Luận văn a study on implicature in english and vietnamese funny stories

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY- HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDLES FACULTY OF POST- GRADUATE STUDIES NGUYEN TH] HONG NHUNG A STUDY ON IMPLICATURE IN ENGLISH AND VIETN

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY- HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDLES

FACULTY OF POST- GRADUATE STUDIES

NGUYEN TH] HONG NHUNG

A STUDY ON IMPLICATURE IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE FUNNY STORIES (Hàm ngôn trong truyện cười tiếng Ánh và tiếng Việt)

MLA Minor Programme Thesis

Supervisor: M.A Bao Thu Trang

HANOL2010

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY- HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST- GRADUATE STUDIES

NGUYEN THI HONG NHUNG

A STUDY ON IMPLICATURE IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE FUNNY STORIES (Hàm ngôn trong truyện cuời tiếng Anh và tiếng Việt)

M.A Minor Programme Thesis

Supervisor: M.A Dao Thu Trang

HHANGL2010

2 Aims of the Sindy

3, Scope of the Study

4, Method of the Study,

5, Organization of the StUBY cseies sonsmnennenenenenen

1.1 OverviewW of Discourse ẢIntAÌy8iS uc thuc

L.E.1 Definition of Discourse

1.2 Discourse versus Toxt

1.5.1 The Notion of Implicature

1.5.2 The Cooperative Principal and Maxims

1.5.2.1 The Maxim of Quantity

1.5.2.2 The Maxim of Quality

1.5.2.3 The Maxim of Relation

1.5.2.4 The Maxim of Manner

a RoR

CHAPTER 2: THE STUDY

3.1 Researchh queslion nọ HH HH HH edec

2 Impheations to Language Teaching and Leaming

3 Limitation of the Study and Suggestions for Kuther Study,

REFERENCE:

APPENDICES

APPENDIX b: LNGLISH FUNNY STORIES

APPENDIX 2; VIETNAMESE FUNNY STORIES

8

LIST OF TABLE AND FIGURE

Table 1: Breaking maxims in English and Vietnamese funny stoties

Figure 1: Breaking maxims in English and Vietnamese funny stories

34

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Ratianale

Language is one of the most important areas of human development It is the mechanism by which people communicate, and the means by which people convey their emotion However, in our day-lo-day conversational exchanges, for soms re

sons, peoptc do

not always directly express their ideas As Jenny Thomas states in her book “Meaning in

Interaction” that speaker frequently means much more than their words actually say (Thomas 1995: 1) The hearer interpreis » meaning thal is nol clearly slated in the ulleranee of the

speaker Utteranoes, standing alone out of context, make us confused in our communication

However, being put into the context, words and phrases can be interpreted in a way that takes people undersland the intentional meaning of the nilerances The reason is hal we as

speakers and hearers, according te the American philosophar- linguistics Paull Grice, operate

under the cooperative principal, which means that both speaker and hearer converse with good intentions In other words, the speaker utters words and phrases in order to deliver a

message to the hearer, who interprets a meaning with the knowledge that there is a message

behind the utterance

Tn order (o show what gocs on in conversation, Grice introduced four conversational

maxims A speaker might fall lo observe a maxim bul still get the intended meaning through

to the hearer Falling to observe a maxim is often referred to as “breaking a maxim” In

finny story, these maxims are constantly broken to create humor

Funny stories are a crucial part of every culture and every socicty From the past to

now, it has been an entertaining form to make people feel cheerful and happy Sometimes, it can be used as a means of weapon to fight against the negative things in the society

However, different types of lmmor are more appealing to different people based on their

personal sense of humer and background And people from different countries have their own sense of hnmor, therefore understanding funny stories means that you have to uncover nmny things relating lo their mations Sometimes we wonder why some unfinished and

meaningless sentences can make people laugh To achieve this interpretation successfully,

readers have to understand intended meaning from the characters and the authors

Being a teacher of English as a foreign language, 1 strongly believe that the use of

humer in funny story would significantly improve second language learning However, to

understand the meaning of implicature in English funny story is a challenging task In order

to ercate more interests in the English learning and build a decp understanding of inplicature

10

mechanism to English learners, the study on “Zmplicature in English and Vietnamese

funny stories” is inspired and caricd oul

2 Aims of the study

The purposes of the research study could be clearly identified as followings:

- To provide background knowledge of implicature

-'To uncover the implicature in terms of maxim conveyed in the English and Vietnamese

funny slories undor study

- To point out implicature in some English and Vietnamese funny stories in terms of maxims

- To draw out the implication in English language teaching and learning

3 Scope of the study

This research is limited to analyze implicature in some selected English and Vietnamese fanny stories

‘This research only touches a small aspect of implicature: maxim

Within the scops of the study, no altention is paid to any other features of furmy stories

4, Method of the study

‘The main method of the study is qualifative one executed with descriptive and contrastive analysis with the following tockuriques:

+ Collecting data containing fanny stories with mechanism of implicature

| Basing on the data collected, we sort out the samples into categories in terms of maxims + On the basis of the analysis of mechanism of implicates in English and Victnamese funny stories, we predict the difticulties that Vietnamese leamers have to deal with,

5, Organivation of the study

The study consists of three parts They are:

Part A: Introduction ‘his part contains rationale, aims of the study, scope of the study, and methods of the study

Part B: Development This is the main part of the thesis and has two chapters

Chapter 1: Literature review

In this chapter, review on some field of semantics, pragmatics and discourse such are given

in the first place, Laler parl deals with concept of implicature and a brief background knowledge about funny storics

Chapter 2: The study

This part gives the detailed description of the study, which inclutes data collection, data

12

PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 1.1 Overview of discourse analysis

an argument, joke or narrative”

Cook (1989: 156) shares the similar idea with Crystal, he states discourse as

“stretches of language perceived to be meaningful, imifisd and purposive” Cook also suggests that “What matters is not its confonmity to rules, but the fact that it communicates and is recognized by its receivers as coherent” Discourse is supposed to be meaningful and thus la be uscd to communicate with one person in a way thal another person docs nat have the necessary knowledge to make sense of,

In Nunan’s opinion, discourse is considered “communicative event involving language in context” (1993:118)

In genoral, discourse is defined differcntly but they have something im common Discourse is understood as language in use, which can retlect people’s point of view and

value systems

1.1.2 Discourse versus text

There has been a lol of confusion between the two terms discourse and lext For some

linguists, these two terms seem to be used almost interchangeably As Halliday & Hasan

(1976: 2) state in their book “Cohesion in English”

Al text is a unit of language in use it

is nat a grammatical unit, like a clause or a

sentence A text ix best regarded as a semantic unit’ a unit not af form but of

meaning, Thus it ix related to a clause or sentence not by size but by realization, the

cading of one symbolic systent in another 1 text does nat consist of sentences; it is

realised by, or encoded in, sentences

They use “text” to refer to “discourse” They see text as a “semantic unit” characterized by cohesion.

Some other linguists draw a clear distinction between them ‘They argue that discourse is language in uction while a tcxt is (he written record of thal interaction

As Crystal’s point of vicw, he states that discomse is “a continous strctch of langnage larger than a sentence” whereas a text is “a piece of naturally occurring spoken, writlen or signed language identified for purpose of arly:

Nhan (1993: 6) appeaus to share the same view when he uses “the term text to retiar

to any written record of a communicative event in context” and discourse refers to

“interpretation of ¢ ommmunivalive eveul in context”

To sum up, it can be see that there is disegreement about the meaning of these two terms Llowever, all seem to agree that both text and discourse need to be defined in terms of meaning and the coherent texts’ pieces of discourse are those that form a meaningfid whole

1.1.3 Discourse analysis

Tiscomae analysis is đeveloped by đifferent works of đifferent scholars One of the

most prominent scholars is Yule (1997: 139), he states in his study of language that

“Un the study of language, some of the most interesting questions arise in connection with the wav language ix used, rather than what tts components are We were, in

affect, asking how it is language users interpret what other lanyuaye-users intend to

convey When we carry this investigation further and ask how it is that we, as language users, make sense of what we read in texts, understand what speakers mean despite what they say, recognize connected as opposed to junthled or incoherent

discourse, and successfully take part in that complex activity called conversation, we

are undertaking what is known discourse analysis”

Ilis undersiood that discuursce analysis is concerned with the study of the relationship

between language and the context in which it is used

In summary, discourse analysis considers the ways that the use of language presents

different views of the world and different understanding It cxamines how the usc of

language is influenced by relationships between participants, as well as its effect on social

relations

1.1.4 Context in discourse analysis

Context is an important concept in discourse analysis As Numan (1993: 7) defines

“conlexd refers to the siluation giving risc to the discourse, and within which the discourse is

14

embedded” in his opinion, there are two different types of context ‘Ihe first is linguistic conlext; it refers te the words, ulleranees and senlenecs surrounding a pices of text The sccond is nen-linguistic or cxpericntial context, it refers to the real- world context in which the text occurs Non-linguistic context includes the type of communicative event, the topic,

the purpose of the evenl, the setting, the participants and the telalionship belwgen there

Non-linguistios also includes background knowledge and assumptions underlying the communicative event Background knowledge can be either cultural general knowledge that thost poopie carry with them in their minds, aboul arcas of fifo, or inlerpersonat knowledge, spevitic and possibly private knowledge about the history of the speakers themselves,

In short, context plays a very important role in discourse analysis A discourse and its context are in close relationship, discourse elaborates context and context helps interpret the

meaning of uttcranecs in discourse

Tn tors of component, lexical meaning is classified inte denolative and counotative meaning,

Denotative meaning is the explicit, literal meaning or in other words, it is dictionary definitions, Il involves a broader consensus, That is, the donotative meaning of a sign would

be broadly agreed upon by members of the same culture and by different cultures

For example, “dog” denotes a common animal with four legs, a tail that they are often kept

as pets, and they can bark and bite

Connotative meaning, on the other hand, reters to the associations that are connected to a certain word or the emotional suggestions related to that word, It exists together with the denotalive mcanings Comnotalive moaning conveys valuo, judgments and evaluative implications behind literal meaning We might say it is the emotional meaning of the word itis determined by the cultural codes to which the interpreter has access and the connotative meaning ofa word can have strong emotional eontout

Vor example, the word “dog” has different comotative meanings in different

cultures

In Arabic culture: it has negative connotation, dirty and inferiority but in British

culture, it has positive one: friendship and loyalty

Sometimes two or more words will have the same or almost the same denotation (definition), but will have very different connotations Depending on how it is used, a word might have a positive, neutral, or negative connotation to it

All of the fotlowing words and phrascs tefer la "2 young person" but their connotations may be quite different depending, in part, on the context in which they appear: youngster, child, kid, little one, small fry, brat, urchin, juvenile, minor, Some of these words tend to carry favorable connotations (ittle one), others unfavorable (brat), and still others fairly neutral connotations (child), Calling a young person a brat lets our readers know at once how we feel about the rotten kid

Tn short, cormotation can be regarded as an additional meaning to denotation

According 19 Halliday, there are three components of scnlence mzaning including

representational, interpersonal and textual meaning Halliday uses the term “semantic

function” or just “function” to refer to them ‘This is a way of representing the meaning of the

sentence

Representational meaning may b2 defined in terms of experiential and logical functions

The experiential function is to communicate ideas it refers to people, objects, states of affairs, cvents, qualitics, places, actions and circumstances The logical function (meaning) relates ideas to each other on an equal or subordinate basis

‘he experiential subcomponent of the representational meaning refers to processes, qualities and participating entities and circumstances

Let’s look at the following example

The linle boy is playing football

The participants realized by the noun phrases: the Hittle boy and football

‘The process realized by the verb: playing

The interpersonal meaning is Gasily to cstablish and 1naintain social relations, and secondly

to influence people’s behavior and gct things done, and thirdly to cxpress the speaker's

feelings, attitudes and opinions The last is to express the speaker’s attitudes or opinions

lowards, or assessment of, the representational coulent af senience

For example

Good morning Establish social relationship

Can you get me some water, please? Request

What she said may be right Speaker’s attitude

Textual meaning is to create texts It helps to give texts coherence and cohesion

1.4 Utterance meaning

Nguyen Hoa claims that an utterance is often regarded as any stretch of speech before which and after which thers is a pause Utterance meaning is defined as what a speaker

means when he makes an utterance in a certain situation In other words, utterance meaning

is context-dependent and the meaning of an utterance is determined by the context in which itis used

Austin presents two kinds of utterances: constative and performative utterance A constative utterance is a statement-making ufterance What it does is to represent a state of affair or experience In contrast, a performative utterance is one that performs an act of doing

something rather (han saying IL brings about a slate of affairs such as bids, blessings, firings, arrests, complaints, marrying A performative utterance is neither true nor false For instance, | say “J apologize for my behavior”, it may be right or wrong for ms fo do so

because the ullcrance “Z apologize” is uscd Lo perform rather (han lo describe an act

4.1 Related acts in producing an utterance

When attcrnpting to cxpress themselves, people not only produce uttcrances

containing grammatical structures and words, they perform actions via those utterances

A: Would vou like to ga fishing tamorrow?

B: My father will visit me, tomorrow

In this conversation, A wants to invite B to go fishing, but B does not agree and

he/she refuses A’s invitation Both A and 1i’s utterances are speech acts.

John Austin In his beok “Ilew †o do things with words” is the first to imtroduce the idea of

spccch act According lo Austin, actions performed via ullcrances are generally called spocch acts, and on any occasion, the action performed by producing an utterance will

consist of three related acts inctuding locutionary act, illocutionary act and perlocutionary

acl

Locution: The actual form of the utterance

Hlocsstion: The communicative force of the utterance

Perlocution: Tho communicative cffect af U

(Nguyen Hoa cited 2003: 228)

‘This can be illustrated in this example

Would you close the door, please?

The surface form, and also the locutionary act, of this utterance is a question with a clear content (Close the door) The illocutionary act conveys a request ftom the part of the speaker and the perfocntionary act expresses the speaker's desire that the hearer shonld go and close the door

Locutionary act

Tis understood thal, “a focutionary act is basic act of utlerance, or producing a meaningfid linguistic expression” (Yule, 1996: 48), To perform a ocutionary act is to produce an utterance with a particular form and a more or less determinate meaning according to the rules of a given language If you have difficulty with actually forming the somnds and words lo create a meaningful ufferanee in a tanguago, then you might fail lo produce a locutionary act

Austin analyses the locutionary act into three sub-types

Phonetic act is the act of producing an utterance in the phonctic medium of sound,

Phatic act is the act constructing a particular sentences in particular language

Rhetic act is the act contextualizing a sentence

; camected with speaker’

promising, requesting, giving commands and so on As Yule (1996: 48) claims, the illocutionary act is performed via the communicative force of an utterance which is also

Perlocutionary act

Perlocutionary act, Austin’s last element in the three-fold definition of speech acts, is performed with the intention of producing a further effect on the hoarcr Sometimes it may seem that perlocutionary act does not differ ftom illocutionary act very much,

For example, “Would you close the door?”

Considcted merely as an ilocutionary act (a request in this casc), the act is sucecssful if the hearer recognizes that he should close the door, but as a perlocutionary act it succeeds only if

Searl’ s classifications

Soarl also divides speech act into five typos as Callow Commisrives are those kinds

of speech acts that commit the speaker to doing something in the future, such as a promise,

or a threat Directives are those kinds of speech acts that have the function of getting the listenar to do something, such as a suggestion, a request, or # command, Declaratives arc

those spesch acts that change the states of affairs in the world Expressives are (hose spssch acts in which the speaker expresses feelings and altitudes aboul somthing, such as an apology, a complaint, to thank someone, to congratulate somconc Representative arc thosc speech acts which describe states or events in the world, such as an assertion, a claim, or a

report

Speech act classified in accordance with the correspondence between structure and

function of the utterance

Tn the discussion of spovch acl, Yule (1996: 55) stales “whonover there is a, direet

relationship between a structure and a fonction, we have a direct speech act Whenever there

is an indirect relationship between a structure and a fiction we have an indirect speech

ae?” In English, there are three structural forms (declarative, interrogative and imperative) and the thrce general communicative functions (statement, question, command/ request)

Thus, a declarative used to make a statement is a direct speech act, but a declarative used to

make a request is an indirect speech acl

When somcone utters “Could you move over a bit?” The speaker docs not expeet hearer to answer these questions with “Yes ot Yes, 1 could” The fimction of this utterance is a

Tequesl, or in other word speaker asks the hearer ta move over a bil

Different structures can be used to accomplish the same basic function, as the following example

a) Move out af the wav

5) Đa you have to stand in front of the TV?

¢) You are standing in front of the TR

4® You'd make a better door than awindow

The basic function of all the above ullcrances is a command! request (hal the spcaker wants

the addressee not to stand in front of the TV However, only the imperative structure in (a) represents a direct speech act The interrogative structure in (b) is not being used only as a

question, hence it is am indirect spcech act The declarative structure in (¢) and (d) are also

indirect requests

1.5, Implicature

1.5.1 The notion of implicature

‘The term “implicate” is used by Grice to account for what a speaker can imply, suggest or mean, as distinct from what the speaker Hilrally says, tn other words, the notion

20

of implicature rests upon a distinction between what is actually said and what is implied in

saying what is said

Consider the following cxample Yulz (1996: 43)

Rick: Hey!, coming to the wild party tonight?

Tom: My parents are visiting

In order to make Tom’s response relevant, Rick has to draw on some assumed knowledge

that one college student 1n this setting expects another to have ‘om will be spending that evening with his parents, and time spent with pưrơnls is quíaL So, Tom implieales thai

tonight he will be busy and he cannot go to the party

Grice discussed two different types of implicatures, including the conventional and the

conversational,

The conventionul implicate has the samc implication no matter what the context is

It means that it does not have to occur in conversation, and they do not depend on special contexts for their interpretation

For example:

Even John came to the party

When “even” is included in any serdence deseribing an evenl, il means “contrary lo

A: Am Jin time for supper?

B I've cleared the table

Speaker B’s implication is that speaker A is late for dinner because as usual, after meal, we clear and tidy the table

1.5.2 The cooperative principal and maxims

In order to explain how hearers interpret the utterance implicature, Grice introduced the cooperative imphicatine (CP) The CP runs like this

Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs,

by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged

Or be helpful

(Keams cited, 2000: 255) According lo the cooperative principle bol speaker and hearer converse with the willingness to deliver and interpret a message The speaker and hearer cooperate and that is why they communicate efficiently

In order to illustrate haw we inlergrel, Grice presewted four conversational maxims,

to show how we communicate effectively in the light of rules

1.5.2.1 The maxim of quantity

1 Make your contribution as informative ay is required (for the current purposes of the exchange)

2 Do not make your contribution more informative than is required

The maxim of quantity requires the speaker to give the right amount of information when he/she speaks, which means not to be too brief or to give more information than the

situation requires During a conversation, the quantity maxim is often violated in directions,

creating prolixity if we say too much and terscness if we arc too bricf

Woman to a friend: “We haven't reached an agreement yet- I'd like a Bernuida honeymoon,

and he doesn twant a wedding”

The woman violated the maxam of quantity because she provided more information than necessary ‘Ihis led to humor, she mentioned “a Bermuda honeymoon”, but, as a matter

of fact, her boy friend did not want a wedding at all

Consider another example:

A farmer gave two city fellows permission to hunt on his land, asking only a small favour in

return “You'll find a still up vonder” he said “I'd like you to bring me a jugfid or two”

The hunter locaied the still easily enough, but as they approached, bullets started whizzing

past their ears They fled down the hill and found the farmer “Your still is being raided”,

they gasped

“Oh, that’s probably the old man Turner” the farmer said

“Who's he “the hunter warded to know

“My neighbour” the farmer replied “He owns the still”

Tn this example, the farmer violated the prineiple of quantity because he just gave the

information on the existence of the still However, the person was actually not as informative

as required, and a3 a result, caused misunderstanding on the part of his listeners

1.5.2.2 The maxim of quality

Trv to make your coniribution one that is rue

1 Do nơi say whal you believe io be false

2 De not say that for which pou lack evidence

The maxim of qualily is a maller of giving the right information The speaker says

nothing that he/she knows to be false or for which he/she lacks sufficient evidence The other

maxims are dependent on this maxim, if a speaker does not convey the truth then the

chúng nhau tiền biểu người quân tương xin cho con voi đứng lại để cùng xem Thấy sở vòi,

thay sờ ngà, thầy sẽ tai, thâu sò chân, thủy th sở đuôi

Đoạn năm thấy ngôi lại bàn tán với nha,

Thây sở vôi bảo:

- Tưởng aon voi nó thể nào, hỗa ra nó đài như con đĩa!

Thây sờ ngà bảo:

- Không phải, nó cứng như cải đôn cần chứ!

tây sở lat bdo:

- Đâu cải Nề 1o bè bè như cái quạt thôi

Thấy sở châm cãi lại:

- Ai bảo? Nó sừng xững như cái cột nhà!

Thây sờ đuôi lại nói:

- Các thấy nói không đúng cả Chỉnh nó tua tũa nhưư cải chỗt xẽ cùm

images of elephant because they lacked evidence, they only touched a part of elephant As 2 resull, thzy agued and fought cach other, thal caused humor

15.2.3 The maxim of relation

Be relevant

The maxim of relevant requires the speaker to be relevant to the context and situation in

which the utterance occurs

A: Fant out of peroal

B: There is a garage round the corner

In this exchange, Grice suggests that [J would be violating the maxim “Le relevant” The implicature, derived fram the assumption that speaker B is adhering to the cooperative

principal, is that the garage is not only round the corner, but also will be open and sclling petrol In order to understand implicature, we have to know certain facts about the wortd It

is that garages sell petrol and that ronmd the comer is not a great distance away A’s

utterance not only is a description of a particular state of affairs, but also as a request for

help, for instance,

1.5.2.4 The maxim of manner

1 Avoid obscurity of expression

The plane took off to the west and taxied down the runway

This may confuse pcople as to what actually happened, so the requirement of being orderly is not cattied ont, In fact, when describing things, we should make them in a good order in which they really occurred ‘The above example should be changed into “the plane taxied down the nmway and took off to the wesl”

In summary, what can be derived from the cooperative principal is the fact that maxims should be theoretical involved in every conversation However, in everyday

cornmunication, the conversational situation is nol always ideal and that is why the maxims

24

are often not fully observed ‘Ihese are several ways in which the speaker can fail to observe

Omlg OF InOTe Maxims

1.5.3 Nom observance

Any failing to observe a maxim may be referred to as “breaking a rmaximn” When a speaker breaks a maxim, the hearer looks tor the implicature since he/she assumes the cooperative principle to be in operation Non-observance of maxims is offen used

intentionally in order to cvoke hurnor Grice di

ssod five ways of ol obs ving a maxim, They are flouting (the speaker blatantly fails to observe a maxim), violating (uostentatious

non- observance of a maxim), infringing (the speaker fails to observe a maxim without any

intentions), suspending and opting out (the speaker indicates unwillingness to cooperate in the way the maxim requires) of a maxim (Thomas, 1995: 64) As a result consequent upon

non-observance of certain maxims, the speaker’s utterance may communicate something

completely different from what was said It leads to a breakdown of normal codes of cooperation and causes humor In this study, the author focuses on violating and flouting

1.5.3.1 Flouting

“A flout occurs when a speaker blatantly fails to observe a maxim at the level of whal

is said, with the deliberate intention of generating an implicature” (Thomas 1995:65), When

flouting a maxim, the speaker does not intend to mislead the hearer but wants the hearer to look for the conversational implicature, that is, the meaning of the utterance not directly

stated in the words ullered Therefore, when the speaker intentionally fails to observe a

maxim the purpose may be to effectively communicate a message

15.3.2, Violating

A: Where does Gerard live?

B: Somewhere in the South of France

B implicates that he does not know exactly where Gerard lives B violates quantity because

B gives less information than required,

When violating a maxim the speaker intends to mislead the hearer The speaker speaks the

truth but implies what is false

6 Overview of funny stories

Funny story is story that is told to make people Iaugh (Oxford Advanced Leamer’s Dictionary), Tl is characterized by humorous phonomsna, There arc Iwo theories for what

people find humorous, incongruity theory, superiority theory ‘he most popular theory of why we find jokes fumy revolves around the concspt of ‘incongruity’, The idea is Gat we laugh at things that surprise us because they sccm out of place, It’s fanny when clowns wear outrageously large shoes, people have especially big noses or politicians tell the truth, In the same way, many jokes are furmy because they involve ideas that run against our expectations A bear walks into a bar Animals talk, And so on But there is more to this theory than such simple forms of incongruity In many jokes, there is an apparent incongruily between the sci-np and the punch line, Scientists refer to this as the “incongruily- resolution’ theory We resolve the incongruity caused by the punch line, and the accompanying feeling of sudden surprise makes us laugh

The superiority theory also explains why we laugh at certain types of jokes Many jokes make us feel superior to other people In these types of jokes, people appear stupid because they have misunderstood an obvious situation, made a stupid mistake, been the hapless victim of unfortunate circumstance or have been made to look stupid by someone else According to the theory, these jokes cause us to laugh because they make us feck superior to other people

Furmy story may be based on four lypical forms as follow

- eccentricity ( against the authority of social convention)

- wordplay ( against the authority of serious discourse)

~non sense ( against the authority of sense)

~ black humor (againsl the authority of roaral)

These forms are well-illustrated in some of the themes These are some typical themes First

is the family matter It consists of love, marriage, relationship between parents and children, husband and wife Political satire is another theme in funny story The political and social backgrounds are the base for this form Superiors are criticized in terms of their lying, they are challenged by common people One of themes that amuses people is sex No doubt the people have always swapped dirty jokes in private or among friends and other themes

The author chooses to collect data from some published books and some reliable

websites in order to demonstrate how humor is created through implicature in funny stories

The samples are collected from “Reader’s Digest” “Nu cudi nude Anh” (English funny

stories) and “Tuyén tap tiéu lâm hay nhat”, “Tuyén tap truyện cười dân gian Việt Nam” (Vietnam folkore funny stories), and websites laughlab (www.laughlab.co.uk),

www.English-world.org

The samples have been carried out with funny stories whose humor mechanisms are based on the violation and flouting of the maxims of implicature

The non-oberservance the author finds out are flouting and violating The author

investigates randomly 100 breakings of maxims in English and 100 breakings of maxims in

Vietnamese funny stories

The author collects data by writing down dialogues where breakings of the four maxims occurred, mainly violating and flouting The author identifies which of the four — quality, quantity, relevance and manner are broken in each story and which are broken most

frequently Furthermore, the author investigates why and when the maxims are broken in

order to create humor in funny stories

2.3 Data analysis

2.3.1 Maxim of quantity

This maxim is broken so as to bring readers humor when the characters do not want

to reveal information that can get them into trouble or when they give too much unneeded

information in the conversation In English funny story, this maxim accounts for 9%

Let’s consider this English funny story

That's Why

A woman told her husband:

“It is sad when you are away!"

“Honey, I'll be back sooner than you expected ”

“Yes, that's why.

‘The wife in this story flouted the maxim of quantity by giving less information than the situation requires, she did not finish the sentences she starled, She did nol want to upseL the listener, her husband, She said that “Ycs, that’s why ” and she left out “You'll be back sooner than I expect that makes me sad because | can not go with another man”

The character is actually nol as informative as required, and as a result, canse

misunderstanding on the part of ‘his listeners

For example, in an English fimny story

There is aveonian sitting on a park bench and a targe dog lying on the gronmi in front of the

bench A woman comes along and sits down on the bench,

Man: Does your dog bite?

Woman: No

(The man reaches down to pet the dog The dog bites the man's hand.)

‘Man: Ouch! Hey! You said your dog does not bite

Woman: He does not but that is not my dag

In the woman's first answer “No”, she gave less information than expected The

problem was the man’s assumption that his question “Does your dog bite?” and the woman's

answer “No” both applied to the dog in front of them Trom the man’s perspective, the woman's answer provided less information than expected In other words, she might be expected to pride the information stated in the last line

‘The following example taken from Vietnamese funny stories violates the maxim of

quantity becanse fess information than required

“Mat rai”

Một người sắp đã chơi xa, dẫn com:

Ô nhà có ai hôi tủ nói bố dã chơi nht

Se con mdi chơi quên mắt, nên cẫn thân lẫy bắt viết vào giấy, rỗi báo:

Có ai hỏi thì con đưa cải giÃy này

Con câu giấy bỗ vào kúi áo cả ngày chẳng thấy ai dân hỏi Tôi dên, sẵn có ngọn đèn nó lẫy

giấy ra coi, chẳng may vô ý giấy cháy mắt

Hém sau có người đến hỏi: "Thầu chảu có nhà không? Nó ngắn ngơ hồi lâu sở vào thí

không thấu lần nói:

-Mét réil Khuich gidt mind hoi: “Mat bao giờ?”

- Tối hôm qua!

- Sao ma mat?

The humorous ¢ffcet in the above cxample was inspired by the violation of quantity

The guest and the son in this story indicated two different things, the father and the letter, because the boy and the guest gave tao little information When the guest asked “Where is

your father?” instcad of answering “My father’s Ictter was lost”, the son answered “Lost”?

because he thought of his father’s letter and the misunderstanding between two people continned al the end of the story The guest asked the reason “Why?”, he referred to father, and the son answered “On fire”, he indicated the letter The violation of this maxim made the two characters misunderstand and it caused laughter

In some Vietnamese funny stories, the characters are portrayed as stupid people in that they do nal know where jo stop or they intentionally give loo much information to show off something This maxim is broken in 7 times (794) of 100 stories

For example, ina Vietnamese funny story,

“Lợn cưúi, áo mới”

Có anh tính bay khoe của Một hôm, may được cải do mới, liễn đem ra mặc, rồi đứng hỏng ở

của, đợi có ai qua người ta khen Túng mãi từ sắng đẳn chiều chả thấy ai hỏi cả, anh ta trúc

lâm

Dang tức tôi, chợt thấy một anh, tùnh cũng hay khoe, tái tưới chạy dén hai to:

- Báo cả thấy con lợn cưới của tôi chạy qua đây không?

Anh kia

gia ngay vat áo ra, bảo

- Từ lúc tôi mặc cúi "ảo mới" này, tôi chẳng thầy con lợn nào chạy qua đây cô

A pig for wedding, a new shirt

There was a man wha always showed off One day, he was wearing a new shirt and he was standing in front of the door so that every body could see and compliment Standing all day from morning to afternoon, there was no pride, he was very angry

Suddenly, there was aman running across, ke shouted:

“Dio you knw where my pig for wedding ix?”

The man touched his shirt and answered:

“Lhave not seen any pig running across here since 1 wore this new shirt”

as a maticr of fact, he touched his shirt and said two unrelated things, a now shist and a pig

‘This Vietnamese funny story not only caused laughter but also criticized some bad habits for example, showing off The laughler in these stories fought against bad altitude and actions for socisty

In some fimny stories, the character does not know where to stop or intentionally give nmch information for other purposes ‘hese superfinous utterances cause laughter

For cxarnple, in an English fimny story;

Room For Two Hor our honeymoon my fiancée and 1 chose a fashionable hotel knawn for its hexurious

suites When I called to make reservations, the desk clerk inquired, “Is this for a special

occasion?"

"Yes," Ireplied "I's our haneymoon."

"And how many adkelts will there be?" she asked,

The desk inquired is this stoty violated the maxim of quantity, because he said an unnecessary sentence Obviously, the honeymoon is for couple Such a stupid question made readers langh,

‘As inthis Vietnamese funny story, the humor causes by a supertluous utterance

Sơ chó

30

Người kia nghèa nhưng lại muốn làm sang Aiột hôm, có khách đến chơi Anh ta lén sang hàng xóm nhờ một chủ bé dên bưng com nước hộ, Anh ta dặn đò cách thức xong rỗi về nhà

trước ngôi dợi Đợi cả buôi, vẫn chưa thấy chai bé sang, mãi mới thâu chủ bé thập thô nguài

ctta, Anh ía ra odi, gọi í0:

- Sao không vio bung com nước ra, káo khách đã đôi bụng, còn chờ đấn bao giờ nữa?

Lie bay gic, chi bé mới lễ phiệp thưa,

-Kin lỗi ông nền cho, tôi sợ con chó nhà ông nó dit quả nên từ nấy đẫn giờ tôi đứng đâu

chưa đám vào

English version

For fear of dog

One paor person wanted to show off One day, a guest visited his house He went to his neighbour's house secretly to resort a litte boy in order to serve hun He aye directions and then he came back home to wait the little boy He waited for along time until he saw the

boy in front of the door He shouted:

“Why don't you bring the meal? How long do Ihave to wait for you?”

The boy answered politely:

“Tam sorry I'm afraid of your dog, so that's why I stand here so far hut I don't dare to come

in”

Jn this funny story, the boy broke the maxim of the quantity The poor man asked him for help le waited the boy for a long time When he saw the boy appear outside the door, the man said aloud “Why don you bring the meat? How long do T have io wail for you?” The boy should have answered: “I’m sorry" However, the boy said excessively that

"i'm sorry I'm afraid of your dog, so | stand here so far but | don't dare to come in" ‘This

made the story humorous The story ccnsured snobbish people im society The readers had

chance to laugh at man’s bad habit and appreciated the boy's intelligence

And this situation also exists in English funny stories, the character gives too much

information

Second Marriage

‘Gf Lwere to die first, would you remarry?" the wife asked

"Well," says the lashand, "Fm in good health, so why not?"

"Would she live in my house?"

"it's all paid up, sa yes."

"Would she drive ny car?"

"No She's lefi-handed."

‘The man’s answer in the last sentence violated the maxim of quantity because he gave tere information than necessary Tis implicature was that he had another woman

already because he knew his mistress’s habit

2.3.2 Maxims of quality

Breaking of the maxim of quality is often seen in hyperbole in funny stories, which is utilized to give ostensibly false statements, especially in Vietnamese fimny stories, it accounts for 29% and in English fimny stories, it accounts for 21% On the other hand, this principle is also violated if the spcaker lacks adequate evidence The charactzrs break the maxim of quality in order to create humor when claiming something that they lack evidence for When the maxim of quality is broken, it is abvious to the interlocutor that the speaker is telling alic

For example, in this English funny story, the character gave false statement

Looking around Iwas walking into the store the other day when 1 suv this blind man with his seeing eve dox Suddenly, the man grabbed the dog's leash, and started swinging the dog around his head I watked up and said “Lley, what the hell are you doing”?

The blind man said “Oh nothing, just looking around.”

The blind man in this story violated the maxim of quality because he said something that lacked evidence Neither he nor his dog could look around We know that blind people can not see, and they therefore use a guide dog to help the walk around and de other basic tasks The man was in a shop and, of course, he could not see anything He then started swinging the dog in the air and thought that it could help him find things, but we knew that it was not the truth, It implicd that the man did not know the limitations of his guide dog and thought it could do umich more than it was capable of, We laughed at the blind man’s stupidity, and the image of a man swinging a dog in the air

The following case in Vietnamese fimny slorics, the characlars brivs to tall Hios and mislead the hearer There are large amount of Vietnamese funny stories which violate this maxim ‘These stories focus on boasting men Vor example,

MT tĩnh, tai thính