Faizal Risdianto; Sumarlam Sumarlam; Djatmika Djatmika; Tri Wiratno
Abstract
This study analyzes the language employed by Kompas, Republika, Media Indonesia, and Jawa Pos regarding the relocation of Indonesia’s capital city, focusing on attitude, graduation, and engagement. Eight online texts were analyzed using discourse analysis. This paper used systemic functional linguistics ...
Read More
This study analyzes the language employed by Kompas, Republika, Media Indonesia, and Jawa Pos regarding the relocation of Indonesia’s capital city, focusing on attitude, graduation, and engagement. Eight online texts were analyzed using discourse analysis. This paper used systemic functional linguistics as a tool to analyze the texts. The findings revealed a predominance of positive attitude data (67.2% positive, 32.8% negative), predominantly heterogloss in engagement (91.8% heterogloss, 8.2% monogloss), and a majority of raising/sharpening graduation data (75.1% raising/sharpening, 24.9% lowering/softening). This disparity between positive and negative appraisal data signifies significant and contentious issues the government, community leaders, and the general public face concerning the capital city’s relocation. The results of news outlets analysis demonstrated how ideological orientations shape the construction of social and political values, influencing public beliefs and perceptions of the capital relocation project in Indonesia.
Nurul Aini; Djatmika Djatmika; Sumarlam Sumarlam; Diah Kristina
Abstract
The study aims at analyzing politeness and gender around the postponement of election discourse in the Rosi Talk Show (RTS). This qualitative study applies a pragmatic approach that investigates hedge markers (HM). Data were collected from the utterances of nine participants using basic tapping, free-flowing ...
Read More
The study aims at analyzing politeness and gender around the postponement of election discourse in the Rosi Talk Show (RTS). This qualitative study applies a pragmatic approach that investigates hedge markers (HM). Data were collected from the utterances of nine participants using basic tapping, free-flowing listening, and note-taking. The results indicated several findings. First, academics (males) represented hedge markers with assertive acts of expressing an opinion. However, the practitioner (female) tended to use directive acts of questioning. Second, academics and practitioners (males) often used hedges for quality maxims. While the practitioner (female) often used hedges with question tags. Third, the function of HM showed performative hedges as hesitation and meta-comments; particles to emphasize questions, soften act, and give flexibility; adverbial clauses to show cause-effect and conditions; hedges to quality maxims to show hesitation, raise objections, minimize criticism, and other corrections; hedges to relevance maxims as allegation and hesitation; and hedges in politeness as indifference, rejection, and avoidance.
Nur Lailiyah; Djatmika Djatmika; Riyadi Santosa; Sumarlam Sumarlam
Abstract
This study aimed to describe the complaining speech act strategy used by Covid-19 survivors from the gender and education perspective. Data were collected using structured interviews with 36 hospitalized survivors of different genders. The results indicated that female patients with undergraduate education ...
Read More
This study aimed to describe the complaining speech act strategy used by Covid-19 survivors from the gender and education perspective. Data were collected using structured interviews with 36 hospitalized survivors of different genders. The results indicated that female patients with undergraduate education use the modified blame strategy, while those with non-undergraduate education use the annoyance strategy. Undergraduate women complain more politely than non-undergraduate women and use longer and more interrogative sentences to soften the interlocutor. Non-undergraduate women blame using direct sentences showing irritation. Furthermore, men with undergraduate education use the annoyance strategy, while non-undergraduates use the ill consequences strategy. Undergraduate and non-undergraduate men tend to use aggressive complaining strategies and ask for improvement from their speech partners. However, women with undergraduate education sometimes realize their complaints to their interlocutors more rudely in the form of judgment than non-undergraduate women and men, as well as undergraduate men.
Monika Widyastuti Surtikanti; Djatmika Djatmika; Riyadi Santosa; Diah Kristina
Abstract
Studies on presidential debates provide evidence that the use of boosters helps to convey strong emphasis on candidates’ ideology. This persuasive strategy is best portrayed through the schematic structure of presidential debates. Therefore, this study aims to scrutinize the boosters’ functions ...
Read More
Studies on presidential debates provide evidence that the use of boosters helps to convey strong emphasis on candidates’ ideology. This persuasive strategy is best portrayed through the schematic structure of presidential debates. Therefore, this study aims to scrutinize the boosters’ functions realized in the first American Presidential Debate 2020. This is a qualitative study with a pragmatic approach that investigates booster’s functions using the domain, taxonomy, and componential analysis. The linguistic evidence in the result shows the candidates exploited several intensifiers largely, including force indication, source tagging, accentuating, and solidarity markers. These boosters emphasize the strength of past deeds, criticizing past policies to promote definite proposals, expose repetitive emotional expression, and seek solidarity in the thesis stage. Meanwhile, in the argument stage, they function as devices for articulating offensive and defensive arguments. The results imply the essential functions of boosters in the persuasive political discourse of presidential debate viewed from its communicative purpose reflected in each schematic structure.
Farida Indri Wijayanti; Djatmika Djatmika; Sumarlam Sumarlam; FX. Sawardi
Abstract
This study captured the characteristics of a good leader from speech acts and politeness strategies performed by the candidates for the commissioner of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) during the interviews and public tests from a gender perspective. This qualitative research applies a naturalist ...
Read More
This study captured the characteristics of a good leader from speech acts and politeness strategies performed by the candidates for the commissioner of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) during the interviews and public tests from a gender perspective. This qualitative research applies a naturalist paradigm and a sociopragmatic approach. The analysis of six videos selected by purposive sampling indicates no difference in the politeness strategies used by female and male candidates, both of which used positive politeness strategies. However, female candidates are slightly different compared to the male candidates in the use of directive speech acts of asking for permission and negative politeness strategies to give deference and impersonalize speakers. Ten character dimensions observed from the candidates include drive, collaboration, humility, integrity, temperance, justice, accountability, courage, transcendence, and judgment. The female candidates show a higher prevalence of collaboration and humility, whereas male candidates have a higher prevalence of integrity and judgment.