digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id
66
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1 Conclusion
After discussing the research finding, the writer wants to describe some conclusion about the structural ambiguity found in The Laugh a Day
Book of Bloopers Quotes and Good Clean Jokes by Jim Kraus. The result of this research is to answer the problems which the writer formulated.
In this final chapter, the writer draws a conclusion which she has gotten from the analysis of chapter 1 to 4. The writer concludes that there
are some structural ambiguity happen in The Laugh a Day Book of Bloopers Quotes and Good Clean Jokes. Therefore, understanding the structural
aspect, the writer will know the meaning of the phrase or sentence and understand about the structure of the phrase and sentence in the object.
Over the analysis of structural ambiguity in The laugh a Day Book of Bloopers Quotes and Good Clean Jokes there are fourteen data of
structural ambiguity found in this research. The writer found some types of structural ambiguity: sentence and phrase. In sentence, there are two types
of sentence, such as simple sentence and compound sentence. There are 6 data as the simple sentence and 5 data as the compound sentence. Then, in
phrase there is one type of phrase, and it is noun phrase and the data which is found is 1.
digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id
The writer choose the theory of Tree diagram by Noam Chomsky for analyzing the data. The structural ambiguity can be minimalized by
using t tree diagram to get the true meaning of two interpretations or both form are grammatically valid in English.
5.2 Suggestion
Based on the results, the suggestions are addressed to readers, students and lecturers of linguistics, and further researchers. For readers,
they can use the findings of this study to understand more about structural ambiguity in terms of how they can determine which phrase and sentence
are structurally ambiguous, and how they clarify the structurally ambiguous sentences and phrases. For students and lecturers of linguistics, it would be
beneficial to take the structural ambiguity as the subject of their study. Thus, understanding the structure and grammar of English lesson will make
student get more knowledge about English language. Over all, the writer of this research hopes that the reader will
continue to discuss the ambiguity more detail clarification. Because, there are many cases about ambiguous sentence that have not been discussed in
previous researcher. It can be briefly stated that the structural ambiguity is one of the interesting phenomena that is very important to discuss. It is due
to the reason that we often find sentences that are potentially structurally ambiguous everyday through speech and written documents.
digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id
REFERENCE
Akmajian, A., Demers, R. A. Farmer, A., Harnish, R. M. 2001. Linguistics: An Introduction to Language and Communication. London: The MIT
Press. Allen, Layman E, 1962. Some Uses of Symbolic Logic in Law Practice. Modern
Uses of Logic in Law. Allen, Layman E. Caldwell, M.E. 1963. Modern Logic and Judicial Decision
Making: A Sketch of One View. New York USA: Basic Books. Andolina, M. 2002. Practical Guide to Critical Thinking. United States of
America: DELMAR THOMPSON LEARNING Bach, K. 2000. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry. May 12,
2016 at http:online.sfs.edu~kbachambguity.html.
Ball, Martin J. 2016. Principles of Clinical Phonology: Theoretical Approach. New York: Routledge.
Beech, John R. 2009. How to Write in Psychology: A Student Guide. United Kingdom: WILEY-BLACKWELL.
Bivins, T. 2015. Public Relations Writing: The Essentials of Style and Format: 7
th
Edition. Brown, E.K., and J.E Miller. 1988. Syntax: A Linguistic Introduction to
Sentence Structure. London: Hutchinson Limited. Chalker, S and Weiner, E. 1998. Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar. New
York: Oxford University Press Chand, S. 2008. The Enrich English Coursebook. New Delhi: BLACKIE ELT
BOOKS. Chomsky, N. 1957. Syntactic Structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter
------------. 1965. Aspect of Theory of Syntax. United States of America: The
MIT Press. ------------, 2002. Syntactic Structures. New York: Walter de Gruyter.
------------, 2002. Syntactic Structure. Second Edition with an Introduction by
David W. Lightfoot. New York.
digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id
Crystal, D. 1980. Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. John Wiley Sons. Darwing, Bruce L. 1973. Transformational Grammar as A Theory of Language
Acquisition: A Study in The Empirical, Conceptual, Methodological Foundations of Contemporary Linguistics. United States of America:
Cambridge University Press.
David, MC. Linguistics: The Structure of American English. Brown University. Djajasudarma, Fatimah. 1999. Semantik I: Pengantar ke Arah Ilmu Makna.
Bandung: PT. Refika Aditama. Francis, W. N. 1958. The structure of American English: Brown University: The
Ronald Press company University. Geerearts. 2010. Theories of Lexical Semantics. United States: Oxford
University Press. Harrison, M. Jakeman, Vanessa. Paterson, Ken. 2012. Improve Your Grammar.
China: Palgrave Macmillan. Hurford, James R, Heasley, Brendan, Smith, Michael B. 1983. Semantics: A
Coursebook. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Joardar, K. 2009. Language and Grammar. New Delhi: Northern Book Centre.
Koopman, H. An Introduction to Syntactic Analysis and Theory. Levine, Diane P Rowe, Bruce M. 2016. A Concise Introduction to
Linguistics: Fourth Edition. New York: Routledge. May, S ed. 1999. Indigenous Community-Based Education. Great Britain: Short
Run Press Ltd. Ottenheimer, Harriet J. 2013. The Anthropology of Language: An Introduction
to Linguistic Anthropology. USA: WADSWORTH Cengage Learning. Pateda, M. 2001. Semantik Leksikal. Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta.
Postal, Paul M. 2004. Skeptical Linguistic Essays. New York: Oxford University Press.
digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id digilib.uinsby.ac.id
Roberts Noel B. 2011. Analyzing Sentences: An Introduction to English Syntax Third Edition. UK: Pearson Education.
Rowe, Bruce M. and Levine, Diane P. 2015. A Concise Introduction to Linguistics. USA: Routledge.
Sengupta, Ruplekha and Ghosh, N. 2011. Cornerstone: Grammar and Composition Skills. India: Dorling Kindersley Pvt Ltd.
Slocum, Brian G. 2015. Ordinary Meaning: A Theory of The Most Fundamental Principle of Legal Interpretation. United States of America: The
University of Chicago Press. S. Stoik, Thomas. 2009. Locality in Minimalist Syntax. London: The MIT Press
Tracy, K. Llie, C. Sandel, Todd. 2015. The International Encyclopedia of
Language and Social Interaction. United Kingdom: Wiley Blackwell Ullmann, S. 1972. Semantics An Introduction to the Science of Meaning.
Oxford: Basil Blackwell Fromkin, V. 2003. An Introduction Language 7
th
Ed. Boston: Heinle. Yule, G. The Study of Language: Third Edition
----------------. 1985. The Study of Language. Cambridge University Press.
http:online.sfs.edu~kbachambguity.html Elmawati, D. Structural Ambiguity in the Headlines Compiled by Department of
Languages, Cultures and Linguistics Bucknell University: A Study on the X-bar Theory.
Sevida, S.L. 2015. Structural Ambiguity of New Headlines “Yahoo News” The
Study of X-Bar Theory. Jakarta: UIN Syarif Hidayatullah A Thesis Bustam, M. R. 2012. The Analysis of Ambiguous Structure Through The
Structural Ambiguity Concept. Indonesia University of Computer Kristianty, S. 2006. The Structural Ambiguity and Lexical Ambiguity Found in
Cleo Magazina Advertisements. Surabaya: Petra Christian University A Thesis
Tambunan, H. A 2009. The Analysis of Lexical and Structural Ambiguity in Your letter of the Jakarta post. Medan: University of Sumatera Utara.
