PRAGMATICS ANALYSIS OF MAXIM FLUOTING IN THE INTERVIEW OF
DWAYNE JOHNSON TROUGH DEDDY CORBUZIER’S YOUTUBE CHANNEL
Arranged by:
Nitana Talia (A1B218091)
Supporting lecturer:
Dr. Reli Handayani, S.Pd., M.Pd.
ENGLISH EDUCATION PROGRAM
FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF JAMBI
2020
INTRODUCTION
Language is an important tool to communicate so that social interaction between individuals,
groups, or society can run well. However, in recent research of pragmatics in the theory of
coorperative principle was found some mistakes where the speaker is considered uncooperative.
Recent theoretical developments have revealed that there is also some maxim flouting or even
maxim violating found in the conversation including in the movie conversation. We have already
pointed out that the conversational maxims are broken rather more often than lingustic rules such
as grammar. Maxim is a rule for knowing whether a speaker can be cooperative or not while he
contributes information in a conversation.
As Yule (1996) stated, it is important to to recognize this maxims as unstated assumptions we
have in conversations. We assume that people are normally going to provide an appropiarte
amount of information. By looking at maxim, we can determine the parts where the speaker
violates the maxims and does not provide appropriate information. On the other hand, fluoting
maxim can also occur because the speaker has a specific purpose. In addition, participants in the
conversation are considered to comply with the maxim if the information provided is appropriate
and reliable, accompanied by evidence, relevant and unambiguous in accordance with the theory
of Coorperative Principle by H. P. Grice.
Thus, the conversation participant is considered to violate maxim if he does not provide
correct information and does not fulfill one of the four maxims, namely maxim of quantity,
maxim of quality, maxim of relation, and maxim of manner.
The aim of the research is to identify the types of maxim flouting done by the participant of
interview between Corbuzier Corbuzier and his son Azka with Dwayne Johnson and the film
director of Skyscraper films in Hongkong that has been uploaded on Corbuzier Corbuzier’s
YouTube channel. With this study, the reader can understand and add insight in the field of
pragmatics especially in the implicature about coorperative principle theory where maxim
fluotings occur. Remember, maxim fluoting very often occurs in various situations of daily
conversation.
THEORY USED
Cooperative Principle
Cooperative Principle is is involve in the conversation or communication where each partivipants
of the conversation will normally being coorperate with each other to produce the accepted
menaning. In contrast , we assume that each participants is telling the truth, not telling the
irellavan statement, and can explain the information as clearly as possible. In this case Grice
(1975) divides maxim into 4 categories,
1. The maxim of quantity, where one tries to be as informative as one possibly can, and
gives as much information as is needed, and no more.
2. The maxim of quality, where one tries to be truthful, and does not give information that is
false or that is not supported by evidence.
3. The maxim of relation, where one tries to be relevant, and says things that are pertinent to
the discussion.
4. The maxim of manner, 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.
Breaking the Maxims
a. Violate
This means that we break the maxims surreptitiously, or covertly, so that other people do
not know. If we violate the maxim of quality, we lie. If we violate the maxim of quantity
by not giving enough information, if someone finds out we can be accused of 'being
economical with the truth', another deceit.
b. Fluot
When the participants of conversation fluot a maxim, they break it in a flagrant way, so
that it is obvious to all concerned that it has been broken. If this happens, then it is clear
that the speaker is intending the hearer to infer additional meaning over and above what
is said. Grice distinguishes what he calls sentence meaning from utterer's meaning and he
refers to an utterer's meaning indicated through a flout as an implicature. So the
implicature is what we have been referring to so far as the extra meaning. As Cutting
(2002: 37) states, that a speakers who flouts maxims expects the hearers to appreciate the
meaning implied but they appears not to follow the maxims. The four types of maxim
flouting are explained in the following points.
1. Maxim of Quantity Flouting
Speakers who conveys too little or too much information than needed can be
categorized as the speakers who fluoting the maxim of quantity because the
information provided is excessive or insufficient.
2. Maxim of Quality Flouting
A speaker who flouts the maxim of quality commonly says something that
obviously does not represent what he/she thinks. The other ways of flouting the
maxim of quality is by using hyperbole, metaphor, and, irony. A speaker seems to
flout the maxim of quality when he/she exaggerates his/her statement (Cutting,
2002: 37).
3. Maxim of Relation Flouting
If the statement given is not relevant, then the speakers is considered fluoting the
maxim of relation. They might expect the hearers to try guessing the addition
meaning they implied as said by Cutting (2002: 39) the speaker who flouts the
maxim of relation expects the hearers to be able to imagine what the utterance did
not say.
4. Maxim of Manner Flouting
Those who flout the maxim of manner are being obscure and often trying to
exclude a third party (Cutting, 2002: 39).
DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
1. Maxim of Quantity Flouting
Speakers who conveys too little or too much information than needed can be
categorized as the speakers who fluoting the maxim of quantity because the information
provided is excessive or insufficient.
a. Giving Too Little Information
Corbuzier: Why him? Why not Jackie Chen why not me? Why not me?
Johnson: Yeah why not Jackie Chen, why not him?
The Director: I think I should have.. I sould have cast you
In the data above, Deddy Corbuzier and Dwayne Johnson asked two questions “why not
Jackie Chen” and “why not me (refers to Corbuzier)” he choose to be the main actor in
the Skyscraper film to the director. However, the director only answered "I think I should
have ... I must have cast you" and did not discuss why he did not choose Jackie Chen as
the actor in the film. which means only one question is answered. Thus, the director is
considered fluoting the maxim of quantity because he provides insufficient information
b. Giving Too Much Information
Corbuzier: Central Intelligence
The director: yes
Corbuzier: yes. And you’re directed this Skyscraper
The director: Skyscraper is my first chance at it and fortunately I have him in it
but I… I… just, I overcame having Dwayne Johnson in my movie and it’s still
good even tough who is in it.
In this conversation, the director should explain whether he plays the role of director in
the Skycrapper film or not. But he revealed too much information about what he thought
in choosing an actor as a director. This is categorized as maxim of quantity fluoting
because the director gives unnecessary information or excessive information.
2. Maxim of Manner Fluoting
Those who flout the maxim of manner are being obscure and often trying to exclude a
third party (Cutting, 2002: 39).
Corbuzier: You’ve got it, right?
Azka: Maybe in your dream..
When Corbuzier and Johnson convinced Azka that his body was bigger and better
than Johnson, then Corbuzier asked whether Azka understood or not, Azka
answered with "Maybe in your dream". Azka should have answered directly that
he disagreed with their statement due to the fact Azka considered that Johnson's
body and muscles were bigger than Corbuzier's by answering "I think Johnson is
than you, pa” (pa is the way Azka call his father) instead of using the previous
sentence which is considered not in accordance with maxim of manner.
3. Maxim of Quality Fluoting
A speaker who flouts the maxim of quality commonly says something that obviously
does not represent what he/she thinks. The other ways of flouting the maxim of quality is
by using hyperbole, metaphor, and, irony. A speaker seems to flout the maxim of quality
when he/she exaggerates his/her statement (Cutting, 2002: 37).
Johnson: Uhm.. I eat the children
Corbuzier: It’s better to run out (said to Azka)
Johnson: How old are you? (pointed at Azka)
Azka: Uhm..12
Johnson: Okay, only 10
Azka: Okay, that’s good
Johnson: Children and pineapples
When Corbuzier asked what Johnson consumed as daily food so he had a large body and
muscular muscles, Johnson said that he ate children and pineapple. The words "Uhm .. I
eat the children" and "Children and pineapples" that Johnson put forward are included as
irony. Where he gives the opposite meaning or implied meaning which implies that he
implies that it is impossible for him to eat human flesh, of course he also eats food as
people generally eat.
The words “Uhm .. I eat the children” and “Children and pineapples” is categorized as
maxim of quality fluoting, in term of Johnson gives the wrong answer because he does
not eat children.
4. Maxim of Relation Fluoting
If the statement given is not relevant, then the speakers is considered fluoting the maxim
of relation. They might expect the hearers to try guessing the addition meaning they
implied as said by Cutting (2002: 39) the speaker who flouts the maxim of relation
expects the hearers to be able to imagine what the utterance did not say.
Johnson: Yeah.. Hitam Putih
Corbuzier: Hitam Putih? Okay…
Johnson: All our fans in Indonesia thank you so much for your love and support.
You’re gonna love Skyscraper
In the data above, Johnson and Corbuzier are talking about "Hitam Putih" show which is
an Indonesian television program guided by Corbuzier. Johnson then greets his fans in
Indonesia and expresses his gratitude for the love and support they gave to him. The
implied meaning was Johnson hoping Corbuzier returned his praise for the Hitam Putih
by re-mentioning the Skyscrapper film where he was an actor of it. Johnson's statement is
also considered as flouting the maxim of relations because the sentence he delivered does
not match the previous topic of conversation.
CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis above, it can be concluded that participants in conversations with
actors and film directors of Skyscrapper do all four fluot of maxim. Indeed, not many fluoting of
maxim is found even if in specific maxim. Because of the short video duration so that the
conversation that is displayed is also short, the flouting of maxim also found in the little amount.
In addition, the speakers in the video are also not speaking formally or in a formal situation, so
the sentences that are spoken may vary, contain jokes, teasing, or are informal.
REFERENCES
Brown, G. and Yule, G. 1983. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Cutting, j. 2002. Pragmatic and Discourse: a Resource Book for Students. New York:
Routledge.
Grice, H.P. 2004. Logic and Conversation; Cooperative Principle.