191 EEJ 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 English Education Journal http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej The Violation of Leech’s Politeness Maxims and Interlocutor’s Responses in Enola Holmes 2020 Movie Shofi Anis Fitriana, Hendi Pratama Universitas Negeri Semarang Article Info ________________ Article History: Accepted 30 January 2023 Approved 8 March 2023 Published 20 June 2023 ________________ Keywords: Violation maxims, Illocutionary function, Movie ____________________ Abstract ___________________________________________________________________ The present study aimed at investigating the violation of politeness maxims of Leech (2014) and the interlocutor’s responses in the movie of Enola Holmes 2020. This study focuses on discussing violations of decency according to Leech and illocutionary acts where there is an action in acting an utterance and a response to what is done. The source of the data was taken from the utterances or dialogue spoken by the characters in this film, the method used is the documentation method by observing the film and then making a transcript of the conversation according to the required data then watching the video and reading the script repeatedly. A qualitative descriptive research design was used in this study. In line with that, Leech's theory of politeness maxims (2014) and illocutionary acts (1993) were used to analyze the research data. Based on the analysis, it was found 7 types of maxims, namely generosity maxim, tact maxim, approbation maxim, modesty maxim, obligation O to S maxim, agreement maxim, and sympathy maxim. Then, the interlocutor’s responses also found 4 types in this movie were Competitive, Convivial, Collaborative and Conflictive, the most appears of violation politeness maxim was Collaborative functions (33,3%), while the most least was Convivial functions (5,5%). There were lots of interlocutor’s reactions by the characters of the movie such as angry, smiling, offended, etc. Correspondence Address: Kampus Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Semarang, Jl. Kelud Utara III, Semarang 50237, Indonesia E-mail: shofifitriana@mail.unnes.ac.id p-ISSN 2087-0108 e-ISSN 2502-4566 Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 192 INTRODUCTION Language is a medium for interacting with other people, thanks to interaction, communication will run smoothly. Language here has a role as a tool to facilitate understanding between the speaker and the interlocutor in conveying information. The use of language also needs to be considered to suit the context and situation. Pateda (2001) assumed that a word or sentence will appear automatically or automatically. Therefore, the speaker must pay attention to the use of language, choosing the right words in order to protect the feelings of the other person. The realization of the use of language is clearly visible in everyday life such as radio, television, print media, and others. The problems of research were (1) the identification of Leech’s politeness is violated by the character of “Enola Holmes 2020” movie; (2) how the characters violate the politeness maxims in this movie; (3) how the illocutionary function of violating utterances in this movie, and (4) how do the politeness maxims violations trigger the interlocutor’s reaction in this movie. Politeness is one of the important elements in communicating with various kinds of people with different traits. Leech (1983) says that politeness is one of the elements that can make participants involved in a social interaction. It is common knowledge that the language used for communication is a social phenomenon in which the way it is used will definitely be influenced by external factors or non-linguistic factors, such as customs, culture, habits and social rules, because changing words or sentences is not enough to launch communication activities but can be influenced by education, economic level and gender. Pragmatics is the study of language that links between grammar and the intended context. Because every expression must have a specific purpose and purpose, therefore this pragmatic examines the deeper meaning of a particular utterance. If in the process of communicating we comply with the existing rules and restrictions it will also produce good communication, but if we do not comply and violate the communication rules then the communication process and the information provided will also not be good, several factors that usually cause impoliteness in speaking between others, deliberately accusing the other person, igniting the other person's/speaker's emotions, deliberately insulting/insulting, forcing their will/decision, and many more examples. Some of the examples above are forms of stimulus that can lead to violations of politeness in communication. Communication should be conveyed politely, but not a few do not pay attention to this. Many people violate and do not apply the principle of politeness in speaking. Even though Leech (2014, p.3) says that “politeness is an act of giving benefits not only to oneself but also to other people or the interlocutor”. But with violations, the theory cannot be fulfilled. Its benefits will instead give a feeling of discomfort, feelings of being offended, angry and feeling unappreciated. There are several studies relevant to the topic of this research from various language researchers, including Guo (2019) who has discussed the analysis of the politeness principle used in e-business which found several maxims including Generosity maxim, Agreement maxim, and Sympathy maxim. Gregorus (2022) has examined how speech act violates politeness maxims and fid out the types of speech acts that can cause violations of the politeness, the writer chose Gerald's Game novel as the object. Megan (2020) has researched how the communication process occurs between students and lecturers through the WhatsApp application and whether there is a violation of politeness in the WhatsApp text. Mako et al (2015) This study has focused on flouting maxims in Grice's theory of Japanese children and adults in communicating. Elsara (2021) this research focuses on identifying violations of the maxim of politeness according to Leech which he took in conversations via the SkinnyIndonesian24 Channel 3 and Skinny Indonesian Youtube channels. Sameer (2021) this study focuses on the types of politeness maxims based on Cook and Leech in an interview with Trumps with Julie Pace. Baok (2021) this research focuses on illocutionary act in a speech by Hillary Clinton which produces several types Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 193 of illocutionary acts and functions such as directive, commissive, convivial, collaborative, etc. Akhmad et al. (2022) this study focuses on the identification of speech acts that occur in a short film entitled Tilik on the Ravacana Youtube Channel which produces 5 types of speech acts. Based on the several reviews above, there were several research sources related to the research topic. From some of these studies, a research gap can be found in the latest Leech 2014 theory and the 2020 Enola Holmes film, which has never been studied. There are many electronic media that can be used as a means of communication, one of which is television, not only can it provide information from various parts of the world, not just one region but from various regions, and the information provided is also varied, such as political news, natural disasters, economic development, entertainment and others that are perfectly packaged. In addition, the occurrence of communication is not only in everyday life verbally but can also occur in several entertainment media such as movies. Likewise in a film where there are many conversations between characters and it is undeniable that there will be violations of politeness in it through spoken dialogues. In ancient times, films could only be enjoyed on television and there were only a few channels. However, as time goes by, a film can be enjoyed through anything, such as cellphones, YouTube, Netflix, and cinema. Film is one of the electronic media nowadays which is widely used as one of the entertainment media which contains a story or information that is packaged properly so that anyone who watches it will be like being carried away in the storyline. or method. In this research, the writer chose to focus on one object, namely film. This is also one of the benefits of electronic media. According to Trianton (2008), "Film is one part of media, because the film contains impressions that are conveyed to the viewer. Besides that, the film is also a medium with the aim of making the communication process successful and conveying information about an event. There are various kinds of film genres in the world such as romantic films, action films, fiction and non-fiction films, documentary films, horror films, comedy films and so on. Each type of film has various characters and characters. Depending on the needs of the story such as the role of antagonist, protagonist, and so on. The film is titled “Enola Holmes 2020”. This film was adapted from a novel by Nancy Springer entitled "The Enola Holmes Mysteries in 1984" where this novel tells the story of a village girl who lives alone in a village her father's mother has died but she still has 2 older siblings who are working in the city. From this novel, a film was created entitled "Enola Holmes 2020" which tells of a girl who was abandoned by her father, while she only lives with her mother in a bad house, Enola has two older brothers, Sherlock Holmes and Mycroft who live in the city and work there. Enola has spent a lot of time with her mother at the house. One day, right on her birthday, Enola woke up from her sleep and immediately looked for her mother in all the rooms of the house but she couldn't find her mother. So he sent a telegram to his two older brothers in town about his mother's disappearance. So Enola's journey began. This film raises a theme, namely gender equality where Enola forces her to choose her path, there is no difference between men and women when they want to achieve their goals. The writer chose this film because this film has a unique background where at that time the position of women had to obey the rules and culture to look elegant. In several scenes, this film shows a conversation that tends to indicate a violation of politeness in the dialogues by several characters in the film. This study used the theory from Leech (2014) which states that in politeness violations several types of maxims have been updated into 10 types of politeness maxims. Among them are the generosity maxim, tact maxim, approbation maxim, modesty maxim, the obligation of S to O maxim, the obligation of O to S maxim, agreement maxim, opinion reticence maxim, sympathy maxim, and feeling reticence maxim. This study was to identify how the politeness maxims were violated by the characters in the movie and to enrich the knowledge on how illocutionary functions applied in the dialogue Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 194 and how the interlocutor’s responses by the characters when hear or see the violation of politeness. The benefits of this research were it can help learners on types of maxims through some examples, because this study used 10 maxims of Leech 2014, the newest theory of Leech about violation maxims. It also expressed many purposes of speaking, like thanking, apologizing, congratulating, etc. METHOD This study used a theoretical and methodological approach. The theoretical approach used is a pragmatic, while this methodological approach uses a Descriptive Qualitative approach. This descriptive method is used to find out the various maxims of politeness violated by several characters in this film. The data source is taken from conversations in the film Enola Holmes 2020. Furthermore, in this study, the data were collected through documentation. More specifically, the researchers first listened to and recorded the conversation from the movie. Then, the researchers transcripted the conversation which contains certain violations of politeness strategies. After that, the data was identified based on some categories of 10 maxims and 4 illocutionary functions. Next, there were some stages of data analysis adopted from Miles and Huberman. Those were data reduction, data presentation, and drawing conclusions. First, data reduction refers to the stage where the data that has been found is then recorded. The second stage was data presentation, in which the data that has been obtained was presented using clear and accurate descriptions so that can be understood easily. The third stage was making conclusions. At this stage, the researchers made a summary conclusion from the data that has been collected and analyzed which contains violations of politeness maxims, speech act functions, and reactions to the interlocutor. Moreover, this research needs credibility so that when tested it can produce data validity so that it can refute the subjective thoughts of researchers. To test the validity of the data, several criteria are needed that can display the data in detail because qualitative research requires a clear and detailed description. Thus, in this study, the authors used investigator triangulation to test and assess the findings to become stronger. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Based on the findings of research on violations of politeness maxims according to Leech (2014), the functions of speech acts and the reactions of the interlocutor in a film Enola Holmes 2020 found some data. the following is an explanation of the research results that have been found, including the following. Types of Violation Maxim Based on the findings in this film, there are several violations of maxims that occur based on leech's 2014 theory. Table 1. The Frequency of Violation Politeness Maxim No Violation Maxim Frequency 1 Generosity 1 2 Tact 2 3 Approbation 2 4 Modesty 1 5 Obligation S to O - 6 Obligation O to S 3 7 Agreement 5 8 Opinion Reticence - 9 Sympathy 2 10 Feeling Reticence - Total 16 Based on Table 1, there are several expressions or dialogues that show violations of politeness as many as 16 expressions, and spread over several types of maxims, there are 7 types of maxims including, the generosity maxim has 1 expression, tact maxim has 2 expressions, approbation maxim has 2 expressions, modesty maxim has 1 expression, obligation o to s maxim has 3 expressions, agreement maxim has 5 expressions, and sympathy maxim has 2 expressions. Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 195 Based on the data above, the researcher found that there were many violations of politeness that were almost evenly distributed in all maxims except the 3 maxims above. Violations of politeness maxims can be seen from the transcript and video which are analyzed in detail according to the context. If the dialogue is not appropriate or contradicts the rules of each maxim, then it is clear that the dialogue has violated the maxim of politeness. In this film, the maxims that are rarely violated are the Generosity maxim and the Modesty maxim, which appear only once in a percentage. Meanwhile, the maxims that appear almost often are Tact maxim, Approbation maxim, Obligation O to S maxim and Sympathy maxim which occurs almost 2-3 times in the dialogue, the last one is the most frequently violated, namely the Agreement maxim that appears 5 times in the dialogue. Because in this early scene there are lots of conflicts and problems between Enola and her sister so that debates often occur, causing politeness violations in the form of Agreement maxim. Besides that, the maxim of politeness that occurs in this film is often carried out by several dominant characters, for example Mycroft and Enola because in the storyline, they are two characters who have different goals and do not want to understand each other so that disagreements often occur about various things. This research was taken with reference to several previous researchers who discussed violation maxims, such as Guo (2019) who examined the politeness principles maxims and their violations in the use of instant e-business, which produced several types of maxims including the Generosity maxim, Agreement maxim, Sympathy. maxim. Then, Hameed (2020) also examines the analysis of violations of the principle of decency based on Grice's theory in video comedy and produces several utterances that are offensive, even if they are only joking such as insulting, demeaning, body shaming etc. Furthermore, according to Estarani et al (2017) his research focuses on investigating the violation and flouting maxim used in the Ellen Degeneres Talkshow which resulted in several violations and the most frequently violated are female participants. This research has some relation of the topic with some researchers ago. From several researchers who have discussed violation of politeness maxims, researchers have found gaps in the results of this study that there are still few researchers who have discussed violations of politeness maxims based on Leech's 2014 theory that there are 10 types of maxims in a film. The Implied Meaning of Violation Politeness Maxim in the Utterances Used by the Character of Enola Holmes 2020 Movie The violation of generosity maxims This maxim contains the purpose of the speech act to maximize the advantage of the other party without paying attention to his own feelings. They were: Datum EH 1. Enola : We have nothing to eat Viscount : Of course, we do, Arctium lappa, which you will know as burdock. Very tasty, and then there’s Trifolium. Clover. And is that… I knew it, Mushrooms, Agaricus lanipes. The princess. I am not entirely an idiot, you know Enola : (smile while walking observing behavior of Viscount) In the conversation above, there is a violation of the politeness maxim where the speaker must provide as little benefit as possible for himself and make sacrifices for himself. The Viscount was trying to give an explanation that he was using those scientific terms to show Enola that he wasn't completely stupid, the Viscount was trying to make Enola believe he was smart but not as he expected, he looked stupid in front of Enola so he made the most possible advantage at the expense of his own convenience. So that the conversation resulted in a violation of the generosity maxim. b. The violation of tact maxims The violation of this maxim is a speech act that causes harm to others as much as possible and takes advantage of others as much as possible. Because it should be said to be polite if Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 196 the speaker gives as little harm to the other person as possible and does not take advantage of other people for his benefit. Below are some violations: Datum EH 2. Mrs.Harrison : Stand tall ! That’s better Ass.Mrs.Harison : Waist 24 inches. Chest 33 inches. Mrs.Harrison : Well that’s too small. (smile) Enola : They perfectly fine. The dialogue above shows that there is a violation of Tact maxim because the speaker gives a loss to the other person because it contains an element of physically insulting Enola who is too small. Datum EH 3 Ass.Mrs.Harrison : Hip 35 inches. Mrs.Harrison : Oh… how disappointing. We will have to use an amplifier. In the dialogue there is a violation of Tact maxim because Mrs. Harrison continues the process of measuring Enola's body whose hip size is too small for girls in general, Mrs. Harrison says 'Oh how disappointing' while laughing satirically, here there is a violation because Mrs. Harrison does not give an advantage to Enola however minimized his profits and took advantage of Enola's physical condition to berate him. c. The violation of approbation maxims The next data is the violation of the politeness maxim of Approbation Maxim which means giving maximum praise to the interlocutor and protecting him without hurting the interlocutor. But the dialogue below violates this maxim by giving maximum abuse and not respecting it. Datum EH 4. Enola : Mr. Holmes? And, um, Mr. Holmes? You sent for me, you sent a telegram. Asked me to meet you here? Sherlock : Enola Mycroft : My god. Look at you, you’re in such a mess. Where’s your hat and your gloves? Enola : Well, I have a hat. It just makes my headitch. And I have no gloves. Mycroft : She has no gloves? Sherlock : Plainly not, Mycroft: The dialogue above shows an offense committed by the speaker to the interlocutor by giving maximum insults without paying respects, when Mycroft and Sherlock saw their sister Enola dressed very improperly and shabby, not like girls in general, by asking what hats, gloves should be worn. So, Mycroft was very surprised by Enola's appearance and seemed to insult and was supported by Sjerlock's sentence "Plainly not, Mycroft" which means to support Mycroft's insult. Datum EH 5. Mrs.Harrison : These clothes will not imprison. They will free. They will allow you to fit into society, to take part in its numerous pleasures. To catch an eye, to attract Mrs.Harrison : at my finishing schools, you will learn how to be a young lady, and you'll make many new friends. Enola :I don't need friends. I have my own company Enola : And I don't need to go To your ridiculous school. (miss H slap Enola) uhh.. (running). No! Please don't do this to me. Let me remain happy. I am happy here. The next data is a violation of the approbation maxim, which is carried out by the speaker to the addressee, when Mrs. Harrison is explaining about the advantages if she wants to live in the hostel she will be accepted in the wider community and have many friends. But Enola dodged it by saying 'i don't need to go to your ridiculous school'. This dialogue shows that Enola does not respect and instead gives insults to Mrs. Harrison's school. d. The violation of modesty maxim The next maxim is Modesty maxim, which means that the speaker and the interlocutor are humble to each other, but it is precisely in this violation that the speaker accuses self- deprecation and praises others. Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 197 Datum EH 6. Enola :And I don't need to go to your ridiculous school. (miss H slap Enola) uhh.. (running) No! Please don't do this to me. Let me remain happy. I am happy here. Mycroft : You are a young woman now, Enola. You need an education Enola :Test me on anything you think I need to know. To be sufficient for this world. Mycroft : If she taught you so well, you wouldn't be standing in your undergarments in front of me. You have no hope of making a husband in your current state. Enola : I don't want a husband! Mycroft : And that is another thing you need to have educated out of you. The dialogue above is a violation of the Modesty maxim because when Enola tries to explain to her two older siblings that she doesn't want to go to the hostel and she doesn't need it because she knows everything. Mycroft replied that if Enola knew everything there was no way she could stand in front of adults in her underwear, that would be impolite. so Enola felt humiliated and embarrassed, in this conversation there was a violation where Mycroft actually maximized the insult on Enola's attitude. e. The violation of obligation o to s maxims The next maxim is about the obligation of an O to S, this means that there must be humility towards the speaker, such as if someone asks for help then he is willing to help, if someone apologizes then he forgives. Datum EH 7. Enola : Sherlock, Don't let him do this to me Sherlock : You are his ward Enola : Make me yours. Guide me. Teach me. For him, I am a nuisance. For you Sherlock : Enola, I'm sorry. It's out of my hands The dialogue above shows that Enola begged Sherlock not to send her to Mrs. Harrison's female dormitory because she didn't need it and wanted to find her mother. But Sherlcok did not grant Enola's request by saying "I'm sorry. it's out of my hands" where Sherlcok did not give low marks to the speaker, namely Enola, for helping him. Datum EH 8. Viscount :Who are you? Enola : Who are you? Viscount : I'm Viscount Tewkesbury, the Marquess of Basilwether. Enola : You're a nincompoop The dialogue above shows a violation of politeness in Obligation O to S because when Enola met the Viscount who was hiding, he asked about identity with the word "who are you" and was answered kindly by the Viscount, but when the Viscount turned to ask about identity Enola instead violated the principle of politeness by saying "you're a nincompoop" which means stupid. The dialogue clearly violates the values of humility and conformity that conversation should have but Enola violates it. Datum EH 9. Enola : Enola Holmes. Viscount : Holmes.. Like Sherlock? Enola : And I am undercover, so forget I told you that piece of information. Viscount : Undercover working for him? Enola : Undercover from him. Viscount :Hence why you're dressed as a boy. Enola : Hence why you are to say nothing. So? Viscount : What? Enola : Thank you? You're supposed to say thank you Viscount : For what? The dialogue above shows that there was a violation of Obligation O to, because when Enola and the Viscount managed to save themselves from the criminals on the train, Enola hoped that with such an uphill struggle the Viscount would at least say thank you by giving a clue 'Thank you? You're supposed to say thank you', but to Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 198 Enola's surprise the Viscount didn't say thank you and instead said 'for what?'. This is not in accordance with the O to S Obligation maxims where the interlocutor should put a low score and respect the Speaker but in this case that doesn't happen, the Viscount does not fulfill the obligation to Enola to say thank you. f. The violation of agreement maxims The next politeness maxim is Agreement maxim which is basically a language rule between the speaker and the interlocutor that must have a match or suitability between the statement and the answer given about a condition or information. But the dialogue below violates this maxim by not showing a match between the question and the answer of the interlocutor. Datum EH 12. Mycroft : Quickly, oh, oh dear god, look at the house. Enola : Isn’t it wonderful? Mycroft : What the hell has she been playing at? The dialogue above is an example of a violation of the politeness of the Agreement maxim because when Enola and her two older siblings headed home, from a distance Mycroft saw that his house had now become unkempt and shabby, but Enola felt proud of that by saying 'Isn't wonderful?' Mycroft disagrees with Enola's statement that the house is very messy and unkempt, this shows a violation of the Agreement maxim between Enola and Mycroft. Datum EH 13. Mycroft : If she taught you so well, you wouldn't be standing in your undergarments in front of me. You have no hope of making a husband in your current state. Enola : I don't want a husband! The dialogue above shows that there was a violation of the maxims in the Agreement because there was a discrepancy between Mycroft and Enola regarding Mycroft's words that he would still send Enola to Mrs. Harrison's girls' dormitory so that she would become a respectable woman and soon get a husband. Hearing this statement, Enola expressed her discomfort and disapproval by saying 'I don't want a husband', because she doesn't want a husband, what she wants now is to be able to find her missing mother. This maxim was clearly violated by Enola because she did not agree with the information provided by Mycroft. Datum EH 14. Mrs.Harrison : at my finishing schools, you will learn how to be a young lady, and you'll make many new friends. Enola : I don't need friends. I have my own company The dialogue above shows that there is a violation of the maxims in the Agreement because there is a discrepancy between Mrs. Harrison and Enola at the time they were chatting about how good it would be to live in the hostel to become a young lady, and have lots of friends there. Because Enola was very angry and didn't want to go with Mrs. Harrison, she expressed her disagreement that 'I don't need friends. I have my own company' Enola doesn't need friends and chooses to live alone, what she needs is to find her mother. Agreement maxim has been violated by Enola because he did not agree. Datum EH 15. Viscount : Is this truly the best way to come? Enola : Can you think of a better way? Do you trust me? Viscount : No !! Enola : If we time it correctly, we can leave him stranded The dialog above shows that there was a violation of the Agreement maxim due to a mismatch between the Viscount and Enola when the two of them tried to escape from the criminals on the train, and the only way was to jump from the train. Before jumping Enola had asked about her belief in Enola's chosen method but instead the Viscount answered "No!!", this meant that the Viscount did not approve of Enola's chosen method of escaping. This dialogue clearly shows a violation by the Viscount of Enola's statement. Datum EH 16. Enola : In the morning, we'll have to Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 199 move fast. The bowler hat man will be hot on your tail Viscount : Where's your destination? I'm going to – Lestrade : London Viscount : Well, um, shall we, um, stick together? If you like. Enola : No. We'll get to London and go our separate ways. Understood? Viscount : Understood. Totally. Entirely The dialogue above shows that there was a violation of the Agreement maxim due to a mismatch between the Viscount and Enola when the two of them were in the middle of the forest and were warming themselves by making a small fireplace. At that time the Viscount hoped that he could continue to be with Enola, but when Enola heard the invitation he immediately refused the Viscount's offer and chose to continue their separate journeys on the grounds that Enola and the Viscount had different goals. The dialogue above shows that Enola violated the Agreement maxim because she did not agree with the Viscount's offer to stay together. g. The violation of sympathy maxims This maxim has a rule that between speakers and interlocutors should have mutual understanding and tolerance, the sympathetic attitude that occurs between the two of them will make the communication process run smoothly and no one feels offended. However, in the dialogue below there is a dialogue that shows an attitude of being unsympathetic to the interlocutor, this means violating the politeness principle that has been made. Datum EH 10. Sherlock : You know, last I remember, you were quite a timid little thing. You had a pine cone wrapped in wool, dragged it with you wherever you went, calling it Dash. Someone told you that Queen Victoria had a Cavalier king Charles Spaniel called dash. and you decided you wanted the same. We never could persuade you to put any trousers on. Your bottom was always bare. I think that's all the memories I have. Enola : Thank you. If you could now forget them all. A pine cone called Dash? That sounds ridiculous The dialogue above shows a violation of the Sympathy maxim. This happened when Enola was sitting up in a tree and Sherlock caught up with her downstairs, they talked about her past memories, to a story from Enola's childhood that she often didn't use underwear so it looked like she was naked. From Sherlock's statement above, it shows that he has no sympathy at all with Enola by making Enola very embarrassed. EH 11 : Viscount : He is coming. Enola : Of course. Viscount : He's checking every carriage. Enola : Wonderful. Viscount : You have to help me. He didn't see me. Enola : Of course he did. Therefore, I say good day to you Viscount Tewkesbury the marquess of Basilwether. The dialogue above shows the occurrence of a violation of the politeness maxim in Sympathy maxim. This happened when the Viscount was panicking because he was being chased by a criminal sent by the kingdom to arrest him. Enola felt that she had no business with the Viscount, so she didn't have any sympathy or pity at first, because Enola didn't want to be dragged into the Viscount's problems. Several times Enola expressed an indifferent attitude such as "Ofc course", "Wonderful", "I say good day to you", these sentences show that Enola gave an indifferent attitude to the problems faced by the Viscount. This showed Enola was violating the Sympathy maxim of not being empathetic towards the Viscount who was panicking because of trouble. The results of the research above mentioned that there were 16 dialogues that violated politeness maxims, then they were spread over 7 types of maxims and had different frequencies and there were also maxims that did not appear, including Generosity maxim (6.25%), Tact maxim ( 12.5%), Approbation maxim (12.5%), Modesty maxim (6.25%), Obligation S to O maxim (0%), Obligation O to S maxim Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 200 (19.0%), Agreement maxim (31 .0%), Opinion reticence maxim (0%), Sympathy maxim (12.5%) and Feeling reticence maxim (0%). From the percentage above, it can be said that the implied meaning in each of the film's dialogues has different contexts and objectives but is still in one type of flouting of maxims. So in Generosity maxim the character tries to make your own profit as small as possible and make your loss as big as possible. This maxim can be violated if the speaker or the interlocutor does not comply with the above rules. Meanwhile, tact maxim has rules that the speaker can respect and respect the other person and is always humble, not allowed to boast, and if it is not in accordance with these rules, it is considered as violating the tact maxim. In the rules of modesty maxim it is said to be polite if it minimizes losses for its listeners and increases the benefit or benefits for its listeners too, without reducing its own benefits, by avoiding jealousy, envy and indifference to the other person, but if doing so is considered a violation of modesty maxim. Then for the rules of approbation maxim, the appreciation maxim can be said to be a principle of politeness which assumes that a person reaches a level of politeness if he often gives appreciation or praise to his interlocutor, this maxim requires the speaker to maximize respect and minimize insults and words as much as possible. which hurts the listener, so that the two do not ridicule and humiliate one party and the participants are said to be impolite if in an interaction they are often condescending. Furthermore, this modesty maxim expects speakers to be humble by reducing profits or praising themselves. This maxim often appears in Indonesian culture, which is often humble, which is a benchmark for assessing a person's level of politeness. People will be said to be arrogant if in interacting speakers always boast. Furthermore, the Agreement maxim in this maxim is expected that speakers and listeners can provide compatibility and comfort to each other in interacting activities if both of them can build compatibility and agreement, it can be said to be polite, so are the two communicators, speakers. and the interlocutor is a benchmark for achieving the politeness rules, if they do not fulfill the above principles, they are considered to have violated this maxim. The next maxim is the Obligation S to O. This maxim is the obligation of S to O which contains polite speech acts that pays high attention to mistakes and obligations of S to O. For examples, apologizing for mistakes, thanking for help, and so on. Meanwhile, in the dialogue of this film, there is a dialogue where the Viscount does not wish to thank Enola for the rescue. It is clear if he violates this maxim. Next is the Obligation O to S maxim, in this case, the response that is considered to fulfill the politeness rules is approval from the other person, while disapproval is more disliked by the speaker. There are several researchers who discuss violations of maxims including Junnilalita (2017) who has researched dominant maxim violations and their causes in he Behind the Lawyer Profession in Black and White Talkshow which produces data based on Grice's theory found some maxims such as relevance maxim, manner maxim , quantity maxim, quality maxim. Then, Parvaneh's (2011) research focuses on analyzing the extent to quantity maxim in the movie Dinner for Schmucks and finds violations of the quantity maxim that are most often violated. In Kadek's research (2013) which focuses on the flouting maxims that occur in different films Charlie's Angels and The Pacifier, etc. The Types of Illocutionary Functions used by the Character of Enola Holmes 2020 movie Communication is an activity that requires 2 important components, namely the speaker and the interlocutor. According to Austin there are 3 types of speech acts including locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutor. Researchers only focus on illocutionary in this movie of Enola Holmes 2020. According to Leech (1983, p.162) classifies illocutionary functions in language into 4 types, namely Competitive, Convivial, Collaborative and Conflictive, which then each type has a category. Based on the theory above, the researcher found some data related to the Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 201 illocutionary function in utterances that violate the politeness maxims above, including of: a. Competitive function Illocutionary function in Competitive can be interpreted as this illocutionary competes with social goals, this means that between what is to be achieved and the goals that exist there is no conflict or there is no struggle with the existing illocutionary. Such as ordering, asking, demanding, begging, etc. b. Convivial function The term convivial is commonly known as a pleasant speech act, this means that the illocutionary goals and social goals of the community can go hand in hand without any conflict. Include of offering, and saying thank you, saying congratulations. c. Collaborative function The function of this illocutionary is a form of cooperation, but this function is not concerned with social relations, in other words, this speech act does not pay attention to social goals. Include of asserting, reporting, announcing, and instructing. d. Conflictive function This function can be said to be contradictory, meaning that there is a conflict between social goals and illocutionary acts. Such as threatening, accusing, cursing, weighing, nagging and reprimanding. Table 2. Illocutionary Function on the Violation Politeness Maxim in Enola Holmes 2020 Movie. Datum C o m p et it iv e C o n v iv ia l C o ll a b o ra ti v e C o n fl ic ti v e EH 1 √ Asserting EH 2 √ nagging EH 3 √ nagging EH 4 √ Asking EH 5 √ cursing EH 6 √ Datum C o m p et it iv e C o n v iv ia l C o ll a b o ra ti v e C o n fl ic ti v e Reprima nding EH 7 √ asserting EH 8 √ cursing EH 9 √ asking EH 10 √ asserting EH 11 √ nagging EH 12 √ asking √ nagging EH 13 √ asserting EH 14 √ asserting EH 15 √ asking EH 16 √ offerin g √ confirm The results were found that there are several illocutionary functions that occur in the film Enola Holmes 2020, including (1) Competitive, there are 4 dialogues with a percentage of 22.2% including the Asking category, including Dialogue EH 4, EH 9, EH 12 and Dialogue EH 15 (2) Convivial has 1 dialogue with a percentage of 5.5% including the Offering category, including in the EH 16 dialogue. (3) Collaborative has 6 dialogues with a percentage of 33.3% including the Asserting category (Dialogues EH1, EH 7, EH 10 , EH 14, EH 15) and Confirm (Dialogue EH 16), (4) Convivial has 7 dialogues with a percentage of 39.0% including the category Nagging (Dialogues EH 2, EH 3, EH 11, EH 12), Cursing (Dialogues EH 5, EH 18), and Reprimanding (Dialogue EH 6). The data above is the result of an analysis of the illocutionary function taken from dialogues that have violated the maxim of decency in this film, the lowest percentage is found in the illocutionary function of the Convivial type with 1 dialogue in the Offering category. While the highest of the illocutionary function is Conflictive type with a total of 7 dialog categories Nagging, Cursing and Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 202 Reprimanding. From the findings above, it can be concluded that in the Enola Holmes 2020 film there are illocutionary acts in the form of complete illocutionary functions of 4 types, and the most dominant is the Conflictive illocutionary function, which means a function that conflicts between social functions and goals, so there are several sentences containing exclamations threatening, accusing scolding and others. In the early part of this film, there are a lot of conflicts or problems that occur, starting from the conflict between Mycroft and Enola over Enola's clothes, house and education. There are several previous studies that also discuss Illocutionary functions, including, Baok (2021) his research focuses on illocutionary acts in Hillary Clinton's speech. From this research, the results of illocutionary acts were assertive 5 data, directive 3 data, commissive 1 data and expressive 2 data. From the aspect of illocutionary function, the following data were obtained convivial 3 data (75%) and collaborative 1 data (25%). Then, from Akhmad et al (2022) this study focuses on the functions of speech acts that occur in the film Tilik which is available on the Youtube Ravacana Channel. The result are 5 types of speech acts, assertive, directive, commissive, expressive and declarative, and then for the competitive illocutionary functions are functions, convivial functions, collaborative functions and conflictive functions. Next, from Zain et al (2020), the research focuses on describing flouting maxims and illocutionary functions on the principle of politeness. Likewise other researchers such as Annahlia et al (2020), Simatupang et al (2021), Reni (2018), Monique (2022), from several studies on illocutionary functions, researchers can conclude that in fact there have been many studies on illocutionary functions in several subject, but no one has made the Enola Holmes 2020 film the object of their research. The Interlocutor’s Reactions of Violation Politeness Maxim. According to Jalaludin Rahmat (1999, p.51) said that the response is the result of an in- depth observation of an event or information that is visible to the eye and heard by the ear and then represented through actions in the form of verbal and non-verbal. In this study, the response observed was through a film and the characters in it after hearing or witnessing a violation of politeness. a. The interlocutor’s reaction to the violation of genrosity maxim Datum EH1. Enola : We have nothing to eat Viscount : Of course we do, Arctium lappa, which you will know as burdock. Very tasty, and then there’s Trifolium. Clover. And is that… I knew it, Mushrooms, Agaricus lanipes. The princess. I am not entirely an idiot, you know Enola : (smile while walking observing behavior of Viscount) The dialogue above is a form of violating the maxim of generosity, which means that the Viscount is trying to maximize self-esteem by pretending he knows anything about wild plants that can be used as food. Upon hearing the Viscount's words, Enola's only response was surprise and a sinister smile as if ridiculing and laughing at the Viscount's overconfidence. b. The interlocutor’s reaction to the violation of tact maxims Datum EH 2. Mrs.Harrison : Stand tall ! That’s better Ass.Mrs.Harison: Waist 24 inches. Chest 33 inches. Mrs.Harrison: Well that’s too small. (smile) Enola : They perfectly fine. The dialogue above showed a violation of politeness in the maxim of wisdom, when Mrs. Harrison mentions that Enola's chest size is very small and not like the age of girls in general, Mrs. Harrison violates the principle of politeness because it maximizes harm to the other person. When she heard these words, Enola responded with facial expressions of shock, astonishment and embarrassment and anger. But he tried to respect Mrs. Harrison by responding gently with the words "They are prefectly fine". Datum EH 3 Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 203 Ass.Mrs.Harrison : Hip 35 inches. Mrs.Harrison : Oh… how disappointing. We will have to use an amplifier Enola : Hips are simply a function of legs, aren’t they? What need have they of amplification? The dialogue above showed a violation of politeness in the maxim of wisdom, when Mrs. Harrison and her assistant head to Enola's house at Mycroft's request to take Enola to the women's dormitory. During the physical examination, the assistant said "Hip 35 inches" hearing this size Mrs. Harrison spontaneously said "Oh how disappointing" where these words made Enola very surprised and felt humiliated by the size of her hip. The response that Enola gave was shocked and surprised to hear these words as well as offended and defending herself. c. The interlocutor’s reaction to the violation of appobation maxim Datum EH 4. Enola : Mr. Holmes? And, um, Mr. Holmes? You sent for me, you sent a telegram. Asked me to meet you here? Sherlock : Enola Mycroft : My god. Look at you, you’re in such a mess. Where’s your hat and your gloves? Enola : Well, I have a hat. It just makes my headitch. And I have no gloves. Mycroft : She has no gloves? Sherlock : Plainly not, Mycroft: The dialogue above showed a violation of politeness in the Approbation maxim, this can be seen from Mycroft and Enola's conversation when they met for the first time and the focus was on Enola's appearance which was very shabby and untidy. Mycroft insults Enola by asking about hats and gloves that girls there should have. Enola's response is to feel annoyed and disappointed, because Enola is very comfortable with the way she looks now but her brother doesn't like her and she tries to defend herself by saying that she has a hat but it makes her head hurt. Datum EH 5 Enola : I don't need friends. I have my own company Enola : And I don't need to go to your ridiculous school. (miss H slap Enola) uhh..(running). No! Please don't do this to me. Let me remain happy. I am happy here. The dialogue above showed a conflict that occurred between Enola and Mrs. Harrison who at that time were arguing about how good it was to go to boarding school, but Eola insisted on refusing and saying she didn't need friends and she didn't want to go to that silly school . Hearing Enola's remarks were very rude. Mrs. Harrison gave a very surprising response by slapping Enola's cheek because he was very angry and disappointed with Enola's words. d. The interlocutor’s reaction on the violation of modesty maxim Datum 6 Enola : Test me on anything you think I need to know. To be sufficient for this world Mycroft : If she taught you so well, you wouldn't be standing in your undergarments in front of me. You have no hope of making a husband in your current state. The dialogue above showed a violation of modesty maxim politeness. Katika an incident occurred Mrs. Harrison slapped Enola because of his heartache with his words, Enola ran away to his two siblings in the living room, Enola begged mycroft not to enter the dormitory of Mrs. Harrison's woman, but Mycroft rejects it and says that Enola does not know everything the evidence uses everything the evidence uses everything the evidence uses everything. The underwear in front of him, hearing the words of Mycroft Enola gave a response with an expression of shock and disappointment e. The interlocutor’s reaction on the violation of obligation other to speaker Datum 7 Enola : Make me yours. Guide me. Teach me. For him, I am a nuisance. For you – Sherlock : Enola, I'm sorry. It's out of my hands. Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 204 The dialogue above is a continuation with the previous dialogue that shows violations of politeness in Obligation O to S. This happens when Enola is rejected by Mycroft to enter the dormitory then Enola begged Sherlock but he also refused and could not do much because the Enola’s guardian was Mycroft, So all decisions are in MyCroft. Enola gave a response to an expression of annoyance and angry and disappointed with the two attitudes of her brother. Datum EH 8. Viscount :Who are you? Enola : Who are you? Viscount : I'm Viscount Tewkesbury, the Marquess of Basilwether. Enola : You're a nincompoop The dialogue above showed that there has been a violation of politeness committed by Enola. This incident began when Enola did not give a humble attitude to Viscount who wanted to get acquainted. Viscount gave a surprised response to Enola why he did not answer the question about his own name but instead gave insults that the viscount of a foolish person, hearing that statement viscount tried to remain friendly even though his expression looked angry. Datum EH 9. Enola : Enola Holmes. Viscount : Holmes.. Like Sherlock? Enola : And I am undercover, so forget I told you that piece of information. Viscount : Undercover working for him? Enola : Undercover from him. Viscount :Hence why you're dressed as a boy. Enola : Hence why you are to say nothing. So? Viscount : What? Enola : Thank you? You're supposed to say thank you Viscount : For what? The dialogue showed one violation of politeness that does not adjust the value of politeness. When Enola has helped viscount to run away from criminals, the supposedly Viscount would like to say thank you but did not happen. The response given by Enola was that he felt very angry and disappointed because he had struggled to help someone unknown but did not say thank you. f. The interlocutor’s reactions on the violation of sympathy maxim Datum EH 10 Sherlock : You know, last I remember, you were quite a timid little thing. You had a pine cone wrapped in wool, dragged it with you wherever you went, calling it Dash. Someone told you that Queen Victoria had a Cavalier king Charles Spaniel called dash. and you decided you wanted the same. We never could persuade you to put any trousers on. Your bottom was always bare. I think that's all the memories I have. Enola : Thank you. If you could now forget them all. A pine cone called Dash? That sounds ridiculous The dialogue above showed a violation of politeness in Sympathy Maxim. This happened when Enola and Sherlock Denag chatted under a tree where Enola was still very upset with Mycroft's decision to put it in the dormitory. They both told me about childhood to the story when Enola never liked to wear underwear and The Bottom was always bare. When he heard this sentence Enola gave a very surprised response why Sherlock still remembered and brought up the embarrassing incident, he was very ashamed and just silent, then he changed the subject about Dash. EH 11 : Viscount : He is coming. Enola : Of course. Viscount : He's checking every carriage. Enola : Wonderful. Viscount : You have to help me. He didn't see me. Enola : Of course he did. Therefore, I say good day to you Viscount Tewkesbury the marquess of Basilwether. The dialogue above showed a violation of Sympathy Maxim, where it happened when Enola first met Viscount and he asked for help. Because Enola did not want to interfere, it gave a response to ignorant and did not want to help, Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 205 besides that Enola also felt he did not know the stranger. Viscount can only be silent very panic if the criminal comes again. g. The interlocutor’s reaction on the violation of agreement maxim Datum EH 12. Mycroft : Quickly, oh, oh dear god, look at the house. Enola : Isn’t it wonderful? Mycroft : What the hell has she been playing at? The dialogue above has shown a violation of politeness in the Maxim agreement, where there should be a compatibility of information between the speaker and the interlocutors. But in the dialogue dialogue below there is no common opinion there is information. When Enola and his two siblings got home and saw the condition of the house that was very messy mycroft was surprised and surprised to see an unkempt house. The response given by Enola is to keep smiling and says that this house is very beautiful, and says it very proudly. Datum EH 13. Mycroft : If she taught you so well, you wouldn't be standing in your undergarments in front of me. You have no hope of making a husband in your current state. Enola : I don't want a husband! The dialogue above showed disapproval between Enola and Mucroft about the offer to have a husband later, but is denied and rejected by Enola because he does not need a husband. The response given by Enola was a very angry and furious expression while saying "I don't want a Husband". Datum EH 14 Mrs.Harrison : at my finishing schools, you will learn how to be a young lady, and you'll make many new friends. Enola : I don't need friends. I have my own company The dialogue above has shown violations of politeness about the agreement where Mrs. Harrison offers advantages if he wants to enter his dormitory, including having many friends, but Enola refuses. The response given by Enola was very angry and firmly said that he did not need friends. Datum EH 15. Viscount : Is this truly the best way to come? Enola : Can you think of a better way? Do you trust me? Viscount : No !! Enola : If we time it correctly, we can leave him stranded The dialogue above has shown a violation of politeness about the Maxim agreement, when Enola wants to help viscount by jumping from the train. Enola asked for viscount approval but he actually did not agree and did not believe in this method. The response from Enola is to remain insisting to do this way very confidently because he really wants to help Viscount. Datum EH 16. Enola : In the morning, we'll have to move fast. The bowler hat man will be hot on your tail Viscount : Where's your destination? I'm going to – Lestrade : London Viscount : Well, um, shall we, um, stick together? If you like. Enola : No. We'll get to London and go our separate ways. Understood? Viscount : Understood. Totally. Entirely The dialogue above has shown a violation of the Maxim Agreement politeness. When Viscount and Enola talked at night about his journey, Viscount hoped he would be with Enola, but Enola refused because he felt that they had different goals. Viscount response to hearing the rejection was just silent and smiled then answered in a trembling voice and tried to remain calm. From the data above, it can be said that there are various responses to each dialog, among others (1) Dialogue EH 1: Enola's response was to smile sarcastically as if mockingly. (2) Dialogue EH 2: Enola felt very offended, (3) Dialogue EH 3: Enola's response showed that she did not accept Mrs. Harrison doing something strange to her and tried to defend herself. (4) Dialogue EH 4: Enola's response at that time was Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 206 to smile. (5) Dialogue EH 5: she slapped Enola hard because she was offended by Enola's words that insulted Mrs. Harrison's dormitory, and Enola was shocked. (6) Dialogue EH 6: Enola feels embarrassed and disappointed. (7) Dialogue EH 7: Enola's response was to feel disappointed and didn't expect Sherlock didn't want to help her even though Enola was her biological sister. (8) Dialogue EH 8: The viscount felt unappreciated but he tried to maintain communication. (9) Dialogue EH 9: Enola's response at that time was to feel astonished and confused as to why someone would be ungrateful for being helped, Enola just sighed and left just like that leaving the Viscount. (10) Dialogue EH 10: Enola's response was immediately shocked and shocked as if her face showed that she was still doing it even now. (11) Dialogue EH 11: . The viscount's response to each of Enola's answers was that he could only sigh and keep glancing. (12) Dialogue EH 12: . He was not offended because he was very happy that his two brothers had come to visit. (13) Dialogue EH 13: Enola is dumbfounded and shocked that he feels defeated in everything and has to obey Mycroft's wishes. (14) Dialogue EH 14: Enola's statement was very shocked and shocked because she felt rejected by a small child, she felt humiliated and disrespected as the head of the boarding school. (15) Dialogue EH 15: Viscount's answer was to feel annoyed because he had tried to help the Viscount not to be caught by the criminal. (16) Dialogue EH 16: Viscount was disappointed by the refusal but he tried to stay calm as he didn't want to appear weak as a man. Communication violations often occur if there is no agreement and mutual respect between the speaker and the interlocutor because this can happen intentionally or unintentionally. Therefore, it is important for us to always maintain a communication style so that the harmony of communication is maintained. CONCLUSION Based on the results of the research above, some data has been found regarding violations of politeness maxims according to Leech 2014 as well as the functions of speech acts and reactions from the interlocutor. From the data above, it can be concluded that there were 7 types of maxims that were violated in 16 utterances, namely the Generosity Maxim where there was 1 expression that violated decency, Tact Maxim occurred 2 times to violate decency in the film, Approbation Maxim occurred 2 times to violate decency, Modesty Maxim occurs 1 expression of politeness violation, Obligation O to S Maxim occurs 3 expressions in the film, Agreement Maxim has 5 forms of politeness violation, and Sympathy Maxim has 2 expressions of politeness violation. Then there are 4 illocutionary functions contained in this politeness violation, Competitive (4 utterances), Convivial (1 utterance), Collaborative (6 utterances) and Conflictive (7 utterances). There are various responses that appear to every character who hears or sees violations such as anger, disappointment, shame, panic, worry, joy, surprise, and others. So it can be concluded that there are decency violations that occur in the Enola Holmes film which are analyzed into the illocutionary function and the responses of several characters in it when hearing an offense. I hope that the results of this research can be an additional reference in studying pragmatics with various easy-to-understand examples through this film. REFERENCES Al-Zubeiry, H. Y.(2020).Violation of Grice’s maxims and humorous implicatures in the Arabic comedy Madraset Al- Mushaghbeen. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16(2).1043-1057. Alim, J., Hanip, P., Attas, S. G.,& Leiliyanti, E. (2020). Maxims deviation and politeness scale of uang panai mahar movie by using Leech’s perspective. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute Journal (BIRCI- Journal),3,137-1391. Anjani, Z.N., Jepri & Hafsah, S. (2020). The relation of maxim flouting used to illocutionary function of politeness in 12 Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 207 Years a Slave movie. Prologue: Journal on Language and Literature, 6(1).48-58. Ayunon, C. (2018). Gricean maxims revisted in FB conversation posts: its pedagogical implications. TESOL International Journal. 13(4), 82-95. Baok, L.F.S. (2021). The analysis of Illocutionary act in Hillary Clinton’s speech. English Literature, Linguistic and Translation Studies.1(2).99-107. Brown, P.& Levinson, S.C. (1987). Politeness some universal in language usage. Cambridge University Press. Cook, G.(1989). Discourse. Oxford University Press. Eshghinejad, S,. & Moini, M.R. (2016). Politeness strategies used in text messaging: Pragmatic competence in an Asymmetrical power relation of Teacher- student. SAGE Journals 1-13. Eso, A., Martisa, E., & RAF, J. (2020). Violation of maxim in paranoid Schizophrenia Patients’ conversation. ISLLCE Press. Grant,B.K. (2007).Movie genre: From iconography to ideology. Wallflower Press. Hafizi, M. I. & Sarah, A. (2019). The analysis of politeness principles and their violation in Heidi’s cartoon movie based on Leech’s perspective. Ahmad Dahlan International Conference Series on Education & Learning, Social Science & Humanities,370. Atlantis Press. Jewad, H.G., Ghapanchi, Z., & Ghazanfari, M. (2020). Investigating Leech’s politeness principle in conversational verses in three surahs from the Holy Quran. Canadian Center of Science and Education,16(3).29-42 Khayati,I., Mujiyanto, J.,& Warsono. (2019). The realization of Grice’s maxims in English teacher’s interaction with male and female students. English Education Journal, 9 (3), 391-298. Leech, G. (1993). Principles of pragmatics. Longman, Inc. Leech, G. (2014). The Pragmatics of politeness. Oxford University Press Nisa, E.K. (2021). The violation of politeness maxim principles found in Skinnyindonesian24 Youtube Channel. Seloka:Journal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, 10(3), 227-237. Osondu, P.A., Umeh, & Juliana, I. (2020). Violation of politeness maxims as a catalyst for tragedy: A study of Akachiadimora-ezeigbo’s roses and bullets. Pan-African Journal of Humanities and Social Science,2(1),184-211 Pearson, et al. (2009). Pragmatics and pedagogy: Conversational rules and politeness strategies may inhibit effective tutoring. Cognition and Instruction Article. P. 161-188. Peccei, J. S.(1999). Pragmatics .Routledge Perrine,T.A.(1998). Movie and the nuclear age: Representing cultural anxiety. Garland Publishing, Inc. A Member of the Taylor & Francis Group. Pratama, H. (2019). Linguistic politeness in Online communication. LPPM Universitas Negeri Semarang. Rahayuningsih, D.,Saleh,M.,& Fitriati,S.W.(2020. The realization of politeness strategies EFL Teacher-students classroom interaction. English Education Journal, 10(1), 85-93. Searle, J.R. (1996). Speech act: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. London: Cambridge University Press. Sibarani, B. (2019). Maxim violation by Indonesian Government officials with different cultures in TV talk show. Journal of Language Literature and Teaching,1(2),22- 31 Simatupang, E. CM., & Ibrahim, M. F. (2021). Illocutionary Acts in Joaquin Phoenix acceptance speeches at film Awards Ceremonies in 2020. Budapest International Research and Critics in Linguistics and Education (BirLE) Journal, 4(4), 1217-1226 Siyaswati. (2017). Teaching, language and communication: A shortcut to learn English culturally from violated maxims in movie Project X. Advances in Social Science Education and Humanities Research,145. Atlantis Press. Sofyan, A., Badrudin, A., Fitriani, D.N, & Muta’alim, M,. (2022). Types and Shofi Anis Fitriana, et al./ English Education Journal 13 (2) (2023) 191-208 208 functions of Illucotionary speech acts on inter-character dialogue in Tilik short films. Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra (LINGUA), 8(2). Tsojon, I.Y,. & Jonah, P.K. (2016). An analysis of pragmatic implicatures of selected advert billboards around Jos Metropolis of Grice (1975) maxims of cooperative principle. International Journal of English Language Teaching. 3(1), 42-49. Wardhaugh,R. (1987). Introduction to sociolinguistic . Basil Blackweel. Zebua, E., Rukmini, D, & Saleh,M. (2017). The violation and flouting of Cooperative Principles in the Ellen Degeners talkshow. Journal of Language Literature,12(1), 103- 113.