www.rsisinternational.org
Page 68
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025
A Comparative Study of Cooperative Principal Violation in How I Met
Your Mother and Phua Chu Kang
Muhammad Raziq Othman Ghani
1
, Muhammad Hanafi Md Zaini
2
, Muhammad Akram Sallahuddin
3
,
Mohd. Syamim Safian
4
, Nur Aqila Kamila Mohd Lani
5
1
,
2,3
Academy Pengajian Bahasa, Universiti Teknologi MARA Shah Alam, Malaysia
4
Faculty of Education, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Malaysia
5
General Studies Unit, Universiti Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
*Corresponding Author
DOI: https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.924ILEIID008
Received: 23 September 2025; Accepted: 30 September 2025; Published: 29 October 2025
ABSTRACT
This comparative study examines how non-observance of Grice’s Cooperative Principle generates humour in
How I Met Your Mother and Phua Chu Kang, aiming to map breach types to strategies. The framework
integrates Grice’s maxims (Quality, Quantity, Relation, Manner) with incongruity, superiority, and relief
theories to explain how pragmatic choices cue audience inferences. The problem addressed is the lack of
cross-show, cross-cultural evidence about which maxims are breached, why they are not observed, and how
such breaches translate into coherent humour mechanisms. Using comparative content analysis, the sample
comprised the three highest-rated season-one episodes from each sitcom, restricted to main-cast utterances that
show non-observance. Data were collected through close reading and human coding, then analyzed via
frequency profiling of breach types and discourse analysis of implicatures and joke functions. Findings show
distinct breach profiles: one series favors information play and misdirection, the other strategic ambiguity and
politeness-tinged vagueness. Across both shows, incongruity leads most laughs, while superiority and relief
vary with character dynamics and situational tension. Overall, pragmatic design—not merely topics or
punchlines—shapes laugh timing and social meaning audiences quickly recognize. Implications include writer,
translator, and educator guidance; future work should use multi-season corpora, test audiences, and model
multimodal cues robustly...
Keywords: maxims, humor, discourse analysis
INTRODUCTION
The Background of The Study
Communication is the exchange of meaning between interlocutors, enabling shared understanding across
contexts. In everyday communication, speakers typically conform to Grice’s Cooperative Principle, which
organizes conversation through four maxims: Quality, Quantity, Relation, and Manner. These maxims guide
speakers to be truthful, informative, relevant, and clear to ensure an effective and successful communication.
While simple in formulation, the principle encapsulates how participants manage expectations about meaning
and implicature in interaction (Hu, 2024). Ultimately, this highlights that misaligned contributions are not
merely errors, but often indicate deeper issues, as intent plays a crucial role in how actions are interpreted.
Non-observance of these maxims happens when speakers do not adhere to the four maxims of Cooperative
Principle whether intentionally or accidentally. Recent research identifies categories of maxims breach such as
flouting, violating, opting out, suspending, and infringing, each linked to intentions and contexts (Rachmah,
Widya, & Putri, 2022). This study focuses on violating and flouting as flouting differs from violating in the
sense of it is an obvious breach where speaker has no intention to mislead but give cue implicature to hearer,
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 69
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025
whereas violating is a breach that intentionally misleads the hearer (Essentials of Linguistics, 2022).
Consequently, there are several motives and intentions including sarcasm, secrecy, or playfulness underlying
these breaches performed by a speaker.
Taken together, the Cooperative Principle explains how communication is supposed to work, while
non-observance explains how deeper meaning are conveyed when a speaker flouts or violates the maxims. In
this study, both lenses help compare comedic dialogue across distinct cultures, so we can trace how different
maxim breaches shape humour, characterisation, and audience inference and timing effects.
Problem Statement
According to Ghani (2018), despite the growing interest in humour studies, there is a lack of comparative
research on how humour is created through the non-observance of conversational maxims in Western and
Eastern sitcoms. Most studies have focused on single cultural contexts only, such as American sitcoms like
Friends, without exploring cross-cultural differences in humor strategies. This gap limits our understanding of
how cultural norms influence the pragmatic choices that generate laughter. Therefore, examining both Western
and Eastern sitcoms is essential to reveal how cultural variation shapes humor through maxim breaches.
Another challenge lies in identifying which maxims are most frequently breached and the reasons behind these
non-observances. Previous research shows that violating and floutings often occur for purposes such as
sarcasm, face-saving, or avoiding sensitive topics (Arbain et al., 2023). However, these studies rarely provide
systematic comparisons across genres or cultures. Without such analysis, it is difficult to determine whether
certain frequently breached maxims, like Quality or Quantity, are universally exploited for humor or if their
use reflects cultural communication styles. This lack of clarity indicates the need for a more focused
investigation.
Finally, while humor theories such as Incongruity, Superiority, and Relief have been widely discussed, few
studies have examined how these theories interact with maxim breaches in sitcom discourse. Humor often
arises from unexpected contrasts, feelings of superiority, or emotional release (Wieczorek, 2022). Yet, the
extent to which these mechanisms operate differently in Western and Eastern sitcoms remains questionable in a
gray area. Understanding this relationship is crucial for explaining why certain jokes work differently across
audiences and how pragmatic strategies align with cultural humor norms.
In summary, the absence of cross-cultural humor analysis, the limited exploration of reasons for non-
observance, and the insufficient integration of humor theories with maxim breaches create a significant
research gap. Addressing these issues will provide deeper insights into the pragmatic and cultural dimensions
of humor studies in academia of English Language.
LITERATURE REVIEW
A. Cooperative Principle by Herbert Paul Grice (1975)
The Cooperative Principle, coined by Herbert Paul Grice in 1975, is an effective conversation framework
between interlocutors that generate implicature through four maxims: Quality (be truthful), Quantity (be
appropriately informative), Relation (be relevant), and Manner (be clear) (Grice, 1975). Later applications
emphasize that non-observance—whether flouting or violation—conveys inferable meanings that audiences
usually perform, and that these choices carry social consequences beyond mere semantics (Hu, 2024). In media
discourse, researchers show that sitcom frequently exploits strategic breaches of these maxims, making the
inference process a part of the joke structure (Xu, 2022; Rachmah et al., 2022). Accordingly, this study
leverages the Cooperative Principle to quantify breach frequency in How I Met Your Mother and Phua Chu
Kang and to interpret the characters’ discourse that results in humor. Simply put, the Cooperative Principle
outlines how conversation is expected to work, and its violation often leads to comedic effect. This interaction
provides a valuable perspective for examining cross-cultural communication.
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 70
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025
B. Non-Observance of Maxims for both Sitcoms in Frequency and Discourse Analysis
A growing body of work applies the Cooperative Principle to humorous texts and performances, showing that
maxim breaches are patterned and interpretable across languages and genres (Al-Zubeiry, 2020). Building on
this idea, it is argued by researchers that incorporate social context that the pragmatics of cooperation—and
non-cooperation—should be interpreted considering cultural norms and audience knowledge, as both can
shape the likelihood of a breach and how it is understood (Hu, 2024). For the present comparative topic, these
insights are mainly derived from the analysis of Western (HIMYM) and Eastern (PCK) sitcoms, where different
breach types can determine different implicatures and laughter intensity. Thus, this research integrates
frequency analysis with close discourse reading: counting what is the most and least breached maxims,
whereas discourse analysis explains how the humor are generated through the humor theories; Incongruity
theory of humor, Superiority theory of humor and Release theory of humor (Ghani, 2018).
A review of Grice’s Cooperative Principle and its application in humor studies shows several key patterns and
gaps. The theory presents conversation as guided by rules, but intentional violations of these rules can serve
creative or cultural functions—particularly in scripted media like sitcoms. This helps explain how sitcoms use
flouted maxims to create humor while still being understood by audiences. However, applying these strategies
across cultures remains difficult, as there are few studies that compare Western and Eastern sitcoms.
Additionally, many researchers examine maxim violations without linking them to humor theory, leaving their
relationship largely unexamined. These gaps highlight the need for cross-cultural studies that combine
quantitative data on frequency with qualitative analysis on discourse to better understand how humor arises
from pragmatic rule-breaking.
C. Past Studies on Cooperative Principle Violation
Recent studies highlight how sitcom humor systematically exploits the non-observance of maxims, yet
up-to-date comparative work on Desperate Housewives versus That 70’s Show is scarce. For instance, a
cross-cultural study sampled 200 utterances from two U.S.–China sitcoms and, using qualitative coding under
the Cooperative Principle and Politeness frameworks, found frequent maxim breaches with culturally inflected
purposes (e.g., false statements for effect) (Changchao, 2024). Similarly, a 2023 thesis surveying American
sitcoms (Friends, HIMYM, TBBT) used episode sampling and qualitative discourse analysis to show maxim
manipulation as a core humor device (Reljac, 2023). Together these studies signal viable designs and coding
schemes while underlining a gap: neither targets Desperate Housewives alongside That 70’s Show directly.
Methodologically, comparable research details how episode-level sampling enables frequency counts and
discourse explanations of flouts and violations. For example, an analysis of 12 episodes of The IT Crowd
identified 102 floutings, with Quality maxim the most frequent, through qualitative coding and simple tallies
(Krisdwiyani & Hanidar, 2022). According to Maulida (2022), humorous effects in Friends are frequently
created through the violation of all four of Grice's conversational maxims—quantity, quality, relation, and
manner—with each maxim's breach contributing to different joke structures and comedic outcomes. These
designs and findings can transfer to a Desperate Housewives vs. That 70’s Show comparison; however, without
show-specific recent studies, claims about genre (drama–comedy) differences remain tentative and should be
tested with balanced sampling across seasons and characters.
Several recent studies analyze The Big Bang Theory (TBBT) with explicit counts and discourse interpretation.
According to a qualitative pragmatic study conducted by Udeze & Udeze (2024), the characters’ dialogues
frequently breached the maxims of Quantity, Relation, and Manner using conversational implicature to trigger
humor. The study’s sampling focused on selected scenes and interpreted Sheldon’s breaches as a comedic tool.
Additionally, Liu (2023) also examined Season 1 of TBBT and researched on how implicatures emerge when
characters intentionally violate maxims in her conference paper. Complementing this, a season-11 study coded
140 violations across 12 episodes (Quantity 31.4%; Relation 27.8%; Manner 20%; Quality 17.1%), offering a
frequency profile of breach types (Novebry & Rosa, 2023). Collectively, the abovementioned studies examine
the non-observance of maxims with frequency analysis and discourse analysis but vary in sampling depth.
Beyond frequency analysis, researchers highlight rhetorical techniques and reasons for non-observance. A
journal article argues that sarcasm, hyperbole, and metaphor recurrently cue implicature in TBBT, explaining
why audiences infer unstated meanings even when maxims are not observed (Qiu, 2023). The conference
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 71
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025
analysis similarly links violations to humor construction through context-driven inferences (Liu, 2023).
Qualitative interpretation further shows how characters’ pragmatics (e.g., Sheldon’s literalism) interact with
breaches to heighten comedic result (Udeze & Udeze, 2024). These studies agree on mechanism but differ in
unit of analysis; thus, a combined frequency-plus-function approach is preferable.
From a methodological perspective, studies based on small or single-season samples limit generalizability, and
some focus too narrowly on specific character interactions. Although the season 11 dataset is relatively large, it
excludes the character development seen in earlier seasons (Novebry & Rosa, 2023). Scene-based qualitative
studies provide detailed insights but involve fewer examples (Udeze & Udeze, 2024). Recent discourse
analysis also recommends linking maxim use to changes in plot and relationships, but more extensive, multi-
season data is still lacking (Ganaden, 2025). Therefore, future research on TBBT would benefit from stratified
sampling across seasons and storylines, combining frequency analysis with close examination of discourse
functions.
Recent studies on HIMYM examine how non-observance shapes verbal humor, though samples are often
narrow. A 2023 article used a documentation-based qualitative design on selected episodes to identify flouting
across all maxims, then linked flouts to verbal-humor types (Aritorang et al., 2023). A bachelor’s thesis written
by Ako (2020) analyzed four episodes, contrasting male and female characters’ humor through Grice’s maxims
and three humor theories, and reported gendered tendencies in how flouts/violations were deployed. A 2023
thesis on American sitcoms that include HIMYM verify the maxim manipulation for sitcom humor but does not
isolate show-specific frequencies (Reljac, 2023). These designs demonstrate feasibility, yet small, convenience
samples limit robust cross-episode claims. Adding tighter episode control, another project analyzed Season 2,
Episodes 1–5 qualitatively and showed that humorous moments often stem from violations and floutings that
cue implicatures (Rasbi et al., 2022). While such studies converge on mechanism, they differ in coding breadth
and the integration of humor theory; for instance, some pair Grice analysis with verbal-humor taxonomies,
whereas others stop at maxim identification (Aritorang et al., 2023). Consequently, a next step is scaling up to
multi-season corpora and pairing frequency analysis with discourse-pragmatic explanation to compare
character- or plot-specific humor patterns more reliably.
The review of past studies reveals several recurring patterns and unresolved issues. First, most research
confirms that sitcom humor relies heavily on maxim flouting and violation, yet the scope of analysis often
remains narrow, focusing on single shows or limited episodes. This creates a methodological gap in terms of
sample size and cross-cultural comparison. Second, while some studies integrate humor theories, many stop at
identifying maxim breaches without explaining how these breaches interact with cultural norms or audience
expectations. Finally, theoretical integration is inconsistent, leaving the relationship between pragmatic
strategies and humor mechanisms underexplored. These gaps justify the need for a comparative, multi-layered
approach that combines frequency analysis with discourse interpretation across different cultural contexts.
Introduction and Explanation of the Conceptual Framework
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 72
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025
The conceptual framework illustrates the relationship between non-observance of Grice’s maxims, humor
strategies, and humor creation in sitcoms. At the left, the independent variable represents the four
conversational maxims—Quality, Quantity, Relation, and Manner—whose breaches serve as the starting point
for humor generation. These breaches influence the mediating variable, humor strategies, which include
Incongruity, Superiority, and Release theories. Both maxim breaches and humor strategies contribute to the
dependent variable: humor creation in How I Met Your Mother and Phua Chu Kang. This framework
emphasizes that humor does not arise from maxim breaches alone but through their interaction with specific
humor strategies. Ultimately, this structure aligns with the study’s aim to compare how pragmatic violations
and humor theories jointly shape comedic effects across cultural contexts.
METHODOLOGY
This study employs a comparative content analysis to examine how conversational maxims are breached in
How I Met Your Mother and Phua Chu Kang. Content analysis is widely used to identify patterns in
communication and interpret meaning within texts (Krippendorff, 2019). In this research, the design allows
systematic coding of maxim breaches and humor strategies across two culturally distinct sitcoms. By
comparing Western and Eastern contexts, the study highlights cultural influences on humor construction. This
design is appropriate because it combines structured categorization with interpretive depth, enabling both
frequency-based and discourse-level insights. The research also adopts a mixed-method approach. It
combines quantitative technique of frequency analysis to quantify breached occurrences, with qualitative
methods of discourse analysis to interpret the contextual and pragmatic functions of humor, resulting in a more
comprehensive understanding than relying on a single method alone (Ghani, 2018). This combination ensures
that numerical trends are supported by in-depth explanations of meaning-making processes. Such an approach
is essential for understanding not only how often maxims are broken but also why these breaches create humor
in culturally specific ways.
The sample for this study consists of the three highest-rated episodes from the first season of How I Met
Your Mother and Phua Chu Kang. The sample population includes all utterances by the main characters that
breach Grice’s Cooperative Principle. Similar sampling strategies have been applied in previous research, such
as Wang (2023), who analyzed randomly selected episodes of Friends to examine how characters create humor
by violating Grice’s Cooperative Principle, and Al-Houri (2022), who examined three episodes per season of
Not Going Out for non-observance patterns. This approach is justified because selecting top-rated episodes
ensures rich humorous content and maxim breaches, making the data both manageable and representative for
comparative analysis. This study uses online purposive sampling, obtaining episodes from official and
reliable sources: HIMYM episodes from 123movies and scripts from a fan page, and PCK episodes from its
official Facebook page and YouTube channel. Similar methods were used in prior studies, such as Bušelić
(2023), who accessed Modern Family episodes online for maxim analysis, and Yuliasri (2024), who analyzed 2
Broke Girls episodes sourced from streaming platforms. This method is practical and cost-effective, ensuring
accessibility to authentic content while maintaining data integrity. It also aligns with the study’s aim to
compare two culturally distinct sitcoms using consistent and verifiable sources.
The primary instrument for this study is close reading combined with human coding, which enables detailed
identification of maxim breaches and humor strategies in context. Close reading allows researchers to interpret
pragmatic meaning beyond literal text, while human coding organizes these observations into analysable
categories. Similar instruments were used by Aritorang et al. (2023) in analysing humor in How I Met Your
Mother and by Udeze and Udeze (2024) in their pragmatic study of The Big Bang Theory. Both studies justify
this method for its ability to capture nuanced conversational implicatures. In the present research, this
instrument ensures accurate categorization of flouting and violating instances, which automated tools might
overlook, making it essential for qualitative depth. The data collection process involved sampling, close
reading, coding, and discourse analysis over a three-month period (November 2017–January 2018).
Episodes were sourced online, stored in Microsoft Word and an external hard drive, and then filtered by
removing incomplete or irrelevant data before analysis. Similar multi-step procedures were applied by Rasbi et
al. (2022) in their study of HIMYM and by Novebry and Rosa (2023) in analysing The Big Bang Theory. These
studies highlight the importance of systematic organization for reliability. Likewise, this research follows a
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 73
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025
structured process to ensure that only complete, contextually relevant utterances are analysed for maxim
breaches and humor strategies.
The data were analysed using two major stages that combine frequency analysis and discourse analysis. First, a
codebook of Gricean non-observance types and humor strategies guided human coding, and breached maxims
counts were tabulated in a spreadsheet to produce episode-level and show-level frequencies (cf. Novebry &
Rosa, 2023). Next, coded excerpts were carefully examined by applying discourse analysis to interpret how
breaches triggered implicatures and mapped onto humor theories in context (Ghani, 2018). This pairing is
justified because counts reveal pattern strength while discourse reading explains mechanism. Accordingly, the
present study tallies each breach and then interprets representative segments to explain why the same breach
evokes humor differently across HIMYM and PCK.
Validity Tool: Content Validity
A suitable validity tool for this research is Content Validity, which ensures that the coding framework
accurately represents the constructs being studied. Content validity is widely used in qualitative research to
confirm that categories and codes align with theoretical concepts and research objectives (Noble & Smith,
2024). Similarly, Yadav (2022) emphasizes that content validity strengthens trustworthiness by verifying that
the instrument reflects the intended domain of inquiry. In this study, content validity is applied by aligning the
coding scheme with Grice’s maxims and humor theories, ensuring that every identified breach maxims and
humor strategy corresponds to the conceptual framework. This process guarantees that the analysis remains
theoretically grounded and contextually relevant.
Reliability Tool: Intercoder Agreement
For reliability, Intercoder Agreement (ICA) is an appropriate tool because it measures consistency between
coders in applying the same coding scheme. ICA is commonly used in qualitative content analysis to enhance
rigor and reduce subjectivity (Halpin, 2024). Likewise, Cofie et al. (2022) argue that intercoder reliability
ensures coding stability and transparency, which are essential for credible findings. In this research, two coders
independently coded a subset of utterances, and discrepancies were resolved through discussion to refine the
codebook. This approach ensures that the coding process is systematic and replicable, thereby reinforcing the
reliability of the findings.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Research Question 1: Which maxims are breached in How I Met Your Mother and Phua Chu Kang, and
what are the reasons underlying the non-observance?
Table 1 presents the coded counts of Gricean non-observance by maxim and show, and Table 1A provides
illustrative utterances for each maxim category. Overall, How I Met Your Mother (HIMYM) showed 137
breaches across the three episodes, while Phua Chu Kang (PCK) showed 90. In HIMYM, Quality (44.5%) and
Relation (23.4%) dominated; in PCK, Quality (40%) and Quantity (22.2%) were most frequent. Reasons
clustered around sarcasm/teasing, evasion to save face, and topic-shifting to manage awkwardness.
Notably, it is found that the maxim of quality is the most frequently breached in both sitcoms. Characters in
HIMYM tend to use sarcasm by violating maxim of quality, as this might due to the higher tendency of
western people in mocking or humiliating people to create humour. However, maxim of quality is flouted more
often in PCK as the characters expect other interlocutors to understand their implicature, with no intention to
mislead them.
Table 1 Frequencies of maxim non-observance across shows (three highest-rated S1 episodes)
Maxim
HIMYM n (%)
PCK n (%)
Typical reason(s)
Quality
61 (44.5%)
36 (40%)
Pretend ignorance; playful deceit
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 74
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025
Quantity
23 (16.7%)
20 (22.2%)
Exaggeration; economy for punchline
Relation
32 (23.4%)
15 (16.7%)
Topic shift; misdirection
Manner
21 (15.3%)
19 (21.1%)
Ambiguity; strategic vagueness
Total
137
90
—
Table 1A Illustrative (paraphrased) utterances by maxim category
Show
Example (paraphrased)
Rationale
HIMYM
Ted: “It was… fine—like, galaxy
shattering fine.”
Over informing for comedic inflation.
PCK
PCK: “Long story short: yes.”
Under informing to speed the gag.
HIMYM
Barney: “I never lie. Ever. Except
constantly.”
Self contradiction cues playful deceit.
PCK
Rosie: “We’re totally not late… just
early for tomorrow.”
False statement as wink to the audience.
HIMYM
Lily (asked about rent): “Have you tried
the cupcakes?”
Topic shift to dodge a face threat.
PCK
Chu Beng: “Speaking of that… the
weather!”
Irrelevance redirects to humor.
HIMYM
Marshall: “It’s… uh… complicated
ish.”
Deliberate vagueness to cue inference.
PCK
PCK: “Can… maybe… later lah.”
Ambiguity softens refusal for politeness.
The result of the research shows distinct breach profiles: HIMYM leans on maxims of Quality followed by
Relation, while PCK favors maxims of Quality followed by Quantity. The large frequency of Quality maxims
breached in both sitcoms are due to the usage of sarcasm in mocking and ridiculing people to evoke laughter
(Ghani, 2018) and Quantity violations in PCK are numerically prominent across episodes (Novebry & Rosa,
2023). However, our finding that PCK also relies more on Manner (strategic ambiguity and vagueness)
complements cross-cultural accounts showing how Asian sitcoms often mobilize indirectness and
clarity-withholding to balance humor with politeness and facework (Changchao, 2024). Moreover, the reasons
we observed—sarcasm, evasion, and topic-shifting—mirror documented functions of non-observance used to
misdirect and soften stance in comic dialogue (Rachmah et al., 2022). In short, the same Grice’s toolkit
supports different stylistic preferences across shows. Therefore, breach type appears culturally patterned rather
than randomly distributed. This matters because it implies that pragmatic design choices are
audience-calibrated, so altering the breach mix could shift both laugh timing and social meaning.
All in all, cultural norms significantly shape how conversational maxims are breached and interpreted in both
sitcoms. In How I Met Your Mother, sarcasm is a dominant humor strategy, leading characters to violate the
Quality maxim by making statements that are clearly false or exaggerated for comic effect (Hu, 2024;
Aritorang et al., 2023). This reflects American cultural values that favor directness and bold humor, where
contradiction and irony are perceived as clever rather than deceptive. Such violations often create superiority
humor, allowing characters to mock or tease openly without threatening social harmony. In contrast, Phua Chu
Kang demonstrates a different approach, relying more on flouting than outright violating, particularly with the
Manner and Quantity maxims. Here, speakers use vagueness, understatement, and coded hints to maintain
politeness and avoid face-threatening acts, which aligns with Singaporean norms emphasizing harmony and
indirectness (Changchao, 2024; Rachmah et al., 2022). These strategies allow humor to coexist with respect for
social hierarchy and communal values. Overall, the contrast shows that maxim non-observance is not random
but culturally patterned: American humor thrives on overt incongruity and sharp sarcasm, while Singaporean
humor leans on subtle ambiguity and strategic politeness to balance laughter with social tact.
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 75
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025
Research Question 2: How do the breaches create humor, and which humor strategies are frequently
used in How I Met Your Mother and Phua Chu Kang?
Table 2 summarizes the mapping of maxim non-observance to humor strategies; Table 2A illustrates typical
realizations. In both shows, Incongruity is most frequent (HIMYM 52%; PCK 47%), followed by Superiority
(HIMYM 25%; PCK 23%) and Relief (HIMYM 23%; PCK 30%). Quantity flouts in HIMYM often fuel
incongruity via sudden excess or scarcity of detail, whereas PCK’s Manner flouts commonly cue superiority
humor through gentle one-upmanship or playful scolding. Relief episodes appear when taboo or tension is
defused by an obviously “safe” violation (e.g., self-mockery). Consequently, breaches are not humorous per se;
they gain comedic force when audiences can infer the intended implicature quickly and align it with a
recognizable strategy. This finding highlights how maxim work scaffolds a strategy profile that differs subtly
across the two cultures.
Table 2 Humor strategies by show (strategy share of all humorous breaches)
Strategy
HIMYM
%
PCK %
Dominant maxim link (observed)
Incongruity
52%
47%
Quantity & Relation (HIMYM); Manner (PCK)
Superiority
25%
23%
Quality (teasing/put downs)
Relief
23%
30%
Relation (taboo deflection); Quality (self mock)
Table 2A Illustrative (paraphrased) utterances by humor strategy
Strategy
Show
Example (paraphrased)
Why it works
Incongruity
HIMYM
Barney: “I have a totally modest plan: step
one—legendary.”
Expectation vs. absurd
escalation.
Incongruity
PCK
PCK: “Simple solution: fifty two steps.”
Over complexity clashes
with “simple.”
Superiority
HIMYM
Robin to Ted: “Adorable plan—like training
wheels for adults.”
Mild put down asserts
playful edge.
Superiority
PCK
Rosie: “Boss, your idea ah—upgrade from blur
to super blur.”
Teasing boosts speaker
status.
Relief
HIMYM
Marshall: “Great, we’re broke—guess we’ll eat
dreams.”
Tension release via
hyperbole.
Relief
PCK
Chu Beng: “Mother in law coming? I suddenly
love overtime.”
Anxiety reframed as comic
escape.
Mapping breaches to humor strategies revealed incongruity as the dominant pathway in both shows, with
superiority and relief also present. This aligns with sitcom discourse analyses showing that incongruity is
typically the engine of televised humor, as rapid expectation shifts are easily staged and recognized by
audiences. For example, research on sitcoms like "Kontrakan Rempong" (Damanik, 2023) and "2 Broke Girls"
(Messerli, 2016) demonstrates that humor frequently arises from events or utterances that are incompatible
with normal expectations, making incongruity central to the comedic effect. Our profile refines that picture:
HIMYM often uses breaches of Quantity and Relation to over- or under-supply information for surprise,
whereas PCK uses Manner to cue mild one-upmanship—small, face-safe superiority effects that fit its
communal tone. Relief episodes surface when tension is reframed as obviously “safe” taboo play, a pattern
consistent with mixed pragmatic–theoretical accounts of sitcom humor (Udeze & Udeze, 2024). Thus,
breaches do not produce humor alone; they become funny when aligned with audience-legible strategies. This
alignment matters because it explains why similar breaches can land differently across shows and cultures.
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 76
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025
CONCLUSION
Implications
Theoretically, our findings extend Gricean pragmatics by showing how specific maxim breaches channel
distinct humor strategies, thereby clarifying the interface between conversational non-observance and humor
mechanisms in scripted talk (Ghani, 2018). Moreover, the cross-show contrast indicates that breach profiles are
culturally patterned, which supports recent cross-cultural accounts of sitcom humor and its politeness load
(Changchao, 2024). Practically, writers and editors can tune joke design by varying breach type and density to
match audience expectations; translators and subtitlers can preserve effects by prioritizing implicature cues
rather than literal wording. Producers may also use breach–strategy dashboards to calibrate pacing and
character voice. Educators in media writing can turn these mappings into teachable heuristics for joke revision.
In short, small changes in which maxims are bent—and how—alter both laugh timing and social meaning,
because audiences read pragmatic signals quickly and locally (Xu, 2022; Changchao, 2024).
Recommendations for Future Research
Methodologically, future studies should scale up to multi-season corpora, incorporate intercoder agreement to
document coding consistency, and report reconciliation procedures transparently (Halpin, 2024). Researchers
might also combine frequency profiling with episode-embedded experiments or audience surveys to test
whether breach–strategy mixes predict perceived funniness, building on episode-level counting practices
(Novebry & Rosa, 2023). Practically, collaboration with writers’ rooms and subtitling teams could validate
which edits best preserve implicature across cultures. Theoretically, studies should model humor strategies as
mediators between breach types and audience response, and include multimodal cues (timing, prosody) in the
mapping. Ultimately, a comparative, multi-method program will show not only what breaks the maxims but
why those breaks travel—or fail to travel—across audiences (Halpin, 2024; Novebry & Rosa, 2023).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I dedicate this paper to my ex-supervisor in University Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) Bangi, Dr. Kesumawati
binti A. Bakar, whom with her dedication and perseverance, guided me in writing and completing this topic for
my degree thesis completion. To my loving and supporting wife, Amni Nizzatul Alia who had been my
backbone through thick and thins, my best friend and my soul mate. To my close degree classmates back in
UKM who had supported and gave advice to me. May we all succeed in this life and hereafter. Aamin.
REFERENCES
1. Ako, C. (2020). Humour by violating & flouting the Gricean maxims: Male and female characters in How
I Met Your Mother [Bachelor’s thesis]. University West. https://diva-
portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:1471263
2. Al-Houri, H. M. I. (2022). Hyperbole and non-observance of Grice’s maxims in the British sitcom Not
Going Out. University of Kerbala Journal.
https://iasj.rdd.edu.iq/journals/uploads/2025/01/16/52faf8eb101d0089fb4db9842432813c.pdf
3. Anderson, C., Bjorkman, B., Denis, D., Doner, J., Grant, M., Sanders, N., & Taniguchi, A. (2022).
Essentials of linguistics (2nd ed.). eCampusOntario. Chapter 8.7: Violating vs. flouting a maxim.
https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/essentialsoflinguistics2/chapter/8-7-violating-vs-flouting-a-maxim/
4. Arbain, A., Geroda, G. B., & Mulyono, E. A. (2023). Maxim violations and their reasons in an animated
movie: A Gricean approach to communication. ResearchGate.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372010526Maximviolationsandtheirreasonsinananimatedmoviea
Griceanapproachtocommunication/fulltext/64a2e05eb9ed6874a5f4160d/Maxim-violations-and-their-
reasons-in-an-animated-movie-a-Gricean-approach-to-communication.pdf
5. Aritorang, A. B., Beratha, N. L. S., & Sukarini, N. W. (2023). Verbal humor created by flouting maxims in
How I Met Your Mother series. Aksara: Journal Bahasa dan Sastra, 24(2).
https://jurnal.fkip.unila.ac.id/index.php/aksara/article/view/28030
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 77
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025
6. Bušelić, I. (2023). The use of Grice’s conversational maxims in the American sitcom Modern Family
[Undergraduate thesis]. University of Split.
https://zir.nsk.hr/islandora/object/ffst%3A4188/datastream/PDF/view
7. Changchao, L. (2024). Cultural dimensions of verbal humor in American and Chinese sitcoms.
Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16(10), 1153–1162.
https://www.scimatic.org/storage/journals/11/pdfs/2493.pdf
8. Cofie, N., Braund, H., & Dalgarno, N. (2022). Eight ways to get a grip on intercoder reliability using
qualitative-based measures. Canadian Medical Education Journal, 13(2), 73–76.
https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.72504
9. Damanik, S., Setia, E., Lubis, S., & Surbakti, A. (2023). The portrait of humorous social interaction in
"Kontrakan Rempong" sitcom. Research Journal in Advanced Humanities.
https://doi.org/10.58256/rjah.v4i2.1200
10. Ganaden, A. S. M. (2025). Breaking the code: A discourse analysis of conversational maxims in The Big
Bang Theory. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 36(4), 413–418.
https://www.scimatic.org/storage/journals/11/pdfs/5038.pdf
11. Ghani, M. R. bin O. (2018). A comparative study of cooperative principle violation in How I Met Your
Mother and Phua Chu Kang [Unpublished bachelor’s thesis]. University Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi,
Malaysia.
12. Halpin, S. N. (2024). Inter-coder agreement in qualitative coding: Considerations for its use. American
Journal of Qualitative Research, 8(3), 23–43. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/14487
13. Hu, Y. (2024). A socio-cognitive reinterpretation of Grice’s theory of conversation. Intercultural
Pragmatics, 21(1), 99–119. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2024-0004
14. Krippendorff, K. (2019). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). SAGE
Publications.
15. Krisdwiyani, I., & Hanidar, S. (2022). The production of conversational humor by flouting Gricean
maxims in The IT Crowd. Lexicon, 9(1), 11–22. https://journal.ugm.ac.id/lexicon/article/view/72803
16. Liu, Y. (2023). An analysis of the causes of verbal humor in American sitcom from the perspective of
pragmatics—The Big Bang Theory as an example. In Proceedings of ICHSSR 2023.
https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-092-3_159
17. Maulida, F., Rozi, F., & Pratama, H. (2022). Creation of humorous situation by flouting conversational
maxims accompanied by facial expression in Friends. English Education Journal.
https://doi.org/10.15294/eej.v12i1.51956
18. Messerli, T. (2016). Extradiegetic and character laughter as markers of humorous intentions in the sitcom
2 Broke Girls. Journal of Pragmatics, 95, 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.12.009
19. Noble, H., & Smith, J. (2024). Ensuring validity and reliability in qualitative research. Evidence-Based
Nursing. https://ebn.bmj.com/content/early/2025/01/21/ebnurs-2024-104232
20. Novebry, A., & Rosa, R. N. (2023). An analysis of maxim violation in situational comedy The Big Bang
Theory Season 11. E Journal of English Language & Literature, 8(1).
https://www.academia.edu/97843553/AnAnalysisofMaximViolationinSituationalComedytheBigBangTheo
rySeason_11
21. Rachmah, Z., Widya, & Putri, E. J. (2022). The non-observance of maxims that trigger implicature in
Cruella movie (2021). E Journal of Linguistics, 16(2), 264–272. https://doi.org/10.24843/e-
jl.2022.v16.i02.p12
22. Rasbi, J. N., Amianna, P., & Putranti, A. (2022). Humorous situations created by violations and floutings
of conversational maxims in How I Met Your Mother. Journal of Language and Literature.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/bbf9/8966b55ea87f60549bed027887b9340202ca.pdf
23. Reljac, S. (2023). Violation of Grice’s maxims in American sitcoms [Master’s thesis]. University of
Rijeka. https://zir.nsk.hr/islandora/object/ffri%3A3908
24. Udeze, N. C., & Udeze, C. V. (2024). A pragmatic analysis of the comedy series The Big Bang Theory.
UJAH: Unizik Journal of Arts and Humanities, 25(1).
https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ujah/article/view/272313
25. Wang, X. (2023). The violation of cooperative principles and four maxims to create humor in American
sitcom Friends. OALib. https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1110010
www.rsisinternational.org
Page 78
ILEIID 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS
Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIV October 2025
26. Wieczorek, M. (2022). Different shades of viewership: A pragmatic analysis of humour in sitcom
discourse. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Magdalena-Wieczorek-
3/publication/324273699DifferentShadesofViewershipAPragmaticAnalysisofHumourinSitcomDiscourse/li
nks/5ac87e564585151e80a56127/Different-Shades-of-Viewership-A-Pragmatic-Analysis-of-Humour-in-
Sitcom-Discourse.pdf
27. Yadav, D. (2022). Criteria for good qualitative research: A comprehensive review. The Asia-Pacific
Education Researcher, 31(4), 679–689. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00619-0
28. Yuliasri, I. (2024). Flouting of Grice’s maxims in humorous utterances in American situation comedy 2
Broke Girls. English Education Journal, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.15294/EEJ.V10I4.39465
Figure 1 Description of the figure