THE VIOLATION OF POLITENESS MAXIM BY THE

CHARACTERS “NUSA: BELAJAR JUALAN” CARTOON

ANIMATION VIDEO ON YOUTUBE

Annisa Fitri1, Salsabila Utami2, Silvi Darlely3, Tara Pratiwi4

iichaanns@gmail.com, salsabilautamilubis@gmail.com,
silvidarlely0205@gmail.com, tarapratiwi796@gmail.com

English Education Department

Faculty of Tarbiyah Science and Teacher Training
State Islamic University of North Sumatera Utara Medan
2021

ABSTRACT

In this study, the author examines the maxim from the politeness maxim in a
dialogue between characters in the film "Nusa: Belajar Jualan." The purpose of
this research is to identify the component of the maxim politeness maxim and
explain why it is aberrant. The author collects data from the characters' utterances
in the film "Nusa: Belajar Jualan," then categorizes the maximum deviation into
each politeness maxim provided by Leech (1983) and the theory of effect of the
usage of politeness maxim proposed by Holmes (2008). Based on this study, the
author discovers six sorts of politeness maxims that differ from each of the
characters' utterances. "Tact Maxim," "Generosity Maxim," "Approbation
Maxim," "Modesty Maxim," "Agreement Maxim," and "Sympathy Maxim" are
examples of politeness maxims. After categorizing the many sorts of deviant
politeness maxims, the characters' deviations are explained. The impact that often
arises is status inequality.

Keywords: Maxims of Politeness, Violation, Characters, Pragmatics

INTRODUCTION

1
 Language etiquette teaches people to respect the second person or listener
based on their age or social status. Politeness refers to how individuals establish
peace in their lives and express gratitude to the second person or listener. It occurs
because humans have social roles in which they rely on one another to survive.
Indonesians are aware of this element of language usage as well. Language is
utilized not just for communication but also to boost self-esteem. In this example,
politeness in language represents a sophisticated communication of Indonesians
that is norm-based and utilized to express respect for one another.

Animation includes not just visual but also audio. Music, background
noises such as automobiles and animals, and sound created by movements such as
walking, kicking, and so on can all be included in the audio. Aside from those,
there are voices of animated characters provided by dubbers.

Animated language is a communicative language. Language has numerous

essential purposes, including conveying a message, explaining civility, respecting
listeners, indicating self-esteem, dialect, and unity, acting as an autonomous
symbol, bringing serenity to the soul, and reflecting culture (Poedjosoedarmo,
2001).

When it comes to politeness, Leech (1983:132) argues that the politeness

principle must focus on the six maxims of politeness, which are Tact maxim,
Generosity maxim, Approbation maxim, Modesty maxim, Agreement maxim, and
Sympathy maxim. People frequently break the principles of violating politeness
maxims, resulting in hurting others' sentiments in everyday life when
communicating. People breach civility not only in everyday life, but also in the
movie “Nusa: Belajar Jualan,” which was filmed as a reflection of life itself.

Problems of the Study

There are two issues that need to be addressed. These are the ones:

1. What kind of politeness rules do the characters in the YouTube cartoon

animation video "Nusa: Belajar Jualan" follow, and which ones are broken?

2
2. What are the major reasons for the characters in the cartoon animation video
"Nusa: Belajar Jualan on YouTube" using application maxims?

Aims of the Study

The following are the objectives of this study:

1. To define the different sorts of politeness maxims employed by the characters

in the YouTube cartoon animation film “Nusa: Belajar Jualan” and to
identify which of the politeness maxims are broken by the characters.
2. To explain why the characters in the YouTube cartoon animation video
"Nusa: Belajar Jualan" follow the politeness maxims.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Pragmatics

Pragmatics is the study of the link between language forms and their users;
only pragmatics allows humans into the analysis in this three-part distinction
(Yule, 1996: 4). Pragmatics is the study of meaning in connection to speech
situations, according to Leech (1999: 6). It means pragmatics is concerned with
the meaning of utterances, the meaning of which is determined by the context in
which the utterance happens.

Pragmatics is the study of utterance meaning, sentences that are employed

in communication, and also the study of meaning in linguistic interaction between
speakers and hearers, according to (Yule, 1996: 3) as stated by Risdianto (2016: 1-
2). There are four areas that pragmatics are concerned with in pragmatics:

1. Pragmatics is the study of how people communicate. The study of meaning as

communicated by a speaker (or written) and perceived by a listener is referred
to as pragmatics (or reader). This research is more concerned with
determining what individuals intend by their words and phrases than with
determining what the words or phrases in those utterances signify on their
own.

3
2. Pragmatics is the study of meaning in context. This research looks at how
people understand what they mean in different situations and how the context
effects what they say. It means that the speaker must be aware of who they
are speaking to, where they are speaking, when they are speaking, and under
what conditions they are speaking.
3. Pragmatics is the study of how more information is conveyed than is stated.
This type of research looks at how a lot of what isn't spoken is acknowledged
as part of what is said. It's possible to characterize it as an exploration of
intangible meaning.
4. Pragmatics is the study of relative distance expression. There is a viewpoint
on the decision between the spoken and unspoken meanings. The
fundamental response is based on the national distance. The degree of
proximity, whether physical, social, or whether the listener is the speaker,
determines how much needs to be spoken.

As a result of the previous description, pragmatics can be defined as the

study of relation or meaning of utterance in linguistic interaction between speaker
and hearer.

Politeness

Politeness is a social contact that demonstrates awareness of a social

distance or proximity. In general, people speak properly with one another in order
to respect one another and avoid social strife. According to Holmes (2013: 285),
"generally speaking, politeness entails contributing to social concord while
avoiding social conflict." When people converse with one another, they can avoid
social conflict by being polite. People respect and appreciate each other more
when they speak respectfully to one another.

Politeness is the speaker's aim to lessen face dangers posed by a specific

face threatening behaviour directed at another person (Mills, 2003: 6). As a result,
being nice entails attempting to conserve something for someone else. According
to the Politeness Theory, some speaking acts endanger the needs of others. There

4
are various approaches to obtaining what we desire in ordinary discourse. We can
tell our friends to "shut up" while we're in a group. When we are surrounded by a
group of grownups at a formal gathering when our parents are present, we must
apologize and say, "I'm sorry, I'm not able to hear the speaker outside the room."
It is necessary to alter our use of language to match the occasion in various social
situations. If the phrases above were used, it would appear to be socially
inappropriate. If the phrases above were reversed, they would appear to be
socially unacceptable.

Politeness methods are established to safeguard the hearers‟ “face”,

according to Brown and Levinson (1987:157). Face refers to an individual's
regard for himself or herself, as well as retaining that “self-esteem” in public and
private contexts. Normally, you attempt to avoid embarrassing or making the
other person uncomfortable. FTAs (Face Threatening Behaviors) are acts that
violate the hearer's need to retain his or her own respect and admiration.

Politeness methods are being created specifically for dealing with these
FTAs. Interaction, and thus collaboration, is predicated on mutual facial
weakness. Everyone in the interaction will try to keep each other's faces clean,
because everyone's face depends on everyone else's being clean. Instead, the
aspect of face can be described as basic criteria, which each participant is aware of
in order to partially satisfy the demands of each other member (Siburian, 2016: 4).

Maxim

Cutting (2002: 34-36) writes on the four maxims that have been listed
above.

1. The quantity maxim states that speakers should be as informative as is

required, giving neither too little nor too much information. Some speakers
like to emphasize that they understand how much information the listener
needs or can handle by saying things like, “Well, to make a long tale short,
she didn't get home „till two”. People who provide insufficient information

5
 risk their listeners not being able to understand what they are saying because
they are not specific enough, whereas those who provide more information
than the listener requires risk boring them.
2. Speakers are supposed to be truthful, to say something that they believe
matches to reality, according to the quality maxim. They are expected to
refrain from saying anything they consider to be false or for which they lack
evidence. Some speakers want to emphasize to their listeners that they are
merely speaking what they feel to be true and that they do not have sufficient
evidence.
3. The relational maxim states that speakers are assumed to be speaking
something related to what has been said previously. As a result, if we hear,
"The infant wailed." We thought that the mommy was the mother of the
crying baby and that she had picked up the crying baby because it was crying.
4. The maxim of manners states that an utterance should be succinct and
ordered, with no ambiguity or obscurity. The speaker in this committee
exchange emphasizes that he is following the maxim: „Thank you Chairman,
just one point to clarify. There will be a meeting of the police committee on
the provision of their camera, which is an item on their budget.' Hearers
presume that speakers follow the cooperative principle, according to Grice
(1975), and it is the knowledge of the four maxims that allows hearers to infer
the speakers' aim and inferred meaning. Conversational implicature is the
meaning conveyed by speakers and recovered as a result of the hearer's
inferences.

Those four conversational maxims, according to Grice's view, are derived

from natural language pragmatics. Those maxims are better understood as
descriptions of listeners' preconceptions about how speakers would communicate,
rather than prescriptions for how one should speak. Grice, on the other hand, does
not presume that everyone should adhere to these rules all of the time. Instead, he
was intrigued when these were "flouted" or "violated" by the speaker (either
intentionally or unwittingly breaching the maxim), implying some other, and
hidden meaning. What was significant was what was not expressed. For example,
the phrase "it's pouring" is a poor example of spoken language quality; The

6
meaning for this 'fragment' language becomes evident in context (for example,
when someone suggests a game of tennis). Unfortunately, Leech maintains that
there are certain flaws in Grice's maxims, citing the following:

1. Because the majority of declarative statements do not have an information

carrying role, conversional constraints like the CP do not work.
2. Because there are linguistic communities to which not all of the CP maxims
apply, they are not universal to language.

As a result, it demonstrates that the CP is in a vulnerable position; in fact,

the Politeness Principle (PP) might be considered as a required complement to the
CP, rescuing it from significant difficulties. The Cooperative Principle and its
accompanying maxims are designed to collaborate with, and even rescue, Leech's
Politeness Principle. Grice not only introduces this theory, but also the principle
of courtesy. He goes on to say that we need it in our conversations as well.

According to Leech (1983: 81), the politeness principle indicates that one
should "maximize the statement of courteous beliefs, limit the exhibition of rude
beliefs." He divides them into six categories: tact maxim, generosity maxim,
approbation maxim, modesty maxim, agreement maxim, and sympathy maxim.
Six politeness maxims are proposed by Leech (1983: 132). He claims that
politeness in conversation is concerned not only with the interaction between two
participants, self and other, and turn-taking, but also with the presence of third
people who may or may not be present in the conversation. The six politeness
maxims are presented in pairs as follows:

1. Tact Maxim

“Minimize the expression of opinions that imply a cost to others; and

maximize the presentation of beliefs that benefit others,” according to the tact
maxim (Leech, 1983: 109). In both directive and commissive illocutions, this tact
maxim is utilized (Leech, 1983: 107).

2. Generosity Maxim

7
 This maxim is employed to reduce the expression of self-benefit while
increasing the expression of self-cost. It's utilized in illocutionary acts that are
both directive and commissive. If the tact maxim emphasizes other-centeredness,
the generosity maxim emphasizes self-centeredness (Leech, 1983: 133).

3. Approbation Maxim

The speaker should minimize the expression of beliefs that express

disapproval of others and increase the expression of opinions that express
approval of others, according to the approbation maxim (Leech, 1983: 135). This
maxim is employed in representational speech in an utterance that represents the
speaker's feelings, such as statements of like, dislike, joy, grief, or pleasure. For
example, saying whether or not the speaker is.

4. Modesty Maxim

This maxim advises, "Minimize self-praise while minimizing self-

criticism." In expressive and representative discourse, this maxim is also utilized
(Leech, 1983: 136).

5. Agreement Maxim

According to the agreement maxim, “minimize the display of

disagreement between self and other.” In representative speech, it is employed
(Leech, 1983: 138).

6. Sympathy Maxim

In sympathy maxim, the participant is intended to exhibit the greatest

amount of sympathy to their listener while expressing the least amount of
hostility. This maxim is frequently employed in representative statements (Leech,
1983: 138).

Violation

8
 People frequently violate the maxims, which are referred to as violation.
Violation is the act of disobeying one or more of a maxim's conditions. Violating
politeness maxims is an interesting topic to research since civility is an important
aspect of communicating with others, and defying politeness maxims occurs
frequently throughout communication. It can happen with or without your
knowledge. It could be because the participants communicate in a less formal
manner, or because the participants have a really close relationship.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The data for this study came from the dialogue between the characters in
the movie “Nussa Rara”. This is a 2018 Indonesian film directed by Bony
Wirasmono and written by Mario Irwinsyah. However, not all of the statements
were examined. The utterances utilized as data sources were convensational
utterances that applied politeness expressions that were violated in their
utterances.

The processes for data collecting for a movie used as a data source are as
follows: To begin, carefully observe and listen to the dialogue in order to
comperehend the storyline of the story as well as their statements. Second,
utterances including violations of politeness maxims were noted down in order to
narrow down which data were analyzed and chosen as main data. The final step
was to find the data that contained violated utterances. The data in this essay was
gathered using the note technique.

The data was descriptively analyzed by characterizing the different types

of politeness maxims and which statements the characters break. Leech (1983)
proposed the first theory, which was used to address the first problem, while
Holmes (2008) proposed the second theory to answer the second difficulty. The
data was provided in the form of sentences in the last phase.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

9
Tact Maxim

The tact maxim asserts that beliefs that indicate a cost to others should be
expressed as little as possible, while beliefs that imply a benefit to others should
be expressed as much as possible. The politeness paradox serves as an antidote to
a more harmful type of dilemma. This more severe paradox is a breach of goal-
oriented action logic, i.e., a situation in which two people, „a‟ and „b‟ have
irreconcilable goals.

00:49 Rarra : Bu ini uangnya belum ada kembaliannya..

00:52 Nussa : Hhmmm, kalau ada uang pas 20 ribu aja bu.. Rarra: Iya
bu..

00:56 The buyer : Ooohh.. Hhmmm, buat kalian aja deh kembaliannya..
Nussa & Rarra : Hah! Loh..

When talking with Nussa & Rarra, the buyer made a violation of tact
maxim. This was demonstrated when Nussa requested cash, but the buyer
declined since she was in a rush. It is supposed to convey advantage to others, and
Nussa & Rarra were effective in doing so while asking for cash, but the customer
did not respond well. Because of the social distance, Nussa & Rarra used the tact
maxim when conversing with the buyer. The buyer in this case was older than
Nussa and Rarra.

Generosity Maxim

The Generosity Maxim states that the display of self-benefit should be

minimized while the expression of self-cost should be maximized. The generosity
maxim, in contrast to the tact maxim, focuses on the speaker and states that others
should come first rather than the self. People breach the Generosity Maxim
principles, resulting in the hurting of other people's sentiments, as seen in the
“Nussa: Belajar Jualan” Cartoon Animation Video on Youtube.

00:59 The buyer : Saya lagi buru-buru nih.. Nussa: Hah! Tapi bu..

01:00 Rarra : Ini beneran bu? Pembeli: Makasih ya de..

01:01 Nussa : Ini gimana?

10
01:02 Nussa&Rarra : Aduuh..

01:04 Rarra : Waaah.. Kalau semua pembelinya kaya ibu tadi Rarra
bisa untung banyak..

Rarra accompanied her brother, Nussa, to trade. That means they would
share the profits for the merchandise they got. Nussa was confused and tried to
give the buyer change, while Rarra was happy because if every buyer who bought
the kue cubit they always gave big money and they did not have the change, then
every buyer could give it for free to Nussa & Rarra and got a profit the big one.
Rarra perfectly violated the generosity maxim by maximizing self-benefit and
minimizing self-cost. The context situation influenced the use of the generosity
maxim in this discourse (the relation between participants).

Approbation Maxim

The approbation maxim states that the expression of beliefs that express
disapproval of others should be minimized, while the expression of beliefs that
express approval of others should be maximized. This maxim appears in a
statement that communicates the speaker's emotions. The first part of the maxim
aims to avoid conflict; the second portion aims to make others happy by
demonstrating solidarity.

01:21 Rarra : Emang kak abdul sama kak syifa jualan apa?

01:26 Nussa : Wuuiiiihh ager-ager jelly..

01:28 Rarra : Ooohh ager-ager jelly.. Hmmmphh!

01:31 Abdul : Dan satu lagiii, taddaaaaa kue cubit coklat meleerrr..

01:37 Rarra : Hah? Kue cubit juga. Masa jualannya sama sih..

The conversation took place in Bazar Anak Ceria. Rarra was feeling
surprised about what Abdul & Syifa sold. They both sold Kue cubit. Because
Rarra was dissatisfied with Abdul & Syifa for selling the same type of food, this
speech fully broke the approval maxim. Rather than insinuating them, Rarra
should encourage them so that their things sell successfully. Friendship is the

11
reason why the approbation maxim was used in this dialogue. Friendship is a
phrase that refers to allied nations' mutual trust and solidarity.

Modesty Maxim

The humility maxim suggests that self-praise should be minimized and

self-criticism should be maximized. When the modesty maxim conflicts with
another maxim or when there is asymmetry, we must allow one maxim to take
precedence over the other.

01:43 Nussa : Ra jangan gitu, kue boleh sama..

01:46 Nussa : Tapi rasanya kan beda, ya kan..

01:49 Rarra : Enakan juga kue cubitnya Umma..

Nussa tried to make Rarra understood that it is fine if the food they sell
was the same, but tasted different. In this case, “Enakan juga kue cubitnya
Umma,” Rarra said, breaking the modesty rule. She maximized self-praise while
minimizing self-criticism. It might be true that her mother's kue cubit tasted better,
but she should not be that proud of it. Because of the deliciousness of the food,
politeness modesty was used in this conversation.

Agreement Maxim

The agreement maxim states that the expressing of disagreement between

self and others should be minimized while the statement of agreement between
self and others should be maximized. It's just that they're considerably more
forthright in expressing agreement than in expressing disagreement. This
principle, however, was broken not only in everyday life, but also in this video.

04:28 Syifa : Makasih banyak Pak Ucok.. Laris Dul..

Abdul : Makasih banyak Pak Ucok..

04:30 Mr. Ucok : Sama-sama Abdul Syifa.. Nussa

Abdul & Syifa : Alhamdulillah..

04:34 Rarra : Kak Nussa sini deh..

Nussa : Hah.

04:36 Nussa : Kenapa si Ra?

12
04:37 Rarra : Kok malah nawarin kue cubitnya kak Abdul sih.

Rarra wanted to know why Nussa had to offer Abdul's kue cubit to Mr.
Ucok. Nussa explained that if Mr. Ucok was given to Nussa & Rarra, they could
earn a lot and Nussa didn't want that. Meanwhile, Rarra really wanted to get more
money from Mr. Ucok. Rara asks, "kok malah nawarin kue cubitnya kak Abdul
sih," was an outright violation of the agreement maxim since she maximized self-
and-other disagreement. Because of kinship, which is a phrase for blood link, the
agreement maxim was used in this conversation.

Sympathy Maxim

The Compassion Minimize antagonism between self and others and

promote compassion between self and others, according to maxim. This maxim is
commonly applied to representative utterances and encompasses a small number
of speech acts such as condolences, commiserations, and congratulations.

02:35 Nussa : Mereka kenapa si?

Syifa : Ga tau tuh..

02:38 Rarra : Ayo ibu bapak silahkan silahkan silahkan..

02:43 Rarra : Ssstt.. Sini deh dagangan kak Abdul sama kak Syifa
masih banyak..
Nussa : Hmm..

02:50 Abdul : Wah saingannya berat nih..

Rarra called Nussa and said that Abdul & Syifa's kue cubit was still
plentiful and she was happy that there was less competition. Because she
maximized animosity between herself and Abdul, she clearly violated the
sympathy maxim in this conversation. Because of the circumstances of the issue,
sympathy was employed in this discourse (setting). The circumstance was not
ideal, and it was a difficult situation.

CONCLUSION

13
 The following six maxims were discovered to be broken in the cartoon
animation film “Nusa: Belajar Jualan” on YouTube, based on the findings and
discussion: tact, generosity, approbation, modesty, agreement, and sympathy
maxim. When compared to the other maxims, the generosity maxim was the most
commonly utilized in this cartoon animation video, and it was violated. The
employment of the politeness maxim is mostly motivated by friendship, as this
cartoon animation film features four children with tight relationships.

REFERENCES

Brown, P. L. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Cutting, J. (2002). Pragmatics and Discourse. Florences, KY, New York:

Routledge.

Handayani, T. (2013). Violating Politeness Principles In Cellular Phone Provider.

LANTERN (Journal on English Language, Culture and Literature). 2 (3),
(293-303).

Holmes, J. (2008). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics – 3rd Ed. Longman:

Lancastar University.

Holmes, J. (2013). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics – 4th Ed. Harlow: Pearson

Education.

Kareem, M. I. (2018). Politeness: Linguistic Study. International Journal of

Research in Social Sciences and Humanities (IJRSSH). 8 (4), (167-179).

Mills, S. (2003). Gender and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.

Poedjosoedarmo, S. (2001). Filsafat Bahasa. Surakarta: Muhammadiyah

University Press.

14
Risdianto, F. (2016). Introduction to Pragmatics. Salatiga: IAIN Salatiga Press.

Siburian, A. (2016). An Analysis Of Politeness Strategy In Soimah Talkshow In

TRANS TV. Episteme Journal of linguistics and Literature. 2 (3), (1-13).

Wikipedia. (2019). Nussa (animasi). (Cited on July, 27th 2019). Available from:
https://id.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nussa.

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press.

15