, Meiliawati (2001) A Pragmatic analysis on a collection of Indonesian Humors entitled Buku Pintar Ketawa Lagi. Bachelor thesis, Petra Christian University.Full text not available from this repository.
Reading humor is enjoyable as long as we can catch the amusing part. Meaning is inadequate to make us understand but we should concern on context and communication between the speaker and interlocutor as well. Those three can be learned in the study of Pragmatics. Furthermore, the writer chooses Indonesian humors of two-liner and short-text in which the two-way communication exists. Due to the interest of analyzing the Indonesian humors pragmatically, she conducts this research. In this thesis, she wants to answer two basic questions: how the Indonesian humors are pragmatically analyzed and how they are pragmatically classified. of pragmatics as the main theories. In the theory of pragmatics, the idea of world knowledge has already been explained to help her understand the context and the idea of inference to help her grasp the amusing part. Moreover, those theories are supported by the theory of speech act to see the speaker?s intended meaning and the theory of conversational implicature to see how participants observe the Cooperative Principle and to find what implicature they might generate. In this study, she takes 48 two-liner and short-text humors from a humor book entitled Buku Pintar Ketwa Lagi She uses a qualitative approach; especially documentary analyses to find out how the amusing approach occurs and the meanings people have given to particular utterances. Moreover, she sees the humorous text as a process rather than as a product. Next, she collects the data based on the category of the participants. There are nineteen categories in which three of them (animal, magician, and fortune-teller) are excluded for this study. Dirty jokes, too long humors, and one-participant humors are excluded as well. After analyzing the data, this study leads to the findings that in most humors people commonly uses the type of directives as expressing their intended meaning (the illocutionary act). Besides, most of them disobeyed the Cooperative Principle. Violating maxims arose at the highest rank of the non-observance of maxims. The maxim of quality and manner are mostly violated. In contrast, none carries out the suspension of a maxim. Finally, the findings lead to the conclusion that violating maxims - that is normally believed to rarely occur in daily communication for people are afraid to trick or make others feel offended-is created intentionally to cause humor.
|Item Type:||Thesis (Bachelor)|
|Uncontrolled Keywords:||linguistic, discourse, analysis|
|Date Deposited:||23 Mar 2011 18:48|
|Last Modified:||31 Mar 2011 11:05|
Actions (login required)