“the little rascals save the day”movie

AN IMPLICATURE ANALYSIS IN THE
CONVERSATION OF “THE LITTLE RASCALS SAVE
THE DAY”MOVIE
A GRADUATING PAPER
Submitted to the Board of Examiners as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degree of Sarjana Pendidikan Islam (S.Pd.I)
English Education Department of Teacher Training and Education Faculty
State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Salatiga
By:
Chusnul Chotimah
113 10 026
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY
STATE INSTITUTE FOR ISLAMIC STUDIES (IAIN) SALATIGA
2015
i
DECLARATION
In the name of Allah, the most gracious.
Hereby the writer declares that this graduating paper is written by the writer
herself. It does not contain any materials which have been published by other people
and other people‘s idea except the information from the references.
This declaration is written by the writer to be understood.
Salatiga, March 5th, 2015
The writer
Chusnul Chotimah
NIM. 113 10 026
ii
iii
iv
MOTTO
―There's always a first time for everything‖
Melissa de la Cruz, Blue Bloods
v
DEDICATION
To
My beloved Dad (Mr. Sutrisno) and Mom (Mrs. Daryatun)
My lovely Brother (Aziz)
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
In the name of Allah, the most gracious, the most merciful, the Lord of
universe. The writer would like to express her grateful to the almighty Allah SWT for
his blessing, chance, and guidance to finish this graduating paper as one of the
requirement for Sarjana Kependidikan Islam in English Education Department of
IAIN Salatiga in 2015.
Shalawat and Salam are always sent to my beloved prophet Rasulullah SAW
for his unparallel effort and sacrifices to show the right path and spread the light of
salvation to all mankind and universe.
However, this success would not be achieved without those supports,
guidance, advice, help, and encouragement from individual and institution, and the
writer somehow realize that an appropriate moment for me to deepest gratitude for:
1. Dr. H. Rahmat Hariyadi, M.Pd. as the Rector of State Institute for Islamic
Studies (IAIN) Salatiga.
2. Suwardi, M.Pd. as the Dean of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of
IAIN Salatiga.
3. Noor Malihah, Ph.D. as the Head of English Education Department of IAIN
Salatiga and as the writer counselor‘s who has educated, supported, directed
and given the writer advice, suggestion and recomendation for this graduating
paper from beginning until the end. Thanks for your patience and care.
4. All lecturers of IAIN Salatiga who have bestowed their knowledge to the
writer, especially the lectures of English Department. Thanks a lot for the very
invaluable education.
5. All staffs of IAIN Salatiga who have helped the writer in processing
administration.
vii
6. My beloved parents. My father Mr. Sutrisno and my mother Mrs. Daryatun
who always give me support encouragement, finance, love, trust, advice, and
everlasting praying. I love you and Allah always blesses you.
7. My beloved brother Nur Azis and all of my family, thanks for your
encouragement, and praying to Allah.
8. My best friends the Ponk (Tika Rahmawati, Jayanti, Nur Faizah, Choirin Tria
Kartika, Laely Wahidatul, Layla Nurjannah, Malihatun Badroh, Lia Febriyani,
Sariyatul Hidayah) Nur Efiana, Sari Marzuqoh, Siti Umatul M and Dyah
Saraswati thanks for your helping and support.
9. My friends in TBI 2010 especially TBI A keep on fire.
10. My dear Little Foot ACEGU (Yumay, Mami Ari, Etika, Galih) and my sisters
(Luthfi, Sani) who always give me support and motivation.
11. Many people who have helped the writer that I cannot mention one by one,
thanks all.
Salatiga, March 5th, 2015
The writer
Chusnul Chotimah
NIM. 113 10 026
viii
ABSTRACT
Chotimah, Chusnul: 2015. ―An Implicature Analysis in the Conversation of ―The
Little Rascals Save the Day‖ Movie‖. Graduating Paper of English
Education Department. State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Salatiga.
This study aims to elaborate the implied meaning in the utterances of the
conversation in ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie and disclose the effect of
using Conversational Implicature. The method used in analyzing the data in this study
is descriptive method, which describes and explaines the meaning of each utterance
which is delivered for attention in context as a whole, rather than analyzed a
particular sentence separately without a background conversation. From the analysis
conducted, the writer finds some utterances which is implied by the speakers and has
more than one meaning in speaking. The meaning can be understood if the speakers
and listeners have a background in speech and conventional meanings of words
which is used. The object of this study is 20 utterances of conversational implicature
in ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie.
The writer analyses the violating of conversation principles which cause
implicature occur in the conversation. There are cooperative principle, politeness
principle and ironical principle. The violating of cooperative principles are the most
dominant on the movie ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ conversations. There are so
many irrelevant utterance, obscurity expression, unnecessary information and untruth
information in the conversation. In addition, the fact shows that the social degree in
community may influence the speakers in violating or obeying the conversation
principles.
Keyword: Implicature, Conversational Implicature, Conversation
Cooperative principle, Politeness Principle, Ironical Principle.
ix
principle,
TABLE OF CONTENT
TITLE PAGE ..........................................................................................
DECLARATION .....................................................................................
ATTENTIVE COUNSELOR .................................................................
CERTIFICATION PAGE ......................................................................
MOTTO ...................................................................................................
DEDICATION .........................................................................................
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ......................................................................
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................
TABLE OF CONTENT ..........................................................................
LIST OF TABLE ....................................................................................
i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
ix
x
xiv
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ...........................................................
1.1. Background of the Study ...................................................................
1.2. Problem of the Study .........................................................................
1.3. Objectives of the Study ......................................................................
1.4. Benefit of the study ............................................................................
1.5. Limitation of the Study ......................................................................
1.6. Clarification of Key Term ..................................................................
1.7. Paper Outline .....................................................................................
1
1
5
5
6
6
7
7
CHAPTER II THEORETICAL REVIEW ..........................................
2.1. Pragmatics ..........................................................................................
2.2. Implicature .........................................................................................
2.3. Conversational Implicature ................................................................
2.3.1. Cooperative Principle ..............................................................
2.3.1.1. Maxim of Quantity .....................................................
2.3.1.2. Maxim of Quality .......................................................
2.3.1.3. Maxim of Relevant ....................................................
2.3.1.4. Maxim of Manner ......................................................
2.3.2. Politeness Principle .................................................................
2.3.2.1. Types of Politeness (Yule, 1996) ...............................
2.3.2.1.1. Positive Politeness .....................................
2.3.2.1.2. Negative Politeness ...................................
2.3.2.2. Maxim in Politeness Principle ...................................
2.3.2.2.1. Maxim of Tact ...........................................
9
9
12
14
16
17
17
18
19
19
20
20
22
24
24
x
2.3.2.2.2. Maxim of Generosity .................................
2.3.2.2.3. Maxim of Approbation ..............................
2.3.2.2.4. Maxim of Modesty ....................................
2.3.2.2.5. Maxim of Agreement ................................
2.3.2.2.6. Maxim of Sympathy ..................................
2.3.3. Ironical Principle .....................................................................
2.4. Conventional Implicature ...................................................................
2.5. Movie .................................................................................................
2.5.1. Implicature in Movie ...............................................................
26
26
27
28
28
29
30
31
32
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY .......................................................
3.1. Type of Study .....................................................................................
3.2. Object of the Study ............................................................................
3.3. Data Sources ......................................................................................
3.4. Technique of Collecting Data ............................................................
3.5. Technique of Analyzing Data ............................................................
3.6. Movie Review ....................................................................................
3.6.1. Synopsis ...................................................................................
35
35
37
37
38
40
41
43
CHAPTER IV DATA ANALYSIS ........................................................
4.1. Data Presentation ...............................................................................
4.2. Cooperative Principle .........................................................................
4.3. Politeness Principle ............................................................................
4.4. Ironical Principle .................................................................................
46
46
49
53
56
CHAPTER V CLOSURE .......................................................................
5.1. Conclusion .........................................................................................
5.2. Suggestion ..........................................................................................
5.2.1. For the Reader .........................................................................
5.2.2. For the Future Researcher .......................................................
57
57
60
60
61
REFERENCES ........................................................................................
CURRICULUM VITAE .........................................................................
APPENDIXES .........................................................................................
62
64
65
xi
LIST OF TABLES
1. Table 3.1. Table instrument ..........................................................
40
2. Table 3.2. Information Related to the Movie ................................
42
3. Table 4.1. Type of Violated Conversation Principles ...................
46
4. Table 4.2. Types of Cooperative Principles ..................................
49
5. Table 4.3. Types of Politeness Principles .....................................
54
xii
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the Study
Language is one of the important things for human life. Language is a media
connector among people. People use language to communicate to others, for example
to give a greeting, ask permission or to ask something. People spend much more time
in communicating than they realize. However, they sometimes do not aware that
when they communicate they reveal something deeper through their utterances.
Understanding how the process of communication works is equally important to how
to have good communication skill.
On the other hand, the communication or conversation among the people does
not always go well. Sometimes there is any lie, ambiguity, irrelevant or
uninformative conversation which creates confusion even misunderstanding among
the participants.
In there the writer gives an example how the conversation is going well
because of the speaker and the hearer can understand and match their interpretation
about what they talk
[1]
Husband
: ―Where are the car keys?‖
Wife
: ―They are on the table in the hall.‖
2
In example [1] the wife has answered clearly and truthfully, has given just the right
information and has directly addressed her husband‘s goal in asking the question. She
has said precisely what she meant, no more and no less.
Regarding to the above statement, people have to interpret what the speaker‘s
saying because the speaker probably has different sense in their utterances, and in
pragmatic it is called as implicature. And since this case exists in a conversational
area, it is than called as conversational implicature, conversational implicature
concern the way we understand an utterance in conversation in accordance with what
we expect to hear. Yule (1996: 40) illustrates the use of conversational implicature in
example [2]
[2]
Charlene
: ―I hope you brought the bread and the cheese.‖
Dexter
: ―Ah, I brought the bread.‖
From example [2] Charlene assumed that Dexter brought bread and cheese,
although Dexter did not mention cheese explicitly in his answer.
In example [2], the writer sees that, it is sometimes necessary to interpret what
the people say. This is because there is an implicit message that the speaker want to
say. To understand the case in example [2], the writer can analyze it through
pragmatics.
Conversation may happen in every activity in human life, just like in their
daily activity, in a meeting, in the class, in the street, also in the movie. In this study
3
the writer would like to look at the conversations which happen in a movie. As we
know that most people in the world love movies such as humor, scary, action, drama,
love, war, or others. It can express someone‘s thought and meaning sense. But
sometimes, there are some conversations of the movie that make someone confused
of the speaker‘s statement. In a movie, many utterances have different meaning.
Therefore we have to understand what the conversational purposes are. Besides that,
understanding the meaning of conversation is needed by viewer to avoid
misunderstanding.
Before this, Lestari (2013) presents considering the study that having
similarity to this study. Lestari‘s study is entitled ―The Analysis of Conversational
Implicature in the Movie Script of Despicable Me‖. She investigates the implicature
existing in a movie. She collects the main data from utterance. In her conclusion, she
presents several the type of conversational implicature based on cooperative principle
used in movie. She concludes that the cooperative principle is important to
understand the movie.
Following that study this study is concerned with investigating the meanings
and the implicatures that might appear in the film script of ‗The Little Rascals Save
the Day‘. The Little Rascals Save the Day is 2014 American comedy film released by
Universal Pictures. The film is an adaptation of Hal Roach's Our Gang, a series of
short films of the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s (many of which were broadcast on
television as The Little Rascals) which centered around the adventures of a group of
4
neighborhood children1. With the existence of some implicatures that appear in the
script, the writer feels interested in studying deeper about the implicatures for the
sake of clarity about the meaning implied in sentence or conversation. Since
implicatures that often appears in film possibly will not be understood by the movie
goers.
Therefore, the writer looks at the conversational implicature which are on The
Little Rascals Save the Day manuscript and the violations. The writer, then, conducts
a study entitled ―An Implicature Analysis in the Conversation of ―The Little Rascals
Save the Day‖ Movie‖.
1.2. Problem of the Study
Based on the background of study presented above, this study is conducted to
answer the following questions:
1. What are the types of violated conversation principles found in the movie
script ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖?
2. What is the most dominant violated conversation principle found in the movie
script ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖?
3. What is the contextual meaning of the conversational implicature used in the
movie script ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖?
1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Rascals_Save_the_Day
(last accessed in 11 September 2014)
5
1.3. Objectives of the Study
Based on the problem of the study above, the objectives of the study can be
shown in the following sentences:
1. To identify the types of violated conversation principles found in the movie
script ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖.
2. To identify the most dominant violated conversation principle found in the
movie script ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖.
3. To describe the contextual meaning of the conversational implicature used in
the movie script ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖.
1.4. Benefits of the Study
The writer hopes that this study give contributions in pragmatic study
especially implicature. The findings of the study are expected to be one of references
and alternative information about how to apply pragmatic study especially
implicature theory in the real field. Since this study is focused on types of implicature
namely conversational implicature, the results of the study are expected to provide
more exploration toward conversational implicature in the movie`s script and provide
deeper analysis toward the types of conversational implicature which exists in the
movie`s script. In other word, the results of this study are expected to provide and
enrich the conversational implicature study from different phenomenon and object.
6
Then, the results of this study are also expected to fill the gap of the previous related
study.
Furthermore, the writer hopes that this study will raise the reader`s awareness
and understanding of predicting that conveyed meaning. Therefore, they will achieve
a successful conversation.
1.5. Limitation of the Research
This study will be undertaken within the scope of pragmatic study focusing on
implicatures that appear in the film script ‗The Little Rascals Save the Day‘. This
study is limited to ‗The Little Rascals Save the Day‘ movie, which was released in
2014. Implicatures which occur in ‗The Little Rascals Save the Day‘ become the
object of investigation and the utterances spoken by the main character.
1.6. Clarification of Key Term
1.6.1. Implicature
An utterance can imply a proposition (a statement) that is not
part of the utterance and that does not follow as a necessary
consequence of the utterance. (Grice, 1975)
7
1.6.2. Conversational Implicature
A conversational implicature is, therefore, something which
is implied in conversation, that is, something which is left implicit in
actual language use (Mey, 1983: 45).
1.6.3. Movie
Movie is a sequence of picture projected on a screen from a
developed and prepared film especially with an accompanying sound
track. (Webster`s Dictionary, 2004: 654)
1.7. Paper Outline
As guidance for either writer in writing the paper or reader on whole content of
the paper, the writer needs to set up paper outline. This study consist of five chapters,
those are following: Chapter I is introduction that discusses background of the study,
problems of the study, benefits of the study, limitation of the study, clarification of
key terms and paper outline. Chapter II presents theoretical review. It consists of
discussion about the conversational implicature, the theories of conversation
principles. Chapter III discusses the methodology of this study, including the general
method of this study, the procedure of the study, technique of collection data, and
technique of data analysis. Chapter IV presents the analysis of the data. Finally, in
chapter V the writer gives the summary that includes conclusion and suggestion. The
last part is reference and appendix.
8
CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL REVIEW
In this chapter, the writer will discuss several related theories which will be
used to analyze the implicature in this study. In addition, this chapter also discusses
about the definition of movie. This chapter will attach some definition and
description as theoretical foundation of the study.
In section 2.1, the writer will discuss about an overview of pragmatics. Next,
the writer will discuss about the general idea of an implicature in section 2.2. In
section 2.3, the writer will present the conversational implicature and its principles. In
section 2.4, the writer will discuss about conventional implicature. For next in section
2.5 the writer will explain about movie and implicature in a movie will the writer
discuss in the last section.
2.1. Pragmatics
In studying about language, we will meet two branches of language science,
semantics and pragmatics. Both of that sciences concern at language but in different
side. Semantics refers to the construction of meaning language, while pragmatics
refers to meaning construction in specific interactional context. In other word,
semantics is study of word meaning and sentence meaning without any relation to
context whereas pragmatics also means as the study of utterance meaning, sentences
9
which are used in communication, between speaker and a hearer (Wagiman, 2008:
63). Context is the thing that makes semantics and pragmatics different at their basic.
If you see a notice like ―drink to your fill‖ on a library shelf, you definitely
know what each of the words means, and you also know what the notice means.
However, you are not likely to think that the notice is asking you to drink some
natural liquid water. It is about an advice to read as many books as possible. What
you have done is to use the meaning of the words in combination with the context in
which they occur and try to decode the meaning which the writer of the notice
intended to communicate.
Speakers and writers often mean much more than they say or write and expect
their hearers to understand them. They will generally assume that some aspects of
meanings that are not expressed in words are can be concluded from the context. This
assumption is based on their shared environment, values, social conventions or world
view which guides them to interpret meanings beyond words or grammatical
structures. Ultimately the goal is to rightly interpret the speakers intended meaning.
The notion of the speaker‘s or writer‘s intended meaning is a very crucial element in
the study of pragmatics. And as you will see in this study, traditional pragmatics is all
about investigating the speaker or writer intended meaning rather than what is
expressed in words.
On the other hand, Parker (1946: 11) states that pragmatics is the study of
how language is used to communicate. It has, consequently, more to do with the
10
analysis of what people mean by their utterances than what the words or phrases in
those utterances might mean by themselves.
Different from Parker, Leech and Short (1981: 290) agree that pragmatics is
the investigation into that aspect of meaning which is derived not from the formal
properties of words, but from the way in which utterances are used and how they
relate to the context in which they are uttered. Leech (1983: 6) defines pragmatics as
the study of meaning in relation to speech situations. The speech situation enables the
speaker use language to achieve a particular effect on the mind of the hearer.
While Leech looks at pragmatics as related to speech situation, Levinson
(1983: 9) views pragmatics as the study, where language and context are related and
relevant to the writing of grammar. Notice in this definition that interest is mainly in
the inter-relation of language and principles of language use that are context
dependent.
Similarly, Yule (1996: 4) looks pragmatics also as a relation between
linguistic form or grammar and the user. However Yule emphasizes that the meaning
of the communication by the speaker or writer, or the meaning of the listener or
reader‘s interpretation is the main focus.
In more detail, Yule (1996: 129-133) argues that the coverage of pragmatics
includes presupposition, implicature, entailment, speech act, and deixis2. From the
definition above, the writer concludes that pragmatics is the study about how to
2
The writer will not discuss further on this subject, the reader can read George Yule‘s ―Pragmatics‖
for more details.
11
understanding the meaning of utterances or sentences not just base on the lexical
meaning but it is deeper depending on the context. So, pragmatics is an approach
used to explore the way of listener to interfere an utterance that is uttered by the
speakers in order to arrive at an interpretation of the speaker‘s intended meaning.
2.2. Implicature
In conversation, very often the speaker does not express the meaning
explicitly. The meaning is left implicit and the hearer has to unfold the meaning on
the basis of the linguistic input and knowledge of the world.
For theories of implicature, this study will follow what Grice has argued as
the writer has discussed above.
Grice (1975) points out that an utterance can imply a proposition (a statement)
that is not part of the utterance and that does not follow as a necessary consequence
of the utterance. Grice called such implied statements implicature. Consider example
[1] from Parker (1946: 21) below:
[1]
John
: ―Uncle chester is coming over for dinner tonight.‖
Marry : ―I guess I‘d better lock up the liquor.‖
In example [1], observer of this interchange might draw the inference that
uncle Chester has a drinking problem. Thus, in Grice‘s terms, we might say that
Marry‘s utterance raises the implicature that uncle Chester has a drinking problem.
12
It is important to make three points about implicature. First, the implicature is not part
of utterance. Second, the implicature does not follow as a necessary consequence
from the utterance. Third, it is possible for an utterance to raise more than one
implicature, or to raise different implicatures if uttered in different contexts.
That something in conversation must be more than just the word mean, it is an
additional conveyed meaning, called an implicature (Yule, 1996: 35). It is attained
when a speaker intends to communicate more than just what the word mean. An
implicature is a result of a listener making an inference as the most likely meaning an
utterance may have in a given context. Implicatures actually occur when the
conversational maxims are violated. Yule (1996: 36) added that implicatures are
primary examples of more being communicated than is said, but in order for them to
be interpreted, some basic cooperative principle must first be assumed to be in
operation.
While discussing implicature, Grice (1989, cited in Mey, 1998: 365) proposes
two types of implicature: (i) conversational implicature and (ii) conventional
implicature. The writer will discuss each of the two in turn in the next section.
2.3. Conversational implicature
According to Grice (1989), utterance interpretation is not a matter of decoding
messages, but rather involves:
13
1. Taking the meaning of the sentences together with contextual information,
2. Using inference rules
3. Working out what the speaker means on the basis of the assumption that the
utterance conforms to the maxims.
The main advantage of this approach from Grice‘s point of view is that it
provides a pragmatic explanation for a wide range of phenomena, especially for
conversational implicatures- a kind of extra meaning that is not literally contained in
the utterance.
According to brown and Levinson (1987) and Yule (1996), conversational
implicature is derived from a general principle of conversation plus a number of
maxims which speaker normally obeys. It‘s mean that conversation principles have a
big influence for conversational implicature.
Grice (1989, cited in Mey, 1998: 365) divides conversational implicature into
two kinds. Generalized conversational implicature and particularized conversational
implicature.
Generalized conversational implicatures occur without reference to any
particular features of the context (Levinson 1983: 126), it means special background
knowledge or inferences are not required in calculating the additional conveyed
meaning. Further Levinson divides generalized implicature into Q-implicature, Iimplicature, and M-implicature.
14
Q-implicature is based on Grice‘s first sub maxim of quantity it means you
have to make your contribution as informative as required for the purpose of
communication. Next is I-implicature. It based on Grice‘s second sub maxim that is
do not make your contribution more informative than what is required, and the last
one is M-implicature is based on the third submaxims of manner it is to avoid
obscurity of expression, and avoid prolixity.
In contrast to generalized conversational implicature, particularized
conversational implicature is strongly tied to the particular features of the context.
The meaning is not always actually stated. It is derived from the violation or
flouting of the cooperative principle that consists of: be true, be brief, be relevant, and
be clear. The speaker violates one of the conversational maxims on purpose, and the
hearer has to interpret the meaning of the utterance on the basis of the violation of the
maxim, this kind of meaning is called a conversational maxim (Wagiman, 2008: 74).
Example [2] illustrates the use of conversational maxim (Wagiman, 2008: 75):
[2]
Teacher
: ―Could anyone of you assist me tomorrow at nine
o‘clock?
Student
: ―Tomorrow is sunday.‖
In example [2] about the conversation, the student, who is also a speaker,
violates the maxim of relevance. His answer to the teacher‘s question is not relevant,
and the meaning is left implicit. The meaning is unfolded by knowledge of the word
15
that Sunday is a holiday and nobody goes to the campus. The meaning of the
utterance is that the students cannot help the teacher on the next day.
There are some principles that work on how implicature appear in the
conversations. The writer will explain that principle in 3 sections, section 1 about
cooperative principle, section 2 is about politeness principle and the last section is
about irony principle.
2.3.1. Cooperative Principle
Conversational implicatures come about by the exploitation (apparent
flouting) or observation of the cooperative principle and a set of maxim, Grice (1989,
cited in Mey, 1998: 365).
Grice observes that when people talk they try to be ―cooperative‖ and attempt
to obey some ―cooperative principle‖ which demands that they make their
conversational contributions such as is required, at the stage where it occurred, by the
accepted purpose or direction of the talk in which they are engaged. The
conversational principle operates with some ―maxims‖ in the assumption that the
speaker does not say what is false, or irrelevant, or too much or too little. There 4
maxims related to cooperative principle as proposed by Grice (1989):
16
2.3.1.1. Maxim of Quantity
The maxim of quantity which has the principle of:
1. Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current
purposes of the conversation)
2. Do not make your contribution more informative than is required
Grundy (2000: 74) states that maxim of quantity as one of the cooperative
principles is concerned in giving the information as it is required and is not giving the
information more than it is required. The speakers just say the information needed, it
should not be less informative or more informative. Following grundy‘s idea about
maxim quantity, Wagiman (2008) illustrates the use of maxim quantity in example
[3]:
[3]
Mr. Steev
: ―what is the capital of Australia?‖
Mr. Swart
: ―Canberra. An elementary school student knows better
than you do.‖
In example [3] Mr. Swart flouts the maxim of quantity. He added unneeded
comment in his information.
2.3.1.2. Maxim of Quality
The meaning of maxim of quality is to try to make your contribution one that
is true. And there are some principles of the maxim of quality:
1. Do not say what you believe to be false
2. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence
17
Grundy (2000: 74) argues that maxim quality can be defined as truthful as
required. That means the speaker should inform the truth and they are not allowed to
say what they think false and give the statement that run short of proof. As what
Grundy argues about maxim quality, Wagiman (2008) illustrate the example of the
violating of maxim quality in example [4] below:
[4]
Lewis : ―Does tim drink spirits?‖
Ruben : ―He has one million bottles of brandy, whisky, gin and rum.
Ruben violates the maxim of quality to exaggerate, he is not answer the
question shortly, but he prefers to added something useless, make his answer
hyperbole.
2.3.1.3. Maxim of Relevant
For maxim of relevant you have to be relevant, your contributions should be
such that are relevant to the conversation).
Grundy (2000: 74) states that maxim of relevance is fulfilled when the
speaker give information that is relevant to the topic proceeding. Therefore, each of
the speaker or hearer must be relevant to the topic of conversation. Wagiman (2008)
state the illustration of maxim relevant in example [5]:
[5]
July
: ―Could you lend me 500 dollars?‖
Agnes : ―Am I billionaire?‖
18
Agnes violates the maxim of relevance, be relevant, in order to be forthright
that she cannot lend July 500 dollars.
2.3.1.4. Maxim of manner
Maxim of manner is when one tries to be as clear, as brief, and as orderly as
one can in what one says, and where one avoids obscurity and ambiguity.
Wagiman (2008) illustrate the violating of maxim of manner on purpose to be
polite in example [6]:
[6]
Max
: ―I hear you went to the opera last night; how was the
lead singer?‖
Be
: ―The singer produced a series of sounds corresponding
closely to the score of an aria from rigoletto.‖
From example [6] we can see b disobeys the maxim of manner, thereby
implying that the singer wasn‘t very good.
2.3.2. The Politeness Principles
The other principle of conversational implicature is politeness principles.
According to Yule (1996: 60), politeness can be defined as the means employed to
show awareness of another person‘s face. In this sense, politeness can be
accomplished in situations of social distance or closeness. Showing awareness for
another person‘s face when the others seem socially distant is often described in
19
terms of respect. Showing the equivalent awareness when the other is socially close is
often described in terms of friendliness, ―camaraderie‖ or solidarity.
Kasper (cited in Nanda et al, 2012: 125) clarifies that conversational view
sees politeness principles as a complement to Grice‘s cooperative principles. The
cooperative principle controls conversation whose purpose is optimally efficient
transmission of information. Lakoff (1989: 64) contends that the principle of
politeness addresses relational goals, which mainly serve to reduce friction in
personal interaction.
2.3.2.1. Types of Politeness (Yule, 1996)
2.3.2.1.1. Positive Politeness
Positive politeness which deals with face saving act which is
concerned with the person‘s positive face. This tends to show
solidarity, emphasizes that both speakers want the same thing and they
both have a common goal.
Positive politeness usually is about attends to the hearer, avoid
disagreement, assume agreement, and hedge opinion. Positive
Politeness makes the hearer feel good about themselves, interests, or
possessions. (Usually audiences are familiar to one another) example:
be optimistic, inclusive, use in group markers, joke.
In addition to hedging and attempts to avoid conflict, some
strategies of positive politeness include statements of friendship,
20
solidarity, compliments, and the following examples from Brown and
Levinson (1987):

Attend to hearer‘s interests, needs, wants
You look sad. Can I do anything?

Use solidarity in-group identity markers
Heh, mate, can you lend me a dollar?

Be optimistic
I‟ll just come along, if you don‟t mind.

Include both speaker and hearer in activity
If we help each other, I guess, we‟ll both sink or swim
in this course.

Offer or promise
If you wash the dishes, I‟ll vacuum the floor.

Exaggerate interest in hearer and his interests
That‟s a nice haircut you got; where did you get it?

Avoid Disagreement
Yes, it‟s rather long; not short certainly.

Joke
Wow, that‟s a whopper!
Yule (1996: 64) gives an example about positive politeness in
example [7] below:
21
[7]
a. How about letting me use your pen?
b. Hey, buddy, I‘d appreciate it if you‘d let me use your
pen.
From example [7] a positive politeness strategy leads the
requester to appeal to a common goal, and even friendship, via
expression such those in [7].
2.3.2.1.2. Negative Politeness
Negative politeness can be defined as a face saving act which
is oriented to the person‘s negative face which tends to show
difference. Risdiyanto (2011) also states that a person‘s negative face
is the need to be independent, to have freedom for action, and not be
imposed on by others. Yule (1996: 64-65) gives an example about
negative politeness statement in example [8] bellow:
[8]
a. Could you lend me a pen?
b. I‘m sorry to bother you, but can I ask you for a pen
or something?
c. I know you‘re busy, but might I ask you if you-em—if you happen to have an extra pen that I could,
you know—eh—maybe borrow?
In example [8], the most typical form for negative politeness
used is question containing a modal verb such as [8a]. [8b] contain
22
expression of apology for the imposition. More elaborate negative
politeness work sometimes be heard in extended talk, often with
hesitations, similar to that shown in [8c].
Negative Politeness presumes that the speaker will be imposing
on the listener and there is a higher potential for awkwardness or
embarrassment. Examples from Brown and Levinson (1987) include:

Be indirect
Would you know where Oxford Street is?

Use hedges or questions
Perhaps, he might have taken it, maybe.
Could you please pass the rice?

Be pessimistic
You couldn‟t find your way to lending me a thousand dollars,
could you?
So I suppose some help is out of the question, then?

Minimize the imposition
It‟s not too much out of your way, just a couple of blocks.

Use obviating structures, like nominalizations, passives, or
statements of general rules
I hope offense will not be taken.
Visitors sign the ledger.
23
Spitting will not be tolerated.

Apologize
I‟m sorry; it‟s a lot to ask, but can you lend me a thousand
dollars?

Use plural pronouns
We regret to inform you.
2.3.2.2. Maxims in Politeness Principle
Besides that, according to Leech (1983, cited in Risdiyanto. 2012), politeness
principles are distinguished into six maxims:
2.3.2.2.1. The Maxim of Tact
It requires the participants to minimize cost to other and
maximize benefit to other. This maxim implemented by directive /
impossitive and commissive utterances. The directive / impossitive
utterance is a form of utterance commonly used to show a command
either direct or indirect. This utterance can usually be found in some
utterances such as; inviting, commanding, ordering, advising, etc.
Meanwhile, the commissive utterance is the utterance functioning to
declare a promise or offer something. The purpose of this maxim is to
reduce the words that are not polite and assume negative and
detrimental to the listener, but to say that positive remarks and polite.
24
Example:
Marissa
: ―Can I finish getting dressed, please? Thank
you.
Stephanie
: ―You‘re the one who keeps talking about being
a manager. All I am saying is, it could be
you.‖
Marissa employs tact maxim in her utterance since she
minimizes the cost to Stephanie. It can be proved by seeing the
indirect utterance used by Marissa to Stephanie. This indirect utterance
shows that Marissa wants Stephanie to help her, but she makes an
utterance as if she doesn‘t ask Stephanie to help her wearing the
uniform. It seems that she just wants Stephanie to give more time to
her to finish her dressing by herself. Marissa‘s utterance is not force
Stephanie to help her friend. It shows that Marissa is being tactful in
delivering a request to Stephanie (Nurdianingsih, 2006: 21)
2.3.2.2.2. The Maxim of Generosity
The generosity maxim is to minimize benefit to self and
maximizing cost to self. Like tact maxim, the generosity maxim occurs
in commissives and directives/ impositives. This maxim is centered to
self, while the tact maxim is to other.
25
The intention is to show the attitude of courtesy to others in a
way willing to do anything for others, to be good without expecting
anything from others.
Example:
―You must come and have dinner with us‖.
In this case the speaker implies that cost of the utterance is to
his self. Meanwhile, the utterance implies that benefit is for the hearer.
2.3.2.2.3. The Maxim of Approbation
The approbation maxim requires to minimizing dispraise of
other and maximizing praise of other. This maxim instructs to avoid
saying unpleasant things about others and especially about the hearer.
This maxim occurs in assertives/ representatives and expressives.
The expressive utterance is the utterance which its function is
to express the speaker‘s psychological attitude toward a situation. This
utterance can usually be found in some utterances expressed to say
thankfulness, congratulation, welcoming, apologizing, praising, etc.
The assertive utterance is the utterance commonly used to declare the
truth proposition that is expressed. This utterance can usually be found
if someone carries his opinion, comment, suggestion, complain, etc
(Nurdianingsih, 2006: 23)
26
Example:
―I know you're a genius - would you know how to solve this
math problem here?‖
2.3.2.2.4. The Maxim of Modesty
In the modesty maxim, the participants must minimize praise
of self and maximize dispraise of self. This maxim is applied in
assertives/ representatives and expressives like the approbation
maxim. Both the approbation maxim and the modesty maxim concern
to the degree of good or bad evaluation of other or self
that is uttered by the speaker. The approbation maxim is exampled by
courtesy of congratulation. On other hand, the modesty maxim usually
occurs in apologies.
Example:
―Please accept this small gift as prize of your achievement.‖
In this case, the utterance above is categorized as the modesty
maxim because the speaker maximizes dispraise of himself.
2.3.2.2.5. The Maxim of Agreement
In the agreement maxim, there is tendency to maximize
agreement between self and other people and minimize disagreement
27
between self and other. The disagreement, in this maxim, usually is
expressed by regret or partial agreement.
Example:
A: ―Let‘s eat some potatoes tonight‖
B: ―Ok, I will get the potatoes in the market now!‖
2.3.2.2.6. The Maxim of Sympathy
Sympathy maxim requires a speaker and a hearer to maximize
sympathy and minimize antipathy between them.
Example:
―I am sorry to hear about your father.‖
Sympathy maxim serves as a way of showing empathy towards
others. This includes congratulating, commiserating and expressing
condolences.
2.3.3. The Ironical Principle
When Cindy says ―I don't like parties,‖ we cannot interpret what she said
because on that interpretation she would be violating maxim of quality (see section
2.3.1.2). But we cannot interpret Cindy as the opposite of what she said, because on
that interpretation, she would be violating maxim of manner (see section 2.3.1.4). It is
28
hardly perspicuous to use a sentence to mean the opposite of what the sentence
means. Indeed, it is hard to see how any implicatures could be worked out on the
basis of the maxims, because it would always be more perspicuous to explicitly state
something rather than implicate it. While both are included in manner, perspicuity
often clashes with brevity.
We use irony in part because we have conversational goals other than the
efficient communication of information. We observe not only the cooperative
principle, but also the ironical principle.
Irony indicates that what is meant is the contradictory of what is said. The use
of irony is intentional. In other word, we employ this linguistic device in utterance if
we want the addressee to encode the extra meaning hidden in the ironical remark.
Irony is contradicting either what the speaker has said or usually says, or,
contradicting what the take to be true. To read the irony a hearer or reader do not just
have to know the context, but also have to be committed to specific beliefs and
positions within that context (Colebrook, 2004: 166, Stykatova, 2009: 53).
Irony principle is a second order principle, which builds upon, or exploits, the
principle of politeness. It allows the hearer to arrive at the offensive point of the
speaker‘s remark indirectly, by way of implicature (Leech, 1983: 82, Stykatova,
2009: 5). Irony, as a number of other means of expression, is also frequently
employed in fictional works like novels and shor stories. It provides interestingness in
29
dialogue, it makes explicit and implicit dialogues more sophisticated and it is more
laborious for readers.
The use of irony in conversation is intentional. The author of the literary
works employs irony with some particular goal; they wish to achieve a particular
purpose. Irony can have a function humor and ridicule. It can serve only for
entertaining the the readers. The speaker or writer may want to be sarcastic, he or she
may want to indicate that something is disapproved but does not want to be too direct
when criticizing (Stykatova, 2009: 55).
2.4. Conventional Implicature
According to Grice (1975, cited in Nanda et al., 2012: 124), the conventional
meaning of the words used will determine what is implicated, besides helping to
determine what is said. Conventional implicature works with specific words and
results in additional conveyed meanings when those words are used (Yule, 1996: 45).
It is not related with cooperative principle and not tied to the context in which they
occur for the interpretation. Conjunctions are the specific words that Yule means in
his description. Some examples of the conjunctions are and, so, but, therefore, and
however.
We can see a conventional implicature in, ―Umar is a Padangese, and
therefore, he is good at business‖ to implicate that ―every Padangese is good at
business.‖ Another example is given by Yule (1996: 45) using coordinating
30
conjunction ―but‖. The utterance, ―I gave her money, but she refused it.‖ Consists of
two information‘s, ―I gave her money‖ and ―she refused the money.‖ Implicating
unexpected situation.
2.5. Movie
Movie is something familiar in the showbiz, everybody like it, everybody
enjoy it, there are even a few who make it a hobby. Today is not really difficult to
find a movie. There are so many artist and producers who make it to entertain and
sometimes give interesting information.
A movie or motion picture, is a series of still images which, when shown on a
screen, creates the illusion of moving images due to the phi phenomenon, that is an
optical illusion causes the audience to perceive continuous motion between separate
objects viewed rapidly in succession3.
Movie made for entertaining, showing skill the artist and gets some of profit
for that. Technological advances make the better quality of the movie and interesting
to watch. The producers are competing to make the movie interesting as possible to
attract the audience, because the audience is the main target in the screening.
There are so many kinds genre of movie to watch, like horror, science fiction,
musical, melodrama, romantic comedy, action/adventure, fantasy, biopic, war,
historical, teen comedy, animation, biblical, mystery, crime thriller, suspense, parody,
3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film (last accessed in October 23, 2014)
31
mockumentary, blaxploitation, disaster, political, court drama, social problem, and
also pornography.
All of them are about art, imaginer, does not really exist in reality. And watch
movie is something refreshing, enjoying and entertaining.
2.5.1. Implicature in a Movie
As we know according to Grice (1975) that an utterance can imply a
proposition (a statement) that is not part of the utterance and that does not follow as a
necessary consequence of the utterance, it is mean we have to interpret what people
implicitly meaning in their utterance. In each utterance people usually not aware
when they did not mention directly what they want, at that time implicature arise,
make the hearer have to understand well what the speaker mean so there is no
misunderstanding between them.
In movie something like that often used. It is makes a variation in the
language, and more interesting.
Before this study there are some study that explore implicature in the
conversation of the movie, the reason why the writer take this study although there
was so many people who make the same study is because the writer really love to
watch a movie, and want get the same experience when explore a movie, interpret
what the meaning as detailed as the writer can.
32
Nanda et al., (2012) investigates a conversational implicature in an Indonesian
variety show called Take Me Out. Exactly take me out Indonesia is not a movie, it is
such a game show in Indonesia, although it is not a movie but this show aired in
Indonesian channel television.
That paper is a pragmatic study that aims at investigating conversational
implicature that the presenters of take me out Indonesia operate within their
utterances along with the possible implications that lie behind implicature.
Qualitative method was employed in processing the transcription of the recorded
implicature data.
The study concludes that various types of implicature were used in informal
game show conversation to make interaction flows smoothly.
Another study about this pragmatic field is Lestari‘s study (2013). She
investigates the implicature existing in a movie. She collects the main data from
utterance. In her conclusion, she presents several the types of conversational
implicature based on cooperative principle used in movie. She concludes that the
cooperative principle is important to understand the movie.
Both Nanda et al. (2012) and Lestari (2013) investigate the conversational
implicature in different object. Following what they have conduct the writer would
like to conduct a similar research. The writer will look at the conversational
implicature in a movie that the writers choose.
33
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This study is descriptive. Kumar (1998, cited in Inayati et al, 2014: 55) argues
that in a descriptive study, the researcher describes systematically a situation, a
problem and phenomenon. It is also to provide information about a condition of
living in the communities or an issue. Similar to Kumar, Arikunto (2010: 3) also
writes that a descriptive study is intended to investigate the situation, condition,
circumstances, events, and other activities, and the result presented in the form of the
study report.
In this chapter, the writer presents type of study in section 3.1, and object of
the study in section 3.2. In section 3.3, the writer discusses the data source and in
section 3.4, the technique used to collect the data. Finally, in section 3.5, the writer
discusses the technique of analyzing data and in section 3.6, the writer presents the
information about ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie in movie review.
3.1. Type of Study
The writer used a qualitative study for this study. Creswell (1994: 1) defines
qualitative study as an inquiry process of understanding a social or human problem,
based on building a complex, holistic picture, formed with words, reporting detailed
views of informants, and conducting in a natural setting. Locke et al., (1987, cited in
34
Creswell 1994: 147) state that qualitative study is interpretative study. As such, the
biases, values, and judjement of the researcher become stated explicitly in the
research report.
Arikunto (2010: 27) states that in qualitative study, the writer does not use
numbers in collecting data and in providing interpretation of the results. However, it
does not mean that in this qualitative study researchers did not use numbers.
Woods (2006, cited in Inayati at al., 2014: 55) argues that qualitative method
focuses on natural setting, has interest in meaning, perspectives and understanding,
and gives great consideration on process.
The purpose of qualitative research is to understand something specifically,
not always looking for the cause and effect of something and to deepen
comprehension about something that studied (Moleong, 2009:31).
Qualitative research is concerned with developing explanations of social
phenomena. It aims to help us to understand the social world in which we live and
why things are the way they are.
In this study, the general methodology used to investigate the implicature in
the conversation in ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie is socio-pragmatic
approach. These term was first employed by Levinson (1983: 10-11) and then
elaborated by Blum-Kulka (1997: 55-56), who explains that in socio-pragmatic
studies , the focus is on the choice of strategies across different situations, examining
the way in which pragmatic performance is subjected to social and cultural condition.
35
3.2. Object of the Study
The object of the study was the conversational implicature used in ―The Little
Rascals Save the Day‖ movie scripts. The writer analyzed all of the conversational
implicature which appeared in the movies conversation in the form of script.
3.3. Data Sources
Moleong (1998, cited in Arikunto, 2010: 22) states that data sources of
qualitative study presented in spoken or written that accurate by the writer. Data
source should be original, however if the original data is difficult to get, photocopy or
imitation is not be a problem, as long as the evidence can be acquired.
According to Arikunto (2010: 21-22), a qualified study is study that has
complete data, primary data and secondary data. Primary data is data in the form of
verbal or words spoken orally, gestures or behavior by subjects who can be trusted, in
this case is the subject of research subjects (informants) with respect to the variable
owned. Secondary data is data obtained from the documents graphics (tables, records,
meeting notes, SMS etc), photographs, films, video recordings, objects, etc., which
can enrich the primary data.
In this study, the primary data was taken the document from the script of 2014
American comedy‘s movie. ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie was carried out
on March 25, 2014 with approximately 98 minutes of its running time. The remake
36
brings back the ―Our Gang‖ kids in another slapstick-filled comedy4. The script of
this movie was taken from website 5 which the writer compressed in text form. The
secondary data were taken from books, journals and websites.
3.4. Technique of Collecting Data
The exact method for qualitative study is a mix of various data sources and
multi-method of the data collection (Arikunto 2010: 25). The data source can be
either human, object, situation, event or occurrence, appearance and behavior of
people (or other creatures like animal), and various forms of writings, drawings,
graphs, and other graphical forms.
In this study, the writer used documentation as the way to collect the data.
According to Arikunto (2010: 201), documentation was from the original word
document, which means that stuff writing. In implement the method of
documentation, researchers investigated the objects written as books, magazines,
documents, regulations, meeting notes, diaries and so on.
Usually the method of documentation is used to be observe inanimate objects.
Documentation method is the primary method if researchers want to use content
analysis approach. Arikunto (2010: 202-203) continues that documentation methods
is looking for a data about things or variables in the form of notes, transcripts, books,
4
The Little Rascals Save the day is a remake of The Our Gang 1937‘s movie. The writer explained
little bit in chapter 1 and the whole about the movie is in next chapter.
5
http://www.yifysubtitles.com/subtitles/the-little-rascals-save-the-day-english-yify-13937 (accessed
Tuesday. October 28, 2014)
37
newspapers, magazines, inscriptions, meeting notes, etc. This method is somewhat
not so difficult, because if there is a mistake about the data the source data remains
unchanged.
In this study, the writer uses documentation method to analyze data from ―The
Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie. The writer also uses taking note method to
complete the data. To sum up, the steps that are used to collect the data are as follow:
a. The writer decided to investigate the movie ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖
b. The writer watched the movie
c. The writer searched the script of the movie, and changed in printed form
d. The writer read the script in order to understand the story well
e. The writer selected the conversational implicature which were found in the
movie scripts
f. The writer collected and took a note about the conversational implicature
from the movie scripts
g. The writer rearranged the data which are appropriate with the problem of
study using a unique string of codes as the instrument used to collect the data.
About point g, to give information on the data, the writer used a string of
codes as the instrument used to collect the data which provides information on each
data. The full list of codes is in the table 3.1.
38
Table 3.1. Instrument used to collect the data
Field
1st
2nd
Code
CPMQN
CPMQL
CPMR
CPMM
PPPP
PPMA
PPMM
IP
01, 02, 03…
3rd
01, 02, 03…
Information
Cooperative Principle – Maxim of Quantity
Cooperative Principle – Maxim of Quality
Cooperative Principle – Maxim of Relevant
Cooperative Principle – Maxim of Manner
Politeness Principle – Positive Politeness
Politeness Principle – Maxim of Approbation
Politeness Principle – Maxim of Modesty
Ironical Principle
Number of occurrence as specified in the 1st
field
Number of data
A combination of codes as per table 3.4, creates a technique string of code for
each conversation in the data. For example: CPMQN01001, means that the data is a
conversation which violates maxim quantity; this is data number 1 in this type and
data number 1 for all the data. Therefore, there is no data has the same string of code
as another.
3.5. Technique of Analyzing Data
Data analysis is the process of organizing and sorting data into patterns,
categories, and a basic description of the unit so that it can be found themes and
working hypothesis can be formulated as suggested by the data (Moleong, 2002:
103). Moleong continued data analysis intends to organize the data. Data analysis in
this case has a job to set, sort, categorize, give the code and categorized.
39
In summary, the steps which the writer uses in analyzing the data are as
follow:
a. Reading and analyzing ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie script.
b. Selecting the Conversational Implicature on ―The Little Rascals Save the
Day‖ movie script
c. Collecting the Conversational Implicature on ―The Little Rascals Save the
Day‖ manuscript.
d. Describing and analyzing the Conversational Implicature and socio-cultural
background on ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie script.
e. Making the conclusion and suggestions based on data analysis.
3.6. Movie Review
―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ is a 2014 American comedy movie
released by Universal Pictures. The movie is an adaptation of Hal Roach's Our Gang,
a series of short movies of the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s which focuses on the
adventures of a group of neighborhood children6.
In this section the writer discusses any information relevant to the ―The Little
Rascals Save the Day‖ movie. The information is listed in table 3.2 below:
6
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Rascals_Save_the_Day (last accessed in December 31, 2014)
40
Table 3.2 Information related to ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie7.
―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ full cast & crew
Director
Alex Zamm
Mike Elliott
Producer
Greg Holstein
Jerry P. Jacobs
Alex Zamm
Writer
William Robertson
Based on
Our Gang by Hal Roach
Jet Jurgensmeyer as Spanky
Drew Justice as Alfafa
Jenna Ortega as Marry Ann
Connor Beaty as Stymie
Isaiah "Zay Zay" Fredericks as Buckwheat
Camden Gray as Porky
Cast
Eden Wood as Darla
Grant Palmer as Waldo
Doris Roberts as Grandma
Greg Germann as Ray ―Big Ray‖ Kaye
Lex Medlin as Officer Kennnedy
Valerie Azlynn as Miss Crabtree
Music by
Chris Hajian
Cinematography
Levie Issacks
Editor
Heath Ryan
Distributor
Universal Pictures
Release dates
March 25, 2014
Running time
98 minutes
Country
United States
Language
English
Alex Zamm is an American movie director. He has directed numerous movies
from 1998 to now. Raised in Woodstock, New York, Alex started his career as a
cartoonist for SPY Magazine and as an interviewer for National Public Radio's All
Things Considered. He earned his Bachelor of Arts (BA) in Film and Classical
Mythology from the State University of New York at Binghamton and studied
7
ibid
41
cartooning and illustration at the School Of Visual Arts, before receiving a Master of
Fine Arts (MFA) in screenwriting and directing from Columbia University's Graduate
Film Program, where he was mentored by such directors as Miloš Forman and Martin
Scorsese.
Alex Zamm is known for his work on Chairman of the Board (1998),
Inspector Gadget 2 (2003) and My Date with the President's Daughter (1998)8.
3.6.1. Synopsis
This movie tells about the story of a group of neighborhood children that
consist of 5 boys. They are Spanky, Alfafa, Stymie, Porky, Buckwheat and one girl
named Mary Ann plus their dog, called Petey. Spanky gives names for their group as
The International Silver String Submarine Band, because their group also a band.
The stories begin in the class where Spanky, Alfafa, Mary Ann and Steimy
get their last day in the school before their long holiday. Before the class is over,
Spanky gives a signal to Alfafa. Alfafa continues the signal to Mary Ann and she
gives the signal to Stymie. Stymie makes a sound to continue the signal to their dog
Petey in the window. Then Petey comes and wakes Porky and Buckwheat up. The
meaning of the signal is to start their plan to get out from the class. They finally can
get out from the class but they feel regret. This because, they miss their ice cream
cake that their teacher has bought to them to celebrate their last day in the school.
8
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005618/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm (last accessed in December 31,
2014)
42
The stories continue in Grandma‘s bakery shop. The kids practice their music
in their tree house beside Grandma‘s bakery shop. Suddenly, Grandma calls them and
asks them to keep the shop for a while because she has to handle something in the
bank. This is so funny and troublesome when they got an order to make a big red
velvet cake from the costumer. They try to make a big cake by them self with a
strange flavor and this makes a big trouble. They destroy the shop with a big blast
from their strange cake.
The side story of this story is the love story between Alfafa and his dreaming
girl Darla, also his rival Waldo. Alfafa always dream that one day he can get Darla as
his lover. However, although he always tries to get Darla‘s attention but he always
failed. This is because Waldo always gets Darla in his side by his power of money.
The problems arise when Grandma tells the kids that the shop has to be
closed. A bank officer informs Grandma that she owes the bank $10,000. If she is
unable to pay the money in two weeks, she will lose her bakery. The matters get
worse when Waldo‘s father wants to buy the bakery and replace it with a shopping
mall and Waldo wants the kids' tree house for himself.
Spanky suggests the kids get jobs in order to help save Grandma's bakery. The
kids do anything that they can, like helps in police station, engineering company,
construction place, hospital and become a caddie in golf local country club. They also
try to gets the money by open their pet washing business, taxi cab and gets Alfafa in
43
wrestling competition. But they get nothing for all of their work, they just gets some
trouble.
Their last hope to earning the $10,000 for Grandma is follow and win the
talent show. At the talent show, the kids are up against several professional acts
including a song and dance routine by Waldo and Darla, but Waldo continuously
pushes Darla out of the spotlight and she eventually leaves him after he attempts to
sabotage the International Silver String Submarine Band's performance. The band's
rendition of "I Got You Babe" starts poorly and gradually gets fair, and gets even
better when Darla arrives to sing with Alfalfa. The kids win the $10,000, Darla
officially joins the kids' band, and Grandma's bakery is saved.
44
CHAPTER IV
DATA ANALYSIS
In this chapter the writer presents data presentation in section 4.1. Next, the
writer discusses analysis of cooperative principle in section 4.2, analysis of politeness
principle in section 4.3 and the last is the analysis of ironical principle in section 4.4.
4.1. Data Presentation
In this section, the writer discusses the data collected from the main issue of
this study. In this study, there are 20 conversations with violates 3 conversations
principles: cooperative principle, politeness principle and ironical principle. These
violation leads to the occurrence of implicature. The data is presented in table 4.1.
No
1
2
3
Table 4.1. Types of violated conversations principles in
―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie.
Type of violated conversations
Number
Percentage
principles
Cooperative Principle
10
50
Politeness Principle
6
30
Ironical Principle
4
20
Total
20
100
From table 4.1, the frequency of conversation which violates the cooperative
principle is the highest (50%). The writer assumes that this is because of the genre of
―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie is a comedy movie. The story is about the
45
naughtiness of the kids in the movie. In the conversation, there are so many parts
when the kids answer irrelevantly when someone ask or talk to them. Sometimes,
there are also part when the cast speak hyperbole, something false or indirectly, and
those are violates the types of cooperative principles.
The writer gives the example of each conversation principles which appear in
the ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie in example [1], [2], and [3].
[1] CPMR01005 (Cooperative Principle)
Alfafa
: Hey, are you going to the library?
Darla
: I love books about cats. See?
Darla directly gives irrelevant answer toward Alfafa question. When Alfafa
meets Darla on the way, he asks Darla whether she is going to the library or not.
However, Darla does not answer Alfafa along with ‗yes‘ or ‗no‘. Instead, Darla
shows alfafa that she likes to read books about cat. Darla‘s answer implies that she is
going to library to read books about cats. Darla‘s answer violates maxim of
relevance, which is the types of cooperative principle, this happen when someone
speak or tell the information irrelevant with the question.
[2] PPMA01012 (Politeness principle)
Officer Kennedy : Look, don't touch. You understand?
Spanky
: Isn't there supposed to be a diamond on it? Oh, there it
is. It looks real nice when you can see it.
Alfafa
: Well, good luck, Officer Kennedy.
Officer Kennedy : Thank you.
Spanky
: Try not to blow it. Come on, guys.
46
The kids greet Officer Kennedy well at first, but then they suddenly mock
Officer Kennedy. They ask about how the relationship between Officer Kennedy and
Ms. Crabtree, their beautiful teacher in the school. Officer Kennedy replies that he
will soon confess his feeling to Ms. Crabtree. He shows the ring that he has just
bought. The kids begin mocking Officer Kennedy by asking whether there is any
diamond in the ring or not. Stymie put out a magnifying glass and tries to see if there
is a diamond on the ring. The kids then talk impolite to Officer Kennedy by saying
‗not to blow it‘. The conversation in example [2] is show that the kids violated maxim
of approbation from politeness principle by look down towards Officer Kennedy.
[3] IP02018 (Ironical Principle)
Alfafa
: Oh, man. Did you see that cake?
Mary Ann : Not just a cake, an ice cream cake.
Stymie
: Yeah, ice cream and cake. The two best things in the world
all mixed together.
Spanky : Too many calories, men. And you all could stand to lose a
few pounds anyway.
This conversation happens after the kids are successful to get out from the
class. They blame their selves because they cannot get the ice cream cake. Spanky
tries to calm down his friend by telling them that Ice cream cake has so many calories
and it is not healthy. But the truth is he also feels regret when he cannot get the piece
of ice cream cake. Spanky violates the ironical principle because what he thinks is
different from what he is saying. It can be seen from the expression of his face.
47
In the next sections, the writer will discuss the more detailed about
conversation principles, especially for cooperative principle, politeness principle and
ironical principle.
4.2. Cooperative Principle
The cooperative principle, along with the conversational maxims, partly
account for conversational implicatures. Participants assume that a speaker is being
cooperative, and thus they make conversational implicatures about what is said.
Cooperative principle and their maxims or the rules have been discussed in chapter 2.
From table 4.1, there are 10 conversations which violate the cooperative
principle. Based on the analysis, the writer identified each data into 4 types of
cooperative principle. They are maxim of quantity, maxim of quality, maxim of
manner and maxim of relevant. The 4 types of cooperative principle is show in table
4.2.
Table 4.2. Types of Cooperative Principles
No
1
2
3
4
Types of Cooperative Principle
Maxim of Quantity (CPMQN)
Maxim of Quality (CPMQL)
Maxim of Manner (CPMM)
Maxim of Relevant (CPMR)
Total
Number
2
2
2
4
10
Percentage
20
20
20
40
100
From table 4.2, conversations in the data that violate maxim of relevant occur
most frequently (40%). Other conversations which violate the other 3 types of
48
cooperative principle occur relatively equal (20% for each type). The writer assumes
that this issue is because the basic of the story, ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖
movie is about how the kids make some trouble in their neighborhood, so sometimes
they answer irrelevantly when someone ask to them.
From the analysis of ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie, the writer
gives the example of each violating maxim from cooperative principle in example
[4], [5], [6] and [7].
As in Chapter 2, maxim of quantity is a condition when someone has to give
the information just the necessary information only and do not give a contribution
more informative than is required. The writer illustrates an example of conversation
that violates maxim of quantity in example [4].
[4] CPMQN01001
Grandma : Oh, so, isn't there still one more day left at school?
Spanky
: They never do anything important on the last day.
Stymie
: Except eat ice cream cake.
This conversation happens when the kids come to Grandma‘s bakery after
they get off from the school. Grandma asks whether or not there is still one more day
left at school. But, Spanky and Stymie answer her question with the information that
is exactly not really important to know. Spanky answer‘s is not an effective and
efficient answer. Actually, he only needs to answer whether there is one day left in
school or not. His answer leads to a conversational implicature, because the answer
violates the maxim of quantity.Spanky actually wants to inform his Grandma that
49
there is one more day left in the school. However, what he tells is that there is no
important thing in their last day in the school so they decided to get off from the
class.
From ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie scripts, the writer found 2
conversations which violates maxim of quality.
As what the writer presents in chapter 2, maxim of quality is a condition when
the speaker should tell the truth, no lies and have the evidence of what his
information about. The writer gives the example of conversation that violates maxim
of quantity in example [5].
[5] CPMQL02004
Stymie
: What are we going to do now? Yeah, we all got fired from
our jobs.
Spanky : Alfalfa and me didn't get fired, we resigned. Working
conditions were terrible. Mmm-hmm.
Conversation in example [5] occurs when the kids gather in tree house and
discuss their next plan after they are all fired from their jobs. Styme asks about the
plan; but Spanky does not answer his question, instead he implicitly says that he also
get fired by saying that he does not get fired not resign from the job because the
works condition is terrible. Example [5] is conversation which violates maxim of
quality. In this conversation, Spanky does not tell the truth because the truth is that he
makes a trouble in the Golf field and they got fired from their job.
In the data, there are also 2 examples of conversational implicature which
violates maxim of manner. As in chapter 2, maxim of manner is where the speaker
50
should avoid obscurity, avoid ambiguity, speak directly, and not to be hyperbole
when they tell the information. The violation maxim of manner in this data is because
their information is so hyperbole or so obscure.The conversation violating maxim of
manner is illustrated in example [6].
[6] CPMM02010
Bank Officer
Grandma
Bank Officer
: Oh, my Gosh. That's the best chocolate chip cookie
I've ever had. It's got just the right crunchy to chewy
ratio.
: I'm glad you like them.
: This isn't a cookie. It's nirvana. It's bliss. It's a warm
puppy. It's sleeping late on a summer morning, or
walking barefoot on the beach at sunset. If this cookie
were a woman, I would ask it to marry me.
Conversation [6] is a conversation which violates maxim of manner. Actually
bank officer just wants to say that the cookies are really amazed. The cookies are
really delicious, but he confesses it so hyperbole and absurd. So from the analysis
above, it is clear that conversation in example [6] violates maxim of manner from
cooperative principles.
From table 4.2 there are 4 conversations violate maxim of relevant. Maxim of
relevant is that the speaker has to tell the information relevant with the ongoing topic
(see chapter 2). One example of conversation violates maxim of relevant is shown in
example [7].
[7] CPMR04008
Alfafa
: Did I win?
Spanky : Alfalfa, you're a genius. You've given me a great idea.
51
Spanky violates the maxim of relevance, because his answer has no relation
with what Alfafa has said. This scene is about Alfafa who gets really angry with
Waldo. Alfafa imagines that he can hit Waldo with his hand and makes Waldo
collapse, in reality he just hit a basket ball and the ball hit back his head and make
him collapse and ask the kids unconsciously did he wins. And Spanky just answers
what Alfafa said by the information that he gets big idea to get money by Alfafa
incident.
4.3. Politeness Principle
Politeness Principle proposes how to produce and understand language based
on politeness (see chapter 2). The purpose of Politeness Principle is to establish
feeling of community and social relationship. Thus, Politeness Principle focuses on
process of interpretation that the center of the study is on the effect of the hearer
rather than the speaker.
From the analysis of ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie in table 4.1, the
writer finds out 30% from all the data is violating politeness principle. The writer
found that there are 3 types of politeness principle are violated. The 3 types of
politeness principle is show in table 4.3.
52
Table 4.3 Type of Politeness Principle
NO
1
2
3
Type of Politeness Principle
Maxim of Approbation (PPMA)
Maxim of Modesty (PPMM)
Positive Politeness (PPPP)
Total
Number
4
1
1
6
Percentage
66,67
16,665
16,665
100
There are 6 conversations which violate politeness principle. From the 6
conversations, the writer identifies each of them in more detail based on the type of
politeness principle. From table 4.3, it seeing that conversations which violating
maxim of approbation occur most frequently (66,67%).
The writer assumes it is because that the theme of this movie is about the
naughtiness of the child, so usually they talking down each other or not showing their
respect to the older one. But actually they are not usually like that, it is happen when
they talk or speak with the antagonist character.
Example of each conversation violating types of politeness principle is shown
in example [8], [9] and [10]. As the writer explains in chapter 2, maxim of
approbation shortly has a meaning appreciation. Always try to give a respect to the
other, not mocking, cursing, and talking down each other.
[8] PPMA02013
Manager : Here they are, gentlemen your new caddies.
Mr. Kaye : Is this some kind of a joke?
Manager : I'm sorry, but three of my caddies called in sick.
53
It is the scene when Spanky and Alfafa becomes a caddie in Mr.Kaye‘s Golf
club. That is one of their ways to get the money for their grandma. The word ―is this
some kind of joke‖ by Mr. Kaye is an expression of not believing in the ability of
Spanky and Alfalfa. Mr. Kaye looked down Spanky and Alfalfa and sees them as a
joke. And it is how Mr. Kaye violated the maxim of approbation because he did not
respect Spanky and Alfafa.
In the data there is conversation violating maxim of modesty, maxim of
modesty is a maxim about the simplicity or the humility. Being humble by reducing
compliment or not too proud of oneself. The writer gives the example of conversation
violating maxim of moodesty in example [9].
[9] PPMM01016
Mr. Kaye : Mrs. Larson? Ray Kaye, but my friends call me Big Ray,
because I think big.
Grandma : Well, what can I do for you, Mr. Kaye?
Mr. Kaye‘s utterance violated maxim of modesty. He wants Grandma to
recognize that he is a rich person, has a big popularity and authority. His arrogant
attitude is seen by his utterance and his annoying attitude in front of Grandma.
In this study, there are 2 conversations violating positive politeness. Positive
politeness from politeness principle tends to show friendship, solidarity, emphasizes
that both speaker want the same thing and they both have a common goal (see chapter
2). The writer gives the example of the violating of this principle in example [10].
54
[10] PPNP01011
Alfafa : But I thought we were going to the library.
Waldo : That's okay, I'll take her. I'd offer you a ride, too, but clearly there's
not enough room for three.
Darla : Sorry. Bye, Alfalfa.
Waldo has his opinion to take Darla with him without Alfafa. He tries to
comfort Alfafa, by offer a ride together although it is just a joke for Alfafa. At the
last, he gets Darla with him and left Alfafa behind.
4.4. Ironical Principle
From table 4.1 there are about 20% from all the data which violate ironical
principle. Irony indicates that what is meant is the contradictory of what is said. To
read the irony the hearer or reader do not just have to know the context, but also have
to be connected to specific beliefs and positions within that context (see chapter 2).
Based on the analysis the writer gives the example of conversation violating
the ironical principle below:
[11] IP03019
Postman : What is that noise?
Grandma : That's the kids' band.
Postman : Oh... Well, tell them to keep practicing.
The postman comes to Grandma‘s bakery when the kids have been practicing.
The postman‘s expression is so bad when he heard the sound from the band.
Sometimes he closed his ear by his hand. But he tells grandma to tell the kids to keep
55
practicing, although actually he won‘t to hear it again. The postman just said the
things that actually he never wants it and it is violated ironical principle.
56
CHAPTER V
CLOSURE
The purpose of this study is to identify the implicature in the conversations of
―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ scripts movie. After collecting, presenting and
analyzing the data, the writer has also discussed the results of the analysis focusing
on how conversation principles influence the implicature which occur in the
conversation. Finally in this chapter, the writer would like to present the conclusions
and suggestions of this study.
5.1. Conclusion
Based on the analysis of the data in chapter 4, the writer has answered the
three problem question given in chapter 1. Thus, in this chapter the writer present the
answers in three major conclusions as the findings found in this study: (1) types of
violated conversation principles; (2) the most dominant type of violated conversation
principles and (3) the context meaning of each conversational implicature. The writer
will elaborate each of the conclusions in turn as follow.
Firstly, the writer finds that sometimes the speaker is not explicitly saying
what they mean, but the speaker is saying it in another words or sentence. In the
movie, conversational implicature takes place in the context of the cast‘s
communication. It is important to understand the implicit meaning from the context
57
to follow the stories plot. Conversational implicature connected with the conversation
principles. Therefore, among the 20 conversations the writer has found in the data,
the writer identified 3 types of violated conversation principles, they are (1)
cooperative principle, (2) politeness principle and (3) ironical principle, (see table
4.1). Then, the writer discussed more for the cooperative principle type. For
conversations that violate the cooperative principle, the writer analyzed them further
by identifying each conversation into four types of cooperative principles; (1) Maxim
of Quality (2) Maxim of Quantity (3) Maxim of Relevant and (4) Maxim of Manner.
Then based on politeness principle, conversations which violated the politeness
principle can be identified more into 3 types politeness principles, they are (1)
Positive Politeness (2) Maxim of Approbation and (3) Maxim of Modesty. However,
there is no further analysis can be taken for conversations which violated the ironical
principle.
Secondly, based on the first conclusion above, which is also my first finding,
the most dominant type of violated conversation principles is violating of cooperative
principle (50% from all the data, see table 4.1). The writer concludes that is because
of the theme of the movie. ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie is a movie about
the story of the gang kids which always makes some troublesome with their
neighborhood. The kids utterance‘s sometimes contain irrelevant utterance, obscurity
of expression, unnecessary information and sometimes they gives untruth information
which is phenomenon of violating maxim as cooperative principles.
58
Thirdly, the writer explains the context of each situation from the utterances
which contain conversational implicature. From the movie scripts which the writer
analyze, most of the issues that occur is because there is no any respectful of the
children toward the older, especially the one that they hates. The purpose of the
implicature occur in the conversation is to make the conversation more colorful, not
really formal for a kids comedic movie. The movie writer presents a movie which has
some parts that did not follow the conversation principle in order to make the movie
could be fun and is not too serious, but he implicitly give any lesson from the
conversation.
From this study, the writer realizes that not all of the conversation is going
well. Sometimes there is an implicit meaning in their utterances. So, it is important
for understanding the context of the conversation to interpret the meaning well, the
hearer has to be able to clearly figure out what the speaker means. In the conversation
there is conversation principle that help people make a good communication and can
avoid misunderstanding and misinterpret between the speaker and the hearer, but
sometimes people breaks the rule of conversation principle and makes the implicit
meaning occur in their conversation.
59
5.2. Suggestion
After analyzing the data and discussing the result, the writer gives some
suggestions to those who might be benefited to the results of this study; they are the
reader, and future researchers.
5.2.1. For the Readers
The writer hopes that this study can improve the reader‘s knowledge about
Implicature especially the conversational implicature. The result of this study can also
contribute to knowledge, especially the pragmatic area (implicature). Therefore, any
readers need reference on implicature can read this graduating paper as a source;
within the example the writer presents in this study, the readers will be able to
understand that not any communication run very well. This because the conversation
during the communication, it often happen several implicit meanings in the
conversation where the hearer has to interpret and understanding the context of the
conversation to know the meaning.
The writer hopes this study can be one of
references in studying conversational implicature especially to give more
understanding about implicature as one of the part pragmatics study in linguistic
field. And also it perhaps will give more references and further considerations for
language students in their studies within their communication.
60
5.2.2. For the Future Researcher
This study could be one of the references in studying conversational
implicature and for the other researcher, and the writer hopes that in the future
there will be other researchers who will conduct the same topic to complete this
research although in different fields.
61
REFERENCES
Adisutrisno, W. 2008. Semantic an Introduction to the Basic Concepts. Yogyakarta:
Andi .
Arikunto, S. 2010. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta:
Rineka Cipta.
Brown, P., and Stephen C. L. 1987. Politeness: Some universals in language usage.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Creswell, J. W. 1994. Research Design Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches.
London: Sage Publications.
Fahilah, R. 2012. An Analysis Of Implicature In „The Neverending Story‟ A Film
Script By Michael Ende.
Grice, P. 1975. Logic and Conversation.London. Oxford University Press.
Grice, P. 1981. Presupposition and Conversational Implicature. New York:
Academic Press.
Grice, P. 1989. Studies in the Way of swords. Cambridge. MA: Harvard
University press.
Grundy, P. 2000. Doing Pragmatic. London-Arnold, a member of the Hodder
Headline Group.
Inayati, A., Citraresmana, E., and Mahdi, S. 2014. IJLLALW: Flouting Maxims in
Particularized Conversational Implicature. Vol. 6, No. 3.
Kumar, R. 1996. Research Methodology. California: Sage Publication.
Lakoff, R. 1983. The limits of politeness: Therapeutic and classroom discourse.
Multilingua 8: pp. 101-29.
Leech, G. 1983. Principle of Pragmatics. United Stated of America: Longman
Group.
Lestari. 2013. The Analysis of Conversational Implicature in the Movie Script of
“Despicable Me”. Salatiga: STAIN Salatiga.
62
Levinson, S. C. 1983. Pragmatics. New York. Cambridge University Press.
Mey, J. L. 1983. An Introduction of Pragmatics. United States of America:
Blackwell.
Mey, J. L. 1998. Concise Encylopedia of Pragmatics. New York: Elseiver.
Moleong, L. J. 2002. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: PT. Remaja
Rosdakarya.
Nanda, S., Sukyadi, D., and Sudarsono, M.I. 2012. Conaplin Journal. Conversational
Implicature of the Presenters in Take Me Out Indonesia. Vol.1. No. 2.
Bandung: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
Palmer, F.R .1981. Semantics. New York. Cambridge University Press.
Parker, F. 1946. Linguistic for Non-Linguistic. London: Taylor and Francis Ltd.
Potter, J. L. 1967. Elements of Literature. The United States. The Odysery
Press,Inc.
Risdiyanto, F. 2011. Register Journal: A Conversational Implicature Analysis on
Oscar Wilde‟s Happy Prince. Vol.4, No. 2. Salatiga: STAIN Salatiga.
Stykarova, M. 2009. Indirectness in Fictional Dialogues as Expression of Extra
Meanings Based on Discourse Analysis of Lively‟s Heat Wave. Available at:
http://is.muni.cz/th/124889/ff_m/m.a_diploma_thesis.txt
[Last accessed:17October 2014].
Woods, P. (1999). Successful Writing for Qualitative Researchers. New York:
Routledge.
Yule, G. 1996. Pragmatics. New York. Oxford University Press.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Rascals_Save_the_Day
(Last accessed in 11 September 2014)
http://www.yifysubtitles.com/subtitles/the-little-rascals-save-the-day-english-yify13937 (Last accessed Tuesday. October 28, 2014)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Rascals_Save_the_Day (Last accessed in
December 31, 2014)
63
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005618/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm (Last accessed in
December 31, 2014)
64
CURRICULUM VITAE
Name
: Chusnul Chotimah
Date of Birth
: November 17th, 1992
Address
: Jl. Lingga No. 11, Gedanganak, Ungaran, Semarang,
Central Java, Indonesia.
Mobile Phone
: 0856-4160-3945
E-mail
: [email protected]
Faculty
: English Department
Educational History :
1. MI Hidayatul Atfal Gedanganak, in 2004
2. SMP N 2 Ungaran, in 2007
3. SMK Informatika NU Ungaran, in 2010
4. IAIN Salatiga, in 2015
Salatiga, March 3rd, 2015
Chusnul Chotimah
113 10 026
65
66
Appendix 1:
The conversational implicature in ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ Movie.
Quotation
: Oh, so, isn't there still one
more day left at school?
Spanky
: They never do anything
important on the last day.
Stymie
: Except eat ice cream cake.
Darla : Hey, Alfalfa!
Alfafa : Hi, Darla!
Darla : Are you all right?
Alfafa : I've died and gone to heaven.
Darla : Actually, this is Maple Street. Let
me help you up.
Mr. Kaye
: Haven't I seen you two guys
somewhere before?
Spanky
: Where would you have seen
us before?
Alfafa
: Yeah, we travel in different
social circles.
Stymie
: What are we going to do
now? Yeah, we all got fired
from our jobs.
Spanky
: Alfalfa and me didn't get
fired, we resigned. Working
conditions
were
terrible.
Mmm-hmm.
Alfafa : Hey, are you going to the library?
Darla : Yeah. I love books about cats. See?
Alfafa : Hey, Darla. Like a ride to the
library?
Darla : Alfalfa? Where did you get that?
Spanky
: Hold it, hold it. That sounded
terrible. Alfalfa, what's the
problem?
Alfafa
: The problem is I don't got the
babe.
Alfafa
: Did I win?
Spanky
: Alfalfa, you're a genius.
You've given me a great idea.
Time
Codes
00:08:28 –
00:08:39
CPMQN01001
00:40:48 –
00:41:09
CPMQN02002
00:25:57 –
00:26:03
CPMQL01003
00:28:51 –
00:29:00
CPMQL02004
00:41:33 –
00:41:35
CPMR01005
00:43:45 –
00:43:49
CPMR02006
00:54:11 –
00:54:18
CPMR03007
00:55:23 –
00:55:26
CPMR04008
Grandma
67
Costumer
Alfafa
: Hello? Anybody here?
: Hi! Yes, ma'am. How may
we help you?
Costumer
: Is there somebody else
working here today who's a
little older?
Spanky
: Don't be fooled. We're older
than we look. Why, I'm nearly
nine.
Stymie
: And our combined ages
equal over 45. Mmm-hmm.
And if you count, Petey, it's
103 in dog years.
Bank Officer : Oh, my Gosh. That's the best
chocolate chip cookie I've
ever had. It's got just the right
crunchy to chewy ratio.
Grandma
: I'm glad you like them.
Bank Officer : This isn't a cookie. It's
nirvana. It's bliss. It's a warm
puppy. It's sleeping late on a
summer morning, or walking
barefoot on the beach at
sunset. If this cookie were a
woman, I would ask it to
marry me.
Alfafa : But I thought we were going to the
library.
Waldo : That's okay, I'll take her. I'd offer
you a ride, too, but clearly there's not
enough room for three.
Darla : Sorry. Bye, Alfalfa.
Officer Kennedy
: Look, don't touch.
You understand?
Spanky
: Isn't there supposed
to be a diamond on it?
Oh, there it is. It looks
real nice when you can
see it.
Alfafa
: Well, good luck,
Officer Kennedy.
Officer Kennedy
: Thank you.
00:13:47 –
00:14:06
CPMM01009
00:17:37 –
00:17:59
CPMM02010
00:42:36 –
00:42:48
PPNP01011
00:07:44 –
00:07:59
PPMA01012
68
Spanky
Manager
Mr. Kaye
Manager
Mr. Kaye
Spanky
Waldo
Spanky
Waldo
Spanky
: Try not to blow it.
Come on, guys.
: Here they are, gentlemen
your new caddies.
: Is this some kind of a joke?
: I'm sorry, but three of my
caddies called in sick.
: You're not getting any taller.
: Simmer down, hot sauce.
: Hello, Spanky.
: Waldo? I didn't think of you
as the wrestling type.
: I couldn't pass up the
opportunity to see the Masked
Marvel wipe the floor with
Alfalfa.
: Oh, yeah? You're gonna be
disappointed, Waldo. There's
no way Alfalfa's going to lose.
: Mrs. Larson? Ray Kaye, but
my friends call me Big Ray,
because I think big.
Grandma
: Well, what can I do for you,
Mr. Kaye?
Ms. Crabtree : Thank you so much, Waldo.
Waldo
: But...
Ms. Crabtree : Please, take a seat, that was...
Waldo
: Wait, but I'm...
Ms. Crabtree : Nope, take a seat. Thank you
very much. That was... unique.
That was very unique.
Alfafa
: Oh, man. Did you see that
cake?
Mary Ann
: Not just a cake, an ice cream
cake.
Stymie
: Yeah, ice cream and cake.
The two best things in the
world all mixed together.
Spanky
: Too many calories, men.
And you all could stand to
lose a few pounds anyway.
00:25:46 –
00:25:52
PPMA02013
00:27:50 –
00:27:52
PPMA03014
00:59:32 –
00:59:47
PPMA04015
Mr. Kaye
00:21:16 –
00:21:22
PPMM01016
00:04:02 –
00:04:10
IP01017
00:06:17 –
00:06:31
IP02018
69
Postman
Grandma
Postman
Spanky
Mr. Kaye
Alfafa
: What is that noise?
: That's the kids' band.
: Oh... Well, tell them to keep
practicing.
: With pleasure. Watch and
learn.
: Oh, good. I can't wait.
: Show him how it's done,
Spank.
00:11:51 –
00:11:55
IP03019
00:27:24 –
00:27:30
IP04020
70
Appendix 2:
The official poster‘s of ―The Little Rascals Save the Day‖ movie.
The Gangs: (Right-left) Darla, Marry Ann, Alfafa, Stymie, Spanky, Buckwheat.
71
PERNYATAAN PUBLIKASI SKRIPSI
Assalamu‘alaikum wr.wb.
Saya yang bertanda tangan dibawah ini:
Nama: Chusnul Chotimah
Nim: 11310026
Fakultas: Tarbiyah
Jurusan: TBI
Menyatakan bahwa skripsi ini benar-benar merupakan karya sendiri dan tidak
berkeberatan untuk dipublikasikan oleh pihak Perpustakaan IAIN Salatiga tanpa
menuntut konsekuensi apapun.
Demikian surat pernyataan ini saya buat, dan jika dikemudian hari terbukti
bahwa skripsi saya ini bukan merupakan karya saya sendiri, maka saya sanggup
untuk menanggung konsekuensinya. Atas perhatiannya saya ucapkan terimakasih.
Wassalamualaikum wr.wb.
Salatiga, 21 April 2015
Hormat saya
Chusnul Chotimah
11310026