implicature in panji koming comic

8/10/2019 implicature in panji koming comic

1/19

IMPLICATURES IN PANJI KOMI NG COMIC

Final Paper of Pragmatics

Lecturer: Prof. Dr. I Dewa Putu Wijana, S.U., M.A.

By:

Mayla Choesna FP

13/350956/PSA/07449

GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF CULTURAL SCIENCE

LINGUISTIC DEPARTMENT

2014


2/19

1. Introduction

To a large extent, language has been widely studied in numerous different

lenses as an object of investigation. Theories and approaches in linguistics are

grounded by the necessity to investigate language in a different viewpoint with

different purposes as well. Pragmatics, to be one kind of those theories, propose to

give a detail look at language that is not merely take the language for granted on

its own, as syntax and semantics do. But afar from that, pragmatics lays human as

other binding factor beside language into the analysis of messages conveyed

through language. As Yule (1996:4) puts it, by the term pragmatics, he asserts that

it is the study of the relationships between linguistic forms and the users of those

forms. This means that only pragmatics that allows humans into the analysis.

Language carries two types of function, transactional and interactional

function. The transactional function denotes that language is a mean to express

the content, while interactional function implies that function of language

dealing with expressing social relationships and personal attitudes (Brown &

Yule, 1983). Putting these two functions into account, pragmatics then presuppose

the interactional function of language into consideration for the sake of the

analysis of language. It is, therefore, at some point pragmatics is marked as the

study of communication as say Akmajian et.al. (2010) designate it. As pragmatics

studies communication, there are certain circumstances of communication where

which need certain interpretation too.

It has been obviously aware that in communication, a speaker does not

directly say what he meant to say at times. Using perfect forms of expression,

choice of words, and sometimes indirect answers, one could easily send a message

to his partner in conversation without making it explicitly carried by the utterancehe uttered. Such a phenomenon, if to be taken into account, could be encoded

through pragmatic analysis, specifically referring to what so labelled as

conversational implicature. As can be closely related and seen through its

terminology, implicature is what is being implied by a speaker in an utterance.

The study of implicature becomes one of those important areaif not the

utmostof subject matter in pragmatics to be dealt with. Any kind of

conversational issues can be delve into detail through this lense. In this


3/19


4/19

derived. A further observation would be presented in the subsequent

methodological elaboration.

2.

Method of Investigation

This investigation is started by compiling data considered to be relevant to

the topic of the analysis. The data is in the form of comic entitled Panji Koming

that appears weekly in Kompas newspaper. Nevertheless, to ease the process of

compiling the comics, they are sorted out and taken from a website page

(http://nikicomic.blogspot.com/2010/12/panji-koming-oye.html) providing a

collection ofPanji Koming comics. The analysis is conducted using distributional

method in which it allows the researcher to use something that is not a part of the

language (langue)concerned as an instrument to analyze the data. Distributional

method can be broken down to five classes according to types of instrument being

used in the investigation, (i) referential method, (ii) articulatory phonetic method,

(iii) translational method, (iv) orthographic method, and (v) pragmatic method

(Sudaryanto, 1993:13-16). The method best to investigate this study is pragmatic

method where the interlocutor being the instrument to determine and takes part in

the process of analysis. In addition, the process of uncovering the implicatures is

assisted by the context of the utterance being said between two or more speakers.

By so doing, the context of an expression is analyzed based upon those properties

alluded to.

3. Implicatures and Some Basic Concepts

Implicature implies the definition of the implied meaning of ones

utterance. As it is implied, accordingly, the proposition implied in an expression isneither part of the utterance nor a consequence of the utterance (Parker, 1946:21).

In a real atmosphere, sometimes it is undeniably true that a speakers utterance

carries more than the expression being uttered. Grice called this under the label of

conversational implicature (Akmajian, et.al, 2010:400). This is in line with

Kridalaksanas delineation that says implicature as the meaning understood but

not told in the utterance and therefore, is not part of it. Implicatures are those
http://nikicomic.blogspot.com/2010/12/panji-koming-oye.htmlhttp://nikicomic.blogspot.com/2010/12/panji-koming-oye.htmlhttp://nikicomic.blogspot.com/2010/12/panji-koming-oye.htmlhttp://nikicomic.blogspot.com/2010/12/panji-koming-oye.html


5/19

understood meanings as a result of explicaturethe meaning expressed inside the

utterance.

Interpreting an utterance is ultimately a matter of guesswork (Leech,

1983:30). Suchlike statements of Leech is aimed at an acknowledgement that

implicature in some way must have probability in being figured out by the hearer

of ones partner in speaking. The use of the word probability is employed so as

to give an emphasize that what a hearer may presume is not an exact or precise

interpretation of meaning conveyed by the speaker. It is discernibly so as what

qualifies a correct and precise interpretation belongs only to the speaker. The task

of the hearer is to give a diagnostic guess around what is the meaning most likely

and most closely possible to be construed. Leech further asserts that interpreting is

a matter of guesswork.

In doing the guesswork, Leech proposed an informal rational problem-

solving strategy. Three ways are applied to arrive at an interpretation.

a. Formulating the most likely available hypothesis

b. Testing it, and, if it fails,

c. Formulating the next most likely available hypothesis.

Those three ways are the most likely general as well as simplest stages to which

people will usually have in inferring an implied meaning.

3.1. Cooperative Principle

In conversation, the existence of implicature may arise as a result of

Cooperative Principle. These principles govern the conversation where what is

implied is implicated based on the fact that speaker and hearer is contributing in

the conversation cooperatively (Akmajian, et.al., 2010:400). CooperativePrinciple then can be understood as principles to which one should conform in

order to make his contribution in the conversation as required at the stage at which

it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which he is

engaged in (Brown & Yule, 1983:31-32).

In relation to Cooperative Principle, Grice mentions five maxims in

Cooperative Principle along with how these maxims administer.

a.

Quantity


6/19

- Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current

purposes of the exchange).

-

Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.

b.

Quality : try to make your contribution one that is true.

- Do not say what you believe to be false.

-

Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.

c. Relation : be relevant

d. Manner : be perspicuous

-

Avoid obscurity of expression.

- Avoid ambiguity.

-

Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).

- Be orderly.

3.2. Kinds of Implicature

Back at the notion of implicature, there are classifications of implicature as

acclaimed by Yule (1996). The classification Yule has proposed is grounded at

how inferences may arrive.

a.

Generalized conversational implicatures.

To infer the implied meaning, sometimes in a conversation, the hearer

does not need special background knowledge to fathom what is actually

transmitted by the speaker through utterance.

b. Scalar implicatures.

Mostly in expressing quantity, speaker usually carries information by

choosing words which best expresses a value from scale of values.

Whenever the speaker tries to articulates something in association toquantity, the speaker frequently select a scalar words like all, most,

many, some, few, etc.

c. Particularized conversational implicatures.

Contrary to generalized conversational implicatures, there is a situation

where certain special background knowledge is necessitate and demanded

for the hearer to arrive at the understanding of the implied meaning. Most


7/19

of times, conversations that take place do require particular understanding

of certain context to predict the implied meaning.

d.

Conventional implicatures.

The conventional implicatures need not to occur in a conversation. It does

not based on the cooperative principle or the maxims. One underpinning

idea that best explain conventional implicatures is that they are associated

with specific words. When those specific words are employed, the extra

conveyed implied meaning is exposed.

3.3. Speech Acts

In addition to implicature, there is a classification of speech act based on

Parker (1986) theory of speech act. The classification he proposed is based on the

direct-indirect and literal-nonliteral strategies one may use in performing

utterance.

a. Literal and Direct.

This kind of speech act is the act of uttering a sentence when what is

meant by the message of the utterance means exactly what the words say.

It is direct because the utterance is delivered directly to the hearer.

b. Nonliteral and Direct.

Parker give an illustration of this speech act using example of Joe who

says to Jack That was the most miserable test Ive ever seen. It is

responded by Jack by saying You can say that again.The utterance is

classified as nonliteral as the meaning is not literally the same with the

words uttered. It is, also, a direct speech act since Jack is using a

declarative structure to perform a direct statement.c. Literal and Indirect.

This speech act can be illustrated when someone asks to her friend who sit

next to her and say Id like some butter. The utterance is in the form of

literal speech act since the meaning of the utterance is literally the same

with what the speaker meant. On the other hand, though it is literal, the

utterance is delivered indirectly because the speaker uttered the word in

order to make a request indirectly.


8/19

d. Nonliteral and Indirect.

Example to explain this speech act is when a mother say to her boisterous

child Why dont you yell a little louder?. This utterance exemplifies an

indirect speech because what is actually being the issue of that sentence is

to tell someone to be quiet. Furthermore, this is categorized as nonliteral

speech act for the meaning of the message is not literally the same with the

words chosen.

4. Implicatures in Panji Koming Comic

This part constitutes the analysis of implicatures found in Panji Komang

comic. To arrive at the interpretation of the implicature, the discussion of the

findings will comprise three issues, (i) how the utterance is delivered (its speech

act), (ii) in what way of speaking does the intention of the speaker is delivered (its

speech act), and (iii) what kind of implicature found in that utterance. The three

basic affairs are discussed here regarding of their interconnectedness to the origin

of the implicatures. Here is the first comic picture to be taken into consideration.

Title: SontoloyoDumb


9/19

A : Tolong Denmas, jangan tambah lagi penderitaan kami.

Please, Sir. Dont add more misery on us.

Pailul : Hwarakadah, mereka Bhayangkarapraja atau penindas, sih? Biadab

amat!!

Holy shit, are they Bhayangkarapraja or oppressor? How uncivilized!!

B : Kalian ditunggangi Nayakapraja Sontoloyo

You have been ridden by Nayakapraja Sontoloyo

Pailul : Nunggangi kami? Apa untungnya?

Riding over us? Whats in it?

A : Aduh, Pailul. Ia Nayakapraja ahli telik sandi

Geez, He is Nayakapraja intelligent expertise.

Pailul : Bekoar macam orang udik, artinya andhika juga sontoloyo!!

You boasting like a yokel. That means you are also a madcap!!

From a single data above, several implied meaning can be deduced.

(1)A : Tolong Denmas, jangan tambah lagi penderitaan kami.

Please, Sir. Dont add more misery on us.

The first is As initial utterance Tolong,Denmas, jangan tambah lagi

penderitaan kamifor Please, Sir. Dont add more misery on us. Through

this saying, it can be inferred that before the speech event takes place, there

already exist a misery. As from the speech the speaker intends to request/to

beg something, the speech is delivered literally and indirectly. This inference

does not need certain knowledge to conclude. This implicature belongs to that

of generalized conversational implicature. Further, the implicature rise notbecause violating cooperative principles.

(2) Pailul : Hwarakadah, mereka Bhayangkarapraja atau penindas, sih?

Biadab amat!!

Holy shit, are they Bhayangkarapraja or oppressor? How

uncivilized!!

B : Kalian ditunggangi Nayakapraja Sontoloyo


10/19

You have been ridden by Nayakapraja Sontoloyo

Pailuls speech carries an implied meaning that Pailul actualy thinks

Bhayangkarapraja as having characters like an oppressor which can be

inferred through the use of the word sih and the employment of connector

atau or to provide two possibilities offeredBhayangkarapraja and

oppressor. The message or the content of the speech is given in literal and

direct speech ach as the meaning is the same with what the words carry and it

is directly uttered to mean the same thing. Pailuls utterance gives rise to

implicature as a result of his violation on maxim of quantity, quality, and

manner. By maxim of quantity, it can be explained that Pailul could actually

omit the first sentence and simply say the second sentence to express that his

partner is as uncivilized as oppressor.

The second implicature is found in Bs utterance. In that utterance, B is

statingthus the implied meaning is carried through, again, literal and direct

speech act. And yet, he says something that is not clearly understood by the

hearers. His conversational implicature appears as violation against maxim of

manner (that his utterance is ambiguous and obscure in expression) and

maxim of relation (that somehow appears to be not relevant to be a follow-up

response to Pailuls utterance). Of the obscurity meaning in Bs speech,

therefore, special background knowledge is required to infer the conveyed

meaning. This is then belongs to particularized conversational implicature.

The next analysis is based on the second picture comic as attached below.

Title: Orang Miskin Dilarang SekolahPoor People Cant Go to School


11/19

A : Belajar yang rajin, ya.

Study diligently, ok.

B : Pasti Paman

I will, Uncle.

C : Mesti bayar uang buku baru, ongkos pembangunan, padepokan, ongkos

mengajar.

We should pay for the new books, taxes, house, and teaching fee

D : Kita nggak bisa sekolah, dong!

Then we cant go to school!

B : Minta tolong paman Panji Koming sama paman pailul, ya.

Lets ask Uncle Panji and Uncle Koming for help.

E : Hwarakadaah!

My Goodness!

A : Apakah bisa ditawar?

Can this be bargain?

F : Pendidikan bukan jual beli barang Pamongpraja telah menentukan.

Education is unlike trading--- Pamongpraja have decided.

A : Nayakapraja dulunya pada sekolah enggak, sih?


12/19

Did Nayakapraja go to school?

E : Sekolah juga, sih. Setelah lulus dengan baik kerja di swasta kalau

cuma mengejar gelar jadi nayakapraja yang geblek.

They did. After they graduated they worked for private companies if

they just wanted the title, then they are dumb Nayakapraja.

A : Jadi selama ini kita diperintah orang gebleg, dong.

So weve been governed by dumb people, then!

The comic above can only be analyzed and resulted the below implicature:

(1)A : Apakah bisa ditawar?

Can this be bargain?

F : Pendidikan bukan jual beli barang Pamongpraja telah

menentukan.

Education is unlike trading--- Pamongpraja have decided.

The implicature of the above conversation lies in Fs statement in

which the meaning of the statement is somehow hidden. It should be noted

that Fs statement is the response of As question. However, the statement of F

is not directly saying yes or no, rather, F gives statement from which the

response could be predicted that it is a no. Therefore, this statement is

categorized as a nonliteral direct speech act. The implicature rises as F does

not seem to follow maxim of quantity and maxim of manner. In the case like

this, F can simply give yes or no response to A. The implicature is one that

belongs to generalized conversational implicature for the inferring process is

done by simply relating the statement of F with that of A.

(2)A : Nayakapraja dulunya pada sekolah enggak, sih?

Did Nayakapraja really go to school?

E : Sekolah juga, sih. Setelah lulus dengan baik kerja di swasta

kalau Cuma mengejar gelar jadi nayakapraja yang geblek.


13/19

They did. After they graduated they worked for private

companies if they just wanted the title, then they are dumb

Nayakapraja.

A : Jadi selama ini kita diperintah orang gebleg, dong.

So weve been governed by dumb people, then!

From the statement stated by E, implied meaning can be seen. The hint

point is situated in the Indonesian particle sihin which it is commonly used

in the sense that there is a contradictory fact within the statememt. Here, E

implicates that he thinks Nayakapraja did go to school, but to him, they are

dumbfurther explained in the next sentence. The contradiction is realized

because people who go to school are expected to be educated and smart, not

the other way around. Therefore, the implicature can be declared as E implies

that although Nayakapraja went to school, they are dumb. The meaning of this

speech is carried through nonliteral direct act. This, is a conventional

implicature as people who go to school is conventionally believed to be

educated.


14/19

The next data is given the below comic picture.

Title:Lapar = MakanHungry = Eat

A : Yaaah nggak cukup buat beli makan, Trinil

Awh its not enough to buy a meal, Trinil

B : Padahal aku lapal kak bujel.

Im hungry, Brother.

C : Brisik!!! Bikin rusak pemandangan!!!

Shhh, you noisy!!! You are an eyesore!!!

D : Tokoh-tokoh tua tak usah maju, dong.

Old people, do not put yourselves up, please.E : Monggo Maju Maju, Ayo bertarung tentukan adipati baru

Please Yes, go. Lets compete for a new ruler.

A : Itu ibu yang dekat sama wong cilik minta makan, yuk.

Thats the madam who closes to civilians. Lets ask her for a meal.

E : Jangan jadi golput ya anak-anak.

Dont be blank voters, kids.


15/19


16/19

statement itself, the implied meaning may be assumed as the speaker telling

the kids to vote. The message is delivered through literal and direct speech act.

Implicature appears as E does not give a relevant response to the previous

conditionthus violating maxim of relation.

The next data as presented in the following space can be analyzed as follows.

Title:Baju Sang KoruptorThe Costume of The Corrupts

A : Kok kelihatan tegang, Kakang Mbok Dyah Gembili.

Why, you look uneasy, Kakang Mbok Dyah Gembili.

B : Kakang Pailul mengunci diri Ni Mas Woro Ciblon, sibuk sekali.

Kakang Pailul lock himself up, Ni Mas Woro Ciblon, hes very up to his

ears.

C : Katanya Pailul akan memperlihatkan karya busana masa depan kami,

mana dia?

I heard Pailul will show his hand-made clothing for our forthcoming.

Where is he?

Pailul : Silakan coba.


17/19

Please, try this.

A : Tinggalkan Koming kamu akan melihat masa depanku, Ni Woro Ciblon.

Leave it Koming. Youll see my future, Ni Woro Ciblon.

C : Hah? Nggak salah, nih.

What? Really?

Pailul : Bagikan busana ini kepada para Nayapraja yang naik pangkat jadi

terdakwa demi peningkatan budaya kapok.

Distribute these clothing to those Nayapraja who has been moved up as

the accused to give and raise a learning leasson.

(1)

Pailul : Bagikan busana ini kepada para Nayapraja yang naik pangkat

jadi terdakwa demi peningkatan budaya kapok.

Distribute these clothing to those Nayapraja who has been

moved up as the accused to give and raise a learning leasson.

The statement above has implied meaning as its implicature. As Pailul

tells to the hearer to distribute that special clothing to Nayapraja to give a

lesson to them, it implies that so far, the accused Nayapraja does not take a

lesson from the previous Nayapraja who also being accused of a corrupt

conduct. This is seen through the context of the conversation. This implicature

is included to that of particularized conversational implicature as the inference

requires knowledge particularly about the political condition of Indonesia.

5. Conclusion

Conclusively, the comic Panji Koming mainly uses implied messages bymeans of direct speech. Nearly all of the analyzed data, the utterances used to

convey meaning is articulated through direct speech act. This can be assumed as

the comic is deliberately aimed at carrying political nuance. By using this direct

speech it is possible that the message within the comic is meant to be one form of

satire to give a protest to the government and can be seen by the public. The satire

posits in the using of nonliteral form, although some of the speech act is delivered

through a literal speech act. The employment of forms like implicature in nearly


18/19

all the dialogues in the comic shows that such a mode is frequently used in critics,

protests, satires, and giving advice (Wijana, 2001).


19/19

Bibliography

Akmajian, Adrian, Richard A. Demers, Ann K. Farmer, Robert M. Harnish. 2010.

Linguistics An Introduction to Language and Communication. Cambridge:

The MIT Press.

Brown, Gillian and George Yule. 1983. Discourse Analysis (trans.). Jakarta:

Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

Kridalaksana. 1982. Kamus Linguistik. Jakarta: PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. Essex: Longman Group Limited.

Parker, Frank. 1946. Linguistics for Non-Linguists. London: Taylor & Francis

Ltd.

Sudaryanto. 1993. Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa. Yogyakarta: Duta

Wacana University Press.

Wijana, I Dewa Putu. (2001). Implikatur Dalam Wacana Pojok. Humaniora

Volume XIII, No. 3.

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

http://nikicomic.blogspot.com/2010/12/panji-koming-oye.html

implicature in panji koming comic

Documents