Jumat, 07 September 2018

Men Compliment to the Women Style


Discourse Analysis

Men Compliment to the Women Style







By :
 Jon Sastro
0821110047
Vc




Lecture;
Epi Wadison, M.Pd






DEPARTEMENT OF ENGLISH
FACULTY OF TEACHER TREANING AND EDUCATION
MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY OF BENGKULU
2011




CHAPTER 1


INTRODUCTION


1.1  Background

Discourse Analysis explores the relationship between meaning, context, and communication. This is what discourse analysis is able to do for us, in particular, it can help us explain the relationship between what we say and what we mean and understanding, in a particular context. It can also give us the tools to took at larger units of texts such as patterns of vocabulary and textual organization that are typical of particular uses of language.
Discourse analysis than can take us into what riggenbach(1999) calls the ‘bigger picture’ of language description that is often left out of more micro-level descriptions of language use. It can take us into the social and cultural settings of language use to help us understand particular language choices. That is, it can take us beyond description to explanation and help us understand the ruler of the game that are part of the knowledge users or a language draw on in their everyday communications (Bhatia 1999).

1.2  research problem

Base on in the introduction above is research will discuss about Men Compliment to the Women Style.
1.      How the men compliment to the women style?
2.      What the mean of  that compliment?
1.3  research objective
The objective research is to find out and describe Men Compliment to the Women Style in my around.
1.4  the significance  of the research
The importance of this research is to inform readers about the manner and purpose of a compliment. Researchers hope this study can also provide information about the conversation praising the appearance of women in the neighborhood.

1.5  the limitation of the research
In this reseach, the writer limit the research only to investigate a conversation about men compliment to the women style.






CHAPTER II


REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1              Definition of discourse Analysis
discourse analysis, is a general term for a number of approaches to analyzing written, spoken, signed language use or any significant semiotic event.The objects of discourse analysis discourse, writing, talk, conversation, communicative event, etc. are variously defined in terms of coherent sequences of sentences, propositions, speech acts or turns-at-talk.
Discourse Analysis explores the relationship between meaning, context, and communication. discourse analysis has 3 theory, based on meaning, types of sentences and the kinds of conversations, that are: austin’s theory, sherlie’s theory and grice’s theory.

2.2              Kinds of the theory
A.           Austin’s analysis of meaning is unique in the sense that meaning is not explained through some forms of reduction. In reductive theories of meaning, complexities of meaning expressed by a sentence are reduced by a single criterion to something else, and this is claimed to be the process of explaining the meaning of the sentence.
 According to Austin's theory (1962), what we say has three kinds of meaning:
1.      lucotionary meaning - the literal meaning of what is said     
2.      illocutionary meaning - the social function of what is said                           
3.      perlocutionary meaning - the effect of what is said.

B.  A theory of john Searle(1969) developed from the theory of Austin.
Sarle identified and classified of the austin theory in 5 classes
1.    Representative - speech acts that commit a speaker to the expressed proposition.
2.    Directive - speech acts that are to cause the hearer to take partcular action
3.    Expressive - speech acts that express the speaker’s attitudes andemotions towards the proposition
4.    Comissives - speech acts that commit a speaker to some future action
5.    Declaration - speech acts that change the reality in accor with the proposition of the declaration

C.                Grice(1975) argues that is principleis based on four sub principles or conversational maxim.
Kinds of Conversational Maxim:
1.    Maxim of Quality
The maxim of quality for cooperative interaction in English may be best measured by the number of expressions we use to indicate that what we’re saying may not be totally accurate.
2.    Maxim of Quantity
The maxim of quantity is used to express information clearly, to ask for help and to avoid misunderstanding.
3.    Maxim of Relation
The maxim of relation is used to find out true information and to give true information be relevant.
4.    Maxim of Manner
The maxim of manner is used to avoid obscurity of expression, avoid ambiguity, be brief and be orderly.




CHAPTER III

RESERCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Methodology
This is a descriptive study that aims to describe how men compliment to women style. The writer collected data by directly listening to the conversation of friends. Data information about the purpose of research. data taken directly from events in the conversation, which involved men and women. and sources of data were taken from the book and hear direct conversations, this study took place on campuss and in kost.

3.2 Technique for colleting the data
1. hear direct conversation
          2. analysis what mean the speaker say to hearer





CHAPTER IV


FINDINGS


4.1 discussion

Generally we are always find the conversational  in the people’s habit activities. I am going to give some example and scenario that people always do to interact one another, althought sometimes people doesn’t dare and never care in their conversation. The following scenario, indicate that doesn’t happen the conversational between them.
In the classroom there was a woman(timi) sitting while doing her task. then came a man(herza) and he compliment the girl:

Herza  : way tim, cantik nian kau hari ko,. Hehehe
 timi    : yak au lah,.,.

Conversation above becomes funny and confusing, because the conversation did not know what it means, then appears on the of perception austin’s theory in herza’s utterence

herza: wai tim, cantik nian kau hari ko.

In lucotionary meaning it it the real meaning that timi is beautiful, in  illocutionary meaning that the herza want to timi to do somethig for him. and in perlocutionary meaning that the timi understand what the meaning herza utterence and timi do something for herza,(that mean herza want to timi do his task).

And than from herza’s utterance ; wai tim, cantik nian kau hari ko, it’s mean that same with “ tim, tolong buatin ambo tugas” so the utterance appears in Sarle’s theory that identified and classified the meaning utterance. That is:
Directive; (request)
Ø    Tim, tolong buatin ambo tugas

After that I am going to give the examples of conversational by using Indonesian language. This happen at the campuss:
Fery    : za, tengok cewek tu cantik dak menurut kau?
Herza  : way, sumpah, cantik nian men, naksir ambo lah
Fery    : menurut kau cak mano jon?
Jon     : cacam, cantik nian tu cuy, sumpah ajib men

Based on the conversation above, herza and jon told the right information, that the women they see very beautiful. moreover this information be strengthened with the word “SUMPAH”. so the information they convey is correct. So that conversation above there in grice’s theory of the conversation maxim quality.






CHAPTER V


CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION


5.1 conclussions
Based on the results and discussion in chapter IV of this study took several conclusions, that every conversation has a different meaning between the speaker with the listener so that conversations are relationship and have a meaning which according to the situation and context

5.2 suggestion
conversation is something that can connect from person to person, so conversation is very important in our lives, and in this Investigation, I hope be useful for us especially for English department Student in Muhammadiyah University of Bengkulu. Also,I want to thank to my lecture that had this task to me.






REFERENCES


Paltridge,Brian.2000. Making Sense Of Discourse Analysis. Australia: Gold Coast.
Yule, George.1985. The Study of Language. New York: Cambrige University Press.
Spolsky, B. 1998. Sociolinguistics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

































Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar