474 

 

                                          EEJ 10 (4) (2020) 474-479 

 

English Education Journal 
 

http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej 

 

Flouting of Grice’s Maxims in the Humorous Utterances in American 

Situation Comedy 2 Broke Girls 

 

Rahmi Rafika, Issy Yuliasri,  Warsono Warsono 

 

DOI :  https:// DOI 10.15294/eej.v10i4.39465 

 

Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia 

 

Article Info 

________________ 

Article History: 

Accepted 20 March 

2020 

Approved 09 July 2020 

Published 23 

December 2020 

 

Keywords: 

Flouting of Maxim, 

Humour, Situation 

Comedy. 
____________________ 

Abstract 

 
In daily life, when people interact, they sometimes use humorous utterances in 

the conversation. Humor may occur because the speakers flout Grice’s maxims. 

This study aims to describe how Grice’s maxims flout in the humorous 

utterances in American Situation Comedy 2 Broke Girls in Season 6 Episode 3-9 

and the humorous utterances usually contain laughter. The finding of this study 

shows that all types of maxims were flouted by the actors and there are different 

language styles involved in the conversations. The maxim which is flouted the 

most is quantity and the language style which is found the most is hyperbole. 

The contents of situation which cause the actors to flout Grice’s maxims are as 

follows; the actors flout maxim of quality when they say something which is 

blatantly untrue or they lack adequacy. Then, in flouting of maxim of quantity, 

the actors sometimes give too little information and too much information. The 

third, the actors flout maxim of manner when they say ambiguous, sometimes 

being obscure. Last, the actors flout the maxim of relation if they say something 

irrelevant in responding to the previous topic. This study can be concluded that 

Grice’s maxims flouted in humorous utterances and the language styles are also 

found. The most dominant maxim flouted is quantity. 

 
Correspondence Address: 

Kampus Pascasarjana Unnes jl Kelud Utara 3 Sampangan.Semarang 

E-mail : rahmirafika165@gmail.com 

p-ISSN 2087-0108 

e-ISSN 2502-4566 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mailto:rahmirafika165@gmail.com


Rahmi Rafika, et al. / English Education Journal EEJ 10 (4) (2020) 474-479 

475 

INTRODUCTION 

 

In social interaction, people like to get 

together and do interaction. In this case, language 

has a role as a medium to make interaction 

around those people. They can express their 

feeling, tell someone about something, and the 

importance is they can communicate with one 

another. In communication, people must know 

what the meaning or the purpose of the 

conversation is, so it will not lead to 

misunderstanding between the speaker and the 

interlocutor.  

According to Grice (1989), there is a 

principle that has to be followed by the speaker 

and hearer to have a successful conversation, 

namely Cooperative Principle, which says: 

“Make your conversational contribution such as 

is required, at the stage at which you are 

engaged” (Grice, 1989, p. 26). The rules of talking 

to each other are known and applied by all human 

beings to keep the conversation going smoothly 

(Cook, 1992). One of the most basic assumptions 

is people must make successful communication 

where both people in a conversation are 

cooperating and this is called the Cooperative 

Principle. Without cooperation, human’s 

interaction will be more difficult. Therefore, the 

Cooperative Principle and the Grice Maxims are 

not only specific for conversation but also for 

verbal interactions in general.  

The cooperative speakers may 

intentionally disobey the maxims, as long as a 

person or the context sets enough indicators for 

the listener to notice it. This is called flouting of a 

maxim and it is used to convey information 

indirectly. Levinson (1983) argues that the 

flouting of maxims occurs when individuals 

wittingly stop to apply the maxims to entice their 

listeners to decide the hidden meaning behind the 

utterances; that is, the speakers apply the 

implicature. 

In flouting of maxims, the entrants of the 

conversation look like uncooperative, but 

actually they do. The participants themselves 

have certain intentions of flouting of maxims. 

There are same intended meanings and certain 

aims which are delivered by the speaker behind 

the utterance where flouting of maxims occur. 

Hence, by flouting of maxims, the participants 

are not said to be uncooperative in a 

conversation. It is because flouting of maxims are 

a way to carry out the listener seeks the true 

meaning through what is said indirectly by the 

speakers. In some matters, sometimes the 

cooperative principles flout in many reasons like 

for jesting or getting politeness. Like these study 

that focus on flouting of Grice’s maxims which 

have been conducted by Safitri and Faridi (2017); 

Khosravizadeh and Sadehvand (2011); Machali 

(2012); Alduais (2012); Monica (2015); 

Mehawesh and Jaradat (2015); Aisya and 

Fitrawati (2019)). Their studies mention that 

flouting of maxims happen in which the speaker 

deliberately does not explicitly show what people 

intend so all of the maxims cannot execute 

normally. 

The phenomenon of flouting of maxims 

can be seen not only in real life but also in Movie, 

Situation Comedy, Standup Comedy, Talk 

Show, etc. Detrianto (2018); Chadafi (2014); 

Amiana and Putranti (2014); Nofitriana, 

Ratnadewi, and Wijaya (2017); Zebua, Rukmini 

and Saleh (2017) conducted their studies on 

Grice’s maxims that are flouted in the humor in 

Indonesian Drama Comedy.  The humorous 

effects were caused by the actors whose 

utterances were not relevant to the spoken topics. 

Then, the back sound in this drama-comedy 

supported that the situations when one of the 

characters flouted the maxims were in a funny 

situation. The maxims flouted but it did not lead 

the conversations into the end. The flouting of 

maxims might make the conversation lively and 

friendly, sometimes the maxims flout also caused 

the humorous effects. Other research from Dynel 

(2017): Listiyaningsih, Rukmini, and Sutopo 

(2019); Hu (2012); Ibraheem and Abbas (2015); 

Puri and Baskara (2019); Puspasari and Ariyanti 

(2019); Ulfah and Afrilia (2018) have the same 

background of research, humor, but in different 

case of problems. Ross (1998, p. 7) states that the 

context for humor is crucial for determining 

whether an individual finds something amusing 

or not. For this reason, in the study of linguistics, 

humor is discussed not only in syntax and 



Rahmi Rafika, et al. / English Education Journal EEJ 10 (4) (2020) 474-479 

476 

semantic, but also in pragmatics, in which the 

context is the central point (Ferrar in Kehinde, 

2006). Another study in humor from Xue and Hei 

(2015) describe that the maxim has an important 

role in creating a humor. The finding explains 

that flouting and violating are the most frequently 

to be used to create humor. It has beneficial affect 

for L2 learners of Mandarin.  

This study is quite different from the 

previous studies because this study analyzes the 

flouting of maxims and also the kinds of language 

style in the American Situation Comedy 2 Broke 

Girls. 

 

METHODS 

 

This study is a descriptive qualitative 

study. The data were taken from American 

Situation Comedy 2 Broke Girls in Season 6 

Episode 3-9. The data of humorous utterances are 

those spoken by the actors in the situation 

comedy that cause laughter and only those 

flouting of Grice’s maxims are used as the data 

for analysis. Before reporting the final result, the 

researcher identified the data first. After that, the 

data were classified into some categories in each 

utterance. Then, the researchers interpret based 

on the research problems. The last, the researcher 

took conclusion about the findings and 

discussion. There are totally 122 data, and they 

are further analyzed based on the language styles 

(hyperbole, metaphor, banter, sarcasm, and 

irony). 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

 

In Thomas (1997, p.19) stated that flouting 

of maxims is a situation in which a speaker 

bluntly flops to keep track of a maxim, not with 

any purpose of deceiving or misleading, because 

the speaker hopes to tell the hearer to search a 

meaning which is not the same as from the 

expected meaning. The only reason is that the 

speakers hope the listeners get the meaning of the 

speakers, either the literal expressed meaning or 

the hidden meaning. Here, the speaker can 

deliver the dissimilar meanings from the literal 

meaning of the dictum. Then, the speaker 

assumes that the hearer is adequate to decide the 

implied meanings of the speaker. 

 

Flouting of Grice’s Maxim of Quality  

The second type of flouting of maxim is 

quality. Grice proposed some formulations in 

flouting of maxim of quality, among which is 

“Do not say what you believe to be false” (Grice, 

1989, p. 16). This flouting of maxim happens 

when people do not tell the true information. 

Then, another formula from Grice is “do not say 

that for which you lack of adequate evidence” 

(Grice, 1989, p. 18). There is an example of 

flouting of maxim of quality which is uttered by 

Earl in the situation comedy. The example can be 

seen here.  

Sophie : well, thank you so much. I would pay 
you, but I know you’re proud to take the 

money. 
Earl : Uh, actually, the medical bills are pilling up, 

Sophie. 

Sophie : well, see you later. 
Earl : And I could really use …. 

Sophie : (to people around) If you need a free 
babysitter, that guy. 

In the previous scene, Earl was taking care 

of Barbara, Sophie’s baby. Sophie asked Earl to 

do it because she wants to rest a while. In short 

order, Barbara’s diaper is full of crap. There is a 

doll near Earl and it yelled to him and asked him 

to change the diaper. Suddenly, Sophie comes 

and wants to go with her baby, Barbara.  She is 

very thankful to Earl and happy that it is free. In 

the dialogue, Earl complains; he takes care of 

Barbara is not for free.  

Earl intentionally flouts maxim of quality 

because he exaggerates his statement by not 

telling the real situation. His responses by saying 

that the medical bills are pilling up (as seen from 

whole story in the sitcom). He tells untrue 

statements. Obviously, his medical bills are not 

pilling up. Earl intentionally fails quality maxim 

to implicitly tell Sophie that he wants a fee. The 

‘believe to be false’ formulation occurs in this 

conversation. 

 

Flouting of Grice’s Maxim of Relation 

Another type of the flouting of maxim is 

relation. This flouting happens when someone 



Rahmi Rafika, et al. / English Education Journal EEJ 10 (4) (2020) 474-479 

477 

gives a response that is irrelevant towards the 

prior utterance. The utterance is here. 

Caroline : I’m more nimble, so you 

distract Father Kozac while I 
grab the holy water. 

Max  : nice jug.  

Caroline  : max, I’ve been waiting six 
years for you to say that. 

This situation happens in the Church. 

Caroline and Max come to realize their plan. 

They want to take the Holy water for the baptism 

that will be held in the dessert bar. They still want 

to do the baptism although Mrs. Golishevsky, the 

Barbara’s Grand Mother, cancels Max and 

Caroline become the Godparent, because they 

are not serious the rehearsal. In that church, 

Caroline explains that Max will distract Father 

Kozac’s sight. Suddenly, Max comments on the 

jug which is brought by Caroline. In that case, the 

statement which is said by Max flouts the maxim 

of relation. The utterance that’s given is irrelevant 

to the main topic. In that conversation, Max 

flouts the maxim of relation to change a topic and 

it causes a humor. 

 

Flouting of Grice’s Maxim of Manner  

People are said to flout the maxim of 

manner if their speakers are being obscure, being 

ambiguity, being brief (avoid unnecessary 

proxolity), and being orderly. An example of the 

conversation that contain flouting of maxim of 

manner is given. 

Oleg : you want me to give up my sexy Yaris 
for a minivan? Why don’t I just in a 

uterus with wheels?  
Sophie : I’m not asking you to buy a Prius. Oleg, all 

we have to do now is sell the Yaris. 

This conversation happens in Max and 

Caroline dessert bar. Oleg is sitting in front of the 

bar. He looks unhappy. Max and Caroline are 

still having a video call with Randy. Afterwards, 

they end the call. Oleg tries to express his feelings 

to Max and Caroline. He is depressed. He tells 

that his wife, Sophie, asks him to sell his beloved 

car. Soon after that, Sophie comes with her car 

with her driver in a drive-thru area. Oleg is 

shocked because he sees the car that Sophie drives 

and wants, a Minivan. Then, in an annoyed tone, 

he asks again to her that he should give up the 

beloved car for it. From that conversation, it can 

be seen that Sophie’s response does not directly 

answer yes or no, but she tells that she does not 

ask Oleg to buy a Prius. She is being obscure 

instead. 

 

Language Style Resulted from Maxim Flouting  

There are some language styles involved in 

the conversation. They are Hyperbole, Metaphor, 

Irony, Sarcasm, and Banter. These kinds of 

language styles are used in the conversation. 

Some characters in this situation comedy 

sometimes use these by flouting the maxims. 

These are examples of conversations that 

contain difference language style. And here is an 

example of conversation that contains hyperbole. 

Oleg : we did it, Sophie. We baptized little 

bohus … Barbara. 

Sophie : Awww, she’s smiling. She can tell that 
she avoided an eternal hell fire. 

This situation happens in Caroline and 

Max’s bar. They are doing baptism for Sophie 

and Oleg’s daughter, Barbara. The baptism is 

done in the bar because Caroline and Max were 

are not wanted by Mrs. Golishevsky. Sophie and 

Oleg feel happy because the baptism keeps going 

although in the bar. After the baptism, Sophie 

looks at their daughter who is smiling. Sophie 

says that Barbara smiles because she avoids the 

eternal hell-fire. 

This conversation contains hyperbole. 

Sophie exaggerates her statement by saying that 

eternal hell-fire is a symbol of the worst tragedy 

and/or the bad habit in life. However, the 

statement is a reflection that Barbara is happy at 

that time.  

Another conversation that contains 

hyperbole happens in this conversation. 

(knock a door) …. 

Sophie  : Oh, it must be Oleg. Hide us. 

Max : Hide you? That carriage can be 
seen from the space. 

Sophie : All right, tell Oleg I am 

definitely not in the barn.  

This conversation happens when Sophie 

visits to Max and Caroline’s home. Sophie comes 

to skulk from Oleg, because they still fight. She 

does not want her husband, Oleg, sees their 

daughter. When Caroline, Max and Sophie are 

talking, someone comes and knocks the door. 

Sophie assumes that is Oleg. She asks Caroline 



Rahmi Rafika, et al. / English Education Journal EEJ 10 (4) (2020) 474-479 

478 

and Max to hide her and the baby. Therefore, 

Max says that the carriage can be seen from the 

space. Max just exaggerates or bombasts. The 

sentence “can be seen from the space” overstates 

the carriage. It tells that the thing is too big, and 

if it is hidden, people are easy to find it.  

Last, an example that contains irony will 

be described here: 

Caroline : Han looked pretty unsteady. 

Do you think someone should 
make sure he gets home okay? 

Max : don’t worry so much. He’ll be 
fine. See? Fine. 

This conversation happens in the dessert 

bar. When Caroline and Max are talking to each 

other, Han comes and bears down on them. They 

see that Han’s condition is not good. Apparently, 

he has a chicken pox. Because of it, Caroline feels 

sorry for Han; she asks him to go home and take 

a rest. Caroline thinks that Han needs a person 

who can take him home safely. Max tells 

Caroline not to worry about him too much. Han 

will go home safely.  

When Max says like that, Han is still 

standing in front of the door, shortly thereafter, 

Han fell unconscious. While looking up at Han, 

Max emphasized that Han is really fine. The 

utterance made by Max is a positive sentence but 

the implied meaning is negative. Cutting (2002) 

also says that in the case of irony, the speaker 

conveys an expressing of positive sentiment and 

implies a negative statement and it’s difficult to 

be true and believed.  

 

CONCLUSIONS  

 

This study focused on analyzing Flouting 

of Grice’s Maxim in the Humorous Utterance in 

American Situation Comedy ‘2 Broke Girls’. 

Based on the finding above, there are 122 data 

flouting of a maxim of quantity, quality, manner 

and relation in the humorous utterances in 

American Situation Comedy 2 Broke Girls. The 

most prominent flouting of a maxim is that of 

quantity. Sometimes, the actors flout this maxim, 

they say something less or more than needed or 

exaggerate their statement. Because of that, 

usually, humor is created in the conversation. 

The kinds of language styles involved in the 

flouting of Grice’s maxim are hyperbole, 

metaphor, irony, sarcasm, and banter. Almost all 

of them are found in all episodes analyzed. The 

results of the analyses is the most prominent is 

hyperbole.  

Flouting of maxims is one of many topics 

that is interesting to investigate. The subjects of 

the research usually use film, situation comedy, 

book, or advertisement. To enrich the study of 

flouting of maxims, the further researches can use 

different text or they can collect the data from 

naturally occurring conversation in different 

settings such as talk show etc. 

 

REFERENCES 

 

Aisya, N., & Fitrawati (2019). An analysis of 

flouting of maxim performed by politician 

guests in Mata Najwa Talk Show in the 

Episode ‘Adu Lantang Jelang Penentuan’ 

and ‘Babak Akhir Pilpres’. E-Journal of 

English Language and Literature, 8 (4).  

Alduais, A., & Saleh, M., (2012). Conversational 

implicature (flouting the maxims): 

applying conversational maxims on 

examples taken from non-standard Arabic 

language, Yemeni Dialect, an idiolect 

spoken at IBB City. Journal of Sociological 

Research, 3(2).  

Amianna, J.N., & Putranti, A. (2014). Humorous 

situations created by violations and 

flouting of conversational maxims in a 

situation comedy entitled How I Met Your 

Mother. Journal of Language and Literature, 

17(1). 

Cohen, Manion, & Morrison. (2007). Research 

Methods in Education. New York: 

Routledge. 

Cook, G. (1992). Discourse: Language teaching. 

Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Detrianto, B. (2018). Humorous effects on 

flouting ocnversational maxims found in 

Indonesian drama comedy: A study of 

humor in language. International Journal of 

Social Science, 4(2), 1262-1276.  

Dynel, M. (2017). But Seriously: On 

onversational umor and (Un) truthfulness. 

Lingua.  



Rahmi Rafika, et al. / English Education Journal EEJ 10 (4) (2020) 474-479 

479 

Grice, H. P. (1989). Studies in the way of words. 

London: Harvard University Press. 

Hu, S. (2012). An analysis of humor in “The Big 

Bang Theory” From Pragmatic 

Perspective. Academy Publisher, 2(6), 1185 

– 1190.  

Ibraheem, S.D., & Abbas, N. F. (2016). A 

pragmatics study of humor. Advances in 

Language and Literary Studies, 7(1), 80 -87.  

Khosravizadeh, P., & Sadehvandi, N. (2011). 

Some instances of violation and flouting of 

the maxim of quantity by the main 

characters (Barry & Tim) in Dinner for 

Schmucks. [paper presentation] 2011 

International Conference on Languages, 

Literature, and Linguistics IPEDR vol.26. 

IACSIT Press: Singapore. 

Larsen, D., & Freeman. (2001). Techniques and 

principles in language teaching. 

Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford 

University Press. 

Levinson, S.C. (1983).  Pragmatics. Cambridge: 

Cambrigde University Press. 

Listiyaningsih, F., Rukmini, D., & Sutopo, D. 

(2019). Digital literacy via readers’ 

responses towards humor presented in 

“9GAG Memes”. English Education 

Journal, 10(2), 214 – 224.  

Machali, R. (2012). Gricean maxims as 

anaAnalytical tool in translation studies: 

Questions of adequacy. TEFLIN Journal, 

23 (1).  

Mehawesh, M. I., & Jaradat, A.A. (2015). 

Inshallah: Extensive flouting of Grice’s 

maxim of quality. Asian Social Science, 

11(4).  

Nofitriana, E., Ratnadewi, D., & Wijaya, A. 

(2017). An analysis of flouting maxims to 

create humor in stand-up comedy by 

Raditya Dika. Teaching of English Language 

and Literature Journal, 2(2).  

Puri, A. D., & Baskara, F.X.R. (2019). An 

analysis of humor on cartoon comics “Be 

Like Bro”: Pragmatics Study. Journal of 

Pragmatics Research, 1(1), 13-22.  

Puspasari, M.A, & Ariyanti, L. (2019). Flouting 

maxims in creating humor: A comparison 

study between Indonesian and American 

stand-up comedy. Prosodi, 13(2).  

Richards, R. (2014). Approaches and methods in 

language teaching: (3rd Ed). Cambridge: 

Cambridge University Press. 

Ross, A. (1998). The Language of Humor. New 

York: Routledge. 

Safitri, R., & Faridi, A. (2017) The flouting of 

Grice’s cooperative principles by native 

and non-native speakers of English. 

English Education Journal, 7(3), 279-285.  

Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An 

Introduction to Pragmatics. Harlow: 

Pearson Education. 

Ulfah, R.A.N., & Afrilia, R. (2018). An analysis 

of flouting maxim in “The B.F.G” movie. 

Professional Journal of English Education, 

1(5), 687 – 695. 

Xue, Z., & Hei, K.C. (2017). Grice’s maxims in 

humor: The case of “Home with Kids”. 

English Review: Journal of English Education, 

6(1), 49 – 58.  

Zebua, E., Rukmini, D., & Saleh, M. (2017). The 

violation and flouting of cooperative 

principles in the Ellen Degeneres Talk 

Show. English Education Journal, 12 (1).