their conversatinal action, Gumperz dicovered that the British English patrons were atributing rudeness to the staff because of the workers’ intonation patterns when they
offered service. Instead of saying “Gravy” with a rising intonation, as British English speakers would to offer a service and be polite, the Indian Speaker were saying
“Gravy” with a falling intonation. For British English speakers, this conveyed an identity message the suggested you are not important, so just take it or leave it.
Whereas Goffman focuses on how language is situated in particular circumstance of social life, and how it adds or reflects different types of meaning and
structure to those circumstances. For Example, communicators may consciously work to created certain impression or may do inadvertently. Goffman describes this as the
differences between meanings that itentionally given and those that are given off. A person speaking to a group may work to present, telling a joke to get started, and so on.
On the other hand, if in speaking her voice cracks or she pauses just after a few words, people will consider her as nervous. This is categorized as meaning that was given off.
2.1.4 Variation Theory
A variation approach to discourse stems from linguistic variation and change. An important part of thre variationist approach to discourse is the discovery of formal
patterns in text narratives. This theory was initially developed by Labov 1972, in Eggins and Slade, 1997, the majority of his analyzing the work on the structure of text
within conversations. Labov and Waletzky 1967 in Eggins and Slade 1997 state that there are fundamental structure of narratives which are signaled in spoken narratives of
Universitas Sumatera Utara
personal experience. This involves in six stages: Abstarct, Orientation, Complication, Evaluation, Resolution, and Coda see further Eggins and Slade, 1997:39.
2.1.5 Speech Act Theory
Speech act theory was developed by John Austin 1962 and John Searle 1969, in Eggins and Slade 1997, from basic insight that language is used not just to
describe the world as been discussed previouly, but to perform a range of other actions that can be indicated in the performance of the utterances itself. They call this as the
illocutionary force of an utterance. As example, the following utterances in Toba Batak contex indicate a performance of forbidding:
A : Sian dia ho Tiur? Where have you been? B : Keep silent and immediately entering her room
As seen from the example that A father asked B daughter the place where she was from. B actually should have answered by naming the place she is from, but
she just kept silent and immediately came into her room. She understood that her father was not just asking her but more than that, her father did not allow her to be outside at
midnight. So the utterances above can be understood as both a question and a forbidding.
2.1.6 Pragmatics
A pragmatic approach to discourse is based primarily on the philosophical ideas of H.P.Grice 1975, in Eggins and Slade, 1997. Grice proposed distinction between
Universitas Sumatera Utara
different types of meaning and argued that general maxims of cooperation provide inferential routes to speaker’s communicative intention. He further developed some
maxims which are implicative in cooperative principle. These maxims are: maxim of quality say only the required quantity, maxim of quality say honestly, maxim of
relevant be relevant, and maxim of manner be brief, not being ambiguous. In describing conversation as cooperative, Grice did not mean to say that
conversation is only and always nice and pleasant. Conversation is a cooperative activity in much the same way as football-playing. So, cooperative pribciples are not
obligatory in that they are not attached to rules.
2.1.7 Birmingham School
