Advanced Writing (Academic Essay)

ABSTRACT

This study was aimed to analyze the conversational maxims appeared and flouted by the speakers in casual conversation which are conducted by two students of English Language Education, Graduate Program of State Semarang University. In order to achieve the goal, the writer used descriptive qualitative research design. Therefore, this study is conducted systematically through the technique of data collecting and data analysis. As the results of this research, the writer divided into two categories. The first result, the writer found out that maxim of quality was the most appeared in the conversation, the frequency appeared of maxim of quantity was 16 times, followed by maxim of quality with 13 times appeared, 2 times appeared for the maxim of relation and only 1 time for maxim of manner. The second result showed that there were 3 kinds flouting maxims in the conversation. The flouting maxims that the speakers did were maxim of quantity (only 1 time) and maxim of quality (2 times). From the result, it implicated that the speakers obey the rule of Gricean maxims. It also means that the conversation runs smoothly and both of the speakers understand what they uttered in the conversation. Although there is some flouting inside the conversation, it does not mean that there is some problems occur in the conversation.

Keywords: conversational maxims, flouting maxim, casual conversation

Advanced Writing (Academic Essay)

CONCLUSION

The purpose of this study is to identify the conversational maxims which are appeared and what types of maxims which are flouted in the casual conversation. Based on the analysis above, It can be seen the results as follows.

1.    The first result shows that the frequency maxim of quantity is the highest among the other maxims in the casual conversation. The maxims of quantity appeared 16 times, followed by maxim of quality with 13 times appeared, 2 times appeared for the maxim of relation and only 1 time for maxim of manner.

2.     The second result shows that there were 3 kinds flouting maxims in the conversation. The flouting maxims that the speakers did were maxim of quantity (only 1 time) and maxim of quality (2 times).

According to the result, the writer concluded that both of the students obey the conversational maxims. it means that the speakers obey the rule of Gricean maxims. It also means that the conversation runs smoothly and both of the speakers understand what they uttered in the conversation. Although there is some flouting inside the conversation, but it does not mean that there is some problems occur in the conversation. The writer also concluded that both of the students understand well about the role of their selves in the conversation. So, the casual conversation runs well without any pressure or intimidation.

REFERENCES

Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In: P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (eds). Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press.

Kumar, R. (1996). Research Methodology. California: Sage Publication.

Leech, G. N. (1983). Principle of Pragmatics. London: Longman.

Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Woods, P. (1999). Successful Writing for Qualitative Researchers. New York: Routledge.

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press.

Advanced Writing (Academic Essay)

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

A.    Findings

After analyzing the data, the writer found several conversational maxims and also some flouting maxims which are done by the students in the casual conversation. The result of the analysis divided in two categories, those could be seen as follows:

      1. The Result of Conversational Maxims
    The result of four conversational maxims could be seen in the table below.

Table 4.1

Conversational maxims appeared

No	Kinds of Maxim	Frequency
1	Maxim of Quality	13
2	Maxim of Quantity	16
3	Maxim of Relation	2
4	Maxim of Manner	1
Total		32

                
        2. The Result of Flouting Maxims

                  The flouting maxims of the casual conversation could be seen in the table below:

Table 4.2

Flouting maxims appeared

No	Kinds of Maxim	Frequency
1	Maxim of Quality	-
2	Maxim of Quantity	1
3	Maxim of Relation	2
4	Maxim of Manner	-
Total		3

Based on the data above, the first result (table 4.1) shows that the frequency maxim of quantity is the highest among the other maxims in the casual conversation. The maxims of quantity appeared 16 times, followed by maxim of quality with 13 times appeared, 2 times appeared for the maxim of relation and only 1 time for maxim of manner. The second result (table 4.2) shows that there were 3 kinds flouting maxims in the conversation. The flouting maxims that the speakers did were maxim of quantity (only 1 time) and maxim of quality (2 times). According to the result, it means that the speakers obey the rule of Gricean maxims. It also means that the conversation runs smoothly and both of the speakers understand what they uttered in the conversation. Although there is some flouting inside the conversation, it does not mean that there is some problem occur in the conversation.

B.     Discussion

The conversational maxims can be categorized into four categories. The first one was the maxim of quality (do not say what you believe to be false or that for which you lack evidence), the second one is maxim of quantity (say as much as but no more than is necessary), the third one is maxim of relation (be relevant), and the last one is maxim of manner (be clear, avoid ambiguity, be brief, be orderly).

Based on those categories, the writer shows some parts of the conversation that contains the maxims. These are the examples of conversational maxims which appeared and flouted in the casual conversation between two English students of graduate program.

 1. Maxim of quality (do not say what you believe to be false or that for which you lack evidence)

B	By the way, how did you spend your holiday last semester?
A	After we went to Jogja, I did nothing. Just stay at my hometown, spending time there.

A	And What will you after this?
B	Ummm… I think I want to go to Gramedia. I want to buy some books of linguistics likes pragmatic or discourse. But I will read them first in Gramedia.

       2. Maxim of quantity (say as much as but no more than is necessary)

A	After we went to Jogja, I did nothing. Just stay at my hometown, spending time there.
	And how ‘bout you?
B	Same here…

B	So, you are the first child, Alrina?
A	Yas, I should say aaa…yes.
B	Mmm…
A	I should say I am.

  
       3. Maxim of relation (be relevant)

A	Hi Kak… How are you?
B	Only my pet which is fine.

A	Swimming with Kak Tia. I love swimming. Do you want to come along?
B	What? Swimming? I am a stone in the water.

       4. Maxim of manner (be clear, avoid ambiguity, be brief, be orderly).

B	Uh um… how do you know about that kind of thing?  Do you love football, too?
A	I did, actually. Let me highlight the word did. Not too much right now. I have no friends who will accompany me to watch football match at night. Even though I want to do it so much. You know, in my boarding house, all of them are girls and when I want to watch it, there are no one who like football like me. So, I have….to…get back.
B	Uh um. And but, I think I will invite you to come with me. While having coffee in Indomaret point.
A	Really? If the match is not late at night, I will come next time for sure.

Advanced Writing (Academic Essay)

Methodology

         This research used descriptive qualitative method. According to Kumar (1998), he said that descriptive method is an attempt to describe systematically a situation, problem or phenomenon, or to provide information about, say the condition of living in the communities or an issue. In addition, Woods (2006) said that qualitative method focuses on natural setting, has interest in meaning, perspectives and understanding, and gives great consideration on process. Therefore, this research is conducted systematically through the technique of data collecting and data analysis. The data are taken from the casual conversation between two students of graduate program of UNNES in the spare time. The focus of this study is to find out the types of maxims which appeared and flouted by the speakers in the conversation.

Advanced Writing (Academic Essay)

Conversational Maxims
in Casual Conversation by English Students

Muhammad Aulia Taufiqi

auliataufiqi@gmail.com

Universitas Negeri Semarang

Introduction

In daily communication, conversation will occur in various style. The ways in delivering the messages in conversation are developing through the ages. Levinson (1983: 284) defined conversation as the familiar kind of talk in which two or more participants freely alternate in speaking, which generally occurs outside specific institutional settings like religious services, law courts, classrooms, and the like. In understanding the messages conveyed in the daily conversation, it is needed that we learn and study about one of an idea in pragmatics which called conversational implicature. Levinson (1983:101) described conversational implicatures as “a nonconventional implicature based on an addressee’s assumption that the speaker is following the conversational maxims or at least the cooperative principle”. In producing a good conversation, participants need to understand each other’s meaning of the utterance. That is why the participants tend to follow the cooperative principle and the conversational maxim by giving enough, true, related, and arranged utterance which is assumed as explicit information. In the other hand, conversational implicature tends to flout the conversational maxim. Grice (1975) categorized the cooperative principle of conversation and elaborates it in four sub-principles: (1) maxim of quantity, (2) maxim of quality, (3) maxim of relation, and (4) maxim of manner. Yule (1996: 37) says that it is important to recognize these maxims as unstated assumptions we have in conversation.

Many participants of conversation, sometimes, are difficult to understand the meaning that assumed from the flouted conversational maxim in the conversation implicature. They need some effort to understand the meaning and sometimes they clarify to the speaker about what they intend to. As the result of the case, not all of the hearer (interlocutor) could follow and refer to what the speaker means. That is why it is very important to the hearer to see the context of which the conversation occurred. Talking about conversation is also talking about context. As stated by Yule (1996: 3) that pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning. So, talking about pragmatics is also talking about context. Context itself according to Leech (1983: 13) is the relevant aspect of the physical or social setting of utterance. It is a background knowledge assumed to be shared by speaker and addressee. The contexts help the hearer to imply the meaning in the conversation occurred. The study of pragmatics especially conversational implicature has been built by people as the influence of conversational implicature and conversational maxims which were created by Yule (1996) and Grice (1975). This study conducted to figure out the types of conversational maxim which are appeared and flouted in casual conversational done by the English students of Graduate Program (UNNES).