Abstract

Many linguists worked on language in conversation and among these works, one of the most
accepted theoretical approaches is the Cooperative principle proposed by Paul Grice. However,
in conversations, the theory of the Cooperative principle does not always suit the purpose of the
interaction. Speakers prefer to make use of implicatures for many reasons linked to the context of
the discussion as is the case in The Untamed Destiny of Dorothée Tchada. This work aims to
analyze instances of maxims flouting in the selected novel to explain how Conversational
implicatures and Cooperative principles co-relate. For the data analysis of this study, the mixed
method is used. Through a quantitative methodology, the data obtained after analyses of the
novel have been organized and presented statistically in an informative way. Then a qualitative
methodology is used to explain the data collected. For the results, the study reveals sixty-three
cases (63) of implicatures in the novel, and the analysis of these shows that Implicatures is raised
due to the insufficiency of the Cooperative principle in coping with all the variables that appear
in conversations.
Key Words: Co-operative principle; Conversational implicatures; Flouting Maxim,

Résumé
De nombreux linguistes ont travaillé sur le langage en communication et parmi les différentes
approches théoriques, l'une des plus plausible est le Principe de Coopération proposé par Paul
Grice. Cependant, l’usage de cette théorie en conversations n'est pas toujours adapté à l'objectif
de l'interaction. Les locuteurs préfèrent recourir à l'inférence pour des raisons liées au contexte
de la discussion, comme c'est le cas dans le roman The Untamed Destiny de Dorothée Tchada.
L'objectif de ce travail est d'identifier les maximes bafouées dans le livre étudié afin d'expliquer
le lien qui existe entre l'Inférence en conversation et le Principe de Coopération. La méthode
mixte a été utilisée afin d’analyser les données de recherche trouvée. À travers une approche
quantitative, les données obtenues après analyses du roman ont été résumées, et présentées
statistiquement pour la lisibilité. Ensuite, l’approche qualitative a été utilisée afin d’interprétée
les résultats collectés. Les résultats de la recherche montrent qu’il y a soixante-trois (63) cas
d'inférences dans le roman et l’analyse de ces inférences révèlent que ceux-ci apparaissent
généralement suite dû à l’insuffisance du principe de coopération face aux qu’apparaissent en
conversation.

Mots clés : Principe de coopération ; Inférence en Conversation, Violée une Maxime

i
Dedication
I dedicate this work to:

- My father, Mr. AHOUEHOME Servais

- My mother, Mrs. BONOU Céline

ii
Acknowledgments
First and foremost, I thank the Almighty God for the blessing, strength, courage,
and inspiration that allowed me to achieve this work.
A warm thank you to Dr. Dadjo Servais for his supervision and support, stepping
in to help when it was needed despite his loaded schedule. Thanks for his
guidance, advice, and suggestions from the thesis’s topic selection till the end of
the work. I sincerely thank him for his patience in reading and editing my work.
My gratitude goes to the lecturers at the English Department of FLASH Adjarra for
sharing their knowledge and advice throughout my study there.
Special thanks to the members of the English laboratory of CAEB for the material
and technical assistance they granted me during the writing of this work.
I would like to express my gratitude to my family, especially my father, and
mother, for their assistance, love, and prayers that helped me a lot during the
difficult times of this study.
Also, thanks to my brother and my sisters for their care, encouragement as well as
admonition that boosted me in realizing this work.
Finally, a thank you to my friends and classmates with whom I have spent a lot
during these years of study. Though not always the best, their suggestions have
contributed to the realization of this work.

iii
Lists of Acronyms and Abbreviations
CP: Co-operative Principle

CVI: Conventional Implicatures

CI: Conversational Implicatures

FM: Flouting of Maxim

FMQN: Flouting Maxim of Quantity

FMQ: Flouting Maxim of Quality

FMM: Flouting Maxim of Manner

FMR: Flouting Maxim of Relevance (Relation)

iv
Lists of Tables
Table 1: Statistical classification of the various maxims’ flouting identified in the
novel.

Table 2: Effective and Percentages of Flouting Identified.

Table 3: Percentages of Types of Conversational Implicatures

v
Lists of Figures
Figure 1: Schema to calculate implicatures.

Figure 2: Calculating an Implicatures

vi
Table des matières
Abstract......................................................................................................................i
Résumé.......................................................................................................................i
Dedication.................................................................................................................ii
Acknowledgments....................................................................................................iii
Lists of Acronyms and Abbreviations......................................................................iv
Lists of Tables...........................................................................................................v
Lists of Figures.........................................................................................................vi
Introduction...............................................................................................................1
CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................4
1.1 Literature Review..........................................................................................5
CHAPTER TWO: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK............................................10
2 Theoretical Framework.....................................................................................11
2.1 Grice’s Cooperative Maxims......................................................................11
2.2 Observing Maxims in Conversation...........................................................11
2.3 Breaking-Maxims and Conversational Implicatures..................................12
2.3.1 Violating a Maxim................................................................................12
2.3.2 Opting out of a Maxim.........................................................................13
2.3.3 Flouting a Maxim.................................................................................13
2.4 Types of Conversational Implicatures........................................................15
2.5 Background study of the novel The Untamed Destiny...............................15
2.6 Research Method........................................................................................16
CHAPTER THREE: PRESENTATION AND DATA ANALYSIS.......................17
3 Presentation and Data Analysis.........................................................................18
3.1 Presentation of Data....................................................................................18
3.1.1 Data identified from the novel..............................................................18
3.1.2 Calculating Conversational Implicatures..............................................38
3.2 Data Analysis..............................................................................................39
3.2.1 Statistical Table Analysis.....................................................................40
3.2.2 Conversational Implicatures in The Untamed Destiny.........................40
CHAPTER FOUR: DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS.......................................51
vii
4 Discussion of the Findings................................................................................52
Conclusion...............................................................................................................58
References List........................................................................................................61
Appendix.................................................................................................................64

viii
Introduction
People live in society because they are social beings. To fulfill their needs, they
live together and interact with each other. People communicate with each other to
share and express their ideas and their feeling to other people. They exchange
meanings and intentions through language. They use it to create a common
understanding between the speaker and the hearer. The hearer should interpret the
speaker’s utterance to know what the speaker means. The conversation has a set of
rules that can help people communicate effectively. According to Grice (1975),
these rules guide the speakers and hearers or their interlocutors to follow the rules
or be cooperative. The cooperative principle is constructed by four sets of maxims,
the maxim of quantity (informative), the maxim of quality (truthful), the maxim of
relation (relevant), and the maxim of manner (clarity). The maxim of quality plays
an important role in the cooperative principle because every utterance should be
based on the truth, no matter which maxims the interlocutors required.

However, interlocutors need to obey all maxims, so the conversation will run
smoothly and successful communication can occur. And even though successful
communication can occur by obeying the maxims, there are still instances in
conversation when a speaker does not follow the rules of the maxims. According to
Agustina Ariyanti (2016), it is called non-observance of the maxim and occurs
because of disobedience towards maxims or because of the failure to observe a
maxim: breaking maxim. There are many types of breaking maxim and each type
of non-observance of maxim occurs in a different condition and has respectively
different effects.

Grice makes a clear distinction between quietly violating a maxim and openly
flouting a maxim in communication. In Grice's analysis, violations might brake
communication but they do not lead to implicatures in contrast to the flouting of a

1
maxim. Implicatures is a technical term denoting 'implying something by saying
something else'. Thus, implicatures in Grice's definition implies that unstated
information is conveyed to an audience that can work out what is being said by
reference to cultural or linguistic maxims that are being flagrantly flouted. Grice
attempted to account for conversational implicatures by suggesting a general
cooperative principle between speaker and hearer i.e., a kind of agreement.
Flouting and violating towards maxim of quality happen in spoken form and are
also found in written form, such as a novel. A novel can reflect social interaction
and the conversation in the novel can be used to analyze the utilization of the
Cooperative principle as well as Implicatures.

Following the above explanations, the current research work is an analysis of the
instances of conversational implicatures based on Grice’s cooperative principle in
the novel The Untamed Destiny. It aims to identify instances of maxims flouting in
the novel and explain how Conversational implicatures and cooperative principle
co-relate. To achieve this, the following questions have been considered:

• How does Conversational implicatures arise through the Cooperative

principle?

• Which categories of maxims’ flouting are in the novel and which one is the
most prominent?

• How does implicatures influence social interaction ?

• Why is implicatures appearing in conversation despite the existing

cooperative principle?

This study is expected to give both academic and practical contributions to

discourse studies, especially in flouting of maxims used by people in their
conversations. Theoretically, this research is expected to enrich the understanding
of inferences in pragmatics studies, especially in using conversational implicatures.

2
It is expected that the findings in this research will give a direct contribution to the
existing knowledge in the field of linguistics. This research work’s significance
also extends to fellow students in the realization of a thesis on any related topics to
this one as the answers to the questions of the study will help ongoing work on
cooperative principle and implicatures analysis and further research on the
relevance of the co-operative principle, reassessing the notion of implicatures in
African literature context.

The following part of this research work turns around four chapters. The first one
is related to the literature review. The second one is the theoretical framework of
the study. The third one focuses on the presentation and analysis of data and the
last one is the discussion of the findings.

3
CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW

4
1.1 Literature Review
This section presents some previous research works related to the topic that has
been carried out by senior researchers. These are books, articles, and thesis…

Pragmatics is the branch of linguistics dealing with language in use and the
contexts in which it is used. It focuses on the speaker’s intended meaning including
deixis, turn-taking in conversation, text organization, presupposition, and
implicatures.
Grice (1975) put forward the Cooperative principle (CP). Grice believed that
people’s talk was not made up of a bunch of incoherent words under normal
circumstances. The most obvious feature of conversation is that it is a kind of
rational, cooperative, and purpose-oriented, and the reason why people’s
conversations can go smoothly is that both sides follow a certain purpose, and act
in harmony with each other. Grice has subdivided the Cooperative principle into
four sub-principles called maxim of Quantity, Quality, Relation, and Manner.
Furthermore, Grice describes four ways in which the speaker can behave
concerning the CP which are to “observe” the maxims, to “violate” a maxim, to
“flout” a maxim, or to “opt-out out of the maxims. He distinguishes between what
is said and what is implicated. According to him, what is said is truth-conditional,
and what is implicated is not. What is implicated, in turn, may be either
conversationally or conventionally implicated, and what is conversationally
implicated may be due to either a generalized or a particularized conversational
implicatures.
More than any other person Grice brought implicatures to the attention of
philosophers and linguists. His account of the nature of the implicatures generation
has provided a hugely influential framework for thinking about implicatures. The
core idea of the account is that the link between utterances and the implicatures
they carry is not arbitrary or contingent, based on the speaker’s intentions or
5
general conventions, but a rational one, grounded in general principles of
cooperative behavior.
Grice argues that an implicatures arises when an utterance is uncooperative if taken
literally, violating one or more maxims about how a cooperative speaker should
convey information. Since a presumption of cooperation is essential to
communication, Grice argues, in such cases, the speaker must be understood to be
conveying something other than the literal meaning of their utterance, and this is
the implicated meaning. But in this case, how is “going beyond what is said”
supposed to work in the case of conversational implicatures? Grice claims that
hearers can arrive at the implicated meaning by a process of inference, guided by
the assumption that the speaker is trying to be cooperative. He points out that
conversational exchanges are typically cooperative.
Grice’s approach was aimed at providing a unified account of both generalized,
context-independent implicatures and particularized context-specific ones, and it
has been the dominant approach to implicatures in philosophical literature.

Following Grice’s account of conversational exchanges, Birner, J. (2012) in his

book Introduction to Pragmatics explains that speakers can observe a maxim,
violate it, flout it, or opt-out. The first three options give rise to conversational
implicatures. He concludes that conversational implicatures are context-dependent
and non-truth-conditional. Specifically, conversational implicatures is calculable,
cancellable, nondetachable, nonconventional, indeterminate, and not carried by
what is said, but only by saying what is said.
In this logic, Griffith (2006) in his Introduction to English Semantics and
Pragmatics said that the cooperative principle describes that the speakers and their
interlocutors have an assumption that everyone involved in a process of
communication understands and follows the principle of communication.

6
In the same way, Faizal (2011) in his thesis entitled “A Conversational
Implicatures Analysis in Oscar Wilde’s Short Story Happy Prince” has worked on
the CP and its relation with implicatures in conversations. He explains that there is
a general cooperative principle between speakers and hearers that controls and
guides the way they speak. It controls the participants in doing conversation, so
their conversation works in cooperative and polite ways.

The Cooperative Principle coined by Paul Grice has been considered one of the
most influential theories in the development of pragmatics for its attempt to
describe the mechanism of a conversation and or how the speakers and their
interlocutors can get the expressed meaning and the implied meaning.

As Grice’s theory laid the groundwork for all later work in implicatures, two lines
of pragmatic theories arose. The first line is the neo-Gricean who holds that when
hearers interpret utterances, they automatically apply certain heuristics, related to
the maxims Grice proposes, which transform and enrich the literal meanings of the
utterances in various ways, creating a new level of meaning that speakers can
exploit and which makes communication more efficient.
Horn (1984) recognized two interacting aspects of Grice’s Cooperative Principle.
He presents a simplified system consisting of two opposing forces, the Q-Principle,
and the R-Principle which subsume most of the maxims and submaxims of Grice’s
system. According to him, the Q-Principle maps onto Grice’s first submaxim of
Quantity, while the R-Principle subsumes Grice’s second submaxim of quantity,
the maxim of relation, and the maxim of manner. Quality is considered a sort of
super-maxim that is assumed to operate above the level of Q and R and without
which the system cannot function.
Similarly, Levinson (2000) presents a distinct framework, retaining the notion of
opposing speaker-based and hearer-based forces in language but distinguishing
between semantic content and linguistic form and separating these two aspects of

7
Horn’s Q-Principle. Levinson based his theory on three heuristics for utterance
interpretation: The Q-heuristic, the I-heuristic, and the M-heuristic.

The second line of pragmatic theories that arose is radically different from the neo-
Gricean theories. The chief alternative to the Neo-Gricean theories of implicatures
is the Relevance theory proposed by Wilson and Sperber (2004) which takes
relevance to be central to human communication. This ‘post-Gricean’ approach
agrees that interpretation involves the application of general communicative
principles, but it posits only one of these: that speakers aim to be maximally
relevant. The relevance theory assumes a single Communicative Principle of
Relevance and according to Wilson and Sperber says, every ostensive stimulus
conveys a presumption of its optimal relevance. In addition to refocusing the
Gricean apparatus in terms of a language user’s general cognitive processes.

Another radically different approach to implicatures generation is the one proposed

by Wayne Davis (1998) who completely rejects the Gricean view that implicatures
depends on general principles of communication.
Besides, Prasetyo, D. & Ahmad, M. (2018) in their research work entitled “I Have
Never Touched It: Flouting and Violation of Maxims in a Court Testimony” argue
that, in some circumstances, the reasons why people cannot meet the obligation to
observe the maxims is because they probably cannot speak clearly or likely
because they decide to lie. They conclude that the maxims of the CP that Grice had
put forward cannot encompass all the different features of exchange despite the
four maxims mentioned. There is no doubt that the CP is not perfect and it is
important to recognize these maxims as unstated assumptions we have in
conversations. We assume that people are normally going to provide an
appropriate amount of information and are telling the truth, being relevant, and
trying to be as clear as possible.
Saiful Akmal (2020) in his thesis entitled “Conversational Implicatures Analysis in
8
Kingdom of Heaven” says that culturally, instead of delivering a message through
communication directly, sometimes we say it indirectly. Moreover, the symbol the
speakers use in conversation in the communication not only refers to their subject
but also carries out the meaning. Therefore, in some conditions of human
communication, the words uttered more than what they said. He concludes that
many language users use language based on their needs as there are no accurate
and internationally agreed rules for using language.
On the same line, Palupi (2006) argues that, in some circumstances, the reasons
why people cannot meet the obligation to observe the maxims are because they
probably cannot speak clearly or likely because they decide to lie. He concludes
that the state in which people are unsuccessful in adhering to the maxims is called
the non-observance of maxims.
In her thesis entitled “Conversational Implicatures: Re-assessing the Gricean
Framework”, Kasmirli (2016) assessed the Gricean framework as a global theory
of implicatures. Kasmirli states that “the duties of the implicatures user are not
simply those of the cooperative communicator (to be truthful, informative,
relevant, and so on) but also those of someone who offered a sort of intimacy and
invited trust” (p.188).
This thesis focuses on Grice’s account of how conversational implicatures in
relation to the cooperative principle based on the novel The Untamed Destiny of
Dorothée Tchada.

9
CHAPTER TWO: THEORETICAL
FRAMEWORK

10
2 Theoretical Framework
This part of the work gives some explanations of the theories applied to the
analysis of the novel; some key concepts, the background of the novel, and the
major characters of the novel whose interactions are analyzed.

2.1 Grice’s Cooperative Maxims

 Quantity maxim

-Make your conversation have sufficient information just as it is

desired for the present aims of the exchange.
-Do not make your conversation more informative than it is desired.
 Quality maxim

-Try to make your conversation faithful.

-Do not say what you think is not faithful to the fact.
-Do not say that for which you do not have enough evidence.
 Relation maxim

-Make your conversation correlative

-Be relevant
 Maxim of Manner

-Be coherent, be clear.

-Avoid ambiguity.
-make your utterance avoid prolixity, be regular
2.2 Observing Maxims in Conversation
The use of certain expressions signals our awareness of the maxims in
conversation. Such expressions are called meta-discourse items. Meta-discourse
describes comments on what people are about to say or have just said. It signals
11
our awareness of the maxims and our observation of them. Some example of meta-
discourse items is as follow:
 Maxim of Quality: ‘I may be mistaken, but…’; ‘She might be sick’; ‘I think

she’s the one who said so…’; I am not sure, but I heard that….
 Maxim of Quantity: ‘To cut a long story short…”; I don’t want to bore you

with details, but…

 Maxim of Relevance: ‘By the way,’ or ‘Anyway…’

 Maxim of Manner: ‘It might sound confusing, but…’; “It may rain
tomorrow.”

2.3 Breaking-Maxims and Conversational Implicatures

According to Grice (1975), on occasion, a speaker may fail to follow these
maxims. He mentions four cases. First, the speaker may covertly violate a maxim,
usually to mislead the hearer. Second, a speaker may explicitly opt out of a maxim,
for example by indicating that they are unwilling to tell all they know. Third, a
speaker may find that two maxims clash, forcing them to choose between them.
For example, if a speaker has information that is important but of doubtful
reliability then they will not be able to simultaneously respect the maxims of
Quantity and Quality. Finally, a speaker may openly flout a maxim in a way that is
obvious to their hearer. Cases of the last type, Grice proposes, are the ones that
typically generate Conversational Implicatures. By openly flouting the CP in what
they say, yet without ceasing to observe the CP by opting out, a speaker signals to
their hearer that they wish to convey some further message that is consistent with
the CP. Thus, even though the speaker seems to be flouting the maxims, they are
following them at another level.

12
2.3.1 Violating a Maxim
Violating a maxim can mislead a hearer. Grice states that “people may quietly
violate a maxim, if so, in some cases he will be liable to mislead.” Violating a
maxim can happen in the four sub-principles of the maxim. There are violating the
maxim of quantity, quality, relation, and of manner. Violating towards maxim of
quantity happens when a speaker does not give enough information to a hearer
about the whole picture or the topic being discussed. Then, violating towards
maxim of quality is a situation where a speaker is not sincere and gives wrong
information to a hearer, which can be said as a lie. Furthermore, violating towards
maxim of relation happens when a speaker changes the topic to avoid the answer
or topic brought up by other interlocutors in conversation. Lastly, violating towards
maxim of manner happens when someone gives obscure reference, and vague
references, to avoid a brief and orderly answer in a conversation.

2.3.2 Opting out of a Maxim

Grice explains that people who do not want to cooperate in conversation choose to
opt out, and the speakers directly say their unwillingness to continue the
conversation in which maxim is required.

2.3.3 Flouting a Maxim

In the case of flouting the cooperative maxims, the speaker desires the greatest
understanding in his/her recipient because it is expected that the interlocutor can
uncover the hidden meaning behind the utterances. People may flout the maxim of
quality to deliver implicitly a sarcastic tone in what they state. This definition of
maxim’s flouting may appear similar to the case of maxims violating but there are
quite distinct from each other. Flouting is the kind of non-observance of the maxim
that results from the failure of the speaker to follow the maxim. It can happen in
the four sub-principles of the maxim. Based on the different types of the breaking
maxim, the one which often leads to implicatures is flouting. This kind of breaking
maxim extends to all the sub-principle of the cooperative principle. Hence, we
13
have flouting of the maxim of quantity, flouting of the maxim of quality, flouting
of the maxim of relation, and flouting of the maxim of manner.

2.3.3.1 Flouting the Maxim of Quantity

Flouting the maxim of quantity (FMQN) happens when a speaker gives too little or
much information. Thomas (2013) explains that flouting the maxim of quantity is a
situation when a speaker blatantly gives more or less information than the situation
requires. For example, in a court of law when the accused is asked a question and
started to talk of something unrelated to prove his innocence, he is flouting the
maxim of quantity.

Judge: What did you do on Friday?

Accused: I woke up at seven forty. I made some toast and a cup of tea. I listened to
the news. And I left for work at about eight-thirty.
2.3.3.2 Flouting the Maxim of Quality
Flouting the maxim of quality (FMQ) happens when an utterance cannot be
interpreted literally. According to Cruse (as cited in Ester, N., et al., 2005) flouting
the maxim of quality is not literally true, but is not likely to mislead hearers
because of the context of use in the utterance. There are several strategies for how
the quality maxim can be flouted. The first is the hyperbole strategy. According to
Wales (2001), hyperbole is often used to emphasize something (word) or as a sign
of great expression or passion (p.190). The second is the metaphor strategy. Wales
also states that “when words are used with metaphor sense, the domain of
reference is carried over onto another based on same perceived similarity”.
Euphemism is also a part of the metaphor strategy. The third is the irony strategy
which in Wales’s terms are contradictory words and often sarcastic. Fourth is the
banter strategy. Banter is a mild aggression that expresses a negative sentiment but
implies a positive one. It is familiarly known as “mock impoliteness”.

14
2.3.3.3 Flouting the Maxim of Relation
Flouting the maxim of relation (FMR) happens when a speaker changes the topic
of conversation but still expects the hearer to realize and know about the alteration.
According to Ester, N., et al., (2005) flouting the maxim of relation is changing a
topic by using an irrelevant comment, but it is expected that the hearer knows the
meaning by making the connection between the current topic and the preceding
one.

2.3.3.4 Flouting the Maxim of Manner

Flouting the maxim of manner (FMM) happens when a speaker says something
unclear. According to Cutting (2002), flouting the maxim of manner happens when
a speaker does not talk clearly, appearing to obscure and tending to ambiguity.

2.4 Types of Conversational Implicatures

There are two types of conversational implicatures, they are Generalized
Conversational Implicatures and Particularized Conversational Implicatures.
Generalized conversational implicatures are usually carried by a certain word or
phrase, while particularized conversational implicatures depend far more heavily
on the whole context.

2.5 Background study of the novel The Untamed Destiny.

The Untamed Destiny is an African novel written by the Beninese lecturer and
writer Dorothée TCHADA. Published in 2020, this fictional novel is about the
story of Sister Emma, a nun. She ran an orphanage called the Helpless Souls and
was someone with a benevolent heart. She is known for her kindness as she always
strives to help children and orphans in need because of the scars left from
childhood since she grew up fatherless and has been treated as a bastard girl. This
ordeal led her in rescuing a pair of twins abandoned in City Dump, a place known
to be the garbage dumpsite. The saving of the pair of twins has ushered the rise of
her mysterious past, the doubt of her status as a bastard child, and the whereabouts
15
of her missing father. As the story unravels more and more about her unknown
past, she went through many tragedies but has always thrived to remain herself and
help as much as she could muster. Finally, she realizes that her father was dead
since. For the first time in years, she felt empty but free as she finally wasn’t a
bastard girl. In this novel, many of the tragedies that happened were heralded by a
misinterpretation of some cultural and religious phenomenon that happened. As for
the setting, the fictional story took place in the Benin City of Cotonou with a clear
timeline throughout the whole novel. This novel is entertaining, with good themes
and moral values, and more importantly, it has great research value as it has been
written in English by a writer who has it as a foreign language. It is full of
interactions with underlying purposes.

2.6 Research Method

This study is conducted in several steps which start from a deep reading of the
studied novel, selecting the interactions which contained the conversational
implicatures, classifying the data into four categories of the conversation maxims,
identifying each conversation maxim’s flouting, and analyzing the data. In this
study, the mixed method has been used. Through the quantitative approach, the
instances of conversational implicatures identified in the novel have been compiled
in a table according to their frequency. The data are into four categories of maxims
which are based on the breaking maxim that typically causes implicatures that is
flouting. The qualitative approach has been used according to Kothari (2004) who
states that “qualitative methods aim at discovering the underlying motives and
desires in depth for purposes” (p.3). Hence, the qualitative data is collected through
frequent reading and analysis of the novel as well as previous related work. The
object of this study is the novel The Untamed Destiny written by Dorothée Tchada
which has one hundred and eighty-three (183) pages.

16
CHAPTER THREE: PRESENTATION
AND DATA ANALYSIS

17
 3 Presentation and Data Analysis
This part of the work focuses on the presentation of the data collected through the
research and their analysis and tries to answer the research question bring up by the
topic of the research.

3.1 Presentation of Data

In this section, the data collected is presented to achieve the purposes of the
research.

3.1.1 Data identified from the novel

The following table mentions the number of maxims’ flouting found in the novel
per category. It also describes the percentage of the maxims to describe the data
accurately. The table is as follows:

Table 1: Statistical classification of the various maxims’ flouting identified in the

novel.

Types of
Maxim Sentences
Numbers Sentences Conversational
Flouted without Flouting
Implicatures

01 “Please don’t beat around Maxim of “Please, just tell Generalized

the bush” (p.4) Quality me directly Implicatures
what’s going on.”
The speaker
has used an
idiomatic
expression to

18
 convey his
intention.

“Sister Emma, my mind went Maxim of “Sister Emma,

straight back to the minor Quality my mind went
blunders I’ve made in the straight back to
Through
past.” (p.12) the
Euphemism,
02 rehabilitation
the speaker
project for
tried to
orphans that
attenuate his
I’ve
deeds.
mismanaged.”

- “Mathieu is a son or Maxim of “Yes, his father Generalized

relative of an MP? Quantity is an influential Implicatures
MP.”
- “Of course, his father The speaker
is an influential MP. implies that
03
Any door he knocks Mathieu’s
on opens on the spot. father is much
So he’s a mogul…” more than a
(p.16) simple MP.

04 - “It’s just startling! I Maxim of “Ah, you’re Generalized

wonder how it’s Manner speaking like a Implicatures
possible to dump babies human rights
The speaker
in the rubbish…” activist.”
implies to the
- “Ah, there’s a human interlocutor
rights activist around how similar he
here!” (p.7) is to human

19
 rights activists.

- “Sorry to interrupt you. Maxim of “It will be very Generalized

Let’s search for another Quality difficult to deal Implicatures
way out. We may…” with this”
Through this
- “This is a hot potato.” idiom, the
05 (p.18) speaker
implies that it
is a very
difficult
situation.

- “And where does the Maxim of “The exorcist Generalized

exorcist live?” Quantity lives on the side Implicatures
of the lagoon”
- “Well, he lives on the The speaker
side of the lagoon. And has given
06 if we have to go, it will much more
be by a motorized information
canoe. It’s just going than needed.
to be an hour’s trip.”
(p.19)

07 - “I’m sure you’re Maxim of “No, the is not Generalized

preoccupied with the Quantity going down.” Implicatures
condition of the twins. I
The speaker
guess the swelling is
has given
going down.”
much more
- “Not really. You know, information
in spite of the triduum than needed to
prayers we held, show how
20
 nothing seems to work tricky the
out for the twins. problem they
We’re now faced was.
considering …” (p.20)

- “Thank you for offering Maxim of “Of course it is.”

to help. By the way, I Quantity
guess your new
The speaker
cafeteria is thronged
has given
with people.”
much more
- “Of course it is. On the information
whole, it is not bad. than needed.
08 Even some people
close to you have
started coming to the
cafeteria. And believe
me, there’s one of
them who makes my
stomach
summersault…” (p.21)

- “Enough is enough. I Maxim of “I never

really need your help.” Quality expected you
will fall in love
- “Love keeps on The speaker
too.”
claiming victims. And used a figure
09
nobody seems to stand of speech:
in its way. I always Personification
thought you’d never to convey her
succumb to the intention.

21
 blazing flames of
undying love…”(p.21)

- “…Old habits die Maxim of “You can’t Generalized

hard!” Quality change your way Implicatures

10 of doing things
- “You can’t reverse the An idiomatic
overnight.”
trend overnight!” (p.25) expression has
been used.

- “You can’t reverse the Maxim of “Agreed. So, as

trend overnight!” Relation soon as I got my
passport, Dad
- “Agreed. So, Dad sent The speaker
sent me oversea
me overseas to pursue
11 diverted the
to study. This is
my training. This is
topic of
why we didn’t
why we didn’t see each
discussion
see each other.”
other.” (p.25)
back to the
original one.

- “We had lunch in a Maxim of “I see. So, are

restaurant with his Manner you going to
family before I joined become a couple
The speaker
you. And he seems to again?”
made an
stick to his principles.”
12 ambiguous
- “I see. I wish you assumption.
guys…”

- “It’s now out of the

question.” (p.27)

13 - “And where is that Maxim of “I can’t tell you Generalized

son?” quantity now.” Implicatures
22
 - “It’s a long story, as The speaker
time passes, you’ll has given
work out everything. much more
Just be patient!” information
(pp.32-33) than needed.

- “I don’t really Maxim of “I don’t agree

subscribe to this Manner with this
allegation. In fact, he assertion. I think
The speaker’s
was accused of being he was accused
answer was
behind a mutiny over of instigating a
unclear to his
unpaid allowances.” mutiny over
interlocutor.
14 unpaid
- “Sorry, Sister Emma, I
allowances.”
can’t make head or tail
of what you’re saying.
Please, can you
elaborate on the
background to the
problem?” (p.34)

15 - “Sorry, Sister Emma, I Maxim of “I can’t Generalized

can’t make head or Quality understand what Implicatures
tail of what you’re you mean.”
An idiomatic
saying. Please, can you
expression has
elaborate on the
been used.
background to the
problem?”

- “Let me see; I think the

problem arose with…”

23
 (p.34)

- “What’s the way out, Maxim of “I’m ready for

then?” Quality anything that

16 can save the

- “I’m ready to sacrifice Hyperbole is
twins.”
my life to save the used.
twins.” (p.39)

- “Really?”; “I suspected Maxim of “Of course it is. Generalized

that the origin of the Manner Everything we Implicatures
ailment was do, good or bad
A paradox has
preternatural.” will always come
been used.
17 back on us.”
- “Of course it is. All
that goes around
comes around and
nothing at the end is
lost.” (p.45)

- “Anyway, such is the Maxim of “Don’t start

world of…” Relation again! Let’s talk
about Mathieu,
- “Don’t start again! By The speaker
18 how is he?”
the way, how’s
diverted the
Mathieu?” (p.51)
topic of
discussion.

19 - “I love Mathieu so Maxim of “… he acts Generalized

much, he’s a man of Quality without Implicatures
actions. Guess what, hesitation…”
Metaphor is
Sister Emma. He
used to imply
introduced himself
how Mathieu
24
 formally to my family behave?
as my boyfriend.”

- “Congrats, Patience!”
(p.52)

- “Ah, I see. You kind of Maxim of “Ah, I see. You Generalized

killed two birds with Quality succeeded.” Implicatures

20 one stone.”
An idiomatic
- “Sort of,” (p.52) expression has
been used.

- “I’m just disposed to Maxim of “… Fatima

learn from daily life Quality loved the young
experiences. Period.” cashier so much
Irony has been
that she was
- “You know what, used by the
almost on the
Fatima was so mad at speaker
21
brink of …”
the young cashier that
she was almost on the
brink of failing her
first-term exams…” (p.
54)

22 - “Incredible! And the Maxim of “It was quite Generalized

two lovers met in the Manner complicated” Implicatures
end, didn’t they?”
A metaphor is
- “That was a hard nut used by the
to crack.” (p.54) speaker to
allude to the
toughness of a

25
 nutshell.

- “Incredible! And the Maxim of “No, she didn’t.

two lovers met in the Quantity She came up
end, didn’t they?” with a way to
The speaker
deal with the
- “That was a hard nut to didn’t provide
stubborn
crack.” enough
23 bodyguard.”
explanation.
- “She eloped, didn’t
she?”

- “Eloped? That would

have been the last
resort.” (p.54)

- “Food is life. Do you Maxim of “I agree.” Generalized

agree or disagree?” Quantity Implicatures

- “But food isn’t life The speaker

only. It’s also death. If has given
24
you eat unhealthy much more
food, you’ll put your information
health in danger.” (pp. than needed.
57-58)

25 - “Food is life. Do you Maxim of “Food is crucial Generalized

agree or disagree?” Quality in life” Implicatures

- “But food isn’t life Metaphor is

only. It’s also death. If used by the
you eat unhealthy food, speaker
you’ll put your health in

26
 danger.” (p.57)

- “You call Emma Maxim of “At least I live

bastard girl. Fine. Can Quality with a man”
you tell me while
Metonymy is
swearing on the Bible
used by the
you apparently fancy
speaker.
26 reading that all your
children belong to that
husband of yours?”

- “At least I’m under

the roof of a man,”
(p.66)

- “Rather than cheating Maxim of “… strives to Generalized

on a man who, day in Quality provide me and Implicatures
day out, strives to my children
Synecdoche
provide me and my livings, I prefer
has been used
27 children with bread to live a single
to convey
and butter, I prefer to life.”
meanings.
live a single life.”

- “Cheating on whom?”
(p.66)

28 - “Howdy, Mohammed! Maxim of “… And you? Generalized

Why were you standing Relation Why are you at Implicatures
in front of the store?” the hospital?”
The speaker
- “In fact, I was sent to
Introduced
meet someone there for
another topic
my aunt,”; “And what
27
 are you doing in in the
hospital?” (pp. 72-73) discussion.

- “In fact, I was sent to Maxim of “Mama Amour Generalized

meet someone there for Quality has an accident” Implicatures
my aunt,”; “and what
Euphemism is
are you doing in
used by the
hospital?”
speaker in
29
- “Mama Amour’s a bit order to
sick…” attenuate the
situation
- “Oh no! But I heard her
shouting at you this
morning?” (p.73)

- “It’s okay. Every cloud Maxim of “It’s okay. Generalized

has a silver lining, Manner Every difficult Implicatures
they say.” or sad situation
30 Euphemism is
has a comforting
- “Agreed.” (p.75) used by the
aspect, they
speaker.
say.”

- “Emma, I have a Maxim of “I heard Mama

concern,” Quantity Amour this
morning calling
- “Which concern?” The speaker
you names,
hasn’t given
31 - “I heard Mama
saying that
enough
Amour this morning
you’re a bastard
information in
calling you names,
girl.”
order to
saying that you’re
maintain the
a…”
suspense.
28
 - “Come on.” (p.75)

- “At least you got me Maxim of “I gave you some

pregnant, remember?” Quantity money to
terminate the
- “I gave you some The speaker
pregnancy.”
money to terminate hasn’t given
32 the …” enough
information in
- “Pregnancy?” (p.80)
order to
maintain the
suspense.

- “How is Fifa feeling?” Maxim of “She is feeling Generalized

Relation well now” Implicatures
- “We came back from
hospital a few minutes The speaker
ago.” (p.86) used a
33
circumlocution
to answer the
interlocutor
inquiry.

- “She shouldn’t worry.” Maxim of - “Why” Generalized

Manner Implicatures
- “Why?” - “Because
The speaker something
- “Easy come, easy go.”
used an that is
34
- “I can’t understand you,
epigram to achieved
Emma,” (p.88)
imply. easily is
also lost
easily.”

29
 - “Don’t tell me that Maxim of “Are you going Generalized
you’re going overseas Quality overseas for Implicatures
for studies,” studies?”
The speaker
35 - “That’s exactly what I used a
was about to tell you. circumlocution
It’s as if you read my to inquire.
mind.” (p.94)

- “That’s exactly what I Maxim of “I can’t believe Generalized

was about to tell you. Quality what I’m Implicatures
It’s as if you read my hearing.”
The speaker
36
mind.”
used an
- “I can’t believe my idiomatic
ears.” (p.94) expression.

- “It is. And the last she Maxim of “ Finally, she

has heard about her Relation has got what she
estranged husband is deserved.”
The speaker
that he got married to
Introduced
another woman.
another topic
They’ve already got
37
in the
three kids.
discussion
- “Finally, nature has
through an
done her justice,
interrogation.
right?”

- “What justice?” (p.96)

38 - “Welcome babe!” Maxim of “… I’m glad to Generalized

Quality see that you look Implicatures

30
 - “Thank you, sweetie. The speaker healthy now.”
I’m glad to see that used a simile.
you look a picture of
health.” (p.99)

- “Can I have more Maxim of “ Serve yourself

dough?”; “I need some Quality as much as you
sauce, too.” want”
The speaker
39 - “Feel free.” (p.101) used a
metaphoric
expression to
imply.

- “I ate like a horse,” Maxim of “I ate a lot.” Generalized

Quality Implicatures
- “You need it.”
40 The speaker
used a
hyperbole

- “Relax! The Man of Maxim of “… Do you Generalized

God just got horny.” Relation mean that I Implicatures
cheated on
- “So you didn’t go far in Introduced
you?”
… did you?” another topic
in the
41 - “Do you doubt my
discussion to
faithfulness to you?”
avoid replying
(p.102)
the
interlocutor
question.

31
 - We have a mission and Maxim of “…I have to
must do everything Relation make you
possible to pull it off,” believe I didn’t
Introduced
cheat on you?”
- “You know, I have to another topic
absolve my innocence in the
42
regardless of whatever discussion to
it costs me.” (p.111) avoid replying
to the
interlocutor’s
question.

- “Exactly, sweetie!” Maxim of “I’ve told you Generalized

Quality many times to Implicatures
- “But I’ve told you
stop wearing
times without number The speaker
43
provocative
that you should stop used a
dresses”
dressing to kill,” metaphor.
(p.111)

- “Ah, I see. You no Maxim of “Speak clearly

longer trust me. Let’s Quality and directly, you
call a spade a spade.” no longer believe
The speaker
44 in me.”
- “You shouldn’t see red has used an
if you know that you idiomatic
haven’t done anything expression.
wrong.” (p.114)

45 - “Sorry Papa Amour, but Maxim of “… a popular

as long as I can’t solve Relation example of
the mystery successful
Introduced
surrounding the person is
32
 whereabouts of my another topic President Bill
biological father I’ll in the Clinton. Like
always be maimed in discussion to you he has never
my mind.” convince his seen his father.
interlocutor’s
- “You’re just bothering
question.
yourself. There are
thousands of people
worldwide who’ve
never seen their
biological fathers, yet
they’ve been very
successful. You know
President Bill
Clinton.” (p.116)

- “Of course it is. We do Maxim of “You will have

carry out urgent DNA Manner to pay more to
tests with special get the result
The speaker
conditions.” earlier.”
has used
46
- “An increase in fees?” scientific
expressions
- “You got it right.”
related to
(p.119)
medicine.

47 - “Gosh! She was so Maxim of “Yes. But it Generalized

lucky!” Quality became worse.” Implicatures

- “Yes. But it was like The speaker

jumping from the has used an
frying pan into the idiomatic
33
 fire.” (p.125) expression.

- “Sounds great! By the Maxim of “I agree! By the Generalized

way, Mama Amour Quality way, Mama Implicatures
asked me to say hi.” Amour asked me
An idiom has
48
to say hi.”
- “Gosh, I’m glad to hear been used to
that!” (p.126) convey
meaning.

- “Gosh, I’m glad to hear Maxim of “Everything is Generalized

that! How is she Manner okay for the Implicatures
doing?” time being.”
The speaker
- “So far, so good.” has used an
49 (p.126) idiomatic
expression that
has obscured
the conveyed
meaning.

50 - “And who’s Ola?” Maxim of “Well, I’m from Generalized

Quantity a family of high Implicatures
- “Well, I’m from a
reputation and
family of high The speaker
respect. I have
reputation and has given
one elder
respect. I have one much more
brother and a
elder brother and a information
younger sister”
younger sister. The than needed.
former is a
professional and the
latter a student. But I
have to confess that I
34
 hardly get along with
them. On the other
hand …” (p.132)

- “So can I call you a Maxim of “Actually, Generalized

baby politician?” Quantity politics is not my Implicatures
cup of tea. I
- “Actually, politics is The speaker
prefer to work
not my cup of tea. I has given
out of the
prefer to work out of much more
limelight.”
the limelight. But information
unlike me, my older than needed.
51 brother seems to be
interested in politics.
He’s kind of following
in our father’s
footsteps. And
seemingly it is
working for him.”
(p.133)

- “How on earth did they Maxim of “They have

do that?” Relation become used to
- “When you begin The speaker this and it does
eating a certain food, has spoken not seem weird
52
in time it gets into using a anymore.”
your blood, you don’t paradox to
feel like putting it convey his
aside. So …” (p.141) intention.
53 - “Two takeaways, Maxim of “… I can’t Generalized
please; one containing believe what
35
 food and the other one Quality you’re saying…” Implicatures
only meat. Thanks.” The speaker
- “You’ve carried with used an
you this village idiomatic
behavior to town. I expression
can’t believe my ears.
We live in town, and
there’s a code of
conduct to abide by.”
(p.153)
- “I wonder if we could Maxim of - “And when -
not substitute those Quality are you
statues of great The speaker going to
expatriate figures for has implied help the
national and African the continent
figures.” impossibility get rid of
- “For national or of getting rid Christianity
continental pride.” of religion and Islam?
54 - “Yes.” through They are a
- “And when are you “Yesterday”. legacy
going to help the bequeathed
continent get rid of by
Christianity and Islam? expatriates
They are a legacy as well.”
bequeathed by - “I’ll never
expatriates as well.” do that.”
- “Yesterday.” (p.164)
55 - “She gave up the Maxim of - “She Generalized
ghost.” Quality died.” Implicatures
36
 - “God rest her soul in The speaker - “God rest
peace!” (p.169) has made use her soul in
of peace!”
euphemisms to
attenuate the
impact of the
information.
- “Can I take you to Maxim of “No, I’m going
hospital?” Quality to die no matter
what you do to
- “No, My Skull hurts, The speaker
help.”
and this problem is implied that no
56
beyond going to medical care
hospital.” (p.175) could save him
from his
demise.

Table 2: Effective and Percentages of Flouting Identified.

Percentage of
Type of maxim
Numbers each category
flouting
(%)
Flouting of Quantity 11 19,64%
Flouting of Quality 27 48,21%
Flouting of Relation 09 16,07%
Flouting of Manner 09 16,07%
Total 56 100%

37
 Table 3: Percentages of Types of Conversational Implicatures
Type of Conversational Implicatures Percentages
Generalized Implicatures 60.71%
Particularized Implicatures 39.28%
Total 100%

3.1.2 Calculating Conversational Implicatures

To identify and analyze the implicatures generated throughout the novel, the
calculable characteristic of conversational implicatures has been used. Through it,
the maxims flouted have been determined. The figure below illustrates the process
through which the implicatures is analyzed.

Figure 1: Schema to calculate Implicatures

Doctor: “She gave up the ghost”

Sister Emma: “God rest her soul in peace!”

- Knowledge of Context :

 Sister Emma know that

Patient’s life was in
 SSist danger.
er Implicatur
Doctor Emm  Sister Emma know that
has a Doctor was the one in e raised is:
flouted know charge of Patient.
that Patient has
the Docto - Knowledge of the
Maxim r was world :
died
the
of one in  Doctor has used a popular 38
Quality charg expression to announce
e of Patient death to Sister
Patien Emma.
Figure 2: Calculating an Implicatures.

3.2 Data Analysis

The data that have been obtained are analyzed according to the Gricean
Cooperative Principle’s theory. The analysis is based on the collected data to
answer the research questions.

3.2.1 Statistical Table Analysis

As can be seen from the statistical table (table 1) which present the statistical
classification of the various maxims’ flouting in the novel The Untamed Destiny all
of the four maxims of the cooperative principle have been flouted in different
proportion based on the several interactions that happen between the characters. In
particular, the instances of conversation in which the maxim of quality has been
flouted exceed the other by a great marge. According to statistical Table 2, which
shows the frequency of each maxim flouted, a total of fifty-seven (57) instances of
maxim flouting have been identified in the novel. A close look reveals that on one
hundred percent (100%) of the maxims flouted, the maxim of quality amounts to
forty-eight-point twenty-one percent (48,21%) while the other flouted maxim
percentages do not differ much from each other. The quantity maxim amounts to
nineteen-point sixty-four percent (19,64%). The maxim of relation and the maxim
of manner each amount to sixteen-point zero-seven percent (16,07%). Finally,
taking into account the overall classification, the maxim of quality comes first, the
maxim of quantity comes second followed by the maxim of relation and the maxim
of manner.

39
Statistical Table 3 shows the various percentages of the type of conversational
implicatures found in the studied novel. It reveals that the studied novel contains a
lot more Generalized implicatures (GCI) than the Particularized Implicatures
(PCI). As a matter of fact, among the instances of conversational implicatures
found, the GCI amounted to sixty-point-seven-one percent (61.71%) while the PCI
amounted to thirty-nine-point-two-eight percent (39.28%).

3.2.2 Conversational Implicatures in The Untamed Destiny.

To identify the maxim flouted in the novel, Grice’s notion of calculating
implicatures (figure 1 and figure 2) has been used. The utterance that contains the
conversational implicatures are in bold.

3.2.2.1 Conversational implicatures generated by flouting the maxim of

quantity.
As mentioned before, the maxim of quantity takes into account two aspects.
Firstly, the speaker should provide sufficient information as it is required;
secondly, the speaker should not provide more information than is needed. In the
novel The Untamed Destiny, characters have sometimes provided more or less
information than needed. Here are some examples:

Example 1: This conversation occurs between Sister Emma and her friend Patience
in the Helpless Souls orphanage. They discuss Patience’s boyfriend.

Sister Emma: “Mathieu is a son or relative of an MP?” She enquired. “The name
seems to be familiar.”

Patience: “Of course, his father is an influential MP,” she said with pride. “Any
door he knocks on opens on the spot. So he’s a mogul. And any obstacle
standing in his way is crushed immediately.” (Page 16)

Here when Sister Emma asked about Mathieu, Patience could have just said that
“Of course, his father is an influential MP,” but because she also wanted to express
how proud she is of her boyfriend, she moves on to more details. Therefore, she
40
gives much more information than needed, and by doing that she has flouted the
quantity maxim.

Example 2: This interaction happens between Sister Emma and Aunt Sarah in the
Helpless Souls orphanage. They were planning to look for an exorcist to diagnose
and solve the twins’ ailment.

Sister Emma: “And where does the exorcist live?”

Aunt Sarah: “Well, he lives on the side of the lagoon.” She pointed towards the
north. “And if we have to go, it will be by a motorized canoe. It’s just going to
be an hour’s trip. More often than not, it’s a crowded area; part of a church
parish is used to iron out exorcism-related problems.” (Page 19)

In this interaction, Aunt Sarah not only tells where the exorcist lives but also spoke
of the means of transportation they will use and the situation on the other side. As
it can be noticed, she gave too much information than needed and has hence
flouted the quantity maxim.

Example 3: The two conversations below occurred between Idriss and Sister
Emma. They occurred just in front of the Helpless Souls orphanage. They are
discussing the twin’s health situation for the first one and Idriss’s business for the
second one.

• First conversation

Idriss: “Hey, Sister Emma, you look haggard,” he remarked, looking concerned.
“I’m sure you’re preoccupied with the condition of the twins. I guess the swelling
is going down.”

Sister Emma: “Not really.” She was keen to see Idriss around. He had always been
helpful to Helpless Souls. “You know, in spite of the triduum prayers we held,
nothing seems to work out for the twins. We’re now considering plan B, so

41
we’re taking a trip tomorrow morning to the exorcist. Patience, Aunt Sarah
and me.” (Page 20)

• Second conversation

Sister Emma: “Thank you for offering to help. By the way, I guess your new
cafeteria is thronged with people.”

Idriss: “Of course it is. On the whole, it is not bad. Even some people close to you
have started coming to the cafeteria. And believe me, there’s one of them who
makes my stomach summersault to the point that I began losing my…” (page
21)

In the above conversations, Sister Emma and Idriss have respectively given more
information than what their interlocutors need. In Sister Emma’s case, she implied
that though the twins’ situation has yet to be solved, she has already planned the
follow-up and Idriss doesn’t need to worry. As for Idriss, after being asked how his
business was going, he not only talked of his business. He implied that not only his
business was going well but his love situation is changing. In the two
conversations, the maxim of quantity is flouted. In both cases, the speakers choose
not to observe the maxim of quantity for specific reasons each time. They didn’t
flout the maxim just because they feel like doing it but to express specific
information related to the topic of the context of the situation.

Example 4: The following conversation occurred between Emma and her friend
Ola. In this discussion, Ola introduced himself as per Emma’s question.

Emma: “And who’s Ola?”

Ola: “I’m from a family of high reputation and respect. I have one elder brother
and a younger sister. The former is a professional and the latter a student. But I
have to confess that I hardly get along with them. On the other hand, both of
them are on good terms with my parents.” (Page 132)

42
In this interaction, when Emma asked about Ola’s personal information, he talked
about his origin but he went on further and talked about his relationship with a
member of his family. By detailing how well his family relationship is, he is
implying to Emma that even though he comes from a wealthy family, it doesn’t
mean that he is living well. In this interaction, he has given more information than
required and has thus flouted the quantity maxim.

3.2.2.2 Conversational implicatures generated by flouting the maxim of

quality.
The maxim quality is flouted when an utterance cannot be interpreted literally.
When an utterance is not truthful to the conversation. It may happen through
hyperbole, metaphor, euphemism, irony…. In this novel, many cases of quality
maxim flouting have been noticed. Here are some examples:

Example 5: The interaction is between Sister Emma and a boy who has witnessed
how the twins were dumped. The conversation occurred in City Dump. In this
conversation, Sister Emma has asked the boy what happened as she has just arrived
and discovered the dumped twins.

Boy: “Ah, Reverend Sister! Here, we don’t like to poke our nose into other
businesses,” he declared in a faltering voice. “But for the sake of the babies, I’ve
made up my mind to talk. Rain or shine!”

Sister Emma: “Please don’t beat around the bush,” I pressed. “Get straight to the
point!” (Page 4)

Actually, in this conversation, Sister Emma’s question is addressed to all the

people around her on the site but they were reluctant to answer as they do not want
to be implicated in the twin’s situation, seeing the weird cloth tied to their heads.
Hence, when the Boy answered Sister Emma’s question, he made sure to imply
even though not literally that he doesn't want to get implicated just because he has
talked. Through the sentence “Here, we don’t like to poke our nose into other
43
businesses”, he implied that normally no one would have answered but because
she is a nun, he will help. As for Sister Emma, so as not to waste time and to save
the twins, she implied to the boy to go straight to the point and tell her what she
wants. In the interaction, the quality maxim has been flouted by both interlocutors
to imply something that couldn’t be said directly.

Example 6: The interaction happens between Sister Emma and Paul in the
orphanage. They are talking about the current situation of his relationship with his
girlfriend. Sister Emma asked him the reason for the reluctance of Annabelle’s
father to agree to their relationship.

Sister Emma: “And what other reasons could clearly explain Annabelle’s
reluctance to okay your relationship?” I asked, nonplussed.”

Paul: “Ah, I see,” he said as if remembering something. “Sister Emma, my mind

went straight back to the minor blunders I’ve made in the past.” (In the past,
he has mismanaged the funds of the project for the rehabilitation of the orphans
thronging the streets of the biggest cities in Benin and the project has then failed.)

Sister Emma: “Oh yes! That could be a good reason,” I acquiesced…”

Paul: “But those mistakes belong to the past,” he remarked, looking thoughtful. “In
reality, I think we shouldn’t devote all our time to nourishing the past and making
a meal of this on and on. Let bygones be bygones! This is over. Let’s simply look
into the future!”. (Page 12)

By saying “Sister Emma, my mind went straight back to the minor blunders
I’ve made in the past.”, Paul implies that his past mistake is not much important
and that they shouldn’t pay much attention to it. But is a lie as Sister Emma is well
aware that it was all but a minor blunder. In fact, his past action has generated
much more damage than he could imagine. Consequently, in this conversation, the
maxim of quality is flouted.

44
Example 7: The conversation below is between Sister Emma and Aunt Sarah and
happened in the orphanage. They are discussing a way out of the twin’s ailment.

Sister Emma: “We’ve already had a triduum for two weeks,” I said, cutting her off.
“Sorry to interrupt you. Let’s search for another way out. We may have another
nine-day prayer session, and the sooner the better.”

Aunt Sarah: “This is a hot potato.” (Page 18)

In this interaction, through “This is a hot potato.”, Aunt Sarah implied that this is
not easy to solve. By doing this she has flouted the maxim of quality because she
has not faithfully uttered what she meant.

Example 8: it is an interaction that happened between Sister Emma, Aunt Sarah,

and the Exorcist at the latter home. The subject of discussion is still how to save
the twins from their predicament.

Sister Emma: “Oh, goodness!” I signed, flustered. “I thought our suffering would
come to an end today, but we must keep on bearing this heavy cross!”

Aunt Sarah: “What’s the way out, then?” asked Aunt Sarah, befuddled. She stared
at the exorcist, waiting for him to tell us what to do next.”

Sister Emma: “I’m ready to sacrifice my life to save the twins.” Sister Emma
declared before the exorcist could utter a word.” (Page 39)

In the above interaction, by uttering “I’m ready to sacrifice my life to save the
twins.” Sister Emma doesn’t literally mean to get herself sacrificed but implies that
she is ready to do all her possible for the twins, even risking her status as a nun. In
this conversation, she has flouted the quality maxim.

Example 9: This conversation is between Emma and her boyfriend Mohammed in

front of the hospital. In this conversation, Mohammed and Emma chanced upon
each other and start discussing.

45
Emma: “Howdy, Mohammed! Why were you standing in front of the store?”

Mohammed: “In fact, I was sent to meet someone there for my aunt,” he told me
finally. “And what are you doing in hospital?”

Emma: “Mama Amour’s a bit sick…” (page 73)

Actually, Mama Amour got into an accident, she bumped a Zémidjan with her car,
and the Zémidjan was wounded. In order not to pay a fine, she has faked that she
was hurt too. Emma knew that Mama Amour is not sick as she too was in the car
when the car crashed but she couldn’t tell the truth to Mohammed because she will
surely be beaten if Mama Amour heard of that. Then, she lies to Mohammed, and
by doing this she has flouted the maxim of quality which require truthfulness.

3.2.2.3 Conversational implicatures generated by flouting the maxim of

relevance (relation).
According to what was being said above, the maxim of relation is flouted when the
speaker changes the topic of conversation; but expects the hearer to realize. Below
are some examples of the flouting of the relation maxim that has been identified.

Example 10: The conversation is between Mohammed and Emma and it happens
in a restaurant. Mohammed was telling Emma about his aunt through whom he has
now an opportunity to go overseas and further his study. His aunt couldn’t give
birth to a child but thanks to an unexpected event, she chanced upon a boy, Oluwa-
Sheun who was lost and adopted him.

Emma: “Finally, nature has done her justice, right?” My musings drove me at
such a conclusion, hoping Mohammed would work it out easily.

Mohammed: “What justice?” Seemingly, he failed to figure out my point.”

Emma: “By giving her Oluwa-Sheun.” (Page 96)

It’s quite obvious that Emma’s turns in the conversation have failed to achieve the
desired effect as Mohammed didn’t immediately understand what she was talking
46
about. She hasn’t been relevant enough in her utterance and has hence flouted the
relation maxim.

Example 11: This is an interaction that happened between Patience and Sister
Emma in the orphanage. The discussion is about the dumped twins they have just
taken in the orphanage.

Patience: “It’s just startling! I wonder how it’s possible to dump babies in the
rubbish. Above all, they’re human beings and deserve life.”

Sister Emma: “There’s a human rights activist around here!” I broke the silence
and sent a smile to patience in an effort to lighten the mood.”

Patience: “She giggled and said “As a matter of fact, it’s an issue I’m musing over.
I just wonder if I couldn’t be the voice of those children disdainfully and wickedly
labeled bastard children. I think I will take a shot at it as time passes.” (Pages 7-8)

In this situation, Sister Emma’s utterance, “There’s a human rights activist

around here!” is an attempt to change the topic of discussion. But despite the
abrupt change in the topic, she knew that her interlocutor (Patience) will
understand and make the link between and the following speech of Patience prove
it. Here, Sister Emma is attempting to change the depressing atmosphere by
praising Patience, she implied that Patience is like a human rights activist.
Consequently, the maxim of relevance is flouted.

Example 12: This discussion is between Mama Amour and her husband Captain
Zoga in their bedroom. The subject of discussion is the Man of God (their pastor).
Mama Amour revealed to her husband that she has been harassed by the Man of
God.

Mama Amour: “Relax! The Man of God just got horny.”

Captain Zoga: “So you didn’t go far in… did you?” A deafening silence swept
between them for a while.”
47
Mama Amour: “Do you doubt my faithfulness to you?” (Page 102)

Captain Zoga starts doubting Mama Amour’s words after all she told him about the
Man of God and inquires to know if she has or not gone further than required but
the latter didn’t give a clear answer and in fact, asks a question back in order to
change the topic and take the initiative in their conversation. She has flouted the
maxim of relevance so as not to answer her husband’s question.

3.2.2.4 Conversational implicatures generated by flouting the maxim of

manner.
The maxim of manner is said to be flouted when the speaker said something
unclear or does not talk clearly and appears to be obscure. Below is one of the
instances of manner flouting identified in the novel.

Example 13: This is an interaction between Sister Emma and Papa Zoga at the
latter house. They were talking about the reason why Captain Zoga has been jailed.

Papa Zoga: “You know, rumor has it that he was staging a conspiracy. What do
you make of that?”

Sister Emma: “I don’t really subscribe to this allegation. In fact, he was

accused of being behind a mutiny over unpaid allowances.”

Papa Zoga: “He looked pensive. “Sorry, Sister Emma, I can’t make head or tail of
what you’re saying. Please, can you elaborate on the background of the problem?”
(Page 34)

Papa Zoga is not as literate as Sister Emma as he is just an old man. Hence, Sister
Emma’s technical words to explain why Captain Zoga has been jailed went beyond
what he could understand. Hence, Sister Emma’s utterance appears unclear to her
interlocutor as she has not considered Papa Zoga’s literacy level. The maxim of
manner is flouted.

48
Example 14: The conversation below is between Sister Emma and The Priestess to
whom they went in search of a solution to save the twins. The conversation
occurred in the shrine of the divinities.

Sister Emma: “Really?” … “I suspected that the origin of the ailment was
preternatural.”

The Priestess: “Of course it is. All that goes around comes around and nothing
at the end is lost.”

Sister Emma: “How do you mean?” I was baffled by her words.” (Pages 45-46)

Similar to the first example related to maxim manner flouting, The Priestess’s
utterance “All that goes around comes around and nothing at the end is lost.”
made Sister Emma confused as she couldn’t understand what the priestess meant
by that. The Priestess was simply implying that it’s because the twins’ father didn’t
fulfill his promise to the divinities that the twins are suffering.

49
CHAPTER FOUR: DISCUSSION OF
THE FINDINGS

50
4 Discussion of the Findings
This research has attempted to identify and analyze the instances of conversational
implicatures in the novel The Untamed Destiny of Dorothée Tchada based on
Grice’s theories. The purpose of the research is to find the relationships that exist
between the Cooperative principle and Implicatures and to understand how
successful interactions are made. To achieve the purpose of the research, instances
of conversational implicatures identified in the novel and excerpts of interactions
have been analyzed. The Cooperative principle’s maxims are used to access the
conversational implicatures which occurred during the characters’ interaction. This
section focuses on the interpretation of the findings of the research.

The findings show that throughout the novel, the maxims of the cooperative
principle (quantity, quality, relation, and manner) have been flouted more than
once. Among the four maxims, the maxim of quality is the most flouted, forty-
eight-point twenty-one percent (48,21%). Then after was the maxim of quantity
nineteen-point sixty-four percent (19,64%), and finally the maxim of relation,
sixteen-point zero-seven percent (16,07%), and the maxim of manner, sixteen-
point zero-seven percent (16,07%) which was equally flouted. The maxim of

quality requires speakers to be sincere, to make a truthful contribution, and to not

say that for which they lack adequate evidence. It is flouted when an utterance

cannot be interpreted literally. As for the maxim of quantity, it requires one’s

contribution to be as informative as is required for the current purpose of the
exchange. It is flouted when the speaker gives too much or less information. The
maxim of relation has to do with the relevance, the coherence of the utterance and
when in a conversation speakers change the topic of the discussion, they have
flouted the maxim of relation. Finally, the maxim of manner requires you to be
clear in what you say and avoid ambiguity or obscurity. Speakers flout this maxim
when they said something unclear, do not talk clearly, or appear to be obscure.

51
Based on the above result, conversational implicatures is pragmatic inference. It is
something that a speaker indicates or implies with an utterance, even if it is not
explicitly stated in the speech. Therefore, it is possible to communicate more
effectively through the use of implication than it is through explicit language. This
brings us back to the main topic of discussion which is The Untamed Destiny.
From the instances of maxim flouting identified throughout the novel (fifty-seven
cases of maxim flouting), it can be said that in the interactions, emphasis has been
put on making the conversations fluid, and realistic, without communication
breakdown, despite not observing the cooperative maxims which sometimes limit
the scope of expression.

Furthermore, the abundance of generalized implicature or particularized

implicatures in a text relates to the presence and frequency of implied meaning
beyond the literal interpretation of the words used. Implicature refers to the
inferred or suggested meaning conveyed indirectly through language. In the novel
studied, generalized implicature (GCI) occurs when speakers or the author use
language that goes beyond what is explicitly stated to convey a more general or
broad meaning. This implicature relies on shared knowledge, common sense, or
conventional understanding to elicit meaning. It encompasses implied assumptions
or implications that can be derived from the context, background information, or
cultural norms.
On the other hand, particularized implicatures pertain to implied meanings that are
specific or tailored to the particular context or situation. These implicatures are
often dependent on specific linguistic cues, such as pragmatic principles,
conversational implicatures, or the cooperative principle in communication. They
can be derived from the specific wording, intonation, or context of a given
utterance.
The abundance of generalized implicatures (GCI) in the novel suggests that the
author has relied heavily on implied meaning, making extensive use of shared

52
knowledge and broad assumptions. This may require the readers or listeners to
infer additional information beyond what is explicitly mentioned to fully grasp the
intended meaning.
Conversely, the presence of particularized implicatures in the novel implies that
the author has employed specific language cues and contextual information to
convey nuanced or situational meaning. This can involve implicatures that are
tailored to the specific conversation or topic being discussed.
Another finding of the research has to do with the analysis of the instances of
conversational implicatures detected in the novel. This has allowed deducing that
the occurrence of conversational implicatures does not happen arbitrarily. In fact,
throughout the many cases of flouting identified in the novel, the choices to flout a
maxim have all been made for a specific purpose by the speakers. In Example 1
where the quantity maxim is flouted, Patience has given more information than
needed because she wanted Sister Emma to have a good opinion of her boyfriend,
so she has spoken of how rich and ambitious her boyfriend is even though this was
not the question of Sister Emma. To achieve her desired purposes, she has flouted
the maxim of quantity, and a conversational implicatures is raised. Similar to
Example 1, in Example 6 of quality maxim flouting, Paul has flouted the quality
maxim because he indirectly lied. The fact is that what he has done in the past
cannot be considered a minor blunder, but as he wanted to shy away from his past
doing and embrace a new life with his fiancée, he didn’t want Sister Emma to
bring this up. In Example 10 of the maxim of relevance flouting, Emma’s question
caught Mohammed off guard as Emma’s purpose was to change the mood of the
discussion as she noticed how engrossed Mohammed was in his monologue. In the
last example, Example 14, in which the manner maxim is flouted, The Priestess’
purpose was to just summarize all she has previously said to Sister Emma through
an idiom but this was not clear to Sister Emma who fail to understand the implied
meaning, hence a conversational implicatures is raised. Consequently, people
rarely do not observe the maxims without reason. Rather, we intentionally fail to
53
observe the maxims for many reasons tied to the context of the situation. For
instance, flouting a maxim can be because of the desire to make one’s language
more or less interesting. It can also be used to increase the force of one’s message
to achieve many different effects at the level of the interlocutors. Finally, a maxim
can be flouted for reasons of tact and politeness regarding face. This means that the
status of an interlocutor may push the speaker to flout a maxim.

The meaning implied by speakers in the different interactions where maxims were
flouted were understood by their interlocutors as these implicatures are based on
the knowledge of the context and the world. For a conversational implicatures to
arise, it necessitates the speaker to master the maxims of conversation, the general
context of the conversation, and the cultural background of his interlocutor. Things
that the author of the novel has tried to adhere to by being as clear as possible so
that the novel can be read and understood by the layman reader despite the cultural
background of the story. In fact, in The Untamed Destiny, the plot turns around
cultures and traditions specific to Africans and the Beninese in particular. Had the
author blindly observed the cooperative maxim, a lot of confusion would have
arisen for readers who do not have a basic knowledge of African beliefs or
Beninese traditions and beliefs due to the implicatures made throughout the
interactions, the character’s interactive relation depicted appears very easy to
understand with almost no confusion in their interaction.

From the findings of this research, it comes out that conversationally implicated
contents are utterance contents that are only loosely related to what is said by an
utterance. But they are not part of the conventional meaning of an utterance. Due
to this rather loose connection between conversational implicatures and what is
said, the former must, as Grice puts it, be worked out or calculated based on
contextual clues. Conversational implicatures arises in particular conversational
contexts using general principles governing rational communication. In The
Untamed Destiny, the main characters when talking to each other are usually
54
cooperating. This is because they have to make an effort to ensure successful
communication. This effort is achieved by following all the maxims of
conversation. The four maxims flouted or observed in the conversations are the
maxim of quality (be truthful), the maxim of quantity (do not say less/more than
required), the maxim of relation (be relevant) and the maxim of manner (be
perspicuous). The predominance of instances of flouting the maxim of quality
shows the humorous and easygoing attitude the characters have toward each other
during their interaction. Speakers flout maxims to imply something and then, they
create conversational implicatures all to make a successful conversation.

From the research findings, it comes out that the cooperative principle of Grice is
the basis for a good and successful conversation. But it is only the basis because
the conversation is an unorganized, spontaneous, and interactive form of
communication and its realization requires more than just a principle. At this level,
implicatures come to light as they provide many alternatives to succeed in
conversation. Through conversational implicatures, speakers are able to go beyond
Grice’s cooperative principle and achieve their desired aim, which is to convey
information. Hence, the simultaneous use of cooperative principle and
conversational implicatures is crucial for a successful interaction because only by
observing the cooperative maxim can one know how to flout them to respond to
the interlocutor as in the end, it's all about cooperation. By openly flouting the
Cooperative principle in what they say, yet without ceasing to observe the CP, the
speaker signals to the hearer that they wish to convey some further message that is
consistent with the CP. Thus, even though the speaker seems to be flouting the
maxims, they are following them at another level.

55
CONCLUSION

56
Conclusion
This study has attempted to explain how Grice’s cooperative principle and
conversational implicatures correlate in our daily interactions. The research is
based on the analysis of instances of conversational implicatures in the novel The
Untamed Destiny written by Dorothée Tchada and the non-observance of the
maxim to explain how Conversational implicatures and Grice’s Co-operative
principle co-relates.

The findings of the research, conversational implicatures induced by flouting the

maxim of quality, forty-eight-point twenty-one percent (48,21%), by flouting the
maxim of quantity, nineteen-point sixty-four percent (19,64%), by flouting the
maxim of relation and by flouting the maxim of manner sixteen-point zero-seven
percent (16,07%) each, allow saying that Grice’s cooperative principle is closely
connected to the notion of conversational implicatures with the type of breaking-
maxim found in the data being the flouting of maxim. The analysis of the
conversational implicatures allows the conclusion that a speaker flouts a maxim
when he/she anticipates the hearer to appreciate the meaning inferred and assumes
the hearer can understand the implicit meaning.

Moreover, among the four maxims flouted, the most frequent maxim is the maxim
of quality which meant that the characters of the movie failed to observe it. Many
utterances cannot be literally interpreted. In fact, a lot of figures of speech such as
hyperbole, euphemism, metaphor, and irony were used by the characters during
interactions to imply. The reasons for the use of conversational implicatures in the
novel are to assure a successful interaction between the characters and to make it
easy for readers to understand the dialogue or conversation in the novel. Besides
that, this is aimed at minimizing misunderstanding among the readers and literary
critics. In addition, understanding GCI and PCI and identifying these implicatures

57
is crucial for effective communication and comprehension. By recognizing and
interpreting the implied meaning, readers or listeners can gain a deeper
understanding of a text or conversation, as well as accurately capture the intended
message beyond the literal words used.
The result of this thesis on the one hand is similar to previous findings in the field
of pragmatics study as far as Grice’s cooperative principle and conversational
implicatures are concerned. According to these findings, Conversational
implicatures are usually described as being licensed by the disobeying or flouting
of a Principle of Cooperation. However, the specification of this principle has
proved computationally elusive. Mark Lee (1988) in Rationality, Cooperation and
Conversational Implicatures suggested a more useful concept which is rationality.
Such a concept can be specified explicitly in planning terms and we argue that
speakers perform utterances as part of the optimal plan for their particular
communicative goals. Such an assumption can be used by the hearer to infer
conversational implicatures implicit in the speaker's utterance.

Consequently, this thesis’s result allows concluding that the Cooperative principle
and the Conversational implicatures are closely tied for the maintaining of real
interaction. The fact is that in real life, people often use so many informal words,
less or more information, irrelevant statements, ambiguous sentences,
uninformative information, and untruthful answers to convey meaning. Though it
does not appropriate with cooperative principles, what matter is that these
conversational implicatures only occur based on the maxim of conversation
enacted by Grice.

On the other hand, other findings in the same field have pointed out the inadequacy
of Grice’s cooperative principle and his theory on the nature of implicatures. In a
thesis entitled Conversational Implicatures: Re-assessing the Gricean Framework
Maria Kasmirli (2016) found that the Gricean framework faces many problems, in
particular, there are some basic issues with Grice’s definition of conversational
58
implicatures and the supplementary calculability assumption. In her opinion, the
cooperative presumption of Grice is to be re-assessed. Similarly, Saul (2010) in
Meaning and Analysis argued that Grice’s notion of conversational implicatures is
a normative one and that additional notions are needed to capture all the
psychological aspects of implicatures.

In sum, this study has covered the analysis of conversational maxims and
conversational implicatures. It has attempted to provide a reliable answer to what
are the mechanism that rules conversation based on the Gricean framework. Later
research may attempt to study the keys to a successful interaction through other
philosophical approach in pragmatics.

59
References List
A. CORPUS

Lee, M. (1988). Rationality, Cooperation, and Conversational Implicatures. New

York: Academic Press. Retrieved from https://www.semanticscholar.org

Tchada, D. (2020). The Untamed Destiny. Benin: OGW Editions

B. BOOKS

Birner, J. (2012). Introduction to Pragmatics. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org
Cruse, A. Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics.
UK: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://www.philarchive.org

Cutting, J. (2002) Pragmatics and Discourse: A Resource Book for Students.

USA: Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.library.uc.edu
Davis, W. (1998). Implicatures: Intention, Convention, and Principle in the
Failure of Gricean Theory. UK: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved
from https://www.core.ac.uk

Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (Eds.),

Syntax and semantics. New York: Academic Press.

Griffiths, P. (2006). Introduction to English semantics and pragmatics. Edinburgh:

Edinburgh University Press.

Horn, L. (1984). Towards a New Taxonomy for Pragmatic Inference: Q- and R-

based Implicatures. In D. Schiffrin (ed.) Meaning, Form and Use in
Context: Linguistic Application. Georgetown University. Retrieved from
https://www.semantics.uchicago.edu

60
Kothari, R, C. Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. Second Edition.
New Delhi: New Age International Publishers. Retrieved from
https://www.ccsuniversity.ac.in
Levinson, S.C. (2000). Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized
Conversational Implicatures. First Edition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Retrieved from https://www.googlescholar.com

Saul, J. (2010). Speaker-meaning, Conversational Implicatures, and Calculability.

In Meaning and Analysis: New Essays on Grice. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan. Retrieved from https://www.eprints.whiterose.ac.uk

Wales, K. (2001). A Dictionary of Stylistics. Third Edition. New York: Routledge

and CRC Press. Retrieved from https://www.routledge.com

Wilson, D & Sperber, D. (2004). Relevance Theory in L. Horn & G. Ward(eds).

Blackwell’s Handbook of Pragmatics, Routledge. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu

C. ARTICLES

Agustina & Ariyanti. (2016). Flouting Maxim to Create Humor in Move This
Means War.Language Horion, 4(2), Retrieved from https://ejournal.com
Akmal, S. (2020). Conversational Implicatures Analysis in Kingdom of Heaven
movie script by William Monahan. Buletin Al-Turas, 26(2). Retrieved from
https://www.semanticscholars.org
Ester, N., Bahri, A. & Ariani, S. (2017). Analysis of Flouting and Violating
towards Maxim of Quality in My Sister’s Keeper novel. Ilmu Budaya, 1(3).
Retrieved from https://www.core.ac.uk

Faizal, R. (2011). A Conversational Implicatures Analysis in Oscar Wilde's Short

Story Happy Prince. Register Journal, 4(2), DOI:10.18326/rgt.v4i2.196-213

61
Kasmirli, M. (2016). Conversational Implicatures: Re-Assessing the Gricean
Framework. Journal of Pragmatics,12(25), p.188. Ph.D. Thesis, University
of Sheffield. Retrieved from http://www.etheses.whiterose.ac.uk

Palupi, S. R. (2006). An analysis of humor types and Grice’s maxim in the

situation comedy Friends episode of “The One With That Could Have
Been”. Indonesia: Sebelas Maret University. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu
Prasetyo, D., Bukhori, A. M., Ernie, D. A. (2018). I Have Never Touched It:
Flouting and Violation of Maxims in a Court Testimony. Passage, 6(2).
Retrieved from https://www.ejournal.upi.edu

62
Appendix
Characters of the novel whose interactions have been analyzed
 Sister Emma: Emma is the protagonist of the novel. She grew up without
knowing who her father is and whether he was dead or still alive. She has
many times been treated as a bastard girl and once an adult, she decided to
be a nun and take care of the orphans in the Helpless Souls orphanage.

 Aunt Sarah: she is a nun and the former director of the orphanage before
Sister Emma. She has been one of the few that have always helped Emma
through difficult times.

 Patience: she is the daughter of Papa Zoga and a colleague of Sister Emma
at the orphanage and also a friend of hers, she is well vexed in medicine and
took care of the twins that have been brought in the Helpless Souls
orphanage. She has two sisters and one brother.

 Paul: he is a colleague of Sister Emma at the orphanage and an orphan. He

has been for years the biggest financial contributor to the running of the
Helpless Souls orphanage. He is in a love relationship with Patience’s elder
sister, Annabelle but has yet to convince his father-in-law to accept him.

 Idriss: he runs a cafeteria near the orphanage and is an acquaintance of

Sister Emma. He is the baguette supplier of the orphanage and had a crush
on Patience’s younger sister, Rachelle but doesn’t dare to tell her.

 Mohammed: he was Emma’s childhood sweetheart. He was sent abroad by

his relative to further his studies and then got separated from Emma for
years. He remains a close friend of Sister Emma after his return.

63
 Ola: he was Emma’s classmate during her professional training in child
psychology and they got along well. He was from a rich family and when he
introduces Emma to his parents, they later sent him abroad because of
Emma’s status as a bastard child.

 Captain Zoga: he has been the one to whom Emma’s mother has entrusted
Emma. He brought Emma up till the age of twenty (20 years old).

 Mama Emma: she is Emma’s mother.

 Papa Zoga: he is the father of Viyon, Rachelle, Annabelle, and Patience.

64