CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1. 1 Background of the Study Communication
works because the speaker and the hearer know and understand what they are talking about.
Communication is impossible without shared
knowledge and assumption between speakers and hearers (Stubbs, 1983:1).
The hearer or the reader must get
the messages the same way as the speaker or the writer had in his or her mind. When the
speaker or the writer implies or does not express his or her message literally, that
implication is called an implicature. In analyzing the implicature, the researcher used
the theory of implicature by Grice.
Grice notice when people
communicate in daily conversations, they often make their literal expression implied.
Moreover, Grice (2002: 76) states
that implicature is used to account for what
a sender can imply, suggest, or mean, as distinction from what the most usually deliver. It does not only just to take
literal meaning of the utterance or sentences,
but also to show what is inside and hidden, or in other word, implied in the sentences or utterances. Implicature is a
part of discourse analysis that is very interesting
to be investigated. It is a little part of discourse analysis where language (spoken or written) and context are
in separable, spoken language such as
conversation between teacher and the student and written language such as an article, novel or short story. Clearly, when a
writer uses implicature in their writing
or a speaker uses implicature in their speaking, they do not need another people have to understand all of words of what
they said, because there are some information
they hints.
Grice divided implicature into
conventional implicature and non conventional
(conversational) implicature. Yule (1996: 45) says that conventional implicatures do not rely very much on the
cooperative principles or the maxims applications.
Something is clearly understood because the rules have been generally accepted (something arbitrary) and
more logically. The other idea, Conventional
implicature is independent of the cooperative principle and its maxims. Conversational implicature is any
meaning implied by or understood from
the utterance or sentence, which goes beyond what is strictly said or entailed.
The meaning depend on how the
reader or hearer interprets a certain utterance or sentence.
For example, in the sentence ―The
dog is in the kitchen or under the bad‖. This utterance include in conversational implicature because this
utterance have implied meaning
that contrast with non-truth condition. If the speaker said that, he or she doesn‘t know for fact that the
dog is in the ki tchen or under the bad.
The dog could be in the other
places, so this utterance has to analyze deep more with so many possibilities. Conversational
implicature was used when the utterance
needed to be stated by lexical item or when the utterance depended o n a specific context.
Furthermore, some previous
studies done by some researchers that conducted
the researches in this area will be also discussed below as the additional references. Some students have done the
research on discourse analysis, especially for impliacture from different perspective as
the followings. Shaifulloh (2002) in his thesis analyzed the implicatures of
headlines used in Jakarta Post based on Grace‘s
theory of implicatures. He focuses in cooperative principles as a basic assumption in conversation or writing that
each participant attempt. Shaifulloh found
that hedging maxims usually happens when the writers use certain words and take information from other persons
without considering the truth- value. This study has relation to the previous researches
on the same field.
Fuatilah (2004) focused on the
implicature used in funny pictures in Internet
using descriptive qualitative approach. She sum up into two conclusions.
First, funny pictures are
classified as generalized implicature when the implied meaning of the utterance is straightforward.
Readers will understand the utterance with
minimal effort without looking at the picture because the writer tries to be cooperative and the goals are achieved only by
understanding the utterance.
Rahmawati (2006) focused on the
theory of implicature to investigate the utterances use in Danielle Stell‘s
Kaleidoscope. She found the theory about that.
First, the implicatures used in
the titles of the implcatures of the opinions used in the Novel Danielle Stell‘s calaidoscope could
be categorized into generalized implicatures
and particularized implicatures. Second, she found that the cooperative principle, in particular the maxim
of quantity, quality, manner, and relevant
also being considered or abided by journalist in conveying the information the opinion. Based
on the explanation above, the researcher is interested in investigating the utterance use in epigraph of
Chicken Soup for the Soul with implicature
theory. The implicature here can be categorized into conventional and conversational implicature. Moreover, the
conversational implicature ca n be divided into generalize and particularized
implicature.
Beside that, in Al Baqoroh (26)
which was translated by Marmaduke Pickthall
―Lo! Allah disdaineth not to coin the similitude even of a gnat. Those who believe know that it is the truth from
their Lord; but those who disbelieve say:
What doth Allah wish (to teach) by such a similitude? He misleadeth many thereby, and He guideth many thereby; and He
misleadeth thereby only miscreants;‖ From those explanations we can conclude that we need interpreting and seeing through the deepness meaning of The
Holy Qur‘an to express the secret and to
get the detail lesson which is hidden. This concept or idea can be used in interpreting the utterance by using
implicature theory.
In literature, an epigraph is a
phrase, quotation, or poem that is set at the beginning of a document or component. The
epigraph may serve as a preface, as a summary,
as a counter-example, or to link the work to a wider literary canon, either to invite comparison or to enlist a
conventional context. Based on World Book
Dictionary (2005), Epigraph is a quotation placed at beginning of a book, chapter, or the like, to indicate the leading
idea or theme. Epigraph in Chicken Soup
was taken from people who are capable in their field.
This research focuses on
analyzing Epigraph of Chicken Soup for the Soul Teens Talk Relationships using the theory
that related with implicature.
Practically, a speaker or a writer can give
information through their utterances or writings
in which the information can appear literally or not. It means that we need to interpret more to get the intended
message.
1. 2 Research Problems In line
with above description, the problems proposed here are: 1. What the types of implicature are found in
Epigraph of Chicken Soup for the Soul
Teens Talk Relationships? 2. How are
implicature used in Epigraph of Chicken Soup for the Soul Teens Talk Relationships? 1. 3 Objectives of the
Study Based on the research questions of the study above the researcher has some objectives as follows: 1. To identify the types of implicature are used
in Epigraph of Chicken Soup for the Soul
Teens Talk Relationships.
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar