An Analysis Of Presupposition In “Kick Andy” Talk Show

(1)

AN ANALYSIS OF PRESUPPOSITION IN “KICK ANDY” TALK

SHOW

A THESIS

BY:

NURUL SYAKINAH

REG. NO. 090705056

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH

FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES

UNIVERSITY OF SUMATERA UTARA

(2)

AN ANALYSIS OF PRESUPPOSITION IN “KICK ANDY” TALK

SHOW

A THESIS

BY:

NURUL SYAKINAH REG.NO. 090705056

SUPERVISOR CO-SUPERVISOR

_________________ __________________ Dr. Eddy Setia, M.Ed. TESP Drs. Yulianus Harefa, M.Ed. TESOL Submitted to Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatera Utara Medan in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Sarjana Sastra from Department of English.

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH

FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF SUMATERA UTARA

(3)

Approved by the Department of English, Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatera Utara (USU) Medan as thesis for The Sarjana Sastra Examination.

Head, Secretary,

_________________ _____________________ Dr. H. Muhizar Muchtar, MS Rahmadsyah Rangkuti, MA. Ph.D NIP. 195411171980031002 NIP. 197502092008121002

(4)

Accepted by the Board of Examiners in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Sarjana Sastra from the Department of English, Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatera Utara, Medan.

The Examination is held in Department of English Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatera Utara on 26 May 2014

Dean of Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatera Utara

Dr. H. Syahron Lubis, MA NIP. 19511013 197603 1 001

Board of Examiners

Rahmadsyah Rangkuti, MA. Ph.D ...

Dr. Eddy Setia, M.Ed. TESP ... Dr. Roswita Silalahi, M.Hum ...

(5)

AUTHOR’S DECLARATION

I, NURUL SYAKINAH DECLARE THAT I AM THE SOLE AUTHOR OF THIS THESIS EXCEPT WHERE REFERENCE IS MADE IN THE TEXT OF THIS THESIS. THIS THESIS CONTAINS NO MATERIAL PUBLISHED ELSEWHERE OR EXTRACTED IN WHOLE OR IN PART FROM A THESIS BY WHICH A HAVE QUALIFIED FOR OR AWARDED ANOTHER DEGREE. NO OTHER PERSON’S WORK HAS BEEN USED WITHOUT DUE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IN THE MAIN TEXT OF THIS THESIS. THIS THESIS HAS NOT BEEN SUBMITTED FOR THE AWARD OF ANOTHER DEGREE IN ANY TERTIARY EDUCATION.

Signed :

(6)

NAME : NURUL SYAKINAH

TITLE OF THESIS :AN ANALYSIS OF PRESUPPOSITION IN “KICK

ANDY” TALK SHOW

QUALIFICATION : S-1/ SARJANA SASTRA DEPARTMENT : ENGLISH

I AM WILLING THAT MY THESIS SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR REPRODUCTION AT THE DISCRETION OF THE LIBRARIAN OF DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH, FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES, UNIVERSITY OF SUMATERA UTARA ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT USERS ARE MADE AWARE OF THEIR OBLIGATION UNDER THE LAW OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA.

Signed :

(7)

ACKNOWLEDGMENT Assalamualaikum Warrahmatullahi Wabarakatuh,

Praise and majesty to Almighty Allah SWT for the blessing and endowments in my life. that I can finish my study in Department of English, University of Sumatera Utara and complete this thesis, entitled “AN ANALYSIS OF PRESUPPOSITION IN “KICK ANDY” TALK SHOW.

First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Eddy Setia, M.Ed, TESP and my Co – Supervisor, Drs. Yulianus Harefa, M.Ed. TESOL for their attention, contribution and support with all their great patience and understanding to guide me to finish this thesis. I would like to thank Dra. Hj. Rohani Ganie, M.Hum as my academic advisor. I also thank Dr. H. Muhizar Muchtar, M.S. as the head of English Department, Rahmadsyah Rangkuti, Phd. as the secretary, for their attention to all my academic affairs, and Dr. H. Syahron Lubis, M.A. the Dean of Faculty of Cultural Studies, University of Sumatera Utara and the staffs for their help. My gratitude is also addressed to all my lecturers in English Department who have taught me during my college with their love and patience.

A very special gratitude is also addressed to my beloved family. I do truly thank my father, Alm.M.Idris, my mother, Syarifah Nurul Huda, my brother, M.Rasyid and my sister, Maya Laurensi Mangonto. I also thank to my Grandmother, Jidah Syarifah Azizah. I will not be able to finish this thesis without all of your prayers, support and motivations who raise my spirit in writing this thesis.

Next, special and deep thank to my beloved Sayed Muazzar, thank you for your prayers, spirit, motivation and help. I would also to thank my lovely friends; Siti Lestari Nainggolan, Pratiwi Hutapea, Roni Abraham Simangunsong, for the time we have shared together. Zufita Nila Sari thanks for your help. For all members of English Department’09, I seriously appreciate our solidarity and thank you all.

(8)

Finally, I admit that this thesis is still far from being perfect. Any constructive ideas and suggestions which can improve the quality of my next writing are needed. I also hope this thesis can be useful as the references for those who have interest in linguistic study.

Medan, ….. May 2014 Writer,

Nurul Syakinah Reg. No. 090705056

(9)

ABSTRACT

The title of this thesis is An Analysis of Presupposition in TalkShow "Kick Andy". In this thesis, the writer analyzes the presuppositions in talk show Kick Andy. The analysis of this thesis is to find out the truth of an utterance and the factors that affect the listener in analyzing the truth of an utterance. The theory used in this thesis is Yule’s theory (1996) that divides types of presuppositions into 6 types, namely,

existential presupposition, factive presupposition, lexical presupposition, structural

presupposition, non-factive presupposition, and counterfactual presupposition. The

data used in this thesis is the utterance in talk show Kick Andy episode "Political Caricature" and "Learning to Kangaroo Island". The method used in this analysis is a qualitative descriptive method where the writer finds out the truths and interprets the utterances that has figurative meaning. Episode of Kick Andy has also been recorded in a book and the writer uses the book as a reference. After analyzing the presuppositions of talk show Kick Andy, the writer finds that the listener can analyze an utterance by many factors such as the choosing of words by the speaker, implicit meaning of an utterance, the speaker stop speaking in the middle of an utterance, the background of speaker and the using of slang. The misunderstanding of analyzing those factors can cause misunderstanding in the communication.

(10)

ABSTRAK

Judul skripsi ini adalah An Analysis of Presupposition in “KickAndy” Talk Show. Dalam skripsi ini, penulis menganalisis praanggapan dalam talk show Kick Andy. Analisis ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan kebenaran/makna sebenarnya dari sebuah ucapan dan faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi pendengar dalam menganalisis kebenaran sebuah ucapan. Analisis ini menggunakan teori Yule (1996) yang membagi jenis praanggapan ke dalam 6 jenis yaitu, existential presupposition, factive presupposition, lexical presupposition, structural presupposition, non-factive

presupposition, dan counterfactual presupposition. Data yang digunakan sebagai

bahan analisis adalah satuan ujaran yang terdapat pada talk show Kick Andy episode “Politik Karikatur” dan “Menuntut Ilmu Hingga ke Negeri Kangguru”. Metode yang digunakan dalam analisis ini adalah metode analisis deskriptif kualitatif dimana penulis menemukan dan mendeskripsikan kebenaran yang mengandung interpretasi dari ucapan-ucapan yang bernada kiasan. Epidose Kick Andy juga sudah dibukukan dan penulis menggunakan buku tersebut sebagai acuan. Setelah dilakukan analisis terhadap praanggapan dalam program talk show tersebut, penulis menemukan bahwa pendengar dapat menganalisis sebuah ucapan berdasarkan banyak faktor seperti pemilihan kata oleh pembicara, ucapan yang bermakna kiasan, pembicara yang tidak menyelesaikan kalimatnya di tengah ujaran, latar belakang pembicara dan penggunaan bahasa populer. Kesalahan pendengar dalam memahami faktor-faktor tersebutlah yang dapat menyebabkan kesalapahaman dalam komunikasi.

(11)

TABLE OF CONTENT

Title Page ... i

Supervisor’s Approval Sheet ... ii

Department’s Approval Sheet ... iii

Board of Examiner’s Approval ... iv

Author’s Declaration ... v

Copyright Declaration ... vi

Acknowledgement ... vii

Abstract ... ix

Abstrak ... x

Table of contents…...…...……...………... xi

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study...1

1.2 Problems of the Study ...3

1.3 Objectives of the Study ...3

1.4 Scope of the Study ...3

1.5 Significances of the Study ...4

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE, THEORY AND CONCEPT 2.1 Definition of Talk Show...5

2.2 Theories and Concept...6

2.2.1 Pragmatics ...6

2.2.2 Scope of Pragmatics...9

(12)

2.2.2.2 Deixis...10

2.2.2.3 Implicature... ..10

2.2.2.4 Presupposition...12

2.3 Theory of Presupposition...12

2.3.1 Existential Presupposition...12

2.3.2 Factive Presupposition...13

2.3.3 Lexical Presupposition...13

2.3.4 Structural Presupposition...14

2.3.5 Non-Factive Presupposition...14

2.3.6 Counterfactual Presupposition...15

2.4 Review of Presupposition’s Reference...18

2.4.1 Presupposition in Film “Janji Joni” (Gayatri Nadya Paramytha, 2009)...17

2.4.2 An Analysis of Presupposition in Newsweek Advertisements Slogans (Try Reza Essra, 2011)... 19

2.4.3 Analysis of Types of Presupposition Used in The Editorial Articles of The Jakarta Post News Paper (Yeni Marlisa, 2008)...20

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD 3.1 Research Design...22

3.2 Data and Data Source...22

3.3 Data Collection Method...23

(13)

CHAPTER IV FINDING AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Caricatur Politics...25 4.2 Learning to The Kangoroo Island...30 CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusions...36 5.2 Suggestions...37 REFERENCES ...38 APPENDICES

i. Politik Karikatur

(14)

(15)

ABSTRACT

existential presupposition, factive presupposition, lexical presupposition, structural

presupposition, non-factive presupposition, and counterfactual presupposition. The

(16)

ABSTRAK

presupposition, dan counterfactual presupposition. Data yang digunakan sebagai

(17)

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of The Study

There are uncountable interesting topics to talk from all over the world for being broadcasted as television program. One of those programs is talk show where some people sit together and discuss a theme. In Indonesia, talk show is also well known and one of the most well known talk shows is Kick Andy. Kick Andy is a talk show program that hosted by Andy F .Noya. Andy as the host presents several guest stars called speakers, to discuss various issues related to the theme in each episode.

Kick Andy began broadcasting on March 1, 2006 until now. This talk show presents real life stories that are informative, educational and inspiring with the various themes and cover all aspects of life. Andy is well known with his unique character which often asking the speaker straightforwardly and his sarcastic question. But, although, sometimes his question is very straightforward and sarcastic, he can make it sounds fun. The speakers also are not limited by their professions. They can come from any background especially they who have exciting stories to share, connected to the themes discussed.

The reason why the writer chooses KickAndy is because Kick Andy invites us to watch with heart. While the ordinary television shows are filled with the shows which showing band and music, the program which the point is mocking someone because of physical reason, and also the gossip about celebrity, Kick Andy is exist to motivate us for keep being inspired and grateful for the life God has given. The writer also likes Andy F. Noya with a style that is sometimes a bit serious but funny.

(18)

Kick Andy is packaging well. If there are two different talk shows that discussing the same topic, the writer thinks Kick Andy will seem better because the concept of the show in Kick Andy is not made formal but keep flowing. Andy F. Noya looks very smart in interviewing speakers with serious style, witty but still striking. Kick Andy in the process of interviewing or questioning, Andy F. Noya tends to ask things that are unexpected but it does not contain questions that are niceties. In the interview process, Andy F. Noya always be consistent and not swept away so that the answers of the interviewee do not float or out of context.

The speech interaction that occurs in Kick Andy is also interesting to watch in terms of presuppositions. Mulyana (2005:14) states that all statements or sentence expressions, whether they are positive or negative, still contain the basic assumption as the content and substance of the sentence. According to Mulyana’s statement itself, dialogues tangible interactional questions and answers between the host and speakers at the Kick Andy describes the process speech containing presuppositions. Some questions may only contain the answers yes-no but in talk show, many of utterance let the host assume and conclude the answer from the speaker or vice versa.

The writer is interested to the presupposition because in the most straightforward utterance can also have implicit meaning. By supposing an utterance correctly, there will be no misunderstanding in a conversation. In this thesis, the writer chooses the data that will be analyzed by selected utterance in Kick Andy talk show. The writer has chose some utterance that can cause misunderstanding meaning or the utterance that have factors which can affect to the misunderstanding itself.

(19)

1.2 Problems of the Study

Based on the background, there are some questions to be raised as the problems of this analysis, they are:

1. What are the types of presuppositions of the selected utterance in "Kick Andy" talk show?

2. How is the truth of presupposition of the selected utterance in "Kick Andy" talk show?

1.3 Objective of the Study The objectives are as follows:

1. To identify the types of presupposition of the selected utterance in “Kick Andy” talk show.

2. To comprehend the truth of presuppositionof the selected utterance in "Kick Andy"talk show.

1.4 Scope of the Study

The scope of this analysis is the types of presupposition used in the talk show. The presupposition analysis is based on George Yule’s theory (1996: 25-32) which divides the presupposition into six types: (1) Existential presupposition; (2) Factive presupposition; (3) Lexical presupposition; (4) Structural presupposition; (5) Non-factive presupposition; and (6) Counterfactual presupposition. For answering the problem of study, the writer scopes the data by only choosing two themes, the first theme is caricature of politic and the second theme is learning to Kangaroo Island, to make this thesis focus on analyzing the presupposition significantly. The data that

(20)

will be selected is the utterance that has implicit meaning and the utterances that can cause misunderstanding presuppose which affect the communication

.

1.5 Significance of the Study

The writer describes the significances of this analysis theoretically and practically. Theoretically, this research is to enrich the literary work. Practically, this thesis can provide the readers an easy understanding about presupposition especially in talk show. Thus, for the people who find difficulties in understanding presupposition, this thesis provide them the information about presupposition, including sample and the analysis for make people understand presupposition easily.

(21)

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE,

THEORY AND CONCEPT

A review of the literature is an essential part of academic research project. The literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. As the literature review, the writer uses the studies from previous researchers who also have interest in the same focus of presupposition especially in talk show.

2.1 Definition of Talk Show

One format that is often used in the television show discourse of "serious" is a talk show. Talk show is a broadcast discourse that can be seen as a product and as a media-oriented talk constantly. As a product of the media, talk shows can be 'text' culture that interact with viewers in the production and exchange of meanings. As a process of dialogue, talk show would pay attention to the problem of efficiency and accuracy, in aspects: emcee control, condition of participants and audience evaluation event

Definition of a talk show by Farlex in The Free Dictionary: A television or radio show in which noted people, such as authorities in a particular field, participate in discussions or are interviewed and often answer questions from viewers or listeners. (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Talk+shows).

Talk show has typical characteristics: using a simple conversation (casual conversation) with a universal language (to deal with the heterogeneity of the

(22)

audience). The theme must necessarily really important (or deemed important) to known audience or at least interesting for viewers. Discourse under discussion was the issue (or trend) and warm growing in the community. Based on the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission Decree No. 009/SK/KPI/8/2004 About Broadcasting Code of Conduct and Standards Program Releases Indonesian Broadcasting Commission on Article 8 mentioned when talk show program included in the factual program. The notion refers to the factual program broadcast programs serving non-fiction facts

There are types of talk show, too. The first is talk show that is light and entertaining. The second is talk show that are formal and serious talk show that formal and serious nature are generally included in the category news, while talk shows that are light and entertaining are included in the category of information. For the second category, talk show usually presented in a relaxed and full familiarity with one or more speakers invited to discuss hot topics. The topics that are light and easily digested by the audience. Relaxed atmosphere and light that is reflected from the expertise of the host of the show (hosted) aka liven moderator with comments or ignorant act that provoked laughter

2.2 Theories and Concept 2.2.1 Pragmatics

Yule (1996: 3) explains that pragmatics concerns with 4 areas:

Pragmatics is concerned with the study of meaning as communicated by a speaker (or writer) and interpreted by a listener (or reader). It has consequently, move to do with the analysis of what people mean by their utterences than what the

(23)

words or phrases in those utterances might mean by themselves. Pragmatics is the study of speaker meaning.

This type of study necessarily involves the interpretation of what people mean in particular context and how the context influences what is said. It requires a consideration of how speakers organize what circumstances. Pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning.

This approach also necessarily explores make inferences about what is said in order to arrive at an interpretation of the speakers intended meaning. This type of study explores how a great deal of what is unsaid is recognized as a part of what is communicated. We might say that it is the investigation of invisible meaning.

Pragmatics is the study of how more gets communicated than is said.

This perspective than raises the question of what determines the choice between the said and unsaid. Closeness, weather it is physical, social, or conceptual, implies shared experience. On the assumption of how close or distant the listener is, speaker determine how much needs to be said. Pragmatics is the study of the expression of relative distance.

Yule (1996:4) also distinguishes three fields of linguistic study to review its relationship with other areas of linguistic analysis. Firstly, he defines syntax as the study of relationships between linguistic forms – how they are arranged in sequences are well-formed. This type of study generally takes place without considering any world of reference of any user of the forms. Secondly, he considers semantics are the study of the relationship between linguistic forms and entities in the world – how words literally connect to things. Semantics analysis also attempts to establish the relationship between verbal descriptions and states of affairs in the world as accurate (true) or not, regardless of who produces that description. Thirdly, he regards

(24)

pragmatics as the study of relationships between linguistic forms and the users of those forms.

In addition, as social individuals, people spend much of their time talking or interacting with other people, for example when they are getting together with friends, workmates or families over meal time. These interactions involving utterances can be analyzed by pragmatics analysis to find out the speaker’s intended meanings, the listener’s assumptions or receptions regard with some aspects such as who the speaker and the listener are, what relationship they have, and in what context they are in when they interact.

The meaning gained from an utterance may differ from one to another person, it depends on the mentioned aspects. For example, two friends, Maggie and James, are having a conversation which may imply some things and infer some other things without providing any clear linguistic evidence of ‘the meaning’ of what was being communicated.

Maggie : “Coffee?”

James : “It would keep me awake all night “

Maggie has to know that Jamie has to stay up all night to study for an exam to comprehend that James receives her offering.

Here is another example of utterances in conversation which may often be heard, but what the participants mean depend on the shared knowledge laid between the speaker and listener.

A: “Hey, have you?’

B: “Yup, just this morning.”

The meaning of the words in the example is understood, literally, but not what is communicated by the speaker and the listener. However, both speaker and

(25)

the listener seem to understand each other as B answers A’s question without asking what does A mean with “have you?”

2.2.2 Scope of Pragmatics

Pragmatics is also has its scope. Yule (1996: xii) describes the subject areas of pragmatics as follows:

2.2.2.1Entailment

Yule (1996: 25) states that entailment is something that logically follows from what is asserted in the utterance. For example:

(1 ) Mary’s brother has brought three horses.

In producing the utterance (1), the speaker will normally be expected to have the presuppositions that a person called Mary has a brother. The speaker may also hold the specific presuppositions that Mary has only have one brother and that he has a lot of money. In fact, all of these presuppositions are the speaker’s and all of them can be wrong. The sentence in (1) will be treated as having some entailments such as Mary’s brother bought something, Mary’s brother bought three animals, somebody had bought three horses, and other similar logical consequences.

Moreover, there are two types of entailments; one way entailment and two way entailment. One-way entailment means that the sentences are not true paraphrases each other. For example:

(2) Harry saw a squirrel

(3) Harry saw an animal

If Harry saw a squirrel, then he necessarily saw an animal. But if he saw an animal, he could have seen a squirrel, but not necessarily. It could have been a mouse, a cat, a tiger, a big crocodile or else.

(26)

Meanwhile, two – way entailment means that the sentences are paraphrases of each other. For example:

(4) Jane sits in front of Ann.

(5) Ann sits behind Jane.

Sentence (4) and (5) have meaning relationships between in front of and

behind. We have a situation two – way entailment between the sentences. These

sentences are paraphrases one to another that it is also called two way entailment. 2.2.2.2Deixis

Yule (1996: 9) states that deixis is a process whereby words or expressions rely absolutely on content. It is a technical term from Greek for one of the most basic things we do with utterances which means ‘pointing’ through language. For example:

(6) Jim: “I’ll put this here”

(The context is Jim is telling his wife that he is about to put the key of the house in the kitchen drawer)

From sentence (6) it can be seen two deictic expressions – ‘this’ and ‘here’. These deictic expressions are conventionally understood as the expressions of being ‘near speaker’.

2.2.2.3Implicature

Yule (1996: 131) states that implicature is a short version of conversational implicature which is defined as an additional unstated meaning in conversation. There is a basic assumption in conversation that each participant (the speaker and the listener) attempt to cooperate to the exchange of talk. People produce implicatures all the time, but are mostly unaware of it. For example, if someone asks, “Could you

close the door?” the listener does not usually answer “Yes,” instead they perform the

(27)

of words that is conventionally a question, the listener can infer that the speaker is making a request.

Here are two examples of implicature which implicate “I don’t like” and

“I’m not going”:

(7) A: “Do you like the color?” B: “Red is red.”

(The context is – A and B are close friends and A knows well that B does not like red color)

Stating that “Red is red” in (7) is apparently both too informative (since people already know that red is red) and not informative enough because B does not directly answer the question of A. There may be some interpretations gained by anyone when hearing B’s answer, but since the context is A knows that B really does not like red, then B has given the answer of the question. Thus, A understands that B does not like the color they are talking about. B does not say that she/he does not like the color but she/he implies it.

For another example:

(8) A: “We’re going to the movie, are you going with us tonight?”

B: ‘My parents’ are visiting tonight.”

(The context is that A and B are good friends and A knows that B rarely meets her/his parents who live out of the town)

In (8), B’s answer is not related with the question of A, because there is not any relationship between the movie and B’s parents. However, since there is a shared knowledge between A and B, then B has actually answered A’s question. A knows that B seldom meets her parents living out of the town, so A must understand that B is not going with A because B must want to spend the night with her/his parents. B does not say that she is not going to the movie with the other, but she implies it.

(28)

2.2.2.4Presuppositions

Yule (1996: 133) states that presupposition is something the speaker assumes to be the case prior to making an utterance. Speakers, not sentences, have presuppositions. For example:

(9) Where has Anne looked for the keys?

Presuppositions of (9): Anne has looked for the keys, but has not found it yet. (10) Do you want to do it again?

Presupposition of (10): You have done it already, at least one time. (11) My wife is pregnant

Presupposition of (11): The speaker has a wife. 2.3Theory of Presupposition

Since the main focus of this thesis is the presupposition, the writer uses the theory of presupposition as main title for making the reader easier understand the theory. In this thesis, types of presupposition are based on Yule’s (1996: 25-32) explanation. To answer the first problem, the writer uses the types of presuppositions as follows:

2.3.1 Existential Presuppositions

This type of presupposition is not only assumed to be present in possessive constructions (for example, ‘your car’), but more generally in any definite noun phrase. By using any of the expressions in (12), the speaker is assumed to be commited to the existence of the entities named.

(12) The king of Sweden, the cat, the girl next door, the Counting Crows. Other triggers of existential presupposition: the (definite article). a/an (indefinite article), this, that, these, those (demonstrative) my, their, her, his, our (possessive

(29)

2.3.2 Factive Presupposition

The presupposed information following a verb like “know” can be tread as a fact and is described as a factive presupposition.

Example:

(13) I regret inviting him

Presupposition of (13): I invite him.

(14) It isn’t odd that she come early

Presupposition of (14): She comes early.

(15) He didn’t realize that he is a teacher

Presupposition of (15): He is a teacher.

Other triggers of factive presupposition: know, be sorry that, be proud that, be indifferent that, be glad that, be sad that, be odd that, surprised that, know that, matter, realized that, aware that, notice that, discover that.

2.3.3 Lexical Presupposition

This is assumption that in using one word, the speaker can act as if another meaning (word) will be understood. For example:

(16) Fathan stopped running

Presupposition of (16): He used to run.

(17) You are late agains

Presupposition of (17): He was late before.

In this case, the use of the expression stop and again are took to presuppose another (unstead) concept. Other triggers of lexical presupposition: return, no mere, another time, anymore, come back, repeat, still, restore.

(30)

2.3.4 Structural Presupposition

In this type, the assumption is associated with the use of certain words and phrases and assumed to be true. WH- question construction in English are conventionally interpreted with the presupposition that the information after the WH- form is already known to be the case.

Example:

(18) When did she travel to the USA?

Presupposition of (18): She traveled.

(19) When did you buy the book?

Presupposition of (19): You bought the book. 2.3.5 Non-Factive Presupposition

This type is an assumption that is assumed not to be true. In this type, verb like dream, pretend and imagine are used with the presupposition that what follows is not true.

Example:

(20) She dreamed that she was married

Presupposition of (20): She was not married

(21)He imagine he was a president

Presupposition of (21): He was not a president

(22)He pretends to be an expert

Presupposition of (22): He is not an expert.

2.3.6 Counterfactual Presupposition

(31)

instance, some conditional structural, presupposes that the information, in the if- clause is not true at the time of utterance.

Example:

(23) If you were my daughter, I would not allow you to do this.

Presupposition of (23): You are not my daughter.

In this thesis, the truth of presupposition are based on Yule’s (1996: 30-32) explanation.The presupposition of a simple sentence will continue to be true when that simple sentence becomes part of a more complex sentence. This is one version of the general idea that the meaning of the whole sentence is a combination of the meaning of its parts. However, the meaning of some presupposition (as ‘parts’) does not survive to become the meaning of some complex sentences (as ‘wholes’).

This is known as the project problem. In example, we are going to see what happens to the presupposition q (‘Kelly was ill’) which is assumed to be true in the simple structure of, but which does not ‘project’ into the complex structure. In order to follow this type of analysis, we have to think of a situation in which a person might say: ‘I imagined that Kelly was ill and nobody realized that she was ill.’

a. Nobody realized that Kelly was ill. (=p)

b. Kelly was ill. (=q)

c. p >>q

(At this point, the speaker uttering ‘a’ presupposition ‘b’

d. I imagined that Kelly was ill. (=r) e. Kelly was not ill. (=NOT q) f. r >>NOT q

(32)

g. I imagined that Kelly was ill and nobody realized that she was ill.

(=r&q)

h. r&q>> NOT q

(At this point, after combining r&q, the presupposition q can no longer be assumed to be true.

In an example, the technical analysis may be straight forward, but it may be difficult to think of a context in which someone would talk like that.

Perhaps example will contextualize better.

Shirley: It’s so sad. George regrets getting Mary pregnant. Jean: But he didn’t get her pregnant. We know that now.

If we combine two of the utterances, we have the sequence, ‘George regrets getting Mary pregnant; but he didn’t get her pregnant’. Identifying the different propositions involved, as in:

a. George regrets getting Mary pregnant. (= p ) b. George got Mary pregnant. (= q ) c. p >> q

d. He didn’t get her pregnant. (= r ) e. George regrets getting Mary pregnant,

but he didn’t get her pregnant. (= p & r) f. p & r >> NOT q

One way to think about the whole sentence presented is as an utterance by a person reporting what happen in the soap opera that day. That person will not assume that presupposition q (that George got Mary pregnant) is true when uttering.

A simple explanation for the fact that presupposition do not ‘project’ is that they are destroyed by entailments. Memories that an entailment is something that necessarily follows from what is asserted. In example, Jean’s utterance of ‘he didn’t

(33)

get her pregnant’ actually entails ‘George didn’t get Mary pregnant’ as a logical consequence.

In analyzing presuppositions, the truth of the data analysis process rests on the truth of presupposition itself. Truth presuppositions according to Yule(1996: 30-32) can be viewed from the perspective of the kinds of presuppositions. To answer the second problem, the writer uses the kinds of presuppositions as follows.

1. A truth Non-factive presupposition

A truth Non-factive presupposition is one that is assumed not to be true verbs like ‘dream’, ‘imagine’, ‘pretend’, as shown in, are used with the presupposition that what follows is not true. Here is example of a truth Non-factive presupposition:

a.I dreamed that I was rich (>>I was not rich) b.We imagined we were in Hawai (>>We were not in Hawai) c.He pretends to be ill (>>He is not ill)

2. A truth counterfactual presupposition

A truth counterfactual presupposition, meaning that what is presupposed is not only not true, but is the opposite of what is true, or contrary to facts. Here is example of a truth counterfactual presupposition:

a. If you were my friend, you would helped me (>>You are not my friend)

2.4 Review of Presupposition’s Reference

2.4.1 Presupposition in Film “Janji Joni” (Gayatri Nadya Paramytha, 2009) Gayatri Nadya Paramytha conducted a study in 2009 to know utterances

presupposition emerge through the scenes of film “Janji Joni”. She used Yule’s and Grundy’s theory in analyzing “Janji Joni” films. In analyzing the data, she used

(34)

descriptive study using methodology presented by Soejono and Abdurrahman (2005). Soejono and Abdurrahman stated that the descriptive method is no more than research is the discovery of the facts or collectively improvised fact finding. She formed two research questions to describe presupposition in “Janji Joni” films, which are:

1. How the utterance presuppositions emerge through the scenes of the film “Janji Joni”?

2. What are the types of presupposition that appeared in scenes “Janji Joni” films associated with the context of the situation, participants, and common knowledge that under lie the speech?

Her findings showed the five classifications of presupposition with different frequencies used in both speeches. It was revealed that every classification occurred in Janji Joni’s film. They are presuppositions that are found in each of the data is factual presuppositions. Existential presuppositions of data appearing in six of the seven data analyzed factual presuppositions while appearing in seven overall data. There are two lexical presuppositions and preconceptions of the opposite of all existing data. There is no presumption in the seventh structural data analyzed

The contribution of Gayatri’s analysis are giving the writer some ideas in choosing the exact reference theory. The writer and Gayatri has the similarities of the topic of study, which is the presupposition, and it inspire the writer in how to scope the study and make it focus. The first similarity between the writer and Gayatri is the thesis uses the theory of presupposition by Yule to analyze the data. Then, the second are equally make a transcript of the speech in writing in the form of spoken language. The third is writer will examine only utterances the data that have been

(35)

the writer has some clear differences from Gayatri’s study. The first difference is that Gayatri uses two theories; Yule and Grundy’s theory, but the writer does not use Grundy’s theory. The writer only uses Yule’s theory to analyze the data. The second difference is that Gayatri chooses a film as the data, but the writer chooses a talk show as the data.

2.4.2 An Analysis of Presupposition in Newsweek Advertisements Slogans (Try Reza Essra, 2011)

Try Reza Essra conducted a study in 2011 and focused on presupposition in Newsweek Advertisements Slogans. The theory is used to process the research is Yule’s theory. In analyzing the data, he used descriptive qualitative method. He formed two research questions to have a better understanding about presupposition in newsweek advertisements slogans, which are:

1. What types of presupposition are found in the slogan of newsweek magazine’s advertisement?

2. What does the slogan in advertisements presuppose?

The writer generates two problem statements; to find the types of presupposition and to find the slogan in advertisements presuppose. The writer has some similarities with Try’s study. The first similarity is that both used the theory of by Yule’s to analyze the data. The second one is that both analyze type of the presupposition. However, the writer has some clear differences from Try’s study. The first difference is that Try’s using newsweek magazine’s advertisement slogan as object research, but the writer uses presupposition in talk show “Kick Andy” as object research. The contribution of Try’s analysis for the writer is giving the idea to the writer in how supposing the truth behind the words.

(36)

2.4.3 Analysis of Types of Presupposition Used in the Editorial Articles of the Jakarta Post News Paper (Yeni Marlisa, 2008)

Yeni Marlisa conducted a study in 2008 and focused on Presupposition used in The Editorial Articles of The Jakarta Post News Paper. The theories is used to proceed the research is Yule’s theory. In analyzing the data, she used library research to collect and obtain and theories needed for the paper. She formed two research questions to have better understanding about presupposition used in The Editorial Articles of The Jakarta Post News Paper, which are:

1. How The Jakarta Post uses presupposition in its articles?

2. What types of presuppositions are mostly used in The Jakarta Post?

The contribution of Yeni’s analysis to the writer is as reference of Yule’s theory. Yeni’s analysis also explains the type of presupposition based on Yule’s theory which help the writer to classify the type of presupposition. The writer has some similarities with Yeni’s study. The first similarity is that both used the theory of by Yule’s to analyze the data. However, the difference between Yeni’s analysis and the writer’s analysis is the object research or data where Yeni’s uses newsweek as the data and the writer uses a talk show as the data. The writer also explains the comprehend truth of an utterance found from the data.

(37)

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHOD

3.1 Research Design

The research method in this thesis is qualitative research which observes and analyses directly the subject of this study. Qualitative research is concerned with developing explanations of social phenomena. Bogdan and Biklen (1982) propose five characteristics of qualitative research as quoted from Aulia (2010:29), they are;

a. Qualitative research has the natural setting as the direct source of data and researcher is the key instrument.

b. Qualitative research is descriptive. The data collected is in the form of words of pictures rather than number.

c. Qualitative research is concern with process rather than simply with outcomes or products.

d. Qualitative research tends to analyze their data inductively. e. “Meaning” is essential to the qualitative approach.

The design of this research is descriptive qualitative method since the data are in the form of words. This point discusses the way to collect, analyze, and get the valid data due to the need of completing the research objectives. The data are analyzed descriptively based on Yule’s theory especially on the types of presupposition used by Kick Andy talk show.

3.2Data and Data Source

(38)

from the Kick Andy talk show which has been made as a book. The tittle of that book is Kick Andy Kisah Inspiratif 3. Another source for completing this thesis are the books about pragmatic and presupposition that are connected to the problem of this thesis as references.

This thesis focuses on presupposition in the talk show Kick Andy. From the data source, the researcher analyzes the presupposition focusing on the types of presupposition based on Yule’s theory and find out the comprehend truth of the utterance.

3.3 Data Collection Method

The Kick Andy is already made as a book for make the reader easier accessing the topic discussed during the talk show. In this thesis, the writer uses the book to analyze the utterance in talk show Kick Andy. The title of that book is Kick

Andy Kisah Inspiratif 3. Related to the data collection, this research uses the

following steps. First, the writer collects all the related data from the library and internet. The next steps are selecting, and picking up the data referring to the problems of this study by classifying and selecting. The last step is arranges the data systematically deal with the objective of the study.

3.4 Technique of Data Analysis

Bogdan and Biklen (1992) state in qualitative research, the data gathered appear in words rather than in numbers. The first procedure of the data collection is observation. The data are analyzed through these following steps:

(39)

b. Arranging the data systematically deal with the objective of the study. c. Selecting, and picking up the data referring to the problems of this study

by classifying and selecting. In this thesis, the writer chooses the theme entitled politic of caricature and learning to Kangaroo Island and select the utterance that has implicit meaning and the utterances that can cause misunderstanding in a communication.

d. Finally, verifying and concluding the data that has been analyzed for making the conclusion.

(40)

CHAPTER IV

FINDING AND ANALYSIS

Behind a word, sometimes there is an implicit meaning that should be found out for finding the comprehend truth. Presupposing meaning is also not only occurring in a direct conversation or utterance, it is also needed for the written text. For this thesis, the writer is analyzing the presupposition in some selected utterances taken from Kick Andy talk show. Here are the themes that are analyzed:

4. 1 Caricature of Politics

The first of them on Kick Andy that should be analyzed is Caricature of Politics. In Kick Andy’s show entitled Caricature of Politics, there are some caricaturists invited as the speakers for discussing this theme. In this theme, the writer has found some utterance especially the utterance that has the implicit meaning or the utterance that can cause misunderstanding in a conversation which need to be found out its actual meaning. Here are the presuppositions:

“Nah, sejak itu saya yakin harus selalu bikin yang jelek. (Page 54) “Since that, I sure I have to make it ugly.”

Here is said by Priyanto, one of the speakers for this theme. He is a caricaturist and well known as the caricaturist that has high concern of situation and condition that are on happening. Here are the analyses of the presuppositions:

Type : Lexical presupposition

The type of the utterance above is the lexical because this is the assumption that in using in one word, the speaker can act as if another meaning (word) will be

(41)

Comprehend Truth :

1. Priyanto is caricaturist that always makes the ugly caricature. 2. Priyanto has the reason why he makes his caricature ugly.

Here can be stated because in that conversation, Priyanto’s friends in Tempo’s magazines saying that the pretty characters are only for advertisement consumption. By hearing that statement, Priyanto chooses that his caricature style must be ugly characters. That statement is also has presupposition that Priyanto caricature is not about advertisement consumption. In fact, his caricature is always identical with the critic of politic social.

Since Priyanto has many caricatures in media, there is also a case where people being pro and contra with his caricature. But he seems have no problem with it. Here is what he says that also has the comprehend truth to presuppose:

“Yang satu bilang menghina, yang lain mengatakan, ‘Nah, itulah fitrah manusia, makanan harus memilih’. Saya tidak perlu menjawab, biarkan pembaca bertengkar sendiri.”(Page 55)

“Some people say it does humiliate, the others say, ‘Look, this is the original character of human. Food must choose’. I do not need to answer it, let the reader having quarrel by themselves.”

Type : Factive Presupposition and Lexical Presupposition

The first sentence is the factive presuppostion because the information following a verb like ‘know’ can be tread as a fact. From the utterance, he knows that there is the pro and contra about his caricature. The next sentence is lexical presupposition because this is the assumption that in using in one word, the speaker can act as if another meaning (word) will be understood. In this utterance, he doesn’t give any comment about his caricature as if his opinion will be understood.

Comprehend Truth :

(42)

2. There are people who agree with his caricature.

3. There is a contravention of people’s opinion about his caricature. Here is the reason why there is the first and second comprehend truth above. 4. There are some people who saying that his caricature is showing the truth

about human being.

5. Priyanto thinks he does not need to give the answer of the contravention about his caricature.

6. People can have a quarrel with other people only because of having different opinion of something.

In introducing his way in caricature, Priyanto also has his own style. Here is how Priyanto describes his way in being caricaturist:

“Menjadi seorang karikaturis adalah jalan hidup saya yang tak akan mati.” (Page 56)

“Being the caricaturist is my way of life that will never die.”

Type : Factive Presupposition

The type of the utterance above is the factive presupposition because the information following a verb like ‘know’ can be tread as a fact and the others triggers of the factive presupposition contain of the ‘realized that’. The utterance can be understood being the Priyanto realizes that his choice is being the caricaturist.

Comprehend Truth :

1. Priyanto will always be caricaturist for his whole life.

2. Although Priyanto may have different job/career, being caricaturist is always in his life.

3. Priyanto loves caricature very much.

(43)

“Ya, inilah, memaksakan diri pengin jadi orang kaya, tapi tetap memamerkan kemiskinan.”(Page 56)

“Yeah, here is it, forcing ourselves to be the rich people but keep showing the proverty.”

Type : Lexical Presupposition

The type of the utterance above is the lexical because this is the assumption that in using in one word, the speaker can act as if another meaning (word) will be understood.

Comprehend Truth :

Oom Pasikom is well known with his coat that has patch. The statement above gives people some ideas to suppose. Here are the comprehend truth:

1. Coat is identical as the clothes for rich people.

2. A patch is identical as the clothes for the poor people. 3. People look at someone else by the way they are dressed. 4. Oom Pasikom has his own style.

This is probably because Oom Pasikom, who is a caricaturist that also criticizes the social by his caricature, uses his style of dressing as critic of social, “That’s how the society looks like.” This is because Indonesia is well known as the rich country, but there is much poverty among its citizens.

Those samples above may easily be understood by people. But there are many words that are related to general understanding of people in one area and only understood by that area. For that case, people have to find the correct presuppositions or it can give the misunderstanding. Here is the sample found in Kick Andy talk show:

“Dwi Koen muntah.”(Page 62) “Dwi Koen (is) vomit.”

(44)

The type of the utterance above is the lexical because this is the assumption that in using in one word, the speaker can act as if another meaning (word) will be understood.

Comprehend Truth :

Literally, it means that Dwi Koen is vomit. It may because of she eats something which is rejected by her body or other medical reasons. But here, the comprehend truth of that statements is something related of general understanding of people’s habit. In Indonesia, vomit can be understood as the real vomit and can be understood as allegory. According to the allegory of Indonesian’s point of view, vomit can also say by people who see something continuously and mostly they are bored for seeing it again and again. As a ratio, in Indonesia, someone can say “I want to vomit” if he/she sees or hears something repeatedly. It is not really connected with stomach, but other people can understand it well.

In this case, the journalist of culture who saying those words uses that statement as allegory for showing how much Dwi Koen’s caricature on media, so people can see it again and again. This allegory also has a ‘feeling’ for the reader. If someone likes the way Dwi Koen makes caricature, he/she can assume the word vomit as positively, but if someone does not like the way Dwi Koen makes caricature, he/she can assume it negatively.

By understanding the literal meaning and the allegory meaning, here are the comprehend truth of that statement:

1. Dwi Koen is really vomit.

(45)

The first truth is as literal meaning and the second is the allegory meaning. Once people misunderstanding, they will get the meaning of that statement that very far of the correct meaning.

Here is also found another presupposition connected with general understanding of people:

“Iya. Ini masih lama sebelum ramai-ramai berita korupsi di DPR. Tapi, saya masih coba-coba bikin karena ada kabar-kabar tidak terlalu ‘open’. Ternyata, di belakang SBY sendiri banyak tikusnya.”(Page 62)

Yes. Here is still old before there are many news about corruption in DPR. But, I am still trying to make it because there are issues which are not opened. In fact, there are also many rats in SBY’s backside.”

Type : Lexical Presupposition

The type of the utterance above is the lexical because this is the assumption that in using in one word, the speaker can act as if another meaning (word) will be understood.

Comprehend Truth :

The words that are interesting to be underlined is the rats on “there are many rats in SBY”s backside because in this sample, rats is also an allegory which refers something else. Literally, rat refers to an animal. But, considering who is the subject in that statement, for this sample is SBY, rats should be translated in political way because SBY, as the president of Indonesia for period 2004-2014, is exist in politics. In politics, rat means corruptor. So, by analyzing the subject and what the word refers to, people can assume some comprehend truth:

1. There are many corruptors on SBY’s sides.

2. Since SBY is the president, it can assume that ‘there are many corruptors in the government,’ because in Indonesia, the president who win the

(46)

biggest vote in general election also mean many of his people also win the general election to take them to the ruling chair in government.

3. The government hides the case of corruption of being broadcasted to the public.

Meanwhile, if someone is misunderstanding to presuppose that word, he/she can assume that SBY is a breeder of rats as the comprehend truth.

4.2 Learning to the Kangaroo Island

In this talk show’s session, the host is using theme of learning to the Kangaroo Island. There are some teachers, as speakers, who are going to Kangaroo Island that share their experience of teaching method, system and anything else they get from Kangaroo Island. They can go to Kangaroo Island by a program called BRIDGE (Building Relationship trough Intercultural Dialogue and Growing Engagement) which having exchange program and sister schools as their programs. By talking of Kangaroo Island, people will have one country to think of. By talking presupposition, if people say Kangaroo Island, people also will suppose it as Australia.

The first speaker of this theme is Ahmad Fais, the teacher of biology in a school in Surabaya. When he visits the gas station in Australia, the worker uses the pin with a written text ‘smile’ in it. Then, he gets an idea from it and he wants to apply the pin idea in Indonesia.

“Saya ambil ide itu, kemudian kenapa tidak itu dicoba di sekolah saya, tapi bukan smile. Masa guru disuruh senyum terus, kan….”(Page 139)

“I use that idea, then why I do not try it in my school, but not the ‘smile’. How can the teachers are always smiling, isn’t… (People will call them as….)”

(47)

Type : Factive Presupposition

The type of the utterance above is the factive presupposition because the information following a verb like ‘know’ can be tread as a fact. From the utterance, the people know the information that Ahmad Fais gets an idea from Australia.

Comprehend Truth :

He does not finish his words in the utterance above. He stops it after giving a conditional how if the teacher keeps smiling. The presupposition here is to guessing what he wants to say and the point of his saying and why he stops it. By analyzing it, here are the comprehend truth:

1. He gets an idea in Australia.

2. He wants to apply the idea in Indonesia.

3. He uses some modification in how to apply the idea.

4. He has considered the effect of using the idea by using same written text ‘smile’ in the pin.

For the point that he has considered the effect of using a pin ‘smile’, he stops his saying and let the reader guessing it. Normally, if people see someone that keep smiling in every situation, people will consider him/her as insane people. This analysis is also got by the host, that why he says “Nanti dibilang gendeng iki,” which can be translated being “Then people will say ‘here are crazy people’”.

The modification of the pin is the text. The text ‘smile’ is changed being ‘Speak English with me, please,’ which mean everyone who meet the one using the pin must speak English with him/her. When Andy asks the reaction of the teachers about the pin, here is Fais’s answer:

“Yang paling pertama itu gini, Bung Andy, orang yang…guru-guru yang dapat pin ini biasanya…awalnya banyak omong, jadi tidak banyak omong.”(Page 140)

(48)

“Here is the first, Mister Andy, the people…the teacher who get this pin usually…at first is talking much, now is not talking much.”

Type : Lexical Presupposition

The type of the utterance above is the lexical because this is the assumption that in using in one word, the speaker can act as if another meaning (word) will be understood.

Comprehend Truth :

1. At first, the teachers who get the pin are talking too much. At first, Fais also uses the word ‘people’ before changing it specifically into ‘teacher’, it may have the comprehend truth that people usually talk too much, too. 2. After getting the pin ‘Speak English with me, please,’ the teachers are

talking less.

3. The teachers can not speak English well. Here is proven by the reaction of the teachers. If they can speak English well, it should not be a problem for them to talk as much as before the pin is exist.

The other speaker is Budy Waluyo, an English teacher who graduated from (University) IKIP Mataram. During in Australia, Budi says he has learnt many things about the students, disciplines and cleanness. He also explains in Australia the students has one hour for the break time. They can go to supermarket, mall, cafeteria or any place they want to visit but, ten minutes before the bell, the students already comeback to the class. But he explains that this method can be applied in Indonesia for this reason:

“Istirahat satu jam, hilang semua anak saya, Pak.”(Page 144) “One hour for break, all my students will be lost, Sir.”

(49)

The type of the utterance above is the lexical because this is the assumption that in using in one word, the speaker can act as if another meaning (word) will be understood.

Comprehend Truth :

1. There is topic of talking on how if the students in Indonesia has one hour in break time.

2. There is cause and consequence in that utterance where the cause is if break time is one hour, the consequences is the students will be lost. 3. The students will be lost means if the students has one hour for the break,

they will take the time more that they get and will not come back again to the next class.

This presupposition is connected to the habit. If someone does not know the habit of the students in Indonesia, they may think that the students is lost because they are kidnapped by someone, getting lost somewhere or seriously disappear without any track. But, by knowing the habits, they can assume that ‘lost’ means they will forget the time and not come back to the school for the next class.

By the above sample, people can see that assuming something of an utterance is also connected to the habit. Another interesting point of presupposition is what the happening of the slang language is. The sample is found in Sally’s utterance. Sally Karisma Putri, as the speaker, is a teacher from Sumatera Selatan (The South of Sumatera Island). Based on her experience in Australia, she tells one sample of misunderstanding the slang language. When an Australian’s teacher asks her the slang language, she teaches them the slang ‘cape, deh.’ Here is her saying when the host is asking Sally whether the Australian teacher can copy the Indonesian’ slang language or not:

(50)

“Ya, mereka dapat niruin.Tapi, penggunaannya, ketika mengantarkan kami dari satu ruangan ke ruangan lain, dia justru bilang gini, ‘Bu, saya cape, deh,’”(Page 148)

“Yeah, they can copy it. But, its use, when she takes us from one room to another room, she says this, ‘Mam, saya cape, deh,’”

Type : Factive Presupposition

The type of the utterance above is the factive presupposition because the information following a verb like ‘know’ can be tread as a fact. From the utterance, the people know that the Australian can speak Indonesian slang language although the Austalian does not get the correct meaning of the slang.

Comprehend Truth :

The writer can not translate the word ‘Cape, deh’ because it will lose its sense. In this case, that utterance is because the misunderstanding of presupposition. That utterance is already being the slang language among Indonesian. “Cape, deh” is usually says to mock someone in funny way without intention to hurt his/her feeling. But someone who does not know its slang, they will think that ‘cape’ is the translation of the word ‘tired’. Here are the comprehend truth of the presupposition:

1. The Australian teacher can copy the slang language in Indonesia.

2. The function and its use are not completely different of what the Indonesian teacher means.

3. The Australian teacher seriously translates the word ‘cape’ as ‘tired’ in English.

By seeing the utterance above, people can see the slang language has an effect of assuming an utterance. Slang language can make the misunderstanding meaning. In presupposing something, people should know the slang language used in an utterance if there is slang language.

(51)

The sample above is sample of the wrong presupposition of the listener. The Australian teacher already suppose something in her mind that are different from the correct meaning which affect her uses the words in different way than how it should be. The word ‘slang’ which is also known as the popular language also can make people supposes many things when they hear it. Here is the sample found in Michael Bliss’s saying:

“Saya kira proses pembagian pengalaman masing-masing guru ini sangat berguna untuk kedua pihak. Dan, saya sedikit terkejut bahwa bahasa gaul sangat populer di beberapa sekolah di Australia.”(Page 151)

“I think this sharing process of each teacher is very useful for the both sides. And, I am little bit surprise that (Indonesian’s) popular language (slang) is very popular in some schools in Australia.”

Michael Bliss is a minister of counselor in Australian’s Embassy. By analyzing the utterance above, here is the comprehend truth found:

Type : Factive Presupposition

The type of the utterance above is the factive presupposition because the information following a verb like ‘know’ can be tread as a fact.From the utterance, the people know Michael Bliss’s opinion and the fact that Indonesian’s slang is popular in Australia.

Comprehend Truth :

1. There is process of sharing experience between Indonesian and Australian teacher.

2. According to Michael’s opinion, the sharing experience of the teachers is useful for Indonesian teacher and also for Australian teacher.

3. Michael Bliss surprise of the popularity of slang (popular language) in Australia.

(52)

4. If someone translates slang as the popular language, it means there is unpopular language.

(53)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1Conclusions

Basically, normal people speak something, hear something and respond something. In the process of communication, people should able to assume what they partner trying to say or the point of their saying which called as presupposition. In this thesis, the type of presupposition found are four types: existential presupposition, lexical presupposition, factive presupposition, and non-factive presupposition which means those four types of presupposition often contain of allegory meaning.

By analyzing presupposition and its comprehend truth, the writer has found some factors that should be considered for people to suppose what other people say. The first factor is the word choosing which affect the different meaning of an utterance. The second is the words said are allegory where the words factually refer to something else e.g. in politics, ‘rat’ refers to the corruptor. The third is the slang language which usually only understood by one community or people from limited area. Sometimes, although the slang word may have the positive meaning, if the listener does not understand it, it can convey a negative meaning or turn into bad meaning. Before supposing the truth of an utterance, it seems better to clarify the correct meaning of slang. The fourth is the condition where people stop their saying in middle of the utterance.Here is found in the second theme of talk show which analyzed in this thesis. Sometimes, people stop saying something in the middle of conversation although their words have not finished yet. Here may because there is something they do not want to say and it is being the job of the listener to assume

(54)

because background of someone has the influence in how he/she chooses the word to say. Two people can say the same thing in the same way, but the background of listener can make him/her suppose something differently.

5.2 Suggestions

For avoiding the misunderstanding of a communication, people need to suppose something correctly. In this thesis, the writer has analyzed how people suppose an utterance taken from Kick Andy talk show and the writer suggests that before answering an utterance, people should presuppose the truth and find out the point of the utterance itself. If the listener does not get the point of the speaker’s saying, it’s better to ask for avoiding the misunderstanding conversation. For the people who want to study about presupposition, the writer suggests to explore the presupposition by seeing them from many aspects. Hopefully, this thesis can be useful for the reader to learn about presupposition further.

(55)

REFERENCES

Aulia, Adisti Maryam. 2010. “A Brief Description of Code Switching and Code Mixing in Informal Conversation used by 2009 Batch Students of English Department University of Sumatera Utara”. Unpublished Thesis. Medan: Universitas Sumatera Utara.

Bogdan, R. and Biklen, S. 1982. Methods of Social Research. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Bogdan, R. and Biklen, S. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods (2nd Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Caffi, C. 2006. Pragmatic Presupposition. Italy & Switzerland: Elsevier. Dia, Eva Eri. 2012. Analisis Praanggapan. Malang: Madani.

Koyama, W. 2006. The Pragmatics and Semanticsn. Jepang: Elsavier.

Leech, Geofrey. 1993. Prinsip - Prinsip Pragmatik. Jakarta: UI Press.

Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Marlisa, Yeni. 2008. Analysis of Types of Presupposition Used In The Editorial Articles of The Jakarta Post News Paper. Unpublished Thesis. Jakarta: Universitas Bina Nusantara.

Moleong, J Lexy. 2005. Metodology Penulisan Kualitatif. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.

Mulyana. 2005. Kajian Wacana. Teori, Metode dan Aplikasi Prinsip-Prinsip Analisis Wacana. Yogyakarta: Tiara Wacana.

(56)

Nadya Paramytha, Gayatri. 2009. Praanggapan Dalam Film Janji Joni. Unpublished Thesis. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia.

Noya, Andy F. 2012. Kick Andy: Kisah Inspiratif 3. Yogyakarta: Bentang. Peccei, Jean Stilwell. 1990. Pragmatics. China: Taylor & Francis.

Purwo, Bambang Kaswati. 1990. Pragmatik Dan Pengajaran Bahasa. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.

Rahardi, R.Kunjaya. 2008. Pragmatik: Kesantunan Imperatif Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Reza Essra, Try. 2011. An Analysis of Presupposition In Newsweek Advertisement Slogans. Unpublished Thesis. Medan: Universitas Sumatera Utara

Soejono dan Abdurrahman. 2005. Metode Penelitian Suatu Pemikiran dan Penerapan. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Sudaryat, Yayat. 2008. Makna Dalam Wacana. Bandung: Yrama Widya.

Yule, George. 1996. Pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press.

Zeevat, H. 2006. Pragmatics: Optimality Theory. Amsterdam: Elsavier.

(1)

dengan membaca buku literature dan menceritakan kembali dalam bentuk review

bahasa Inggris dengan kata-kata yang singkat dan mudah dipahami.

Selain itu, Fais juga menerapkan morning brieving untuk para guru. Para guru harus menghadiri sebuah pertemuan selama 10-15 menit sebelum pelajaran dimulai. Pertemuan ini sebagai forum untuk berdoa, membahas perkembangan sekolah, dan bercerita secara bergiliran dengan menggunakan bahasa Inggris.

***

Pengalaman belajar ke Negeri Kanguru melalui program BRIDGE juga sempat dirasakan oleh Abdul Latif, guru Bahasa Indonesia di SMA Negeri 5 Surabaya. Di Australia, Abdul Latif ditempatkan di Tranby College, Baldavis, Australia Barat. Ia bertugas mem-back up guru Bahasa Indonesia sekolah tersebut, memperkenalkan budaya-budaya Indonesia kepada para siswa dan menyusun sebuah project bersama Ibu Vicky Richardson yang menjadi partnernya.

Banyak hal yang Abdul Latif dapatkan selama mengikuti program BRIDGE. Yang paling mengesankan baginya adalah bagaimana guru-guru di Australia mengapresiasi muridnya. Di sana murid diposisikan sebagai rekan kerja dan teman.

“Iya, saya pernah punya pengalaman, ada seorang murid menunjukkan tugasnya kepada guru. ‘Mr. Steve, this is my assignment,’ gurunya mengatakan, ‘Oh, well done, very good, you are very clever.’ Kemudian, saya lihat, wah, pekerjaan gitu saja

very good,’ cerita Abdul Latif.

Menurut Abdul Latif, setiap usaha murid walaupun kecil tetap harus dihargai. Kepada murid-muridnya, Abdul Latif berkata “If you make mistake I am happy because you are still learning, I am happy. But if you are right I am happier.” Berkaca dari pengalamannya itulah, ia menerapkan bahwa apa pun yang siswa kerjakan, meskipun sedikit, ia beri poin.

“Bagaimana reaksi murid-murid dengan cara Anda ini?”

“Oh, ketika saya membaca buku ... ‘Oke, Anak-Anak, siapa yang ...,’ ini sudah

mengancung semua, Pak,” ungkap Abdul Latif yang membuat Andy dan penonton pun tertawa. “Iya, bahkan ketika misalnya ...’Oke Anak-Anak, tolong, ya, ini LCD dibawa ke sana,’ lalu, ‘Ada poinnya, Pak, ya?’”

Abdul Latif mengungkapkan bahwa program BRIDGE dengan situs web WIKISPACE-nya sangat bermanfaat bagi guru dan siswa. Melalui WIKISPACE, siswa di sekolahnya bisa berkomunikasi langsung dengan siswa di Tranby College. Teknologi menjadi jembatan untuk berbagi ilmu dan memperluas persahabatan.

***

Terpilih untuk mengikuti program BRIDGE ke Australia, Johanes Budi Waluyo sangat memanfaatkan kesempatan tersebut untuk memperkenalkan budaya Indonesia khususnya budaya Lombok. Tidak tanggung-tanggung, ia pun memboyong pakaian adat Sasak-nya.

Guru Bahasa Inggris lulusan IKIP Mataram yang dikenal sabar dan disenangi murid-muridnya saat mengikuti program BRIDGE ini, mengerahkan segala kemampuannya

(2)

untuk menarik simpati murid-murid Australia agar proses belajar tidak membosankan. Budi pun memberi suasana lain dalam mengajar dengan meminta muridnya menyanyi sampai menonton film. Metode mengajar yang diperoleh dari program BRIDGE, kini ditetapkan Budi di tempat mengajarnya SMAK Kesuma Cakra Negara Mataram. Ia membuat kelas belajar bernuansa Australia untuk menambah motivasi belajar siswanya. Perlengkapan belajar mengajar dan materi ajar pun disiapkan sedemikian rupa untuk memudahkan dirinya di kelas.

Selama di Australia, Budi banyak belajar mengenai kedisiplinan murid dan kebersihan. “Ketika istirahatnya yang cukup lama, anak-anak di Victor Harbor High School itu ada yang ke mal, ada yang ke supermarket, ada yang ke kantin. Mereka makan. Tetapi, 10 menit sebelum bel, mereka sudah baris di depan kelas. Sayangnya hal tersebut susah diterapkan di Indonesia,” ungkap Budi sedih.

“Kenapa susah?”

“Istirahat satu jam, hilang semua anak saya, Pak,” jawab Budi yang membuat Andy dan penonton tertawa.

Saya diminta bercerita mengenai reaksinya saat tahu bila anak-anak TK dan SD di Australia sudah diajari bahasa Indonesia, Budi menuturkan bahwa ia sangat kaget. Saat mengunjungi kelas Preparation, di sebuah SD Victor Harbor, murid-muridnya langsung mengucapkan, “Celamat pagi, Pak Budi,” lalu menyanyi lagu “Satu-Satu Aku Sayang Ibu”. “Saya hampir nangis terharu mendengar ‘Catu-Catu Saya Cayang Ibu’ ...,” ungkap Budi diiringi gelak tawa Andy dan penonton.

***

Sri Wuryaningsih dan Keni Putih adalah guru SMA Negeri 70 Jakarta Selatan yang mengikuti program BRIDGE ke Australia selama tiga minggu. Mereka berdua ditempatkan di sebuah sekolah umum, yaitu Parramatta High School yang terletak di daerah pinggiran kota Sydney. Disekolah ini siswanya sebagian berasal dari berbagai negara dan budaya yang berbeda-beda, seperti Afghanistan, Filipina, Malaysia, Afrika, China, bahkan dari Indonesia. Selain itu, guru-guru yang mengajar pun berasal negara yang berbeda-beda juga, seperti Yunani, Bosnia, Fiji, dan lain-lain. Meskipun mereka berbeda-beda, mereka telah diajarkan untik selalu menghormati sesama.

Sri dan Keni, selain mengajar bahasa dan kebudayaan Indonesia, juga mengajarkan tentang agama Islam di sekolah ini. Menurut Sri, active-learning, di mana siswa mendapat porsi yang banyak untuk mengeksplorasi potensi mereka adalah perbedaan dasar mengajar anak-anak di Australia dengan anak-anak di Indonesia. Selain itu, sistem pendidikan disekolah tempatnya mengajar tidak memiliki peraturan mengenai seragam, juga tidak mengenal sistem naik kelas dan tidak naik kelas

“Waktu Anda ke sana, Anda kaget karena tidak ada sistem naik kelas dan tidak naik kelas. Tapi, di sekolah sana itu, sekolah apa, sih, sebenarnya?” tanya Andy dengan penasaran dan penuh selidik.

“Menurut sistem pendidikan di sana, sekolah itu sesuai dengan umurnya, sesuai dengan kebutuhannya. Berbeda dengan sekolah di Indonesia yang ada kriteria kenaikan kelas, dengan sikap, dengan nilai kognitif, dengan nilai psikomotor, dan

(3)

sebagainya. Untuk mereka, mereka sesuai dengan penilaian oleh guru, tidak ada kriteria-kriteria seperti yang kami kenal di sekolah kami,” ungkap Sri.

Selama di Australia, Sri dan Keni tinggal di rumah seorang guru di Kings Langley sekitar 20 menit perjalanan dari sekolah. Keduanya merasa tidak aneh selama tinggal bersama guru setempat, Diana Uren, karena pemilik rumah ternyata paham tentang kebudayaan Indonesia. Sri dan Keni mengaku terkesan dengan program pertukaran guru ini karena banyak manfaat yang bisa diperoleh. Selain bisa melihat secara langsung sistem belajar dan mengajar di Australia yang bisa diterapkan di Indonesia, juga bisa lebih mengerti dengan kebudayaan dan adat istiadat warga Australia. Selain itu, mereka membuat sebuah kesepakatan yang mengikat SMA Negara 70 Jakarta Selatan dan Parramatta High School sebagai sister school.

***

Eny Ratih dan Eko Raharjo, guru Kimia dan guru Bahasa Indonesia dan Bahasa Inggris dari SMA 8 Jakarta, juga terpilih mengikuti program BRIDGE. Mereka berdua ditempatkan di sebuah sekolah swasta Katolik khusus putri yang bernama Monte Saint Angelo Mercy College yang terletak di Sydney bagian utara. Di sekolah tersebut, selain memperkenalkan budaya Indonesia dan mengajar Bahasa Indonesia, Eny dan Eko juga ikut menjelaskan tentang agama Islam.

“Mereka sangat ingin tahu mengenai agama Islam. Tadi saya tanya-tanya dengan teman-teman, cuma satu saya yang mengajar agama Islam, saya tidak sama seperti yang lain mungkin, saya mengajar shalat, wudu, kemudian pilgrimate ... pergi haji,” ungkap Eny.

“Kalau kami, karena host-nya adalah guru Bahasa Indonesia, kami mengajar Bahasa Indonesia ... bahasa gaul gitu,” kata Eko.

Mendengar guru-guru bercerita pengalaman mereka selama mengikuti program BRIDGE ke Australia, Arif Rachman, Pemerhati Pendidik/Kepala Sekolah Lab School, memandang program ini sangat penting untuk dikembangkan. Tantangannya adalah 51 juta murid dari SD sampai SMA dan 2,7 juta guru, dengan satu kelas terdiri atas 40 orang, kuncinya ada pada guru-guru yang mempunyai cita-cita tinggi dan keberanian untuk masuk ke dalam budaya yang baru tanpa mengalami yang disebut dislokasi kultural atau gegar budaya. Mereka bisa menyesuaikan diri dengan cepat.

***

Setiap guru ternyata punya pengalaman yang berbeda di berbagai daerah di Australia, termasuk Sally Kharisma Putri dan Kasim Bahri Batubara, guru SMUN Sumatera Selatan sendiri merupakan sekolah negeri hasil kerja sama Departemen Pendidikan dan Sampoerna Academy. Sekolah ini mempunyai sekitar 80-an siswa terpilih yang mendapatkan beasiswa dari Sampoerna dan tinggal di asrama. Sally dan Kasim merupakan dua dari lima guru yang juga tinggal di asrama dan ikut mengawasi siswa-siswa tersebut. Sekolah ini memang baru mempunyai satu angkatan, yaitu kelas X atau SMA kelas 1.

Melalui program BRIDGE, mereka berdua ditempatkan di Kangaroo Island and Community Education (KICE) di Kingscote, Kangaroo Island, Australia. Di sekolah

(4)

yang lokasinya terpencil ini, keduanya mengajar bahasa dan kebudayaan Indonesia. Mengajar bahasa Indonesia di Australia, bagi Sally dan Kasim tidaklah begitu sulit. Ini dikarenakan semua alat peraganya cukup lengkap. Hampir di semua dinding di ruang kelas terdapat kalimat dalam bahasa Indonesia dan Inggris sehingga sangat memudahkan para siswa belajar bahasa Indonesia. Selain itu, rasa ingin tahu mereka besar sekali.

“Jadi, waktu kami ada tur keliling Kangaroo Island, sembari tur, di mobil dia

menyamperi dan duduk di sebelah kami, terus dia nanya, ‘What is cool in Indonesia?’ Cool in Indonesia is ...nyantai aja,” tutur Sally. “Terus, ada lagi yang lain, dia tanya bahasa slang lain di Indonesia seperti apa ... terus kami bilang, ‘Cape, deh.”

“Mereka bisa menirukan?” tanya Andy.

“Ya, mereka bisa niruin. Tapi, penggunaannya, ketika dia mengantarkan kami dari satu ruangan ke ruangan lain, dia justru bilang gini, ‘Bu, saya cape, deh,’” kata Sally yang disambut gelak tawa penonton. Selain mengajar bahasa dan kebudayaan Indonesia, Sally dan Kasim juga mempelajari budaya dan adat istiadat warga Australia dengan tinggal di rumah seorang guru setempat. Sally dan Kasim mengaku banyak manfaat yang bisa diambil melalui program pertukaran guru ini, salah satunya mengajar dengan tidak membosankan dan menggurui. Selain itu, siswa hendaknya dirangsang dengan berbagai latihan melalui praktik lapangan.

Sally dan Kasim yang baru pulang dari Australia sudah punya rencana untuk menerapkan beberapa konsep yang mereka lihat dan pelajari di sana ke sekolah masing-masing.

“Saya paling geregetan itu mau menerapkan environmentalist-nya mereka di sini,” kata Sally.

“Apa itu? Yang mereka lakukan di sana apa?” tanya Andy ingin tahu.

“Jadi kami pernah jalan ke salah satu bay di sana, Paddington Bay. Kami mungutin

sampah, dalam satu hari itu kami mungutin sampah dan kami mau menerapkan itu ke anak-anak murid karena di sana mereka peduli banget dengan lingkungannya. Bahkan, ada salah satu special subject di sana yang bener-bener belajar tentang sampah gitu. Gimana sampah itu bisa diurai, terus gimana penggunaan ulangnya, dan itu tidak masuk ke science, tapi terpisah dari science,” ungkap Sally.

“Kalau Kasim?” tanya Andy.

“Karena saya mengajar bahasa Inggris juga, jadi saya mau minta anak-anak ... itu

project mereka juga sebenarnya, mereka akan membuat short story. Cerita pendek di dalam bahasa Indonesia dan kami di sekolah saya, Insya Allah, saya akan ajak anak-anak untuk membuat short story juga, tapi dalam bahasa Inggris,” jawab Kasim.

***

Sejak kecil Umiyanti Umar, guru Bahasa Inggris SMPN 2 Pattallassang, Sulawesi Selatan, sudah bercita-cita menjadi guru. Keinginannya kuat untuk mengajar membuatnya menerima tanpa ragu tawaran sebagai tenaga pengajar sukarela di

(5)

sekolah yang kini dikenal dengan nama SMPN 2 Pattallasang, Sulawesi Selatan. Umiyanti tidak patah meskipun harus melakukan proses belajar mengajar yang berpindah-pindah dengan menumpang di sekolah-sekolah lain karena sekolahnya belum memiliki gedung sendiri. Lebih-lebih ketika melihat delapan orang siswanya yang begitu antusias. Bersama dengan lima orang ibu guru lainnya, ia aktif mencari murid dengan mendatangi warga agar anak-anaknya tetap melanjutkan sekolah sehingga seiring dengan waktu jumlah muridnya terus bertambah.

SMPN 2 Pattallasang merupakan sekolah yang dibangun dengan bantuan biaya dari Pemerintah Australia dalam program kerja sama District Communication AIBEP (Australia Indonesia Basic Education Program). Kini sekolah ini telah menjadi sekolah percontohan hingga memiliki 314 siswa, 11 ruang kelas, dan mendapat tambahan 15 guru dari Dinas Pendidikan Kabupaten Gowa. Pada Maret 2009 lalu, Umiyanti mendapat kesempatan untuk mengikuti program BRIDGE dan ditempatkan di sekolah Loreto Manville Hall yang menjadi sister school SMPN 2 Pattallasang. Sekembalinya dari Australia, ia pun mencoba menerapkan fun teaching kepada siswa yang diajarnya dan membagikan pengalaman tersebut kepada guru-guru yang lain agar belajar di kelas tidak menjadi sesuatu yang menegangkan dan membosankan, tetapi membuat siswa merasa senang dan nyaman di kelas dan dapat menerima pelajaran dengan baik. Para siswa pun mengaku senang dengan metode belajar baru itu. Selain itu, Umi juga mulai mengajarkan perbedaan antara bahasa Inggris-Amerika dan bahasa Inggris-Australia karena ada beberapa sapaan dan bahasa sehari-hari yang berbeda dengan yang dipelajari di buku.

Untuk ke depannya, Umi berharap bisa menerapkan sistem ICT (Interactive Classroom Technique) untuk pembelajaran di kelas, khususnya bahasa Inggris, karena siswa bisa lebih efektif menerima pelajaran secara visual dari pada hanya mendengar. “Pakai film?” tanya Andy.

“Iya, karena selama ini, kan, saya hanya buat pajangan-pajangan di kelas mereka, yang bisa membantu mereka dalam belajar,” ungkap Umi.

***

Bagi Anastasia Iin Normawati, Kepala Sekolah SMP Negeri 12 Sungai Raya Pontianak yang juga pernah mengikuti program BRIDGE, hal utama yang ingin diterapkan di sekolahnya adalah pembelajaran, bagaimana siswa sangat antusias dalam belajar meskipun yang mereka pelajari hanya sedikit. Walaupun begitu, mereka banyak menggali dari yang sedikit itu.

Selama tiga tahun pelaksanaan program ini, ada hubungan baik yang sudah diciptakan antara banyak sekolah di Indonesia dan di Australia. Namun, hal yang penting adalah bahwa hubungan ini dilanjutkan oleh guru-guru mereka sendiri ketika mereka kembali ke Indonesia dengan menggunakan alat komunikasi, seperti internet. Selain itu, ada manfaat untuk kedua belah pihak dalam ilmu pendidikan dengan melihat bagaimana sistem pendidikan di negara yang lain.

“Saya kira proses pembagian pengalaman masing-masing guru ini sangat berguna untuk kedua pihak. Dan, saya sedikit terkejut bahwa bahasa gaul sangat populer di beberapa sekolah di Australia,” ungkap Michael Bliss, Minister of Counselor

(6)

Australia punya tujuan yang penting, yaitu lebih banyak warga negara Australia punya kemampuan untuk berbahasa Indonesia.”

Menurut Arif Rachman, program ini adalah suatu ujung tombak untuk menciptakan perdamaian dunia karena dalam pembelajaran di UNESCO dikenal ungkapan

learning to know: jadi tahu, learning to do: mengerjakan, learning to be: menjadi orang, dan learning to live together. Jadi, hidup bersama itu dari mulai tahu, yang dalam hal ini dikerjakan melalui suatu program seperti BRIDGE ini, karena terjadi pembelajaran tentang diri sendiri (personal), orang yang berbeda ( interpersonal), budaya yang berbeda (intercultural), dan yang terakhir adalah yang disebut global. “Jadi, Mas Andy, kalau mau membuat dunia ini damai, ini adalah salah satu yang disebut politik lunak ... soft power policy yang harus terus-menerus melalui guru-guru yang sangat berdedikasi ini, yang sangat pengabdi di Australia maupun di Indonesia, Insya Allah, kawasan kita dan dunia ini akan menjadi dunia yang damai,” terang Arif Rahman.[]

An Analysis Of Presupposition In “Kick Andy” Talk Show

AN ANALYSIS OF PRESUPPOSITION IN “KICK ANDY” TALK

SHOW

A THESIS

BY:

NURUL SYAKINAH

REG. NO. 090705056

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH

FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES

UNIVERSITY OF SUMATERA UTARA

AN ANALYSIS OF PRESUPPOSITION IN “KICK ANDY” TALK

SHOW

ABSTRACT

ABSTRAK

TABLE OF CONTENT

ABSTRACT

ABSTRAK

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE,

THEORY AND CONCEPT

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHOD

CHAPTER IV

FINDING AND ANALYSIS

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

REFERENCES

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

PROFILINNG ANTA PROFILING ANTASARI AZHAR DALAM PROGRAM TALK SHOW KICK ANDY.

PENDAHULUAN PROFILING ANTASARI AZHAR DALAM PROGRAM TALK SHOW KICK ANDY.

KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN PROFILING ANTASARI AZHAR DALAM PROGRAM TALK SHOW KICK ANDY.

POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN “KICK ANDY” TALK SHOW PROGRAM ON METRO TV.

AN ANALYSIS OF CONVERSATIONAL MAXIMS IN DR. OZ TALK SHOW.

ANALISIS PRINSIP KERJASAMA GRICE PADA PROGRAM TALK SHOW KICK ANDY “JODOH DI UJUNG JARI”.

CONVERSATIONAL MAXIMS IN KICK ANDY TALK SHOW PROGRAM ON METRO TV.

MOTIF MAHASISWA SURABAYA MENONTON TALK SHOW KICK ANDY DI METRO TV (Studi Deskriptif Tentang Motif Mahasiswa Surabaya Dalam Menonton Talk Show Kick Andy Di Metro TV).

A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF THE FLOUTING MAXIMS IN KICK ANDY TALK SHOW: “LASKAR PELANGI” BASED ON GRICE’S COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE

An Analysis Of Presupposition In “Kick Andy” Talk Show

Dokumen yang Anda mencari sudah siap untuk unduhkan