POLITENESS STRATEGIES OF CRITICIZING A STUDY ON A MOVIE THE UGLY TRUTH (Pragmatics Study)

commit to user

i

A STUDY ON A MOVIE

THE UGLY TRUTH

(Pragmatics Study)

THESIS

Submitted As a Partial Fulfillment of Requirement For the Sarjana Sastra Degree of the English Department

Faculty of Letters and Fine Arts Sebelas Maret University

By:

SUSI ANJARSARI C0306050

ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LETTERS AND FINE ARTS SEBELAS MARET UNIVERSITY

SURAKARTA 2011

commit to user

ii

A STUDY ON A MOVIE

THE UGLY TRUTH

(Pragmatics Study)

By:

SUSI ANJARSARI C0306050

Approved to be examined before the Board of Examiners Faculty of Letters and Fine Arts

Sebelas Maret University

Thesis Consultant

Agus Dwi Priyanto, S.S., M.CALL NIP 197408182000121001

The Head of English Department

Prof. Dr. Djatmika, M.A. NIP 196707261993021001

commit to user

iii

A STUDY ON A MOVIE

THE UGLY TRUTH

(Pragmatics Study)

By:

SUSI ANJARSARI C0306050

Accepted and approved by the Board of Examiners Faculty of Letters and Fine Arts

Sebelas Maret University On August 10, 2011

Chairman of Examiners: Dr. Sri Marmanto, M.Hum ( ) NIP. 195009011986011001

Secretary : Drs. Agus Hari Wibowo, M.A. ( ) NIP. 196708301993021001

First examiner : Agus Dwi Priyanto, S.S., M.CALL ( ) NIP. 197408182000121001

Second examiner : Drs. Budi Waskito, M. Pd. ( ) NIP. 195211081983031001

Dean of Faculty of Letters and Fine Arts Sebelas Maret University

Drs. Riyadi Santosa, M. Ed., Ph.D NIP. 196003281986011001

commit to user

iv Name : Susi Anjarsari

Number : C0306050

In the name of God, I certify that I myself write this thesis entitled Politeness Strategies of Criticizing a Study on a Movie The Ugly Truth. It is neither a plagiarism, nor made by others. The things related to other people’s work are written in quotation and included within bibliography.

If it is then proved that I cheat, I am ready to take the responsibility, including the withdrawal of my academic title.

Surakarta, August 10, 2011

commit to user

v

!"

!#$%

&

'

&

(

)

'

'

)

&

commit to user

vi DEDICATION

& '

&& ''

& '

/ )

/ )

/ )

/ ) / 0 ' )/ 0 ' )/ 0 ' )/ 0 ' ) 1111

) ) )

) / ))/ ))/ ))/ )) //// 2 )2 )2 )2 )

) )) )

) ) )

commit to user

vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Alhamdulillahirabbil'alamin… All praise is due to Allah Azza Wa Jalla; Lord of the Lords, The Merciful, The Hearer of supplications, who guides every steps on my life that finally I can accomplish this thesis. Peace and blessings upon His messenger,the Prophet Muhammad Shalallahu ’Alaihi Wassalam who shows me the meaning of being patient while completing the thesis. Yet, there are many people who have helped me along the way in finishing the thesis. Therefore, I would like to extend a special note thanks to them.

First of all, I owe a debt gratitude to Drs. Riyadi Santosa, M.Ed,, Ph.D, as the dean of Faculty of Letters and Fine Arts for guiding me to learn research method and letting me conduct this research. I also owe a debt gratitude to Prof. Djatmika, M.A as the head of English Department for the big concern on his students. Being lectured by him is a favorable thing I ever had. I wish particularly to thank all English Department’s lectures for enjoyable five years studying. All knowledge and love that they have given me are so much worth.

My best gratitude goes to my best supervisor, Agus Dwi Priyanto, S.S, M.CALL, who has shown me the authentic meaning of politeness strategy. He was like the reflection of Brown and Levinson in my real life when I could not understand their book. I am especially grateful for his perspective thinking in politeness strategy and his generous time for more than one year supervising me.

I thank the board of examiners: Dr. Sri Marmanto, M.Hum, Drs. Agus Hari Wibowo, M.A., Agus Dwi Priyanto, S.S., M.CALL, Drs. Budi Waskito, M. Pd., for giving valuable comments and suggestions on my thesis.

commit to user

viii

believing on me and supporting every activity on my campus. Without their love and prayer, this work would have never been completed. I thank my little brother Viqi Vendi for always being patient to lend me laptop to finish this research. I specially thank to my little sister Chinan, whom loud chuckle become my best medicine to pump up my energy. I also thank to my grandma for every prayer she sends to me.

During five years studying in Faculty of Letters and Fine Arts, I had mesmerizing friendship with great people. I am sincerely grateful for M. Rizqi, S.S, for always being my best-friend to share happiness and sadness in my life since the first we met. I also thank to Arifin, for 3 days joyful holiday in his hometown when I got stuck with the research. My gratitude is also to Itha Kunthi, for every single helps and being a nice place to share. I would also like to thank to all linguistic mates; Faridha, S.S, Ikha, S.S, Ima, Ata, S.S, Lala, S.S, Intan, S.S, Dila (boy), Dede, Yuli, Hendro, Hamid, S.S and Fajar, S.S, for the togetherness and the time to ‘control’ each other in accomplishing thesis. I owe special thanks to Beckha, Fadhila and Hamsi, the students who own the same supervisor with me, for their prayer and support everytime I got problems.

I owe a special debt of gratitude to my big family of English Department 2006; Hanif (for his generous time everytime I need him), Rini Setyarini, S.S, (for her love and support) doube W; Wulan & Wisnu, Pondra (for the wisdom of life and great friendship), Herman (for being a great friend to laugh), Aji (for the “Haii Suz!”), Rena, Ucay, Asni, Bimo, Vika, Cindy, Letizia, Deka, Vendra,

commit to user

ix maintain this intimate relationship forever.

I do believe that doing a thesis is a psychological and spiritual process. My big thanks also go to Ummu Raidan Rasyida for showing me the meaning of faith. I also thank to Suci Aya Aryani. Nothing can describe her except two words; best-companion. Special thanks go to Ida ‘Nana’ Yuliana, for courage to strengthen each other to complete this thesis. My best-Chikuk, Imbun, Miss. Betty, Miss. Alia, Mrs. Iqbal and Miss. Reny who always remind me to be patient in accomplishing my thesis. The transformers girls: Mylo, Nurfa, Indras, Retno, and Dila. I do thanks for the nice ukhuwah they have given me that I can grow wisely. I thank to my small family in Al-Ashr: Koim, Chuwi, Ning, Vika, Yeni, Ani. I will miss the time when we did Sholat together in the path of Al-Ashr and argued who was going to be Imam.

My endless thanks are also due to my special ‘Deer’ for teaching me how to paint the sky. His presence is the best in my life.

I also thank to all people who love and support me in finishing the thesis. Perhaps, I cannot mention their names here, but I do write their names in my heart.

Surakarta, August 10, 2011

commit to user

x

TITLE……….. i

APPROVAL BY THESIS CONSULTANT………... ii

APPROVAL BY THESIS BOARD OF EXAMINERS………. iii

PRONOUNCEMENT………... iv

MOTTO………... v

DEDICATION……….... vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENT………. vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS……….... x

LIST OF TABLES... xii

ABSTRACT……….... xiii

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION A. Research Background……….. 1

B. Research Question... 2

C. Research Objectives ……….... 2

D. Research Benefits... 3

E. Scope of Research……….……... 4

F. Research Method...……….…….... 4

G. Thesis Organization………... 5

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW A. Pragmatics……… 6

B. Speech Acts……….. 8

C. The Classification of Speech Acts………... 10

D. Context...……….. 15

E. The Act of Criticizing...………... 17

F. Politeness Strategy………... 19

G. Response to Criticism... 31

H. The Factors Influencing the Choice of Strategy... 32

I. Politeness Strategy of Criticism... 35

commit to user

xi

A. Type of Research………... 38

B. Data and Source Data………... 39

C. Technique of Collecting Data……….. 40

D. Technique of Coding Data... 40

E. Technique of Analyzing Data……….. 41

CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS A. Introduction……….... .. 42

B. Data Analysis………... 43

C. Discussion………... 95

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion……… 116

B. Suggestion………... .. 119 BIBLIOGRAPHY

commit to user

xii

Table 4.1. The speakers’ strategies and the number of data…... 100 Table 4.2. The hearers’ strategies to respond criticism………. ... 102 Table 4.3. The factors influencing the choice of strategy to criticize... 105 Table 4.4. The factors influence the choice of strategy to respond the criticism 113 Table 5.1. The factors which influence the choice of strategy to criticize……. 122 Table 5.2. The factors influencing the choice of strategy to respond………… 123

commit to user

xiii

Susi Anjarsari. C0306050. Politeness Strategies of Criticizing, a Study on a Movie The Ugly Truth. Thesis: English Department of Faculty of Letters and Fine Arts. Sebelas Maret University.

The research is conducted to analyze the politeness strategy of criticizing employed by the characters in the movie The Ugly Truth. The research explores the politeness strategy to extend criticism, the politeness strategy to respond the criticism and the factors which influence the choice of strategy.

The research uses pragmatics study to analyze the speech act of criticism. The descriptive qualitative research is employed in this research. All of criticism utterances in the movie The Ugly Truth are taken as the data. There are 17 data which have been analyzed by Brown and Levinson theory of politeness strategy.

The findings of the analysis can be seen as follows: First, there are three strategies employed by the characters in the movie The Ugly Truth to extend criticism. The strategies are bald on record, positive politeness and negative politeness strategy. Bald on record strategy is mostly used by the participants in the movie. There are 14 data which show that the speakers employ bald on record strategy to extend criticism to hearers. Positive politeness strategy is used twice by the speakers to send criticism. Then, there is one occurrence of negative politeness strategy used by the speaker to extend criticism.

Second, there are three strategies used by the hearers to respond the criticism. They are bald on record strategy, positive politeness and off record strategy. Most hearers use bald on record strategy to refuse and to ignore the criticism. There are 15 data which show that the hearers use bald on record strategy to respond the criticism. Positive politeness strategy is chosen once by the hearers to accept speaker’s criticism. Then, there is one occurrence of off record strategy used by the hearer to accept the criticism.

Third, there are several factors which influence the speakers to the choice of strategy. In choosing strategies to extend criticism, the speakers are influenced by several factors. The use of bald on record strategy is influenced by the legitimate power, the expert power and the close relationship between the participants. The speakers who have two competing goals and big rank of imposition tend to choose positive politeness strategy to deliver criticism. Then, the use of negative politeness strategy is influenced by the social distance relationship between speaker and hearer. The choice of strategy to respond the criticism is also influenced by many factors. The choice of bald on record is influenced by the close relationship between the interlocutors, the legitimate power owned by the hearer and the situational context. The hearers who have two competing goals use positive politeness to respond the criticism. Then, the hearer who has subordinate status tends to choose off record strategy to respond speaker’s criticism.

This research is expected to be beneficial for the readers in studying politeness strategy of criticism. It is suggested that other researchers conduct other studies about criticism done by subordinate status to superior status in order to know the real description of politeness strategy in today’s communication.

commit to user

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Research Background

People criticize others in order to give negative evaluation by virtue of various conditions. Speakers will try their best way to extend their criticisms. Hence, they use politeness strategy to extend criticism so that it does not sound rude. Dealing with that occurrence, this study analyzes the politeness strategies of extending and responding to criticism. This is a case study, taking a movie The Ugly Truth produced by Heigl and Luketic (2009)as the source of data.

In this introduction part, I will begin with reason why politeness strategy of criticism is worth analyzing. Then I will continue with the reasons of choosing the movie The Ugly Truth as the source of data.

A study on criticism is worth doing because this act is really sensitive since the speaker may burden the hearer. In other words, criticism is highly potential to threat the hearer’s face. When a speaker is giving negative evaluation to the hearer, he or she may cost the hearer’s face. Therefore, a speaker needs to use certain strategies when he is criticizing others in order to lessen the threat.

The movie The Ugly Truth is selected as the source of data with some reasons. The first reason is because the language of this movie represents the ways people actually talk. The movie The Ugly Truth represents daily life conversation which tells about the life of a producer and her employee in one TV station. Hence, I use this movie as the source of data since its validity of using language.

In addition, the movie pictures the best way how two characters who have rocky relationship finally fall in love to each other. What then intrigue me to use this movie as the source of data is that the conversation uttered by the characters in the movie. I want to know the strategies used by the characters to deliver criticism, how they respond the criticism and what factors influence them to use the strategies.

To analyze criticism, pragmatic approach is employed in this research. It is done because analyzing criticism shows the exploitation of character’s pragmatics repertoire. Hence it cannot be separated from pragmatics study.

B. Research Questions This study is guided by the following three questions:

1. What politeness strategies are used by the characters to extend criticism? 2. What politeness strategies are used by the characters to respond criticism? 3. What factors influence the choice of politeness strategies?

C. Research Objectives

1. To find out the politeness strategies used by the characters to extend criticism.

2. To find out the politeness strategies used by the characters to respond the criticism.

commit to user

D. Research Benefits

The research of politeness strategies of criticizing in the movie The Ugly Truth is expected to be beneficial for:

1. English Department students

The research will deepen the understanding about speech act, specifically criticism and the way to extend it. By conducting this research, I expect that English Department students will be more aware about the speech act of criticism in everyday conversation so that the research will help them to study it more comprehensively.

2. Other researchers

The research will be beneficial for other researchers to conduct a more comprehensive research of related study. By having this research, other researchers who want to conduct under the same topic of speech act can use this research as a reference.

3. The public

The public will know how to extend criticism using proper politeness strategies. By doing this research, I expect that the public will have a comprehension about how to extend criticism using politeness strategies considering the context and situation.

E. Scope of the Research

The research focuses on the utterance of politeness strategies of criticism and the non-verbal expressions of the characters. The research identifies the kinds of politeness strategies used by the characters to extend criticism, the kinds of politeness strategies used by the characters to respond criticism and the factors influence the characters to choose the kinds of politeness strategies. To analyze the data, the theory of politeness by Brown and Levinson is applied in this research. As the source of data, this research uses a movie entitled The Ugly Truth

produced by Heigl and Luketic in 2009.

F. Research Method

This research employs a descriptive qualitative method. It aims to solve problems by collecting data, classifying data, analyzing data, and finally drawing the conclusion. The source of data of this research is the movie entitled The Ugly Truth produced by Heigl and Luketic in 2009. All criticism utterances and the non-verbal expressions of the characters are taken as the source of data. This is done to collect data containing politeness strategies of extending and responding criticism and also the factors that support the use of each politeness strategies. Further details of Research Method will be clarified in Chapter III.

commit to user

G. Thesis Organization

This thesis provides five chapters and bibliography. CHAPTER I presents INTRODUCTION which consists of Research Background, Research Question, Research Objective, Research Benefits, Scope of Research, Research Method and Thesis Organization.

CHAPTER II provides LITERATURE REVIEW of the research. It stands of Pragmatics, Speech Act, Context, The Act of Criticizing, Politeness Strategy, Response to Criticism, Factors Influencing the Choice of Strategy, Review Related Study of Criticism and The Synopsis of the Movie The Ugly Truth.

CHAPTER III describes the RESEARCH METHOD which is used in this study. It contains Type of Research, Data and Source of Data, Technique of Collecting Data, Technique of Coding Data and Technique of Analyzing Data.

CHAPTER IV presents ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION. It reviews and discusses the result of the research findings.

CHAPTER V gives CONCLUSION and SUGGESTION. It presents the conclusion of the research and recommends possible avenues for further research.

commit to user

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

A.Pragmatics

In this section, I will provide some definitions of pragmatics taken from several linguists regarding its period. The first definition of pragmatics is quoted from Steven C. Levinson in 1983, followed by Geoffrey Leech, then Jenny Thomas and the last is George Yule.

The term pragmatics covers both context-dependent aspects of language structure and principles of language usage. Hence it is difficult to forge a definition that covers both aspects (Levinson, 1983 p.9). For a thorough discussion of a number of definitions and the inherent difficulties, Levinson states that “pragmatics is the study of the ability of language users to pair sentences with the contexts in which they would be appropriate” (1983 p.24). Such definition leads to the interpretation that pragmatics cannot be separated from context and principles of language usage. Therefore, to understand pragmatics meaning of the speaker, one should consider the principles of language used by the speaker.

With different term, Thomas (1995 p.22) defines pragmatics as meaning in interaction. He claims that to interpret speaker’s meaning, it involves the negotiation of meaning between speaker and hearer, the context of utterance (physical, social and linguistic) and the meaning potential of an utterance. It is because meaning in interaction is not something which is inherent in the words alone, nor is produced by the speaker or the hearer alone, but it relates to context and meaning potential of an utterance.

commit to user

Thomas’s definition was later developed by Yule (1996 p.3) who divides the definition of pragmatics into four:

a. Pragmatics is the study of speaker meaning

People do not always say what they mean to say. They mean much more than their words actually say. Pragmatics deals with the study of meaning uttered by the speaker and interpreted by listener. Thus, it analyzes the meaning behind what people say rather than what the words might mean by themselves.

b. Pragmatics is the study of contextual meaning

In saying something, people also consider to whom they are talking to, where, when, and under what circumstances. It is because a particular context may influence what is said by the speaker.

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

In other words, pragmatics is the study of ‘invisible meaning’. It explores how a great deal of what is unsaid is recognized as part of what is communicated.

d. Pragmatics is the study of the expression of relative distance

People will not say anything to anyone whom they do not recognize well. Hence, closeness whether it is physical, social or conceptual, implies shared experience.

From many definitions above, it is obvious that pragmatics is a significant field to study. To comprehend the meaning of a word like well, oh or anyway,

people cannot be explicated simply by statements of context-independent content, rather have to refer to pragmatics concept like context, implicature or speech acts (context-dependent content). Moreover, pragmatics provides part of the necessary input to a semantic theory. A sentence can only be assigned the right truth conditions if the context of a sentence is taken into an account.

To sum up the explanation, it can be concluded that pragmatics is the study about language; that is always related to the context of the speaker and the hearer. Pragmatics is the perfect field which studies how a context might influence the interpretation of an utterance. It is because an utterance should be comprehended in relation to the context in which language is used.

B. Speech acts 1. The Definition of Speech acts

As Levinson (1983 p.27) suggests, one of the central topics of pragmatics is speech acts. Therefore, this section provides the definition and the classification of speech acts. For the discussion of the definition of speech acts, below is quotation from John R. Searle and George Yule about speech acts.

Searle (1969 p. 16) states that the unit of linguistic communication is not the symbol, word or sentence, but rather the production or issuance of the symbol or word or sentence in the performance of the speech acts. Speech acts are the basic minimal units of linguistic communication.

Meanwhile, Yule (1996 p.47) defines that speech acts is action performed via utterance. In English, speech acts are commonly given more specific labels,

commit to user

such as apology, complaint, compliment, invitation, promise, request or any other acts.

Based on the definitions above, it can be concluded that speech acts is the action people actually do through a language. It covers social acts, to promise, to request, to criticize, to offer and so on. The speaker normally expects that the hearer will recognize his or her communicative intention. Concerning this, both speaker and hearer are usually helped in this process by the context or circumstances, which surround the utterance.

Yule (1996 p.48) states that speech acts relate to three acts:

a. Locutionary act

It is the basic of utterance or the literal meaning of the utterance. In other word, locutionary act is the utterance of a sentence which determines sense and reference.

b. Illocutionary act

The act is performed via the communicative force of an utterance. However, the illocutionary act can be uttered both directly and indirectly. There are two kinds of speech acts namely direct and indirect speech acts.

1) Direct speech

A direct speech acts is performed when there is a direct relationship between the linguistic form of an utterance and its pragmatics function.

2) Indirect speech

An indirect speech acts cannot be identified easily as the direct speech acts because the speaker does not deliver his intention explicitly. Indirect speech happens whenever there is an indirect relationship between a structure and its pragmatic function.

c. Perlocutionary act

It is the result or the effect produced by the utterance. A speaker may utter sentence on the assumption that the hearer will recognize the effect intended.

In short, a locutionary act is the act of saying something. The illocutionary act is the act of doing something, while perlocutionary act is the act of affecting someone.

2. The Classification of Speech acts

There are many different classifications of speech act which are conveyed by linguists. Here, I would like to provide the discussion of speech acts classification from John L. Austin, John R. Searle and Amy B. M. Tsui.

The first classification of speech acts was introduced by John L. Austin in 1962. Austin in Mey (1993 p.151) classifies the speech acts into five categories. They are ‘verdictive’, ‘expositive’, ‘exercitive’, ‘behabitive’ and ‘commisive’. Among other things, Searle in Mey (1993 p.151) criticizes Austin’s classification of speech acts for operating with overlapping criteria, for having incompatible

commit to user

elements within his categories and for including elements in his categories that do not satisfy the definition of the category.

Then, Searle in Mey (1993 p.163) ends up by establishing the classification of speech acts into five categories. They are Representatives, Directives, Commissives, Expressives and Declarations. This classification seems undoubtedly right in criticizing Austin’s theory. However Searle in Tsui (1994 p.51) points out that there is not an infinite or indefinite number of language games or uses of language. Rather, he adds that the illusion of limitless uses of language is engendered by an enormous unclarity about what constitutes the criteria for delimiting one language game or use of language from another. Hence Tsui (1994 p.51) claims that it is impossible to delimit a set of speech action categories. Considering this, Tsui (1994 p.52) presents a taxonomy of discourse acts. The primary class acts are divided into three head acts; Initiating acts, responding acts and follow-up acts.

The Initiating acts covers the subclasses of Elicitation, Requestive, Directive, and Informative. The responding acts consists of positive, negative and

temporization, while follow up acts stand for turn-passing. Due to the purpose of the discussion is to define the classification of speech acts, I would like to focus on the Initiating acts. Tsui (1994 p.95) classifies the subclasses of initiating acts into four categories. They are:

1. Elicitation

The term elicitation is used to describe any utterance which functions to elicit an obligatory in the form of verbal or non-verbal response (Tsui, 1994 p.81). There are four types of elicitation:

a. Elicit inform functions to invite the addressee to provide information. Example: “What time you will be finished?”

b. Elicit confirm is a kind of elicitation which invites the addressee to confirm the speaker’s assumption.

Example: “Is that you Henry?”

c. Elicit agree is a kind of elicitation which invites the addressee to agree with the speaker’s assumption.

Example: “I suppose he’s a bit senile now, isn’t he?”

d. Elicit commit is a kind of elicitation which not only invites a verbal response but also action from the addressee.

For example:

X : “Could you open the window, Son?”

Y : “Yes, sure Mom.” (open the window)

2. Requestives

The requestives refers to the utterances which ask for non-verbal actions but give the addressee an option whether she/he wants to carry out the request or not (Tsui, 1994 p.90). The speech act of requestives is divided into five subclasses.

commit to user

a. Request in the form of permission is characterized by the speaker who asks the addressee to do something which is beneficial for him.

Example: “Can I have a match please?”

b. Request in the form of invitation is an utterance which functions to invite the addressee. In this case the addressee’s future action is beneficial for him. Example: “It is my pleasure and privilege now to invite her Royal Highness to

announce his name and to present the prizes.”

c. Request in the form of proposal is uttered by the speaker who convinces the addressee to do something benefit for him in the form of proposal.

Example: “We have to do a few things over.”

d. Invitation in the form of request is an utterance which functions to invite the addressee. If the invitation is obeyed by, it will benefit the speaker.

Example: “I’d love you to join us to have a dinner tonight. Would you?” e. An offer in the form of request is characterized by the speaker who offers

something which is benefit for the addressee. Example: “Can I help you to carry the bag?” 3. Directives

Tsui (1994 p.116) characterizes Directives as acts which try to get a non-verbal action from the addressee without giving him/her the option of refusal. There are two major subclasses of directives.

a. Advisives are directives which direct the addressee to perform an action for the benefit of his own. There are two kinds of advisives:

i) Advice is directives which advocates a course of action for the benefit of the addressee, in which the consequence of compliance is desirable. Example: “You had better do it by yourself. You will be very satisfied

with your own result.”

ii) Warning is directives which advocates the addressee to do action for the benefit of himself which explicitly or impliedly specifies the undesirable of non-compliance.

Example: “Do not pick up this cattle. It’s burning hot!”

b. Mandatives are directives by which the speaker attempts to get the addressee to do action for the benefit of the speaker himself. There are also two kinds of

mandatives:

i) Instruction. The speaker usually has the authority over the addressee to obey what is said.

For example the customer says to the waitress: “Black coffee!”

ii) Threats. It is a kind of directives to get the addressee to do action. Usually it is uttered by the speaker to talk about something wicked.

Example: “Put your gun or I’ll shoot her!” 4. Informatives

Tsui (1994 p.135) characterizes the term of “Informative’ as a more general category which covers not only utterances which provide information, but also those which report events or states of affair, recount personal experiences and express belief, evaluative judgment, feeling and thought. The subclasses of

commit to user

a. Report. It is a subclass of informatives which gives an account of certain event, states of affairs or personal experiences in the past, present or future.

For example: “She is the cleverest student in the class.”

b. Assessments. It is a subclass of informatives in which the speaker asserts his judgment or evaluation of certain people, object, event, states of affair and so on. There are five types of assessments:

i) Compliment. It is the assessment in which the speaker evaluates the addressee positively.

Example: “You are very diligent student.”

ii) Criticism. It is labeled by the utterance which judges the addressee negatively.

Example: “You are ugly with that dress”

iii)Self-commendation. It is the assessment in which the speaker evaluates himself positively.

Example: “You have to learn from me. I can get my love in a month” iv) Self-denigration. It is the name of assessment when the speaker judges

himself negatively.

Example: “I forget about it. I think I’m getting old”

v) Assessing. The evaluation is directed neither speaker nor addressee. Example: “Suzan is a very sexy and smart girl”

c. Expressive are ritualistic acts in which a speaker expresses civility and goodwill toward each other. The subclasses are:

i) Emphaty. The speaker shows concern and empathies with the addressee. Example: “I hope you will get better soon”

ii) Debt-incured. The speaker expresses his feelings toward debt, which he was incurred.

Example: “Sorry to trouble you”

C. Context

Context plays crucial role in understanding pragmatics meaning. In this section, I provide some explanations about the importance of context in pragmatics. The explanation is started from Levinson, followed by Firth and then Huang.

The importance of context in language can be seen from the opinion of Levinson (1983 p.21) who says that pragmatics is the study of relation between language and context. For being able to understand the meaning of an utterance, one cannot ignore the context surrounding since it is very important to define a meaning of a sentence. If the context surrounding is ignored, there might appear different interpretation from what is intended.

Meanwhile, Firth in Halliday and Hasan (1985 p.8) gives a description of context called context of situation, which consist of:

1. The participant in the situation referring to persons and personalities or the status and roles of the participant.

commit to user

2. The action of the participants referring to what they are doing, including their verbal action and non-verbal action.

3. Other relevant features of the situation referring to the surrounding objects and events.

4. The effect of the verbal action referring to the changes brought by what the participants in the situation have to say.

Context has many contributions in spoken and written language. If one does not know the context of situation, he may interpret different thing from what is intended by the other one. Hence, context functions to help speaker in delivering and receiving meaning from hearer.

In addition, Huang (2007 pp.13-14) refers context to any relevant features of dynamic setting or environment in which a linguistic unit is systematically used. Further, context can be seen as a composition of three different sources. First place is physical context which refers to physical setting of utterance. Second type is the linguistic context which refers to surrounding utterances in the same discourse. The last is general knowledge context. This involves a set of background and assumption shared by the speaker and the addressee.

To sum up, it is important to know the context of situation in order to understand the meaning of a pragmatic utterance. The same sentence may refer to different meaning if it occurs in different context. Hence, recognizing the context of the situation is highly essential to understand the intended meaning of the speaker in a conversation.

D. The Act of Criticizing

In this section, I first present the definition of the term criticism in linguistic field taken from the definition of some linguists. Secondly, I discuss the criticism rules in more detail based upon some theories of criticism.

John L. Austin (1962 pp.150-163) devides speech act into five categories. They are ‘verdictive’, ‘expositive’, ‘exercitive’, ‘behabitive’ and ‘commisive’. He includes the act of criticism into behabitive category, since criticism is an act which functions to express the speaker’s negative reaction of the addressee’s bad habit. In this case, the speaker expresses negative thing to the addressee related to the bad behavior that the addressee has done.

Searle in Martinich (1996 pp.147-149) divides speech act into five groups. They are Assertive, Directives, Commisive, Expressives and Declaration. The act of criticism is included in the expressives act. This is because criticism is an act which tries to express negative evaluation of the hearer’s condition. The speaker expects that the criticism utterance is able to evaluate the bad condition of the hearer.

Leech (1993 pp.327-329) classifies speech act into six categories. They are Assertive, Directive, Commissive, Expressives, Declarative and Rogative. In this classification, Leech includes criticism in Expressives, because the criticism utterance functions to express a psychological act toward negative condition of the hearer. This means the speaker expresses the negative condition of the hearer through the criticism act.

commit to user

Tsui (1994 p.143) defines criticism as a kind of assessment which gives negative judgment or evaluation of certain people, events or objects toward the addressee. It is employed to make the addressee accept the negative evaluation informed by the speaker.

Moreover, Riekkinen (2009 p.18) confirms that criticism is an act that may cause Face-Threatening Act (FTA) because it expresses negative evaluation to the hearer. When a speaker employs criticism, he may threat the positive self-image of the addressee. For that reason, a speaker cannot criticize directly to anyone because he must consider some basic rules of criticizing.

Next discussion is about the crucial rules when a speaker criticizes hearer. The first point is the relationship between the speaker and the hearer. Tsui (1994 p.147) states that a speaker may not criticize others unless they know each other well. It implies a statement that a speaker may extend his criticism baldly if he has an intimate relationship with the hearer. This will be different when a speaker criticizes someone who has social distance with him. He may be more indirect since he considers about the distant relationship between him and the hearer.

The second point is about the relative power of the speaker over the hearer. Jauhari (2010) argues that a speaker who has greater power tends to criticize the hearer directly. On the contrary, people having lower of power tend to use indirectness with people who have greater authority (Thomas, 1995 p.124).

E. Politeness Strategy

Further, I provide the explanation of politeness strategy by Brown and Levinson. In the first point, I describe the classification of politeness strategy. Next I provide the summary of the factors influencing the speakers to choose each strategy.

1. The Classification of Politeness Strategy

Brown and Levinson (1987 pp.68-71) have divided the politeness strategies according to how much the speakers and hearers minimize the threat when they are having conversation. The strategies range from doing the FTA directly without minimizing the threat at all to not doing the FTA. They are bald on-record, positive politeness, negative politeness and off record strategy. For more complete explanation, below is the classification of the theory of politeness strategy by Brown and Levinson.

a) Bald on-Record

Bald on-record strategy does not attempt to minimize the threat to the hearer’s face. The strategy is mostly used by the speakers having intimate relationship with the addressee. Brown and Levinson (1987 p.95) state that speaker mostly uses bald on-record strategy when he wants to do FTA with maximum efficiency toward the hearer’s face. Still according to Brown and Levinson (1987 p.95), there are different kinds of bald-on record usage in different circumstances because speakers may have different motives for his want to do FTA with maximum efficiency. Hence, they divide bald on-record strategy into two classes:

commit to user

1) Cases of non-minimization of the threat

This strategy is applied by the speaker when maximum efficiency is more important and usually is known by both speaker and the hearer.

For example: “Watch out!”

2) Cases of FTA-oriented bald on-record usage

This class of bald on-record strategy is utilized when a speaker and hearer have orientation of face. Thus, each participant attempts to foresee what the other participant is attempting to foresee.

For example: “Come in, don’t hesitate, I’m not busy.” b) Positive Politeness Strategy

Brown and Levinson (1987 p.70) give definition that positive politeness is the strategy which is oriented by the speaker toward the positive face or the positive self image of the hearer that the speaker claims for himself. The speaker can satisfy the addressee's positive face wants by emphasizing that speaker wants what the hearer’s wants. Positive politeness techniques are usable not only for FTA redress, but as a kind of social accelerator which indicates that speaker wants to come closer to hearer. Brown and Levinson (1987 pp.103-129) divide positive politeness strategy into 15 strategies. They are:

1) Strategy 1: Notice, attend to H (his interests, wants, needs, goods)

The strategy suggests that S should take notice of aspects of H’s condition (anything which looks as though H would want S to notice and approve of it). Example: “Goodness, you cut your hair! By the way, I came to borrow some flour”.

2) Strategy 2: Exaggerate (interest, approval, sympathy with H)

This strategy is often done with exaggerated intonation, stress, and other aspects of prosodic, as well as intensifying modifiers. Below is the example when a woman describes the disreputable appearance of her drunken husband.

Example: “He looked as if he was still drunk; he looked incredibly dirty, really uncombed hair, really crooked clothes, really his belt half-tied!”

3) Strategy 3: Intensify interest to H

Another way for S to communicate to H that he shares his wants is to intensify the interest of S’s own contributions to the conversation, by ‘making good story’.

Example: “I came down the stairs, and what do you think I see? -- a huge mess all over the place, the phone’s off the hook and clothes are scattered all over…”

4) Strategy 4; Use in-group identity marker

This strategy is done by using innumerable address forms to indicate that S and H belong to some set of persons who share specific wants.

Example: “Help me with this bag here, will you darling?”

5) Strategy 5; Seek agreement

Another way to save positive face of H is to seek ways in which it is possible to agree with him. Seek agreement may be stressed by raising weather topics and repeating what the preceding speaker has said in a conversation. Example:

A: “John went to London this weekend!” B: “To London!”

commit to user

6) Strategy 6: Avoid disagreement

The desire to agree or appear to agree with H leads to mechanisms for pretending to agree. Using this strategy, speakers may go in twisting their utterances to agree or to hide disagreement. Example:

A: “So, you hate your Mom and Dad.” B: “Oh, sometimes.”

7) Strategy 7: Presuppose/raise/assert common ground

The strategy is widely used by the speakers as a way to indicate that S knows H’s wants, tastes, habits, etc. and thus partially to redress the imposition of FTAs.

Example: “Don’t you think it’s marvelous!?”

8) Strategy 8; Joke

Jokes are based on mutual shared background knowledge and values that they redefine the size of FTA.

Example: when a speaker wants to borrow his friend’s new Cadillac by saying, “How about lending me this old heap of junk?”

9) Strategy 9: Assert S’s knowledge of and concern for H’s wants

This strategy is done by asserting knowledge of H’s wants and willingness to fit one’s own wants in with them.

For example: “I know you love roses but the florist didn’t have any more, so I brought you geraniums instead.”

10)Strategy 10; Offer, promise

This strategy is done to redress the potential threat of some FTAs. Speaker may claim that whatever H wants, S wants for him and will help to obtain.

Example: “I’ll drop by sometime next week”

11)Strategy 11; Be optimistic

This strategy assumes that H will cooperate with S because it will be in their mutual shared interest. For example, a wife said to her husband before appearing in public: “Wait a minute, you haven’t brushed your hair!”

12)Strategy 12; Include both S and H in the activity

This is done by using an inclusive ‘we’ form, when S really means ‘you’ or ‘me’. For example: when she is asked if she has any chocolate gingers, a sweet-shop lady said: “Let’s just go into the back room and see if we have any.” Then she trundle back alone.

13)Strategy 13: Give (or ask for) reasons

Another aspect of including H in the activity is demanding reasons ‘why not’ and assuming that H has no good reasons why can’t help.

Example: “Why didn’t you do the dishes?”

14)Strategy 14: Assume or assert reciprocity

The strategy is done by giving evidence of reciprocal rights or obligations obtaining between S and H.

commit to user

15)Strategy 15: Give gifts to H (sympathy, understanding, cooperation) To satisfy H’s positive face, S may do this classic strategy. That is to give gift not only tangible gifts but also human-relation wants such to be liked, to be admired. Example: “You’re such a good girl. Would you help me to move these books?”

c) Negative Politeness Strategy

Brown and Levinson (1987 p.129) asserts that negative politeness strategy is redressive action addressed to the addressee’s negative face: his want to have his freedom of action unhindered and his attention unimpeded. Unlike positive politeness which is free ranging, negative politeness is specific and focused; it performs the function of minimizing the particular imposition that the FTA unavoidably effects. Brown and Levinson (1987 pp.132-210) also classify negative politeness strategy into 10 strategies:

1) Strategy 1: Be conventionally indirect

The strategy is conducted by using phrases and sentences that have contextually unambiguous meanings that are different from their literal meaning. When a speaker is doing calculus homework and need a help for instance, he says to a friend “Can you do advanced calculus?”

2) Strategy 2: Question, hedge

A hedge makes the membership of a noun phrase in a set that it is partial, or true only in certain respects and more complete than might be expected. Hedge may be functioned to soften command and turn it into a polite suggestion

3) Strategy 3: Be pessimistic

This strategy gives redress to H’s negative face by explicitly expressing doubt that the conditions for the appropriateness of S’s speech act obtain.

For example: “Perhaps you’d care for a lift”

4) Strategy 4: Minimize the imposition

One way of defusing the FTA is to indicate that the intrinsic seriousness of the imposition is not great, though it is. For example if speaker wants to ask some papers he may say:

“I just want to ask you if you could lend me a single sheet of paper”

5) Strategy 5: Give deference

There are two sides of deference realization: one in which S humbles and abases himself and another where S raises H (pays him positive face/satisfies H’s want to be treated as superior).

For example: “I don’t think you ought to do that, Mr. President”

6) Strategy 6: Apologize

By apologizing for doing an FTA, the speaker can indicate his reluctance to impinge on H’s negative face and thereby redress that impingement.

commit to user

7) Strategy 7: Impersonalize S and H

Other way of indicating that S doesn’t want to impinge on H is to phrase the FTA as if the agent were other than S, or not S alone at least, and the addressee were other than H, or only inclusive of H.

For example: “I got delayed. I’m sorry”

8) Strategy 8: State the FTA as a general rule

One way of dissociating S and H from particular imposition in the FTA is to state the FTA as an instance of some general social rule, regulation, or obligation.

Example: The United States expresses regrets over the occurrence of the incident.

9) Strategy 9; Nominalize

The more nouns are used in an expression, the more removed an actor from doing or being something and the less dangerous an FTA seems to be.

For example: “An urgent request is made for your cooperation”is better than “We urgently request your cooperation”.

10)Strategy 10: Go on record as incurring a debt, or as not indebting H The strategy is done by claiming S’s indebtness to H or by disclaiming any indebtness of H, so that S can redress an FTA.

d) Off Record Strategy

The final politeness strategy outlined by Brown and Levinson is the indirect or off-record strategy. Brown and Levinson (1987 p.211) state that a communicative act is done off record if it is not possible to attribute only one clear intention act. Thus, when a speaker wants to do an FTA, but wants to avoid the responsibility for doing it, he uses off record strategy. By this way, he let the addressee decide how to interpret the FTA

1) Strategy 1: Give hints

The strategy is done by giving hints; that S invites H to search for interpretation of the possible relevance. Generally, hints consist in ‘raising issue of’ certain desired act by stating motives or reasons for doing that act.

Example: “This soup’s a bit bland” (c.i. Pass the salt)

2) Strategy 2: Give association clues

The strategy is conducted by mentioning something associated with the act required of H either by precedent in S-H’s experience or by mutual knowledge irrespective of their interaction experience.

For example when someone needs a ride to a market, she says “Are you going to market tomorrow?…There’s a market tomorrow, I suppose”

3) Strategy 3: Presuppose

This strategy is done through an utterance which relevant in context and invites H to search for an interpretation of the possible relevance just at the level of its presuppositions.

commit to user

For example: when someone implicates a criticism on his friend responsibility to wash the car, he says “I washed the car again today”.

4) Strategy 4: Understate

To express understatements, S says less than is required and as result generates implicatures.

For example: when someone doesn’t really like a friend’s new haircut, she just says “It’s pretty nice”.

5) Strategy 5: Overstate

The strategy is done by saying more than is necessary, or by exaggerating or choosing a point on scale which is higher than the actual state of affair.

For example: “I tried to call a hundred times, but there was never any answer”

6) Strategy 6: Use tautologies

Using the strategy tautology means S encourages H to look for an informative interpretation of the non-informative utterance.

For example: “You’re men, why don’t you do something about it?”

7) Strategy 7: Use contradictions

The strategy is done by stating two contradict things. By doing so, S makes it appear that he cannot be telling the truth, thus encourage H to look for a interpretation that reconciles the two contradictory propositions. For example:

A: Are you upset about that? B: Well, I am and I’m not

8) Strategy 8: Be ironic

To be ironic means by saying the opposite of what S means. Through that way, S can indirectly convey his intended meaning, if there are clues (prosodic, kinesics, or textual) which relevant to the context.

For instance: when a man and his guest passing through a slum area for instance, he says “Lovely neighborhood, eh?”

9) Strategy 9: Use metaphor

The use of metaphor is usually on record, but there is possibility that the connotations of the metaphor uttered by S may be off record.

For example when someone says “Harry’s a real fish” which means Harry drinks like a fish.

10)Strategy 10: Use rhetorical questions

The use of this strategy is by raising questions that leave their answers hanging in the air or implicated to do FTAs.

For example: “How many times do I have to tell you?”

11)Strategy 11: Be ambiguous

The term ‘ambiguity’ includes the ambiguity between the literal meaning of an utterance and any possible implicatures inside.

commit to user

For example: “John’s a pretty smooth cookie” can be intended as compliment or insult, depending on which the connotations of smooth are latched on to.

12)Strategy 12: Be vague

This strategy is conducted by being vague about who the object of the FTA is, or what the offence is.

As criticism for instance, S says “Looks like someone may have had too much drink”

13)Strategy 13: Over-generalize

This strategy is done by saying utterance that may leave the object vaguely off record, and then H has the choice of deciding whether the general rule applies to him. For example: “Mature people sometimes help do the dishes”

14)Strategy 14: Displace H

S may go off record as by pretending to address the FTA to someone whom it wouldn’t threaten, and hope that the real target will see that the FTA is aimed at him. One case happens when a secretary in an office asks another to pass stapler, in situation where a professor is much nearer than the other secretary. In this case, H’s face is not threatened and he can choose to do it or not.

15)Strategy 15: Be incomplete, use ellipsis

The strategy is done by leaving the implicature ‘hanging in the air’, without rhetorical question. For example S got headache and ask H to go for an aspirin, he just says: “Oh sir, a headache…. ”

F. Response to Criticism

Tsui (1994 p.183) states that the act of criticism intends to get the addressee to agree with the speaker’s judgment or evaluation. It presupposes that the speaker believes that his criticism is an accurate evaluation to the hearer. Hence, a speaker expects positive response from the hearer. However, there is also negative response which is extended by the hearer to reject the criticism. Here is the explanation in more detail.

1. Positive Response

The hearer gives positive response in order to accept the criticism uttered by the speaker. The positive response is done by giving second evaluation which agrees with or upgrades the prior criticism.

2. Negative Response

The hearer gives negative response in order to refuse the criticism uttered by the speaker. The negative response can be in varying forms. They are:

a. By giving second evaluation which disagrees to the criticism extended by the speaker in the strong or in the weak forms.

b. By challenging the criticism which is extended by the speaker, either in the strong or in the weak forms.

c. By saying thanking. This is actually the way to generate conversational implicature that the hearer rejects the criticism.

3. Lack of Response (Ignore)

This is done by changing the topic of criticism as a way to ignore the criticism.

commit to user

G. The Factors Influencing the Choice of Strategies

For this research, I use the theory of Brown and Levinson dealing with the reasons of the speaker to choose the strategies. In addition, Thomas’ theory is also put in this part since the theory relates to politeness strategy.

Brown and Levinson (1987 pp.71-74) outline two major factors influencing the speakers to choose one of the four politeness strategies. The first factor is called as payoffs while the second is the circumstances. Here I present the major factors in more detail.

1) The payoffs: a priori considerations

There are many payoffs or advantages when a speaker decides to choose each of the strategies. Hence, a speaker considers the payoff that he will get when using each strategy.

By using bald on-record strategy, speaker and hearer can get clarity about the meaning of an utterance. Furthermore, speaker can avoid the danger of being misunderstood. For going on record with positive politeness, a speaker can minimize the face-threatening act. This is because speaker can satisfy the hearer’s positive face as if the speaker wants what hearer’s wants. By utilizing negative politeness strategy, a speaker can avoid the threat or potential face loss. In another word, speakers satisfy hearer’s negative face. Lastly, by going off record, speaker can get benefit for being tactful and non-coercive. Moreover, speaker can avoid responsibility for the potentially face-damaging interpretation.

2) The Circumstances: Sociological Variables

Brown and Levinson (1987 pp.74-77) argue that the circumstances in most culture involve following factors:

a) The ‘social distance’ (D) of speaker and hearer.

D is a symmetric social dimension of similarity/difference between S and H. It is based on the frequency of interaction and the kinds of face that S and H exchanged.

b) The relative ‘power’ (P) of speaker and hearer.

P is an asymmetric social dimension of relative power. In general, there are two sources of P; either authorized or unauthorized and material control (over economic distribution and physical force) or metaphysical control. Thomas (1995 p.127) also states that there are three kinds of power:

i. Legitimate power: one person has the right to prescribe or requests certain things by virtue of role, age or status.

ii. Referent power: one person has power over another because the other admires and wants to be like him/her in some respect.

iii. Expert power: in this case, one person has some special knowledge or expertise which the other person needs.

c) The absolute ranking (R) of imposition in the particular culture.

R is defined as the ranking of impositions by the degree to which FTA entails. There are two ranks which contribute to do FTA; the ranking impositions of service and goods (like information and other face payment).

commit to user

More specifically, Thomas (1995 p.143) provides four factors that motivate the speakers to use the strategy of indirectness. They are interestingness, increasing the force of one’s language, competing goals, and politeness. Here it is in more details:

a) Interestingness

People may use indirectness because they enjoy having fun with language. Speaker wants to attract hearer by using unusual utterance. Though the hearer may not understand what the speaker says, he enjoys on the way he uses language.

b) Increasing the force of one’s language

This factor is closely related to the previous one. When a speaker wants to increase the impact or the effectiveness of his message, he may use indirectness. This is often done in a poem in which the speaker wants to convey a message through indirectness sentences or phrases.

c) Competing goals

Speaker often employs indirectness because he has two goals which compete. In some cases, a speaker avoids to say hurtful thing to hearer in order not to discourage him. Hence, to detect what a speaker means, hearer must recognize the conflict of goals.

d) Politeness

Politeness is interpreted as a genuine desire to be pleasant to others. For the sake of being polite, a speaker delivers his utterance in indirect forms. By doing in such way, speaker avoids responsibility to do FTA.

H. Politeness Strategy of Criticism

A study of politeness strategy to employ criticism has been conducted by Jauhari (2010) in Indonesian language. Through a paper entitled Kritik dalam Masyarakat Jawa (A Speech Act of Criticism in Javanese), Jauhari tries to figure out the politeness strategy done by the people to criticize each other using Brown and Levinson theory. The study was done in the governance office. The result of this study shows that people having subordinate status do the strategy of negative politeness and strategy don’t do the FTA when criticizing people having greater authority. Meanwhile those who have superior status tend to use bald on-record

strategy to criticize people. This study also reveals that the most influence factor is the relative power owned by Javanese people.

More specific study about the strategy of criticism was conducted by Riekkinen (2009) entitled Softening Criticism: The Use of Lexical Hedges in Academic Spoken Interaction. Through the study, Riekkinen wants to describe how native speakers of English and non-native speakers of English use hedges when giving criticism in face-to-face situations. The result of this study shows that both groups use lexical hedges when giving criticism, although the non-native speakers of English do so slightly less and also in a less varied way.

Meanwhile, in this research, I conduct a study to explore the politeness strategy to extend criticism used by the characters in the film entitled The Ugly Truth. The criticism utterances are analyzed with politeness strategy by Brown and Levinson theory.

commit to user

I. The Synopsis of the Movie The Ugly Truth

Abby Richter (Katherine Heigl) is a morning show TV producer in Sacramento, California. Coming home from a disastrous date one night, she happens to see a segment of a local television show, The Ugly Truth, run by Mike Chadway (Gerard Butler), whose cynicism about relationships prompts Abby to call into the show to argue with him on-air. The next day, she discovers that the station is threatening to cancel her show because of its poor ratings, and the station owner has hired Mike to do a segment on her show to bring them back up.

At first, the two have a rocky relationship; Abby thinks Mike is crass and disgusting while Mike finds Abby to be a control freak. Nevertheless, when she meets the man of her dreams, a doctor named Colin (Eric Winter) living next to her, Mike persuades her to follow his lead. She agrees to his helpful advice and if he can get her the man she wants, proving his theories on relationships, she will work happily with him, but if Mike fails, he agrees to quit.

Mike succeeds in improving the ratings of the show, helps bring the married co-anchors closer together, and successfully guides Abby to be exactly what Colin would want. Mike is invited to appear on The Late Late Night Show

with Craig Ferguson and is being offered the chance to move to another network. Abby is forced to cancel a romantic weekend away with Colin, during which they had planned to finally sleep together, and instead go with Mike and persuade him to stay with the morning show. After the show, they go for drinks and dancing, and Mike admits he doesn't want to move and is happier to stay in Sacramento

with his sister and nephew. In the elevator, they passionately kiss and almost get to the point of intense sex but leave for their separate rooms when the doors open. Mike, dealing with his inner conflict of the intensity of his feelings for Abby, calls on her room only to find Colin has shown up to surprise her. He leaves Abby to be with Colin. Abby is upset and soon realizes Colin only likes the woman she has been pretending to be, not the real her, and she breaks up with him.

Mike leaves for another local station, but ends up doing an outside broadcast at the same hot-air balloon festival as Abby, and he cannot resist returning to argue with her when she kicks the new "Mike Chadway" imitator off the air and goes into a tirade about men. The balloon they are standing in takes off while they argue and finally, Abby tells Mike she broke up with Colin, and Mike admits he loves her. Abby then kisses him and they are shown kissing passionately while flying off in the balloon (Lutz & Smith, 2009).

commit to user

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD

In this chapter III, I present the research method of this study. The method is used to reach the objectives of the research which is stated in chapter I. Here, I begin with the explanation about the type of this research, data and the source of data and then continued with technique of collecting data, technique of coding data, and technique of analyzing data.

A. Type of Research

The descriptive qualitative method is employed as the type of this research. Wiersma (1994 p.12) states that qualitative research has its origins in descriptive analysis and is essentially an inductive process, reasoning from the specific situation to a general conclusion. Hence, qualitative research cannot be separated from descriptive analysis.

Descriptive research means the data are collected in the form of words, sentences, or pictures having meaning other than merely number (Moleong, 2001 p.6). Moreover, Bodgan & Taylor in (Moleong, 2001 p.3) states that qualitative research is a research which presents descriptive data in the form of written and oral words of human and human behavior that can be observed

For those reasons, this research belongs to descriptive qualitative research since it focuses on the explanation of politeness strategies used by the characters in the movie The Ugly Truth to criticize, to respond, and the factors which influence the characters to choose the strategy.

B. Data and Source of Data

Sutopo (2002 p.47) states that qualitative research emphasizes inductive analysis in which data are occupied as the basic modal of understanding not as instrument to prove. Hence data plays significant part in the research. The term data refers to a collection of information. Subroto (1992 p.7) argues that in qualitative research, the data may appear in the form of discourse, sentence, clause, word or even morpheme. In this research, the data emerge in the form of sentences uttered by the characters of the movie containing politeness strategies of criticism. All data are taken and then classified based on Brown and Levinson’s theory of politeness.

More detail, Schreiber (2008) affirms that qualitative data are generally non-numerical but have a greater variety of sources. The data sources are generally categorized as verbal and nonverbal. Nonverbal data sources include items such as student concept maps, kinship diagrams, pictures, video, movie, art and print advertisements. Hence, I take the movie entitled The Ugly Truth produced by Heigl and Luketic (2009) as the source of data for this research. There are two reasons why the movie is taken as the source of data:

1. The movie The Ugly Truth represents daily life conversation which tells about the life of a producer and her employee in one TV station. Hence, I use this movie as the source of data since its validity of using language.

2. The Ugly Truth pictures the best way how two characters having rocky relationship finally fall in love to each other. It intrigues me to know the way

commit to user

the character delivers criticism to other characters, how they respond the criticism and what factors influence them to use the strategy.

C. Technique of Collecting Data

In the following is the technique of how the data are collected:

1. Replaying the movie The Ugly Truth as the source of data by computer for many times.

2. Searching and copying the transcript of the movie The Ugly Truth from the internet on http://www.script-o-rama.com.

3. Comparing the transcript of the movie to the dialogues of the characters in the movie.

4. Editing the transcript of the movie to the dialogues of the characters in the movie by adding or deleting words or sentences.

5. Taking notes on all of the utterances which contain criticism as the data of the research.

6. Copying the dialogues where the criticisms occur. 7. Classifying the data based on the politeness strategy. 8. Giving codes on each datum.

D. Technique of Coding Data

In order to make the analysis easier, I give a code on each datum. The coding is based on the order of datum and the exact time when criticism occurs on CD. The following is the example of coding:

Datum 4 CD 1/14.05”

This coding means it is datum number 4 in the data found in the movie. The dialogue happens on CD 1 and it occurs in the minute 14 pasts 5 seconds.

E. Technique of Analyzing Data The followings are the procedures of analyzing the data:

1. Describing the context of situation based on the theory of context.

2. Analyzing the data based on the four politeness strategies of Brown and Levinson in order to find the data which have certain characteristics into bald on record, positive politeness, negative politeness and off record strategy.

3. Analyzing the dialogues on each strategy to know the response of the characters toward the criticism given by another character.

4. Analyzing the dialogues based on Brown, Levinson and Thomas’ theory in order to get better understanding about the factors influence the characters to use each strategy.

commit to user

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

A. Introduction

This chapter covers two parts. They are analysis and discussion. In the first part of this chapter, the data of the research are analyzed based on the theories presented in the literature review part of this thesis. I make three steps of analysis to make it easier. They are:

1. The dialogue which contains criticism.

I present the dialogue containing criticism in this section. The previous or the following dialogue which relates to the data is also included. This is done in order to make the readers understand the scene easily.

2. The description of the context.

I describe the context of the data where the criticism happens. It includes the participants in the situation, the action of the participants, and any other relevant features of the situation which support the analysis of criticism.

3. The analysis of criticism.

In this part, the research questions are answered one by one. Firstly, I explain what politeness strategies used by the speakers to extend criticism. The strategies chosen by the speakers are analyzed based on Brown and Levinson’s theory of politeness. Next, I describe what politeness strategies used by the characters to respond the criticism which is uttered by the speaker. To describe the response, I combine Tsui’s theory of responding criticism and Brown and Levinson’s theory of politeness. Last, I define the factors which influence the

characters to choose the strategy. I use the theory of Brown and Levinson in order to find out the factors which encourage the speakers to choose the strategy.

Then, in the second part of this chapter, I provide discussion of the data analysis. Here, I give explanation about the whole result of the analysis. The explanation is based on the research questions stated in chapter I. They are what strategies used by the characters to extend criticism, what strategies used by the hearers to respond criticism and the factors which influence the choice of strategy.

B. Data Analysis Datum 1 CD 1/02.09”

Larry : Abby!

Abby : Morning, Larry.

Larry : I’m sorry to do this to you, Abby, but I don’t think I can work with her anymore. It’s bad enough I have to take her criticism at home. I can’t do it on air, too. A man can only take so much.

Abby nods, taking him seriously.

Abby : Larry, you’re not a man. You are a newsman. A newsman isn’t

defined by the easy times; they’re defined by the hard times. Can you imagine Ted Koppel or Tom Brokaw working with their wives as co-anchors? No, because they couldn’t handle it. But you, you my friend got balls the size of Volkswagens. Don’t think I haven’t noticed.

Larry : I’ve only thought of them as blue as of late, but you’re right. They are quite sizeable. But not disproportionately so. I like to think of them as aesthetically pleasing

The Description of Context

The conversation takes place in the newsroom of KSXP 2 office. It is early morning where everyone is busy preparing their own jobs. The participants of the conversation are Larry and Abby. Larry, a fifty year anchor man, works as an anchor of a morning news show “Sacramento AM”. He always has quarrel with

commit to user

are three factors which influence the speakers to the choice of bald on

record strategy in order to extend criticism to the addressee. They are

the close relationship, the legitimate power and the expert power.

Positive politeness is chosen by the speakers to extend criticism since

the factors of the competing goals and the rank of imposition.

Meanwhile, the participants who have a social distance relationship

tend to choose negative politeness strategy to extend criticism to

hearers.

From the explanation, it can be concluded that American young

people tend to use bald on record strategy to extend criticism to others.

The choice of strategy is influenced by the relative power that the

speakers have and the close relationship between the participants.

The table below explains the factors which influence the hearers to

the choice of strategy to respond the criticism.

Table 5.2. The factors influencing the choice of strategy to respond

No. The strategy to respond Factors to respond

1. Bald on record 1. Close relationship 2. Legitimate power 3. Situational context 2. Positive politeness 1. The two competing goals 3. Off record 1. Subordinate status

The factors which influence the choice of bald on record strategy to

respond the criticism are the close relationship, the legitimate power

influenced by the factor of the competing goals owned by the hearer.

Last, the hearer who places subordinate status chooses off record

strategy to respond the criticism.

In this case, there are unusual occurences where the participants do

not obey Brown and Levinson’ theory of politeness strategy. In data

number 4, 5, 8, 9 and 14, the hearers who have no superior status or

legitimate power to the speakers, use bald on record strategy to respond

the criticism. Based on the analysis, the choice of bald on record

strategy is influenced by the situational factor. When the speakers

evaluate the hearers negatively, it is natural that the hearers do not feel

good about the criticism. Lin (2005, p. 138) states that this kind of

speech event helps to license the use of bald on record strategy.

Moreover, she also states that in many speech events, the choice of

using bald on record strategy is not merely influenced by social

variables but also by situational context (Lin 2005). In other word, the

choice of bald on record strategy is not a constant choice but

situation-dependent. In this case, when the hearers feel threatened by the

speakers’ criticism, they tend to use bald on record strategy to deny and

to ignore the utterance since their faces are attacked by the speakers.

From the explanation, it can be concluded that American young

people tend to use bald on record strategy to respond the criticism. The

choice of strategy is influenced by the relative power that the hearers

commit to user

B. Suggestion

In the last subchapter of this research, I draw some suggestions for the

students of English and other researchers.

1. Students of English

The speech act of criticism is really sensitive and threatening to the hearers’

positive face. Hence, it is suggested that the students apply Brown and Levinson

theory of politeness strategy in order to deliver criticism. When the students want

to criticize others, it is suggested that they do not utter the criticism in bald on

record strategy. Except, the students have close relationship or more authority

than the addressee. In this situation, the criticism may be sent in bald on record

since the addressee will believe in speakers’ negative evaluation. Yet, if the

students want to criticize the hearers without discouraging them, it is suggested

that students send the criticism in positive politeness strategy. It can be done by

giving positive evaluation first to the addressee before giving criticism. By doing

so, the hearers will feel that the speakers care about them since the speakers notice

the goodness of the hearers and try to give criticism for the benefit of the hearers.

Last suggestion is doing criticism in negative politeness strategy. When students

want to send negative evaluation to someone whom they do not really know, it is

suggested that they send the criticism in negative politeness strategy. It can be

done by being conventially indirect so that so that the hearers feel unimpeded. To

conclude, students should always consider the context of situation around them

Moreover, this research also explores the response of the hearers when they

are being criticized. Hence, it is expected that this research will be benefit for

students as an example to respond the criticism appropriately. In responding the

criticism, it is suggested that students respond the criticism without hurting

speakers’ feeling. When the students want to accept the criticism, it is

recommended that they accept it in positive politeness strategy. It is done by

giving agreement to the criticism. Then, when they want to refuse the criticism, it

is suggested that they refuse it off recordly, so that the speakers will feel

respected.

2. Other researchers

This research studies the politeness strategy in criticizing between the

speakers who have more authority and close relationship with hearers. Thus, I

suggest other researchers to conduct research about politeness strategy of criticism

between the speakers who have subordinate status to superior status. By doing the

research, there will be additional understanding about politeness strategy in

criticizing.

Last, it is also recommended that other researchers explore other sources of

data to analyze criticism. Since this research uses movie as the source of data, it is

suggested that researchers take other sources of data such as novels,

advertisements, speeches, or talk show script in order to reveal the real description

commit to user

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Austin J.L. (1962). How to do things with words. New York: Oxford University Press

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness, some universal in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Halliday, M., & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, text, and context: Aspects of language in social. Semiotics perspective. Victoria: Deakin University Press.

Heigl, K. (Producer) & Luketic, R. (Director). (2009). The ugly truth [Motion Picture]. United States: Columbia Pictures.

Huang, Y. (2007). Pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.

Jauhari, E. (2010). Kritik dalam masyarakat jawa: Sebuah kajian pemberdayaan fungsi bahasa sebagai sarana kontrol sosial. Retrieved 17th September, 2010, from http://sastra.um.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/075-Edy-Jauhari-FIB-UnAir-Kritik-dalam-Masyarakat-Jawa-.-.-.pdf

Leech, Geoffrey. (1993). The principles of pragmatic. New York: Longman Group Limited

Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lin H. H. (2005) Contextualizing linguistic politeness in Chinese – a socio-pragmatic approach with examples from persuasive sales talk in Taiwan mandarin.Retrieved 5th June, 2011, from

http://etd.ohiolink.edu/view.cgi/Lin%20Huey%20Hannah.pdf?osu1109961 198

Lutz, K. M., & Smith, K. (2009). The ugly truth. Retrieved March 12th 2010, 2010, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ugly_Truth_film

Martinich A.P. (1996). The philosophy of language. New York: Oxford University Press

Mey, J. L. (1993). Pragmatics, an intoduction. Massachussetts: Blackwell.

Moleong, L. J. (2001). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitataif. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.

Riekkinen, N. (2009). Softening criticism: The use of lexical hedges in academic spoken interaction. Retrieved 17th January, 2010, from

http://www.uta.fi/laitokset/kielet/engf/research/elfa/research_nr.pdf Schreiber, James. B. (2008). Data. In the sage encyclopedia of qualitative

research methods. SAGE Publications. Retrieved April 7th, 2010, from http://www.sage-ereference.com/research/Article_n93.html

Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts, an essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Subroto, E. (1992). Pengantar metode penelitian linguistik struktural. Surakarta: Sebelas Maret University Press.

Sutopo, H. B. (2002). Metodologi penelitian kualitatif. Surakarta: Sebelas Maret University Press.

Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. London and New York: Longman.

Tsui, A. B. M. (1994). English Conversation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Wiersma, W. (1994). An introduction: Research methods in education. London: Longman Group Ltd.