INTERRUPTION IN LUMET’S 12 ANGRY MEN MOVIE: A CONVERSATION ANALYSIS.

A THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Attainment of Sarjana Sastra Degree in English Literature

By

Rendra Novian Rizan Jaya

12211141032

ENGLISH LITERATURE STUDY PROGRAM

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS

STATE UNIVERSITY OF YOGYAKARTA

I00 z 109002 8zz08L6I 'dIN I00 z E[e0021160086I 'dIN

'(I'rtrd "v'tr{tr

"s's'un$B^plil\

BuBsns _IAI "S'S 'qaurtrBpns

_{!rII

SISflTII V

SISATYNV

hIOIIVSUSANOS

Y

:f,IAOW

_NgW

_Ttr'NV

_ZT

_S.IUI{IN]

_NI

_NOIIdNUUIINI

v

IMPORTANT THAN ANY OTHERS”

_{Abraham Lincoln}

It is not our abilities that show what we truly are, it is our choices



J.K. Rowling



You become what you believe

_{Oprah Winfrey}

Tidaklah akan berpindah Kaki seorang hamba pada hari

kiamat, sampai ia ditanya Tentang 4 perkasa. Tentang

umurnya, bagaimana ia menghabiskannya; Tentang

jasadnya, bagaimana ia mempergunakannya; Tentang

hartanya, dari mana ia mendapatkannya dan kemana ia

menghabiskannya; dan Tentang ilmunya, bagaimana ia

mengamalkannya

.

vi

This Thesis is dedicated to:

MY MOTHER

MY FAMILY AND RELATIVES

and

vii

due to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. Without His mercy, this thesis is far from being finished. I also express my deepest gratitude on record to all parties who have lend their hand directly or indirectly to compose this research. Here, my sincere gratitude is presented to:

1. my first supervisor, Titik Sudartinah, S.S., M.A., for guiding me with her support, patience, and insightful comment;

2. my second supervisor Susana Widyastuti S.S., M.A., Ph.D., for her effort in guiding me during the process of thesis writing;

3. my Academic Advisor, Rachmat Nurcahyo, S.S., M.A., for his advice, support, and comment during my study in State University of Yogyakarta; 4. all lecturers at English Education Department, for their best effort and

immense contribution during my study in State University of Yogyakarta; 5. my mother, Endang Hartiningsih, for her best advice and eternal wishes

which make me stronger from time to time, my uncles, Drs. Bambang Sri Sunarto and Drs. Bambang Purnomo, for their best advice and knowledge; 6. all the members of Wiro Hartono family for their support;

7. my beloved friends, Muhammad Wildani, Mono, Yuli, Vonita, Ellis, Rini, Joe, and my friends of Le Krasak Boutique Hotel and New Saphir Hotel Yogyakarta for their encouragement during the process of writing the thesis;

viii

of my classmates of class F and Linguistics major; and

9. many people who gave me help and support during the process of writing the thesis who cannot be mentioned one by one.

I regard that this thesis has many weaknesses. Therefore, suggestions and comments are needed for this thesis improvement. Hopefully, my thesis would be useful for many parties.

Yogyakarta, January 30th, 2017

ix

APPROVAL SHEET ... ii

RATIFICATION SHEET ... iii

SURAT PERNYATAAN ... iv

MOTTOS ... v

DEDICATIONS ... vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... ix

LIST OF FIGURE, TABLES, AND SYMBOLS ... xii

ABSTRACT ... xiii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Study ... 1

B. Focus of the Study ... 4

C. Objectives of the Study ... 5

D. Significance of the Study ... 6

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK A. Literature Review ... 7

1. Conversation Analysis... 7

a. Adjacency Pairs ... 8

b. Preference Organization ... 10

c. Backchannels... 11

d. Repairs... 12

e. Context ... 14

f. Turn Taking ... 15

2. Interruption ... 16

a. Types of Interruption... 18

1) Simple Interruption ... 18

2) Overlap Interruption ... 18

3) Butting-in Interruption ... 19

4) Silent Interruption ... 20

b. Purposes of Interruption ... 20

x

b) To Show Understanding... 23

c) To Show Interest in Topic ... 24

d) To Show Clarification ... 25

3) Neutral Interruption ... 25

3. Previous Studies ... 26

4. 12 Angry Men ... 28

B. Conceptual Famework ... 29

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD A. Type of the Research ... 32

B. Form, Context and Source of Data ... 33

C. Instrument of the Research... 33

D. Data Collection Technique ... 34

E. Data Analysis Technique ... 35

F. Trustworthiness ... 36

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION A. Findings ... 38

B. Discussion ... 40

1. Types of Interruption ... 41

a. Simple Interruption ... 41

b. Overlap Interruption ... 45

c. Butting-in Interruption ... 49

d. Silent Interruption ... 53

2. Purposes of Interruption ... 54

a. Disruptive ... 54

1) Disagreement ... 54

2) Topic Change ... 59

b. Cooperative ... 62

1) To Show Agreement ... 63

2) To Show Understanding... 65

3) To Show Clarification ... 69

c. Neutral Interruption ... 72

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS A. Conclusions ... 75

B. Suggestions ... 77

xii

Figure 1. Analytical Construct ... 31

Tables

Table 1. Sample Data Sheet of Types and Purposes of Interruption Presented by the Characters in Lumet’s 12 Angry Men Movie ... 35 Table 2. Frequency of Occurrence of Types and Purposes of

Interruption Presented by the Characters in Lumet’s 12 Angry Men Movie ... 39

Symbols

(silent) : the word “silent” in double brackets indicates a mute words : the words printed in bold indicate an interruption

: the

symbol “ “ which comes before bold words indicates a simultaneous speech where an interruption appears between two different speakers

xiii

Rendra Novian Rizan Jaya 12211141032

ABSTRACT

This research employs Conversation Analysis (CA) to analyze interruptions in 12 Angry Men. This research is aimed at describing the types of interruptions employed by the characters in the movie as well as the purposes of interruptions.

In attaining the objectives of the research, descriptive qualitative research was employed in this research. The data were collected in the form of utterances indicating interruptions, while the context of the data was in the form of dialogues. However, the source of data was the film entitled 12 Angry Men. Two instruments were employed in this research, i.e. the researcher and the data sheet. To validate all the data and the findings, the researcher applied peer debriefing technique by discussing with his two supervisors and students of English Literature.

Two findings can be drawn in this research. Firstly, the four types of interruptions are found in this research. They are simple interruptions, overlap interruptions, butting-in interruptions, and silent interruptions. Overlap interruptions appear frequently and this means the interrupter is highly involved and very enthusiastic to follow the conversation. This interruption also means that the interrupter is trying to elaborate the conversation. However, silent interruption only appears once out of 39 data. This interruption occurs to show the interrupter’s understanding about the topic. Secondly, all of the functions of interruption are found in this research. They are disruptive interruptions, cooperative interruptions, and neutral interruptions. Disruptive interruptions occur to show disagreement, to take the floor, and to change the topic of discussion. To take the floor is not found in the data since there is no jury who tries to take others floor. However, cooperative purposes appear to support the current speaker. In cooperative interruptions, the speaker mostly wants to show clarification. Meanwhile, neutral interruptions employed by the interrupter is used neither to disrupt nor to collaborate with the current speaker. It occurs to show neutrality.

1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

This chapter discusses the background, focus, objectives and significance of the research.

A. Background of the Study

As social creature, people need to communicate in order to maintain their relationship and to give or gain information from others. In these interactions, conversations occur between two or more people in which one person in a particular time plays as an informant or speaker, and the other plays as a listener. Conversation is a cooperative activity between a speaker and a listener. In maintaining cooperative activity, people should know the right time when to speak in accordance to make the conversation flows. Yule (1996: 72) in his book entitled Pragmatics states that people should be aware of the right time to speak. This particular timing of speaking turns is called turn taking which serves to maintain smooth transition in a flowing conversation.

Since conversation is an organized sequence of talking, there is a basic role for establishing who talks and who talks next. Naturally, only one person talks at a time regardless who speaks to whom in what language. The talk is socially organized (Wiemann and Knapp,1975: 78). Organizing taking turns is fundamental to conversation. People may give a signal by taking some actions, such as lowering or raising an intonation, moving eye gaze smoothly, or naming the next speaker to show that he/she finished his/her utterance.

Sustaining smooth transition in series of talk, especially in spontaneous conversation, is not as easy as it could be. Sometimes, people disturbs their partners in order to grab their chance to speak and try to be dominant by taking other’s floor. This phenomenon of battling the floor in conversation is called interruption (Wiemann and Knapp,1975: 88). Interruption happens when the current speaker who is interrupted (interruptee) does not finish his or her utterances because the listener grabs the speaker’s floor. Usually the interrupter (the person who interrupts) talks at the same time with the speaker and makes the speaker stop his/her utterances. People usually regard this phenomenon as a way to dominate the conversation.

An interruption is not permanently an action to dominate a conversation. This is in line with what Tannen says

[…] interruption is inescapably a matter of interpretation regarding individuals' rights and obligations. To determine whether a speaker is violating another speaker's rights, you have to know a lot about both speakers and the situation. (Tannen 1990:93)

According to Tannen, having known the speaker’s intention and the situation may help another speaker to know the purpose of interruption. Sometimes, an interruption is needed to support smooth conversation, and in this context, interruption plays for cooperative purposes. If an interruption occurs when the interrupter still gets confused about the interruptee’s idea, this interruption belongs to neutral interruption Goldberg (1990:888). This interruption does not have a purpose to disrupt or cooperate with the interruptee. However, this interruption occurs to collect a brief information from the speaker. This idea is supported by

Tannen (1994: 61) who states that a listener sometimes interrupts the speaker not in order to disrupt but to show enthusiasm.

An interruption is an interesting object to be analyzed under conversation analysis approach since it is an aspect of a conversation which gives a big impact on both the speaker and listener. In a series of context, an interruption might have different purposes. Therefore, the context and situational context are important to be taken into account to analyze the purpose of occurring interruption. Moreover, Heritage & Atkinson (1984:11) states that in Conversation Analysis studies, talk and interaction are examined as a site where intersubjective understanding concerning the participants’ intentions, their state of knowledge, their relation, and their stance towards the talked-about object is created, maintained, and negotiated.

People cannot abandon the occurrence of interruption in daily conversation. Besides, the phenomenon of interruption also appears in a movie whether it occurs to support or to disrupt the speaker speech. It is interesting to analyze interruption which is taking place in a movie because movie is one of the entertainment media which reflects daily interaction at least between two people. 12 Angry Men is one of movies where the phenomenon of interruption in a courtroom discussion can be observed.

12 Angry Men is selected to be the object of the research because of several reasons. Firstly, it is an American drama film which portrays the discussion of jury consisted of 12 men acquitted the defendant in the lawsuit. Courtroom language is more specific and standardized than language of everyday conversation. Secondly, this film has a uniqueness of using one set screen play, the jury room, and the

characters in this movie are all male characters. Thirdly, in 2007, 12 Angry Men was selected by the US Library of Congress for being culturally, historically, aesthetically significant. Moreover, this movie also won BAFTA Film Awards 1958 for best foreign actor, Henry Fonda, Berlin International Festival: Golden Berlin Bear and OCIC Awards, Sidney Lumet, and etc. 12 Angry Men won 16 Awards and 11 Nominations in total. Consequently, the phenomenon of interruption in this movie is presented to answer the research problem in this research.

B. Focus of the Study

12 Angry Men presented numerous problems regarding the language. Firstly, this movie can be analyzed under sociolinguistic approach. 12 Angry Men consists of 12 male jurors with various ages. From the conversation, the twelve men language style is unique since they have different personality and mind set. The twelve male jurors also hold different occupation which gives big deals on how they communicate each other. One of the sociolinguistics aspects that can be applied to research this courtroom drama movie is the language variation.

Secondly, this movie portrays how jury is trying to show their wisdom for the defendant. The conversation in the jury room become an interesting object of speech acts study because many utterances contain locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts. Thirdly, the phenomenon of interruption in this movie is also interesting to be analyzed since most of the jury tend to interrupt most of the time. Interruption occurs in several cases in this movie to show certain purposes.

Given a number of issues in this movie which have possibility to be analyzed, the researcher eventually focuses on the problem related to the phenomenon of interruption. The first problem is the type of interruption which are based on Ferguson’s theory in Beattie’s journal 1982. In his journal entitled "Turn-taking and Interruption in Political Interviews: Margaret Thatcher and Jim Callaghan Compared and Contrasted", Ferguson classifies interruption into simple interruption, overlap, butting-in, and silent. Then, the second problem is the purpose of doing interruption. Every interruption has disruptive or cooperative purpose. The aim can be identified using some cues which the speaker employs when interrupting. To be able to analyze the purposes, context needs to be taken into account.

Based on the description above, the researcher proposes some questions as follows:

1. What types of interruption are employed by the characters in 12 Angry Men?

2. What are the purposes of interruption done by the characters in 12 Angry Men?

C. Objectives of the Study

In correlation with the problems formulated above, the objectives of the research are:

1. to reveal the types of interruptions employed by the characters in 12 Angry Men, and

2. to describe the purposes of interruption employed by the characters in 12 Angry Men.

D. Significance of the Study

This study on interruption has two significances which can be in the form of theoretical and the practical forms;

1. Theoretical Significance

The research of this study may enrich linguistics research, especially in the field of conversation analysis. Moreover, this research enriches knowledge to the society about the phenomena of interruption in daily life. It also contributes at giving deeper understanding in the analysis of interruption especially in a movie. 2. Practical Significance

This research may become an additional reference for the researcher who focuses on the same theme, interruption. It can help English Department students to gain deeper understanding on learning conversation analysis especially interruption as well. It is expected that this research can stimulate other researchers to conduct a research on the same topic with different object.

7

This chapter provides literature review on relevant theories usedin analysing the problem of interruption found in 12 Angry Men. This chapter also includes the description of the movie entitled 12 Angry Men, as well as explanation of previous studies which have similar topic. This section also provides conceptual framework and analytical construct of the research.

A. Literature Review

This section presents several relevant theories to guide the researcher in answering and explaining the formulation of this research. This section also presents Conversation Analysis and several related fields in a brief description.This chapter particularly discusses interruption in detail.

1. Conversation Analysis

The study of Conversation Analysis (CA) was first developed by Harvey Sacks and his co-workers, Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson. Harvey Sack’s ideas on conversation analysis are mostly recorded at his lectures in the University of California, Berkeley in the 1960s. One who persistently transcribed almost all of Sack’s ideas is Gail Jefferson during lectures on Fall 1964 – Spring 1965(Schegloff, 1992a: ix). Harvey Sack begins to develop Conversation Analysis during his interest on telephone conversation in Suicide Prevention Centre. He studies the structures of the interaction, the real-time sequential ordering of actions such as the

rules, patterns, and structures in the relations between actions (Schegloff, 1992a: xviii).

The study of Conversation analysis (CA) is focused on the interaction that people do in everyday life (Goodwin, 1990: 289). Itconcerns moreabout human spoken interaction typically in institutional environment. According to Wooffitt, CA examines how speakers’ conduct displays a sensitivity to the normative expectations associated with sequential organisations, such as paired action sequences (Wooffitt, 2005:35).CA has the aspects of spoken communication such as Adjacency Pairs, Preference Organization, Backchannels, Repairs, Context and Turn Taking.

a. Adjacency Pairs

Generally, people could notice that there are pairs of utterance in every conversation. Schegloff and Sacks (1973:73) calls these kinds of paired utterances as adjacency pairs which is the basic unit to build a sequence in a conversation. Yule (1998: 127) gives much more detail explanation that adjacency pair is a sequence of conversation between two people where the first speaker gives an initiation to the second speaker to respond.

Liddicoat (2007: 106) says that “some types of talk are designed to initiate next actions, while other types of talk are designed to complete the action initiated”. One type of talk which initiates next actions is called First Pair Part (FPP), and another type of talk that follows from such initiation is called Second Pair Part (SPP).For example, a question is basically followed by an answer from the listener, a greeting is followed by another greeting, and a congratulation followed by thanks.

Several types and examples of adjacency pairs are shownbelow. 1) Greeting-greeting

Amy : Hello Jean : Hi

(Liddicoat, 2007: 107) Amy greets Jean by saying “Hello” and Jean answers with a greeting by saying “Hi”. The second utterance by Jean regards as a respond to the first utterance by Amy. Jean gives an answer as what Amy expected to cooperate in conversation. An example of question-answer sequence is demonstrated in the following dialogue.

2) Question-answer

John : What time is it? Betty : Three uh clock.

(Liddicoat, 2007: 107) In dialogue above, John asks Betty about the current time. Betty gives an answer immediately by saying “three uh clock” as a respond to John’s question “what time is it?”. It is to show that Betty gives an exact answer without silence. The following dialogue exhibit the last example of the last type of adjacency pair.

3) Telling-accept

John : I’ve jus’ finish my las’ exam. Betty : That’s great.

(Liddicoat, 2007: 107) In the example above, the first turn of the pair initiates some actions which can be seen at the utterance “ I’vejus’ finish my las’ exam” and make the next action relevant as seen on the utterance “That’s great”. Both utterancesare relevant to each other.

b. Preference organization

Preference organization or preference structure is a pattern of the typical utterance of a response. It is usually used in a conversation sequence (Yule, 1998:133). The basic distinction in preferred organization is that the emergence of an action might be avoided or sometimes delayed, but in other time an action might be performed directly. Here is the example.

(1) invitation – accept

Amy : W’ d yuh like tuh come over t’morrow night Jane : yea:h. = that’ d be nice

(1’) invitation – decline

Harry : I don’ have much tuh do on we:nesday. W’ d yuh like tuh get together then. (0.3)

Joy : huh we::llhh I don’ really know if yuh see I’s a bit hectic fuh We:nsdayyih know

Harry : oh wokay

In (1) and (1’), the first turn of the dialogue initiates some actions while the second turn responds and completes to the prior turn. Liddicoat (2007) describes the first turn as First Pair Part (FPP) and the second turn as Second Pair Part (SPP). In (1) and (1’), both the FPP of the sequence is the same, an invitation, but the respond to the FPP is quite different. In the first example, the SPP accept the invitation and the second SPP decline it. In a conversation, a participant may be able to decide an alternative to design their contribution towards conversation.When the action was accepted by the other partner, it is called preferred, and vice versa. In other words, actions which are performed immediately

are termed as preferred actions while those which would not be performed immediately are termed as dispreferred actions (Liddicoat, 2007:111).

c. Backchannels

Backchannel is a way to indicate that conversational partners are listening. Yule (1998:75) in his book calls Pragmatics comments on backchannels or backchannel signals as “vocal indications of attention, e.g. uh-huh, hmm, when someone else is talking. Yule (1998:75) expresses that there are some different ways of doing this, including head nods, smiles, and other facial expression and gestures and this is called Backchannel signals or simply Backchannels.In line with that statement, Yngve (1970: 568) describes backchannel as follows:

When two people are engaged in conversation, they generally take turns. . . . In fact, both the person who has the turn and his partner are simultaneously engaged in both speaking and listening. This is because of the existence of what I call the backchannel, over which the person who has the turn receives short messages such as yes and un-huh without relinquishing the turn.

McCarthy says that Backchannels are short verbal responses that the listener makes without aiming to take over speakership (McCarthy 1998: 176).Fries (1952), Yngve (1970) and Orestrom (1983) via Cutron believe that backchannels are a means for the nonprimary speaker to signal to the primary speaker that s/he understands and agrees, and thus have a supportive function (Cutron, 2010:31). Typically, English backchannels are utterances like ah, oh, mhm, yes/yeah, right,

really, I see, that’s right, sure, quite, good heavens, of course, oh dear, oh God, that’s nice, and that’s not bad. Therefore, according to Schiffrin (1987: 99) via

Lammi (2010:119), in backchannelling “speaker remains speaker, and hearer remains hearer. In this example below, backchannels are given in bold.

A: I’ll pick it up from his place B:Mm hm

A: at around 7 o’clock

(Cutron, 2010:31) In the example above, B’s backchannel of Mm hmsignals that B is listening and A should continue speaking.

d. Repairs

In doing a conversation, there is possibility for someone to make a mistake in his/her utterances. In a couple of second forward, the speaker immediately repairs the wrong utterances or word he/shemade. In this condition, what the speaker does is called repairs. Liddicoat (2007:171) expresses that Repair refers to the processes where speakers deal with the problems arise in talking.However, repair does not only occur to change the wrong word or utterances, but it also emergesin a different way such as silence. People try to keep silent for a while to gain certain words for expressing their idea.

Sacks et al. (1974:701) propose that repair mechanisms exist for dealing with turn taking errors and violations. While Schegloff (1977:361),has proposed a model of the mechanism for repair in conversation which makes a central distinction between who initiates repair and who makes the repair. There are four types of repair as proposed by Liddicoat (2007:173) namely:

1) Self-initiated self-repair:the speaker indicates a problem in the utterance and he/she corrects it by him/herself.

B: -then more people will show up. Cuz theywon’t feel obligated to sell. Tuh buy.

(Liddicoat, 2007: 175) B immediately repairs his utterance after he realizes a mistake in his utterance without a help from others. It is clearly seen in the word ”sell” when he actually wants to say ‘buy’, then he corrects it to ‘buy’.

2) Self-initiated other-repair: the speaker indicates a problem in the utterance and the recipient resolves the problem.

B: He had dis uh mistuh W- whatever k- I can’t Think of his name, watts on, the one thet

Wrote [ that piece,

A: [ Dan Watts

(Liddicoat, 2007: 180) Here, B is having difficulty on finding a name and this supports by the phrase ‘I can’t think of his name,’. By the word’watts on’, B is trying to show his effort to remember the name and giving a clue to the recipient by providing an identity. At this point, A resolves the problem.

3) Other-initiated self-repair: the recipient indicates a problem in the utterance and the speaker resolves the problem.

A: Hey the first time they stopped me from selling cigarettes was this morning. (1.0)

B: From selling cigarettes?

A: From buying cigarettes. They [ said uh

Here, A is having a problem in his/her utterance. B is indicating the problem by repeating the word ‘selling’. B’s initiation about the problem makes A realized that he/she is having a problem in his/her utterance and repair it immediately.

4) Other-initiated other-repair: the recipient indicates a problem in his/her utterance and he/she corrects it by him/herself.

Joy: Kerry’s no good. She’s haven a fight with Sally.

Harry: Yih mean Sarah dontchuh. Those two are always fightin’ Joy: Yeh. ‘s a bitch isn’t it,

(Liddicoat, 2007: 190) Here, Harry is not only providing an initiation about the problem in the talk but he also provides a candidate correction by saying ‘Yih mean Sarah dontchuh’ and resolves the problem. This correction is accepted by joe as seen in the word ‘Yeh’.

e. Context

Context is crucial because it describes the situation where the speech exists.Context gives an additional information about the situation given in a conversation or a talk. Dell Hymes defines a context as a several component comprising a conversation (Johnstone, 2010:04). They are known as ‘SPEAKING’ which each letter is an abbreviation of different component of communication (Vakili, 2012:27). Those are ‘S’ for Setting and scene, ‘P’ for Participant, ‘E’ for Ends, ‘A’ for Act sequence, ‘K’ for Key, ‘I’ for Instrumentalities, ‘N’ for Norm, and ‘G’ for Genre.

Below is the example of context in conversation taken from the research conducted byVakili(2012:31).

Monica : There's nothing to tell. It's just some guy I work with. Joey : Come on! You're going out with a guy.

Joey : There's gotta be something wrong with him. Chandler : All right, Joey, be nice.

Chandler : So does he have a hump, a hump and a hair piece? Phoebe : Wait. Does he eat chalk?

Phoebe : It’s just cause I don't want her to go through what I did with Carl. Monica : Hmm, Okay, everybody relax.

Monica : Relax. This is not even a date.

Monica : It is not. It's just two people going out to dinner and not having sex.

Chandler : Sounds like a date to me.

Vakili describes the context of above conversation as below

Setting and Scene: the setting is Central Park Café in New York while the scene is gather in after work to have coffee, rest, and friendly talk.

Participants: Monica, Joey, Chandler, and Phoebe

Ends: Monica is curious to her friend’s reaction about his date tonight.

Act sequence:at first, Monica talks normallyabout her date but her friends make it as a joke. Her friends think it is a big issue but Monica thinks conversely.

Key: the tone is joking.

Instrument: the channel is totally oral and the register is totally informal.

Norms of interaction: since this is a friendly talk, all participants say things directly even a sarcastic word. All participants show their cooperation by taking a turn.

Genre: friendly chat f. Turn Taking

A conversation involves at least two people, a speaker and a hearer. Each of them has the right to speak at any time. Yule (1998:72) states that having control of this right at any time is called a turn. In such conversation, a hearer might have a

turn after the speaker finishedhis/herutterance. However, anyone can attempt to get control in any situation where control is not fixed. This is called turn-taking. The nature of turn taking in talk in interaction is at the heart of CA(Hutchby and Wooffitt, 2008). Meanwhile, Liddicoat says that the speakers’ exchange is the most noticeable features in a conversation (Liddicoat, 2007:51).

Sack at al. (1974:704) suggest three possibilities of changing turn which seems to be a basic set of rules governing a turn.

1. The current speaker selects the next speakerby using names or vocatives, gaze, posture, and the targeting of moves such as directing questions to particular interactants.

2. The current speaker did not select then the next speaker may self-select. 3. The current speaker may continue taking his/her floor or remain silent

when those two rules do not occur.

Sack at al. (1974:700) summarize that there are several facts about conversation. They arespeaker-change recurs or at least occurs; overwhelmingly, one party talks at a time; occurrences of more than one speaker at a time are common, but brief. This situation of more than one speaker at a time occurs in daily conversation and it makes a problem for both speaker and listener.

2. Interruption

Interruption is an interesting phenomenon to be analyzed in a conversation. To understand interruption, it is not just about dominance but it is beyond that. It includes status of the speaker, the time of interruption, the place, etc. According to Beattie (1982:96), interruption is indicated as losing a speaker’s floor before he/she

has intended to finish it which makes his/her utterance incomplete. It means that the current speaker lost their floor. In other word, the interrupter successfully takes the floor.

Another definition of interruption proposed by Zimmerman and West (1975: 115) who have categorized interruption as an instance of simultaneous speech which violates the rules of turn-taking. A description of this case is an interruptee talks but an interrupter begins to talk in the middle of interruptee’s utterance. It may give inappropriate atmosphere for both of them. An example of interruption is presented by Beatie (1982:103) in the conversation between Denis Tuohy (DT) and Margaret Thactcher (MT) as follow:

DT : …and you give a list which included, most of the public sector workers who have been on strike in the last few months, you said you would, pursue those disruptive elements with (pause)

MT : unremitting hostilityquite right (Beattie, 1982: 103) Note:

Denis Tuohy : an interruptee (a person who is interruptedby interrupter) Margaret Thatcher : an interrupter (a person who interrupt)

(pause) : indicates a pause (when interruption occur)

There is a pause in the middle of DT’s utterance, where DT act as interruptee, so the word ‘pause’ in bracket play as a signal of a pause. In this case DT does not success to hold their right and finish his utterance because after several second of silent, MT start to grasp the floor which means that DT is not finished to deliver their message.

a. Types of Interruption

In analysing the type of interruption, the researcher used the theories of type of interruption proposed by Ferguson (1977) (in Beattie, 1982:101-103) who divides four types of interruption as follow:

1) Simple Interruption

Simple interruption occurs once an interrupter takes the floor when the current speaker still incompletes his/her sentence. The interrupter succeeds to disrupt the interruptee’s talk so the interruptee stops his/her speaking. Therefore, the interruptee listens to the interrupter until the interrupter finishes his/her talk, then the floor comes back to the interruptee. Here is the example:

S1 : I know what you thought I know you

S2 : Ya still see her anymore?

(Zimmerman, 1975: 114) The dialogue between speaker 1 and speaker 2 above indicates that speaker 1 become the interruptee and speaker 2 become the interrupter. Speaker 1 loses his/her floor because speaker 2 start to interrupt his/her utterance. Simple interruption is shown when the speaker 2 cut the speaker 1’s utterance before the speaker 1 complete their utterance. Speaker 2 who hold the floor can say his utterance fullywhile speaker one stop his/her utterance and listen to speaker 2’s utterance.

2) Overlap Interruption

In overlap interruption, the floor is shared between the participants because they speak at the same time. Nevertheless, he/she still can interrupt even though the original speaker does not stop until he/she completes his/her utterance. After the

first speaker finishes, the interrupter still grabs the floor, so there is no break during the simultaneous speech.

LG : ... I wonder whether people feel that this is because the Labour Party has run out of some steam. It hasn't so many new ideas.

JC : I think i-,

I think it's because they are, ah answers to what are, gross over claims by the Conservative Party, ...

(Beattie, 1982: 102) In the example above LG (Liew Gardner) as the interruptee ignore JC (Jim Calaghan) who interrupt in the middle of his utterance. LG succeed to finish his utterance before he finish his utterance JC start to interrupt by saying “I think i-“. Overlap interruption is shown when JC as the interrupter still grabs the floor to finish his ideas. Thereis no pause between LG’s utterance and JC’s utterance and the floor is shared between interruptee and interrupter.

3) Butting-in Interruption

Butting-in interruption involves simultaneous speech. However, in this interruption there is no floor taking as the other interruption done. In this case the interrupter is unsuccessful in interrupting the speaker and he/she intends to stop their utterance because the interruptee keeps saying his/her word and ignoring the interrupter’s interruption.

S1 : . . . Although I don’t think anybody would do that unless they’re going against what she says and I

S2 : Ya, but

S1 : can’t see anybody going against that.

(Marche, 1993: 395) From the dialogue, speaker 1 keeps talking and ignores speaker 2 who interrupts in the middle of his/her utterance. Speaker 1 still grabs the floor and does

not allow the speaker 2 to grab the floor. Butting-in interruption occurs in this conversation when speaker 2 remains to stop his/her word and prefers to listen speaker 1’s utterance. In this interruption, the speaker 2 as the interrupter fails to deliver his/her utterance. There is no floor taking in butting-in interruption as shown in the example above.

4) Silent Interruption

In silent interruption, there is no simultaneous speech because the interruptee intends to stop his/her utterance for a while before he/she finish his/her utterance. The interrupter grasps the floor between the pause and the interruptee did not finished his/her utterance who actually wants to continue his/her speech. The example below shows the silent interruption.

S1 : But before you knew all this stuff, before you knew that she was (pause)

S2 : That was

Tina.

(Marche, 1993: 395) It can be notice from the dialogue above that there is no simultaneous speech between speaker 1 and speaker 2 because both speakers did not speak at the same time. Silent interruption is indicated by pause between both speakers. Speaker 1’s utterance remains incomplete and there is a pause in his/her utterance. Speaker 2 grabs the floor during the silence and finish his/her utterance. Speaker 1 actually wants to finish his/her utterance after he/she take a pause but he/she cannot do it because speaker 2 grabs the floor finish their utterance.

b. Purposes of Interruption

Basically there are two purposes of interruption, i.e. disruptive and cooperative as suggested by Murata (in Li, Han Z: 2001:369). On the other hand,

Goldberg (1990:888) adds one purpose of interruption that is neutral interruption. Generally, the basic purpose of interruption is to take the floor before the speaker finishes his/her utterance, so the next speaker could deliver their message.

1) Disruptive

According to Chiung Yang (1996), disruptive or competitive interruption takes place when one speaker attempts to take the floor by making his/her own comment a higher priority over the main speaker’s speech when the main speaker intends to continue. Murata (in Han Z. Li, 2001: 369) divides disruptive interruption into three categories; they are disagreement, floor taking, and topic change.

a) Disagreement

An interruption can be used as a way of expressing disagreement to the current speaker’s opinion when the next speaker disagrees with the current speaker and he/she wants to deliver it immediately.

A : It’s not worth saying in the first place.

M : But don’t you think he’d feel better if she told him.

(Beaumont et al, 2001: 431) In the dialogue, M does not agree with A’s opinion and M immediately interruptsA’s utterance. M shows his/her disagreement in the middle of A’s utterance by saying his opinion before A finishes his/her utterance. M’s opinion differs from A’s opinion about the current topic. M delivers his/her disagreement by saying the opposite opinion from A’s ideas. Disagreement can be seen when M finished his/her utterance that begins with the word ‘but’.

b) Floor taking

In this context the interrupter has a desire to improve the quality of conversation by doing interruption. So he takes the floor to get a turn and interrupt the current speaker for delivering a message without changing the topic.

Teddy : I read a newspaper this morning and the legalization of cannabis seems very interesting. But it has negative aspect from

Flint : if it is legalized in our

country, negative points will appear more than the positive ones. (Beaumont et al, 2001: 431) The dialogue above demonstrates that there is an interruption employed by Flint in the middle of Teddy’s utterance. Flint has a desire to improve the quality of conversation by doing interruption before Teddy finish his utterance. Flint grabs the floor to get a turn to deliver his message without changing the topic being discussed. Flint utters his opinion that is in line with Teddy’s utterance.

c) Topic change

This purpose of interruption is to change the topic of the discussion. The interrupter immediately changes the topic when the current speaker did not finish their utterance. The interrupter speaks aggressively to get the floor and guide the topic.

M : I would never wait until he was 20 years old then try to deal

A : The phone. The

phone is ringing.

(Beaumont et al, 2001: 432) The dialogue above exhibits the event when speaker M and Aare speaking at the same time. A grabs the floor by interrupting M’s utterance to change the topic

of the utterance and it is means that A did not want to continue talking about the current topic being discussed.

2) Cooperative

According to Murata (in Han Z. Li, 2001: 369), cooperative interruption is intended to help the speaker by coordinating on the process and/or content of the ongoing conversation. Zhao and Gantz (2003: 354) suggest that cooperative interruption is providing to achieve some purposes as follow.

a) To show agreement

It indicates that the interruption is used to show agreement as the response to the topic in the conversation. Here, the interrupter gives their approval and support by taking the floor.

M : I’d hope that my life would still be full enough that

A : Yeah. You’d live by

yourself or you’d get married again.

(Beaumont et al, 2001: 431) The emergence of interruption in this conversation shows that A interrupt M’s utterance before he/she finishes his/her utterance in the conversation. A interrupts M’s utterance so that he or she does not to monopolize the floor but he/she wants to show agreement as the response to the topic. A agrees with the speaker M’s utterance by giving a choice to his/her.

b) To show understanding

The occurrence of interruption is to show understanding about the topic being discussed.

Lily : I think the movie last night is so awesome. The main actor, Johnny, Johnny (pause)

Sony : Johnny Depp.

Lily : Mm-hmm, yes, Johnny Depp acts the character impressively.

(Beaumont et al, 2001: 431) Here, Lily has to stop in the middle of her utterance. She forgets the full name of the actor and she starts to think for a while. During the pause, Sony grabs the floor and interrupts Lily’s utterance by saying the full name of the character. This dialogue shows that Sony understands about the topic being discussed it, and he interrupts to show his understanding. After Sony finishes his utterance, Lily admits Sony’s answer and continues his utterance.

c) To show interest in topic

The emergence of interruption in this case shows the interest of the interrupter in a certain topic being discussed as the interrupter is very high-involved in it.

A : Can I ask you guys a question? Do you ever think that Alan is maybe

B : What?

(Beaumont et al, 2001: 431) It is seen in the dialogue that when the conversation is taking place, B interrupts A’s utterance before he/she finished it. B tries to grabs the floor not to disrupt the conversation but he/she tries to improve the quality of conversation. It is shown by B’s curiosity about the topic being discussed. B as the interrupter in this conversation is highly involved in it.

d) To show clarification

The emergence of this interruption has a purpose to clarify something because the interrupter may not be sure with the point of a topic that the speaker utters.

A : He should be home for dinner at least two or three times a week, and if he can’t

M : Two or three?

(Beaumont et al, 2001: 431) In the dialogue, A suggests that he (someone who should be home for dinner) should go home for at least two or three times a week. M cannot believe that A says two or three times a week, which is for M this frequency is too little. M starts to interrupt A’s utterance before he/she finishes his/her utterance to make sure about the point of a topic being discussed. M grabs the floor to clarify A’s utterance by asking about it immediately.

3) Neutral Interruption

This last purpose of interruption is neither negative interruption nor positive interruption. This purpose is not to show dominance or support the interruptee speech. Sometimes, the emergence of this interruption happens when the interrupter does not realize that the interruptee has not finished his or her utterance.

Phoebe : (sings) Raindrops on roses and rabbits and kittens, (Rachel and Monica turn to look at her.) bluebells and sleighbells and- something withmittens … La lalala… something and noodles with string.

These are a few…

Rachel : I’m all better now.

(Fei, 2010:32) The dialogue above shows that the purpose of interruption is not to disrupt or cooperate with the speaker. This interruption is considered to be neutral because

the emergence of this interruption happens when Rachel as the interrupter does not support or dominate the conversation. She does not grasp the floor to take a turn. This interruption is to show that Rachel really feels better or she does not like Phoebe’s singing. Here in the example, Phoebe tries to comfort Rachel who is depressed because of his unfinished wedding ceremony. She also encounters a sorrowful conversation with his father.

3. Previous Studies

Two researches share similar topic but this study differs in terms of the object of the research. These researches are in the form of article and a thesis. a. An Analysis of Gender Differences in Interruption Based on the American TV Series Friends (Zhao Fei, 2010)

This article concerns on the functions and frequency of interruption presented by the characters in Friends, an American TV series. The researcher tried to reveal the interruption in conversations between same and mixed sex. The objective of the research was to investigate the difference of speech style between six protagonist characters in the series and the functions of interruption, i.e. competitive, cooperative, and neutral applied by the researcher.

The result of functional categories of interruption shows that competitive interruption occurs a little bit more than cooperative one. It is presented by six main characters in the series. This happens because of the conversational contexts and the relationship among the characters as well as their behaviour and speech style.

The other result shows that in the terms of gender, men initiate interruption more than woman because they are naturally different each other. Men tend to show

dominance to interrupt than woman and this condition triggers competitive interruption in the conversation.

b. A Conversation Analysis of Interruption in Modern Family Season I (CheraKurniaLarasati, 2010)

This research investigates interruption in daily conversation represented in TV series entitled Modern Family Season I. The objective of this research is to investigate the type and the function of interruption spoken by characters in the series. By using four types of interruption such as simple, overlap, butting-in, and silent interruption, the researcher tried to see the highest occurrence of interruption.

Simple interruption is the highest interruption found in the series because it has easiest pattern than the other one. However, butting-in is the latest interruption in the series because they are close friends. Then, three functions of interruption were found to show the function of interruption expressed by the characters. They are cooperative interruption which consists of agreement, assistance, and clarification; intrusive interruption which is consist of disagreement, floor taking, topic change, and tangentalization; and neutral interruption.

Both research concerns on interruption but they are different in terms of the object and context and also the characters who express interruption which affect to the interruption itself. By using different context, object, and characters in the movie entitled 12 Angry Men, it is exciting to analyze the same topic to reveal the different result by investigating the interruption presented by male characters in the movie.The result of this research would be different because 12 Angry Men as the

object of the researchuses only one place setting and it is an institutional talk between twelve male characters.

4. 12 Angry Men

12 Angry Men is a 1957 American drama film adapted from a teleplay of the same name by Reginald Rose. This movie was written and co-produced by Reginald Rose himself and directed by Sidney Lumet. At the beginning, 12 Angry Men is produced for television in September 1954. After the success of the television production, 12 Angry Men is adapted in film production. This movie talks about twelve jurors in conducting deliberation for a young defendant on the basis of reasonable doubt.

The characters in the movie are Rudy Bond as the Judge, James Kelly as the Guard, Billy Nelson as the court clerk, John Savoca as the accused, and the twelve jurors: Martin Balsam, John Fidler, Lee J. Jacob, E. G. Marshall, Jack Klugman, Edward Binns, Jack Warden, Henry Fonda, Joseph Sweeney, Ed Begley, George Voskovec, and Robert Webber.

This movie which is notable for its almost exclusive use of one set screen play with the exception of the film’s opening talks about a discussion to judge a defendant whether he is guilty or not depending on reasonable doubt. The story begins in New York court room, where an eighteen years old boy from a slum is accused for stubbing his father to death. After final closing argument, the judge instructs the jury to decide whether the boy is guilty of murdered his father or not under reasonable doubt. Then the jury comes to the private room where they deliberately pick a decision.

The jury already decided that the boy is guilty except the jury number 8 (Henry Fonda) who is the only one to vote “not guilty” in preliminary tally. This first case triggers a difficult verdict for the case. Despite of using one set screen play, this movie could gain several awards. The several awards are BAFTA Film Awards 1958 for best foreign actor, Henry Fonda, Berlin International Festival: Golden Berlin Bear and OCIC Awards, Sidney Lumet, and etc. 12 Angry Men won 16 Awards and 11 Nominations in total.

B. Conceptual Framework

This research is conducted by employing Conversation Analysis approach. It is used in this research to reveal the types of interruption as well as the purposes of interruption. To analyse the objective of this research, the researcher used the classification of types of interruption by Ferguson (1977) (in Beattie, 1982:101-103). He proposed four types of interruption, i.e. Simple interruption, Overlap interruption, Butting-in interruption, Silent Interruption. All of these interruptions occur in a simultaneous speech where the two speaker in the conversation are speaking at the same time. Interruption is an action of taking others floor. Interruption is also regarded as a violation of turn taking system.

To analyse the second objective of the research, the researcher used the classification of purposes of interruption presented by Murata (in Li, H. Z: 2001:369) who categorizes the purposes of interruption into disruptive and cooperative. Each purpose also consists of several types. Disruptive purpose consists of Disagreement, Floor Taking, Topic change,while cooperative purpose consists of four purposes, i.e. to show agreement, to show understanding, to show

interest in topic, and to show clarification. The researcher also takes one other purpose of interruption proposed by Goldberg (1990:888) who adds one purpose of interruption that is neutral interruption. It means that the interrupter does not support or show dominance toward the interruptee.

31

Figure 1: Analytical Construct Interruption

Purposes

1) Simple

2) Overlap

3) Butting-in

4) Silent

Disruptive Cooperative

1) Disagreement

2) Floor taking

3) Topic change

1) To show agreement

2) To show understanding

3) To show interest in topic 4) To show clarrification

Types

Adjacency Pair Backchannel Preference Organization Repair

Interruption in Lumet’s 12 Angry Men Movie: A Conversation Analysis

32

This chapter illustrates the method employed in this research, which includes the type of the research and the form, context, and source of the data. This chapter also explains the research instrument and describes the data, how to collect the data and analyzethe data. Moreover, this chapter also provides the trustworthiness of the data.

A. Type of the Research

According to Kerlinger (1979:83) a research design is the plan and structure of research to obtain answers of research questions. A qualitative design refers to research method or procedure which produces descriptive data; people own written or spoken words and observable behaviour (Bodgan and Taylor in Moleong, 2001:4).Juddith(in Cresswell, 1998:24) states that qualitative research is defined as a category of research designs or models which transcribes the data from audio and videotapes, other written records, and pictures or films into descriptive narratives form. Meanwhile, according to Vanderstoep and Johnston (2009: 167), the goal of a qualitative research is to describe the phenomenon of research rather than to predict the result. They also describe that a qualitative research should be in depth and understandable to refer to the viewpoint of a research participant.

This research aimed to give description of interruption employed by the characters in 12 Angry Menespecially on the type and the purpose of interruption. Thus, the best research design to be applied in this research was descriptive

qualitative research since qualitative research gave a realistic description towards the phenomenon (Vanderstoep and Johnston, 2009: 167). Moreover, qualitative research gives more explicit description about particular phenomena than quantitative method (Strauss and Corbin, 1998:11). Therefore, the data in this research were not only displayed descriptively but it is also described through quantitative method to help the researcher in simplifying the data.

B. Form,Context,and Sourceof Data

The object of this research was a 1957 American drama film entitled 12 Angry Men. The data of the research were in the form of utterances indicating interruption spoken by the characters in 12 Angry Men. The context of the data was in the form of dialogue containing interruption undertaken by the characters in12 Angry Men.Finally, the data source of this research divided into two categories. The primary source of data wasthe transcript of the dialogues spoken by the characters in12 Angry Menwhile The secondary source of data was the film itself.

C. Instrument of the research

Since this research was a qualitative research, the researcher played as the primary instrument in this research. As stated by Moleong (2001:4), the researcher played as the key instrument in this research because he was involved in the entire research process including in observing the data, analysing the data, and interpreting the data of the research. Then, the secondary instrument used in this research was the data sheet in order to obtain the data accurately.

D. DataCollectionTechnique

There are four categories of data collection in qualitative research as stated by Vanderstoep and Johnston (2009: 189). Those are interviewing,ethnographic observation, documents and material culture, and visual analysis. The data of this research were taken from the film entitled12 Angry Men and the printed script of this film. To collect all the data about interruption, the researcher employed note taking and visual analysis by watching the movie and reading the transcript. Those techniques were applied to gain an accurate data.

To collect all the data about interruption performed by the characters of12 Angry Men,the researcher conducted several stages below:

1. watching12 Angry Men completely to understand the story as well as the aspect in it,

2. gaining the script from the World Wide Web,

3. watching12 Angry Men one more time to check the accuracy of the transcription and marking the interruption that occurs in the movie, 4. taking a note on interruption and writing the time of interruptions, and 5. classifying the collecting data of interruption into the data sheet. The

Table 1: Sample Data Sheet of Types and Purposes of Interruption Presented by the Characters in Lumet’s 12 Angry Men Movie

CODE DIALOGUES TYPES

PURPOSES

EXPLANATION

DISRUPTIVE COOPERATIVE _NEUT

RAL

SM OV BU SL DI FT TC SA SU SI SC

1/10:51:

317 –

10:53:90 2

FOREMAN: and uh, well, we can vote on it right now and…

FOUR: I think it’s customary to take a preliminary vote.

SEVEN: Yeah, let’s –let’s

vote. Who knows? Maybe we all can get outta here, huh?

FOREMAN: uh uhuh.

√ √ All the jury get into the jury

room after some

explanations from the Judge that all the jury should separate the facts and give a verdict depending on reasonable doubt. They sit in order according to the jury number. Then the Foreman stands in front of the others to explain the rule. After he gives some suggestions, the

jury number Four

interrupts him before he could finish his utterance. So, this interruption is categorized as simple interruption and it is used to show agreement.

Notes:

SM : Simple Interruption DI : Disagreement SA : To show agreement OV : Overlap FT: Floor Taking SU : To show understanding BU : Butting-in Interruption TC: Topic Change SI : To show interest in topic

SL : Silent Interruption SC : To show the need of clarification CODE : 1/10:51:317 – 10:53:902  number of the data / time

E. Data Analysis Technique

The next step after collecting the data was data analysis technique. In analysing the data, textual analysis was employed to analyse the data. According to Vanderstoep(2009: 211) textual analysis focuses on the identification and

interpretation a set of text based on the researcher’s perspective. Each perspective on meaning caused different interpretation of a text. In this research, the researcher was the interpreter of selected text. The process of data analysis is stated in details as in the following:

1. transferring and classifying the data collected into the data sheet, 2. interpreting the data according to the context where this data was taken, 3. discussing the data with supervisor and colleagues who are linguistics

students, and

4. making description of the data and drawing conclusion. F. Trustworthiness

To validate the finding of this research, the researcher applied triangulation which is the combination of methodologies in the study of the same phenomena or programs (Patton, 1980:108). To enhance the validity of the finding, Moleong(2001:173) states that four categories of data trustworthiness such as credibility, dependability, conformability, and transferability. Those categories of data trustworthiness had to be applied to check and prove the data. Credibility and conformability were chosen to triangulate the data of this research.

Credibility means that the result of the research was credible or believable from the perspective of the research participants. If the research is credible, then the conclusion of the research was supported by the findings. The researcherused a consistence and appropriate methodology as well as systematic and comprehensive literature reviewto enhance the credibility of the research. Meanwhile, conformability refers to the neutrality of the research interpretation to check how

far the research could be confirmed by others. Thus, the finding and the data of the research should be interpreted based on the data.

Peer debriefing technique by discussing the data with the people considered competent in criticizing the process of analysing the data was chosen by the researcher to triangulate the research. The researcher discussed the research with his supervisors, TitikSudartinah, S.S., M.A. and Susana Widyastuti, S.S., M.A., Ph.D. to avoid plagiarism. The researcher also asked other researchers to check and discuss about the research findings, so the validity of the data in this research could be accomplished by the researcher.

38

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter explains the results of the research, which are the types and purposes of interruption employed by the characters in 12 Angry Men. This chapter is divided into two sections, the findings section and discussion section. The findings section describes briefly the frequency of the types of interruption as well as the purposes of interruption in 12 Angry Men. Meanwhile, detailed explanation about the results of the research is described in detail on the discussion section. A. Findings

The data in this research are taken from the utterances in the dialogue presented by the characters in 12 Angry Men. There are 39 data found in this research which describe the types and purposes of interruption. Table 2 simplifies the result of occurrence of the interruption in 12 Angry Men which is uttered by almost all the characters in the movie. As can be seen from table 2, all types of interruption occur in different frequencies. Meanwhile, not all purposes of interruption are found in the movie and gain a significant difference between one purpose of interruption to the other ones. Regarding to this result, to show disagreement is one of the purposes of interruption which gets dominant frequencies toward the other purposes of interruption.

Table 2. Frequency of Occurrence of Types and Purposes of Interruption Presented by the Characters in Lumet’s 12 Angry Men Movie

No. Types

Purposes TOTAL

Disruptive Cooperative Neut ral

DI FT TC SA SU SI SC

1. Simple Interruption

7 0 3 2 1 0 1 0 14

2. Overlap Interruption

6 0 3 2 1 0 3 3 18

3. Butting-in Interruption

2 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 6

4. Silent Interruption

0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

TOTAL

15 0 6 4 3 0 7 4 39

From the table 2, the types of interruption are divided into four categories, i.e. simple interruption, overlap interruption, butting-in interruption, and silent interruption. From the four types of interruption, overlap interruption reaches the highest frequency of occurring interruption. In overlap interruption, the interruptee is highly involved in the conversation. So, the interrupter interrupts the interruptee by speaking at the same time. Meanwhile, silent interruption reaches the lowest position. In silent interruption, the interruptee intends to continue his speaking but he stops his utterance for a while. The interrupter interrupts the interruptee in his silent time. There is no simultaneous speech in this interruption. This interruption appears only once since all the jury is able to manage his speaking.

The purposes of occurring interruption are also presented in table 2. There are three categories of purposes of interruption: disruptive, cooperative, and neutral. From the three categories of purpose of interruption, disruptive interruption has the highest occurrence which is followed by cooperative interruption and neutral interruption in the last position. The subcategory of disruptive is divided into 3 types, those are disagreement, floor taking, and topic change. Disagreement

interruption gain a highest occurrence in all categories of disruptive interruption. Meanwhile, floor taking is not uttered by the characters in this movie. There is no juror who tries to improve the quality of a conversation.

Then the second category of purposes of interruption is cooperative interruption. Cooperative interruption consists of four types: to show agreement, to show understanding, to show interest in topic, and to show clarification. From the four types of cooperative interruption, to show clarification gets the highest occurrence in the movie which is followed by to show agreement in the second position and to show understanding in the third position. To show interest in topic is not found in this movie since every juror’s curiosity appears not to support the

current speaker’s utterance but it is used to disrupt it. Meanwhile, neutral interruption only occurs in overlap interruption and butting-in interruption.

B. Discussion

The object of this research is 1957 American drama film entitled 12 Angry Men. Thus, the data of the research are in the form of utterances indicating interruption uttered by all characters in this movie. This section is divided into two parts to answer the problem formulation stated in Chapter I. It begins with the discussion of the types of interruption in detailed explanation to answer the first problem of this research. The next part in this discussion section is explanation about the purposes of occurring interruption in the movie 12 Angry Men which answers the purposes of occurring interruptions employed by the characters in the movie.

1. Types of Interruption

Four types of interruption, i.e. simple interruption, overlap interruption, butting-in interruption, and silent interruption appear in the movie 12 Angry Men. Those interruptions occur in different frequencies as found in the movie. Each type of interruption is explained in detailed through some examples.

a. Simple Interruption

This types of interruption are commonly discovered in every conversation taken by the participants. The most widely range to find this interruption is in institutional setting such as in courtroom, doctor’s office or hospital, business centre, and etc. Simple interruption is an interruption which is simultaneous speech occurs between the speakers. One speaker loses his turn because the other is handling the floor to give his idea. In 12 Angry Men, simple interruption reaches the second rank as the highest interruption after overlap interruption. This interruption is found as much as 14 data out of 39 data in the movie. Simple interruption happens because the current speaker cannot finish his utterance since the interrupter grasp his floor.

An example of simple interruption found in the movie is described in datum number 2.

TEN : Great. I heard pretty good story last night…

EIGHT : That’s not why we are sitting here for.

TEN : All right. Then you tell me what are we sitting here for?

(2/13:42:196 – 13:44:364) The dialogue above happens after all the jury begin to enter the jury room for discussing whether the defendant stabs his father four inches into the chest or

not. Then all the jury gathered to vote. There are eleven jury voting not guilty out of twelve jury. In addition, in the preliminary vote, there is one juror who votes not guilty, juror number eight. Juror number Eight votes not guilty under the reason that the child is about 18 years old. Juror number three assumes that 18 years old is old enough for someone to be punished.

Some jury debate with the juror number Eight about his vote. Juror number Seven says that eleven jury think the guy is guilty. However, juror number Eight says that it is irresponsible to send a boy off to die without thinking about the case seriously. He seriously thinks to separate the fact from the fancy as the judge tells to all the jury and gives the boy amnesty if he is innocence. A silence comes out after some arguments from juror number Seven and Eight.

In a couple of second forward, the Foreman asks who wants to give opinion. Juror number Nine uttered that he is willing to sit an hour for discussing the case. However, the juror number Ten prefers to tell about his last night story. Before he tells about his story and finish his utterance, juror number Eight interrupts him to show his disagreement toward juror number Ten. This interruption is categorized as simple interruption because juror number Ten cannot finish his utterance.

The next example of simple interruption is explained in datum number 3. TEN : Now listen…

NINE : Do you think you were born with a monopoly on the truth?

(3/14:50:472 – 14:53:392) This second example of interruption is found in the movie as the second data in appendix. This interruption is found after juror number nine explains that the kid encounters a miserable eighteen years. He just lives with his father since

his mother is dead when he is only nine years old. A couple years later, his father is sent to jail for forgery. Juror number nine thinks that this is not a happy beginning for the kid. Unfortunately, juror number Ten explains that it is hard to believe a kid from slum background. He intends to say that the kid from slum background cannot be trusted.

Simple interruption is done by juror number Nine who disagrees with juror number Ten who states that “the kid cannot be trusted in every word they say”. Juror number Nine disagrees with juror number Ten by implying a statement “Do you think you were born with a monopoly on the truth?” By saying this utterance, juror number Nine succeed to interrupts juror number Ten who actually wants to explain his reason why he does not believe the kid’s story.

The utterance which is stated by juror number nine not only cuts juror

number Ten’s utterance but also shows him that everyone cannot claim that he knows the truth. The word ‘monopoly’ in juror number Nine’s utterance, in the view point of economy, means having a control of something. In this movie, juror number Nine, actually, wants to say that no one possesses the truth. In more sarcastic meaning, juror number Nine intends to say that juror number Ten is an arrogant.

Simple interruption is also found in in another example which is stated in the following dialogue.

ELEVEN : Don’t you care…

SEVEN : now, wait a minute.

The example above is found in the movie as simple interruption uttered by one of the jury, juror number Seven. Juror number Eleven fails to finish his utterance since juror number Seven interrupts him. This interruption belongs to simple interruption because the interruptee cannot finish his utterance and the

interrupter succeed to stop the interruptee’s utterance. It happens when juror

number Ten asks him about his vote. He changes his vote to not guilty because he is sick about all the talking in the jury room. It is getting nowhere after an hour discussion. This is also supported by the juror number Seven who states that he is getting little tired with the debate by saying ‘I am getting little tired of this yackety

-yackin’ back and forth’. Further, it also means that he has no responsibility about his job.

At the previous dialogue, it is stated that juror number Seven wants to see a baseball game. It is shown in the dialogue between juror number Eight and number Seven in preliminary vote. Juror number Eleven realizes that juror number Seven changes his vote because he holds a baseball ticket in his pocket. In addition, the baseball game starts at 8 o’clock. Then juror number Eleven continues to force juror number Seven to explain why he alter his vote to not guilty but he gets nothing.

In this sense, both jury portray how people in society take a responsibility of something. One juror describes how people get in a duty but he made it easy as a game because of a personal reason. In other side, it portrays how people care a lot

about somebody’s right and shows how a man gives an empathy towards other because of a responsibility he holds in his job.

b. Overlap Interruption

Overlap interruption mostly occurs in this movie since it is easily recognized by its occurrence. All the male characters in this movie performs overlap interruption spontaneously. This interruption appears when both of the speakers speak at the same time in a simultaneous speech. There is no apparent break in continuity. Moreover, the result of this research shows that overlap interruption has the highest rank which appears 15 times out of 39 data. This interruption is categorized as overlap interruption since the interrupted speaker succeed in maintaining his floor although he is being interrupted by interrupter.

An example of overlap interruption which is found in this movie is shown in the datum bellow.

SIX : Well, it don’t exactly prove anything. It’s just part of the picture.

EIGHT : well, you said it provided a motive.

(6/19:46:351 – 19:47:663) The expression in bold is uttered by juror number Eight when he disagrees with juror number Six. They discuss about the woman in the apartment across the

hall from the kid’s apartment. She swears that she saw a fight of argument between the boy and his father. Actually, juror number Six hesitates about his utterance which can be indicated by his utterance ‘…I mean, I could be wrong…’. This utterance indicates that the speaker is not sure with his word. Further, juror number Eight asks him about a motive that juror number Six explain previously.

Juror number Eight performs interruption which is classified as overlap interruption since he interrupts juror number Six who keeps telling his idea about the fact. It is about the boy run angrily out of the house after fighting with his father.

Juror number Eight asks juror number Six to explain it. However, juror number Six prefer to say it is not so important. This interruption that is performed by juror number Eight is used to oppose juror number Six’s argument.

The next instance of overlap interruption is described as follows.

FOREMAN : You wanna take the chair, just take the chair. That’s all. TEN : did you

ever see such a thing?

FOREMAN : see if you can keep it running.

(12/23:41:33 6– 23:43:880)

All the discussion begins with jury’s idea to convince that juror number

Eight gets wrong with his option to vote not guilty. They start to give some facts one by one which begins from juror number Two. When the turn comes to juror number Eight, he refuses to give his idea because he is the one who is convinced by all the jury in jury room. Nevertheless, juror number Ten asks the Foreman to give a chance to juror number Eight to explain his ideas. The Foreman prefers to do it in order as previously stated. Juror number Ten thinks that the Foreman become a kid who prefers to do something in order.

The interruption happens after juror number Ten walks to the window. The Foreman interrupts him by employing overlap since he cannot handle his anger toward juror number Ten. This interruption happens when both jury speak at the same time. The Foreman keeps telling his idea while juror number Ten interrupts him by cutting his utterance. Even though The Foreman does not reach his last word, juror number Ten speaks at the same time with juror number Ten. Juror number Ten guesses that the problem is not really matter toward the Foreman. He

tries not to talk about it, so he changes the topic being discussed by uttering ‘did

you ever see such a thing?’.

In the result, the datum number 23 also shows that overlap interruption is used to show clarification about the topic actually discuss.

EIGHT : It’s not that easy to identify a voice, particularly a shouting voice.

FOREMAN : he

identified it in court.

(23/40:08:88 1– 40:10:641) The dialogue above shows the conversation between juror number Eight and

Three discussing about the old man living down stairs from the boy’s apartment.

They debate about how clearly the old man could hear the boy’s voice when he yelled to his father. Juror number Eight assumes that the old man only hears indistinct sound. Since an apartment beside an elevate train is very noisy, a shouting voice from the boy with his father is not easy to be identified. The sound of the train

which passes the apartment is louder than human’s voice.

The Foreman interrupts juror number Eight in order to clarify whether the old man heard the voice and saw the boy run to the door. The Foreman performs overlap interruption when interrupting juror number Eight. It is clear that the interruption occurs when the Foreman suddenly speaks at the same time when juror number Eight utters “It’s not that easy to identify a voice, particularly a shouting voice.”. This interruption happens in simultaneous speech. In performing this interruption, the Foreman succeeds in taking the floor while juror number Eight is able to finish his utterance. Both jury manages to maintain his floor. One juror, The

31/53:49:05 9–

53:50:804

FIVE: Look, I don’t remember what he said, but I don’t see how he could have run to the door.

FOUR: He said he went from

his bedroom to the front door.

√ √ Juror number Five wonders that the

old man could run to the door. Juror number Four interrupts him by saying what he knows about the case. There is simultaneous speech in this interruption, so the interruption belongs to overlap interruption to show understanding about the case.

32/55:06:05 3–

55:08:754

EIGHT: Now, if the killer began running immediately…

TWELVE: maybe he

didn’t.

√ √ Juror number Eight explains that the

old man is running to the front door when the kid runs. Juror number Twelve disagree with him and he argue that the kid does not run immediately after killing his father. 33/56:18:55

4–

56:19:704

FIVE: Maybe he just didn’t think about it, huh?

TEN: what do you mean didn’t

think of it?

√ √ Juror number Eight makes a

simulation when the old man runs to the door. Some juries keep arguing that the lawyer does not makes a simulation like that. The interruption

101

CODE DIALOGUES

TYPES

PURPOSES

EXPLANATION DISRUPTIVE COOPERATIVE NEUTR

AL

SM OV BU SL DI FT TC SA SU SI SC 34/58:24:53

9–

58:26:136

SIX: I think that’s pos sible. THREE: assumed. Now listen to me, you people.

√ √ After taking a slow walk like the old

man, juror number Eight explain that the old man assumes the one who runs down the stair is the boy. When juror number Six heard this, he agrees with him. Yet, juror number Three raises his voice implying his disagreement toward juror number Six. Juror number Three perform interruption which belongs to overlap to show his disagreement. 35/01:16:33

:953– 01:16:35:00 1

ELEVEN: Don’t you care…

SEVEN: now, wait a minute.

√ √ Juror number Seven changes his vote

from guilty to not guilty. He also says that he is sick of all the talking. Then, juror number Eleven reminds him that this is not a game that somebody has a right to play with a man’s life. Juror number Seven employs simple interruption to change the topic being discussed.

36/01:17:01 :638– 01:17:02:90 7

SEVEN: Look, I don’t have to.. ELEVEN: you do have to, say it! Why?

√ √ Juror number Eleven wants juror

number Seven to give his reason why he changes his vote to not guilty but he reject it. This interruption is classified as simple interruption because the interrupter succeeds to interrupt the interruptee. This interruption occurs to show disagreement.

37/01:23:03 :889– 01:23:04:68 5

TWELVE: Well maybe…

THREE: let’s vote on it

√ √ Juror number Twelve is confused

with the evidence and then he changes again his vote. There is simple interruption in the dialogue because juror number Twelve cannot finish his utterance. This interruption is used to change the topic to call another vote.

103

CODE DIALOGUES

TYPES

PURPOSES

EXPLANATION DISRUPTIVE COOPERATIVE NEUTR

AL

SM OV BU SL DI FT TC SA SU SI SC 38/01:24:10

:836– 01:24:12:16 5

FOUR: I was saying that seven o’clock would be a reasonable time to…

NINE: the reason I asked about that was because you were

rubbing your nose like…

√ √ Juror number Four rubs his nose and

it makes juror number Nine wonder why he rubs his nose. Then, he interrupts him by employing simple interruption since the interruptee cannot finish his utterance. This interruption is used to change the topic of the discussion.

39/01:28:00 :214– 01:28:01:17 6

EIGHT: She couldn’t have had to put them on then

THREE: wait a second. EIGHT: and

here’s another guess. Maybe she

honestly thought she saw the boy kill his father. I say she only saw a blur.

√ √ Juror number Eight argues that the

woman across the street only saw a blur. Juror number Nine noticed that the woman does not wear glasses in the court and there is a mark in his nose. This interruption belongs to butting in because the interrupter fails to interrupt. Actually the interrupter, juror number Three, wants to show his disagreement