THE IMPLICATURE AND VIOLATION OF MAXIMS IN INDONESIAN ADVERTISEMENTS

Abstract

We all know that advertising is a business in which language is used to persuade people to do things (e.g., buy some product) and / or believe things (believing that the value of the product is trustworthy or a good one). The phenomenon, however, is that we tend to doubtthe truth conditions of the advertisements. In other words, we do not take those ads seriously. We are not very affected emotionally yet we are just amused and regard them as entertaining fallacies (e.g. the “AXE” male perfume). Some reasons might verify this fact. However, this paper is just concerned with the language phenomenon existing in theadvertisement world. A common shared perspective on the advertisement language within Indonesian ads is, among others, bombastic, hyperbolic, and many times, irrational. Not the least, most of the ads have a similar tendency to “violate” the language as long as theproduct sells. Apparently, Indonesian ads are apt to employ indirect language(‘implicature’) in their emulating their own product and devaluing their competitor’s product (e.g. the then Yahama’s “Yang Lain Makin Ketinggalan”). Upon these intriguing facts, this paper attempts to highlight general features of Indonesian advertisements in termsof (1) the violation of Grice’s conversational maxims (rules and norms) and (2) implicature(extended meaning). Alternating a more ‘acceptable’ model of ads could be a by-product ofthis paper.