SPEECH FUNCTIONS CLASSROOM INTERACTION.

ABSTRACT

Sulaiman, Ruwaida. Registration Number: 082188310065. Speech Functions in
Classroom Interaction. English Applied Linguistics Study Program,
Postgrad ..ate School, State University ofMedan. 2010.

Interpersonal function is a tenn used in semantics as a part of classification
of types of meaning. The function of language as the interpersonal function means
that language is used to enable people to participate in commooicative acts, to take
on roles, to express and understand feelings, attitudes, and judgements. Speech
Function is an action or performance done by language users such as: asking,
commanding, and answering in order to fulfill the intention of the speakers and
listeners. The objectives of the research are ( 1) to describe how the speech
functions are coded and patterned in the English classroom interaction (2) to
investigate the types of speech functions used in classroom interaction, to describe
how the speech functions are patterned in classroom interaction, and (3) to
investigate why the speech functions are realized in the ways they are. The research
used descriptive qualitative design based on Participant-Observation was conducted
to discover Speech Fooctions in Classroom Interaction of the students. The students
were from the Grade X consisting of 55 students State Senior High School 3
(Sekolah Menengah Atas: SMA 3) Medan. The research findings show that both

teacher and students play an important role in classroom interaction. The teacher
used almost all types of speech functions and the dominant speech functions used
were question (27.91 %) followed by statement (18.60 %), and command &
response offer to command (14.53 %), and then response statement to question
(8.72 %), greeting and response to greeting (5.81 %), followed by offer (2.91 %),
and acknowledge statement (1.16 %). This happens because the role of the teacher
is as a leader of class. As the leader of class s/he has authority to inquire, ofter
something, and to command all elements of c1ass. While the dominant speec
function used by the students was statement (46.21%) which is almost of the whole
utterances in classroom. It is because of students just answer questions from teacher
and gave statements needed. And then they ask questions if they still do not
understand or if they do not get knowledge or information. The second s~
function used by the students dominantly is response statement to question
(33.10%), followed by question (10.34%), acknowledge statement (5.52%), and
then greeting & response to greeting (2.07%), while offer (0.69 %). Calling &
response to calling, exclamation & response to exclamation, acknowledge offer,
command & response offer to command were not used by students. The reasons are
students' ole and students' position is not a leader in class, they never command
all elements in class.

iv

-z
?

•

m
STlJDY PROGliAl\'.l
SCHOOL
O'F !ilEDAN
lJNi~'ERSITY

2010

A THESIS
SPEECH FUNCTIONS IN CLASSROOM INTERACTION

By
RUWAIDA SULAIMAN

Registration Number : 082188310065

ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
This hesis was examined on 29tb June 2010 by the board examiners
Approved by

Advise I

Adviser II

The Head of English Applied
Linguistics Study rogram

The Director of the Postgraduate
School,
State Univers
~

Approval
This thesis was examined on 29th June 2010 by the Board Examiners.

Board examiners:

Prof. Tina Mariany Arifm, M.A., Ph.D
Nip.19440302 196902 2 001

Prof. Amrin Saragih, M.A., Ph.D
Nip. 95501131982031002

Prof. D.

Tampubolon, Ph. D

Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombiqg, M.Pd
Nip. 19610425 l98601 2 001

Dr. Didik Santoso, M.Pd

Adviser's Statements

I certify that I have read this thesis and that in my opinion it is fully adequate in
scope and quality as a thesis for degree o:t:Magister Humaniora

I certify that I have read this thesis and that in my opinion it is fully adequate in
scope and quality as a thesis for degree of Magister Humanio

Prof. Amrin Saragih, M.
Second Adviser

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, the writer expresses her deepest gratitude to Allah SWT
for His Blessings that has been poured to her especially in getting the golden

In the process of completing this thesis, she has to confess her profound
thankfulness for the generous

idance and assistance which has been rendered to

her by many people. It would be impossible to list all names but in particular she
wishes to mention the following people.

and continuous care and support, and also, as the former Head of English Ap lied

Linguistics Study Program for being so was extraordinary. She was there to cheer
up the "Bapeda" class and her encouragement up to this time is never ending.
To Prof. Amrin Saragih, M.A., Ph.D., her second adviser, who has given the
guidance, comments, criticisms, suggestions, support, and special notes for the
imp vement of the thesis from the very beginning up to the end of tliis thesis.
She would like to express her thanks to all lecturers who have given the
e lectures

Mariany Arifm, M.l\:.,

:e

D., Pro . :Amrin Saragifi; M:A':., Ph.D., Pro£ Dr. Busmin

Gurning, M. Pd., Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing, M. Pd., Prof. DP. Tampubolon, Ph.D.,

Prof. M. Butar Butar, M.A., Ph.D., Dr. Berlin Sibarani, M. Pd., Dr. Eddy Setia, M.
Ed, TESP.
Thanks also to her reviewers and examiners, Prof. DP. Tampubolon, Ph.D.,
Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing, M. Pd., and Dr. Didik Santoso, M. Pd., for their
suggestions and valuable inputs to shape this thesis.
Her truthfully gratefulness goes to Prof. Dr. Busmi Gurning, M. Pd and
Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing, M. Pd, Head and Secretary, English Applied
Linguistics Study Program, and Prof. Dr. Belferik Manullang, Director of the
Postgraduate School of the State University of Medan, for their suggestions and
administrative assistance during the process of conducting the study and
completing this thesis.

In addition, she would like to express her deepest thanks and endless
appreciations to her parents, her sisters, and her brothers for their support,
assistance, and prayer for her success in fmishing her study. A very special thanks
to her beloved husband, Irsan Idris Nst, AP, Mora Karunia Nst her daughter, and
her son, Alfisyah Idris Nst, for their motivation, care, endless love
understanding in fmishing her study on time.

The writer's appreciation is also addressed to the School Principal o
Senior High School 3 Medan, Drs. Sahlan Daulay, M.P , who has allowed her to
conduct the research, all colleagues in State Senior High School 3 Medan, and also

Finally, this thesis is still far for being perfect in spite of the fact that the
writer has done her very best in completing her work, but she wannly welcomes

ii

any constructive ideas and critics that will improve the quality of the thesis. She
also hopes this thesis would be useful for those who read it, especially majoring in
English.

~

~

The writer,

~

1ft

-z
?

~

m

~

m

&,,

E-9

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT •.••.•..•..•..••......•....•..•••....•................••..••.• i

ABSTRACT ................................. .............................................. iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......•..••.•••.••••...•.•...•.•..•••...•••...........•....••.. v

LIST OF TABLES ............... ......................................................... vii
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................... ix
LIST OF APPENDIXES .••....••.....•...............................••...••••......••

X

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .........•.....•..•......................•...•....••••••• xi

CHAPTER I :INTRODUCTION

z
~

1.1 The Background of the Study ................................... 1

1.2 The Problems of the Study ...................................... 5
1.3

1.4
1.5

CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE

speech Functions and Mood ..................................... 13

2.2.2 Interpersonal Function .................................... 14
2.2.3 Textual Function .......................................... 14

v

2.3 Interpersonal Metaphor: Mood Metaphor......................... 18
2.3.1 Exchanging Information: Grammatical Structure
of Propositions ............................................... 25
2.3.1.1 Constituents of the Mood ........................ 26
2.3.1.2 Constituents ofthe Residue.............. ......... 28
The Mood Structure of Declarative Clause .. .............. 35
2.3.2.1 The Mood Structure of Interrogative Clause ... 36
2.3.2.2 The Mood Structure ofExclamatives ........... 38

The Grammar of Proposal.. ........... ...... .... ........ 40
2.3.3.1 The Structure oflmperatives (Deman(ling
Goods and Services .............................. 42

z

2.3.3.2 The Structure of Offers (Giving Goods

~

2.4.2 Non Verbal Interaction ................................... 50

CHAPTER ill: METHOD OF RESEARCH

55

3.4 Technique of Data Collection ................................... 55
3.5 Trustworthiness .................................................. 56

vi

3.6 Technique of Data Analysis ... , ................................. 56
CHAPTER IV: THE RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 The Research Findings.......................................... 57
4.2 Discussions ............................................................. 69

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIQNS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions ........................................................ 75

5.2 Suggestions......................................................... 77
REFERENCES .............................................................................. 78

-z
?

m

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table

Page

2.1

Speech Functions .................................................................... 10

2.2

Types of Speech Functi n. ......................................................... 11

2.3

Elaboration Realization of Speech Functions in Mood... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 17

2.4

Speech Roles and Conunodities in Interaction...... . . . .. . . .

2.5

Speech Functions and Responses................................................. 21

2.6

SRCeCh Functions and Typical Mood of Clause.................................... 23

2. 7

Speech Functions and Typical Clause and Non-typical

. .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . 19

Clause ofMood ..................................................................... 24
2.8

Summary of Adjuncts ......................................................... ..... 34

4.1

Proportion of Speech Functions by the Teacher ................................ 65

4.2

Proportion of Speech Functions by the Students ................................ 67

4.3

Moods in the Classroom................................................. .. .. ...... 70

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figures

Page

2.1 The Derivations of Speech Functions.........................................

-z
?

m

ix

12

LIST OF APPENDIXES

Page

APPENDIX
A

The Transcription ofthe Data ................................................ 81

C

Curriculum Vitae ............................................................... 113

X

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

K

:Knower

A

:Actor

T

Ss

acknow

: acknowledgement

e. decl. mood

:elliptical declarative mood

modul interrogative mood

: modulated interrogative mood

-z
?

m

xi

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Background of the Study
The quality of classroom interaction to a greater extent is determined by
the effectiveness of information given to the students. It is a fact, at present that
the quality of Indonesian education is declining. The question is why education is
poorl

conducted. This leads to an expectation that education should be well

carried out.
In the process of transferring knowledge language plays an imgortant role
especially in social interaction. It is used for communication either for spoken or
written interactions. In addition, it is a representation of thoughts, fee ings,
objectives, and actions. Human beings use a language in their lives for various
urposes. In order to achieve the purposes, the language is adjusted to->fhe context
in which it is used. Further, people use language to talk about their ex riences of
the world, including the worlds in their minds, to describe events,
involved in them. They also use language to interact with others, to establish and
maintain relations with them, to influence their be av:·or,and to express their
viewppint on things in

e world.

musing language, people organize messages in

with the wider context in which they are talking or writing. All of these are
activities which involve the use of language.

1

Language serves many functions. The prime function of language is as a
tool of communication. Communication itself is an activity or process of
expressing ideas and feelings or of giving information. Giving information
involves transferring knowledge, facts or news by the speakers as the doers to the
listeners as the receivers. In the classroom, the interaction is between teacherstudents, students-teacher, and students-students. Communication refers to roles
played by the two sides, namely by the addressers (speakers) antl addressee
(listeners). While communicating the addressers and ad essee express their
_thoughts by speech. On the one hand speech is used by a teacher in a classroom
among others teach, to direct, to guide, to instruct, to suggest, and to
~rsuade

students. On the other hand, teachers use speech to silence students and deprive
them of their own words. All speeches they used have their own functions. IUs
functional in the sense that it is designed to account the language is used. Based
on Halliday (1994:30) states that speech functions are realized in four types,
namely : statement, question, offer, and command.

Thompson (2!).03: 12

emphasizes the important point that the use of language lies at the very heart of
social lives. In general, it is noted that communication and language are imwrtant
components of social life.
When people use language to express meanings, they do so in specific

elements of those situations (health institutions, in community, in educational
institutions, for example: hospital, court, school, etc). A school is an important
place for students to learn not only the values and rules of the surrounding
2

educational community but also of the society at large. The improvement of
students' interaction and social skills has been seen as an important aim for
education. The management of classroom discipline is one of the moral and
ethical activities that enable students to improve their social and interaction skills.
In the human lives' activities, communications aiid interaction cannot be
separated from one another.
Ther

are various kinds of interactions, of which teaching-learning

interaction is the interaction which runs the process of education. Teachinglearning interaction involves interactions between teacher-students, studentsteacher, students-students in the teaching-learning process.
This research addresses the interaction between
students-teacher in English classroom interaction during the teaching-learning
process. The importance of interaction in classroom language learning is precisely
that it entails this joint management of learning. The management of classroom
discipline is one of the moral and ethical activities that enable students-to impro e
their social and interaction skills. For teachers, classroom discipline management
is an important but difficult aspects of their job. The organization gf classroom
interaction and discipline management is an

interpla~

between the verbal and

nonv: hal activities as well as the visual and special resources used by teacher and

In verbal interactions, teachers use prosodic signals like timing, pitch, and

emphasis to clarify their verbal messages. All paralinguistic signals, messages
independent of the content of speech such as emotional tone of speech (for
3

example hurt and excitement), are present in the interactions. Nonverbal signals
are used when attitudes, experiences, and emotions are not so expressible by
words (Argyle in Robinson, 1994:23). Nonverbal interaction consists of
unconscious body movements, expressions, gestures, the use of personal, social,
and public space, appearance, touch, and the wa

people view time and

environment. It also serves many functions in a classroom. Nonverbal behavior
provides a soCial channel for providing information, regulating social interaction,
expressing intimacy, exercising social control and facilitating sen'ice (Patterson in
Robinson, 1994:36). Other functions of nonverbal communication are: expressing
emotion, communicating interpersonal attitudes, accompanying and supporting
speech, self presentation and rituals, for example: greetings and classroo

rituals

(Argyle in Robinson, 1994:24). Teacher communication can be intentional, for
example when directing students through a transition; it can also be unintentional
when treating students indifferently without meaning to do so. Thus, an effective
classroom interaction plays an important role in the English classrQOm. And
classroom interaction should be intensified in order that students can fully e
their ideas and thoughts in English.
Base on

e above explanations, this research is planned to provide an in-

depth analysis on the use of speech fun tions in classroom interaction.

4

1.2 The Problems of the Study
The problems of the study are formulated as follows.
(1) How are speech functions linguistically coded in the classroom interactions?
(2) What types of speech functions are used and how are speech functions

(3) Why are the speech functions realized in the ways they are?

1.3 The Objectives of the Study
In relation to the problems, the objectives of the study are
(1) to describe how the speech functions are linguistically coded in classroom
interaction,
(2) to investigate the types of speech functions are used in

classroom

interaction, to describe how the speech functions are patterned in classroom
interaction, and
(3) to investigate why the speech functions are realized in the ways they_...are.

1.4 The Scope of the study
Anal)'J:ing the process of classroom interaction is very interesting in a way
that a teacher must show his/her powerful talent in managing a classroom because

classroom management strategy. In conducting the teaching-learning process, a
teacher should be professional because slhe is not only a leader, but also a
facilitator, motivator, innovator, developer, initiator, and moderator.
5

This study deals with interpersonal functions of language in which it is
used to interact with other people. Specifically, this interpersonal functions
defines clause as an exchange, an interaction between speaker and listener. In this
study, the term speaker and listener specifically refer to the teacher-students,
students-teacher, and students-students in classroom · teractions of Grade X in
Senior High School 3 Medan.
The analysis is based on the four primary

statement, question, command, and offer. They are investtgated in their
realizations of mood.

The Significance of the Study
A study conducted on classroom interaction is very challenging in terms of
observing the dynamic process 'of communication and analyzing the activities of
the students in sharing their full participation in the teaching-learning pracess.lt is
intended to observe the practice of a two-way horizontal and vertical, to
and bottom up between teacher-students and students-teacher.
The fmdings are expected to be useful especially for teache_
s dents should be involved and students' participation is a prerequisite.
The

fin~gs

are expected to be useful as an input for the linguistic

findings would be useful for the English teachers, who are in charge of the
English teaching-learning process in the classroom. It is expected that the fmdings
of the study will contribute some bright ideas to teaching-learning process of
6

English in the classroom and thus there should be an extensive and intensive
interactions between teacher-students and students-teacher.

-z
?

m

7

CHAPTERV
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions
The. function of a language as an interpersonal means that language is used
to enable one to participate in communicative acts wifh another, to take on roles
and to express and understand feelings, attitudes, judgements and to exchange
their experience each other. This interpersonal function pours out
elements that participated in the interaction.
Based on the findings as presented in previous chapter, conclusions are
drawn as the following.
(1) Linguistically, speech functions in classroom are coded into the fonn of

Moods: declarative, elliptical declarative, interrogative, imperative, and
modulated interrogative, both in unmarked and marked structure . Tlie
moods used in giving response to types of speech function are declarative
and elliptical declarative mood.
(2) At lexicogrammar level the four speech functions in initiating are coded as
coded by declarative mood. question coded by
coded by

(3) In the proportion of speech functions used by teacher and students are:
calling & response to calling, greeting & response to greeting, exclamation

75

& response to exclamation, statement & acknowledge statement, question &

response statement to question, offer & acknowledge offer, and command &
response offer to command. The dominant speech functions used by them
are statement and questions. The most dominant types of speech function
used by teacher is question (27.91%), while the most dominant type of
speech function used by student is statement (46.21%). This happens
because both of teacher and students seek and
knowledge. Both of teacher and students play an important role in interaction
in classroom. In giving response to the speech functions used by teacher ·
classroom, teacher gave response to greeting, question, and comman

There

were not response to calling and exclamation because teacher did JlOt use
calling and exclamation in giving response to the speech functions used by
students in classroom, stUdents. gave response to greeting and question.
There were no response to calling, exclamation, and command.
students did not use calling, exclamation, and command.

76

5.2 Suggestions
In line with the fmdings, suggestions are staged as follows
(1) It is suggested that all elements of classroom (teacher and students) should

know the interpersonal coding in order to avoid misunderstanding with one
another in classroom interaction.

(2) All elements of classroom are suggested
~use

using speech functions enable speakers and listeners to express their
needs and messages and to give information clearly.

(3) It is worthy to suggesting to other researchers related with speech functions

field.

-z
?

m

77

REFERENCES

Argyle, M. 1988. Bodily Communication. In Robinson, H. A. 1994. The
Ethnography of Empowerment. The Transformative Power of Classroom
Interaction. The Palmer Press. Washington, D.C. London.
Beny, M 1981. SY.stemic lmguistics and Discourse Antilysis. Prentice-HalL New
York
Bloom, D and Stephanie Power Carter. 2005. Discourse -Analysis and The Study
of Classroom Language and Literacy Events. A Micro Etlinographic
Perspective. ew Jersey. London.
Bloor, T. ~ M. Bloor. 1995. The Functional Analysis of English.
A proach. Oxford University Press. London.
Bogdan, R.C & S. K. Bik.len. 1992. Qualitative Research for Educatio . An
Introduction to Theory and Methods. The 2nd Edition. Boston.
Cegale, D.J. 1981. An elaboration of the Meaning of Interaction Involvement.
New York: Moughton.
Coulthard, M. 1998. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. The 4th Impression.
London.
D~ple,

M; Ronald M. K; John. T. Maxwell. 1995. Formal Issues in LexicalFunctional Grammar. Stanford. California.

Denzin, N. K. 1978. The Research Act. In Sibarani, B. 2004. Qualitative Research
i Linguistics and Language Teaching. Medan: Graduate Pro
State
l9niversity ofMedan {unpublished).

Freire, P. 1910. The Pedagogy ofihe Oppressed. In Robinson, R A. 1994. The
Et1inogr-an.hJ o[_ Empowerment. The Transformative ower ofClassroom
Interaction. The eillner Press. Washington, D.C. London.
Gagnon, G. W & Michelle Collay. 2001. Designing for Learning. New York:
Academic Press.

78

Gee, J. P. 1999. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method.
London.
Green, K & Jill Le Bihan. 1996. Critical Theory and Practice: A Course Book.
Routhledge. New York.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1985. Introduction to Functional Grammar. London.
oro University Press. London.
Hornby. As. 2000. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary,. Oxford University
Press. London.
Lamy, M.N and Regina Hanpel. 2007. Online Communication in Language
Learning and Teaching. Palgrave Macmillan. New York.

Perangin-angin, S. 2006. Speech functions of men and women m 'Business
Transaction in the Tradition{ll Markets. Unpublished Master of
Humaniora Thesis. English Applied Linguistics Study Progra,m. Medan:
Post Graduate School, State University ofMedan.
Patterson, M.L. 1983. Non Verbal Behavior. In Robinson, H. A. 1994. ;rhe
Ethnography of Empowerment. The Transformative Power v.f:-Classr,oom
Interaction. The Palmer Press. Washington, D.C. London.

Piirba, L. 2008./nterpersonal Meanings: Speech Functions in