CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

This research discusses about pragmatic equivalence of

implicature. Therefore, this research relates to two subfields of
linguistic, translation and pragmatics. Newmark explained that
translation is a process of changing a written message from one
language to another language in the way that the author
intended the text.

There are some procedures in translation, called translation

procedures. Newmark states that translation procedures are the
strategy in translation used for sentences and the smaller units
of language. Further, newmark (67-90) suggest some
procedures:

1. Literal translation
Literal translation is translation procedure that
convert the gramatical constraction of the source
language (SL) word or sentence to the nearest target
language (TL) equivalence when lexical word are
translated individually and out of context. The
procedure ranges from the one word to one word,
though group to group, collocation to collocation,
clause to clause, and sentence to sentence.
2. Transsference
Transference is the process of transferring a SL word
to a TL text as atranslation procedures. It is often
called “loan word”
3. Shifts or transpositions
A shift or transposition is a translation procedures
involving a change in the grammar from SL to TL.
4. Modulation
 Modulation is a variation through a change of
viewpoint, of perspective and very often of category
of throught.
5. Reduction
These procedures are applied when translator
intuitively know the equivalenve of the SL in teh TL.
This happend because the translators should have
good knowledge of the SL in the TL. Therefore, good
translator shoud know exactly when part of the SL
should be reduced in the TL. This is tightly related to
the grammar knowledge of the SL and the TL which
should be understood well by translator.
6. Addition
This procedures occures when a translator adds more
information or explanation.

It has sometimes been said that the purpose of translation

should be to achieve ‘equivalence effect’, that is to produce the
same effect (newmark 48). In relation to the pragmatic
equivalence, equivalence can be said to be the central issue
because of its definition, relevance, applicability within the field
of translation theory.. baker defines equivalence as a relation
between a SL text to TL text. Further, he explains that ‘pragmatic
equivalence’ looks at how text are used in communicative
situations that involve variables such writers, readers, and
cultural context (Baker 5).
From the explanation above, it can be concluded
that pragmatic equivalence refers to words in both
languages having the same effect on the readers in both
language. The SL and the TL are equivalent as long as the
message in the SL can be delivered in the TL.
 Pragmatics is a study of contextual meaning ( meaning
(yule 3). It means that context used by speakers is very
influential in the conversations among them. They should know
by what the speak, with whom they talk, where they talk, and
when they talk. It must be appropriate for the circumtances.
Pragmatics is needed in linguistics because people want to know
fuller, deeper, and more reasonable aspect of human language
behavior. It means that problems in linguistics that can not be
solved by other fields can be solved by pragmatics. Pragmatics
studies many topics such as reference, deixis, presupposition,
enntailment, implicature, politeness principle, and speech acts.
However, this research focuses on implicature.
There are many definitions about implicature is derived
from the verb to imply. Etymologically, to imply means to fold
something into something else hence which is implied is folded in
and has to be unfolded in order to be understood (mey 99).
Yule says that implicature is an additional conveyed
meaning. In conversation, the speaker must be able to
convey the utterance well so the heare is able to
understand what the speaker says. The hearerr must also
pay attention to context of the conversation so he or she
will not be wrong in interpretation what the speaker
means.
Thomas (56) also defines that implicature is message or
information which can be found more that what is said whereas
Gazdar (38) says that “implicature refers to proposition imlied by
an utterance in a context even though it is not part, nor the
entailment of what is actually said”. In conclution, implicature is
implicit meaning of what is utterred by the speaker to the hearer
which can be interpreted.
There are two kinds of implicature, they are conventional
implicature and conversational implicature (thomas 57). A
conventional implicature and conversational implicature (thomas
57). A conventional implicature is non truth conditional inference
that is not derived from superordinate pragmatic principles like
the maxim, but is simply attached by convention to particular
lexical items or exspressions (levinson 127). Whereas a
conversational implicature is something implied in a
conversation.
In a conversation, there must be cooperation between the
speaker and the heare. What is said by the speaker should be
understood by the hearer well so there is no misunderstanding
between them and the hearer shiuld respect what the speaker
says. A conversation should be based on a basic assumption. A
basic underlying assumption we make when we speak to one
another is what we are trying to cooperate with one another to
construct meaningful conversation. This assumptio is known as
the cooperative pronciple. The cooperative principle runs as
follow.
“make your conversational contribution such as required,
at the stage it occures, by the accepted purpose or direction of
the talk exchange in which you are engaged (grice 45).”
The statement above means that in conversation, a
speaker or a hearer in conveying utterances must be appropriate
for the necessity. They do not give contribution less or more but
adequate.
Implicature in an utterance can be measured by maxims.
Grices states that there are four maxims (yule 37).
1. Maxim of quality
Be true by not saying what you believe to be false and
thatfor which you lack adequate evidencee.
2. Maxim quantity
Be brief by making your contribution as informative as is
required and no more than is required!
 3. Maxim of relation
Be relevant!
4. Maximof manner
Be clear by avoding obscure exspression and ambiguity
and being brief and orderly!
Then, implicatures can be created in several ways (paltridge 44-
45):
1. A maxim can be followed straightforwardly.
An utterance follows all maxims since it is true, brief as
informative as is required, relevant and clear.
2. A maxim is breached in several situations:
a. The speaker is deliberately deceiving the addressee.
When the speaker deliberately deceives or says
untruth to the addressee, maxim of quality is
breached.
b. There is a clash with another maxim
In a conversation, sometimes a speaker breaches a
maxim to fulfill another maxim.
c. Maxim is opted out for particular reason
In a conversation, sometimes it is dangerous if a
speaker breaches one of the maxim or all maxims
because of some a reasons. There are some kinds of
certain exspressions used by a speaker to sign that
those exspressions are dangerous if the speaker does
not fulfill the principles, called hedges. The table
below shows some example of the hedges of each
maxim:

Maxim hedges
Quality As far as I know,
I may be mistaken,
 I am not sure if it is right,
I guess,
Quantity As you probably know,
So, to cut a long story
short,
I will not bore you with all
the details,
Relation Oh, by the way,
Anyway,
Well,
I do not know if this is
important,
Not to change the
subject,
This may sound like a
dumb question,
Manner This may a bit confusing
I am not sure if this
makes sense,
I do not know if this is
clear at all,

d. A maxim is flouted by exploiting it.

Maxim of quality is breached by exploiting the
falsehood so that the hearre can notice the violation.
This to show that the hearer’s statement is false.
Maxim of quantuty is breached by exploiting the
statement that is not brief and not informative so
that the hearerr can notice the violation. This is to
show that the hearer’s statement is not brief or not
as informative as is required. Maxim of relation is
breached by exploiting with irrelevance so that the
 hearer can notice the violation. This is to show that
the heare’s statement is irrelevant. Maxim of manner
is breached by exploiting the ambiguity or obscurity
so that the hearer can notice that the hearer
statement is uncler or ambigious.
Then, in understanding the meaninng of an
utterance,people must pay attention to the context because it is
very important to interpret the meaning of the utterance. If the
context is ignored, therre might appear different interpretation
from what is intended.
The importance of context in language can be seen from
the opinion of levinson who says that pragmatic is the study of
ability of language users to pair sentences with context in which
they would be appropriate (levinson 24)
According to leech, context deal with relevant aspects of
the psycal or social setting of an utterance (leech 13) it is
abacground of knowledge that is shared by the speaker and the
hearer in understanding the utterance. Context enable the
participants in the conversation process to interact and make the
linguistic exspression of their interaction intelligible. Meanwhile,
mey (38) says that context is dinamic, not static.
Further, firth gives an explanation that acontext may
consist of some elements (halliday and Hasan 8):
1. The participants, refer to people or personalities and rules
of participants.
2. The action reffer to what they do, including verbal action
and non verbal action.
3. Other relevant features refer to the surrounding objects
and events.
4. The effects refer to the changes brought by what the
participants in the situation have to say.
CHAPTER III
 DISCUSSION

In this chapter, the writer analyzes the implicature in the

english translation of prophet Muhammad’s jokes. The objet of
this research consists three jokes made by prophet Muhammad.
The first joke is narrated by Tirmidzi taken from assamail
Muhammadiyyah At Tirmidzi, the second jokes is narrated by
Ahmad bin Hanbal taken from Musnad Ahmad, and the third joke
is narrated by Abu Ahmad taken from Sunan Abi Dawud. The
analysis will be discussed below:

1. The first joke:

Abdu bin Humaid told that Mus’ab bin al Miqdam said that Al
Mubarak bin Fadhalah from AL Hasan narrated that an old
women came to the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and
said: “O Messenger of Alloh, pray to Alloh (subhanahu wa
ta’ala) that I willenter paradise. “He said jokingly, “O Mother of
So-and-so, no old women will enter paradise. “the old women
went away crying, so the prophet (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa
sallam) said, Tell her that she will not enter Paradise as an old
women, for Alloh (subhanallohu wa ta’ala) says: (we have
created [their companions] of special creation, and made them
virgine-pure [and underfield].”

In order to make the analysis easy to understand, the

writer will directly decide each sentence in English translation of
Prophet Muhammad’s jokes. In this hadith, there are three
sentences.
a. First sentence
“Abdu bin Humaid told that Mus’ab bin al Miqdam
said that Al Mubarak bin Fadhalah from AL Hasan
narrated that an old women came to the Prophet
 (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and said: “O
Messenger of Alloh, pray to Alloh (subhanahu wa
ta’ala) that I will enter paradise”
The sentence contains an utterance said by an old women
who came to prophet Muhammad in a hurry. Because of the
rashness, she forgot to greet and introduce herdelf in starting the
conversation. She was aware that she was old and all people
would die. She was affraid that she would not enter paradise if
she died. Because of her worry, she straightforwardly requested
the prophet to pray to Alloh that she would enter paradise. She
requested the prophet to pray to Alloh because she knew that
prophet Muhammad was a messenger of Alloh and his prayer
would be granted.
The old women requested the prophet briefly and clearly.
She did not make something ambigious and the prophet
understand it well. So, the utterance followed maxim of manner.

b. Second sentence
“He said jokingly, “O Mother of So-and-so, no old
women will enter paradise.
This sentence contains an utterance said by prophet
Muhammad to replay the old women’s request. It is stated in the
hadith that after hearing the old women’s request, the prophet
said jokingly that in paradise there would be no old women. The
old women thought that she would not enter paradise there
would be no old women. The old women thought that she would
not enter paradise because she was old. She felt sad. Then, she
cried and left.
By this utterance, the prophet did not lie to the old women.
It was true that there would not be old womenin paradise. It did
not mean that the old women the prophet mentioned was she.
So, his utterance followed maxim of quality.
 The prophet did not know whether the old women would
enter paradise or not because he was not God. Actually, the
prophet could say that only God who could determine that a
person would enter paradise or not. His response was not what
the old women required. So his utterancce breached maxim of
quantity. The prophet breached maxim quantity because He
want to inform the old women that in paradise all women would
be virgin-pure again as Allah said in the holy Quran Surah Al
Waqiah verse 35,36 and 37.
Beside that, the prophet’s response was relevant and
pertinent to what the old women asked. The old women
requested to be prayed that she will enter paradise. Then the
prophed informed what he knew as Alloh says in the holy Quran
so, it followed maxim of relation.
Even though the prophet’s response was rrelevant, but it
was very ambigious. It might be the old women whom the
prophet meant was she, or all old women, or in paradise all
women would be young again. However, the old women thought
that she would not enter paradise because she was old. So, his
utterance breached maxim of manner. The prophet did not mean
to hurt her. He breached maxim of manner because he just want
to joke but she misunderstood.

c. Third sentence

“the old women went away crying, so the prophet

(sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said, Tell her that
she will not enter Paradise as an old women, for
Alloh (subhanallohu wa ta’ala) says: (we have
created [their companions] of special creation,
and made them virgine-pure [and underfield].”
 The sentence contains an utterance said by prophet
Muhammad to his friends. Because the old women cried and left,
finally the prophet requested his friends to tell her that what he
had just said did not mean that she would not enter paradise but
she would not enter paradise as an old women. Hearing this
explanation, the old women was very happy and she left the pe\
rophet without greeting.
The prophet utterance was true. He also gave evidence
that in paradise all women would be virgin again. It was stated
by Alloh in the holy Quran in surah Al Waqiah verses 35,36, and
37 and Holy Quran, of course, would not be false. So the
utterance followed maxim of quality.
Even though the prophet gave evidence from the verses in
Holy Quran, but it was not as informative as the old women
required. The old women requested to be prayed that she would
enter paradise, whereas the prophet only give informed what
Alloh said. So, the utterance breached maxim of quantity. He
breached maxim of quantity because he wanted the old women
knew that all people can enter paradise no matter they are
young or old, it depends on their efforts.
However, the prophet respone was relevant and partinent
to what the old women asked. It was also at the appropriate
moment. The old women felt very hopeless when the prophet
told that no old women would enter paradise. She thought that
her worship was useless. At that time the prophet clarified what
he meant. So the utterance followed maxim of relation.
Then by telling that she would not enter paradise as an old
women, the prophet’s information was not clear. The old women
thought that she would enter paradise and she would be young
again, but what the prophet meant was if she wanted to enter
paradise, she herself must have tried to get it. It shows an
ambiguity. So the utterance breached maxim of manner. The
prophet breached maxim of manner because he wanted the old
women to understand the holy Quran.
After understanding the context of the utterance and the
way the implicature are created, it can be concluded that there is
an implied meaning in the hadits. Implicitly, the prophet wanted
to teach the old women especially and all people generally that
no one knows a person would enter paradise or not except Alloh.
It depends on our faith.

2. The second joke:

Abdul Razaq told that Ma’mar from Tsabit Al Bunani from

Annas reported that there was a man from the desert people
whose name was Zahir. He used to bring gifts from the desert
to the prophet (sallallahu alayhe wa sallam) and in return the
prophet would provide him with whatever he needed when he
went out to fight. The prophet (sallallahu alayhe wa sallam)
said, "Zahir is our man of the desert, and we are his town-
dwellers. The prophet (sallallahu alayhe wa sallam) loved him
very much, and he (Zahir) was an ugly man. One day the
prophet came to him whilst he was selling some goods. He
embraced him from behind. The man could not see him, so he
said, “Let me go! Who is this?” Then he turned around and
recognized the prophet (sallallahu alayhe wa sallam), so he
tried to move closer to him once he knew who it was. The
prophet (sallallahu alayhe wa sallam) started to say, “Who will
buy this slave? Zahir said, “O messenger of Alloh, you will find
me unsellable, The prophet (sallallahu alayhe wa sallam) said,
“but in the sight of Alloh (subhanallahu wa ta’ala) you are not
unsellable, or he said, “but in the sight of Alloh (subhanallahu
wa ta’ala) you are valuable.”
This hadits consists twelve sentences. Each sentence will be
discussed below.

a. The first, second and third sentence

Abdul Razaq told that Ma’mar from Tsabit Al Bunani
from Annas reported that there was a man from the
desert people whose name was Zahir. He used to bring
gifts from the desert to the prophet (sallallahu alayhe
wa sallam) and in return the prophet would provide him
with whatever he needed when he went out to fight. The
prophet (sallallahu alayhe wa sallam) said, "Zahir is our
man of the desert, and we are his town-dwellers.

In this sentence, there is a direct utterance, it was said by

prophet Muhammad when he, one day, gathered around the
people and told that he had a close friend named Zahir. He was
from desert. Then, the prophet said that zahir was their man of
the desert and they were his town-dwellers.
The prophet’s statement was true. Based on the history,
zahir wasfrom desert and Prophet Muhammad and the
companions were from town. So, the utterance followed maximof
quality.
The prophet stated the information just adequately, but he
informed something which had been known by the people. so,
the statement breached maxim of quantity, prophet Muhammad
breached maxim of quantity because he wanted the people to
respect zahir and not to discriminate him. Usually the people of
town did not respect the people of desert becausethey were
considered as low sicieties.
Usually, the people of town were more respected than the
people of desert because they have better culture and
civilization. Related to his view, the prophet said that because he
wanted the people respecteach other without any exceptions, in
this case are between the people and zahir. So, the utterance
followed maxim of relation.
Beside that, the prophet informed the people clearly and
briefly, the statement was not ambigious. The message could be
caught well by the people. So, the utterance followed maxim of
manner.

b. The fouth, fifth, sixth and seventh sentences

The prophet (sallallahu alayhe wa sallam) loved him very

much, and he (Zahir) was an ugly man. One day the
prophet came to him whilst he was selling some foods. He
embraced him from behind. The man could not see him,
so he said, “Let me go!
In the sentence, there is an utterance said by Zahir. One
day the prophet came to Zahir whilst he was selling some goods.
Then the prophet embrace him from behind. He was shocked
because he could not see the prophet. So he snapped at the
prophet and requested to let him go but the prophet kept
embracing him.
Based on the hadith, Zahir requested the man to let him go
because he wanted to know who the man was. His request was
relevant to the situation. So, the utterance followeq maxim of
relation.
Besides that, Zahir also asked the man briefly and clearly.
He did not make something ambigious and the man could
understand it well. So, the utterance followed maxim of manner.

c. The eighth sentence

Who is this?”

In the sentence there is an utterance said by Zahir. After

Zahir tried to secede from the man and the man kept e,bracing
him, he was antonished. He really wanted to know who
embraced him. Frantically, he asked the man who he was.
Zahir asked who actually the man was because the prophet
did not give any response to his request, it was relevant and
partinent to what he requested before. So, the utterance
followed maxim of relation.
Beside that, Zahir asked the prophet clearly and briefly. He
did not make something ambigious and the prophet could
understand it well. So, the utterance followed maxim of manner.

d. The ninth and tenth sentences

Then he turned around and recognized the
prophet (sallallahu alayhe wa sallam), so he tried
to move closer to him once he knew who it was.
The prophet (sallallahu alayhe wa sallam) started
to say, “Who will buy this slave?

After Zahir requested the Prophet to let him go and asked

who he was, the prophet was silent for a moment and kept
embracing Zahir. Then Zahir turned around and recognize the
prophet. The prophet started to speak by making a joke. He
offered the people around who would buy Zahir as a slave.
Actually prophet Muhammad didi not really sell Zahir. The people
around them understood that the prophet’s offer was not serious.
By saying this utterance, it means the prophet changed the
talking point by offering Zahir to the people. It was out the
previous topic. So, the utteance breached maximof relation. The
prophet breached maxim of relation because he wanted to joke
with Zahir.
Besides that, the prophet also offered Zahir to the people
briefly and clearly. He did not make the order ambigious. So, the
utterance followed maxim of manner.
 e. The elevent sentence
Zahir said, “O messenger of Alloh, you will find
me unsellable,

After the prophet offered who would buy Zahir, Zahir

protested immediately by saying that no one would buy him
because he was worthless in the people’s eyes. From that
utterance, Zahir looked serious to respond the Prophet’s joke.
Zahir said modestly that he was unsellable. As an ugly man
and also he came from desert, he thought that no one wanted to
buy him. Because of that, based on his feeling, he really felt
worthless. So, utterance followed maxim of quality.
He said that statement just adequately. So, the utterance
followed maxim of quantity.
Zahir said that because he was aware that he was ugly and
just a man from desert. Because of that, he thought that no one
would buy him. His response was related to whaat the prophet
said before. So, the utterance followed maxim of relation.
By saying that, it was clear that Zahir felt worthless. He
said brieffly and clearly. He also did not make something
ambigious. So, the utterance followed maxim of manner.

f. The twelfth sentence

The prophet (sallallahu alayhe wa sallam) said,
“but in the sight of Alloh (subhanallahu wa ta’ala)
you are not unsellable, or he said, “but in the
sight of Alloh (subhanallahu wa ta’ala) you are
valuable.”

After hearing Zahir response, Prophet Muhammad told that

even though there were many people who did not response him,
but in sign of Alloh he was valuable. Finally, Zahir felt very happy
after hearing this statement.
 The prophet said that because during his life he had good
manners and always fought for islam. Alloh said in the holy
Quran Surah At Taubah verse 20:
“Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with might
and main, in Alloh’s cause, with their goods and their
persons, have the highest rank in the sigh of Alloh. They
are the people who achieve (salvation).”
Based on that verse, the prophet statement agreed with
what Alloh said in the holy Quran. So, the utterance followed
maxim of quality.
Beside that, the prophet’s utterance was clear and brief. It
was also as informative as required to make Zahir happy by the
joke. So, the utterance followed maxim of quantity.
Initially, the prophet’s offer was addressed to the people
but after Zahir stated that he was unsellable, the prophet
explained that in the sight of Alloh he was valuable. It was not
related to his previous statement because the changing
addressee. So, the utterance breached maxim of relation. The
prophet breached maxim of relation because he wanted to give
knowledge to Zahir that Alloh did not differenciate His creatures.
Even though it was not related to the previous statement,
the prophet said that briefly and did not make something
ambigious. Zahir could inderstand what the prophet meant. So,
the utterance followed maxim of manner.
Based on the conversation between Prophet Muhammad
and Zahir in the hadith above and also considering the context,
we can find implied meaning in the hadith. Implicitly, the prophet
wanted to tell that Alloh did not judge people by their weilth and
power. In the sight of Alloh, people who have the best degree are
those who are righteous, as Alloh said in the holy Quran Surah Al
Hujuraah verse 13:
 “O mankind! We created you from single (pair) of a male
and female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye
may know each other (not that ye may despise (each
other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sign of Alloh
is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Alloh has full
knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).”
Besides that, Prophet Muhammad also wanted to teach us
to respect each other. Alloh said in the holy Quran Surah Al
Hujurat verse 11:
“O ye who believe! Let not some man among you laugh at
others. It may be that the (latter) are better than the (former):
Nor let some women laugh at others: it may be that the (latter
are better than the (former): Nor defame nor be sacrastic to each
other, nor call each other by (offensive) nicknames: I ll seeming
is a name connoting wickedness, (to be used of one) after he was
believed: And those who do not desist are (indeed) doing wrong.”

3. The third joke

Wahab bin Baqiyyah told that Kholid from Humaid from Annas
narrated that a person requested Prophet Muhammad that he
be given a conveyance. Prophet Muhammad replied, “The
baby of a camel shall be given to you.” The person said, “
What shall I do with the bay of a camel O’ Messenger of Alloh?”
(I want one for a conveyance). The prophet then replied
smilling, “Every camel is the baby of a camel.”

the hadith consists of four sentence. Each sentence will be

discussed below.

a. The first sentence

 Wahab bin Baqiyyah told that Kholid from Humaid
from Annas narrated that a person requested
Prophet Muhammad that he be given a conveyance.

It was narrated that there was a person who needed a

conveyance. So, he requested Prophet Muhammad to be given a
conveyance. The man requsted the prophet briefly and clearly.
He did not make something ambigious and the prophet
understand it well. So, it followed maxim of manner.

b. The second sentence

Prophet Muhammad replied, “The baby of a camel
shall be given to you.

Based on the hadith, it is explained that, one day, there

was a man requested Prophet Muhammad to be given
conveyance. The Prophet started to joke. He would give a camel
but he said that he would give the baby of a camel which meant
a camel, not a little camel.
This utterance was true because the prophet meant was
not a little camel, but a baby of camel which meant a camel. So,
the utterance followed maxim of quality.
Since the prophet did not want to give a little camel,
actually the prophet could say that he would give a camel but he
said in such a way. So, the utterance breached maxim of
quantity. He breached maxim of quantity because he wanted to
joke with the man.
The prophet’s utterance was also not relevant to what the
man requested. The man requested to be given a conveyance
but the prophet said that he would give the baby of camel. It
made the man confused. He thought thathe would be given a
little camel. The baby of camel could not be used as a
conveyance. So, the utterance breached maxim of relation. The
prophet breached maxim of relation because he wanted to oke
with the man.
Actually, the prophet’s utterance was clear. So, the
utterance followed maxim of manner.

c. The third sentence

The person said, “ What shall I do with the bay of a
camel O’ Messenger of Alloh?” (I want one for a
conveyance).
in the sentence, there is an utterance said by the man.
After the Prophet answered that the baby of a camel would be
given to the man, the man was confused. He did not know how
the baby of camel could be a [Link] asked the Prophet.
The man asked what he could do with the baby of a camel.
He asked that in order to make what the prophet said clear. So,
the utterance followed maxim of relation.
The question was clear and not ambigious. The man
wanted the Prophet to clarify his statement. So, he asked the
prophet. Therefore, the utterance followed maxim of manner.

d. The fourth sentence

The prophet then replied smilling, “Every camel is
the baby of a camel.”
Camel is born from another camel, is not it? The question
was rhetorical question to ask the man to think of the
information. Whereas in the English translation the translator
stated that the prophet said “Every camel is the baby of camel”.
The information was directly stated.
The utterance was said by prophet Muhammad to replay
the man’s question. From the hadith, we know that after the man
looked confused and asked for clarification, the prophet clarified
that he would actually give a camel. He said that every camel
was the baby of a camel. It was enough to make the man
understood.
In the hadith, the Prophet explained to the man that what
he meant was he would give a camel. It was true that there was
no camel which was not the baby of camel. So, the utterance
followed maxim of quality.
In relation to the previous statement that the prophet
would give the baby of camel, the man was confused. So, the
prophed explained that every camel was the baby of camel. The
utterance followed maxim of relation.
In order to make it clear, the Prophed explained what he
meant before. After hearing the explanation, the man could
understand what the prophet said before. So, it was not
ambigious anymore. Therefore, the utterance followed maxim of
manner.
From the hadith above, we can see a conversation between
the man and prophet Muhammad. In the conversation, the
Prophet made a joke with the man. It can be seen when the
Prophet replied the man that he would give the baby of camel. It
did not mean that the Prophet would give a little camel. The man
thought that he would be given a little camel because he did not
know what was implied in what the prophet said . finally, the
man understood after the prophet explained that every camel
was the baby of a camel.