimes, the speaker or hearer does not know about her/his is
saying, if is true or not. Some of people also says without the evidance. While, if
the conversation obey maxim of quality. The conversation will be success but
some of people often missunderstanding about what is talking about. It cause of
flouting maxim.
There are some reasons for flouting this maxim (1) To convince the
addressee (2) to cover something (3) to hide something. Example:
John : Where is Juanda Airport?
Mingky : Surabaya
John :Then, Abdul Rahman Shaleh Airport is in Jakarta.
The example above showed John flouts the maxim of quality. John says is
untrue because Abdul Rahman Shaleh in Malang.
John should say in true then it will make the hearer understand what is
talking by him. If the speaker disobey maxim likes the example above.
2.5.2 Flouting Quantity
The reasons of flouting maxim of quantity is to explain more about
something; usually someone tries to explain about something by giving much
information and expecting that the hearer will understand more about the topic,
people use many words when they want to stress something in order to make the
intended meaning more clear for the listener to follow, To expect something;
Sometimes people act and say more words to show something but factly, the
hearer even didn’t understand about the speaker says. Example :
Kanaya : Are you ready with mathematic olimpiade?
Kinara : I do worry. Even though, I have studied almost six
hours a day
Based on the example above, Kinara flouts a maxim of quantity, where
Kinara says in too much information. Kinara should says “I am ready” it will be better than say in much information. May much information make the hearer
difficult to understanding what is said exactly.
2.5.3 Flouting Manner
Flouting manner occur when the utterances is ambiguity, not brave,
unclear and obscurity. Example :
Kayana : What will you buy?
Based on example above that Kirani’s answer is unclear because “some fresh” may have another literal meaning. Automatically, kayana misunderstands Kirani’s statement.
Kirani is not supposed to say “Some fresh” only, but Kirani should say “ a glass of lemon tea”, because “Some Fresh” makes the reader or hearer confuseed then the conversation is failed. So, Kirani’s answer indicates flouting manner.
2.5.4 Flouting Relation
Flouting relation occurs when the speaker says irrelevant information.
Irrelevant information is created when the speaker says in different topic. Some of
reasons why the speaker flouts maxim of relation : first, to change the
conversation topic; in a conversation people usually change the topic of
conversation to avoid talking about something that is embarrassing or just to end
the conversation. These reason is showed in the example below:
Nihay : Hi, Nad. When will you graduate?
Nadan : I am going home
Second, to give unnecessary additional information; sometimes people
flout the maxim of relevance by giving unnecessary additional information to the
topic being talked about. It is showed by the example below:
Area : Nadin was not in the class, even though there was
Jane : Final test will be held early tomorrow. We must
come on time.
Third, to avoid talking about something; people usually say about
something else when the partner of the conversation does not hear or understand
about what they say because they do not want he or she know about it, example:
Anindit :When will you get married?
Arinah : Soon
Anindit : What did you say?
Arinah : I’m finishing the task
Another common example that shows flouting maxim of relation is
showed below:
Anindit : When will you get married?
Arinah : I’m still studying
Based on example above that Arinah’s answer is irrelevant with Anindit’s question. Arinah is not expected to answer “I’m still studying” because it isn’t exactly answerd. Arinah should says in period because the question arises with
“When”. It could be caused of Arinah does not want to talk about marriage, so she
changes another topic by flouting maxim of relation. Those conversation is not
2.6 Context
Context is characteristic outside of the text. Context helped us to know
when the conversation was created and what are the reason of speaker produces
her or his utterance. Context is helpful for some of people to catch the literally
meaning by speaker’s say. Moreover, some speakers could not produce the utterances without knowing the context. So that why, context is really important
in the interpretation of sentence.
Hymes in Wootton(1975:44), states the use of linguistic form identifies a
range of meaning. A context can support a range of meaning. When a form is used
in a context it eliminates the meaning possible to that context other than those the
form can signal: the context eliminates from consideration the meaning possible
to the form other than those the context can support.
Nunan states context as a situation that gives rise to a discourse and it is
within the discourse. So, different chance means different context.
2.7 Review of Related Studies
This study focuses on the flouting of the conversational maxims. The
writer uses Grice’s theory of cooperative principle (1975) as the basic in this analysis.Flouting is deliberate and apparent violation of maxims. Grundy
(2000:78) states that flouting maxim is a particularly salient way of getting an
addressee to draw an inference and hence recover an implicature thus there is a
become disconnected, too much information, lies and ambigu in habitual
communication.
Thereby,based on explanation above the writer relate this study use those
filed with some previous study that have similararea but focus of this study is
different.
At 2013, Setyoko Cahyo Dwi Putro and Emalia analyzed about Flouting
The Quality Maxim In Baby Milk Slogans Shown On Tv Advertisements. Based
on cooperative principle in his analysis that study found four reasons for flouting
the quality maxim in English baby milk slogans shown on Indonesian TV
advertisements ,they are: interestingness, increasing the force of the
message(effectiveness), competing goals and politeness. Weakness of this study is
only using quality maxim in baby milk slogans. Whereas, this slogan also
supported by quantity maxim, manner and relevant.
At 2013, Lailil Julia Afsa doing research entittled Study Of Flouting
Maxim Found In Some Cosmopolitan Advertisement Slogans. Based on her
research that advertisement does not briefs enough if the readers do not know the
context, less informative, lack of evidence, and one of them is no direct relevance
to the product. It happens due to the intention of making the slogan short.
Consequently, producers sacrifice information, relevance, clarity, and
believability. Context is needed in analyzing the hidden meaning of the slogan.
Without knowing the context of the slogan, the readers will have a difficulty in
The hidden meaning of the slogan always brings the intention to promote the
product and to persuade the customers to buy it. his study, the writer intends to
identify the type of conversational maxims flouted in the advertisement slogans
and to find out themeanings of the slogans based on Grice’s implicature theory.
At 2013, Praisya Jovani K. M analyzed about Flouting And Hedging
Maxims In Bbc Podcast The English We Speak Taken From Bbc Learning English
here are 37 utterances containing flouting maxims, which maxim of quantity takes
the dominance as shown in 17 utterances. The speakers benefit from rhetorical
strategies, such as irony, metaphor, tautology, overstatement and understatement
to communicate the implied meaning. Second, 120 utterances of hedging maxims
are found. Most speakers express uncertainty and inexactitude regarding the truth
or their utterances so that hedges are used to avoid breaking the maxim also to
minimize the imposition that may occur. As a result, 74 utterances are said to
hedge the maxim of quality. Overlapping incidence between flouting and hedging
maxims also can be found referring that the speaker hopes the listener to interpret
the meaning and to feel the speaker’s hesitation all at once so that a proper response can be derived.
At 2013, Niclas Andresen analyzed about Flouting the maxims in comedy:
An analysis of flouting in the comedy series Community. This paper explores how
flouting of the Gricean maxims isused to create comedy in the television series
Community. The aim of the paper is to find out what maxims are floutedthe most
inwhat situations the different characters flout the maxims for comedy. The paper
is based on transcription of eight episodes of the series. The results show that the
maxim of quantity was flouted most often, and some characters used more flouts
than others. These results suggest that the use of flouts has to do with their
different personalities, which is why some characters did not use as many flouts in
order to create comedy, since it would not be in line with their personality.
Based on another researchers that had been defined, study of Grice’s theory used by some research. Most of the object of those studies are TV and
newspaper. Meanwhile, this study analyzed different object. It is testimony often
used by some online shop to persuade customer. Object in Testimony might
become the newest object in this field. Not only the object, this tudy also relate
flouting maxim with the four maxims, they are maxim of quantity, maxim of
quality, maxim of manner and maxim of relation.
Then, the related study as in Setyoko only focuses on Flouting maxim of
quality, while Lailil Julia only focuses on types of flouting maxim. Praisya
Jovani only focused on Flouting maxim of quantity, but her study increase more
in hedging. Niclas focused on the maxim that often flouted by some characters. It
In this part, the writer discusses research method. It consists of research
approach, data source, data, data collection, research instruments, and data
analysis.
3.1 Research Approach
The writer used descriptive qualitative approach. Descriptive in this study
is designed to depict object and put all about description in literal meaning.
Descriptive involves observing and describing object without influencing it in any
way. While, qualitative means that data submitted is not in the form of numbers
but script interviews, field notes, personal and official documents. So, the purpose
of this qualitative research is reveal a reality deeply, in details and completely.
Thereby, the writer used descpritive qualitative approach in this method to
focus on utterances in testimony of Dian Sidoarjo related with flouting maxims.
Then, she used Grice Implicature in order to explain the meaning of utterances in
testimony of Dian Sidoarjo.
3.2 Data Source
The data source in this research is texts of testimony which consist of
conversation between Dian and her customers. This text was taken from
Blackberry Messenger through Dian Online Shop’s group. The writer is interested in Dian Sidoarjo’s Testimony because the writer is interested in language used in Dian’s testimony. Dian Sidoarjo always spreads her testimony in order to influence customers to buy her products. In her testimony she always uses many
beautiful words to persuade customers. Thereby, the writer argued that testimony
consist of flouting maxims.
3.3 Data
The data used in this study is qualitative. It means that all data in this study
were utterances which consisted of flouting maxims used in testimony of Dian
Sidoarjo. The utterances in testimony Dian Sidoarjo taken by the writer are
conversation between Dian and her customers and also statements by her
customers.
3.4 Research Instruments
According to Johnson and Christensen (2004:33), in qualitative research,
the researcher is the instrument of data collection. It means that the researcher is
involved in collecting, analyzing, and describing the data.
Thereby, the instrument is the writer. In this study, the writer becomes an
important role. Through the writer, this study got as well as possible because
utterances in conversation and statements testimony based on the context
underlying.
3.5 Data Collection
In collecting data the writer used the following steps:
1. The writer printed out the testimony from Dian’s BBM Group.
2. The writer made underline in testimony that consists of conversation and
statements in order to understand the language used in the testimony.
3. The writer gave a mark in utterances of testimony which included of
flouting maxims.
3.6 Data Analysis
In analyzing the data, the writer did several steps:
1. After the writer had collected testimony that has been categorized in
flouting maxims, the writer identified the utterances to see what maxim
had been flouted.
2. The writer classified the types of maxims in data based on Grice’s Maxim of Cooperative Principle. In this step, the writer made table to categorize
the utterances in each type of maxims. Those steps were done to answer
question number one.
3. The writer tried to describe the way maxims are flouted. In this step, the
writer analyzed the way flouting maxims were used in utterances. Those
4. After that, the writer interpreted the meaning in data, in order to gave
explanation more about the reason of flouting maxim used in testimony of
Dian Sidoarjo. Those steps were done to answer question number three.
5. Then, to achieve conclusion, the writer discussed all data in finding and
discussion. Finally, the writer could draw conclusion based on pragmatics
In this chapter the writer delivered findings and discussion that focused on
flouting maxims, which was found in testimony Dian Sidoarjo, then it was related
with Grice’s theory in order to answer the research problemsof this study.
The findings of this study, the writer focused on the types of flouting
maxims, which was produced by Dian Sidoarjo’stestimony, it was done to answer the first question of this study. Then the writer described how the maxims were
flouted in testimony Dian Sidoarjo, it was done to answer the second question of
this study. Moreover, the writer presented the context underlying of maxims,
which was flouted to know the reason of flouting maxims utteranced in testimony
Dian Sidoarjo, it was done to answer the third question. Furthermore, the writer
classified the analysis regarding the types of maxims. In this finding, the writer
also related some verses and hadits in order to decrease flouting maxims of
quality, which was implied in the Dian Sidoarjo’stestimony.
In this discussion, the writer presented explanation deeply which came
from the finding. Moreover, the result which came from the finding was presented
4. 1 Finding
Table 4.1 The Flouting of The Maxims
Flouting Maxims Data %
Maxim of Quantity 2,8,10,12,16,18,23 26
Maxim of Quality 1,5,7,9,11,13,14,15,19,20,22,24,25,26 53
Maxim of Manner 4,8,16 11
Maxim of Relation 3,6,12,15,17,21 20
4.1.1 Types of Flouting Maxims used in Testimony Dian Sidoarjo
The writer analyzed the utterances in Dian Sidoarjo’stestimony, which is based on the theory of Grice’s maxims. Those utterances were created by Dian and sometimes came from her customers. In this study, Dian Sidoarjo’stestimony flouted the fourth maxims; maxim of quality, maxim of quantity, maxim of
manner and maxim of relevance.
4.1.1.1 Maxim of Quality
Maxim of quality supposes that the speakers say truthfuly and sincerity or
they believe to be true. In other words, the speakers are supposed to say with
show some evidences, because some of people argued the information is true if it
is supported by evidence but some of them ignored the rules of conversation. The
Hence, this case included flouting maxim of quality. Flouting maxim of quality
was showed in the following data :
Except Data 1
Customer : Oh iya say, minyak bulusnya cepet banget efeknya buat kulit. Cepet mulus. Bisa ngobatin gatelku yang gak hilang-hilang. Sampek bekas hitam.
Dian :Minyak Bulus siip(Data 2)
The utterances above included Data 2, where the conversation above
happened between a customer and Dian. The customer said, “Oh iya say, minyak bulusnya cepet banget efeknya buat kulit. Cepet mulus. Bisa ngobatin gatelku
yang gak hilang-hilang. Sampek bekas hitam”. The customer explained that Minyak Bulus was suitable for her. In each of her utterances, she did not give the
evidance that her skin has been seamless and her itch was gone. Certainly, these
utterances made the reader could not believe with the testimony. It mens that, she
is not only showed without evidance, but also she used the hyperbole utterance.
Based on Cutting’s (2002) explanation that the way of flouting maxims are sometimes used used hyperbole, metaphor and irony. Thereby, the utterance, was
stated by customer, showed flouting maxim of quality.
The customer should show the evidence if her statement was true.
Otherwise, if the customer said without evidence, automatically it could create the
reader hard to believe with her said. So that, some utterances could be true if it
The conversation above strengthened by the context. The conversation
built in the evening at 8:01 when the customer has been using Minyak Bulus
which had bought in Dian Sidoarjo. Then, the customer sent BBM to Dian that
Minyak Bulus was helpful for her skin. Besides for smoothing the skin, Minyak
Bulus also could decrease a itch of skin.
Except Data 2
Customer :Siang sis, aku terlalu kurus pakai apa?
Dian :Pakai Sam Yun Wan ajaa. Tahuu kann?
Customer :Endak, apa sis?
Dian :Terbukti menggemukkan badan lhooo. Aman dan tidak ada efek samping.
Customer :Mau deh sis(Data 8)
The conversation above showed data 8, where the conversation was
occured in the afternoon at 12:25, between Customer and Dian. The conversation
above showed flouting maxim of quality. This flouting maxim produced by Dian
“Terbukti menggemukkan badan lhoo. Aman dan tidak ada efek samping” . These utterance was produced when her customer asked to Dian about the product that
those product was beneficial to increase the weight. Based on these utterances,
Dian said in lack adequate evidence. She did not show the evidence about the
truthness of her product. Even though Dian also said “Terbukti”, automatically Dian should support with evidence. It was difficult to believe her statement,
although the customer bought those product. The customer bought it although she
or he was doubt, the doubt about those product could be seen from customer said
rare if some of reader argued that it was untrue statement. Thus, these utterances
showed Flouting maxim of quality. Flouting maxim of quality occured when the
speaker constributed untrue utterances. Based on Dian utterances, she was
convinced that she was telling the truth.
Except Data 3
Customer :Sis wajahku jerawat pakai apa ya?
Dian :Simple sis, pakai theraskin ajaa. Banyaak lhoo customerku yang pakai. Terbukti ampuh hilangin jerawat
Customer :Mau deh(Data 10)
The conversation above between Dian and her customer. They discussed
about avoiding acne. Data 10 above happened in the afternoon, at 12:12 when the
customer consulted about her acne and wanted to use products from Dian
Sidoarjo. The customer started to ask Dian“Sis, wajahku jerawat pakai apa ya?”.
The customer hoped that Dian Sidoarjo has a solution for her acne. Then, Dian
answered “Simple sis, pakai theraskin ajaa. Banyak lhoo customerku yang pakai. Terbukti ampuh hilangin jerawat” It means that Dian’s answer was suitable with the customer question but based on this utterances could not see the evidence if
theraskin could really omit acne. She broke this maxim because Dian
recommended Theraskin for avoid her acne. Theraskin is cosmetics that consists
of cream and soap.
hilangin jerawat” , but in every statement she did not show evidence. The evidence about the truthness of Theraskin if those product was good for skin and
alot of her customer used theraskin also. By said in lack adequate evidance, some
of reader could not believe what she said. Sometimes, some of people argued that
it was untrue, although these conversation showed that the customer bought it.
Thereby, the conversation above showed that the utterances were produced by
dian included flouting maxim of quality.
Except Data 4
Kiki : Siang sisst, aku mau ngasih testi. Bbku turun 4kg lagi sisst, hihihihi. Seneng bangeeeetttt tau gak siihhh. Skrg BB ku 53. Nanti aku pesen lagi yahhh.
Dian :Jadi totalnya brp kg say?
Kiki :11kg loooohhhh, it’s amazing buat aku sisst!!(Data 12)
Data 12 above was stated by Kiki and Dian. This conversation happened
in the afternoon at 12:40 when Kiki sent Blackberry Messenger to Dian in order to
gave information that Kiki was really happy with Dian’s product. It was called Glucogen. In this conversation, there was flouting maxim that was produced by
Kiki as Dian’s customer. Kiki said to Dian “Siang sisst, aku mau ngasih testi. Bbku turun 4kg lagi sisst, hihihihi. Seneng bangeeeetttt tau gak siihhh. Skrg BB ku
53. Nanti aku pesen lagi yahhh”. When kiki stated her utterances, she showed her satisfaction about Glucugen to Dian. In Kiki’s statement showed that she would buy Glucogen again. Then, Kiki invited the reader to buy Glucogen that Glucogen
flouting maxim of quality. It was occured when Kiki gave her statement in lack
adequate evidence and Kiki said what she believe to be false. It could make the
reader difficult to believe about Kiki said. It would be different if Kiki said by
showing the evidence.
Except Data 5
Dian : Selamat pagii sis/bun. DSC terbukti memutihkan dan menghilangkan jerawat. Wajahmu kencang cantik dan tampak perawatan padahal tidak lhooo. Mauu?. Info:cream saya gak pakek bahan murahhh, masa exp 4 bulan ya.. gak sampek tahunan seperti cream murah lainnya. Flek tebal, wajah susah putih, jerawat bandel? Perawatan pakai creamku yuk, best seller klinik
Customer :Banyak cream sis. Cream apa?
Dian :Cream pemutih only 100rb 1 paket.(Data 16)
This conversation occured in the morning at 11:52. This conversation
happened during six minutes. Data 16 above started by Dian when she promoted
DSC and cream whitening by Blackberry Messenger. Dian sent in twice: first, she
promoted about DSC and second Dian gave information about cream whitening.
Flouting maxim of quality was produced by Dian “Selamat pagii sis/bun. DSC terbukti memutihkan dan menghilangkan jerawat. Wajahmu kencang cantik
dan tampak perawatan padahal tidak lhooo. Mauu?. Info:cream saya gak pakek
bahan murahhh, masa exp 4 bulan ya.. gak sampek tahunan seperti cream murah
lainnya. Flek tebal, wajah susah putih, jerawat bandel? Perawatan pakai
what she said. This utterances also did not supported by evidence, it was not rare
if some of people argued Dian said untrue because she gave information in lack
adequate evidence and say what she believe although it was false. Even though,
Dian said “Terbukti”, it means that Dian could show those evidence. It would be better if Dian said factly and supported by evidence.
Except Data 6
Dian : “Beautysky Magic Cream” Promo Free Ongkir Jawa Usir Wajah Kusam, komedo dan jerawatmu dengan beautysky magic cream
Adreana :Beneran? Coba deh(Data 18)
The conversation between Dian and Adreana occured in the afternoon at
1:11 P.M . It happened when Dian sent information about discount of “Beautysky Magic Cream” by BBM to her customer. At that time, Adreana responded thoose information.
The first speaker was Dian, she said “ “Beautysky Magic Cream Promo” Free Ongkir Jawa Usir Wajah Kusam, komedo dan jerawatmu dengan
“beautysky magic cream” , she gave those information because she wanted her customer to know that “Beautysky Magic Cream” was being discount. This product also helpful the face became more beautiful. She told all benefits of
“Beautysky Magic Cream but”all of her utterance was not supported by evidence. So, these utterance would be difficult to believe the readers. Even, these
utterances argued untrue statement. Thus, this utterances were produced by Dian
speaker said in lack adequate evidence and the speaker said in certainly wrong.
This criteria occured in Dian’s utterance.
After Dian gave information about “Beautysky Magic Cream”, Adreana answered “Beneran? Coba deh” . It was explained that Adreana was dobtful if Beautysky could decrease the dull face, blackheads and acne. Although, Adreana
would buy it to prove it.
Except Data 7
Vivian : Mbak wajah kasar pakai apa?
Dian : Tahu sabun beras thailand? Itu terbukti melembutkan wajah lhooo. Aku pakai lhooo(Data 23)
The utterance was produced by Vivian and Dian. This interaction
happened in the afternoon, exactly at 1:05. They talked about the dull face and
how to decsreased it. Then Vivian sent BBM to Dian in order to get an answer
what product was suitable with her problem. Vivian asked “Mbak wajah kasar pakai apa?” . Then Dian answered “Tahu sabun beras thailand? Itu terbukti melembutkan wajah lhooo. Aku pakai lhooo” . This answer showed flouting maxim of quality. Flouting maxim of quality occured when the speaker
constributed in untrue utterances. It was called untrue utterances because the
speaker did not show the evidence when they said. Some of people certainly did
not know if Dian used it or not, so Dian should prove her utterance if she used it
that, some of people were difficult to think it was true or untrue. Then, it would be
argued true if the speaker supported the evidence.
Based on this explanation, Dian said without support the evidence. Even
though, she said “Itu terbukti melembutkan wajah lhoo. Aku pakai lhoo”. She could provide the real picture about her face which used Sabun Beras Thailand.
Then, it would be complete maxim of quality. Dian flouted maxim of quality
because she convinced to Dian that Sabun Beras Thailand was beneficial to avoid
dull face. Dian also expected Vivian to believe her utterances that Sabun Beras
was good quality.
Based on Data 23 above that testimony in Dian Sidoarjo Online Shop has
been disobey cooperative principle. It was called flouting maxim of quality. There
were seven utterances which was close flouting maxim of quality. It was argued
flouting maxim of quality because the speaker or writer did not show the evidence
when they gave some statement even, they talked as true. Although, all of their
statement made sure the reader to believe the speaker or writer said.
4.1.1.2 Maxim of Quantity
This maxim indicates the speaker says as informative as is required and
the speaker expects to say in enough information than is required. The speaker
supposed to say based on the necessary, so that the speaker does not expect to say
in less or more information. Thereby, if the speaker says in less or more
information than is required, it is called flouting maxim of quantity. Here are the
Except Data 8
Dian :Uda berapa yang invite say?
Customer : Banyak banget, makasih ya...Sampai sekarang ada aja yang invite, makasih ya...(Data 1)
The context based on the conversation happened in the evening at 5:43
when the customer had bought Jasa Kontak. Then, Dian sent Blackberry
Messenger (BBM) to her customer in order to make sure that her customer’s contact has increased. Jasa Kontak is a service which helped the customer/buyer
to get alot of BBM contact. So that was why, the utterances were produced by
customer showed that alot of BBM contact which have invited the customer.
Then, the customer showed that he/she satisfied with Dian services.
Dian asked to her customer “Uda berapa yang invite say?”. Dian implied “Berapa yang invite?” to her customer. It meants that Dian asked the number who had invited the customer. Then, the customer should answer “20, 50, 65, 100,or 350, etc,,”. So, these answer obeyed the rules of conversation that was included maxim of quantity, but the customer did not give the right answer to Dian. The
customer said “Banyak banget, makasih ya.. Sampai sekarang ada aja yang invite, makasih yaa.”.Automatically, the customer did not give the right answer
and made Dian’s question unclear. Thereby, the conversation between Dian and her customer became misunderstanding. The customer answered more
Except Data 9
Alika :Sis, harga Sam Yun Wan berapa?
Sis, harga Sam Yun Wan berapa?
Dian :Sam Yun Wan terbukti membantu menggemukkan badan lhooo sis,, disini only 50rb ditempat lain mehong sis.(Data 5)
This conversation between Alika and Dian. Alika asked “Sis, harga Sam
Yun Wan berapa?” . Alika meants that she asked the price of Sam Yun Wan.
Then, Dian answered “Sam Yun Wan terbukti membantu menggemukkan badan
lhooo sis,, disini only 50rb ditempat lainmehong sis”. Here, Dian did not give the
right answer. Her answer was too much information than was required by Alika’s question. Dian should answered “Hanya 50.000, 70.000 or 75.000”. Actually, Dian should answer about price. Although, Alika has already known about Dian
said. Thereby, Dian’s utterance showed flouting maxim of quantity.
Those conversation seemed urgent. Hence, Alika sent BBM in twice. It
was happened in the morning at 11:33. From the conversation above showed that
Alika was really need Sam Yun Wan. She asked the price in the first. It was done
by Alika may she wanted to compare the price with anothers.
Except Data 10
Customer :Sis, punya DSC?
These utterances happened in the afternoon at 12:19. The conversation
was created because the customer would have bought DSC in Dian Online Shop.
These conversation was starting by a customer who asked to Dian about DSC.
The customer asked to Dian “Sis, punya DSC?”. It means that the customer asked to Dian if Dian has DSC or not. After that, Dian answered “Adaa, DSC whitening acne, normal, gold acne. Disini only 200.000”. Dian was
unexpected to give much information. Dian only should answer “Punya mbak”.
These answer showed maxim of quantity but here, Dian answered in many
words. So, Dian’s utterances included flouting maxim of quantity.
Except Data 11
Dian :Mbk, gimana hasil jolen?
Eva :Iya ada hasile dek(Data 9)
The utterance was stated by Dian and Eva, this dialogue happened when
Dian asked to Eva about how to use Jolen. Jolen is a cream that make the skin
brighter. Then, Eva said “ Iya ada hasile dek” when she had used Jolen in her skin.
Here, Dian asked it because she wanted to know the result after her
customer used Jolen. Meanwhile, Eva only answered “Iya ada hasile dek”. Eva’s answer was not expected for Dian’s questions because she gave little information than was required by Dian asked. Eva was expected to tell the result before and
showed flouting maxim of quantity. It would be different if Eva said “Hasilnya bagus dan cocok. Wajahku lebih kencang”, it could be called Maxim of quantity.
Except Data 12
Dian : Gimana yang anti melasma kemarin mbk? Uda kelihatan
hasilnya?
Neni Yuliani :Udah, Alhamdulillah(Data 11)
Both of girls above was talking about Anti Melasma which has made the
skin brighter. Those product was called “Anti Melasma”. Dian Sidoarjo provided those cosmetic. Their conversation happened on wednesady at 8:45 in the
evening. Dian started to ask Neni when Anti Melasma had arrived in Neni
“Gimana yang anti melasma kemarin mbk? Uda kelihatan hasilnya?” . Dian
implied that she wanted Neni to explain the result of Anti Melasma when it has
been used. Then Neni answered “udah, alhamdulillah”. Dian did not want to
Neni answer like that. Dian wanted Neni to give information about the result, so
that she asked “Gimana yang anti melasma kemarin mbk?”. Then it was
supported by next question “Uda kelihatan hasilnya?” but Neni only answered
less information “Udah, alhamdulillah”. It was refer to the last question from
Dian but the first question was not answered by Neni. Thereby, the conversation
above showed Flouting maxim of quantity. It would be different if Neni answered
“Anti Melasmanya cocok dan gak bikin merah di wajah. Hasilnya udah nampak”,
so the utterances included maxim of quantity but here, Neni Yuliani showed
Except Data 13
Dian :Selamat ya, udah berapa lama?
Rara : Udah 2 bulan,, soalnya temenku nanya aku minum apa. Pas saya bilangin cobain Rumput Kebar. Saya langsung keingat kalau saya belum sempat kabarin ke Pak Sandy tentang khasiat Rumput Kebarnya.. Alhamdulillah membawa berkah.(Data 13)
The conversation above was taken from testimony. This conversation
happened in the morning at 11:41 A.M when Rara has bought Rumput Kebar in
Dian Sidoarjo. Dian asked Rara “Selamat ya, udah berapa lama?”. Dian asked
Rara in order to know the benefits of Rumput Kebar. Rumput Kebaris plant that
helpful for couple of married who wanted to have a children. Then Rara answered
“Udah 2 bulan,, soalnya temenku nanya aku minum apa. Pas saya bilangin
cobain Rumput Kebar. Saya langsung keingat kalau saya belum sempat kabarin
ke Pak Sandy tentang khasiat Rumput Kebarnya. Alhamdulillah membawa
berkah” , this answered was given by much information. Rara did not give right
answer. Rara should say “Sudah dua bulan”, it would be enough. Automaticaly,
it was called maxim of quantity. Here, Rara said in flouting maxim of quantity
because she added much information than was required by Dian asked.
Dian : Pantas, hahaha. Setelah pakek Masker Spirulina ya? Sepupu ayu
udah lama pakainya ya?
The conversation above happened between Dian and Ayu. Dian said
“Pantas, hahaha. Setelah pakek Masker Spirulina ya? Sepupu ayu udah lama
pakainya ya?”.Dian implied that she wanted to make sure that Ayu’s cousin has been long time used Masker Spirulina. Then Ayu answered“Kira-kira dari bulan
April. 10 hari sebelum nikah, nikahnya awal mei”. It showed that Ayu answered
in much information, even though if Ayu said “Iya mbk, pakainya lama sekitar 5
bulan”it would be maxim of quantity and the conversation would be easy for the
reader. There, Ayu answered much words than was required by Dian asked. Thus,
the conversation above was close with flouting maxim of quantity.
This conversation also strengthened with the context in the testimony. This
conversation happened when Ayu has bought Masker Spirulina in Dian Sidoarjo.
Those product was used for her cousin before her cousin got married. Dian
provided Masker Spirulina to the reader if it was useful for face treatment.
Customer :Yang di DP buat apa sis?
Dian :Korset sis, mau?
Gimana pemakaian DSCnya sis?
Customer :Lancar sis, makasih.(Data 15)
It was conversation between Customer and Dian. The customer asked to
Dian “Yang d DP buat apa sis” mean that she wanted to know the function of
those product in the picture. Then Dian answered “Korset sis, mau?”. Automatically Dian answered in flouting maxim of quantity, because she gave
Her answered was not required by customer question. Dian said “Korset sis”, in
the picture showed that it was korset. All of people could see that it was korset
but dian should say “Buat mengecilkan area badan yang diinginkan sis”, this utterance would be adequeated more by customer question but there, Dian brakes
flouting maxim of quantity.
The conversation was created in the morning at 11:45. It happened when
the customer saw Dian’s BBM Picture then asked the function of those product. Dian also asked results of DSC that has ever been bought by her customer. This
conversation happened during two minutes
Except Data 16
Kayana :“Bamboo Slimming”ada?
Dian : “Bamboo Slimming” membantu melangsingkan badan anda maksimal. Melalui Bamboo anda dapat mendapatkan ukuran badan yang sesuai dansexy (Data 19)
The utterance above was stated by Kayana and Dian when Kayana asked
Dian about Bamboo Slimming.. This conversation happened in the afternoon at
1:18. Kayana asked to Dian about Bamboo Slimming. She asked to dian in order
to know Dian sold it or not. Kayana asked like this “Bamboo Slimming ada?”. Then Dian answered “Bamboo Slimming membantu melangsingkan badan anda maksimal. Melalui Bamboo anda dapat mendapatkan ukuran badan yang sesuai
mbk, Bamboo Slimmingnya tidak ada” if there was not Bamboo. This answer
would support Kayana question and could be called Maxim of quantity. Here,
Dian answered in too much information, while much information made the reader
difficult to understand what was said. Thus, this case showed flouting maxim of
quantity.
Except Data 17
Kayana :Sis, nambah“grow up”ada?
