An Implicature Analysis On “Oh, Brother!” Comic Strip Serialsud

摘要

This study focuses on analyzing comic using theory of implicature and cooperative principles proposed by Grice. This study aims to (1) describe the implicatures to occur in the “Oh, Brother!” comic strip serials, (2) describe theudNon observant-maxims in the “Oh, Brother!” comic strip serials. This research applies descriptive qualitative method.The data analyzed are utterances containing implicature in 30 serials of “Oh, Brother!” comicudstrip.Based on the analysis the writer found that there are (1) 41 utterances in the comic contain implicature, (2) There are 45 implicatures which are categorized into three, they are; 1 conventional implicature (2,22%), 36 conversational implicature (5 generalized (11,11%) and 31 particularized (68,89%)) and 8 scalar implicature (17,78%), (3) 43 Non Observant - Maxims, they are 9 data violate theudmaxim of quality (9%), 13 data violate the maxim of quantity (30,23%), 9 data violate the maxim of relevance (20,93%) and 12 data violate the maxim or manner (27,90%)udFrom Implicature aspect; there are three kinds of implicature occur in the comic, namely; conventional;is used to show the contrast meaning to what actually happen using certain words; „but‟; even it is included on conversational act, conversational; occurs on conversational act; the particularized one occurs when the readers rely on the context of the comic to interpret the meaning, while the generalized one occurs when the utterance convey whole meaning if the implicature, so the readers do not need to rely much on the context to interpret it, and scalar; occurs when the scalar mark used contains another meaning than what is conveyed. According to the cooperative principle point of view, the NonudObservant - Maxim can be varyingly used to infer the implication of the utterance. The writer concludes that, the violations are used to; (1) deliberately persuadingudthe addresser to infer some implication, (2) showing irrelevance understanding between speaker‟s background knowledge and the addresser‟s, (3) deceiving theudaddresser to hide something.