Luận văn thạc sỹ: A Pragmatic analysis of humor in movie script monsters INC

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF HUMOR IN MOVIE SCRIPT MONSTERS INC (Phân tích tinh hài hước trong kịch ban phim

công ty quái vật qua ngữ dụng học)

NGUYEN THỊ NHU TRANG

Field: English Language

Code: 8.22.02.01

Hanoi-2023

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF HUMOR IN MOVIE SCRIPT MONSTERS INC (Phân tích tinh hài hước trong kịch ban phim

công ty quái vật qua ngữ dụng học)

NGUYEN THỊ NHU TRANG

Field: English Language

Code: 8.22.02.01

Supervisor: Tran Thi Le Dung PhD

Hanoi-2023

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY

I, the undersigned, hereby certify my authority of the study project report entitled A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF HUMOR IN MOVIE SCRIPT MONSTERS INC (Phân tích tinh hai hước trong kịch bản phim công ty quái vật qua ngữ dụng học) submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in English Language Except where the reference is indicated, no other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the text of the

It has been a long journey for me to finish my thesis There are also many people who walked along with me to support and motivate me during the time of doing the research.

First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Tran Thi Le Dung PhD, my supervisor, who has patiently and constantly supported me through the stages of the study, and whose stimulating ideas, expertise, and suggestions have inspired me greatly through my growth as an academic researcher A special word of thanks goes to all the lecturers of the M.A course at Hanoi Open University and many others, without their supports and encouragements it would never have been possible for me to have this thesis accomplished.

Finally, I am greatly indebted to my family, my friends for the sacrifice they have devoted to the fulfillment of this academic work.

This research is carried out to investigate linguistic factors that contribute to the comedic effect in the movie script for Monsters, Inc The objectives of this research are to evaluate maxims in the movie script Monsters Inc flout in order to make fun and characterize the types of humor that result from maxim flouting In this study, humor in Movie Script Monsters Inc is examined conceptually in the framework theory of Grice's conversational maxims which are based on Grice's cooperative principle The research is mainly carried out through the support of qualitative, quantitative and descriptive approach The data such as words, phrases, clauses, and sentences was found as the form of utterances Data contexts were conversations in movie script Monsters, Inc According to the study's findings, this research reveals two findings First, the characters in Monsters Inc movie script disobey all kinds of rules in an effort to make funny The maxims of quality flouting, quantity flouting, relation flouting and manner flouting are listed here Second, unintentional conversational humor which predominates in everyday speech is portrayed through the film This includes irony, sarcasm, overstatement, teasing, clever reply to serious statement, replies to rhetorical questions and pun Finally, the study was concluded to demonstrate the benefit of humor in daily life Therefore, it not only aids English learners but also enables them to reach the outside world and broaden their knowledge of several languages.

LISTS OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Figure 1 Analytical construct Table 3.1 Flouting maximof quality Table 3.2 Flouting maxim of quantity Table 3.3 Flouting maxim of relation Table 3.4 Flouting maxim of manner Table 3.5 Types of maxim flouting and forms.

1.2 Aims and objectives of the study 1.2.1 Aims of the study

1.2.2 Objectives of the study 1.3 Research questions 1.4 Methodology of the study 1.5 Scope of the study 1.6 Significance of the study 1.7 Structure of the study

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Review of previous studies 2.2 Review of theoretical background

CHAPTER 3: HUMOR IN MOVIE SCRIPT MONSTERS INC 3.1 Humor created through flouting maxim of quality 3.2 Humor created through flouting maxim of quantity 3.3 Humor created through flouting maxim of relation

3.4 Humor created through flouting maxim of manner 3.5 Findings of maxim flouting and forms of humor

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Rationale

Throughout daily life, humor plays a significant role Humor is a universally understood language It lowers barriers between people If you can laugh together, then you have a connection with that person As the walls are broken down, the urge to carry on the dialogue rises Humor is a powerful and effective means of communication because it dismantles barriers If humor is skillfully camouflaged as delight, it may successfully smuggle new ideas into people's hearts Any conversation is greatly enhanced with a good laugh Therefore, humor can be used as a technique to improve relationships and informal interactions among the people who utilize it Since humor may be used to ease tension, weariness, and fatigue in modern situations, it is crucial to understand its uses A speaker can express the truth subtly and gracefully while employing comedy without upsetting anyone by doing so Every hilarious circumstance should try to amuse viewers and make them laugh as this is the main purpose of humor Although humor serves a variety of societal purposes, its primary use is to make others laugh, entertain, or feel good The main purposes of humor in conversation, according to Attardo [2], are outcomes that the speaker can obtain directly by incorporating hilarious passages or segments into his or her discourse.

People are able to find humor in almost any situation, but not with everyone Since humor is such a personal thing, what some people find funny, others may find outrageous Humor then becomes problematic Culture has an impact on the phenomena of humor Every community or culture has its own distinctive and distinctively different sorts of comedy Humor aids in the understanding of social mores and attitudes As a result, comedy is something that cannot be shared between nations What may be funny to someone from one region may not be at all funny to someone from another A person's interpretation, moderated by the cultural environment, determines whether or not they grasp the joke According to Felsch [11], comedy frequently differs by locale and is difficult to translate across cultural boundaries Because comedy frequently depends on context, someone who does not comprehend the context is likely to find humor incomprehensible Even though people from other countries may have problems comprehending it, American

comedy is one of the best-known types of humor Using humor as a communication technique is particularly common in America American humor differs from British humor in that it is unique Despite speaking the same language, Americans and Britons do not have the same values when it comes to comedy Because of the cultural contrasts between America and Britain, American humor tends to be more slapstick in nature The comedy in America is more overt and direct On the other hand, British jokes typically have a subtly dark or satirical undertone According to Marwick [21], British people have employed comedy as a form of social or political commentary or protest It encourages British people to use politics and society as amusing themes Over the years, there has been a lot of work done on the linguistics of comedy In this case, a few possible approaches to look at are the semiotic approach, sociolinguistic approach, stylistic approach, and pragmatic approach Humor is viewed by the pragmatic community as an infringement on Grice's Cooperative Principle It is crucial to conduct a deeper investigation of humor production applying the Cooperative Principle's philosophical framework since hilarious phrases are created by maxim-flouting the Cooperative Principle Due to people's ability to subjectively judge humor, it might be interpreted as either hilarious or offensive Humor does not go against the Cooperative Principle in the same way that other modes of communication, like lying, do People often enjoy being amused, and conversations, business dealings, and other everyday encounters frequently include large amounts of humor As a result, humor is no longer viewed as a poor communication technique like lying, but rather as an essential component of discussion.

In the course of a typical day, people encounter a range of humor that is conveyed in different ways and serves a variety of functions Some humor, according to Martin [20], reaches people through the media In addition to the regular jokes and witty remarks broadcast on radio, individuals can find humor through newspaper comic strips and cartoons, comedies, light reading, stand-up comedy, political satire, blooper shows, comedies, and comedies Politicians, religious leaders, motivational speakers, and educators frequently use humor in their speeches, sermons, and lectures As closely related phenomena as humor and the media are, it might be challenging to address one without also addressing the other The media is full with hilarious language, from cartoons and comic strips to Internet jokes, amusing ads, comedies, and witty editorial and opinion piece comments.

In this study, the researcher will examine how the cooperative principle is violated in a movie's conversation According to Grice, four guiding ideas form the foundation of the cooperation principle: the maxims of quality, quantity, relationships, and manners Flouting is the term used to describe breaking the maxims rule In comedic situations, the breaking of maxims is also common Metaphor, irony, tautology, sarcasm, exaggeration, banter, understatement, overstatement, and rhetorical questions are all examples of flouting According to Attardo [2] when more than one of Grice's cooperative principle maxims are violated, it includes many amusing encounters That is, in the course of a discourse, speakers may intentionally break the rules of cooperation in an effort to get a rise out of their listeners The study's data, which relates to the formation of amusing thoughts of the cooperative principle, was taken from the Monsters, Inc script This data obtained is sufficient and can be used to predict the consequences of disobeying the principle of cooperation The major goal of the discussion is to demonstrate how the Monsters Inc script violate the cooperative principle.

A computer-animated comedy film about monsters called Monsters Inc was made by Pixar Animation Studio for Walt Disney Pictures and released in the United States in 2001 Monsters, Incorporated is another name for Monsters, Inc The film's screenplay was written by Andrew Stanton and Daniel Gerson, and it was directed by Pete Docter The two monsters at the core of the movie are Mike Wazowski (Crystal), Mike Wazowski's one-eyed sidekick and the hairy James P "Sulley" Sullivan (Goodman), who both work for the energy-producing factory Monsters, Inc, which terrifies children to create power Monsters are required to terrify children and elicit screams from them so that additional electricity may be generated for the metropolis However, the children are poisonous to the monsters, and after one of the children escapes, two of the monsters have the realization that things might not be as they think they are In this film, there is a mixed variety of humorous examples Verbal sarcasm and comedic circumstances were two strategies employed to demonstrate funny effect in the movie As a result, we may use these when studying, instructing, and utilizing the English language in daily life, particularly in conversations If students like learning English through movies, they might not feel bored From the research background above, the researcher has decided to choose the topic “A Pragmatic Analysis of Humor in Movie Script Monsters Inc”.

1.2 Aims and objectives of the study 1.2.1 Aims of the study

This study is hoped to help lecturers and learners get knowledge in pragmatics and understand the use of the principle of cooperation by flouting maxims that cause humor in movie script Monsters Inc Additionally, it is also considered as an effective resource for teaching and learning English.

1.2.2 Objectives of the study

In order to achieve the above - mentioned aims, the following objectives can be put forward:

- To describe kinds of maxims are flouted by the characters creating humor in Monsters Inc movie.

- To describe the ways humor is created by the characters through flouting maxim in Monsters Inc movie.

1.3 Research questions

This study intends to answer the following questions:

1 What kinds of maxims are flouted by the characters creating humor in Monsters Inc movie?

2 How humor is created by the characters through flouting maxim? 1.4 Methodology of the study

The methods used in this study include: Research approach

The main aim of the study is to analyze the maxims that are flouted by characters creating humor in Monster Inc movie, describe as well as explain the different types of humor that are exhibited by characters in the movie Monsters Inc through the flouting of several maxims Therefore, to achieve the aims stated, descriptive, qualitative as well as quantitative methods were applied in the study, which are mainly used to analyze humor in Monsters Inc movie.

Research methods

The main method employed in this study is the descriptive method with quantitative and qualitative approach Creswell [7] explains that descriptive, qualitative and quantitative research are techniques that can be utilized to determine the significance of a social phenomenon that takes place in a society This is in line with the aim of this research, which is to look into a social phenomenon known as linguistic comedy, thus this finding is appropriate The cooperation principle theory

was applied in this study to assist researchers in the process of data analysis and in providing answers to the two different problem formulations.

The descriptive, qualitative, quantitative research approach were utilized throughout the course of this investigation As stated by Hancock [14], qualitative research is research that is focused on providing explanations of social phenomena During this time, Vander Step and Johnston [29, p.7] explained that qualitative research results in narrative or textual descriptions of the phenomenon that is being studied It implies that the researcher conducting qualitative research determines the significance of the phenomenon by spontaneously describing it The researcher assesses the data in qualitative studies by describing it and putting it in another way The phenomena being discussed in this study include the various ways the characters in the movie Monsters Inc used maxim flouting to produce humor, as well as the several ways that humor can take different forms Analyses of these events were qualitative in nature The purpose of qualitative research is to describe events rather than predict them To completely appreciate the researcher's viewpoint is the goal More emphasis is placed on meaning in qualitative research Descriptive qualitative research, as defined by Wiersma [29], is study that uses words rather than numbers or measurements to explain phenomena Therefore, Bogdan and Biklen [5] thought that the researcher should study the data in all of its richness as closely as possible to the form in which it is recorded or transcribed because the data in qualitative research are acquired in the form of words or images rather than statistics “Qualitative research focuses on how individuals understand and make meaning of their experiences and the environment in which they live," according to Holloway [16, p 1] It seeks to comprehend the social realities of specific persons, communities and civilizations The maxim-flouting of the cooperative principle in the movie Monsters Inc served as the basis for this study's aims of investigation.

This research also made use of the quantitative approach in order to have the information shown as a percentage, which also served the purpose of assisting the researcher in his or her interpretation The findings were analyzed based on quantitative research conducted by the researcher It was possible to establish the frequency of occurrences as well as the percentages for each group by applying quantitative methods As a result, the researcher had sufficient evidence to reach their conclusion In addition, a pragmatic approach was utilized throughout the data analysis process.

Finally, this study utilized a descriptive approach since it utilized narrative description in both its description and analysis of the phenomena that were the focus of the study Therefore, it is not just a matter of analyzing and describing the data; rather, it is also a matter of interpreting the data in order to acquire a fuller and more in-depth comprehension of the maxim flouting that occurs in the film Monsters, Inc Data collection techniques

For achieving the aims and objectives of the study with high reliability, two data collection techniques have been employed: selecting materials and collecting words, phrases, utterance, dialogues from Monsters Inc's The primary data of qualitative research, according to Lofland & Lofland in Moleong [22] are language and action As a result, the primary source of data for this study was dialogue in 32 scenes from the screenplay for the film Monsters Inc What is more, Bakhtin [3, p-91] argued that, “An utterance is a link in the verbal communication of a certain topic” The change in speech subject determines the utterance's bounds Speech actions are conscious of one another and mirror one another; they are not apathetic to or independent of one another Every statement must be interpreted as a refutation of the subject's prior claims.

The data collected for the study is the film named Monster Inc and it was released in the United States in 2001

Furthermore, Google search engine was used to select materials The movie script Monster Inc was obtained from http:// mephimtv.cc/xem-phim/monsters-inc/.There was just one series from this movie that needed to be examined since it adequately captured the defiance of cooperative principle maxims to create humor, its expressions and its intent.

Data analysis techniques

As stated by Denscombe [9, p.274], “qualitative data needs to be preparedly organized before they can be analyzed” After collecting the data, the author describes, analyzes, and gives conclusions about humor found in Monster Inc’s script.

The procedure of data analysis includes the following steps: 1 The researcher saw the Monsters Inc movie.

2 The script was searched and downloaded by the researcher 3 The conversation in the film was compared to the script carefully 4 The information from the script was gathered and categorized

5 The researcher used the categorizations provided by the data sheet to determine the various sorts of norm-busting humor present in Monsters Inc.

6 The researcher gave a conclusion based on the data analysis and make suggestions

1.5 Scope of the study

- In this research, the researcher intends to choose Monsters Inc movie produced by Pixar.

- The scope of this research is pragmatic based on the theory of maxims by Grice Cooperation is guided by four guiding principles: maxim of quality, maxim of quantity, maxim of relation and maxim of manner Additionally, this study focuses on maxims that are flouted in order to pinpoint specific quotes from the film and demonstrate how doing so might be humorous To locate the utterances that violate a maxim, research material will be obtained from the text script of the film as well as from the actual movie you are watching.

1.6 Significance of the study

Theoretically, the research will make a substantial contribution to pragmatics, particularly in understanding how the cooperation principle is used by flouting the maxims that cause humor in Movie Script Monsters Inc.

Practically, linguistics teachers and students can benefit from this research by learning more about pragmatics, particularly as it relates to the cooperative principle They can also use this study as a model for future research on comedy that takes in other linguistic approaches such as sociolinguistics, semiotics, and stylistics Next, the findings of this study can also aid readers in comprehending each character's entire conversation in terms of how the cooperative principle was violated in the Movie Script Monsters Inc Finally, the results of this study can help the researcher do future research better and broaden more knowledge base on pragmatic studies.

1.7 Structure of the study

For achieving the aims stated above, this study consists of 4 chapters beside references:

Chapter 1 is the Introduction of the study which shows the reasons why the topic is chosen, what the research aims at as well as the scope, the significance and the structural organization of the study

Chapter 2 is the Literature review and Theoretical background of the study This chapter will give the brief review of related literature and theoretical background of every matter mentioned in the study.

Chapter 3 is the Humor in Movie Script Monsters Inc In this chapter, it presents and analyzes kinds of maxims and the ways humor is created through flouting maxim in Monsters Inc movie.

Chapter 4 is the Conclusion of the study which presents the recapitulation of the study, the limitations of the study and some suggestions for further stud

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Review of previous studies

Many studies in the realm of pragmatics examine the phenomenon of maxim flouting There are, however, very few studies that link the linguistic phenomena of maxim flouting to the development of humor These earlier studies served as references for the researcher doing this investigation.

Risti Utami Dewi [10] examined the various rhetorical strategies and maxim flouting to produce humor A methodology used in the investigation was descriptive and qualitative The first finding demonstrates that there are four different types of maxims that are humorously disregarded The maxim of quality has been broken the most (20 times) The maxim of relation is flouted seven times, the maxim of manner is flouted four times, and the maxim of quantity happens two times after that The second finding shows that the characters employ a variety of rhetorical strategies, such as exaggeration, sarcasm, irony, metaphor, pun, teasing, responses to rhetorical questions, and replies to serious statements.

Septi Dyah Anggraini [1] is the second researcher She examined the rules that the individuals in Modern Family Season 4 broke in order to make jokes, as well as the types of humor that resulted from maxim breaking The descriptive qualitative method was used in the study Three conclusions can be drawn from this study First, the characters make use of all four sorts of maxim flouting to make jokes The characters typically use maxim of quality flouting to make jokes The second type of comedy shown in this film are jokes and spontaneous conversational humor Because it is difficult to find in casual speech, unintentional humor does not happen There are eight types of impromptu humor that the characters use in their interactions They come in several forms, including overstatement, sarcasm, irony, metaphor, pun, teasing, replies to rhetorical question and clever replies to serious statement Third, Modern Family Season 4 contains all the elements of humor, including social management, recommitment, mediation, and functionalization.

Muhammad Harits [15] worked on a study titled "Using Maxims to Create Humor in the Film "THE BIG BANG THEORY" Using Grice's Cooperative Principle." He examined the principle that was violated in one of the season's 20 episodes of the TV comedy series The Big Bang Theory The author bases his work on the maxim of cooperation and the theoretical concept of cooperation from H.P Grice in order to identify any offensive language used by the characters in the film.

The author's sources for information include both the conversation script and the dialogue text in the movie The author then conducted analysis by looking for maxims that were broken in character dialogue The author then adds it to the category of violating maxims Next, the author demonstrates how breaking rules in character conversation creates the comedic atmosphere and attractiveness that come from breaking rules in every category Due to the importance of language and context, humor is on the rise The implication of this thesis is that the author can demonstrate how the movie's maxim-flouting cooperation principle theory contributes to laughter The author can investigate the phenomenon of flouting language in this film thanks to H.P Grice's cooperative principle hypothesis Compared to those earlier studies, this one is unique First off, whereas this study used qualitative methodology, the preceding three studies used descriptive qualitative research This researcher will concentrate on humor that makes use of them to identify the kinds of flouting maxims used in the movie script Monsters Inc The researcher uses Grice’s theory.

2.2 Review of theoretical background 2.2.1 Pragmatics

Pragmatics is the study of how language and meaning change depending on the specifics of a given situation According to Leech [18], pragmatics is just one of several subfields of linguistics that have existed for about twenty years but have just recently gained widespread attention The growing recognition among linguists that a grasp of pragmatics is required as a basis for exposing the nature of language, specifically how language is used in communication, is driving the current surge of interest in the field of pragmatics Leech [18] said that the field of study known as pragmatics investigates how context influences the interpretation of words.

Osisanwo [23] defined that the scope of pragmatics extends not only to the process of communication itself, but also to the parties involved, the information they bring to the table about the world, the conclusions drawn from the text based on the context, and the following content: the influence of interaction's nonverbal elements.

According to Trask [28], the field of linguistics known as pragmatics explores how utterances convey meaning in context A linguistic expression can have one of two meanings Linguistic expressions with the first kind of meaning are inseparable from the word and cannot be removed Semantics is the study of the

meaning of this form The second type of meaning, which is not dependent on the specific linguistic expression that it conveys, is the form of meaning that emerges as a result of the interaction between the specific linguistic expression and the context in which it is used It is not specific to the linguistic expression it conveys Pragmatics is the field that studies this type of meaning.

Additionally, Yule [32] defined pragmatics as being concerned with four domains First off, pragmatics is the study of speaker meaning The study of pragmatics focuses on the transmission of meaning from a source to an audience as well as how that audience understands that meaning The study of speaker meaning is known as pragmatics The core of the academic field known as pragmatics is the study of meaning as it is conveyed by a speaker (or writer) and understood by a listener (or reader) As a result, it is more important to conduct an analysis of what people mean by their utterances as opposed to attempting to decipher the meanings of individual words or phrases contained within those utterances Secondly, pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning Regarding who they are speaking to, where they are speaking, when they are speaking, and under what circumstances, it is important to consider how speakers structure what they desire to convey This kind of research always requires the interpretation of what individuals actually mean when they say things in specific contexts, as well as how those contexts influence what people say Thirdly, the study of pragmatics examines how more is transmitted than it is expressed This type of study looks into how a sizable chunk of what is not spoken is perceived to be a part of what is communicated The final one is the investigation of how relative distance is conveyed.

Finally, Levinson [19] concluded that pragmatics is the study of the interaction between language and context, which serves as the basis for understanding and explaining language Pragmatics is the study of how language and context interact The phrase "language comprehension" in this definition refers to the notion that an utterance of a language necessitates knowledge that extends beyond the word's literal meaning and the context in which it is used Another definition of pragmatics is the ability to use language to connect utterances or sentences to contexts that correspond to those utterances or sentences Another way to think of pragmatics is as an analysis of language use.

With the help of the definitions given, it is feasible to draw the conclusion that studying language through the prism of pragmatics enables one to talk about the

intended meanings, presumptions, purposes, and types of activities that individuals engage in when speaking.

2.2.2 Pragmatic of humor

Humor is viewed pragmatically as a breach of Grice's cooperative principle It is socially unacceptable to use certain communication techniques that violate the cooperative principle, including lying Humor, though, is unique Even though a speaker normally violates the cooperation principle when creating humor, it is generally accepted because the goal is amusement.

Wijana [30] argued that as comedy involves contradiction and conflict, it may be studied using linguistics The standards of both textual and interpersonal pragmatics are used in linguistics to explain aspects of incongruity and conflict Interpersonal incongruity is caused by breaking the politeness principle, whereas textual incongruity is caused by breaking the cooperation principle.

While humor may involve some degree of violating the cooperative principle, as argued by Raskin and Attardo [25], information may be shared through cooperation.

Raskin [24, p.87] suggested that “The cooperative principle still governs the joke-telling mode of communication because humor has communicative functions” In summary, jokes and other forms of humor can arise in discussion when one party violates the cooperative principle, and their primary purpose is to make the other person laugh

2.2.3 Cooperative principle

The concept of implicature, as introduced by Grice [1997], was used to describe what a speaker could indicate, suggest, or mean in addition to or instead of what the speaker said out loud Additionally, conversational entailment refers to inferences drawn from utterance forms based on specific cooperating principles that govern conversational validity and conventional acceptance As a result, Brown and Yule [6] showed that the cooperative principle, which is a general concept of conversation, is where the idea of conversational implicature originates.

The phrase "Have you got any cash on you?" is an example of Grice's conversational allusion because the speaker genuinely hopes the listener will understand The listener then replies: "Can I borrow it?" In this case, the speaker is alluding to something that is not obvious from the simple meaning of the sentence This is a rule that guides effective conversation, so listeners can infer this message from the

speaker's speech Grice argues that entailment, defined as the listener's utterances derived from the speaker's utterances, can be computed by considering three factors.

According to Finch [12], individuals would cooperate during the communication process in order to minimize misunderstanding The basic principle is to contribute according to what is required at the end of a discussion exchange in which you have participated, or when you reach an agreed-upon goal According to Leech [18], the cooperative principle permits one conversational partner to speak while assuming that the other is being cooperative Cooperative principle thus serves the purpose of controlling speech in order to further a supposed illocutionary or discourse objective.

All utterance interpretation is predicated on a general premise, according to Grice in Leech [18] The cooperative principle, which states that a speaker and hearer are working toward a common objective, serves as the basis for this

interpretation The following are components of cooperative principles: - Maxim of quantity which is allowed requires you to provide your donation as detailed as possible (for the objectives of the exchange as it currently stands) - Maxim of quality that does not make your contribution any more information than is necessary Do not express what you know in your heart to be untrue Do not make statements for which you do not have sufficient evidence.

- Maxim of relation which renders your contribution significant

- Maxim of manner which is transparent (avoid obscurity of expression, ambiguity, be concise and orderly)

When defining the maxims of quantity and quality, Leech [18, p 84] suggested that they can be taken into consideration together because they frequently function in opposition to one another: the speaker's desire to avoid telling a lie limits the amount of information they are willing to share.

Another type of maxim is the maxim of relation, and it asks us to be relevant not only to what is being said but also to the context in which it is being expressed According to Leech [18], personal goals and social objectives can both be included in the scope of conversational goals For instance, the suitable response to the question "Where is my box of chocolates?" is a description of the location where the box is stored B "It's in your bedroom" or "It's on the table." The alternative response is "The kids were in your room this morning," which is also an option If someone responds in such a way, it does not necessarily mean that they are not

willing to cooperate, but there is an interpretation that can be drawn from their response The box, which the kids carried into the room, has a place that has been explained Additionally, Black [4, p.24] noted that "maxims of quantity, quality, and relation should be respected by cooperating speakers," adding that "maxims of manners in such situations are largely a matter of convention."

On the other hand, a speaker is said to be in violation of a maxim when, according to Thomas [27] in Cutting [8], he knows what those who hear may not perceive it as true He also realizes that listeners only understand the superficial meaning of words They deliberately create deceptive allusions to achieve their ends Whether intentional or not, maxim violation is a form of subtle deception Listeners mistakenly believe that the speaker is cooperating with them because the speaker intentionally provides incomplete information or says things that are dishonest, irrelevant, or confusing Thus, although the task of the principles of cooperation is to ensure the effectiveness and normal acceptance of dialogue, there are violations of these four principles.

In general, there are two ways to put the maxims into practice: the first one is to observe the maxim, and the second one is to act in a way that does not observe the maxim These are both respectable choices.

2.2.3.1 Observance of maxim a Maxim of quality

Speakers are asked to talk truthfully and share their honest opinions Grice [13 p.46] claimed that the maxim of quality forbids the speaker from making claims that are deemed to be untrue or inadequate.

In other words, it is expected that the speaker will be real and honest For instance: A: Why didn't you attend the party the previous night?

B: L attended my niece's wedding.

In this conversation, speaker B freely acknowledges that she was obligated to attend the wedding of her niece and had to miss the party.

b Maxim of quantity

Based on Grice [13], the maxim of quantity states that a speaker should only contribute as much information as is required for the discussion at hand For instance:

A: Where are you headed? B: I'm heading to the mail facility.

In this case, speaker B correctly answers the query of speaker A She immediately replies the query of speaker A and includes all pertinent details in their contribution c Maxim of relation

Grice [13] also said that the maxim of relation requires the speaker to say something that is relevant to what has been said before For example:

According to Cutting [8], the maxim of manner requires speaker to describe things orderly and clearly Besides, Grice [13] said that it asks the speaker to talk clearly, eliminate ambiguity, be clear and keep order For instance:

A: This morning, where was Ann?

B: She went to the store to pick up some supplies for tonight's barbecue party The example illustrates how speaker B should have responded and commanded since they make it quite apparent where Ann was

2.2.3.2 Non-observance of maxim

Cutting [8] identified these four methods of maxim defiance as choosing out, breaking, infringing, and flouting When the speaker disregards the maxim, it is considered non-observance of the maxim.

a Opting out

When a speaker chooses not to use a maxim, it conveys that they are unwilling to cooperate, despite the fact that they do not wish to appear uncooperative Sometimes, due to legal or ethical considerations, they are unable to respond in the manner that is anticipated, and when this occurs, they explain why (for example, "I'm afraid I can't give you that information").

When requested to divulge the identity of an accident victim before alerting the families, a police officer may respond with "I'm afraid I can't give you that information" or "no comment," which is a violation of the maxims.

b Violating a maxim

Breaking the maxim can lead to hearers being misled According to Grice, a violation can also take place in any one of the maxim's four sub principles such as violating towards maxim of quantity, quality, relation, and manner.

Cutting [8] said that violations of the quantification principle occur when the speaker does not provide the listener with sufficient information about the topic being discussed or the big picture being presented If the speaker is dishonest and misinforms the listener, even if it is a lie, this is considered a violation of the quality principle Cutting [8] said that speakers can be dishonest and prone to misleading listeners, thus violating quality principles Additionally, when a speaker changes the subject in order to avoid an answer or a topic brought up by another interlocutor, they are breaching the relational principle Cutting [8] characterized a violation of the relational principle as when speakers attempt to divert attention by changing the subject The last one goes against the manners maxim Cutting [8] claimed that evading giving a direct and acceptable response during a discussion by using vague or indirect allusions is against the etiquette norm.

Thomas claims that this adage is violated when the speaker knowingly withholds facts or makes a false, irrelevant, or confusing claim, and the listener wilfully assumes that they are complying Below is an illustration of a violation A: Does your dog bit people?

B: No, A (stoops to stroke it and is bit) You said that your dog doesn't bite B: That's not my dog.

Cutting [8, p.40] c Infringing a maxim

Thomas in Cutting [8, p.41] stated that “A speaker infringing a maxim fails to observe a maxims because of their imperfect linguistics performance Below is an example of infringement.

English speaker: Would you want strawberry or chicken? Non-English speaker: Yes.

Just by having a poor mastery of the language, the speaker violates the principle She/he does not comprehend the question and is unable to provide a meaningful response.

d Flouting a maxim

Black [4] claimed that there are times when people communicate for their own aims or motivations without using cooperative principles Speakers have an option between violating and disobeying the maxims if they receive no cooperative response in their speech Contravening the maxims is not the same as flouting them According to Finch [12, p.160], “Flouting is more likely to be understood than

actual infringement because it incorporates certain components of communication failure” Contrary to flouting, which is done purposely to help listeners understand the meaning of the neglected maxim Violation of a maxim is something a speaker does.

Maxim flouting, in other words, occurs when the speakers don't seem to be adhering to the maxims but nevertheless expect the listeners to understand the underlying meaning It is also possible to disregard each of the four cooperation principle maxims.

Thus, when a speaker of a dialogue flouts a maxim, there will be a good cause for it, and the speaker himself or herself will already have believed that the hearer will get the meaning of what he or she is doing According to Cutting [8, p 37-39], flouting the precept means:

e Flouting maxim of quality

The speakers repeatedly violate various quality maxims First, the speaker may say something simply that does not reflect his or her thoughts clearly Second, people can exaggerate something and go against the maxim, as when they say, "I might eat a horse." Third, speakers sometimes ignore quality maxims by using metaphors like "Don't do that." “*Wet blankets, we just want to have fun,”

Irony and sarcasm are the last two methods to break the quality rule When you say something that completely contradicts what you intend, such as “The cobbler's children have no shoes” It is irony because a cobbler is a professional shoemaker, so the expectation is that her own children would have many shoes, not zero.

Sarcasm is an unkind form of irony that is frequently employed to do harm Sarcasm, on the other hand, displays a negative attitude while implying a favorable one For example

A: Mm What's the point of this?

B: Well, he is unable to pay for his apartment now that I can't live with him I therefore wondered whether it would be acceptable for him to stay with us for a few weeks.

A: Sure You know what, though? Why not use our room, you guys? B's remark is met with sarcasm from A Sarcasm is a type of conversational humor A's statement implies the inverse Since A uses sarcasm to make fun of and humiliate B, it fulfills a social management purpose.

The speaker who violates the quantity requirement looks to deliver either insufficient or excessive information As an example:

A: How do I seem, then? B: I like your sneakers.

B doesn't say explicitly that the hoodie and pants don't look good together; nonetheless, he is aware that A will infer this from his silence due to the fact that A asks about B's overall appearance but is only told about a portion of it If we take a second look at the elderly woman living in the retirement community who served as the starting point for this lesson, we can see that she violates the principle of quality by contradicting herself when she says “Oh sure, you'll hear other things, but that's what I think” The person being interviewed is aware that she is withholding some of the information that he requires to have a complete understanding of what is being stated Because of this, he will inquire in the future, "What would the other people say?" The elderly woman was aware that the interviewer would find out that she had further information, but it's possible that she wanted to be pushed into providing it anyhow It's comparable to saying "I had an incredible time last night," which begs the follow-up question, "Go on—tell me what happened then!"

e Flouting maxim of relation

When speakers ask listeners to imagine what they do not say and to draw connections between their current statement and previous ones, they are violating relational maxims When a speaker deviates from the relation maxim, it is an indication that they are giving unrelated information For instance:

A: What do you think of David? B: His flat mate is an excellent chef.

Cutting [8] B doesn't say out loud that she wasn't pleased with Mark, but by excluding him from her response and ostensibly expressing something irrelevant, she suggests that she wasn't.

¢ Flouting maxim of manner

When a speaker responds in an ambiguous manner, it happens It indicates that the dialogue has more than one meaning According to Cutting [8, p.39], people who violate the precept of manners by acting mysteriously are frequently attempting to exclude a third party, as in:

A: Where are you going to?

B: I was thinking of going out to get some of that funny white stuff for someone

A: Alright, but don't delay; the dinner is almost ready.

Cutting, [8, p.39] In order to prevent his little daughter from becoming interested and asking for the ice cream before her lunch, B avoids saying "ice cream" and "Michelle" and instead uses the ambiguous phrases "that funny white stuff" and "someone." In order to emphasize an idea, writers will occasionally use ambiguity in their writing to their advantage.

The purpose of this analysis is to place disobeying a rule in the context of the film Monsters, Inc Quality, quantity, relation, and manner are the four categories of ignoring a rule Four of these rules are broken throughout the film, and by examining them we may identify issues with the dialogue between the leads 2.2.4 Humor

2.2.4.1 Definition

The linguistic study of humor has received a lot of attention over the course of history The semantic strategy, social linguistics strategy, stylistic strategy, and pragmatic strategy are just a few that could be investigated in this situation The pragmatic community sees humor as a violation of Grice's cooperative concept It has been essential to undertake a deeper investigation of humor production employing the cooperative principle theory because humorous utterances are created by maxims that disregard the cooperative principle This approach is important because humor is difficult since it can be interpreted in different ways by different individuals, leading them to find it amusing or not Humor does not go against the cooperative principle in the same way that other types of communication, like lying, do People often like being amused, and conversations, business dealings, and other everyday encounters frequently include large amounts of humor As a result, unlike lying, telling jokes is not disregarded as an unproductive means of communication but is instead accepted as an essential component of everyday conversation Since humor is a form of popular culture and a style of dressing, it is closely related to daily life Although many academics have attempted to define comedy, none have succeeded According to Attardo [2, p.3], it is impossible to define comedy in a way that is entirely clear.

However, Singh [26, p.65] asserts that the term "humor" might refer to two different things To begin, one definition of humor is the capacity to comprehend something that is regarded as hilarious or entertaining thing Second, one definition of wit is the capacity of an individual to articulate their perception of what is witty or humorous If I may put it another way, we may say that someone who possesses these qualities also possesses the attribute of being hilarious Therefore, in a broad sense, the term "humor" can be applied to everything and everything that is deemed to be humorous, amusing, or funny.

Raskin [24, p.95] described humor as the strangeness, secularity, facetiousness, comicality, and fun of an action, speech, or writing that arouses laughter Humor can also refer to the ability to recognize absurdity or humor, as well as the ability to communicate humor or jocose treatment of a subject through speech, writing, or other compositions In terms of its functions, humor's qualities support people's cognitive growth and communication abilities.

Langan-Fox [17] claimed that humor has two functions Priority one goes to the psychological function Humor is a sophisticated mental absurdity that is influenced by the combination of numerous cognitive-affective processes Therefore, a good sense of humor can aid in improving cognitive-affective capacities The second quality is communication skills Humor is a social skill that boosts acceptance and impact in interpersonal interactions It allows for flexibility in the transmission of messages that would not otherwise be received.

As a conclusion, humor is produced by humans using language in ways that are amusing, absurd, secular, and incongruous The ability to create humor has an impact on a person's social and personal life Individually, comedy activates a variety of cognitive-affective processes because it uses linguistic play As a result, it influences how well a person's cognitive and affective abilities are developing In relation to the societal impact, humor transmits signals that may not be well received because it is a flexible medium of communication Therefore, using comedy to express criticism of certain social concerns is helpful.

2.2.4.2 Forms of humor

In the course of an average day, most of people come across a broad diversity of comedy, which is expressed in different ways and with different objectives Martin [20, p 10] claims that some comedy originates in the media Humor may be found in a wide variety of media, from newspaper comics and cartoons to comedic

films and books to radio hosts and comedians to blooper reels and stand-up routines to political satire and hilarious commercials Politicians, religious leaders, motivational speakers, and educators frequently include humor into their speeches, sermons, and lectures.

However most of the jokes and giggles that people experience every day come from their interactions with others A discussion between a lover, a friend, a coworker, a business partner, a store clerk and a client, a doctor and a patient, a teacher and a student, or even two strangers in a bank queue will likely contain interpersonal comedy.

Martin [20] highlighted that people differ in the degree to which they are able to generate humor in their day-to-day encounters with other people Most people find laughter to be such a pleasant experience, and they place a great value on people who are particularly skilled at causing laughter for other people These individuals are people who are frequently characterized as being humorous and they are in high demand as companions and lovers Some of them are so adept at bringing a smile to others' faces that they go on to become paid humorists, joining the ranks of comic book writers, comedians (both writers and performers) Further evidence of how highly people appreciate the emotional high that humor brings is the fact that people spend billions of dollars on comedic media every year.

Martin [20] also divided the comedy that occurs in conversation organically into three categories: jokes, which are lighthearted stories commonly shared between friends and family; unplanned or "spontaneous," comedy occurs when two individuals are having a conversation and one or both of them decides to make a joke.

a Jokes

Martin [20] asserted that some people take pleasure in making others laugh during informal conversations by telling jokes, which are brief, amusing anecdotes that end with a punch line To distinguish them from the kind of lighthearted humor and witty remarks that both jokes and joking can also refer to, these are also frequently referred to as produced jokes This is done to emphasize the distinction between the two types of humor Attardo [2] defined a prepared joke is one that has been used before in a way that is similar to the speaker's delivery Examples include jokes from joke books and collections Its language is fairly interchangeable and does not rely on the context An example of one of these jokes is provided below:

A man visits a psychiatrist, who administers a number of tests to him He then makes his results public.

Doctor: I apologize for having to inform you, but you are utterly insane Client: Hell is a good place to get a second opinion.

Doctor: I see that you lack beauty as well.

(Long and Grasser in Martin, 2007) Jokes are a great way to keep students interested in and engaged in their English education They provide a means of presenting various societal perspectives and circumstances Additionally, they're fantastic for giving students the chance to use English in a more natural, everyday situation.

With humor, students will still be learning how to use the English language, but they will be distracted from the monotony of punctuation exercises and textbooks They provide an excellent opportunity to practice inflection and articulation, and students will likely encounter a significant amount of new vocabulary as well.

The fact that jokes can help students become more aware of the intricacies of the language is perhaps the single most important reason to tell jokes in the classroom setting They will understand how some words can have at least two different meanings or how some words are homophones, such as "red" and "read" in the dilemma "high contrast and red all finished?"

During the periods of time spent training and learning unfamiliar dialects, jokes can be an effective tactic to use It is beneficial and essential for learning, just as presenting the language, meanings of etymological wonders, and outlining them with models that are easy to understand and remember.

Jokes is a crucial and helpful tool in the process of acquiring, learning, and remembering foreign tongues They serve to grab and protect the attention of the student or understudy by creating a pleasant and relaxed atmosphere, and they promote the road toward learning and securing another language.

Jokes are a great way to put a student's linguistic skills to the test because their effectiveness depends on the recipient not just understanding the language but also being familiar with slang terms and topical references To appreciate a joke, you need a respectable background in the language and a generally high aptitude for it.

There is a buildup followed by a punch line Everything up to the last sentence in a set-up causes the listener to form preconceived notions about how they should

interpret the situation The humorous and shocking transformation brought about by the punch line gives the impression that humor does not require a big disparity between two things This joke's punch line uses the dictionary meaning of the word "second opinion" to flip the traditionally solemn doctor-patient relationship onto its head It's clear from the story's tone that it's not meant to be taken seriously, and that it's all just for laughs This joke also has a combative undertone.

In ordinary conversation, jokes are typically started with verbal or nonverbal clues like "Did you know the woman " or by sticking to established standard forms like " An elderly man entered a nightclub " that let the audience know this is a funny story and they should expect to laugh Despite the fact that joke tellers typically attempt to attach their jokes to the current content of discussion, a joke is a humorous nugget that stands on its own and provides all the background knowledge the reader needs to get the full laugh As a result, it is applicable to different settings for debate.

b Spontaneous conversational humor

As stated by Martin [20], the majority of comedy people encounter in regular social encounters does not come from pre-written jokes Since it is more context-dependent than joke delivery, spontaneous conversational comedy typically loses part of its wit when recalled later He points out that unlike joke-telling, such conversational humor typically lacks distinct nonverbal cues that indicate a hilarious aim, such as a particular tone of voice or a glint in the eye, making it difficult for the listener to identify whether the speaker is being serious or joking.

Spontaneous conversational humor can take many distinct forms and terms, which are separated from one another by their purposes or applications of comedy.

e Irony

According to Martin [20], a speaker uses irony when she or he makes a statement whose literal interpretation differs from the intended interpretation The following statement contains an instance of irony “What a beautiful day!” The statement assumes a sarcastic tone when the speaker makes it in unfavorable weather, such as when it's chilly or rainy outside The literal meaning of the phrase "saying something lovely using the word "beautiful" is the opposite of what is meant because the speaker would like to convey how miserable the weather is.

e Satire

Social structures or social policies might be criticized through humor [Martin, 20] The classic phrase for this is satire Satire is considered a derogatory style of humor Below is a satirical illustration.

A: I'm interested in the inmates who reside there Clearly, they are quite bored.

B: Well, you can even throw a party inside the jail as long as you have money The statement made by speaker B is sarcastic in nature He wants to convey that when money speaks, anyone can accomplish anything, even in prison, through his words In other words, citizens can pay off the government.

e Sarcasm

As stated by Martin [20] ‘’Sarcasm is regarded as an aggressive form of comedy It goes after someone's emotions as opposed to institutions”.

e Overstatement

Hyperbole or overstatement is a synonym for exaggeration which refers to expressing more than is required It aims to heighten the statement's gravitas, importance, or allure For instance:

Two buddies register for a marathon One of them asks about a buddy who looked to be quite worn out.

A: Are you all right?

B: You could have knocked me over with a feather!

The remark "You could have knocked me over with a feather!" is an example of an overstatement made by speaker B in this instance When something touches her or him, she or he exaggerates the function of a feather, claiming that it is a very heavy thing that might cause someone to fall.

se Teasing

Teasing is a light-hearted comment made on the listener's looks, behavior, and personality In contrast to sarcasm, there is no genuine aim to offend anyone For example:

A: How did you treat your hair? B: I decided to try something new A: Are you becoming old?

A should have responded with a compliment, but instead he teases in order to make a funny comment His joke is that she changed the color of her hair to make herself look older.

e Replies to rhetorical questions

There is no expectation of a response when rhetorical questions are asked Responding to one surprises both the person who posed the question and breaks a conversational expectation So this could be funny, and it would likely just be said to make a friend or acquaintance chuckle For illustration:

A: Could you shut the window?

B: You should move around more regularly, in my opinion.

Since A's question is rhetorical, there is no need for a response B should have responded to the question without even closing the door, but instead decides to do so, suggesting that B is likewise too lazy to do so B should instantly close the door.

¢ Clever reply to serious statement

Martin [20] also said that a smart, peculiar, or ludicrous response is one of the origins of comedy when a speaker reacts to a serious speech The language is deliberately misconstrued to hinder a speaker from responding to the true meaning of the remark As an illustration, consider the following exchange froma first school meeting:

A: I've thought about you B: So you got to meet my husband?

It is considered as clever replies to serious statement because the response that B provides to the statement made by A makes no sense This occurs due to the fact that it is highly improbable that A had previously met the husband of B and talked a great deal of information regarding her or him before they had their first school meeting.

e Pun

According to Martin [20], a pun is a word play Based on a homophone, which is a word that sounds the same as another but has a distinct meaning, it conjures up a different connotation for the phrase For instance:

A: How do turtles communicate? B: Using a shell phone

In this discussion, the word "sell" is sounded similarly to how the word "cell" sounds in a mobile phone The two terms have different meanings The term "sell" alludes to the tough shell that protects the body of the turtle, but "cell" is a component of the term "cell phone," which refers to a mobile phone.

¢ Self- deprecation

Martin [20] claimed that self-deprecation uses the speaker as the focus of comedy It is sometimes referred to as underestimating oneself This type of comedy is used to establish rapport with the audience, show modesty, and make them feel comfortable For instance, Vladimir Nabokov, the author of the novel Lolita, once made fun of himself by declaring, "Lolita is renowned, not I I'm a nameless author who writes in a very esoteric and doubly obscure genre He made this statement to express his modesty on the success of his book Lolita

As stated by Martin [20], it is a phrase or term that is purposefully misinterpreted to invoke a dual meaning, frequently pertaining to sexual matters It can also be defined as semantic ambiguity that invites several interpretations For instance:

The boy: Wow, you have some really large melons there, man You grew them yourself, right? Is there one here?

The girl: “EXCUSE ME”?

The boy shows her a group of watermelons in the background The boy: “The watermelons, can I have one?”

The girl: “Oh, without a doubt This is for you.”

This scene's events are a typical comic plot device The girl believed the boy was saying something wrong despite the fact that his words had a double meaning.

e Transformations of frozen expression

Martin [20] said that speakers who adapt well-known proverbs or sayings into original assertions are able to modify frozen language.

For instance, a man with no hair may lament, "There is some hair today, there is no hair tomorrow." It is essentially an adaptation of the popular motivating adage, "Smile today, cry tomorrow." However, the guy modifies the proverb to create a funny impact.

c Unintentional humor

According to Martin [20], accidental verbal humor and accidental physical humor are the two sorts of inadvertent comedy When someone trips over a peel of banana or pours some water on their clothes, it might be considered accidental physical humor When they occur in an unexpected and odd fashion, these kinds of things are amusing as long as the person experiencing them is not gravely injured or humiliated Slapstick and screwball comedies are likewise built on the principles of this type of comedy Speaker misconceptions that lead to unintentional language humor include logical fallacies, Freudian slips, malapropisms, and spoonerisms Spoonerisms are grammatical mistakes when the first sounds of two or more words are flipped around, giving the sentences a surprising and humorous new meaning As an illustration, it's been reported that a man once toasted Queen Victoria with the phrase "Our queer old dean gets three cheers."

2.2.5 Movie

A movie is a form of visual communication that uses sound and moving visuals to convey stories or impart information that aids in learning new things A

movie is a motion picture that keeps crowds at the multiplex entertained A multiplex is a specific kind of cinema Previously, movies could only be seen in theaters, but today, people may view movies on a variety of electronic devices, including televisions, VCD players, laptops, mobile phones, and more The most popular form of art nowadays is the movie.

In spite of the fact that there are a great number of movies that might be dissected in terms of the presence of flout maxim, the researcher for this project decided to focus on the Monsters Inc movie as the subject of the investigation.

eer ey wrx aa

The energy from the screams of human children powers the metropolis of Monstropolis in a planet wholly populated by monsters Through doors that open gateways to children's bedroom closets, expert monsters working as "scarers" at the Monsters, Inc factory terrify kids so they may collect their cries.

The factory contains a big warehouse full of thousands of doors, "scare floors" where the doors are opened and energy from screaming human youngsters is contained, as well as a simulator area where employees may perfect their scare skills Young people are viewed as poisonous in the business, therefore working there is dangerous.

The action of the narrative occurs in the monster-only metropolis of Monstropolis Although Monstropolis is not a part of the human world, it is accessible from children's bedrooms via their closets A door becomes a doorway between the worlds of humans and monsters when it is properly activated Monsters, Inc., a utility corporation that uses monsters to frighten kids and harvest

energy from their cries, supplies the city with electricity The business features a sizable warehouse filled with doors, "scare floors" with motion-activated doors and a one-of-a-kind classroom for training where staff members hone their scare techniques.

James P "Sully" Sullivan (Goodman), the company's greatest fright-maker, is assisted by Michael "Mike" Wazowski (Crystal), a close friend of Sullivan's Henry J Waternoose III, the company's CEO is Sulley's biggest opponent and is played by Buscemi Children are more difficult to frighten than they used to be, which has caused Monstropolis to be in the midst of an energy crisis.

After doing the job, Sully discovers an open door on his fear floor one day Even though he doesn't find anyone in the chamber concealed behind the door, the young child (Gibbs), who is only 2 years old, follows him back into the monster realm In contrast to being terrified of him, she refers to him as "Kitty" and adores playing with him Sully continually leading the child back to her cell because monsters believe that humans are fatally harmful The girl is finally trapped in the monster dimension when Randall deactivates and stores the door After Sully brings the child into a restaurant to meet Mike and her presence is detected by the general public, they hide the girl at Sully's house while the Child Detection Agency (CDA) searches for her Sully ultimately calls the child "Boo" and starts to bond with her after realizing that she is not toxic He also notices that her laughter is more ferocious than her screams.

The following morning, Sully and Mike trick Boo into going to work by dressing her in a monster costume As soon as Mike goes into the room, Randall traps him in a box, mistaking him for Boo, even though he has agreed to assist them in getting her back to her bedroom Boo will be taken hostage by Randall so he can put her in a machine that will record her screams.

Sully and Mike try to keep Boo safe from Randall and his scream machine in the series of fights, chases, and disasters that ensue Waternoose exiles Sully and Mike to the Himalayas, where they encounter the Abominable Snowman (John Ratzenberger) Randall pursues Sully and Mike through the organization's door-moving roller coaster system as they flee through a settlement at the foot of the mountain When Boo's laughter opens the storage doors, the pursuit enters and leaves the human realm Randall is finally defeated by Sully and Boo After Sully throws

The analytical schema in Figure 1 is drawn by Grice’s cooperative principle

[Observance of maxim | [ Non- observance of maxim

Opting out | [Violating | [infringing | | PFlouúg |

Maxim of quality | [Maxim of quantity | | Maximofrelation | | Maximofmamer |

" ăn”

| Jokes | [Spontaneous conversational humor _ | [ Unintentional humor

a Irony e Replies to rhetorical question b Sarcasm f Clever replies to serious statement

2.3 Summary

These sections presented above is an overview on the theories used as the foundation of this study It consists of concepts, definitions and theories related to the research’s theoretical background Firstly, the definitions of pragmatics is given so as to help readers understand what the author mainly aims to in the first place Secondly, a wide range of definitions, characteristics and classifications of cooperative principle are presented entirely To add, the author also distinguishes four kinds of maxim, including maxim of quality, maxim of quantity, maxim of relation and maxim of manner Next, concepts of flouting the maxims are presented subsequently to provide more comprehensive knowledge supporting the study’s background Last but not least, the author summaries all types of humor with various examples and detailed explanations.

CHAPTER 3: HUMOR IN MOVIE SCRIPT MONSTERS INC 3.1 Humor created through flouting maxim of quality

The maxim of quality can be disregarded in a number of different ways First, the speakers can just say something simply that does not reflect his or her thoughts clearly Second, they might exaggerate and break the rule Third, by employing a metaphor, a speaker can go against the rule of excellence Irony and sarcasm are the final two methods to violate the quality maxim Irony is the expression of the antithesis of a statement while also implying the contrary Sarcasm is an unfriendly sort of irony that is typically used to cause harm to other people All in all, according to Cutting [8] pointed out that speaker may flout the maxim quality by exaggerating as in the irony, overstatement and sarcasm.

Table 3.1 Flouting maxim of quality Data Utterance Type Explanation Mr Bile, can you tell me what you did wrong?

Bile: I fell down? Ms Flint: No, no, before that Can anyone tell me Mr Bile's big mistake? Anyone? Ms Flint: Let's take a look at the tape Here we go Ms Flint: Right there See? The door! You left it wide open (scene 1)

I The entire event is revealed to be a training exercise for novice monsters, during which they are judged on how effectively they scare people This situational irony of a cowardly, clumsy, naive-looking monster is getting scared by the screams of a child The fact that he is designed to scare is delightfully underlined by the incongruity of the character's name, which is Bile, and his naive statement, which is "My friends call me Phlegm" representing his laid-back personality Irony is used in this situation, so it is called flouting the maxim of quality.