17
Since discourse analyzes interactions using language which can be said as text, so it is important to assert definition about text. Crystal 2005: 72 defines,
“Text is a piece of naturally occurring spoken, written, or signed discourse identified for purpose analysis. It is often a language unit with a definable
communicative function, such as conversation, a poster”. The analysis does not only lie on a single clause, but the whole clauses to form a meaningful and
intelligible te xt. In line with this statement, Nunan 1993: 3 explains, “Discourse
analysis examines how stretches of language, considered in their full textual, social, and context, become meaningful and unified for their users”.
It can be concluded that discourse analysis is a process of analyzing text –
either spoken or written – as a product of human interaction that concerns on the
relationship between language and its context, and it attempts to study the organization of linguistic form, for discourse refers to the piece of communication
in context.
2.2.2 Systemic Functional Grammar
People use language to achieve a purpose, so they communicate using spoken or written text in order to exchange meaning with each other. It is, thus, needed to
concern about how language makes meaning by looking the grammatical structure of the texts. By this way, Systemic Functional Grammar developed by Michael
Halliday is considered as an approach to fulfill this need. Martin and Matthiessen 1997: 1 state that, “Functional grammar is a way of looking at grammar in terms
of how grammar is used, and it focusses on the development of grammatical
18
systems as a means for people interact with each other. It not only asserts grammar as the focus of this approach but also meaning making”.
Functional grammar comes as an alternative to formal and traditional grammar. While, on the one hand, traditional grammar focuses on rules for
producing correct sentences, and formal grammar is concerned to describe the structure of individual sentences, functional grammar, as stated by Gerot and
Wignell 1994: 6, is as an approach to view language as a resource for making meaning, to describe language in actual use, and to focus on texts and their
context. Hence, it is concerned not only with the structure but also with how the structures construct meaning. The differences between formal traditional
grammar and functional grammar are presented as follows.
Table 2.1 The Main Differences in Perspective among Formal
and Functional Grammar
Formal +Traditional Functional
Primary Concern
How is should this sentence be structured?
How are the meanings of this text realized?
Unit of Analysis Sentence
whole text
Language Level of Concern
Syntax Semantics
Language
= a set of rules for sentence construction
= something we know = a resource for meaning
making = something we do
In the case of the table above, functional grammar mainly serves purpose to unveil how meanings are realized in a text. In line with the comparison between
formal and functional grammar, Martin and Matthiessen 1997: 2 affirm that
19
“You will find the functional grammar much richer semantically than either formal or traditional school grammar. This makes the analyses you undertake
more insightful when it comes to interpreting a text.” In sum, it can be concluded that as systemic functional grammar looks how
meanings are realized in a text, either spoken or written, through the grammatical structure of the text itself, it is important that this study involves systemic
functional grammar in order to reveal meaning in the spoken text and how the text is organized.
2.2.3 Text
