v
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH
UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma Nama
: Jeanne Maria Pingkan Hapsari Pondaag Nomor Mahasiswa
: 104214031 Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada perpustakaan
Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul
CARIBBEAN ENGLISH VARIETIES SPOKEN BY CHRISTOPHINE, AMÉLI
E, AND DANIEL COSWAY IN JEAN RHYS’S WIDE SARGASSO SEA
Beserta perangkat yang diperlukan bila ada. Dengan demikian saya memberikan kepda Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan
dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di internet atau media lain
untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin kepada saya maupun memberikan royalty kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai
penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenernya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta Pada tanggal 22 Juni 2015
Yang menyatakan,
Jeanne Maria Pingkan Hapsari Pondaag
vi
“Motivation is the art of getting people to do what you want th
em to do because they want to do it.” Dwight D. Eisenhower
“I came, I saw, I conquered.” Julius Caesar
“I am so clever that sometimes I don’t understand a single word of what I am saying.” Oscar Wilde
Elegance is when the inside is as beautiful as the outside. Chanel
vii
For Mama, Papa, and Kakak Kiki
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This is the page for expressing my gratitude to those in my life who have helped me finish the undergraduate thesis.
The first, I would like thank My Almighty God, Jesus Christ for the blessing
and guidance to me, so I can think wisely, patiently, and modestly in the process of writing this undergraduate thesis.
I would like to express my greatest attitude to my advisor, Dr. Fr. B. Alip, M.Pd., M.A for his guidance, support, encouragement, ideas, patience, inspiration,
and also knowledge for me to finish my undergraduate thesis. Also I would thank my co-advisor, Adventina Putranti S.S., M.Hum., for her advice, encouragement,
guidance, and critics in the correction of my thesis.
My deep gratitude goes to my parents, Christina Rumiyati and Alexander Leonardus Pondaag for their support, critics, advice, and reminder to me to finish
my study on time. It is also due to my brother, Alexander Rizky Hapsoro Pondaag for sharing his experience, tips, ideas, also electronics devices in finishing our
undergraduate thesis together.
I would extend my gratitude to all lectures and staffs at the English Letters Department for sharing the knowledge and giving me advice during my study in
Sanata Dharma University. To my spirit team, UKF Basket Sastra, I would like to thank Meity Adelina, Susi Luviya, and Sumunar Renaningtyas for our
togetherness in competitions and practices. To all friends of Sastra Inggris 2010, thanks for our togetherness in our study, Christopher Tjia for helping me to
organize the data analysis and also giving me continuous support to finish my undergraduate thesis, Julyan Adhitama for giving me remarkable advice that is
beneficial for revising my undergraduate thesis, Oktadea Herda Pratiwi for having fun, studying, and struggling together for our graduation, and Dona Windasari
Septiana for always listening and understanding me in any condition.
Also I would like to thank all my family in OMK Aloysius Gonzaga Deus, Opan, Lindi, Maria, Gradi, Reyna, Feby, etc. and OMK Rayon Sleman Duta,
Deo, Hendra, Widi, Bowo, Ryan, Iyus, Steve, Icak, etc. for the cooperation, togetherness, and the support for me in finishing my undergraduate thesis.
Jeanne Maria Pingkan Hapsari Pondaag
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE
………………………………………………………………. i APPROVAL PAGE
………………………………………………………
ii
ACCEPTANCE PAGE………………………………………………….
iii
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ILMIAH…...
iv
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY ……………………………………
v
MOTTO PAGE …………………………………………………………….. vi DEDICATION PAGE
……………………………………………………
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………………………………………….......
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ……………………………………………………. ix
LIST OF TABLES …………………………………………………………... xii
ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………. xiv
ABSTRAK …………………………………………………………………… xv
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTIO N…………………………………………... 1
A. Background of the Study ………………………………………….. 1
B. Problem Formulation ……………………………………………… 3
C. Objectives of the Study …………………………………………… 3
D. Definition of Term ………………………………………………… 4
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE ……………………………. 5
A. Review of Related Studies ………………………………………… 5
B. Review of Related Theories ……………………………………….. 8
1. Theory of Language Varieties and Varieties of English … 8
2. Theory of Dialect …………………………………………. 9
3. Theory of Carribean Englishes …………………………… 10
a. Syntax …………………………………………….. 11
i. Copula …………………………………………….. 11
ii. Subject- verb agreement …………………………… 11
iii. Past Tense …………………………………………. 11
iv. Future Tense ………………………………………. 12
v. Subject and Object Pronouns and Possesive ……… 12
vi. Pluralization ………………………………………. 13
vii. Negation …………………………………………… 13
viii. Question formation inversion …………………….. 14
b. Lexicon …………………………………………… 14
c. Morpholog y or repetition ………………………… 16
i. Repetition of elements or structure in clauses …….. 18
ii. Word repetitions …………………………………... 19
x
4. The Localized Forms of English ………………………….. 19
5. Theory of New Englishes ………………………………… 20
6. Theory of Three Ci rcles …………………………………... 22
7. Style variation in English …………………………………. 22
a. Language variation: dialect ……………………….. 22
b. Language variation: medium ……………………… 23
c. Language variation: tenor …………………………. 23
d. Language variation: domain ………………………. 24
8. Diglossia ………………………………………………….. 24
9. Post- Creole Continuum …………………………………… 25
C. Theoretical framework …………………………………………….. 26
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ……………………………………….. 28 A.
Object of the Study ………………………………………………… 28 B. Approach of t
he Study …………………………………………….. 29 C.
Method of the Study ………………………………………………. 30 1.
Data Collection …………………………………………… 30 2.
Data Analysis ……………………………………………... 31
CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS …………. 36
A. The Caribbean English dialect that is used by Christophine, Amélie, and Daniel Cosway ……………………………………… 36
I. Grammatical Analysis ……………………………………. 38
1. The absence of copula before adjective, expression of location, noun, and in present progressive …………. 39
2. The absence of subject-verb agreement third person –s in present tense …………………………………... 41
3. The use of simple present tense to refer past tense or future tense …………………………………………. 43
4. The absence of subjectverb or auxiliary element inversion in interrogative express
ion ………………. 45 5.
The use of negation or multiple negation …………… 46 6.
The use singular for plural form of nouns ………….. 48 7.
Differences in the use of personal pronouns ……….. 49 II.
Lexical analysis …………………………………………… 50 1. Idiomatic Expressi
on ……………………………… 51 2.
Coinages …………………………………………… 52 3.
Compounds ……………………………………….. 53
xi
4. Semantic modification ……………………………. 55
5. Religious and spiritual terms ……………………… 58
6. Names of Flora and Fauna ………………………… 59
7. Dialectal terms …………………………………….. 59
8. Toponyms ………………………………………… 61
III. Morphological Analysis …………………………………. 65
1. Anaphora …………………………………………. 66
2. Epistrophe ………………………………………… 67
3. Symploce ………………………………………… 68
4. Word Repetition ………………………………….. 69
B. The Social factors which influence three characters in using Caribbean English varieties ……………………………………… 70
1. Dialect ……………………………………………………. 71
i. Christophine ……………………………………… 71
ii. Amélie ……………………………………………. 73
iii. Daniel Cosway ……………………………………
74 2.
Medium ………………………………………………….. 75
i. Written ……………………………………………
75 ii.
Oral ………………………………………………. 76
3. Tenor ……………………………………………………..
77 4.
Domain …………………………………………………… 79 i.
Topic ……………………………………………… 79 ii.
Style ………………………………………………. 81
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION …………………………………………… 88
BIBLIOGRAPHY …………………………………………………………. 91
APPENDICES ……………………………………………………………… 94
Appendix 1 ………………………………………………………. 95
Appendix 2 ………………………………………………………. 109
xii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Findings of feature
s …………………………………………. 37
Table 2: Findings of grammar …………………………………………
38 Table 3:
The absence of copula in an adjective ……………………… 39
Table 4: The absence of copula in expression of location ……………..
40 Table 5:
The absence of copula in noun ……………………………… 40
Table 6: The absence of copula in a form of present continuous ……...
41 Table 7:
The absence of third person –s in present tense ……………..
41 Table 8:
The use of simple present tense to refer past tense ………….. 43
Table 9: The use of simple present ten
se to refer future tense ………… 43
Table 10: The absence of subjectverb or auxiliary in inversion with
helping verb do ……………………………………………..
45 Table 11:
The absence of subjectverb or auxiliary in inversion without helping verb do
………………................................................. 46
Table 12: The use of negation ………………………………………….
47 Table 13:
The use of multiple negation ………………………………… 47
Table 14: The use of ain‟t ………………………………………………
48 Table 15:
The use of singular or plural form of no uns …………………
49 Table 16:
Differences in the use of personal pronouns ………………… 49
Table 17: Findings of lexicon …………………………………………..
50 Table 18:
Idiomatic expression ………………………………………… 51
Table 19: Coinages ……………………………………………………..
53 Table 20:
Compounds …………………………………………………. 54
Table 21: Semantic modification ……………………………………….
55 Table 22:
Religious terms ……………………………………………… 58
Table 23: Names of flora and fauna ……………………………………
59 Table 24:
Dialectal terms ………………………………………………. 60
Table 25: Toponyms ……………………………………………………
62 Table 26:
Findings of repetition ………………………………………. 65
Table 27: Anaphora …………………………………………………….
66 Table 28:
Epistrophe …………………………………………………… 67
Table 29: Symploce …………………………………………………….
68 Table 30:
Word Repetition …………………………………………….. 69
Table 31: Table of Christophine‟s dialect variation ……………………
72 Table 32:
Table of Amélie‟s dialect variation …………………………. 73
Table 33: Table of Daniel Cosway‟s dialect variation …………………..
74 Table 34:
Total list of Christophine‟s speech with other characters ……. 77
Table 35: Total list of Amélie‟s speech with other characters ………….
78
xiii
Table 36: Table of Daniel Cosway‟s list speech with other characters …
79 Table 37:
Table of three characters domain of speech: topic …………... 79
Table 38: Table of Ch
ristophine‟s domain of speech: style with Antoinette …………………………………………………..
81 Table 39:
Table of Christophine‟s domain of speech: style with Rochester ……………………………………………………
82 Table 40:
Table of Christophine‟s domain of speech: style with Amélie ……………………………………………………….
82 Table 41:
Table of Amélie‟s domain of speech: style with Antoinette ……………………………………………..
83 Table 42:
Table of Amélie‟s domain of speech: style with Rochester ………………………………………………
84 Table 43:
Table of Daniel‟s domain of speech: style with Rochester ………………………………………………
84
xiv
ABSTRACT
PONDAAG, JEANNE MARIA PINGKAN HAPSARI. Caribbean English Varieties Spoken by Christophine, Amélie, and Daniel Cosway in Jean Rhys’s
Wide Sargasso Sea.
Yogyakarta: Department of English Letters, Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University 2015.
The Caribbean is the one of third world countries that has associated English with local culture to produce new literature. One of the famous Caribbean authors is
Jean Rhys 1890 who wrote Wide Sargasso Sea. The writer uses this novel as the object of the study to find out Caribbean English varieties used by the three native
characters which are Christophine, Amélie, and Daniel Cosway.
Two problem formulations were formulated as followed: first, what kinds of Caribbean English dialect are used by Christophine, Amélie, and Daniel Cosway in
Jean Rhys‟s Wide Sargasso Sea? Second, what sociolinguistics factors influenced the three characters in using this variety of English?
This thesis used both library and empirical studies by gathering the data from the utterances of three characters in the novel by reading a novel. The writer collected
the data by gathering all utterances of three characters that are indicated as Caribbean English dialect. Next, the writer classified the data based on three linguistic features
used to analyze the problem such as grammar, lexicon, and repetition.
In the grammatical analysis, the writer found 69 data in Christophine‟s utterances, 11 data in Amélie‟s utterances, and 24 data in Daniel‟s utterances. For the
lexical analysis, the writer found 37 data in Christophine‟s utterances, 3 data in Amélie‟s utterances, and 4 data in Daniel‟s utterances. For the repetition analysis, the
writer found 36 data in Chr istophine‟s utterances, 4 data in Amélie‟s utterances, and 8
data in Daniel‟s utterances. For social factors analysis, the writer concluded that all of the three characters used this variety in the context of informal situation. On the other
hand, in the context of formal situation, the three characters used formal language although their dialect grammatical and lexical style was different from British
people as well.
xv
ABSTRAK
PONDAAG, JEANNE MARIA PINGKAN HAPSARI. Caribbean English Varieties Spoken by
Christophine, Amélie, and Daniel Cosway in Jean Rhys’s Wide Sargasso Sea.
Yogyakarta: Department of English Letters, Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University 2015.
Kepulauan Karibia merupakan salah satu bagian dari negara belahan dunia ketiga yang menyatukan bahasa Inggris dengan kebudayaan lokal menjadi sebuah
karya sastra baru. Jean Rhys 1890 adalah salah satu dari sastrawan Karibia yang terkenal dengan karyanya Wide Sargasso Sea. Penulis menggunakan novel ini
sebagai sasaran penelitian untuk mengetahui penggunaan variasi bahasa Inggris Karibia oleh tiga karakter pribumi yaitu Christophine, Amélie, dan Daniel Cosway.
Dua rumusan masalah dirumuskan sebagai berikut: pertama, dialek apakah yang digunakan oleh Christophine, Amélie, and Daniel Cosway di ini? Kedua, Faktor
sosial apakah yang mempengaruhi tiga karakter dalam menggunakan variasi tersebut? Penelitian ini menggunakan studi pustaka dan studi empiris dengan
mengumpulkan data dari ungkapan-ungkapan tiga karakter dengan membaca keseluruhan novel. Penulis mengumpulkan ungkapan-ungkapan tiga karakter yang di
indikasi sebagai
dialek bahasa
inggris Karibia.
Selanjutnya, penulis
mengklasifikasikan data berdasarkan tiga fitur linguistik yaitu tata bahasa, perbendaharaan kata, dan morfologi.
Pada analisis tata bahasa, ditemukan 69 data pada pengucapan Christophine, 11 data ditemukan pada pengucapan Amélie, dan 24 data ditemukan pada
pengucapan Daniel. Pada analisis perbendaharaan kata, ditemukan 37 data ditemukan pada pengucapan Christophine, 3 data ditemukan pada pengucapan Amélie, dan 4
data ditemukan pada pengucapan Daniel. Pada analisis morfologi, ditemukan 36 data ditemukan pada penngucapan Christophine, 4 data ditemukan pada pengucapan
Amélie, dan 8 data ditemukan pada pengucapan Daniel. Pada analisis sosiolinguistik, penulis menyimpulkan ketiga karakter menggunakan variasi ini pada konteks tidak
formal. Sementara dalam konteks formal, ketiga karakter menggunakan ragam formal pada variasi mereka meskipun secara tata bahasa dan perbendaharaan kata sangat
berbeda dari penutur asli pada umumnya.
1
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
