28
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY
This chapter contains six sections. The first section is research method.
The researcher discusses the type of the method which was used in this research. The second section is research setting. The place and the time where and when the
research was conducted are described in this section. The third section is research participant. The researcher describes the subject of the study as well as the method
of sampling which was conducted. The fourth section is instruments and data gathering techniques. In this section, the research instruments used in this study
will be explained together with the techniques of collecting the data. The fifth section is data analysis technique. The researcher talks about the way of analyzing
the finding in order to answer the research problems. The last section is research procedures. The researcher describes the steps on doing this research from the
beginning until the end.
A. Research Method
The researcher used a qualitative study as the method of this study. This research belonged to a qualitative study because the data were presented in the
form of words and sentences. According to Ary, Jacobs and Sorensen 2010, qualitative study will apply words and images in order to provide the answers to
the research problems p. 419. The purpose is to contextualize the findings by PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
29
focusing on the understanding of concept and meaning. Therefore, the findings of this study would rely on words and only minor use of numbers was provided.
Moreover, this research also belonged to discourse-analytic research. According to Wood and Kroger 2001,
discourse analysis is „a perspective on social life that contains both methodologi
cal and conceptual elements‟ p. 3. It analyses the issue which becomes the viewpoint of our social life and the issue will be
analyzed using the appropriate methods and also the concept that we gain theoretically. Hence, discourse analysis involves both theoretical and
methodological elements. By doing discourse-analytic research, the researcher would not only analyze language as a tool or medium for communication but also
as a text and talk in social practices. Discourse analysis is primarily an analysis which is carried out by using
words rather than using numbers or quantitative techniques Wood Kroger, 2001, p. 136-141. Wood and Kroger 2001 adds that discourse analysis is
concerned with what people are doing or not doing, how they are doing it, and how it is connected to other things rather than with how often they are doing it, or
how much they are doing it p. 136-137. However, quantification may be helpful for selecting the data. In the analysis, it may help the researcher to select a
particular feature that occurs frequently or rarely. Potter and Wetherell 1987 state that the coding of discourse data is an improvement over the use of
questionnaires in which the selection of meaning is almost neglectful of the participant‟s views as cited in Wood Kroger, 2001, p. 137. Therefore, this
research used numbers only for selecting the data from the questionnaire and PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
30
presenting the data for analysis of what the participants were doing and how they were doing it.
B. Research Setting
This research was conducted in December 2015. In order to collect the appropriate data, data collection took place in the English Language Education
Study Program ELESP campus, Sanata Dharma University. The data collection was done on December 10
th
, 2015 at 3.30 p.m. in Multimedia Laboratory of Sanata Dharma University. It was carried out after Interpreting class, which was
taken by seventh semester students of ELESP. There were 24 students who participated in this research. The data collection took around 20 minutes until all
of the participants finished filling in the questionnaires.
C. Research Participants
The participants of this research were the seventh semester students of English Language Education Study Program ELESP of Sanata Dharma
University Yogyakarta. The students were from batch 2012. There were 24 students who were asked to fulfill the questionnaires provided by the researcher.
The number of students who were asked to participate in this study was considered as appropriate since it was a sample of 15 from all students in
seventh semester of ELESP in batch 2012. Each of the students would provide four different responses based on the four cases in the questionnaire. Hence, there
31
were 96 data which were gained from 24 participants. The seventh semester students were chosen as the object of the study because they were English learners
who had learned English for around three years. Hence, their proficiency in English language use was expected to be better than that of lower semester
students. These students were expected to understand the theory about speech acts, particularly on illocutionary acts, and the theory of pragmatics, particularly
related to politeness, and also its practice in everyday life. These students also had big chances to interact and communicate with their lecturers due to their needs of
having consultation and gaining feedback from the advisor on doing their thesis. Most importantly, seventh semester students were prepared to graduate soon from
ELESP and face the real work field. Therefore, these students had to equip themselves with strong knowledge about English, including the ability to show
politeness in their acts, both in spoken and written form.
In order to choose the participants, the researcher used purposeful sampling technique. According to Lodico, Spaulding and Voegtle, purposeful
sampling is a sampling procedure which is mostly used in a qualitative research 2006. It is because qualitative researchers choose the participants based on their
characteristics and knowledge as they relate to the research questions being investigated. Moreover, purposeful sampling is stated as a procedure where the
researcher analyzes the people who are familiar and have specific knowledge about the topic which is investigated Lodico, Spaulding Voegtle, 2006. In this
research, the researcher chose the seventh semester students who attended Interpreting class, which belonged to class B. Interpreting is a compulsory course
32
for seventh semester students in ELESP. The researcher chose Interpreting class B instead of the other classes because this class consisted of 15 of the whole
members of seventh semester students of ELESP. There were 24 seventh semester students who became the participants of this study. The students also had already
had knowledge about pragmatics study. Moreover, the researcher also belonged to this class, which made it easier to distribute the questionnaire and gather the data.
D. Instruments and Data Gathering Technique
The researcher used questionnaire as the instrument employed to carry out the study. According to Ary, Jacobs and Sorensen 2010, questionnaire is a list of
questions which are sent to all of the members of a sample group p. 379. The members of the sample group will give their responses to the questions written in
the questionnaire. Moreover, questionnaire can be provided in two types of questions, namely open-ended and close-ended questions. In this research, the
type of questionnaire used was open-ended question where the participants did not have limited choice in giving the answers Cohen et al, 2000. Furthermore, the
questionnaire used in this research was administered using discourse completion test DCT by Blum-Kulka 1982. According to Pariera 2006, DCT is the most
popular instrument in collecting the sociolinguistics data. Pariera adds that DCT uses a „constructed environment to elicit certain parts of discourse and to use the
findings to make predictions about natural language‟. DCT provides some scenarios and asks the participants to write down their responses based on those
Kategori