IMPLICATURES IN PANJI KOMING 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

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 utterance
he 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

investigation, equal exploration of implicatures is conducted by seeking it out in

Panji Koming Comic. Panji Koming Comic is one short comic that appears
weekly in Kompas newspaper and typified by some composition of political
shades. With its characteristic of being politically loaded, it is compulsory and
noteworthy to give it a closer attention for issuing topic. The below assigned
picture depicts one of Panji Koming version.

In the above comic picture, there can be seen an implicature when a close look is
given in this conversation.
A

:Hormatilah para Nayakapraja Wakil kita, Pailul.

Give respect to our Nayakapraja representatives, Pailul.

Pailul

:Banyak pamong maling.

Many guardians are thieves.

From the exemplified conversation found in the comic, arise an implicature that
Pailul as As partner in speaking implies that he will not give respect to the
Nayakapraja, the representatives. The meaning is not directly uttered through his
answer. Yet his phrasing that employs the word maling thieves to contradict the
word wakil representatives, such understanding of implied meaning can be

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

collection of Panji 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 is
neither 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

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 problemsolving 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). Cooperative
Principle 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

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 to
quantity, 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

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.

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: Sontoloyo Dumb

: 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 kami for 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 not
because 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

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 Sekolah Poor People Cant Go to School

: Belajar yang rajin, ya.

Study diligently, ok.

: Pasti Paman
I will, Uncle.

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

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

: Kita nggak bisa sekolah, dong!

Then we cant go to school!

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

Lets ask Uncle Panji and Uncle Koming for help.

: Hwarakadaah!
My Goodness!

: Apakah bisa ditawar?

Can this be bargain?

: Pendidikan bukan jual beli barang Pamongpraja telah menentukan.

Education is unlike trading--- Pamongpraja have decided.

: Nayakapraja dulunya pada sekolah enggak, sih?

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.

: 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?

: 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?

: 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!

From the statement stated by E, implied meaning can be seen. The hint
point is situated in the Indonesian particle sih in 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.

The next data is given the below comic picture.

Title: Lapar = Makan Hungry = Eat

: Yaaah nggak cukup buat beli makan, Trinil

Awh its not enough to buy a meal, Trinil

: Padahal aku lapal kak bujel.

Im hungry, Brother.

: Brisik!!! Bikin rusak pemandangan!!!

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

: Tokoh-tokoh tua tak usah maju, dong.

Old people, do not put yourselves up, please.

: Monggo Maju Maju, Ayo bertarung tentukan adipati baru

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

: Itu ibu yang dekat sama wong cilik minta makan, yuk.
Thats the madam who closes to civilians. Lets ask her for a meal.

: Jangan jadi golput ya anak-anak.

Dont be blank voters, kids.

(1) C

: Brisik!!! Bikin rusak pemandangan!!!

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

The single statement implies that the hearer is expected to be silent. It

is an utterance which is said literally and indirectly. The literal idea as what is
meant is just the exact meaning of the words employed. It is said to be
indirectly for this sentence is likely to be used in telling the hearer to be quite
or silent. This implicature is generalized conversational implicature because
without a certain acknowledgement, the hearer may easily get the point of the
message being conveyed.

(2) D

: Tokoh-tokoh tua tak usah maju, dong.

Old people, do not put yourselves up, please.

There is an implicature behind this statement. In trying to infer the

message of the utterance, it is necessitate in knowing the specific background
comprehension. The context of this environment copes with elections. The
sentence tak usah maju do not put yourselves up means that it tells the
referred figures to not to be the candidates. The implicature, then, means that
the speaker demands that it is the young generation who should be the
candidates, not the old figures. As the implicature need the special knowledge
to interpret, this implicature is classified as particularized conversational
implicature. The conveyed meaning is uttered in literal and direct speech act.

(3) A

: Itu ibu yang dekat sama wong cilik minta makan, yuk.
Thats the madam who closes to civilians. Lets ask her for a
meal.

: Jangan jadi golput ya anak-anak.

Dont be blank voters, kids.

The implicature of this utterance can be simply inferred. As this is a

generalized conversational implicature that can be guessed through the

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 Koruptor The Costume of The Corrupts

: Kok kelihatan tegang, Kakang Mbok Dyah Gembili.

Why, you look uneasy, Kakang Mbok Dyah Gembili.

: 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.

: 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.

Please, try this.

A

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

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

: 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 by
means 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

all the dialogues in the comic shows that such a mode is frequently used in critics,
protests, satires, and giving advice (Wijana, 2001).

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