Face Threatening Act In US Presidential Candidate First Debate Between Joe Biden And Donald Trump On Daily Mail And Youtube’s Skynews 2020

Rofiq Zhahari Adi (1) , Hartono Hartono (2) , Ria Nirwana (3)
(1) Al Ghifari University,
https://doi.org/10.53675/gist.v4i2.376
crossmark

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Terbitan
Vol 4 No 2 (2021): THE GIST: JURNAL SASTRA DAN BAHASA
Telah diserahkan
2022-01-03
Diterbitkan
2022-04-01
PDF (Inggris)

Abstrak

ABSTRACTThe topic of this research is about the first debate of US presidential candidates conducted in 2020 between Joe Biden and Donald Trump. This study aims to analyze indirect politeness on the debate. This study uses Brown and Levinson politeness theory with 4 categories of direct speech act politeness and two FTAs, namely: (1)bald on record (2)positive politeness (3)negative politeness (4)off record, Face Threathening Act is divided into two, namely: (1)FTA speaker (2)FTA listener. This research uses qualitative descriptive method, so descriptive research is able to characterize a phenomenon's situation. It means that descriptive research will provide more information than the researcher who had collected the data requires. Researcher have analyzed conversations during debates between presidential candidates using Brown and Levinson's theory with a total of 61 data, and 45 data as analysis material. This research is aimed to the readers and further researchers can be used as a reference and especially for researcher. Joe Biden's dominant indirect speech act was emotional, but Trump's dominance with accusations indicated that Trump was focused on his opponent. Trump as a speaker also dominates over Biden's speech. Dominant as much as this includes Trump who more often interrupts the conversation with the meaning behind his words. politeness is a way other than expressing one's attitude towards others besides that, because this is a human attitude to respect other people.Keywords: politeness, face threatening act, indirect speech act, debate   ABSTRAKTopik penelitian ini tentang debat pertama para calon presiden US yang dilakukan pada tahun 2020 antara Joe Biden dan Donald Trump. Pada penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis tindak kesopanan tidak langsung pada saat debat. Penelitian ini menggunakan teori kesopanan Brown and Levinson dengan 4 kateogri kesopanan direct speech act dan dua FTA yaitu: (1)bald on record (2)positive politeness (3)negative politeness (4)off record, Face Threathening Act terbagi dua yaitu: (1)FTA speaker (2)FTA hearer. penelitian ini menggunakan metode qualitative descriptive, maka Penelitian deskriptif mampu mencirikan situasi suatu fenomena. Ini berarti bahwa penelitian deskriptif akan memberikan lebih banyak informasi daripada yang dibutuhkan peneliti yang telah mengumpulkan data. Peneliti telah menganalisis percakapan saat debat antara calon presiden menggunakan brown and levinson’s theory dengan jumlah keseluruhan 61 data, dan 45 data sebagai bahan analisis. Penelitian ini ditujukan pada readers dan peneliti selanjutnya bisa digunakan sebagai reference dan khusunya untuk peneliti. Tindak tutur tidak langsung dominan Joe Biden adalah emosional, tetapi dominasi Trump dengan tuduhan menunjukkan bahwa Trump fokus pada lawannya. Trump sebagai pembicara juga mendominasi pidato Biden. Dominan sebanyak ini termasuk Trump yang lebih sering menyela pembicaraan dengan makna di balik ucapannya. kesopanan adalah cara selain mengungkapkan sikap seseorang terhadap orang lain disamping itu, karena ini adalah sikap manusia untuk menghargai orang lain.Keywords: kesopnanan, face threatening act, tindak tutur tidak langsung, debat

Penulis

Rofiq Zhahari Adi
Al Ghifari University
Hartono Hartono
Ria Nirwana

Cara Mengutip

Face Threatening Act In US Presidential Candidate First Debate Between Joe Biden And Donald Trump On Daily Mail And Youtube’s Skynews 2020. (2022). The GIST, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.53675/gist.v4i2.376

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Referensi

Fraser, B. (1990) Perspectives on Politeness . Journal of Pragmatics , (14) , 219 36

Nuccetelli, Susana and Gery Seay. (2008). Philosophy of Language: The central topics. Lnham, Md.:Rowman &Littlefield

Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson.(1987). Politeness: Some Universal in

Languagee Usage. Cambridge: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.

Yule, George. (1996). An Introduction to Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Levinson, Stephen C.(1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Mey, Jacob.(1993). Pragmatics:An Introduction. Cambridge: Wiley Blackwell.

Goffman, E. (1955). On Face work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements Social

Interaction. Psychiatry, 18(3):213-31.

Holmes, J. (2001). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge Publishers Ltd

Brown, P., Levinson, S. C., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage (Vol. 4). Cambridge university press.

Ferguson, A., & Thomson, J. (2008). Systemic functional linguistics and communication impairment. The Handbook of Clinical Linguistics, 130–145.

Hancock, D. R., & Algozzine, B. (2017). Doing case study research: A practical guide for beginning researchers. Teachers College Press.

Hasanah, N., & Sarage, J. (2017). REQUESTING SPEECH ACT OF UTTERANCES IN OCEAN�S ELEVEN BY STEVEN SODERBERGH: A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS. UAD TEFL International Conference, 1, 410–415.

Huber-Kriegler, M., L�z�r, I., & Strange, J. (2003). Mirrors and windows: An intercultural communication textbook. Council of Europe.

Hymes, D. (2005). Models of the interaction of language and social life: toward a descriptive theory. Intercultural Discourse and Communication: The Essential Readings, 4–16.

Kienpointner, M. (1997). Varieties of rudeness: Types and functions of impolite utterances. Functions of Language, 4(2), 251–287.

Taylor, I. N. T. (2013). A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF SPEECH ACTS TO REVEAL NINETEEN SIXTIES AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN�S OBSTACLES. YOGYAKARTA STATE UNIVERSITY.

Wang, J. (2009). Theoretical Interpretations of Questions and Power Relations. 2009). Professional Communication Collaboration Between Academics and Practitioners. Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong, 149–170.

Watts, R. J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge University Press.

Sugiyono 2017,. Metode Penelitian Kuantittaif, Kualitatif, dan R&D Bandung : Alfabeta, CVBrown, P., Levinson, S. C., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage (Vol. 4). Cambridge university press.

Artikel paling banyak dibaca berdasarkan penulis yang sama

1 2 3 4 > >>