The English used by Indonesian teenagers in Facebook and Twitter texts.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
THE ENGLISH USED BY INDONESIAN TEENAGERS
IN FACEBOOK AND TWITTER TEXTS
AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra
in English Letters
By
REINALDO PRADIPTA
Student Number: 094214013
ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS
FACULTY OF LETTERS
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
2013
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
THE ENGLISH USED BY INDONESIAN TEENAGERS
IN FACEBOOK AND TWITTER TEXTS
AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra
in English Letters
By
REINALDO PRADIPTA
Student Number: 094214013
ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS
FACULTY OF LETTERS
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
2013
i
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
iii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY
I declare that the thesis I have written does not contain any works or parts of the
works of other people, except those cited in the quotations as any academic paper
should.
Yogyakarta, September 10, 2013
Reinaldo Pradipta
iv
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH
UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama
: Reinaldo Pradipta
Nomor Mahasiswa
: 094214013
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan
Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah yang berjudul:
THE ENGLISH USED BY INDONESIAN TEENAGERS
IN FACEBOOK AND TWITTER TEXTS
Beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan
kepada Perpustakaan Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam
bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikan
secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di internet atau media lain untuk
kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan
royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada tanggal : 10 September 2013
Yang Menyatakan
(Reinaldo Pradipta)
v
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
We must accept finite disappointment,
but never lose infinite hope.
(Martin Luther King Jr.)
vi
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
For my beloved family,
where life begins and love never
ends.
vii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deepest praise and gratitude to Jesus Christ for
His blessings, love, and protection which have been granted to me so that I am
able to make the best of this study.
My greatest thankfulness is for my advisor, Dr. Francis Borgias Alip,
M.Pd., M.A., for his patience and understanding of the difficulties, for all of the
guidance, encouragement and attention from the beginning until the end of this
research. My gratitude also goes to my co. advisor, Dra. B. Ria Lestari, M.S. for
her willingness and thoroughness in reading and correcting my thesis. Her advice
and suggestion enriched and completed this thesis.
A heart-felt gratitude goes to my beloved parents and sister, for their
unlimited love, prayers, and support. Without them, I will never be the way I am.
My special gratitude goes to my second family, X’orc; Anang, Aristya, Fani,
Ferry, Jenry, Laurent, Maria, Mikhael, Nike, Sherly, and Vero, who always cheer
me up and fill my days with so much excitements.
I also would like to express many thanks to all my friends in English
Letters 2008, 2009 and 2010 for giving me support, encouragement and prayers,
and other people who have helped completing this research, including those to
whom I used the statuses and tweets for conducting the research, whom I cannot
mention all by names. The love of family and the admiration of friends is much
more important than wealth and privilege.
Reinaldo Pradipta
viii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE …………………………………………………...…
APPROVAL PAGE …………………………………………….…
ACCEPTANCE PAGE ……………………………..…………….
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY …………………………...…
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PUBLIKASI ……………………..…
MOTTO PAGE ……………………………………………………
DEDICATION PAGE ………………………………………….…
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………………………………………
TABLE OF CONTENTS …………………………………………
ABSTRACT ………………………………………………….……
ABSTRAK……………………………………………………….…
i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
xi
xii
CHAPTER I:
INTRODUCTION ……………………....……
A. Background of the Study……………………………………
B. Problem Formulation …………………………………….…
C. Objectives of the Study …………………………………..…
D. Definition of Terms ……………………………………...…
1
1
2
3
3
CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL REVIEW………………..…
A. Review of Related Studies ……………………………….…
B. Review of Related Theories ………………………………...
1. Social Networking Services …………...…………………
2. Language Choice ………………………………...………
3. Code Switching ……………………...…………...………
4. Errors and Mistakes ………………………………...……
C. Theoretical Framework ……………………………..………
6
6
7
7
9
11
12
15
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ……………………………
A. Object of the Study…………………………………….……
B. Approach of the Study ………………………………………
C. Method of the Study…………………………………………
1. The Research Instrument ………………………...………
2. Data Collection Procedure ………………….……………
3. Data Analysis Procedure …………………………………
17
17
17
18
19
19
20
CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS RESULTS ……………….………
A. The Use of English in the Facebook’s Statuses and
Twitter’s Tweets Posted by Indonesian Teenagers …………
1. Language Choice …………………………………...……
2. Code Switching ……………………………………..……
22
ix
23
24
30
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
B. The Accuracy of the English in the Facebook’s Statuses
and Twitter’s Tweets Posted by Indonesian Teenagers ….…
1. The Analysis of the Facebook’s Statuses ……..…………
2. The Analysis of the Twitter’s Tweets ……………………
CHAPTER V:
34
35
38
CONCLUSION ……………………….………
43
BIBLIOGRAPHY …………………………………………………
45
APPENDIX …………………………….....…………………..……
48
x
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ABSTRACT
REINALDO PRADIPTA. The English Used by Indonesian Teenagers in
Facebook and Twitter Texts. Yogyakarta: Department of English Letters,
Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University, 2013.
These days, the development of technology and social network are really
huge and fast. Both of them have become really important on communication in
all over the world, including in Indonesia. Started from Friendster in a few years
ago, then continued with the other social networks called as Facebook and
Twitter. People communicate on Facebook and Twitter with many different
languages, depend on where they come from. Mostly, they use English. It is
because English is the first international language used and understood by people
from all over the world, including on those social networks. This phenomenon
interested the present researcher and provided the stimulus to undertake a research
on the use of English by the Indonesian teenagers in their Facebook and Twitter.
Based on the fact, the writer finds one basic problem about the language
use of the Indonesian Facebookers and Tweeps. That basic problem is further
divided into two questions: (1) the use of English in the Indonesian teenagers’
Facebook and Twitter, and (2) the grammatical errors in English postings found in
Facebook and Twitter.
In conducting the study, the writer used the stylistics approach to provide
the hard data in its findings. To reach the aim, the writer did some steps. First, the
writer collected the data. The data were the statuses using English taken from
Facebook and tweets using English taken from Twitter posted on January until
March 2013. After that, the writer categorized the data according to their patterns
and types. Then, the writer calculated the percentage of their occurance. After
that, the writer gave some examples of the statuses and tweets, followed by some
further explanation about them.
Based on the research analysis, followings were the answers to each
problem. First, it has been proven that the English in the social networking
services, Facebook and Twitter, can be identified as language choice and code
switching. The second is that there were still found some errors in the statuses or
tweets. From the total of 148 postings being analized, there are 81 postings which
are incorrect and it covers more than a half of the total posting itself. Therefore,
people should be more aware of this problem especially when they used the
language which they have not mastered well and properly.
xi
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ABSTRAK
REINALDO PRADIPTA. The English Used by Indonesian Teenagers in
Facebook and Twitter Texts. Yogyakarta: Jurusan Sastra Inggris, Universitas
Sanata Dharma, 2013.
Perkembangan teknologi dan jaringan sosial saat ini sangat besar dan
pesat. Keduanya telah menjadi bagian penting dalam hal komunikasi di seluruh
dunia, termasuk di Indonesia. Diawali dengan Friendster beberapa tahun yang
lalu, kemudian berkembang menjadi berbagai jaringan sosial lain diantaranya
Facebook dan Twitter. Orang-orang berkomunikasi di Facebook dan Twitter
dengan berbagai macam bahasa yang berbeda-beda, tergantung dari mana mereka
berasal. Sebagian besar, mereka menggunakan bahasa Inggris. Hal ini
dikarenakan bahasa Inggris merupakan bahasa internasional yang pertama kali
digunakan dan dipahami oleh orang-orang dari seluruh dunia, termasuk di situs
jaringan sosial. Fenomena ini menarik minat peneliti dan memberikan dorongan
untuk melakukan penelitian tentang penggunaan bahasa Inggris oleh remaja
Indonesia di Facebook dan Twitter.
Berdasarkan hal tersebut, penulis menemukan satu permasalahan utama
mengenai penggunaan bahasa oleh para pengguna Facebook dan Twitter dari
Indonesia. Permasalahan tersebut kemudian dipisahkan menjadi dua pertanyaan :
(1) Penggunaan bahasa Inggris pada Facebook dan Twitter para remaja Indonesia,
dan (2) Kesalahan tata bahasa dalam postingan berbahasa Inggris di Facebook dan
Twitter.
Dalam penyusunannya, penulis menggunakan pendekatan stilistika yang
bertujuan untuk menghasilkan temuan-temuan konkret. Penulis melakukan
beberapa langkah untuk mencapai tujuan tersebut. Pertama, penulis
mengumpulkan data-data yang akan digunakan. Data-data tersebut diambil dari
status berbahasa Inggris dari Facebook dan tweet berbahasa Inggris dari Twitter
yang dimuat pada Januari sampai Maret 2013. Setelah itu, penulis
mengelompokkan data sesuai dengan pola dan tipe mereka. Kemudian, penulis
menghitung persentasenya. Setelah itu, penulis memberikan beberapa contoh dari
status dan tweet, beserta beberapa penjelasan lebih lanjut tentang status dan tweet
tersebut.
Berdasarkan analisis penelitian, berikut adalah jawaban atas setiap
masalah. Pertama, telah terbukti bahwa bahasa Inggris di layanan jejaring sosial,
Facebook dan Twitter, dapat diidentifikasikan sebagai pemilihan bahasa dan
pengalihan kode. Yang kedua ialah masih ditemukan beberapa kesalahan dalam
penggunaan bahasa Inggris dalam status maupun tweet. Dari total 148 posting
yang dianalisis, terdapat 81 postingan yang salah dalam penggunaan bahasa
Inggris dan itu mencakup lebih dari setengah dari total postingan itu sendiri. Oleh
karena itu, masyarakat harus lebih peka terhadap permasalahan ini terlebih saat
mereka menggunakan bahasa yang belum mereka kuasai dengan baik dan benar.
xii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
In this modern era, both technology and social network are growing
rapidly. Technology helps people to get a practical way to communicate with their
relatives by using internet that can be opened from Smartphone, PC, laptop, tablet
PC, etc. Both of them have become really important on communication in all over
the world, included in Indonesia. Started from Friendster a few years ago, but it is
already deactivated right now, then continued with the others social network
called as Facebook and Twitter.
Twitter is an online social networking and a micro blogging service
which was created by Jack Dorsey, Evan Williams, and Biz Stone on 2006. It is
used by many people in all over the world, especially since it became really
famous nowadays, and it is going to become larger than before. Twitter is almost
similar to SMS (Short Messages Service) but it is online. Twitter is used mostly to
share anything, not only personal feeling, communication and conversation. It
also enables the users to share and exchange information or news, to sell or buy
something, to communicate with friends by mentioning their ID or sending a
message, to tell what they are doing, to tell what is in their minds, etc. Those
activities can also be called as ‘tweeting’. Twitter is called as ‘micro blogging’
because it has limited characters, only 140 characters length, to write on the blog.
Therefore, the users should tell their ideas briefly.
1
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
2
Actually, the concept of Facebook is almost similar to what Twitter had.
Both of them can chat and read both of the users’ statuses, picture, notes, etc.
However Facebook have much longer capacity in characters length for the status.
The users also can add other user as their friend and if the person approves the
friend request, they automatically will be friends. While on Twitter, it is not called
as ‘friends’ but ‘following-follower’.
People communicate on Facebook and Twitter with many different
languages; depend on where they come from. Mostly, they use English if they
want to have followers and friends from all over the world or they want to
communicate with their friends from a different country. It is because, as we
know, English is the first international language that is used and understood by
people from all over the world, including on Facebook and Twitter. However,
they also use their own language when they communicate with people from the
same country or nation. This phenomenon interested the writer and provided the
stimulus to undertake a research on the use of English among the Indonesian users
of Facebook and Twitter.
B. Problem Formulation
Based on the above background, the problems of the study are
formulated as follows:
1.
How is the English used in the Indonesian teenagers’ Facebook and Twitter?
2.
What are the grammatical errors in English postings found in Facebook and
Twitter?
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
3
C. Objectives of the Study
In accordance with the problems formulated above, this study has two
objectives. The first objective of this study is to observe the phenomenon of the
use of English in the social media sites, Facebook and Twitter. This will include
the form or the pattern of the English and also its classification according to the
circumstances and the type of it. The second is to find out about the accuracy of
the statuses and tweets posted in Facebook and Twitter.
D. Definition of Terms
In order to focus this research, the following terms will be defined as
follows:
1.
Language on the Internet
In general, the universal language on the Internet is English. English on
the internet is in the form of written English. Written English has some
characteristics that differ from spoken English. Written English consists of neat,
correct sentences because its sentence patterns are well organized and planned.
Grammar, including the structure of words, phrases, clauses, and sentences, and
punctuation also have an important role in it. People who use English as their
native language do not know how to spell difficult words, since they basically
know English as a spoken language. Thus, roughly speaking, the universal
language of the Internet is clumsy, coarse and misspelled "English"
(http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/lingua-franca.html, accessed on 14-02-2013).
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
2.
4
Facebook
Facebook is a social networking website intended to connect friends,
family, and business associates. Facebook was founded on 2004 by a Harvard
student, Mark Zuckerberg, and originally it was called as the facebook. Facebook
users create a profile page that shows their friends and networks information
about themselves. The choice to include a profile in a network means that
everyone within that network can view the profile. The profile typically includes
the following: information, status, friends, photos, notes, group, and the wall.
3.
Twitter
Twitter is a social networking and micro blogging service that allows you
to answer the question, "What are you doing?" by sending short text messages,
140 characters in length, called "tweets", to your friends or "followers". Tweeting
is also a less gated method of communication because you can share information
with people that you wouldn't normally exchange email or messages with
(http://tweeternet.com/, accessed on 29-08-2013). However, there is a great
flexibility when it comes to choose what is for public and what is not meant for
public by setting your tweet privacy. You can send a message to a certain friend
without others seeing the message, and you can as well share some information
with a section of friends.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
4.
5
Texts
Verdonk in his Stylistics proposes that “text is the observable product of
a writer’s or speaker’s discourse” (2002: 17). Texts can be literary or non-literary.
Non-literary composition uses facts and figures to proof a point so it is written
objectively. In contrast, literary texts are fictional compositions based on the
artist’s will and imaginations and they are subjective. Both kinds of text have
meaning, coherence, unity and social purpose (LERN, 1990).
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL REVIEW
A. Review of Related Studies
There are some studies which also discuss the use of English in some
medias, like news titles, labels, commentaries, etc.
The first one is conducted by Johan in 2008. Johan in his undergraduate
thesis entitled The Grammatical Errors of the English Written Commentaries
Found in Historical Sites in Jogjakarta and Central Java discussed about the
grammatical quality of the English written commentaries found in some historical
sites. In his conclusion, he said that,
English language is spoken anywhere in the world. It is a lingua franca
serving as the language which enables people from different languages to
communicate to each other. In Indonesia, many people have been
familiar with the language, but that does not mean that they do master the
language. (Johan, 2008:61)
The second study was done by Hammam Riza in 2006. She studied about
the Indonesian language diversity on the internet. She concluded that the digital
language divide does exist at serious level in the region, and the state of
multilingualism and the dominating presence of cross-border languages, English
in particular, are analyzed. From her survey as well, the diversity of Indonesian
official and local languages on the Internet is observed.
The third one is conducted by Wiwik Sushartami in 1996. Wiwik in her
undergraduate thesis entitled Language Choice in Child Bilingualism: A Case
Study of Two Bilingual Children discussed about the situation behind the use of
6
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
7
three languages by the bilingual children. She stated that the form and function of
a speech are not too influencing as it is rather a sequel of the participative or
situational consideration.
The study which is conducted by the writer this time is different from the
studies above. It is not the same as the study conducted by Johan in a way that it
used different object of study. He used the English written commentaries found in
some historical sites in Jogjakarta and Central Java. Meanwhile, the study
conducted by the writer focused on the use of English in the Indonesian Facebook
and Twitter.
It is also different from the study done by Hammam Riza and Wiwik
Sushartami because what Hammam Riza observed is about the digital web pages
while the writer observed only on the social networking services, Facebook and
Twitter. In Wiwik’s study, the language that she observed is the IndonesianJavanese language used by the Javanese people in the daily conversations.
Whereas, this study analyzed the English language used by the Indonesian
teenagers.
B. Review of Related Theories
1.
Social Networking Services
A social networking service is an online service, platform, or site that
focuses on facilitating the building of social networks or social relations among
people who, for example, share interests, activities, backgrounds, or real-life
connections. A social network service consists of a representation of each user
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
8
(often a profile), his/her social links, and a variety of additional services
(http://www.whatissocialnetworking.com/, accessed on 27/01/2013). Most social
network services are web-based and provide means for users to interact over the
Internet, such as e-mail and instant messaging. Social networking sites allow users
to share ideas, activities, events, and interests within their individual networks.
There are many kinds of social networking services, for example Friendster,
MySpace, Cyworld, Twitter, etc. For this research, it’s only focused on Facebook
and Twitter.
1.1 Facebook
Created in 2004, by 2007 Facebook was reported to have more than 21
million registered members generating 1.6 billion page views each day. The site is
tightly integrated into the daily media practices of its users: The typical user
spends about 20 minutes a day on the site, and two-thirds of users log in at least
once a day (Cassidy, 2006). Many people use it mostly for their own personal
reasons, like to reconnect with their long-lost friends. They are able to keep with
touch with people from their high school, university, previous work places, and
relatives.
1.2 Twitter
Twitter, founded by Jack Dorsey, Biz Stone, and Evan Williams in
March 2006 (launched publicly in July 2006), is a social networking and microblogging service that allows users to post updates 140 characters long. Twitter is a
real-time information network that connects users to the latest stories, ideas,
opinions, and news. Twitter is currently available in over 30 languages. Basically,
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
9
Facebook and Twitter are more or less the same. The difference is just the
limitation of the characters for the posting. In the Twitter, we can write at most
140 characters long while in Facebook, we can write as long as we want because
there’s no such limitation for the characters.
2. Language Choice
Language choice involves speech alternatives which shift according to
the situation, Ervin-Tripp proposes four main factors that account for change in
code variety. First, the setting (time and place) and the situation, the
circumstances in which the language isused; second, the participants in the
interaction: their age, sex, occupation, origin, ethnicity, and their role in relation
one to another; third the topic (work, sports, national events); and fourth, the
function of the interaction: request, offering information on interpretation,
routines, such as greetings, thanks, apologies, and so on (Grosjean, 1982:128).
a.
Situation
In some cases, the location of the interaction becomes the most important
variable to be considered in preceding language use. For example the report by
Schweda (1980) as quoted by Grosjean (1982: 138), shows that the inhabitants of
the St. John Valley cross the border between New Brunswick and Maine would
speak English at a party on the American side: French in Frenchvile, English in
Fort Kent, and both languages in Madawaska.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 10
The formality of the situation plays a role in language choice. Barker
(1975) as quoted by Grosjean (1982:139) reported, in economic and formal social
relations. English is widely used.
b. Participants
There are still many concerns related to this variable, first, the language
proficiency of the speaker and interlocutor. Sometimes a bilingual tends to use
one of his two languages more often because he feels that he is better in that
language. The degree of intimacy may also influence the use of language. How a
bilingual gets along with others will lead him to use the appropriate language.
c.
Topic
The content of discourse has been invoked as a factor in language choice.
Fishman, as quoted by Grosjean (1982:140), wrote that some topic are better
handled in one language than another, either because the other language lacks
specialized term for the topic, or because it would be considered strange or
inappropriate to discuss a topic in that language.
d. Function
Bilinguals do not just change the language to include monolinguals, they
also choose the language to exclude them. They use language among themselves
which they think the monolinguals do not understand. A bilingual usually chooses
language rapidly and automatically.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 11
3.
Code Switching
Kasperczyk (2005) in her article Implementing Code Switching in the
Classroom says that, code-switching is the swinging between two codes (both
languages and/or dialects), among people who share those two particular codes.
According to Gumperz (1982), code switching is the use of two
languages together alternating in one conversation or speech. On the other hand,
Myers-Scotton (1993) added that code switching can involve more than two
languages.
Even there are so many arguments about the definition of code switching,
all of the sociolinguistics experts agree in one condition of code switching, that is,
the alternation of two codes in one conversation between two or more persons
who mastered more than one language or at least the variety of the language itself.
3.1 Types of Code Switching
Stockwell (2002: 33) states three types of code switching. They are:
a.
Tag-switching
The other term for tag-switching is emblematic code switching. This type
of code switching only switches an interjection, a tag, or sentence filler in the
utterances of the interlocutors. For some occasions, it is used to identify the
identity of the speaker. Poplack (1978) as cited by Wei (2000) also adds that tags
are component of content words which may be inserted almost anywhere within
the sentence without violating any grammatical rule. The examples of tagswitching can be seen below.
i.
By the way, tumben pramugari lion hari ini cantik.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 12
Well, kita tunggu saja hasil akhirnya.
ii.
b.
Intersentential switch
This type of code switching occurs between sentences made by the
interlocutors. The topic of the conversation may be switch by pause employed by
one of the interlocutor. The examples of intersentential switch can be seen below.
c.
i.
Giggs tidak ada dalam skuat malam ini. 1000 will have to wait.
ii.
Pasti kangen lah. No Doubt! Yang dikangenin juga cuma kamu.
Intrasentential switch
This type of code switching occurs within sentences. The form of code
switching can be in the form of a single word, a phrase, or a clause. Below are the
examples of intrasentential code switch:
4.
i.
Saya tadi dapat free egg muffins di sana.
ii.
Berdasarkan fans report, Tsukapon 2L sudah habis terjual.
iii.
Dia akan datang when the time has come.
Errors and Mistakes
Error is a systematic deviation due to learner’s still developing
knowledge of the second language rule system (Dulay et al, 1982:139). Therefore,
it is not a performance error that is either a random guess or a slip, it is
competence.
Therefore, errors, as Norrish (1983:7-8) notes, are caused by the learners’
incompetence in processing the knowledge in the second language rule systems.
These errors are due to the limited competence of the learners in the rule system
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 13
of the language they are learning. As a consequence, they are not ready to correct
their errors, or they may not aware of making errors. This limited competence is
caused by their knowledge that is still developing. On the other hand, mistakes are
errors in performance that are either a random guess or slip. They refer to a failure
in utilizing a known system correctly (Brown, 1987:170).
4.1 Classification of Errors
Dulay et al base language errors on linguistic category which consists of
errors in the area of article, verb, noun, pronoun, preposition, sentence connector,
lexical error, word order, and genitive (Dulay et al, 1982:146) .
Below are the types of errors based on linguistic category taxonomy.
a.
Errors in Article
Errors in article include incorrect use of both definite and indefinite
articles, and the omission of the article. The example of incorrect use of article is
like the use of the indefinite article an after a consonant. For example *an brush
instead of a brush.
b.
Errors in Verb
Errors in verb phrase include omission of verb, incorrect use of
progressive tense, incorrect verb forms for subjects and sentence context, presence
of unnecessary verbs, and also incorrect agreement of subject and verb. Omission
of verb covers two parts which are, omission of main verb; She (eats) banana,
and omission of to be; I hungry.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 14
Incorrect use of progressive tense consists of omission of to be; you
looking, replacement of –ing by the simple verb form; the girl is walk around,
and substitution of the progressive for the simple past; the baby crying loudly.
The last type of error in verb phrase is disagreement between subject and
verb person; you is rich, between subject and number; the woman are smoking,
and between subject and tense; He did not know what he does.
c.
Errors in Pronoun
Errors in pronoun are omission of the subject pronoun; (you) broke the
glass, omission of object pronouns; We will not give (it) to you, and the use of
pronoun as a redundant element; My sister she eat some porridge.
d.
Errors in Nouns
Errors in nouns include substitution of singular for regular; I found some
stone, substitution of prulars to singulars; she stabbed him in the feet, incorrect
form of noun used in a sentence; make a triangular, addition of unnecessary
nouns; Prambanan temple building complex is under construction, and omission
of nouns in a sentence; he is not a smart or famous (person).
e.
Lexical Errors
Lexical errors are errors in vocabularies. It refers to the incorrect word
choices. For example, she looked at the news on TV, instead of she watched or
she saw the news on TV?
f.
Errors in Sentence Connector
Error in sentence connector refers to the incorrect use of a sentence
connector and ommision of it in a sentence requiring it to connect its clauses. The
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 15
appearance of a sentence connector is quite vital since it can avoid awkwardness.
Here is an example of an incorrect use of a sentence connector; He shouts and he
is angry. And is not the right choice since it does not show why he shouts.
Therefore, it should be replaced by because since it shows the reason why he
shouts.
g.
Errors in Word Order
Error in word order is the incorrect arrangement of words to construct a
noun phrase, verb phrase, and etc. For example; Hard trying. The construction of
verb phrase is not correct. The adjective hard should be placed after the main verb
trying since it is a postmodifier. Therefore, the arrangement of the correct verb
phrase is Trying hard.
h.
Errors in Genitive
It refers to the incorrect use of the genitive. For example, Richards shoes
instead of Richard’s shoes. In another words, it refers to the omission of ‘s.
i.
Errors in Prepositions
Errors in preposition refer to errors in use of prepositions as well as
omission of prepositions; she bought some clothes a factory outlite instead of she
bought some clothes in a factory outlite.
C. Theoretical Framework
In order to answer the questions in the problem formulation theoretically,
the writer employs some theories which have already mentioned above to be a
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 16
basis or foundation of the analysis. Therefore, this section will explain the
contribution of the theories which have already mentioned above.
The researcher employs a theory of circumstances of language choice,
which are situation, participant, topic, and function, proposed by Ervin-Tripp and
a theory of types of code switching, which are tag-switching, intrasentential
switch, and intersentential switch, from Stockwell (2002) in order to answer the
first problem formulation. Those theories will be a basis to reveal the first
problem formulation which is used to analyze the form or pattern, the type, and
the circumstance of the English occurs in Facebook and Twitter, particularly those
Facebook and Twitter users whose pages contain the data targeted. Those theories
are selected because the researcher finds it easy to comprehend and those are
sufficient enough as the tools to answer the first problem formulation.
To answer the second problem which is to determine the grammatical
errors in the data, the theory of errors and the classification of errors based on
their linguistics category as proposed by Dulay (1982). Those theories are very
important since it gives the clear explanation of errors and the types of
grammatical errors. Using Dulay’s theories, it will be such a help to analyze the
data scientifically and decide what kind of grammatical errors occur in the data.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter will discuss the research method and research procedure taken on
this study. The discussion will be divided into: the object of the study, the
approach of the study, and the method of the study.
a) Object of the Study
The data for the present research is the English found in Facebook status
and Twitter tweet posted on January until March 2013. The status and tweet
include the words, phrases, clauses, and sentences. The tweet in the Twitter only
consists of 140 characters while the status in the Facebook can consist as many
characters to be written. There are approximately 71 Facebook statuses and 77
Twitter tweets which will be analyzed.
Generally, the research is aimed to analyze the nature of the English used
by the Indonesian teenagers on their Facebook and Twitter. The analysis will also
reveal the most frequent error and the present writer will try to correct the errors.
b) Approach of the Study
In analyzing the data, the present writer would use stylistic approach.
Verdonk in his Stylistics proposes that “stylistics is the analysis of distinctive
expression in language and the description of its purpose and effect” (2002: 4).
Stylistics studies the style in language. Style in language is a set of conscious or
unconscious choices of expression, inspired or induced by particular context
17
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 18
(2002: 121). Peter Barry in his book entitled Beginning Theory also said that
“stylistics is a critical approach which uses the methods and findings of the
sciences of linguistics in the analysis of literary texts” (Barry, 2002: 203).
The texts analyzed in this study are not the literary one, which are
statuses in Facebook and tweets in Twitter. Stylistic analysis of a non-literary text
for instance means studying in detail a passage. The method of analysis can be
seen as looking at the text in great detail, observing what the parts are, and saying
what
they
perform
in
the
context
of
the
passage
(http://www.mantex.co.uk/2009/09/13/english-language-stylistic-analysis/). The goal is
to achieve the hard data through counting and calculating the occurence of
linguistic feature found.
Although the theories used for this research are taken from
sociolinguistics field (language choice and code switching), the sociolinguistics
approach isn’t suitable to be applied in this study because sociolinguistics is the
descriptive study of the effect of any and all aspects of society, including cultural
norms, expectations, and context, on the way language is used, and the effects of
language use on society (Trudgill, 2000). Therefore, the stylistic approach is
considered the most suitable approach to use in this study.
c) Method of the Study
This part consists of three parts, the research instrument, the data
collection procedure, and data analysis procedure.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 19
1.
The Research Instrument
There were two research instruments used while gathering the data, a
checklist and table. There were two kinds of checklists used in the analysis. The
first checklist was used to indicate the circumstance of those statuses and tweet
according to the theories that the writer stated before. The other checklist helped
the writer to investigate what grammatical errors occur in each incorrect posting
in each data.
Tables were used to show how many correct and incorrect postings along
with their percentages. Then they were used to show what the grammatical errors
occur in each and entire datum are, along with their numbers and percentages. The
tables were also applied to show the most frequent circumstance of the use of
English in the social networking services, Facebook and Twitter along with the
percentages in each and finally in the entire datum.
2.
Data Collection Procedure
The present research is a descriptive and qualitative research. The
qualitative data were the English postings taken from Facebook and Twitter. The
English postings act as the primary data meaning “the original documents or
remains, the first witnesses to a fact” (Good, 1941:253). According to Sprinthall,
Schmutte and Sirois (1991: 98), a descriptive research is a research trying to
describe objectively the states or characteristics of the phenomena better. In this
research, the phenomena refer to the use of English in the Facebook and Twitter.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 20
The data were taken in different time through photographing in order to
get an accurate data. Then, the writer
transcribed the data without adding,
reducing, or interpreting it in order to keep the primary data original.
3.
Data Analysis Procedure
First of all, the writer collected the data, which are the English statuses
and tweets from Facebook and Twitter, posted by the Indonesian teenagers on
January 2013 until March 2013. After the data have been gathered and
transcribed, the analysis could be started. Since the data were taken from different
sources, in this case from Facebook and Twitter, the analysis was done for two
times but with similar steps. There were several steps taken in conducting each
analysis.
The data analyzed were the English statuses taken from the Facebook and
posted by the Indonesian teenagers. Here the writer classified them into some
catagories to indicate under what circumstances English was used in the statuses.
To identify the circumstances, the writer used the theory of language
choice and the theory of code switching. Based on the description of the factors
that account for change in code variety proposed by Ervin-Tripp, the writer took
one of the data and analyzed carefully the pattern of the posting then put it on the
most suitable factor. The writer conducted the same steps for the rest of the data to
identify the circumstances.
After the circumstances were identified, the second step began. The
writer calculated the circumstances according to the frequency of the use of
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 21
English occured mostly in the Facebook’s statuses posted by the Indonesian
teenagers. The result is written in the form of percentages to make it easier to
understand.
After finishing the second step, the third step began. The data were
examined to find out how many and which one of them is correct or incorrect.
Here the writer determined the number of correct or incorrect statuses along with
their amounts. The writer also marked and tried to correct the incorrect statuses.
To determine the correct and the incorrect statuses, the writer used the
theory of error and mistakes based on their linguistic category as proposed by
Dulay (1982). Based the short description of the theory, the writer could identify
the data correctly and also categorize the data specifically. The writer also
conducted the same steps for the other data, Twitter’s tweets. After the data have
been analyzed in detail, the writer tried to draw a conclusion based on the answers
of the problems in the research.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS RESULTS
This chapter is divided into three parts. The first part is about the
explanation about the data that are going to be used for this research. The second
part is meant to answer the first problem which is identifying the use of English
within the Facebook and Twitter’s posting. While, the last part acts as the answer
to the second problem which is to reveal the grammatical accuracy of the data.
The primary data of this study are the postings containing English in the
Facebook and Twitter posted by the Indonesian teenagers in the period of January
2013 until March 2013. There are total 148 postings collected, with the following
details: 71 out of 148 were taken from Facebook and the rest, 77, were taken from
Twitter and each posting was obtained from different users. From 148 users, there
are 67 male users and 81 female users.
Most of those postings were written short, no more than 250 characters
and there are only for about 18 postings that contain more than that and those are
only from Facebook. It is simply because when you want to write something in
Twitter, it is limited only for 140 characters. However in Facebook, you can write
anything you want, as long as you want without any limitation like what we have
in Twitter.
22
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 23
A. The Use of English in the Facebook’s Statuses and Twitter’s Tweets
Posted by Indonesian Teenagers
As stated beforehand, there are total 148 postings being analyzed. Based
on the use of the English and its pattern, those postings can be identified into 2
types: language choice and code switching. Below are some examples of the
identification, for complete list of the identification, see the Appendix.
A posting can be said as language choice if the speakers choose what
language to use in diverse social situations. Here is an example of language choice
from the postings.
Example 1. Language Choice in Facebook’s status
While to be considered as code switching, a posting must contains the
use of words and structures from more than one language or linguistic variety by
the same speaker within the same speech situation, conversation or utterance.
Here is an example of code switching from the postings.
Example 2. Code Switching in Twitter’s tweet
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 24
Thus, it can be concluded that from the total of 148 existing data, 92 of the data
are considered as language choice and 56 of the data are considered as code
switching.
After completing the categorization of the existing data, two theories will
be used to identify the use of English in the data. The first one is about the
circumstances that account for change in code variety. There are four main
circumstances proposed by Ervin-Tripp and they are the setting (time and place)
and the situation, the participants in the interaction, the topic, and the function of
the interaction. The second one is about the types of code switching occured in
the postings. Stockwell (2002: 33) states three types of code switching, they are
tag-switching,
intersentential
switch,
and
intrasentential
switch.
The
implementation and explanation of those theories could be seen in the discussion
below.
1.
Language Choice
Bilingual speakers, just like monolinguals, choose among diverse
varieties of a language. When they speak to other bilinguals, they have an access
to two languages. While monolinguals can only switch from one variety to
another within one language (e.g., colloquial to formal), bilinguals may choose
among varieties within one language, switch between different languages, or do
both (Grosjean, 1982: 128).
According to Ervin-Tripp, there are four factors that account for change
in code variety. The four factors and the examples from Facebook and Twitter users’
pages were as follows:
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 25
a.
Situation
Grosjean (1982:139) stated that the setting (time and place) and the
situation, the circumstances in which the language is used, of the
interaction can be an important variable to be considered in preceding the
use of a language. Below are some examples both from Facebook and
Twitter:
F045.
F059.
T026.
In the examples above, it clearly shows that it is not only the
physical situation (time & place) that influence the choice of a language
but also the emotional situation. In the examples no F045 and F059,
Facebook users were using the English language because of the formal
situation that they had at that time. The situation in the example no F045
is about selling a blouse and the example no F059 is about a job vacancy.
When there is a formal situation like that, a formal language is more
preferable to be used because it can be more attractive and it also can
cover a wider scope in order to get more prospective buyers.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 26
Not only the physical situation that influence the choice of a
language, but also the emotional situation can have a role in it. Just like
the example no T026 that shows the user’s feeling about her belief.
English is often used to express feeling because English has diverse
vocabularies that can be a help to express a feeling or a thought better.
b.
Participants
A bilingual tends to use one of his two languages more often because
he feels that he is better in that language. The degree of intimacy may
also influence the use of language.
F020.
F042.
T008.
In order to recognize the participant in the social media like
Facebook and Twitter, there are some hints about it. First of all and the
most significant one is a tag of other user’s name in Facebook or a
mention which is symbolized with “@” in Twitter. It can be seen in the
example no F020 and T008. There are several reasons why some users
switch their language, from Indonesian into English, one of them is
because the person they are communicating with or the addressee is a
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 27
foreigner. Therefore, the conversation will be more easily understood by
the addressee if the language used is the global language that is
understood by many people, just like the addressee in example no T008,
meyitha, who is a foreigner.
Another feature that indicates the involvement of the participant or
the addressee is the use of the word “you”. Although there is no specific
name of the addressee that is mentioned in the status or tweet, the word
“you” already refers to a particular person that the user intended to talk
to. Like the example in no T042, the user greeted someone in his tweet
but he didn�
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
THE ENGLISH USED BY INDONESIAN TEENAGERS
IN FACEBOOK AND TWITTER TEXTS
AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra
in English Letters
By
REINALDO PRADIPTA
Student Number: 094214013
ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS
FACULTY OF LETTERS
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
2013
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
THE ENGLISH USED BY INDONESIAN TEENAGERS
IN FACEBOOK AND TWITTER TEXTS
AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra
in English Letters
By
REINALDO PRADIPTA
Student Number: 094214013
ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS
FACULTY OF LETTERS
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
2013
i
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
iii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY
I declare that the thesis I have written does not contain any works or parts of the
works of other people, except those cited in the quotations as any academic paper
should.
Yogyakarta, September 10, 2013
Reinaldo Pradipta
iv
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH
UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama
: Reinaldo Pradipta
Nomor Mahasiswa
: 094214013
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan
Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah yang berjudul:
THE ENGLISH USED BY INDONESIAN TEENAGERS
IN FACEBOOK AND TWITTER TEXTS
Beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan
kepada Perpustakaan Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam
bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikan
secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di internet atau media lain untuk
kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan
royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada tanggal : 10 September 2013
Yang Menyatakan
(Reinaldo Pradipta)
v
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
We must accept finite disappointment,
but never lose infinite hope.
(Martin Luther King Jr.)
vi
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
For my beloved family,
where life begins and love never
ends.
vii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deepest praise and gratitude to Jesus Christ for
His blessings, love, and protection which have been granted to me so that I am
able to make the best of this study.
My greatest thankfulness is for my advisor, Dr. Francis Borgias Alip,
M.Pd., M.A., for his patience and understanding of the difficulties, for all of the
guidance, encouragement and attention from the beginning until the end of this
research. My gratitude also goes to my co. advisor, Dra. B. Ria Lestari, M.S. for
her willingness and thoroughness in reading and correcting my thesis. Her advice
and suggestion enriched and completed this thesis.
A heart-felt gratitude goes to my beloved parents and sister, for their
unlimited love, prayers, and support. Without them, I will never be the way I am.
My special gratitude goes to my second family, X’orc; Anang, Aristya, Fani,
Ferry, Jenry, Laurent, Maria, Mikhael, Nike, Sherly, and Vero, who always cheer
me up and fill my days with so much excitements.
I also would like to express many thanks to all my friends in English
Letters 2008, 2009 and 2010 for giving me support, encouragement and prayers,
and other people who have helped completing this research, including those to
whom I used the statuses and tweets for conducting the research, whom I cannot
mention all by names. The love of family and the admiration of friends is much
more important than wealth and privilege.
Reinaldo Pradipta
viii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE …………………………………………………...…
APPROVAL PAGE …………………………………………….…
ACCEPTANCE PAGE ……………………………..…………….
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY …………………………...…
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PUBLIKASI ……………………..…
MOTTO PAGE ……………………………………………………
DEDICATION PAGE ………………………………………….…
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………………………………………
TABLE OF CONTENTS …………………………………………
ABSTRACT ………………………………………………….……
ABSTRAK……………………………………………………….…
i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
xi
xii
CHAPTER I:
INTRODUCTION ……………………....……
A. Background of the Study……………………………………
B. Problem Formulation …………………………………….…
C. Objectives of the Study …………………………………..…
D. Definition of Terms ……………………………………...…
1
1
2
3
3
CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL REVIEW………………..…
A. Review of Related Studies ……………………………….…
B. Review of Related Theories ………………………………...
1. Social Networking Services …………...…………………
2. Language Choice ………………………………...………
3. Code Switching ……………………...…………...………
4. Errors and Mistakes ………………………………...……
C. Theoretical Framework ……………………………..………
6
6
7
7
9
11
12
15
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ……………………………
A. Object of the Study…………………………………….……
B. Approach of the Study ………………………………………
C. Method of the Study…………………………………………
1. The Research Instrument ………………………...………
2. Data Collection Procedure ………………….……………
3. Data Analysis Procedure …………………………………
17
17
17
18
19
19
20
CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS RESULTS ……………….………
A. The Use of English in the Facebook’s Statuses and
Twitter’s Tweets Posted by Indonesian Teenagers …………
1. Language Choice …………………………………...……
2. Code Switching ……………………………………..……
22
ix
23
24
30
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
B. The Accuracy of the English in the Facebook’s Statuses
and Twitter’s Tweets Posted by Indonesian Teenagers ….…
1. The Analysis of the Facebook’s Statuses ……..…………
2. The Analysis of the Twitter’s Tweets ……………………
CHAPTER V:
34
35
38
CONCLUSION ……………………….………
43
BIBLIOGRAPHY …………………………………………………
45
APPENDIX …………………………….....…………………..……
48
x
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ABSTRACT
REINALDO PRADIPTA. The English Used by Indonesian Teenagers in
Facebook and Twitter Texts. Yogyakarta: Department of English Letters,
Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University, 2013.
These days, the development of technology and social network are really
huge and fast. Both of them have become really important on communication in
all over the world, including in Indonesia. Started from Friendster in a few years
ago, then continued with the other social networks called as Facebook and
Twitter. People communicate on Facebook and Twitter with many different
languages, depend on where they come from. Mostly, they use English. It is
because English is the first international language used and understood by people
from all over the world, including on those social networks. This phenomenon
interested the present researcher and provided the stimulus to undertake a research
on the use of English by the Indonesian teenagers in their Facebook and Twitter.
Based on the fact, the writer finds one basic problem about the language
use of the Indonesian Facebookers and Tweeps. That basic problem is further
divided into two questions: (1) the use of English in the Indonesian teenagers’
Facebook and Twitter, and (2) the grammatical errors in English postings found in
Facebook and Twitter.
In conducting the study, the writer used the stylistics approach to provide
the hard data in its findings. To reach the aim, the writer did some steps. First, the
writer collected the data. The data were the statuses using English taken from
Facebook and tweets using English taken from Twitter posted on January until
March 2013. After that, the writer categorized the data according to their patterns
and types. Then, the writer calculated the percentage of their occurance. After
that, the writer gave some examples of the statuses and tweets, followed by some
further explanation about them.
Based on the research analysis, followings were the answers to each
problem. First, it has been proven that the English in the social networking
services, Facebook and Twitter, can be identified as language choice and code
switching. The second is that there were still found some errors in the statuses or
tweets. From the total of 148 postings being analized, there are 81 postings which
are incorrect and it covers more than a half of the total posting itself. Therefore,
people should be more aware of this problem especially when they used the
language which they have not mastered well and properly.
xi
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
ABSTRAK
REINALDO PRADIPTA. The English Used by Indonesian Teenagers in
Facebook and Twitter Texts. Yogyakarta: Jurusan Sastra Inggris, Universitas
Sanata Dharma, 2013.
Perkembangan teknologi dan jaringan sosial saat ini sangat besar dan
pesat. Keduanya telah menjadi bagian penting dalam hal komunikasi di seluruh
dunia, termasuk di Indonesia. Diawali dengan Friendster beberapa tahun yang
lalu, kemudian berkembang menjadi berbagai jaringan sosial lain diantaranya
Facebook dan Twitter. Orang-orang berkomunikasi di Facebook dan Twitter
dengan berbagai macam bahasa yang berbeda-beda, tergantung dari mana mereka
berasal. Sebagian besar, mereka menggunakan bahasa Inggris. Hal ini
dikarenakan bahasa Inggris merupakan bahasa internasional yang pertama kali
digunakan dan dipahami oleh orang-orang dari seluruh dunia, termasuk di situs
jaringan sosial. Fenomena ini menarik minat peneliti dan memberikan dorongan
untuk melakukan penelitian tentang penggunaan bahasa Inggris oleh remaja
Indonesia di Facebook dan Twitter.
Berdasarkan hal tersebut, penulis menemukan satu permasalahan utama
mengenai penggunaan bahasa oleh para pengguna Facebook dan Twitter dari
Indonesia. Permasalahan tersebut kemudian dipisahkan menjadi dua pertanyaan :
(1) Penggunaan bahasa Inggris pada Facebook dan Twitter para remaja Indonesia,
dan (2) Kesalahan tata bahasa dalam postingan berbahasa Inggris di Facebook dan
Twitter.
Dalam penyusunannya, penulis menggunakan pendekatan stilistika yang
bertujuan untuk menghasilkan temuan-temuan konkret. Penulis melakukan
beberapa langkah untuk mencapai tujuan tersebut. Pertama, penulis
mengumpulkan data-data yang akan digunakan. Data-data tersebut diambil dari
status berbahasa Inggris dari Facebook dan tweet berbahasa Inggris dari Twitter
yang dimuat pada Januari sampai Maret 2013. Setelah itu, penulis
mengelompokkan data sesuai dengan pola dan tipe mereka. Kemudian, penulis
menghitung persentasenya. Setelah itu, penulis memberikan beberapa contoh dari
status dan tweet, beserta beberapa penjelasan lebih lanjut tentang status dan tweet
tersebut.
Berdasarkan analisis penelitian, berikut adalah jawaban atas setiap
masalah. Pertama, telah terbukti bahwa bahasa Inggris di layanan jejaring sosial,
Facebook dan Twitter, dapat diidentifikasikan sebagai pemilihan bahasa dan
pengalihan kode. Yang kedua ialah masih ditemukan beberapa kesalahan dalam
penggunaan bahasa Inggris dalam status maupun tweet. Dari total 148 posting
yang dianalisis, terdapat 81 postingan yang salah dalam penggunaan bahasa
Inggris dan itu mencakup lebih dari setengah dari total postingan itu sendiri. Oleh
karena itu, masyarakat harus lebih peka terhadap permasalahan ini terlebih saat
mereka menggunakan bahasa yang belum mereka kuasai dengan baik dan benar.
xii
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
In this modern era, both technology and social network are growing
rapidly. Technology helps people to get a practical way to communicate with their
relatives by using internet that can be opened from Smartphone, PC, laptop, tablet
PC, etc. Both of them have become really important on communication in all over
the world, included in Indonesia. Started from Friendster a few years ago, but it is
already deactivated right now, then continued with the others social network
called as Facebook and Twitter.
Twitter is an online social networking and a micro blogging service
which was created by Jack Dorsey, Evan Williams, and Biz Stone on 2006. It is
used by many people in all over the world, especially since it became really
famous nowadays, and it is going to become larger than before. Twitter is almost
similar to SMS (Short Messages Service) but it is online. Twitter is used mostly to
share anything, not only personal feeling, communication and conversation. It
also enables the users to share and exchange information or news, to sell or buy
something, to communicate with friends by mentioning their ID or sending a
message, to tell what they are doing, to tell what is in their minds, etc. Those
activities can also be called as ‘tweeting’. Twitter is called as ‘micro blogging’
because it has limited characters, only 140 characters length, to write on the blog.
Therefore, the users should tell their ideas briefly.
1
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
2
Actually, the concept of Facebook is almost similar to what Twitter had.
Both of them can chat and read both of the users’ statuses, picture, notes, etc.
However Facebook have much longer capacity in characters length for the status.
The users also can add other user as their friend and if the person approves the
friend request, they automatically will be friends. While on Twitter, it is not called
as ‘friends’ but ‘following-follower’.
People communicate on Facebook and Twitter with many different
languages; depend on where they come from. Mostly, they use English if they
want to have followers and friends from all over the world or they want to
communicate with their friends from a different country. It is because, as we
know, English is the first international language that is used and understood by
people from all over the world, including on Facebook and Twitter. However,
they also use their own language when they communicate with people from the
same country or nation. This phenomenon interested the writer and provided the
stimulus to undertake a research on the use of English among the Indonesian users
of Facebook and Twitter.
B. Problem Formulation
Based on the above background, the problems of the study are
formulated as follows:
1.
How is the English used in the Indonesian teenagers’ Facebook and Twitter?
2.
What are the grammatical errors in English postings found in Facebook and
Twitter?
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
3
C. Objectives of the Study
In accordance with the problems formulated above, this study has two
objectives. The first objective of this study is to observe the phenomenon of the
use of English in the social media sites, Facebook and Twitter. This will include
the form or the pattern of the English and also its classification according to the
circumstances and the type of it. The second is to find out about the accuracy of
the statuses and tweets posted in Facebook and Twitter.
D. Definition of Terms
In order to focus this research, the following terms will be defined as
follows:
1.
Language on the Internet
In general, the universal language on the Internet is English. English on
the internet is in the form of written English. Written English has some
characteristics that differ from spoken English. Written English consists of neat,
correct sentences because its sentence patterns are well organized and planned.
Grammar, including the structure of words, phrases, clauses, and sentences, and
punctuation also have an important role in it. People who use English as their
native language do not know how to spell difficult words, since they basically
know English as a spoken language. Thus, roughly speaking, the universal
language of the Internet is clumsy, coarse and misspelled "English"
(http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/lingua-franca.html, accessed on 14-02-2013).
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
2.
4
Facebook is a social networking website intended to connect friends,
family, and business associates. Facebook was founded on 2004 by a Harvard
student, Mark Zuckerberg, and originally it was called as the facebook. Facebook
users create a profile page that shows their friends and networks information
about themselves. The choice to include a profile in a network means that
everyone within that network can view the profile. The profile typically includes
the following: information, status, friends, photos, notes, group, and the wall.
3.
Twitter is a social networking and micro blogging service that allows you
to answer the question, "What are you doing?" by sending short text messages,
140 characters in length, called "tweets", to your friends or "followers". Tweeting
is also a less gated method of communication because you can share information
with people that you wouldn't normally exchange email or messages with
(http://tweeternet.com/, accessed on 29-08-2013). However, there is a great
flexibility when it comes to choose what is for public and what is not meant for
public by setting your tweet privacy. You can send a message to a certain friend
without others seeing the message, and you can as well share some information
with a section of friends.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
4.
5
Texts
Verdonk in his Stylistics proposes that “text is the observable product of
a writer’s or speaker’s discourse” (2002: 17). Texts can be literary or non-literary.
Non-literary composition uses facts and figures to proof a point so it is written
objectively. In contrast, literary texts are fictional compositions based on the
artist’s will and imaginations and they are subjective. Both kinds of text have
meaning, coherence, unity and social purpose (LERN, 1990).
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL REVIEW
A. Review of Related Studies
There are some studies which also discuss the use of English in some
medias, like news titles, labels, commentaries, etc.
The first one is conducted by Johan in 2008. Johan in his undergraduate
thesis entitled The Grammatical Errors of the English Written Commentaries
Found in Historical Sites in Jogjakarta and Central Java discussed about the
grammatical quality of the English written commentaries found in some historical
sites. In his conclusion, he said that,
English language is spoken anywhere in the world. It is a lingua franca
serving as the language which enables people from different languages to
communicate to each other. In Indonesia, many people have been
familiar with the language, but that does not mean that they do master the
language. (Johan, 2008:61)
The second study was done by Hammam Riza in 2006. She studied about
the Indonesian language diversity on the internet. She concluded that the digital
language divide does exist at serious level in the region, and the state of
multilingualism and the dominating presence of cross-border languages, English
in particular, are analyzed. From her survey as well, the diversity of Indonesian
official and local languages on the Internet is observed.
The third one is conducted by Wiwik Sushartami in 1996. Wiwik in her
undergraduate thesis entitled Language Choice in Child Bilingualism: A Case
Study of Two Bilingual Children discussed about the situation behind the use of
6
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
7
three languages by the bilingual children. She stated that the form and function of
a speech are not too influencing as it is rather a sequel of the participative or
situational consideration.
The study which is conducted by the writer this time is different from the
studies above. It is not the same as the study conducted by Johan in a way that it
used different object of study. He used the English written commentaries found in
some historical sites in Jogjakarta and Central Java. Meanwhile, the study
conducted by the writer focused on the use of English in the Indonesian Facebook
and Twitter.
It is also different from the study done by Hammam Riza and Wiwik
Sushartami because what Hammam Riza observed is about the digital web pages
while the writer observed only on the social networking services, Facebook and
Twitter. In Wiwik’s study, the language that she observed is the IndonesianJavanese language used by the Javanese people in the daily conversations.
Whereas, this study analyzed the English language used by the Indonesian
teenagers.
B. Review of Related Theories
1.
Social Networking Services
A social networking service is an online service, platform, or site that
focuses on facilitating the building of social networks or social relations among
people who, for example, share interests, activities, backgrounds, or real-life
connections. A social network service consists of a representation of each user
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
8
(often a profile), his/her social links, and a variety of additional services
(http://www.whatissocialnetworking.com/, accessed on 27/01/2013). Most social
network services are web-based and provide means for users to interact over the
Internet, such as e-mail and instant messaging. Social networking sites allow users
to share ideas, activities, events, and interests within their individual networks.
There are many kinds of social networking services, for example Friendster,
MySpace, Cyworld, Twitter, etc. For this research, it’s only focused on Facebook
and Twitter.
1.1 Facebook
Created in 2004, by 2007 Facebook was reported to have more than 21
million registered members generating 1.6 billion page views each day. The site is
tightly integrated into the daily media practices of its users: The typical user
spends about 20 minutes a day on the site, and two-thirds of users log in at least
once a day (Cassidy, 2006). Many people use it mostly for their own personal
reasons, like to reconnect with their long-lost friends. They are able to keep with
touch with people from their high school, university, previous work places, and
relatives.
1.2 Twitter
Twitter, founded by Jack Dorsey, Biz Stone, and Evan Williams in
March 2006 (launched publicly in July 2006), is a social networking and microblogging service that allows users to post updates 140 characters long. Twitter is a
real-time information network that connects users to the latest stories, ideas,
opinions, and news. Twitter is currently available in over 30 languages. Basically,
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
9
Facebook and Twitter are more or less the same. The difference is just the
limitation of the characters for the posting. In the Twitter, we can write at most
140 characters long while in Facebook, we can write as long as we want because
there’s no such limitation for the characters.
2. Language Choice
Language choice involves speech alternatives which shift according to
the situation, Ervin-Tripp proposes four main factors that account for change in
code variety. First, the setting (time and place) and the situation, the
circumstances in which the language isused; second, the participants in the
interaction: their age, sex, occupation, origin, ethnicity, and their role in relation
one to another; third the topic (work, sports, national events); and fourth, the
function of the interaction: request, offering information on interpretation,
routines, such as greetings, thanks, apologies, and so on (Grosjean, 1982:128).
a.
Situation
In some cases, the location of the interaction becomes the most important
variable to be considered in preceding language use. For example the report by
Schweda (1980) as quoted by Grosjean (1982: 138), shows that the inhabitants of
the St. John Valley cross the border between New Brunswick and Maine would
speak English at a party on the American side: French in Frenchvile, English in
Fort Kent, and both languages in Madawaska.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 10
The formality of the situation plays a role in language choice. Barker
(1975) as quoted by Grosjean (1982:139) reported, in economic and formal social
relations. English is widely used.
b. Participants
There are still many concerns related to this variable, first, the language
proficiency of the speaker and interlocutor. Sometimes a bilingual tends to use
one of his two languages more often because he feels that he is better in that
language. The degree of intimacy may also influence the use of language. How a
bilingual gets along with others will lead him to use the appropriate language.
c.
Topic
The content of discourse has been invoked as a factor in language choice.
Fishman, as quoted by Grosjean (1982:140), wrote that some topic are better
handled in one language than another, either because the other language lacks
specialized term for the topic, or because it would be considered strange or
inappropriate to discuss a topic in that language.
d. Function
Bilinguals do not just change the language to include monolinguals, they
also choose the language to exclude them. They use language among themselves
which they think the monolinguals do not understand. A bilingual usually chooses
language rapidly and automatically.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 11
3.
Code Switching
Kasperczyk (2005) in her article Implementing Code Switching in the
Classroom says that, code-switching is the swinging between two codes (both
languages and/or dialects), among people who share those two particular codes.
According to Gumperz (1982), code switching is the use of two
languages together alternating in one conversation or speech. On the other hand,
Myers-Scotton (1993) added that code switching can involve more than two
languages.
Even there are so many arguments about the definition of code switching,
all of the sociolinguistics experts agree in one condition of code switching, that is,
the alternation of two codes in one conversation between two or more persons
who mastered more than one language or at least the variety of the language itself.
3.1 Types of Code Switching
Stockwell (2002: 33) states three types of code switching. They are:
a.
Tag-switching
The other term for tag-switching is emblematic code switching. This type
of code switching only switches an interjection, a tag, or sentence filler in the
utterances of the interlocutors. For some occasions, it is used to identify the
identity of the speaker. Poplack (1978) as cited by Wei (2000) also adds that tags
are component of content words which may be inserted almost anywhere within
the sentence without violating any grammatical rule. The examples of tagswitching can be seen below.
i.
By the way, tumben pramugari lion hari ini cantik.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 12
Well, kita tunggu saja hasil akhirnya.
ii.
b.
Intersentential switch
This type of code switching occurs between sentences made by the
interlocutors. The topic of the conversation may be switch by pause employed by
one of the interlocutor. The examples of intersentential switch can be seen below.
c.
i.
Giggs tidak ada dalam skuat malam ini. 1000 will have to wait.
ii.
Pasti kangen lah. No Doubt! Yang dikangenin juga cuma kamu.
Intrasentential switch
This type of code switching occurs within sentences. The form of code
switching can be in the form of a single word, a phrase, or a clause. Below are the
examples of intrasentential code switch:
4.
i.
Saya tadi dapat free egg muffins di sana.
ii.
Berdasarkan fans report, Tsukapon 2L sudah habis terjual.
iii.
Dia akan datang when the time has come.
Errors and Mistakes
Error is a systematic deviation due to learner’s still developing
knowledge of the second language rule system (Dulay et al, 1982:139). Therefore,
it is not a performance error that is either a random guess or a slip, it is
competence.
Therefore, errors, as Norrish (1983:7-8) notes, are caused by the learners’
incompetence in processing the knowledge in the second language rule systems.
These errors are due to the limited competence of the learners in the rule system
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 13
of the language they are learning. As a consequence, they are not ready to correct
their errors, or they may not aware of making errors. This limited competence is
caused by their knowledge that is still developing. On the other hand, mistakes are
errors in performance that are either a random guess or slip. They refer to a failure
in utilizing a known system correctly (Brown, 1987:170).
4.1 Classification of Errors
Dulay et al base language errors on linguistic category which consists of
errors in the area of article, verb, noun, pronoun, preposition, sentence connector,
lexical error, word order, and genitive (Dulay et al, 1982:146) .
Below are the types of errors based on linguistic category taxonomy.
a.
Errors in Article
Errors in article include incorrect use of both definite and indefinite
articles, and the omission of the article. The example of incorrect use of article is
like the use of the indefinite article an after a consonant. For example *an brush
instead of a brush.
b.
Errors in Verb
Errors in verb phrase include omission of verb, incorrect use of
progressive tense, incorrect verb forms for subjects and sentence context, presence
of unnecessary verbs, and also incorrect agreement of subject and verb. Omission
of verb covers two parts which are, omission of main verb; She (eats) banana,
and omission of to be; I hungry.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 14
Incorrect use of progressive tense consists of omission of to be; you
looking, replacement of –ing by the simple verb form; the girl is walk around,
and substitution of the progressive for the simple past; the baby crying loudly.
The last type of error in verb phrase is disagreement between subject and
verb person; you is rich, between subject and number; the woman are smoking,
and between subject and tense; He did not know what he does.
c.
Errors in Pronoun
Errors in pronoun are omission of the subject pronoun; (you) broke the
glass, omission of object pronouns; We will not give (it) to you, and the use of
pronoun as a redundant element; My sister she eat some porridge.
d.
Errors in Nouns
Errors in nouns include substitution of singular for regular; I found some
stone, substitution of prulars to singulars; she stabbed him in the feet, incorrect
form of noun used in a sentence; make a triangular, addition of unnecessary
nouns; Prambanan temple building complex is under construction, and omission
of nouns in a sentence; he is not a smart or famous (person).
e.
Lexical Errors
Lexical errors are errors in vocabularies. It refers to the incorrect word
choices. For example, she looked at the news on TV, instead of she watched or
she saw the news on TV?
f.
Errors in Sentence Connector
Error in sentence connector refers to the incorrect use of a sentence
connector and ommision of it in a sentence requiring it to connect its clauses. The
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 15
appearance of a sentence connector is quite vital since it can avoid awkwardness.
Here is an example of an incorrect use of a sentence connector; He shouts and he
is angry. And is not the right choice since it does not show why he shouts.
Therefore, it should be replaced by because since it shows the reason why he
shouts.
g.
Errors in Word Order
Error in word order is the incorrect arrangement of words to construct a
noun phrase, verb phrase, and etc. For example; Hard trying. The construction of
verb phrase is not correct. The adjective hard should be placed after the main verb
trying since it is a postmodifier. Therefore, the arrangement of the correct verb
phrase is Trying hard.
h.
Errors in Genitive
It refers to the incorrect use of the genitive. For example, Richards shoes
instead of Richard’s shoes. In another words, it refers to the omission of ‘s.
i.
Errors in Prepositions
Errors in preposition refer to errors in use of prepositions as well as
omission of prepositions; she bought some clothes a factory outlite instead of she
bought some clothes in a factory outlite.
C. Theoretical Framework
In order to answer the questions in the problem formulation theoretically,
the writer employs some theories which have already mentioned above to be a
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 16
basis or foundation of the analysis. Therefore, this section will explain the
contribution of the theories which have already mentioned above.
The researcher employs a theory of circumstances of language choice,
which are situation, participant, topic, and function, proposed by Ervin-Tripp and
a theory of types of code switching, which are tag-switching, intrasentential
switch, and intersentential switch, from Stockwell (2002) in order to answer the
first problem formulation. Those theories will be a basis to reveal the first
problem formulation which is used to analyze the form or pattern, the type, and
the circumstance of the English occurs in Facebook and Twitter, particularly those
Facebook and Twitter users whose pages contain the data targeted. Those theories
are selected because the researcher finds it easy to comprehend and those are
sufficient enough as the tools to answer the first problem formulation.
To answer the second problem which is to determine the grammatical
errors in the data, the theory of errors and the classification of errors based on
their linguistics category as proposed by Dulay (1982). Those theories are very
important since it gives the clear explanation of errors and the types of
grammatical errors. Using Dulay’s theories, it will be such a help to analyze the
data scientifically and decide what kind of grammatical errors occur in the data.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter will discuss the research method and research procedure taken on
this study. The discussion will be divided into: the object of the study, the
approach of the study, and the method of the study.
a) Object of the Study
The data for the present research is the English found in Facebook status
and Twitter tweet posted on January until March 2013. The status and tweet
include the words, phrases, clauses, and sentences. The tweet in the Twitter only
consists of 140 characters while the status in the Facebook can consist as many
characters to be written. There are approximately 71 Facebook statuses and 77
Twitter tweets which will be analyzed.
Generally, the research is aimed to analyze the nature of the English used
by the Indonesian teenagers on their Facebook and Twitter. The analysis will also
reveal the most frequent error and the present writer will try to correct the errors.
b) Approach of the Study
In analyzing the data, the present writer would use stylistic approach.
Verdonk in his Stylistics proposes that “stylistics is the analysis of distinctive
expression in language and the description of its purpose and effect” (2002: 4).
Stylistics studies the style in language. Style in language is a set of conscious or
unconscious choices of expression, inspired or induced by particular context
17
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 18
(2002: 121). Peter Barry in his book entitled Beginning Theory also said that
“stylistics is a critical approach which uses the methods and findings of the
sciences of linguistics in the analysis of literary texts” (Barry, 2002: 203).
The texts analyzed in this study are not the literary one, which are
statuses in Facebook and tweets in Twitter. Stylistic analysis of a non-literary text
for instance means studying in detail a passage. The method of analysis can be
seen as looking at the text in great detail, observing what the parts are, and saying
what
they
perform
in
the
context
of
the
passage
(http://www.mantex.co.uk/2009/09/13/english-language-stylistic-analysis/). The goal is
to achieve the hard data through counting and calculating the occurence of
linguistic feature found.
Although the theories used for this research are taken from
sociolinguistics field (language choice and code switching), the sociolinguistics
approach isn’t suitable to be applied in this study because sociolinguistics is the
descriptive study of the effect of any and all aspects of society, including cultural
norms, expectations, and context, on the way language is used, and the effects of
language use on society (Trudgill, 2000). Therefore, the stylistic approach is
considered the most suitable approach to use in this study.
c) Method of the Study
This part consists of three parts, the research instrument, the data
collection procedure, and data analysis procedure.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 19
1.
The Research Instrument
There were two research instruments used while gathering the data, a
checklist and table. There were two kinds of checklists used in the analysis. The
first checklist was used to indicate the circumstance of those statuses and tweet
according to the theories that the writer stated before. The other checklist helped
the writer to investigate what grammatical errors occur in each incorrect posting
in each data.
Tables were used to show how many correct and incorrect postings along
with their percentages. Then they were used to show what the grammatical errors
occur in each and entire datum are, along with their numbers and percentages. The
tables were also applied to show the most frequent circumstance of the use of
English in the social networking services, Facebook and Twitter along with the
percentages in each and finally in the entire datum.
2.
Data Collection Procedure
The present research is a descriptive and qualitative research. The
qualitative data were the English postings taken from Facebook and Twitter. The
English postings act as the primary data meaning “the original documents or
remains, the first witnesses to a fact” (Good, 1941:253). According to Sprinthall,
Schmutte and Sirois (1991: 98), a descriptive research is a research trying to
describe objectively the states or characteristics of the phenomena better. In this
research, the phenomena refer to the use of English in the Facebook and Twitter.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 20
The data were taken in different time through photographing in order to
get an accurate data. Then, the writer
transcribed the data without adding,
reducing, or interpreting it in order to keep the primary data original.
3.
Data Analysis Procedure
First of all, the writer collected the data, which are the English statuses
and tweets from Facebook and Twitter, posted by the Indonesian teenagers on
January 2013 until March 2013. After the data have been gathered and
transcribed, the analysis could be started. Since the data were taken from different
sources, in this case from Facebook and Twitter, the analysis was done for two
times but with similar steps. There were several steps taken in conducting each
analysis.
The data analyzed were the English statuses taken from the Facebook and
posted by the Indonesian teenagers. Here the writer classified them into some
catagories to indicate under what circumstances English was used in the statuses.
To identify the circumstances, the writer used the theory of language
choice and the theory of code switching. Based on the description of the factors
that account for change in code variety proposed by Ervin-Tripp, the writer took
one of the data and analyzed carefully the pattern of the posting then put it on the
most suitable factor. The writer conducted the same steps for the rest of the data to
identify the circumstances.
After the circumstances were identified, the second step began. The
writer calculated the circumstances according to the frequency of the use of
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 21
English occured mostly in the Facebook’s statuses posted by the Indonesian
teenagers. The result is written in the form of percentages to make it easier to
understand.
After finishing the second step, the third step began. The data were
examined to find out how many and which one of them is correct or incorrect.
Here the writer determined the number of correct or incorrect statuses along with
their amounts. The writer also marked and tried to correct the incorrect statuses.
To determine the correct and the incorrect statuses, the writer used the
theory of error and mistakes based on their linguistic category as proposed by
Dulay (1982). Based the short description of the theory, the writer could identify
the data correctly and also categorize the data specifically. The writer also
conducted the same steps for the other data, Twitter’s tweets. After the data have
been analyzed in detail, the writer tried to draw a conclusion based on the answers
of the problems in the research.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS RESULTS
This chapter is divided into three parts. The first part is about the
explanation about the data that are going to be used for this research. The second
part is meant to answer the first problem which is identifying the use of English
within the Facebook and Twitter’s posting. While, the last part acts as the answer
to the second problem which is to reveal the grammatical accuracy of the data.
The primary data of this study are the postings containing English in the
Facebook and Twitter posted by the Indonesian teenagers in the period of January
2013 until March 2013. There are total 148 postings collected, with the following
details: 71 out of 148 were taken from Facebook and the rest, 77, were taken from
Twitter and each posting was obtained from different users. From 148 users, there
are 67 male users and 81 female users.
Most of those postings were written short, no more than 250 characters
and there are only for about 18 postings that contain more than that and those are
only from Facebook. It is simply because when you want to write something in
Twitter, it is limited only for 140 characters. However in Facebook, you can write
anything you want, as long as you want without any limitation like what we have
in Twitter.
22
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 23
A. The Use of English in the Facebook’s Statuses and Twitter’s Tweets
Posted by Indonesian Teenagers
As stated beforehand, there are total 148 postings being analyzed. Based
on the use of the English and its pattern, those postings can be identified into 2
types: language choice and code switching. Below are some examples of the
identification, for complete list of the identification, see the Appendix.
A posting can be said as language choice if the speakers choose what
language to use in diverse social situations. Here is an example of language choice
from the postings.
Example 1. Language Choice in Facebook’s status
While to be considered as code switching, a posting must contains the
use of words and structures from more than one language or linguistic variety by
the same speaker within the same speech situation, conversation or utterance.
Here is an example of code switching from the postings.
Example 2. Code Switching in Twitter’s tweet
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 24
Thus, it can be concluded that from the total of 148 existing data, 92 of the data
are considered as language choice and 56 of the data are considered as code
switching.
After completing the categorization of the existing data, two theories will
be used to identify the use of English in the data. The first one is about the
circumstances that account for change in code variety. There are four main
circumstances proposed by Ervin-Tripp and they are the setting (time and place)
and the situation, the participants in the interaction, the topic, and the function of
the interaction. The second one is about the types of code switching occured in
the postings. Stockwell (2002: 33) states three types of code switching, they are
tag-switching,
intersentential
switch,
and
intrasentential
switch.
The
implementation and explanation of those theories could be seen in the discussion
below.
1.
Language Choice
Bilingual speakers, just like monolinguals, choose among diverse
varieties of a language. When they speak to other bilinguals, they have an access
to two languages. While monolinguals can only switch from one variety to
another within one language (e.g., colloquial to formal), bilinguals may choose
among varieties within one language, switch between different languages, or do
both (Grosjean, 1982: 128).
According to Ervin-Tripp, there are four factors that account for change
in code variety. The four factors and the examples from Facebook and Twitter users’
pages were as follows:
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 25
a.
Situation
Grosjean (1982:139) stated that the setting (time and place) and the
situation, the circumstances in which the language is used, of the
interaction can be an important variable to be considered in preceding the
use of a language. Below are some examples both from Facebook and
Twitter:
F045.
F059.
T026.
In the examples above, it clearly shows that it is not only the
physical situation (time & place) that influence the choice of a language
but also the emotional situation. In the examples no F045 and F059,
Facebook users were using the English language because of the formal
situation that they had at that time. The situation in the example no F045
is about selling a blouse and the example no F059 is about a job vacancy.
When there is a formal situation like that, a formal language is more
preferable to be used because it can be more attractive and it also can
cover a wider scope in order to get more prospective buyers.
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 26
Not only the physical situation that influence the choice of a
language, but also the emotional situation can have a role in it. Just like
the example no T026 that shows the user’s feeling about her belief.
English is often used to express feeling because English has diverse
vocabularies that can be a help to express a feeling or a thought better.
b.
Participants
A bilingual tends to use one of his two languages more often because
he feels that he is better in that language. The degree of intimacy may
also influence the use of language.
F020.
F042.
T008.
In order to recognize the participant in the social media like
Facebook and Twitter, there are some hints about it. First of all and the
most significant one is a tag of other user’s name in Facebook or a
mention which is symbolized with “@” in Twitter. It can be seen in the
example no F020 and T008. There are several reasons why some users
switch their language, from Indonesian into English, one of them is
because the person they are communicating with or the addressee is a
PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI 27
foreigner. Therefore, the conversation will be more easily understood by
the addressee if the language used is the global language that is
understood by many people, just like the addressee in example no T008,
meyitha, who is a foreigner.
Another feature that indicates the involvement of the participant or
the addressee is the use of the word “you”. Although there is no specific
name of the addressee that is mentioned in the status or tweet, the word
“you” already refers to a particular person that the user intended to talk
to. Like the example in no T042, the user greeted someone in his tweet
but he didn�