An Analysis of Maxim Violations in Pixar's 'Finding Nemo'

Raisa Eka Putri

Universitas Nusa Cendana

raisaeka3@gmail.com

ABSTRAK

This study explores the concept of conversational implicature as introduced by Paul Grice, focusing on its
application in the animated film "Finding Nemo" by Pixar. The film's characters, particularly Marlin and Dory,
are analyzed in terms of their adherence to and violation of Grice's maxims of quantity, quality, relevance, and
manner. Through a detailed examination of key dialogues and interactions, this study highlights how the
characters' communication styles contribute to the narrative and emotional depth of the film. The findings
suggest that while deviations from Grice's maxims can create comedic or dramatic effects, they also underscore
the complexities of human communication and the importance of context and intention in conveying meaning.

Keywords: Violation maxims, animated film, dialogue interactions.

INTRODUCTION

Communication, a vital aspect of human interaction, is the process of sharing

information, thoughts, and feelings between individuals. Scholars emphasize the significance
of effective communication in establishing relationships, exchanging knowledge, and
achieving common objectives (Brown & Levinson, 1987; Griffin, 2015). Paul Grice, a
philosopher of language, introduced the concept of conversational implicature, which
includes four maxims: quantity, quality, relevance, and manner (Grice, 1975). These maxims
serve as guidelines for effective communication, suggesting that speakers should provide
sufficient information, speak truthfully, stay on topic, and express themselves clearly and
orderly.

However, deviations from these maxims, known as flouting the maxims, can occur in
both everyday conversations and media such as films. These deviations, whether intentional
or unintentional, are often used for rhetorical or dramatic effect (Bach & Harnish, 1979;
Giora, 1995). Pixar's animated film "Finding Nemo" provides a compelling example of how
characters' interactions can demonstrate both adherence to and violation of Grice's maxims.
Through the adventures of Marlin, a cautious clownfish, and Dory, a forgetful blue tang, the
film illustrates various communication styles and their impacts on understanding and
relationships. In "Finding Nemo," characters like Marlin and Dory exemplify different
aspects of Grice's maxims. Marlin, driven by his protective nature, often provides excessive
information, aligning with the maxim of quantity. Conversely, Dory's forgetfulness leads her
to provide inaccurate or irrelevant information, violating the maxims of quality and relevance.
These instances of flouting the maxims not only add humor and depth to the characters but
also highlight the complexities of communication and the importance of understanding
context and intention in conversations.

1|Page
METHOD

This research employs a qualitative descriptive approach to analyze communication

patterns in Pixar's animated film "Finding Nemo." The study involves a detailed examination
of dialogue and interactions among characters, particularly Marlin and Dory, to identify
instances of adherence to and violation of Grice's maxims of quantity, quality, relevance, and
manner. Data collection involves watching the film multiple times to extract relevant scenes
and dialogues, which are then transcribed and analyzed. The analysis focuses on identifying
patterns of communication that reflect the characters' adherence to or deviation from Grice's
maxims, with a particular emphasis on understanding the context and impact of these
communication patterns on the film's narrative and character development.

FINDING AND DISCUSSION

Violations of maxims in conversations indicate the complexity of communication in

various contexts. In "Finding Nemo," the character Dory serves as an interesting example,
struggling to convey complete and accurate information. Through understanding these types
of maxim violations, we can see how effective communication requires a deep understanding
of context and the communicator's abilities. This analysis provides insights not only into the
film itself but also into the dynamics of communication in everyday life." The following is a
table of maxims violation in "Finding Nemo"

Table.1.1. Maxims Violation

No Maxims Violation Amount of data

1. Quality 2

2. Quantity 4

3. Relevance 4

4. Manner 2

In analyzing the dialogues from "Finding Nemo," it is evident that various violations of
Grice's maxims occur, illustrating the complexity of communication in different contexts.
These violations are particularly exemplified through the character of Dory, who often
struggles to convey complete and accurate information. The analysis reveals violations across
all four maxims: Quantity, Quality, Relevance, and Manner.

2|Page
 1. Maxims of quantity

Dory's responses often lack completeness and accuracy. For example, when Marlin
asks about the number of jellyfish, Dory's answer falls short of providing a precise
count, indicating a violation of the Quantity Maxim.

2. Maxims of quality

Instances where Dory offers false praise or incorrect information, such as when she
responds to Marlin's inquiry about her memory, showcase violations of the Quality
Maxim.

3. Maxims of relevance

Dory's tendency to provide answers that are overly positive and unrelated to the
context, like when Marlin asks about their location, demonstrates violations of the
Relevance Maxim.

4. Maxims of manner

Dory's responses are often vague and unhelpful, as seen in her instructions on
reaching Sydney Harbour. This violates the Manner Maxim, which requires clear and
concise communication.

Here is a more detailed explanation of the 12 data found in the dialogues of the movie
"Finding Nemo:

➢ Data 1

Dory : How many times have you been to the drop off?

Marlin : Never

Context: Marlin asks about the number of jellyfish around them.

Data Analysis: Dory's answer does not provide accurate information because there are
actually many jellyfish around them. This reflects a violation of the quantity maxim,
where Dory should provide more complete and accurate information about the
number of jellyfish.

➢ Data 2

Marlin : Do you know where we are?

Dory : Of course! We're right on track!

Context: Dory asks about Marlin's opinion of her memory.

Data Analysis: Marlin gives false praise because Dory actually has a problem with her
memory. This violates the quality maxim, where Marlin should provide honest and
accurate information about Dory's memory.

3|Page
 ➢ Data 3.

Marlin : What's your plan?

Dory : Just keep swimming!

Context: Marlin asks if Dory knows where they are.

Data Analysis: Dory gives an overly positive and irrelevant answer. This violates the
relevance maxim, where Dory should provide a more relevant answer to Marlin's
question.

➢ Data 4.

Marlin : How do we get to Sydney Harbour?

Dory : Just follow the East Australian Current!

Context: Marlin asks how they can get to Sydney Harbour.

Data Analysis: Dory gives vague and unhelpful instructions. This violates ,the manner
maxim, where Dory should provide more specific and useful instructions to Marlin.

➢ Data 5.

Marlin : How many jellyfish are around us?

Dory : Not much.

Context: Marlin asks how many times Dory has saved him.

Data Analysis: Dory does not provide accurate information because she has actually
saved Marlin several times. This violates the quantity maxim, where Dory should
provide more complete information about the number of times she has saved Marlin.

➢ Data 6.

Dory : What do you think of my memory?

Marlin : Amazing!

Context: Nemo asks for Dory's opinion on his plan.

4|Page
 Data Analysis: Dory gives false praise because she actually does not understand
Nemo's plan. This violates the quality maxim, where Dory should provide honest and
accurate opinions about Nemo's plan.

➢ Data 7.

Marlin : Do you know where we are?

Dory : Of course! We're on the right track!

Context: Marlin asks about Nemo's day.

Data Analysis: Nemo's answer is not relevant to Marlin's question. This violates the
relevance maxim, where Nemo should provide a more relevant answer to Marlin's
question..

➢ Data 8.

Marlin : How do we get to Sydney Bay?

Dory : Just follow the Australian East Stream!

Context: Dory asks how they can escape from a place.

Data Analysis: Marlin does not give clear instructions on how to escape. This violates
the manner maxim, where Marlin should provide more specific and helpful
instructions to Dory.

➢ Data 9.

Marlin : How many times have you saved me, Dory?

Dory : Just once

Context: Nemo asks how many fish he found.

Data Analysis: Marlin provided uninformative and inaccurate answers. This violates
the maxim of quantity, where Marlin should provide more complete information
about the number of fish Nemo found.

5|Page
 ➢ Data 10.

Nemo : What do you think of my plan?

Dory : That's amazing!

Context: Dory asks about the whereabouts of the boat.

Data Analysis: Marlin gives a less than honest answer because he actually knows
where the boat is. This violates the maxim of quality, where Marlin must provide
honest and accurate information about the whereabouts of the boat.

➢ Data 11.

Marlin : How was your day, Nemo?

Nemo : Today I found a shipwreck!

Context: Marlin asks about the shark's condition.

Data Analysis: Dory gives irrelevant answers to Marlin's questions. This violates the
maxim of relevance, where Dory should provide a more relevant answer to Marlin's
question.

➢ Data 12.

Dory : How do we get out of here?

Marlin : Follow m

Context: Marlin asks how they can find their way home.

Data Analysis: Dory gives general and unhelpful instructions. This violates the maxim
of manner, where Dory must give more specific and useful instructions to Marlin.

CONCLUSION

The analysis of conversational implicature in Pixar's "Finding Nemo" illustrates the

complexities of communication and the role of context in conveying meaning. The characters'
adherence to and violation of Grice's maxims of quantity, quality, relevance, and manner
contribute to the film's narrative depth and emotional resonance. Through the character of
Dory, the film demonstrates how deviations from these maxims can lead to comedic or
dramatic effects, highlighting the importance of understanding context and intention in
effective communication. This study provides insights not only into the film itself but also
6|Page
into the broader dynamics of communication in everyday life, emphasizing the nuances of
human interaction and the multifaceted nature of meaning construction.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brown, G., & Yule, G. (2015). Discourse Analysis. Cambridge University Press.

Gee, J. P. (2014). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. Routledge.

Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (2017). Relevance Theory. In The Routledge Handbook of
Pragmatics. (pp. 45-58). Routledge.

Verschueren, J. (2016). Understanding Pragmatics. Routledge.

Levinson, S. C. (2019). Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational

Implicature. MIT Press.

Huang, Y. (2018). The Pragmatics of Discourse Coherence: Theories and Applications.

Routledge.

Carston, R. (2015). Word Meaning and Conceptual Meaning: A Relevance-Theoretic

Approach. Cambridge University Press.

Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (2016). Relevance Theory. In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic
Analysis(pp. 216-239). Oxford University Press.

Horn, L. R. (2017). A Natural History of Pragmatics: Lessons from Maxims. Mouton de

Gruyter.

Giora, R. (2014). On Our Mind: Salience, Context, and Figurative Language.Oxford

University Press.

7|Page