CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of The Research

Language becomes an important aspect in human life. Between human and

language can not be separated each other because people need to comunicate with

others to give an infromation or want to know something from others and how

they communicate is through the language. Language is used to express what we

want, need, and feel. For example, if we want to know something from others, we

will ask them about it and how to ask them is through language. When we need

something from others and how we can get it is tell them what we need through

the language. According to Wardhaugh (1992:8) language allows people to say

things to each other and express needs. In short, language is constantly used by

humans in their daily life. The speakers use language to express thoughts or

feelings.

Conversation is very significant and complex because more than merely

talk exchanges. When people take part in a conversation, they share assumptions

and expectations about what conversation is and how conversation is conducted.

People engaging in a conversation will share common principles of conversation

that lead them to interpret each others utterance as contributing to the

conversation, and cooperative principles is one of the important rules in

conversation to make the conversation become clear.

1
 According to Grice (1975), cooperative principles is when you make your

contribution required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or

direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged. The cooperative

principle describes how effective communication in conversation is achieved in

common social situations. The cooperative principle has four basic maxims of

conversation in pragmatics that we called as Grican Maxims. They are maxim of

Quality, Maxim of Quantity, Maxim of Relation, and Maxim of Manner.

Morever, Grace states that people should cooperate in conversation to guarantee

exchanges, speakers and hearers should obey the conversation principles or

maxims.

Maxim of quantity is where one tries to be as informative as one possibly

can, and gives as much information as is needed, and no more. The example of

maxim of quantity is when people ask where is your mother? the hearer should

answer what the speaker said, maybe the hearer can say I dont know or my

mother went to somewhere that I did not know to answer the question. Second is

Maxim of Quality. Maxim of quality is where one tries to be truthful, and does not

give information that is false or that is not supported by evidence. The example of

maxim of quality is when the people ask do you know Miss Nisas age? and the

hearer should be answer about the right answer about miss Nisas ages. Here, the

hearer should know the truth and do not guess it.

Forth is Maxim of relevance. maxim of relevance is where one tries to be

relevant, and says things that are pertinent to the discussion. For example when

the people say I am hungry and the hearer should answer you should eat now

2
or lets go to the canteen, so maxim of relevance is not flouted. The last maxim

is maxim of manner. Maxim of manner is the speaker should avoid obscurity of

expression and ambiguity to make the conversation clear and make the listener

understand the meaning. For example when the speaker said you have to open it

know, I can not wait and the hearer answer I wont, this is hot. the conversation

like this makes the ambiguity for the other people who listen this conversation, so

this conversation is not to be a maxim of manner. The speaker can add the

information of their conversation like you have to open your rice box, I am

hungry and I can not wait to eat it and the answer must be i wont to open my

rice box now because it is hot

People should apply cooperative principle in their conversation to

help the other people easy to understand the speakers meaning. In fact, people

sometimes flout the maxims or break the rule of conversation. Flouting a maxim

is signals to the hearers that the speaker is not following the cooperative

principle. If speaker flouts a maxim, they may deliberately and flagrantly,

everybody else in the conversation recognize that they are not observing the

maxims. When this occurs the listener perceives the difference between what the

speaker says and what does it means by what the speakers says.

Related in this study, Up is a 2009 American 3D computer animated

comedy drama adventure film released by Walt Disney Pictures. The film centers

on an elderly widower named Carl Fredricksen and an earnest young "Wilderness

Explorer" (a fictional youth group similar to the Boy Scouts) named Russell By

tying thousands of balloons to his

3
home, 78-year-old Carl sets out to fulfill his dream to see the wilds of South

America and complete a promise made to his late wife, Ellie. This movie received

five Academy Award nominations and be the best animations 3D film for several

years even so many a new animation movie.

The Researcher has the important reason why this topic is important to

learn. The researcher have been learned about Coperative Principles in pragmatics

study and think maxims is really important to make the conversation between the

speakers and the hearers clear and the hearers do not just listen to reply but listen

the conversation to understand the meaning. One of the teaching materials or

instructional media in order to facilitate the students to understand the maxim is

through the movie. The researcher using the movie because movie is one which

the conversations represent in the real life, so the researcher will be easier to

analayze the conversation that represents many conversations by the people in the

real life.

The explanation above becomes the researchers background to analyze the

maxim flouting in UP movie. With the title An Analysis Of Maxim Flouting

In Up Movie Script by Bob Peterson.

1.2. Research Question

The research question of this study are :

1. What types of maxims flouting found in Up movie script by Bob

Peterson?

4
 2. What were the reasons of maxims flouting used by the character in the

Up movie according to Leech (2001)?

1.3. objectives of the research

The objectives of this research are:

First, to describe types of maxim flouting in the Up movie, and second, to found

out reasons of maxim flouting by the characters in the Up movie.

1.4. Limitation of the research

The researcher was focused on the scope types of maxim flouting in UP

movie script according to Grice theory and the reason why the character flout the

maxims using theory from Leech.

1.5. Significances of the research

The researcher expects that the finding of this research are useful for many

parties. Below are the significances of the research that may be obtained:

1. Theoretical Significance

Giving some contributions to explore the knowledge of maxims flouting

especially on the movie. The researcher hopes that the readers will

understand about the theory of maxims when they read this research in

order to get the additional knowledge of it.

2. Practical Significance

5
 First, the research gives more understanding of being cooperative with or

without observing the Cooperative Principle, and second, the research gives

more references on pragmatics study of maxims in Universitas Bengkulu

especially for English Students.

1.6. Definition of Key Terms

1. Maxims refers to rules of conversation. Proposed by Grice (1975),

consisting of maxim of quantity, maxim of quality, maxim of relevant and

maxim of manner.

2. Flouting is Floating is when something becomes unclear and was not

completed properly. In this research, flouting happens when the rule of the

maxims in Up movie that should be apply in the Up movie being ignored

and not implemented.

6
 CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Cooperative Principle

Pragmatics is the study of meaning (Yule, 1996: 3). Pragmatics is one of

branch of semiotic, the study about the relation of sign and its interpretation.

Morris divides three branches of semiotic, those are: syntactics (or syntax) being

the study of the formal relation of sign to one another, semantics is the study of

the relations of signs to the objects to which the signs are applicableand

pragmatics the study of the relation of signs to interpreters. Pragmatics is also

has relationship with context. As pragmatics studies language in use, the scope of

pragmatics is quite wide. It includes some central concepts, such as deixis,

Cooperative Principle, speech act, politeness, and implicature.

Cooperative Principle is one of the significant theories in Pragmatics.

Grice (1975: 45) explains that Cooperative Principle leads the participants to

make a contribution as is required in a conversation. They can share what they

intend to share smoothly. They can accept each others meaning despite the status.

The speakers behave in a particular way to lead the listeners to understand the

speakers utterances so the listeners are able to give appropriate responses to the

speakers utterances. The concept of cooperative activity leads the listeners to

assume that all speakers are always cooperative.

Cooperative Principle has four subprinciples called maxims; maxim of

quantity, quality, relevance, and manner. In this research, the researcher will be

focused on the flouting maxims in cooperative principles. They are flouting

7
maxim of Quality, flouting Maxim of Quantity, flouting Maxim of Relation,

and flouting Maxim of Manner.

2.1.1. Maxim Flouting

Maxim flouting is where the rules belongs to the forms of non-observed

Cooperative Principle, maxim is non-observing the maxims of Cooperative

Principle by intentionally breaking the maxims to convey hidden meanings.

Flouting the maxims is different from violating the maxims in terms of the

purposes. The speakers do maxim flouting to lead implied meanings to the

listeners. They have no intention to generate a misleading implicature in the

conversation. On the other hand, maxim violation is intentionally to mislead the

listeners understanding about something.

Thomas (1995: 65) states that maxim flouting means intentionally failing

to follow the maxims of Cooperative Principle without any intention to deceive or

make a misunderstanding. The only reason is that the speaker wishes the listener

to understand the meaning of the speaker. Here, a speaker may convey different

meanings from the literal meaning of the utterance. Then, the speaker assumes

that the listener will be able to infer the implicit meanings of the speaker.

2.1.2. Types of Maxim Flouting

The types of maxim flouting are divided into the same number of the

maxims of Cooperative Principle. It is Grices theory that is used as the basic

notion. Therefore, there are four types of maxim flouting; they are quantity maxim

8
flouting, quality maxim flouting, relevance maxim flouting, and manner maxim

flouting. Below is the explanation of those types of maxim flouting.

1) Maxim Flouting of Quantity

Quantity maxim flouting means that the speakers of a conversation fail to

fulfill the maxim of quantity in the Cooperative Principle. It includes whether the

speakers are not as informative as is required or more informative than is required.

Speakers become less informative or more informative when they flout maxim of

quantity. The previous conversation between Charlene and Dexter can be an

example of this kind of maxim flouting:

Charlene : I hope you brought the bread and the cheese.

Dexter : Ah, I brought the bread.
Yule (1996: 40)
In this conversation, Dexter tries to said that what is not mentioned is not

brought. He intentionally gives too little information to respond to Charlenes

utterance so Charlene as the hearer of Dexter is expected to understand the

unstated meaning of Ah, I brought the bread. By saying that utterance, Dexter

has flouted maxim of quantity because he does not give the required information.

2) Maxim Flouting of Quality

When maxim of quality flouted, the speaker simply says something that

does not represent what he or she actually thinks. The speaker fails to fulfill the

maxim of quality; a maxim that requires the speaker to make a contribution that is

true, that is not saying what is believed to be false and not saying that for which

9
the speaker lacks of adequate evidence. An example of quality maxim flouting

that breaks the maxim requiring a speaker to say what he believes to be true is in

the following dialog.

Ellie : Ough. Winter has come.

Sam : Right. My house is a refrigerator right now.

Here, Ellie and Sam talks about the weather. By saying my house is a

refrigerator, Sam has been flouting maxim of quality. It is because he says

something that is not true. Sam believes that his house is not a refrigerator. Saying

thing that he believes to be false flout maxim of quality. In terms of conveying

hidden message, Sam tries to express his agreement and inform Ellie that his

house is very cold as a refrigerator by saying that expression. Furthermore,

another example of quality maxim flouting is also provided as below. It is an

example that breaks the maxim requiring a speaker to say thing that has adequate

evidence.

3) Maxim Flouting of relevance

Relevance maxim flouting means that the speakers of a conversation fail

to be relevant in communicating. Speakers are usually being irrelevant in flouting

maxim of relevance. However, being irrelevant does not purely mean that the

speakers do not want to be relevant. Sometimes, speakers are being irrelevant

because they want to hide something or to say something to others indirectly.

Bert : Do vegetarians eat hamburgers?

Ernie : Do chickens have lips?
Yule (1996: 44)

10
 In this conversation, Ernie is being irrelevant. As expected, Ernie should

provide a yes or no answer. However, since the answer has been obvious,

Ernie flouts maxim of relevance to emphasize her answer of no. Here, by being

irrelevant, Ernie flouts maxim of relevance and successful in conveying her

unstated meaning.

4) Maxim Flouting of of Manner

To be clear in saying things is what all speakers try to do. However, in

some occasion, ambiguity indeed happens whether the speaker intends to make it

or not. Then, maxim of manner is not fulfilled as the result. An example of

manner maxim flouting is presented in the following dialog:

Daughter : Where are you going, Dad?

Daddy : To the m-a-r-k-e-t.

In this conversation, a father answers his daughters question

ambiguously. Instead of saying market directly, he spells the word market by

its letters. Here, the father has flouted maxim of manner since he does not avoid

obscurity of expression. Related to the meaning and the reason for the father

saying that, context is an important aspect to observe. In this case, the father is

trying to keep a secret from his littlest daughter so his littlest daughter does not

demand to go along with him. This unstated meaning makes the father flouts

maxim of manner, not violate it.

11
 2.1.3. Reasons for Maxim Flouting

By flouting the maxim of Cooperative Principle, speakers intend to deliver

an unstated meaning to the listeners. As Leech and Thomas remark in Mey (2001:

78), people can flout or intentionally break one of conversational maxims to lead

the listener to find a hidden meaning. Here, maxim flouting gently leads the

listener or reader to assume more than one conversational implicature in an

exchange. Mey (2001: 79) states that flouting the maxims can be due to many

reasons. There is no certain limitation of the reasons for maxim flouting. It

depends on the situation. Speakers are able to flout a maxim in the same situation

for different reasons. Nevertheless, speakers are able to flout two different

maxims for the same reason.

As a result, the reasons for maxim flouting will be similar to the

illocutionary functions of politeness. The reasons that may lead people to flout the

maxims of Cooperative Principle are:

1) Competitive

This reason relates to the illocutionary goal that competes with the social goal

as in ordering, asking, demanding, and begging (Leech, 1983: 104). Goal is the

intended meaning. Here, illocutionary goal is a self centered goal, a goal which

concerns more on each persons self and does not care about the others. On the

other hand, its opposite, social goal me ans a goal that aims to bring advantage to

others. In this type of reason, there is a competition between the illocutionary goal

and the social goal. An example of competitive reason is in the following dialog:

Annie : Betty, the phone is ringing.

12
 Betty : Im in the bath.
Cutting (2008: 38)
In the example above, there is a competition between the illocutionary

goal of Betty and her social goal. Her social goal is helping Annie to answer the

phone, while her illocutionary goal is finishing her own activity. Here, Betty

understands the condition, i.e. that Annie asks her to answer the phone. Then, she

intentionally flouts maxim of relevance because she refuses to answer the phone

by saying Im in the bath. In the dialog, a competitive reason leads Betty to

flout maxim of relevance. Her illocutionary goal finally is over her social goal.

2) Convivial

This is a reason for maxim flouting where an illocutionary goal coincides with

the social goal as in offering, inviting, greeting, thanking, and congratulating

(Leech, 1983: 104). Here, there is no disadvantaged side; both self and society are

happily getting advantages from an utterance.

Samira : I cant imagine for sure. Perfect score for your grammar.
Julie : Its also you in charge.

In the conversation above, the socialgoal is that Julie receives the compliment and

the illocutionary goal is that Julie responds the compliment with thanking. Here,

there is no competition, but a perfect goal meeting. Julie flouts maxim of

relevance to thank Samira for her help in teaching grammar to Julie. Julie does not

concern on the compliment, but more about her own need to thank. Since both

sides aim to gain satisfaction in the talk, the reason for maxim flouting is a

convivial reason.

13
 3) Collaborative

Leech (1983: 104) explains that collaborative happens when an illocutionary goal

is indifferent to the social goal. There are asserting, reporting, announcing, and

instructing that are included in this reason. Here, the illocutionary goal and the

social goal work together for a purpose of giving understanding. This reason is

closely related to the flouting of quantity maxim. An example of maxim flouting

with a collaborative reason is provided below:

Charlene : I hope you brought the bread and the cheese.

Dexter : Ah, I brought the bread.
Yule (1996: 40)
In the example above, the reason for Dexter to flout the maxim of quantity is that

he wants to tell Charlene that he does not bring any cheese. His illocutionary goal

is reporting what he has done. In this case, the context supports Dexters response,

so Charlene understands the intended meaning of Dexter.

4) Conflictive
The last reason is conflictive reason. It is a reason where the illocutionary goal

of a conversation conflicts with the social goal (Leech, 1983: 104). They are

including threatening, accusing, cursing, reprimanding, and others. Here, the

illocutionary goal and the social goal are very different. Then, the society is

disadvantaged, while someone dominates the advantage of an utterance.

Anne : How about your meal?

Willy : Yum, this is a lovely undercooked egg youve given me here, as
aaaaaaausual.

14
Here, Willy intends to hurt Anne and flouts maxim of quality. The social goal is

complimenting Anne or giving advice for her lack. On the other hand, the

illocutionary goal is stating what she feels without caring about the others

feeling. In the dialog above, the word lovely becomes the conflictive words. The

meal is not lovely, and then Willy wants to reprimand Anne. Willy states the

contrary, so in this case, the reason for the maxim flouting is conflictive.

2.2. Movie

Movie is a recording of moving images that tells a story and that people

watch on a screen or television. People watch movie to entertain themselves. All

kinds of movies have their own genres in entertaining people. People can feel

comfort when watching fun movie. People can feel sad or cry in their heart when

watching sad movie. People can feel happy when watching romance movie.

People can also feel very afraid when watching horror movie. What is told in a

story of movie can make people to get more knowledge after watching movie that

they are interested in. Furthermore, cambridge advance Learner Dictionary give

the similar definition about movie, that is something shown in a cinema or on

television and often telling a story.

2.3. Previous Study

Related to the maxim flouting, there have been researchers analyzing

maxim flouting. Nurhayati (2012) is one of the researchers focusing on the maxim

flouting as her object of study. Her thesis entitled A Pragmatic Analysis of Maxim

15
Flouting Reflected in the Oprah Winfrey Show in the Exclusive Interview with J.

K. Rowling, aims to describe the types of maxim flouting in the talk show.

Besides, it aims to identify politeness principle as maxim flouting in the talk show

and explain the purposes of maxim flouting in the talk show. In the thesis, Fitria

relates maxim flouting to the politeness principle. She argues that the most

common reason for flouting maxims of Cooperative Principle is to be polite to the

others.

This research use a descriptive qualitative methods to explain the problem

statement.The findings of her research are the highest rank is placed by quantity

maxim flouting. Second, there are six maxims of politeness principle that are

found in the interview; agreement maxim, modestymaxim, tact maxim, generosity

maxim, approbation maxim, and sympathy maxim. Finally, the purposes of

maxim flouting in the interview based on the selfpresentation of Rowling are

found in four types. They are identity development, social approval, self-esteem,

and social reward. Identity development and social approval place at the highest

rank since Rowling shares much of her life experience and wishes that she is

accepted, with her personality and thought, by the public.

Another researcher focusing on maxim flouting are Dewi and Putra (2016)

entitled An Analysis of Maxim Flouting in Toni Morrisons BELOVED. The

objectives of their research are to identify the types of maxim flouting in the

Novel and try to find the implicatures that caused by flouting the maxims. This

research conducted by using a descriptive qualitative method and critical

analyzing and collecting data. The result of this research is there are about 23

16
flouting maxims in the Toni Morrisons Beloved. There are divided into 7

maxim flouting of quantity, 7 maxim flouting of quality, 3 maxim flouting of

relation and 6 maxim flouting of manner.

Compared to the two previous researches, this research used qualitative

method too and they used the theory from Grice (1975) about cooperative

principles. The differences from the research with the previous study above are

they used Talkshow and Poem, but in this research, the researcher used movie as

object. In this research, the researcher not only discuss about kinds of maxim but

the reason why maxim flouting in the UP movie with the theory by Leech (1983:

104).

17
 CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1. Design of the Research

In this research, the researcher used a qualitative research design. It means

that the data which are analyze result have the form of descriptive, not nominal

form. According to Gay (1991), descriptive method is considered appropriate to

describe the present condition of research subject. Arikunto (2002) also states that

the descriptive research as a research that explains or describe the present

condition. Based on the opinions, the researcher designs this research as

descriptive research.

3.2. Subject of the Research

The subject of this research utterences that relates to maxims flouting in the

UP movie scripts.

3.3. Instrument of the Research

The instrument of this research is the researcher. This research used

qualitative descriptive that focus on theoretical to collect the data and analyze the

data. Mukhtar (2013: 109) state that ourself is a instrument or rool of direct

observation, because all sense of researcher is essentially a tool of observation.

3.4. Technique of Collecting Data

1. Downloaded the Up Movie from www.youtube.com and also the script of

Up movie by Bob Peterson on 30 october 2016 from google and the script

18
 from http://thefilmscript.blogspot.co.id/2009/06/up-pete-docter-bob-peterson-

2009.html.

2. Watching up movie to check the accurateness of English transcription with

the motion picture.

3. The researcher identify the utterences in the whole of movies dialogue that

contains maxim flouting

4. The researcher separates some script (conversatons) that contains the main

characters on UP movie and write the reason of maxim flouting by the

characters according to Leech theory.

5. The last, the researcher drawing conclusion of the analysis based on Gricean

theory about maxims.

3.5. Techique of Analysing Data

The researcher used descriptive method to analyze the data. Miles and Huberman

(1994: 10-11) the data analysis is divided in three concurrent activities those are ;

1. Data reduction

Data reduction refers to the process of selecting, focusing, simplifying,

abstracting and transforming the data that appear in transcription. From the

data has been obtained, the writer reduced the data by selecting important

things and discarding the unused.

2. Data Display

Data display is organizing the information include the final conclusion. In data

display the researcher classified the type of maxim flouting and the reason why

19
 maxim is flouting.

3. Drawing Conclusion

In this step explain about conclusion drawing and verification. The researcher

draw a conclusion in maxim flouting in Up movie and the reason of maxim

flouting.

3.6. Research Procedure

1. First, the researcher watch the UP movie.

2. Second, the researcher analyze types of maxims flouting are found in up

movie and find out the reasons maxims flouting by the character in up movie

on the script based on Grices theory.

3. The last, the researcher drawing conclusion of the analysis based on Gricean

theory about maxims.

20
 CHAPTER IV
RESULT AND DISCUSSION

This chapter divided into two sections : the first section is the results of the

study and the second sectionis the discussion. In the data findings, the researcher

present the analysis of maxim flouting in the dialogue/uttarances that contains

maxim flouting based on Grice theory, the meaning of each maxim flouting and

the reason by the character flouting the maxim based on Leech theory.

4.1. Result

In this section, the researcher finds out the maxim flouting by the character

use in this movie. There are a lot of maxim flouting found in Up movie dialogue.

There are 17 scenes of this movie that contains maxim flouting. In those 17 scenes

of Up movie, the types of maxim flouting are various and have different reference

and meaning. There are 2 characters who have the maxim flouting in this movie.

They are Carl and Russel.

The maxim flouting in Up movie dialogue is various. It appeared by each

characters utterances/speech events in this movie. There are four types of maxim

flouting found in Up movie script by Bob Peterson, they are maxim flouting of

quantity, maxim flouting of quality, maxim flouting of relevance and maxim

flouting of manner.

Generally, the reason of using the maxim flouting found in this movie

script are competitive as the most dominant reason for maxim flouting,

collaborative, conflictive reason, but convivial reason can not found in this movie

script.

21
4.1.1. Flouting Maxim in Up Movie Script

After reading Up movie script, the researcher find out that there are 17 maxim

flouting found in Up movie.

4.1.1.1. Maxim flouting of Quantity

(DatumQN/CM/00.28.29/scene6)
Context : Carl and Russel found the Paradise Falls and they bring Carls house
by pulling the house and walk to the Paradise Falls. Carl and Russel pulled it
together.
154. CARL : Darn thing. (calling back) C'mon, Russell, would you hurry it
up?
155. RUSSELL : I'm tiiiired. And my knee hurts.
156.CARL : Which knee?
157. RUSSELL : My elbow hurts and I have to go to the bathroom.
158. CARL : I asked you about that five minutes ago!
159. RUSSELL : Well, I didn't have to go then!

This conversation contains the maxim flouting of quantity. Based on the

conversation between Carl and Russell, and the context of situation, the researcher

found that Russell gave more information than the situation requires when he said

in line 157, he explained that his knee and his elbow are hurt. From that

information, Russell hoped he can take a rest in a few minutes. Actually, to follow

the maxim of quantity, Russell must be making his contribution as informative as

is required. He should said what he wanted clearly and directly. Based on the

context of situation of the conversation above, showed that Russells utterance

complaining contains. Russell felt tired and he complains to Mr. Fredricksen

about his bad condition because Russell wanted to stop walking. Here, the reason

maxim was flouting is competitive.

22
4.1.1.2. Maxim Flouting of Quality

(DatumQL / CL / 00.12.09/ Scene4)

Context : the construction build the big building around Carls house and
they want to buy Carls house to take the land and makes the new big
building but Carl did not want to give or sell his house to them.

18. CARL : (Carl walks to his front door.) Tell your boss he can have
our house.
19. Tom : Really?
20. CARL : When I'm dead! (Carl SLAMS the door.)

This conversation contains maxim flouting of quality. Based on the

conversation between Carl and Tom, and the context of situation, Carl lied about

they can have his house, actually Carl wont to give his house, and when Tom

said Really? Carl answer it with "When I'm dead" it means Carl said something

wrong because the fact is he never want to give his house to anyone. Actually, to

follow the rules of maxim of quantity, he should say directly that he wont to give

hs house to anyone. In this conversation, carl want to asserting Tom about Carl

who does not give his house to them. So, the reason Carl flouting the maxim is

collaborative.

(DatumQL/CM/00.13.49/scene5)
Context: Russel, the wilderness explorer has the last duties to assist an old
person to complete his badges and he forced Carl and ask Carl for Help but
Carl did not need his Help, and Carl gave a fake story and made Russel go
away from him.

48. Carl : (conspiratorially) Have you ever heard of a "snipe"?

49. Russel : "Snipe"?
50. Carl : A bird. Big eyes. Every night it sneaks into my yard and
gobbles my poor azaleas. I'm elderly and infirm. I can't catch
it. If only someone could help me..

23
 This conversation contains the maxim flouting of quality. Based on the

conversation between Carl and Russel, and the context of situation, Carl lied

about what he said in line 50 "A bird. Big eyes. Every night it sneaks into my

yard and gobbles my poor azaleas. I'm elderly and infirm. I can't catch it. If

only someone could help me", Carl does not reallly need any help to catch the

snipe and Carl lied about snipe is animals because he just said that to makes

russel go out from his house and do not bothered him anymore. Actually, to

follow the maxim of quality, Carl must be making his contribution is

truthfull. He should said the right thing about he does not need any help from

Russel and makes Russel understand about his condition.

Here, the reason maxim is flouting by Carl is competitive, because the real

reason that he said that is he want to asked Russel to go and do not bother

him because he does not need any help from Russel.

(DatumQL,CF/ 00.20.26/scene6)
Context : Carls house is floating in the air and there is a person knock his
door and that person is Russel, russel found the snipe but the snipe is run
away, he affraid that he will fall from the floating house, but Carl still do not
approve Russel and let him help Carl, but he changes his mind.

76.Russel : Hi, mr. Fredricksen. It's me, Russell.

77.carl : What are you doing out here, kid?
78.Russel : I found the snipe and i followed it under your porch. But this
snipe had a long tail and looked more like a large mouse. Please,
let me in.
79.Carl : No. (Carl slams the door, leaving Russell alone. Beat. The door
opens again.)

24
80.Carl : Aw, all right. You can... come........ in.

This conversation contains the maxim flouting of quality. Based on the

conversation between Carl and Russel, and the context of situation, Carl want

Russel to follow him, but in the other side, maybe Carl think that Russel could

make him difficult. Based on the conversation between Russell and Carl, and the

context of situation, Carl has denied his feeling and he lied to Russell because

when Carl said No! in this case, Carl lied because actually he want to let Russel

in, after he said no, he opened the door again and said Russel can come in.

Here, the reason maxim is flouting is conflictive. in the dialogue above, the

word "no" is not the true answer from Carl. He wanted to said "yes" and let

Russel in, but he said no first to makes Russel go, but actually he realize that

russel cannot go in the air.

(DatumQL / CL / 00.25.41/ scene6)

Context : after passing cumulonimbus clouds, earthquake comes to Carls
House and turns erratic and lead them astray.

126. CARL :(out of breath) Where... where are we?

127. RUSSELL :This doesn't look like the city or the jungle, Mr.
Fredricksen.

This conversation contains the maxim flouting of quality. Based on the

conversation between Carl and Russell, and the context of situation, the

researcher found that Russell lack adequate evidence about the situation,when

Russell said This doesn't look like the city or the jungle, Mr. Fredricksen.", it

25
 means that he really did not know the situation but Russel still want to inform

Carl about the place. Actually, to follow the maxim of quality, Russell should

answer truthfully. He must explain where they lands with the real fact and

being truthful with the answer and just said dont know if he does not know

the place.

Here, the reason maxim is flouting by Russel is collaborative. Russel does

not know exactly the place, but he want to report and explain about the place

to Carl.

(DatumQL /CM/ 00.31.31/ scene7)

Context : when Russel ate chocholate, there is one thing eat his chocolate
too, it is the big bird, he is really amazed and think that big animal is snipe
and Russel bring that animal to the Carl and ask him about whats Snipe
looks likes but actually we knew that Snipe animal is nothing.

171. RUSSELL : I found the snipe!

172. CARL : (humoring him) Oh, did you?
173. RUSSELL : Are they tall?
174. CARL : Oh yes, they're very tall.
175. RUSSELL : Do they have a lot of colors?
176. CARL : They do indeed.

This conversation contains the maxim of quality. Based on the

conversation between Russell and Carl, and the context of situation, the

researcher found that Carl lied to russel, when russel asked and gave his

informations about "snipe", Carl always answer Russels question with "yes"

but actually the real answer is "no" because there is no Snipe in the world.

Carl said yes because he want to deceive russel. Here, the reason maxim is

26
flouting by Carl is competitive. this reason is competitive because at first Carl

ever asked russel to found the snipe that always bother in the Carls house,

but actually he lied about the snipe because he wanted Russel go out from his

house and always asked him about any help, this is happened because russel

forced to help him while he does not need it.

(DatumQL /CM / 00.39.38 /scene10)

Context : after Carl and Russel take a shelter, Russel want to tell his
secret story about his family to Russel.

292. RUSSELL :Awh. Tents are hard.

293. CARL : Wait, aren't you "Super Wilderness Guy?" With
the GPM's and the badges?
294. RUSSELL : Yeah, but... can I tell you a secret?
295. CARL : No.

This conversation contains the maxim flouting of quality. Based on

the conversation between Russell and Carl, and the context of situation,

the researcher found that Carl lied to russel, when russel asked him about

"can I tell you a secret?", Carl answer Russels question with "no" answer

and he did not give the reason then, actually the answer is "yes" because

Carl acted like he wanted to listen what Russel's secret. Here, the reason

maxim is flouting by Carl is competitive because Carl asked russel to told

his secret without asked him or asked about permission because carl

embarrassed to said that he wanted to listen.

4.1.1.3. Maxim Flouting of Relevamce

27
 (DtumRL/ CM/ 00.20.57/scene6)
Context : after Russel come in to floating house, he saw interesting stuff
from Ellie and try to touch it, Carl really loves Ellie and do not want
someone broke Ellies stuff, he shocked and yelled Russel and ask not
touch tht stuff.
82. Russel : Goggles... Look at this stuff! Are you going on a trip?
"Paradise Falls, a land lost in time". Are you going to South
America, mr. Fredricksen?
83. Carl :Don't touch that! You'll soil it.

This conversation contains the maxim flouting of relevance. Based

on the conversation between Russell and Carl, and the context of situation,

the researcher found that Carl did not gave the answer about Russel's

questions, Carl respon his question in line 83. Actually, to follow maxim

of relevance, Carl should answer about is he really going on a trip or south

america or not. The reason maxim is flouting by Carl is competitive. Here,

when Russel asked his question and touch Ellie's stuff, Carl can not

respond it because he was shocked and affraid that Ellie's stuff will be

broken, so he asked Russel to go away and did not touch his stuff.

(DatumRL/ CL / 00.23.28 / scene6)

Context : after Russel carelessly drove Carls floating house until it
becomes unmanageable and all things are falling apart, carl fainted and
when he woke up he was confused about what happened.

103. RUSSELL : Whew! I thought you were dead.

104. CARL : Wha... what happened?
105. RUSSELL : I steered us. I did! I steered the house!
106. CARL : Steered us?

28
 This conversation contains the maxim flouting of relevance. Based on the

conversation between Carl and Russell, and the context of situation, the

researcher found that Russel did not gave the relevant answer about Carl's

question. Actually, to follow maxim of relevance, when Carl asked him about

"what hapened?" Russel should explained about what happened, but here,

Russel said other thing like "I steered us", so Carl could not understand it and

asked him like "steered us?".

Here, the reason maxim is flouting by Russel is collabortive, Russel

answer with "I steered us. I did! I steered the house!" because he wanted to

announced to Carl that he was succesfull when he helped Carl to steered his

house when storm comes"

(DatumRL / CL / 00.23.56 / scene6)

Context : after the house passed the colomunimbus clouds, the earthquakes
comes and screwed Carls house and they lost.

109. CARL : Can't tell where we are.

110. RUSSELL : Oh we're in South America all right. It was a cinch, with
my Wilderness Explorer GPS.
111. CARL : GP-what?
112. RUSSELL : My dad gave it to me. It shows exactly where we are on
the planet. With this baby, we'll never be lost!

This conversation contains the maxim flouting of relevance. Based on the

conversation between Carl and Russell, and the context of situation, the

researher found that Russel does not gave the relevant answer when Carl ask

him about "GP-what?" and then Russel answered "My dad gave it to me. It

shows exactly where we are on the planet. With this baby, we'll never be

29
 lost!", it is not the answer that Carl needed. Actually, to follow the maxim of

relevance, Russel should be explained that he have GPS, what GPS is and the

function of GPS to Carl.

Here, the reason maxim is flouting by Russel is collaborative. Russel said

"My dad gave it to me. It shows exactly where we are on the planet. With

this baby, we'll never be lost!" because he really excited to show to Carl that

he has GPS from his father and makes him forgot to answer Carl's question.

(DatumRL / CM/ 00.27.34 / scene6)

Context : after they take shelter and Russell told to Carl about his parents,
he looks sad because no one will accompany him during the inauguration.
Russell asks Carl to be with him and Carl surprised and dont understand
what Russel asking about.

138. RUSSELL : Hey, if I could assist you over there, would you sign off on
my badge?
139. CARL : What are you talking about?

This conversation contains the maxim flouting of relevance. Based on the

conversation between Carl and Russell, and the context of situation, the researcher

found that carl does not responed what Russel asked about sign off on his badge,

Carl said "What are you talking about?" and russel does not got his answer about

what russel asking about. Actually, to follow maxim of relevance, Carl should

answer with yes or no. Here, the reason maxim is flouting by Carl is

competitive. Carl said "what are you talking about?" because he can not

understand about what Russel want, so he said that to asked Russel clearly about

what Russel want.

30
 (DatumRL / CM / 00.28.29 / scene6)
Context : after passing many difficulties. Carl and Russel found paradise
falls, but Russel confused because Carl not only want to saw it but wanted to
go exactly where paradise falls is, so Russel confused why Carl really want to
go there while paradise falls still far away and its difficult to reach
.
151. RUSSELL : Wait. Why are we going to Paradise Falls again?
152. CARL : Hey, let's play a game. It's called: "See who can be
quiet the longest."
153. RUSSELL : Cool! My mom loves that game!
This conversation contains the maxim flouting of relevance. Based on the

conversation between Carl and Russell, and the context of situation, the researcher

found that Carl flout maxim of relevance. Carl wont answer Russels question,

but he change the topic with his answer "Hey, let's play a game. It's called: "See

who can be quiet the longest." Actually, to follow maxim of relevance, Carl

should explain to Russel why Carl really want to go to Paradise Falls

. Here, the reason maxim is flouting by Carl is competitive. Carl said "Hey,

let's play a game." because the answer was complicated, difficult to be explained

and makes carl sad to think about Ellie, so Carl tried to changes the interesting

topic to Russel.

(DatumRL / CM / 00.40.30 / scene10)

Context : Russel told about his parents and he was sad because he knew
that his parents never comes, but he need spirit from Carl and make him
believe that his parents will comes to put his badges.

308. RUSSELL :But he promised he'd come to my Explorer ceremony to

aaaaaaaaa pin on my Assisting the Elderly badge, so he can show me
AAAAAAAAA about tents then, Right?
309. CARL :Hey, uh, why don't you get some sleep. Don't want to
wake up the Atraveling flea circus.
This conversation contains the maxim flouting of relevance. Based on the

conversation between Russell and Carl, and the context of situation, the researcher

31
found that Carl flout the maxim of relevance. Carl could not response Russel

question with yes or no because Carl does not knew the truth about whether

Russel's father will come or not, so Carl changes the topic and asked Russel to

get some sleep. Here, the reason maxim is flouting by Carl is competitive because

carl wanted to makes Russel forgot to think about how much he wanted to see his

father.

4.1.1.4. Flouting Maxim of Manner

( DatumMN / CF /00.30.16 / scene7)

context : Somehow energized, Russell jams his pack into Carl's hands,
secures his rope to a tree and tromps off into the shrubs. He goes into the
woods carrying a small shovel in one hand and a pile of leaves in another
because he wanted to go to the bathroom.

164. RUSSELL : I've always wanted to try this!

Mr. Fredricksen? Am I supposed to dig the hole before or
after?
165. CARL : Eugh! None of my concern! Beat.

This conversation contains the maxim flouting of manner. Based on the

conversation between Russell and Carl, and the context of situation, the researcher

found that Carl said statement that the result was ambiguity meanings and

obscurity when he said None of my concern! Carl could probably give obscurity

meaning to Russell about to dig the hole before or after. Actually, to follow the

maxim of manner, Carl should avoid ambiguity. He should answer before or after

to dig the hole. From that ambiguity statement, Russell looked for how the way to

dig the hole by himself because Mr. Fredricksen did not give the right answer.

32
Here, the reason maxim is flouting by Carl is conflictive, Carl very angry because

Russells question is inappropriate to be asked in that situation.

(DatumMN / CL / 00.42.35 / scene10)

Context : Charlez Mumtz and his dogs comes and take Kevin away from Carl
and Russel because Charlez Mumtz really wants Kevin, Russel really sad and
disappointed.

327. RUSSEL : Wait, Kevin just leaving? But you promised to protect her!.

Her babies need her. We gotta make sure theyre together

328. CARL : Sorry Russell, weve lost already.

329. RUSSEL : Yeah(Russell disappointed)

This conversation contains the flouting maxim of manner. Based on the

conversation between Russell and Carl, and the context of situation, the researcher

found that Carl said a statement that results obscurity when he said Sorry

Russell, weve lost already statement could probably give obscurity meaning to

Russell about they cannot keep Kevin anymore because they did not have more

time. Carl afraid the balloons will lose the helium over three days. From the

ambiguity statements, Russell as it should be understand what is Carl means.

Actually, to follow the maxim of manner, Carl should answer that he can not keep

Kevin anymore without giving obscurity statement. Here, the reason maxim is

flouting by Carl is collaborative. Here, indirectly Carl said "Sorry Russell,

weve lost already" to Russel because he won't to keep kevin anymore, kevin and

all the things that Russel did makes Carl difficult to go to paradise fall.

33
 (DatumMN / CM / 00.22.07 / scene6)
Context : russel lokk at window and shocked about what he saw, Carl
curious about what Russel saw.

99. CARL : What are you doing over there?

100. RUSSELL : Look!
This conversation contains the maxim flouting of manner. Based on

the conversation between Carl and Russell, and the context of situation,

the researcher found that Russell deliberately does not answer Carls

question clearly. Russell just said Look!. Actually, to follow the maxim

of manne, Russell should answer Carls answer. He must be clearl and

avoid ambiguity with the situation that happened when the conversation is

in progress, he should say that the cumolonimbous came.

Here, the reason maxim is flouting by Russel is competitive. Based

on the context of situation of the conversation, Russel Asked carl to see by

himself about what Russel saw. Russell not say the cumolonimbous came,

he only said look to asked Carl to comes over the window and look by

himself.

(DatumMN / CL/ 00.45.36 / scene11)

Context : after comes to the Paradise falls, Carl found stranger that he
really knew, the stranger is Charlez Muntz, the childhood hero that he and
Ellie likes, he was really happy.

351. CARL : It's really him! (to Russell) That's Charles Muntz!
352. RUSSELL : (EXCITED) It is!? (CONSIDERS) Who's Charles
Muntz?
353. CARL : Him!
This conversation contains the maxim flouting of manner. Based on the

conversation between Russell and Carl, and the context of situation, the researcher

34
found that Carl do not answer and explain to Russels question about who is

Charles Muntz. When Russel asked "who's Charles Muntz?" Carl just pointing

his finger to Muntz and said "him". Actually, to follow the maxim of manner, Carl

must be making his answer is clearly and avoid ambiguity. He should explain to

Russel who is Charlez Muntz and why Carl is really happy to meet him.

Here, the reason maxim is flouting by Carl is collaborative this reason is

collaborative because carl actually announce to russel that carl is really happy to

meet his childhood hero who lived in paradise fall and famous when carl and ellie

was child, but carl too lazy to explain it, so he just said "him" and let russel found

the answer who is charles muntz.

4.2. Discussion
In this section, the findings of maxim flouting in Up movie script by Bob

Peterson are discussed more comprehensively. Some examples of maxim flouting

that occurs in the movie are provided to give a more in-depth explanation of the

phenomena. The aim of the discussion is to answer the objectives of this research

clearly so there is an understanding of the phenomena under study.

As Grices theory, maxim flouting does not lead to a complete

misunderstanding, but to a hidden meaning. It is intentionally breaking the

maxims of Cooperative Principle to convey messages. In the movie, the characters

tries to perform it in many different ways. Based on the objectives of this

research, there are two parts of discussion concerning about maxim flouting in the

35
movie; its types and reasons. The first discussion gives an in-depth explanation of

the types of maxim flouting performed by the characters.

According to Grice, there are four types of maxim flouting; quantity,

quality, relevance, and manner. In Up movie Script by Bob Peterson, The

characters flouts all of these maxims. The most dominant maxim flouting is

maxim flouting of quality and relevance and the least dominant is maxim flouting

of quantity.

a. Maxim Flouting of Quantity

In Up movie, the maxim of quantity is broken 3 times by the characters. Here, the

characters fails to fulfill the maxim of quantity which requires the speaker to give

enough information to the hearer and to be as informative as is required. In some

exchanges, the characters gives too much information and in some others, he

gives too little information to flout the maxim of quantity.

The first example in which the characters flouts maxim of quantity is taken

from the following dialog. It is when Carl and Russel walk to the paradise falls

and Russel felt tired.

CARL : Darn thing. (calling back) C'mon, Russell, would you hurry it up?
RUSSELL : I'm tiiiired. And my knee hurts.
CARL : Which knee?
RUSSELL : My elbow hurts and I have to go to the bathroom.
This conversation contains the maxim flouting of quantity. Based on the

conversation between Carl and Russell, and the context of situation, the researcher

found that Russell gave more information than the situation requires when he said

36
My elbow hurts and I have to go to the bathroom." explained that his knee and

his elbow are hurt. From that information, Russell hoped he can take a rest in a

few minutes. Actually, to follow the maxim of quantity, Russell must be making

his contribution as informative as is required. Based on the context of situation of

the conversation above, showed that Russells utterance complaining contains.

Russell felt tired and he complains to Mr. Fredricksen about his bad condition

because Russell wanted to stop walking. Actually, to follow the maxim of

quantity, Russel must be making his contribution as informative as is required. He

should explain to Carl that he was tired to walked.

b. Maxim Flouting of Quality

Maxim Flouting of Quality occurs 6 times in Up movie script which makes it

rank second. It flouts the maxim that requires a speaker to make contribution that

is reliable, state what is true according to him, and say that has adequate evidence.

In its occurrences, maxim of quality is flouted in various ways by the character.

An example of this maxim flouting is presented below. It is when Carl and Russel

stop for a while because Russel want to toilet, but he founded the snipe and then

Russel comes to Carl and asked about what does Snipe looks like.

RUSSELL: I found the snipe!

CARL : (humoring him) Oh, did you?
RUSSELL: Are they tall?
CARL : Oh yes, they're very tall.
RUSSELL: Do they have a lot of colors?
CARL : They do indeed.

37
This conversation contains the maxim of quality. Based on the conversation

between Russell and Carl, and the context of situation, the researcher found that

Carl lied to russel, when russel asked and gave his informations about "snipe",

Carl always answer Russels question with "yes" but actually the real answer is

"no" because there is no Snipe in the world. Carl said yes because he want to

deceive russel. Here, the reason maxim is flouting by Carl is competitive. this

reason is competitive because at first Carl ever asked russel to found the snipe that

always bother in the Carls house, but actually he lied about the snipe because he

wanted Russel go out from his house and always asked him about any help, this is

happened because russel forced to help him while he does not need it.

As explained in the findings, maxim flouting of qulity ranks first in the

occurrences. There are still so many examples of the occurrences of maxim

flouting of quality in Up movie script by Bob Peterson. However, to comprise the

entire types of maxim flouting uttered by the character, the example of analyzed

data in terms of maxim flouting of quality is unable to be presented all in this

discussion section.

c. Maxim Flouting of Relevance

Maxim Flouting Relevance breaks the second maxim of cooperative principle,

maxim of relevance. Based on Grices theory, a maxim flouting is classified into

maxim flouting of relevance if a speaker does not give relevant response in an

exchange. The way to flout this maxim is simply by being irrelevant. In Up movie

script by Bob Peterson, this maxim is slightly under manner maxim flouting in its

38
occurrences. It happens 6 times. For the further explanation, below is provided

four examples of maxim flouting of relevance by the character in Up.

RUSSELL : Hey, if I could assist you over there, would you sign off on my
aaaaaaaaaaabadge?
CARL : What are you talking about?

This conversation contains the maxim flouting of relevance . Based on the

conversation between Carl and Russell, and the context of situation, the researcher

found that carl does not responed what Russel asked about sign off on his badge,

Carl said "What are you talking about?" and russel does not got his answer about

what russel asking about. Actually, to follow maxim of relevance, Carl should

answer with yes or no. Here, the reason maxim is flouting by Carl is

competitive. Carl said "what are you talking about?" because he can not

understand about what Russel want, so he said that to asked Russel clearly about

what Russel want. The required answer to be considered as being relevant is a yes

or no. Then, he can add his explanation about his answer after that. Since his

response is irrelevant, Carl has flouted maxim of relevance in this conversation.

d. Flouting Maxim of Manner

This type of maxim flouting of manner ranks as the third dominant maxim

flouting happened in Up movie with the total 4 maxims flouting. It happens more

frequent than maxim flouting of quantity. In this maxim flouting, the character

fails to fulfill the maxim of manner that requires him to be clear, brief, and orderly

39
in stating his utterances. Being perspicuous is the common indication of this

maxim flouting. Some examples of maxim flouting of manne by the character are

presented below. It is happens when Russel and Carl stay in the flouting house

and fly away to the Paradise falls but Russel found something on their ways.

CARL : What are you doing over there?

RUSSELL : Look!
This conversation contains the maxim flouting of manner. Based on the

conversation between Carl and Russell, and the context of situation, the researcher

found that Russell deliberately does not answer Carls question clearly. Russell

just said Look!. Actually, to follow the maxim of manne, Russell should answer

Carls answer. He must be clearl and avoid ambiguity with the situation that

happened when the conversation is in progress, he should say that the

cumolonimbous came.

3. The Reasons for Maxim Flouting in Up Movie Script by Bob Peterson

To identify the second objective of this research, the theory of Leech is

used. It is the theory of Illocutionary function. This theory comprises four types of

reason that may lead the character to do maxim flouting. Those possible reasons

are acompetitive, convivial, collaborative, or conflictive reason. The most

dominant reason for maxim flouting by the character is the competitive reason,

while the least dominant reason is the convivial reason.

a. Competitive Reason

40
 The most dominant reason for the character in maxim flouting is competitive

reason. This reason reaches the number of 9 times in its occurrences. It ranks

First. As its name, this reason indicates a competition between the illocutionary

goal and the social goal. The examples of the analyzed data which contains

competitive reason to flout maxim of Cooperative Principle are provided as in the

following.The example maxim flouting because of competitive reason is in the

conversation between Russel and Carl. When Russel ask Carl about his stuff, Carl

flout the maxim and answer it with the other answer that the Russel wont to listen.

Russel : Goggles... Look at this stuff! Are you going on a trip?

"Paradise Falls, a land lost in time". Are you going to South
America, mr. Fredricksen?
Carl : Don't touch that! You'll soil it.

This conversation contains the maxim flouting of relevance. Based

on the conversation between Russell and Carl, and the context of situation,

Carl did not gave the answer about Russel's questions, Carl respon his

question with " Don't touch that! You'll soil it." Actually, to follow maxim

of relevance, Carl should answer about is he really going on a trip or south

america or not. The reason maxim is flouting by Carl is competitive. Here,

when russel asked his question and touch Ellie's stuff, carl can not respond

it because he was affraid that Ellie's stuff will be broken, so he asked

Russel to go away and did not touch his stuff. So, Carl used Competitive

reason to flout the maxim.

41
b. Collaborative Rreason
Collaborative reason causes the character to flout maxim of Cooperative

Principle for 6 times. Collaborative reason is the reason in which the

illocutionary goal is indifferent to the social goal. The examples below

represent the effects of this reason to lead the character flouting the maxim of

Cooperative Principle. As the first example, a conversation between Carl and

Russel is provided. The situation is that Carl does not know where the place he

have been and he asked Russel about it.

CARL :(out of breath) Where... where are we?

RUSSELL :This doesn't look like the city or the jungle, Mr.
Fredricksen.

This conversation contains the maxim flouting of quality. Based on the

conversation between Carl and Russell, and the context of situation, the

researcher found that Russell lack adequate evidence about the situation,when

Russell said This doesn't look like the city or the jungle, Mr. Fredricksen.", it

means that he really did not know the situation. Actually, to follow the

maxim of quality, Russell should answer truthfully. He must explain where

they lands with the real fact and being truthful with the answer and just said

dont know if he does not know the place. Here, the reason maxim is

flouting by Russel is collaborative. Russel does not know exactly the place,

but he want to report and explain about the place to Carl.

42
 C.Conflicative Reason

The third dominant reason for the character in maxim flouting is conflictive

reason. It is a reason in which the illocutionary goal conflicts with the social

goal. The frequency of conflictive reason is 2 times Theexamples of conflictive

reason is as follow.

RUSSELL : I've always wanted to try this!

Mr. Fredricksen? Am I supposed to dig the hole before or
after?
CARL : Eugh! None of my concern! Beat.

This conversation contains the maxim flouting of manner. Based on the

conversation between Russell and Carl, and the context of situation, the writer

found that Carl said statement that result ambiguity meanings and obscurity when

he said None of my concern! Carl could probably give obscurity meaning to

Russell about to dig the hole before or after. Actually, to follow the maxim of

manner, Carl should avoid ambiguity. He should answer before or after to dig the

hole. From that ambiguity statement, Russell looked for how the way to dig the

hole by himself because Mr. Fredricksen did not give the right answer. Here, the

reason maxim is flouting by Carl is conflictive, Carl very angry because Russells

question is inappropriate to be asked in that situation.

43
 CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

After accomplishing chapter I to chapter IV, in this chapter the researcher

will draw conclusion regarding to the research questions in the first chapter. In the

previous chapter, the researcher has interpreted and discussed the data analysis in

the Up movie as the subject of the study.

5.1. Conclusions

This study aimed to find the types of maxim flouting in Up movie script

by Bob Peterson and find the reasom maxim flouting by the characters in this

movie. According to the Result and discussion in the previous chapter, some

conclusions related to the maxim flouting uttered by Up Script By Bob Peterson

can be drawn as follows. With regard to the data analysis dealing with the types of

maxim flouting, Up Movies Script By Bob Peterson performs four types of

maxim flouting; quantity, quality,relevance, and manner. From the four maxim

flouting, the most dominant maxim flouting uttered by The Character are maxim

flouting of Quality and Maxim Flouting of Relevance. Being alone makes Carl

does not care about his environment makes him limit his communication to others

and Carl sometimes say what he does not want to say, he actually cared with his

environment and people anround him but he was too awkward and lazy to do it

since Ellies was died.

In general, maxim of quality and relevance are frequently used to convince

another participant of the conversation. On the other hand, the type of maxim

flouting having the lowest rank in the occurrences is maxim of quantity.

Lastly, dealing with the reasons for maxim flouting, there are four reasons

44
that lead the character to flout the maxims; competitive, collaborative, convivial,

and conflictive reason. In the movie, competitive reason becomes the most

dominant reason for maxim flouting while there is no convivial reason found in

this movie.

5.2. Suggestions

After conducting this research, the researcher would like to give some

suggestions as follows:

For students whose major is English Department, studying English not

only to study about four skills, but also they must study other language aspect.

Moreover, we have to know about other aspects such as structure, contextual

meaning and other literary sources. One of them is cooperative principles. As we

know, cooperative principles is an important to learn in language, in order to

makes the communication between the speaker and listenes becomes clear and

leads the participants to make a contribution as is required in a conversation. For

English learners, it can be used as a guidance to apply Grices maxim in their

utteraces. It will help the students to understand the the maxim flouting in

utterances. Therefore, the aim of this study is to help the students/learners in

understanding the rules of maxim by maxim flouting.

For the lectures, the researcher wishes that they will be mentors/tutors for

other researchers in cooperative priciples/Gricean Maxim aspect. The researcher

also hopes that the lecturer may give more understanding about Maxim especially

45
Four Gricean maxim in order to help students to get more understanding about

rules of maxim and why maxim is flouting in the sentence or utterance. Therefore,

this study will help them to know more about maxim or cooperative principles

and how to apply it. It will be the guidance for the teacher to choose the media in

teaching Cooperative Principles, so that their students/learner never be bored

when learn Cooperative Principles.

The researcher also hopes that the further research especially dealing with

Gricean Maxim can give a great contribution in terms of English language

teaching and learning. The other researchers had also better in analyzing the

Flouting Maxim in each kind such as the analysis of maxim of Quality, Quantity,

Relevance or Manner. Thus, this study can be enlarged and developed by other

researchers who are interested in analyzing of Maxim Flouting especially from

Gricean Maxim. Hopefully, the further researcher will find another object of the

research, and they will find better ideas to improve more better findings in English

language teaching and learning process.

The researcher suggests to the other researchers who will conduct the

research in the same field to describe and analyze more detail elements which

have not been discussed in this study such as, the maxim of quantity that the

researcher found is 1 times and the convivial reason with the theroy by Leech that

the research didnt found in this research. Moreover, the researcher suggest the

further research to analyze the all characters in the movie in order to gain more

detail result. The writer fully realizes that this paper is still far from being perfect,

therefore any constructive criticisms will be highly appreciated.

46
 REFERENCES

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2002. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan

Praktik.Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Cutting, J. 2008. Pragmatics and Discourse: A Resource Book for Students.

New York: Routledge.

Dewi, C., & Putra, D. A. (2016). AN ANALYSIS OF FLOUTING MAXIMS IN

TONI MORRISONS BELOVED(1987). LITERARY CRITICISM, 1(2).

Gay, L. R. Late of Florida International University. (2000).

Grice, H Paul, Logic and conversation. In Cole, P., and J.L. Morgan, eds.
Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 4158,1975. Web.

Grice, H Paul, Studies in the way of words London: Harvard University Press.
Cambridge Massachusetts.1991. Web.

Leech, G. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman Inc.

Mey, J. L. 2001. Pragmatics: An Introduction. (2nd Ed.). Oxford: Blackwell

Publishing.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded

sourcebook. Sage.

Nurhayati, F. 2012. A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF MAXIM FLOUTING REFLECTED IN

THE OPRAH WINFREY SHOW IN THE EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH J. K.
ROWLING (Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta).

Thomas, J. 1995. The Meaning of Interaction: an Introduction to Pragmatics.

New York: Longman.

Wardaugh, R. 2006. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwell

Publishing.

Yule, G. 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

47
Online resources

www.youtube.com Accessed on 30 october 2016 at 08.15 a.m

http://thefilmscript.blogspot.co.id/2009/06/up-pete-docter-bob-peterson-

2009.html. Accessed on 30 october 2016 at 08.15 a.m

48