CONCLUSION CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
171
selection of different strategies and modifications triggered by seven potential factors discovered by the researcher, namely: sociological variables and politeness,
situation setting, pragmatic competence, request size, reciprocal asymmetry, urgency of requests, and motivations behind it.
Following the four request sequences, it can be infered that Medical students preferred to employ external modifications to modify the requests, thus, the force
and the burden of the hearers can be diminished. At the same time, the employment of other three modifications of internal modifications, head acts and openers put
more concern on hearer’s side and possibly get the addressee to agree and take the pleas. In one hand, Law students favored the internal modifications especially the
syntactic interrogatives since their specialization required them to make negotiation a lot. Despite of shorter expressions used by Law students, they wanted to get
stratightforward about what they wants. Thus, the three other modifications put more focus on the speaker side as to make the hearer give solid “yes” or “no”
responses. Futher, the opting of different strategies by Medical and Law students are
for distinctive communicative goals in making requests. Related to this second problem, the reasercher summaries some points. For the first point, Medical
students made great use of the external modifications to diminish the illocutionary force of the requests. From the results, it was notable that Medical students
employed more complex variety of external modifications with greater occurrence. It is verified through t-test result of significant value 0.000 that indicates very
significant distinction from the Law group. Inclination to apply more supportive PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
172
grounders, high use of the sweeteners and apologies as well as the gratitude successfully mitigated the force of the request acts. On the other hand, the
adaptation of these downgraders preceded by preparators as to prepare hearer’s potential availability and p
ermission before carrying out the speaker’s main intention and want.
To mark the difference, Law students, contrastively employed less external modifications especially by employing shorter and simpler grounders frequently.
Besides, to make it straight to the point, the Law students often do not put any apology statements or preparators as more external modifiers which possibly
heighten the impositive force on the hearers. Less use of supportive sweeteners construe that the speakers employed less negotiability and dynamicity in making
requests. In other words, the Law students preferred to be in a less intimate relation with the speakers. Yet, it is shown that for some times Law group selected
redundancy of compliments as the sweeteners which made it sounds unnatural and inflexible. In addition, Law students were inclined to opt less supportive humbling
oneself to elicit fewer hearer’s sympathy and to build up their strong image to some extents.
To make it more specific, based on the discussion, the researcher draws an insight that Medical students put more concerns on the hearer, yet, the Law students
put more focus on the speaker s’ side. One clear situation examined in this study is
the using of the supportive disarmers to eliminate any possible refusal to the plea expressed by the speaker since variability of the linguistic properties allows the
speaker to manipulate the use of the request acts. Interestingly, Law students found PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
173
to use more downgraders in form of cost minimizers, promising of rewards, and confirmations in order to obtain desired convincing statements; and also upgraders
of reprimanders to criticize, thus, the hearers agree and do the requests. Contrariwise, as the second point to note, the Law students put more weight
on the internal modifications of 1.26 than the Medical group. This difference was confirmed by t-test result of 0.037 which indicated that the different use of the
internal modifications between the two groups is significant. Corresponding to their field of study, Law students favored greater interrogative structure of requests as
the most important syntactic mitigator internally. This finding suggested that when dealing with real working life, the speakers of Law preferred to use interrogatives
since their job required them to do so. On other hand, Medical students were found to advantage more conditional syntactic modifications to convey politeness as well
as to minimize the force. However, as future medical practioners, Medical students would often deal with their patient and they had to be able to give suggestions and
recommendations about things to do and not to do to them. Whereas, giving advice through conditional statements provided less burden of commitments to the hearers
to either accept or refuse it, and at the same time, offered more chance to the hearers to respond the requests stated.
On the other hand, lexically, Salgado 2011 stresses that every time the speakers conveyed a request, they knew that they were asking for a favor and that
the favor represented a high cost for the hearer, consequently, the attachment of particular linguistic units is very useful to mitigate the plea. As discussed
previously, lexical choices of the subjectivizer and downtoners were helpful to PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
174
diminish the force. The researcher discovered that Law students use more subjectivizers and appealers in request for the speaker’s benefit. It was often that
Medical students also opt time intensifiers to increase the urgency of the requests. Meanwhile, th
e Medical students put more cost on the hearer’s side, hence, the speakers employed more downtoners to lower the burden of the pleas.
Besides, the third point highlighted the ensuing of the head acts in requests that even though basically the two groups selected the same favored query
preparatory as the main request acts, the difference was also exited. This is noted by the t-test result of 0.039 which showed level of significant difference where
Medical students opted more hints as the non-conventionally indirect head acts, yet, Law students selected want statements of direct head acts more often. To this extent,
Medical students frequently employed hints, both for strong and mild hints, in which the speakers offered the plea by providing less and strong clues to let the
hearers construed the requests by themselves. In contrary, Law students prefered to use direct want statements as well as other form of the direct head acts like mood
imperatives, performatives, and obligation statements which considered to afford more face-threatening to the hearers.
Finally, for the fourth point, the different use of the openers between Medical and Law group noted by 0.000 level of significant different. It was seen
from the discussion that both groups satisfied the using of the openers consistently to the situated contexts. The speakers were able to adjust the selection of the openers
form based on the issue of [P], [D], and [R] as well as formal or informal situation faced. Despite that both groups were found to employ neutral openers most of time
175
in making requests, the researcher points that Medical students employed more openers to begin the request statements which at the same time also function as
alerts to the hearers’ attention on the requests. One significant distinction discovered from the analysis that the Law students often presented requests with no
openers. This finding potentially led the speakers to lose the attention, and at the same
point, was considered as too straightforward, thus, it increased the impositive force carry out by the requests on the other hand. In short, the decision and selection of
specific request acts strategies used by Medical and Law students might be simply summarized on its fashion and communicative function agreeing their fields of
study. Overall, for the Medical students, the speakers opted request strategies by giving more chances and options to the hearer to decide by themselves whether or
not to accept the requests. Meanwhile, the Law students gave the hearers more affirmations
and directions to provide a solid “yes” or “no” decision about the things or desires asked by the speakers.
As to end the discussion, the researcher read that the difference option of the request strategies employed by Medical and Law group were driven by certain
potential factors. The researcher went to some thoughts that there were seven promising factors underlying the choice of the different request strategies namely:
sociological variables and politeness, situation setting, pragmatic competence, request size, reciprocal asymmetry, urgency of the requests and motivation.
Whenever the sociological variables of power, distance, and rank of imposition are exercised, in the same time, the politeness is also there to be practiced. The
176
politeness is agree to the sociological variables, thus, the greater the gap of the power, distance, and rank of imposition, the greater the politeness is needed.
Besides, the situation setting also affects the trends of fulfilling function based on its situations such as communicating or functions setting, topic area in which the
participants are communicating, and situations related to physical locations setting. Furthermore, conventionally, the pragmatic competence of both speakers
and interpreter gives big contribution to the choice and decision of the utterances used to express the requests. Making request means causing the cost to the hearer
or the addressee, thus, the size of the request is considerable whether or not the request creates a big imposition. On the other hand, the reciprocal asymmetry also
potentially affects the choice of the strategy since what is considered to be polite in one party can be possible considered as impolite to other party. Further, the cost of
the urgency of particular plea or want auspiciously requiring request to get immediate action and the attention from the requestee. And finally, motivation
behind the speakers which offers the speaker a reason to ask something causes force to the hearer to do or not to do the speaker’s intentions. Through taking a close
attention to these factors, it is auspicious to the speakers to select the most appropriate way in conveying requests by opting and deciding the speech acts based
on the situations, functions, politeness and sociological variables to benefit the requests to be successfully granted by the hearers.