Chusni Hadiati
Jenderal Soedirman University
Email: chusnihadiati@yahoo.com
Abstract
The conversation’s implicatures as the impact of the violation of the cooperative principle’s maxims of Grice (1975) can be classified into the speech act category of Searle (1975). The movie “The Sound of Music” is a masterpiece of Robert Wise winning many international awards. The conversations in it have some interesting characteristics worthy to investigate. The implicatures of the maxim violation in the movie’s dialogue can be categorized into: (1) representative: protecting, refusing, pretending, and stating a joke (2) directive: flirting, asking other to go, keeping a secret (3) commissives: accepting an offer, (4) expressive: mocking, entertaining, calming down, and pleasing.
Key words: speech acts, implicature, cooperative principles
Introduction
As a means to build a social relation, language has various functions. Malinowski (1923) in Halliday (1989:15) classifies language functions into two big groups. The first is pragmatic, in which this function is the further divided into narrative and active. In this case, the main function of language is as a means of communication. The second is magical, in which language is used in ceremonial or religious activities in the culture.
A mutual understanding is inevitably needed by a speaker and a hearer in order to construct a good communication. Understanding an utterance syntactically and semantically is not sufficient since the meaning of utterance is not only stated but it is also implied. In order to comprehend the implied meaning of an utterance, implicature becomes unavoidably essential. Implicature is a proposition that is implied by the utterance in a context even though that proposition is not a part of nor an entailment of what is actually said (Gazdar, 1979: 38). Grice classifies implicature into conventional and conversational. Conventional implicature is an implicature which arise solely because of the conventional feature of the words employed in an utterance. On the other hand, the second refers to the implicature which derives from general conversational principles and not just from the lexical entry of the verb concerned (Gazdar, 1979:38).
Grice says that one of the causes of conversational implicature is the flouting or exploitation of his cooperative principles. Cooperative principles proposed by Grice mentions that a speaker makes his conversational contribution such as is required at the stage in which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which he is engaged (Levinsons, 1995:101). He, then, further divides the cooperative principles into four maxims: maxim of quality, maxim of quantity, maxim of relevance, and maxim of manner.
To grasp the notion of communication, context happens to be completely important since speaker and hearer have to know the context in which the conversation takes place. Therefore, understanding context can be a helpful way to know the speaker and hearer’s intention
Below is dialogue taken from The Sound of Music the movie.
(1) context : Max Detweller is tutoring the von trapp’s children to sing since he plans to enrolles them in singing festival in vienna. In fact the children are very upset because maria left their house.
Max Detweller : Let’s make believe we’re on stage at the festival.
Martha : I don’t feel like singing.
Gretl : Not without Fraulein Maria.
Max Detweller : Lesl, get the guitar. Come on Martha…..Everybody into the group. Get in your places. Now be cheerful, right? Give us the key, Liesl….Now impress me!
Max Detweller : Greti, why don’t you sing?
Gretl : I can’t. I got a sore finger.
Max Detweller : But you sang so beautifully the night of the party.
Gretl utterance ‘I can’t. I got a sore finger’ flouts the cooperative principles, especially the maxim of relevance. Maxim of relevance mentions that a speaker should give his contribution relevant. Gretl’s utterance is not relevant with Max Detweller’s question. He asks her why she does not sing and Gretl answers it by saying that she can not sing because she has a sore finger. If anyone suffers from sore finger she or he still can sing. In fact, Gretl says that she can not sing because of her sore finger. Therefore, her utterance flouts the maxim of relevance. The flouting of this maxim causes the conversational implicature. The conversational implicature that derives from her utterance is ‘refusing’. Gretl refuses to sing because she fells sad since Maria leaves her house. Maria is her governess who she really loves.
From the above illustration, the writer is interested in conducting a research on the speech acts and the conversational implicatures found in Wise’s The Sound Of Music.
In order to specify the topic, the researcher formulates two problem statements of the research. The first is to identify the speech acts occurred in Wise’s The Sound Of Music and the second is to explain the conversational implicature found in Wise’s The Sound Of Music.
Speech Acts
Speech acts are words that do things (Mey, 1994:110). When an utterance is produced it is not merely a combination of words. It has deeper intention. When one says ‘I’ll come tomorrow’ he does not solely say it but at the same time when he produces this utterance he also makes a promise. Words that ‘promise’ means that they do ‘something’. There are numerous speech acts in people’s utterances and Searle classifies them into five groups (Mey, 1994:165-167).
1. Representatives (Assertives)
These speech acts carry the values of true and false. In this point, the utterance must match the world in order to be true.
2. Directives
These speech acts embody an effort on the part of the speaker to get the hearer to do something, to ‘direct’ him or her towards some goal.
3. Commissives
Like directives, commissives operate a change in the world by means of creating an obligation; however, this obligation is created in the speaker, not in the hearer, as in the case of directives.
4. Expressives
These speech acts, as the word say, express an inner state of the speaker which, insofar as it is essentially subjective, says nothing about the world.
5. Declaration
These speech acts are the declaration that changes the state of affairs in the world.
Cooperative Principles.
In order to be an effective communicator, a speaker and a hearer have to obey the cooperative principle proposed by Grice. He mentions that each speaker should give ‘enough’ contribution in conversation. He divides the cooperative principles into four maxims (Levinson, 1995 :101-102). The first is maxim of quality. This maxim contains an advice for the speakers to make their contribution one that is true, specifically; do not say what you believe to be false and do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence. The second is maxim of quantity. It includes the suggestion for the speakers to make their contribution as informative as is required for the current purposes of the exchange and do not make contribution more informative than is required. The third is maxim of relevance. It involves the recommendation for the speakers to make their contribution relevant. Last but not least is maxim of manner. It consists of advice for the speakers to be perspicuous and specifically avoid obscurity, avoid ambiguity, be brief, and be orderly.
Implicature
As mention before, implicature is a proposition that is implied by the utterance of a sentence in a context even though that proposition is not a part of nor an entailment of what was actually said (Gazdar, 1979: 38). It has two classes, conventional implicature and conversational implicature. The former refers to implicature that derives from the conventional feature of the word used in utterance. The latter arises from the flouting of the general conversational principles. Lyons (1995:272) states that:
‘the differences between them is that the former depends on something other than what is truth-conditional in the conversational use, or meaning of particular form of expression, whereas the latter derives from a set of mere general principle which regulate the proper conduct of conversation’
Based on Lyons’ opinion, it can be assumed that conventional implicature is more general than conversational implicature since everyone knows that the meaning of words that constitute an utterance is based on the convention of the community which uses the language itself.
Implicature can be resulted from the flouting of maxim of the cooperative principles. When a speaker exploits those maxims, he or she tries to hide something. The ‘hidden’ thing is the implied meaning of the conversation, Therefore this implied meaning is the conversational implicature.
Methodology
This research is a descriptive qualitative research since it tries to describe the language phenomenon descriptively without using statistics (Arikunto, 1993:195). The data are taken from the conversation occurred in the film The Sound of Music. The techniques of data collection are observing and note taking. Observing is done by watching and observing the features of language used in the movie. After observing the language, note taking is then made. The conversations which are indicated having the conversational implicatures are noted and collected. Data are then analyzed using heuristic analysis proposed by Leech (1983:41). Having noted the conversation, the researcher makes a hypothesis of the implicature carried by the utterances. Testing is then done by checking and comparing the meaning of the implicature and the context. In case, if the implicature is supported by the context, further interpretation can be made. If it fails, on the other hand, it must be started from the beginning. Below is the diagram of heuristic analysis.
Problem
Hypothesis
Testing
Failed
Success
Interpretation
Analysis and Discussion
The analysis of this research is divided into four parts based on the maxims of cooperative principles which are flouted by each speaker.
The flouting of maxim of quality and its conversational implicature
The maxim of quality contains an advice for the speaker to give their contribution one that is true. The flouting of maxim of quality results the conversational implicature ‘mocking’ as shown by below dialogue.
(9) CONTEXT: Maria asks the von trapp’s children to mention their names one by one and she also asks them to mention ther age as well. Louisa, one of these children, tries to mock Maria by mentioning that her name is brigita.
Maria : Well, Now that there’s just us. Would you please tell me all your names again and how old you are.
Liesl : I’m Liesl. I’m 16 years old. And I don’t need a governess.
Maria : I’m glad you told me, Liesl. We’ll just be good friend.
Friedrich : I’m Friedrich. I’m 14. I’m impossible.
Maria : Really? Who told you that?
Friedrich : Fraulein Josephine. Four governesses ago.
Louisa : I’m Brigita.
Maria : You did’t tell me how old you are Louisa?
After introducing Maria to his seven children, Captain Von Trapp leaves Maria with them. He hopes Maria can get along with his children. These children usually mock their new governess to make her feel uneasy and then they hope their governess will leave them soon. They always do that because they never like their governess. When Louisa says that her name is Brigita, Maria knows that Louisa tries to mock her. Fortunately Maria still remembers that her name is Louisa so Maria says ‘You did not tell me how old you are, Louisa?’ Louisa utterance is said to flout the maxim of quality since she does not give true contribution, specifically she says something that she believes to be false. By giving the false contribution, Louisa flouts the maxim of quality that result the conversational implicature, which is ‘mocking’.
Based on Seale’s classification of speech acts, ‘mocking’ is grouped into expresives. These speech acts, as the word says, express an inner state of the speaker which says nothing about the world. By mentioning the wrong name, Louisa is trying to mock Maria and mocking is a kind of speech acts that does not change anything in the real world. It just a kind of expression of anyone’s feeling. Louisa wants to express that she does not like Maria. She thinks that all the Von Trapp children do not need any governess since all that they need is their father’s love and attention. Captain Von Trapp is a very busy man, moreover, after his wife’s death; he tries to entertain himself by travelling and leaving his children behind. He often leaves his children with their governess.
Using the same technique, the researcher finds other implicatures caused by the flouting of maxim of quality. They are: ‘mocking’, ‘entertaining’, ‘protecting’, ‘flirting’, and ‘pretending’. Based on Searle’s classification of speech acts, the researcher classifies those implicatures into: (1) representatives: ‘pretending’ and ‘protecting’; (2) directive: ‘flirting’; (3) expressive: ‘mocking’ and ‘entertaining’.
The flouting of maxim of quantity and its conversational implicature
The maxim of quantity consists of two information for the speaker to make their contribution as informative as is required and not to make their contribution more informative than is required. The flouting of maxim of quantity results the conversational implicature ‘refusing’ as shown by below dialogue.
(41) Context : when the von trapp family tries to secretly escape from Austria in the middle of the night, herr zellr, who wants to take captain von trapp to he navy, appeares.
Herr Zeller : I’ve not asked you where you and your family are going nor have you asked me why I’m here.
Captain von Trapp : Apparently we both suffer from a deplorable lack of curiosity.
Herr Zeller : You never answer the telegram from the Admiral of the Navy of the third Reich.
Captain von Trapp : I was under impression, Herr Zeller, that the contents of telegrams in Austria are private. At least the Austrian I know.
Herr Zeller : I have my orders to take you to Bremerheaven tonight where you will accept your commission.
Captain von Trapp : I’m afraid that’s going to be quite impossible…. You see, we…all of us, the entire family, will b singing in the festival tonight. As a matter of fact, we’re going now. We couldn’t possibly let them down now.
Captain von Trapp’s utterance ‘I’m afraid that’s going to be quite impossible…. You see, we…all of us, the entire family, will be singing in the festival tonight. As a matter of fact, we’re going now. We couldn’t possibly let them down’ is said to flout the maxim of quantity. This maxim states that a speaker must give their contribution as informative as is required and not to make their contribution more informative than is required. The Captain’s utterance is too much since Herr Zeller’s question is only asking if he can take The Captain to Bremerheaven or not. Herr Zeller, inevitably, hopes that the Captain’s answer is yes or no. In fact, the captain gives a long answer by saying that he and his family are going to join the singing festival in Austria and he just can not let his family down by cancelling their plan. His long answer is giving more informative contribution than is required. Therefore his utterance is flouting the maxim of quantity. If he only answers yes or no he will not flout the maxim of quantity. Since he flouts the maxim of quantity, he hides something. This hidden message is the conversational implicature. The conversational implicature caused by the flouting of maxim of quantity is ‘refusing’. Captain Von Trapp refuses to be taken into Bremerheaven to join the The Austrian Navy. Joining The Austrian Navy means joining The German Navy. Captain Von Trapp, who loves his country very much, feels that he is not a Germany; therefore he refuses to join German Navy. In 1936, German Navy started the World War II and that time was the golden period of Hitler’s reign. Besides, in 1938, German had a good bilateral relationship with Austria since both countries tried to make liberalism come true in their countries. The German authority would do anything, included threatening the soldiers’ family, to force their soldier joining the troop. Captain von Trapp refuses to cooperate with German Navy since he does not really want to take part in World War II. By giving a long answer on Her Zeller’s question, it can be concluded that Captain Von Trapp refuses Zeller’s offering.
Using the same technique, the researcher finds other implicature caused by the flouting of maxim of quality that is ‘showing’. Both ‘showing’ and ‘refusing’ are grouped into representative.
The flouting of maxim of relevance and its conversational implicature
The maxim of relevance consists of an instruction to the speaker to be relevant. It means the speaker must give relevant contribution in conversation. The flouting of maxim of relevant results the conversational implicature ‘asking other to go’ as shown by below dialogue.
(30) CONTEXT: The Reverend mother asks Maria why she suddenly leaves the von trapp family without asking pemission. At first Maria tries not to tell the reverend mother the truth but finally she makes up her mind and she tells the truth.
Reverend Mother : Tell me what happened?
Maria : I was frightened.
Reverend Mother : Frightened? Were they unkind to you?
Maria : Oh no..I was confused. I felt… I’ve never felt this way before. I couldn’t stay. I knew that here I’d be away from it. I’d be safe.
Reverend Mother : Maria, our abbey is not to be used as an escape. What is it you can’t face?
Maria : I can’t face him again.
Reverend Mother : Him? ….Thank you Sister Margaretha.
By saying ‘Him? ….Thank you Sister Margaretha’, Reverend Mother asks Sister Margaretha to leave her alone with Maria. The maxim of relevance consists of an advice to the speaker that he or she should give relevant contribution in the conversation. At that time, Maria who has been a governess in the Von Trapp family suddenly leaves that family without saying goodbye. She tries to escape from the reality that she may be in love with Captain Von Trapp. She thinks that if she runs from that house to the Abbey she will be safe. Maria is not supposed to fall in love with Captain Von Trapp since she is in the middle of becoming a sister in the Abbey. By leaving the family she thinks that she can hide from the reality. When Reverend Mother says that Abbey was not a place to hide, finally Maria wants to tell her the truth. When Maria goes to the Reverend Mother’s office, she is accompanied by Sister Margaretha. Knowing that Maria really wants to tell the truth, Reverend Mother asks Sister Margaretha to leave her with Maria by saying ‘Him? ….Thank you Sister Margaretha’. In fact, Reverend Mother wants to ask Sister Margaretha to leaver her but she says ‘thank you’.If we want to ask other person to leave us, we can say it directly, ‘please, leave us alone’, for example. Saying ‘thank you’ for asking other to go can be said irrelevant. In a short, we can say that Reverend Mother’s utterance is flouting the maxim of relevance. Flouting maxim of relevance causes conversational implicature, which is ‘asking other to go’. By asking Sister Margaretha to go, Reverend Mother wants to know why Maria leaves the Von Trapp family.
Using the same technique, the researcher finds other implicatures caused by the flouting of maxim of relevance. They are: ‘stating jokes’, ‘refusing’, ‘keeping a secret’ and ‘asking other to go’. Using Searle classification, the researcher classifies those implicatures into: (1) representatives: ‘stating jokes’ and ‘refusing’; (2) directive: ‘keeping a secret’ and ‘asking other to go’.
The Maxim of Manner Flouting and its Conversational Implicature
The maxim of manner contains suggestion for the speaker to avoid obscurity expession, avoid ambiguity, be brief and be orderly. The flouting of maxim of manner results in the conversational implicature ‘calming down’ as shown by below dialogue.
(18) Context: Maria dan the Von Trapp children gatheres in Maria’s bed room since the children are afraid of the heavy rain and the sound of thunder and lightning.
( The sound of thunder and lightning….)
Martha : Why does it do that?
Maria : Well….the lightning talks to the thunder and the thunder answer.
Martha : But the lightning must be nasty.
Maria : Not really.
Martha : Why does the thunder get so angry? It makes me want to cry.
(The sound of thunder and lightning again……..)
Maria : Whenever I’m feeling unhappy, I just try to think of nice things.
Brigita : What kind of things?
Maria : Oh, well. Let me see.. nice things…daffodil’s, green meadows, stars, raindrops…….
Conversational implicature arises from the flouting of maxim of manner is ‘calming down’. When heavy rain falls, the Von Trapp children gather in Maria’s bed room because they are very afraid. Hearing the sound of thunder and lighting, Martha, asks a question to Maria why it happens. Maria, undoubtedly, explains that the lightning and the thunder are having a conversation, so they talk each other. Maria’s answer is absolutely incorrect since her answer is ambiguous. In fact, when thunderstorm happens, thunder happens after lightning has occurred. In short way we may say that thunder and lightning are not having a conversation. What really happens is lightning transferred faster than thunder does. If Maria explains the phenomenon scientifically, she thinks that Martha will not understand it. She tries to explain it in a very simple way that is probably easily understood by young children. By giving this ambiguous explanation, Maria is said to flout the maxim of manner since this maxim gives suggestion to the speaker to avoid ambiguity. Flouting the maxim of manner causes conversational implicature. Conversational implicature which occurs from this flouting is ‘calming down’. By giving that kind of explanation, Maria is trying to calm down the children who are afraid of the thunderstorm. Maria knows that the children are afraid so she tries to calm them down.
Using the same technique, the researcher finds other implicatures caused by the flouting of maxim of manner. They are: ‘refusing’, ‘accepting an offer’, calming down’, ‘entertaining’, and ‘pleasing’. Based on Searle classification, those implicatures can be classified into: (1) representative: refusing; (2) commisives: accepting an offer; (3) expressive: calming down, entertaining, and pleasing.
Closing Remark
From the above explanation, it can be concluded that the conversational implicature happened as a result of the flouting of maxim are as follows:
(1) representative : protecting, refusing, pretending, and stating a joke
(2) directive: flirting, asking other to go, keeping a secret
(3) commissives: accepting an offer
(4) Expressives: mocking, entertaining, calming down, and pleasing.
Declarations are not found in the analysis of the conversational implicatures of this movie.
References
Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2002. Prosedur Penelitian Praktik. Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta.
Departemen Dalam Negeri, Badan Pendidikan dan Latihan. Struktur Politik dan Sistem Kepartaian Di Berbagai Manca Negara. 1976. Jakarta: Percetakan Negara Republik Indonesia.
Departemen Penerangan Republik Indonesia. 1989. Mengenal Eropa. Jakarta : Percetakan Negara Republik Indonesia.
Gazdar, Gerald. 1979. Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, And Logical Form. Florida : Academis Press.INC
Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and Conversation dalam Davis S. Paragmatics: A Reader. New York: Oxford University Press.
Halliday, M.A.K, and Ruqaiya Hasan, 1989. Language, Context, and Text: Aspect of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Victoria: Deakin University
Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman
Levinson. 1991. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lyons, Jhon.1995. Semantics. Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mey, Jacob L. 1994. Pragmatics: An Introduction. Oxford UK & Cambridge USA: Blackwell.
Noth Winfried, 1990. Handbook of Semiotics. Indiana: Indiana University Press.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar