Critical Discourse Analysis on Language and Power in ELT Classroom (An Ethnograpy Study at STKIP Bangkalan, Madura) Thesis Full Text

CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS ON

LANGUAGE AND POWER IN ELT CLASSROOM

(An Ethnography Study at STKIP PGRI Bangkalan Madura)

A THESIS

By

ANDRI DONAL

(S891302001)

Submitted to the Graduate School Sebelas Maret University as a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Master of English Education

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

GRADUATE PROGRAM

FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SEBELAS MARET UNIVERSITY

SURAKARTA

2014

LEGITIMATION OF THE EXAMINERS

CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS ON

LANGUAGE AND POWER IN ELT CLASSROOM

(An Ethnography Study at STKIP PGRI Bangkalan Madura)

by: Andri Donal S891302001

This thesis has been examined by the Board of Thesis Examiners of English Education Department of Graduate School of Sebelas Maret University

On August, 2014 Board of Examiners

Signatures

Chairman Dr. Abdul Asib, M.Pd

(...) 19520307 198903 1005

Secretary Dra. Dewi Rochsantiningsih, M.Ed, Ph.D

(...) 19600918 198702 2001

Examiners 1. Prof. Dr. Joko Nurkamto, M.Pd

(...) 19610124 198702 1001

2. Dr. Sumardi, M.Hum

(...) 19740608 199903 1002

Legalized by The Dean of Teachers Training and

Education Faculty

Prof. Dr. M. Furqon Hidayatullah, M.Pd. NIP. 196007271987021001

The Head of English Department of Graduate Program

Dr. Abdul Asib, M.Pd. NIP. 195203071980031005

commit to user

ABSTRACT

Andri Donal. S891302001. 2014. Critical Discourse Analysis on Language and

Power in ELT Classroom (An Ethnograpy Study at STKIP Bangkalan, Madura). First

Consultant: Prof. Dr. Joko Nurkamto, M.Pd. Second Consultant: Dr. Sumardi, M.Hum. A thesis. Surakarta: English Education Department. Graduate Program of Teacher training and education Faculty, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta.

The objectives of the research are: (1) To describe the power in language represented in the speech acts, (2) To explore the effects of power in language done by teachers toward students’ learning attitude. The research was carried out at STKIP Bangkalan Madura. It was conducted from January to August 2014. The subject of the research is the English teachers’ of STKIP Bangkalan, Madura. It is an ethnograpy study research. The ethnography study data are collected through document analysis, observation, interview, and questionnaire. The data are analyzed using qualitative data analysis technique proposed by James Spradley which covers domain analysis, taxonomy analysis, componential analysis, and theme analysis and this data also analyzed by using critical discourse analysis approach proposed by Norman Fairclough which covers description, interpretation and explanation.

The research findings show that; (1) In the classroom, a teacher represents power in language into some speech acts forms, including: directive, assertive and expressive speech acts forms. The directive speech acts have students do something; the assertive speech act are the teacher’s argument to make students agree or believe with teacher’s idea. The last is the expressive speech acts, they are the teacher’s psychological states about the students such as pleasure and displeasure expressions, (2) The application of teacher’s power in speech acts forms can influence students’ learning attitude, as follows: a). The teacher’s status influences the students’ perspective in responding teacher’s command; b). Students are enjoyful in doing teacher’s request; c). Teacher assumed that teacher’s prohibition acts are the forms of training for students to be more discipline; d). Students consider that the teacher’s permission acts have less negative effect to them; e). The teacher’s advice influences their learning attitude towards positive side because it can increase their motivation and add their knowledge, information and experience; f). Students tend to be afraid in facing the fierce teacher’s questions; g). The teacher’s intervention is a must when there are different arguments among students; h). The students will be happy if the teacher appreciates their arguments; i). The teacher’s pleasure expression will trigger students to be more active in the classroom. It also can increase students’ motivation because the students assume it is as the form of teacher’s appreciation to them; j). The displeasure expression has the high restriction of illocutionary power because it can decrease students’ learning motivation.

Therefore, in teaching learning process, a teacher should create the humanistic teaching where a teacher should consider the negative effects from implementing the powers in language in ELT classroom.

Keywords: power and language, speech acts, critical discourse analysis, learning

attitude, ethnography study

MOTTO

“And if you should count the favors of Allah , you could not enumerate them. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.”

(An Nahl: 18)

DEDICATION With deep profound love, this research is devoted to:

 My beloved parents; BapakYuskar and Mama Andriani,

Without your love, prayers, and support I would not be the person I am today.

 My beloved wife Andriana, SST and My beloved son Alkhalifi Andriando,

Thanks for your prayers, support, patient and sacrifice and being great motivators and inspirators in accomplishing this thesis.

 My beloved big family: My sister Afrida Santi and her husband, my brothers:

Doni Asmon, Ade Romi Irawan and Anton Hilman and their wife, and my nephew and niece.

Thanks for your prayers and supports.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Alhamdulillahirabbil’alamin. Praise to ALLAH SWT who has given His blessing to the writer so that he can accomplish this thesis. In addition, his thesis can never be accomplished without the help of others during the process of writing. Therefore, he would like to express his deepest gratitude and appreciation to:

1. The Dean of Teachers Training and Education Faculty of Sebelas Maret University.

2. The Head of the English Education Department of Graduate Program.

3. Prof. Dr. Joko Nurkamto, M. Pd., the first consultant, for all his guidance, advice, and encouragement during completion of this thesis.

4. Dr. Sumardi, M. Hum., the second consultant, for his guidance, advice, and encouragement during the writing process of this thesis.

5. The Head of English Department of STKIP PGRI Bangkalan, Madura who has allowed him to carry out the research in his institution.

6. All English teachers of STKIP PGRI Bangkalan Madura, especially who have become informants of this thesis.

7. Students of STKIP PGRI Bangkalan, Madura.

8. All friends, especially Doni Alfaruqy, Chairuddin, Arif Choirul Bashir, Farouk Sumarli and everyone who helped the writer in accomplishing the thesis.

The writer hopes and accepts gratefully every comment and suggestion. Hopefully, this thesis will be useful for the readers.

Surakarta, August 2014 Andri Donal

TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE... APPROVAL PAGE……….... i ii LEGITIMATION... PRONOUNCEMENT... ABSTRACT………... iii iv v MOTTO... DEDICATION... ACKNOWLEDGEMENT... TABLE OF CONTENTS………...……..

vi vii viii ix

LIST OF TABLES……… xi

LIST OF FIGURES………... xii

LIST OF APPENDICES……….………. xiii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION……… A. Background of the Study………...……...……. B. Problem Statements………... C. Objectives of the Study ………...………….… D. Significance of the Study………...…………...

1 1 7 7 7

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW……….… A. Theoretical Review...

1. Critical Discourse Analysis... a. The Nature of Critical Discourse Analysis……...… b. The Approaches of Critical Discourse Analysis...…... 2. The Nature of Language …………...…..………...

a. Definition of Language... b. The Functions of Language...……...……… 3. The Nature of Power... a. Definition of Power………...………. b. Analyzing of Power through CDA... 4. The Nature of Speech Acts...

a. Definition of Speech Acts………...………. b. The Classifications of Speech Acts... 5. The Nature of English Language Teaching...

a. Theories of English Language Teaching……...………. b. The Power manifestation in ELT Classroom... 6. The Nature of Attitude...

a. Definitions of Attitude... ……...………. b. Students’ Attitude... B. Review of Related Research..………...………..

9 9 9 9 11 14 14 15 18 18 19 23 23 24 28 28 32 40 40 41 43

commit to user

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD...……… A. Research setting ...……...……….

1. Time... ……….…...….. 2. Place... ………...……... B. Research Method………...………... C. Source of the Data... ………...……….. D. Techniques of Collecting Data………….……...…….. E. Trustworthiness...

F. Techniques of Analysing Data………...…………

52 52 52 52 53 54 55 56 59

CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION……… A. Research Findings... ………...…..

1. Power Forms in Language Represented in The Speech Acts in STKIP Bangkalan Madura... 2. The Implication of Power in Language Manifestation by

Teachers Toward Students’ Learning Attitude…………. B. Discussion...………...………. 65 65 67 94 117

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION AND SUGGESTION. A. Conclusion………... B. Implication ... C. Suggestion…………...…………...……

129 129 132 132 BIBLIOGRAPHY………... 134 APPENDICES………. 139

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Table 4.1

Time Setting of the study...………. Research Findings...

52 65

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3.1 Technique of analyzing the data adapted from Bradley ……… 61

Figure 3.2 Research Procedure ………...……… 62

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1

Appendix 2 Appendix 3 Appendix 4 Appendix 5 Appendix 6 Appendix 7

Transcript of interview with teacher... 140

Transcript of interview with student... 146

Field Note... 149

Kontrak Perkuliahan... 156

Silabus Mata Kuliah... 158

Surat Keterangan Penelitian... 160

Photograph Documentation... 161

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study

Humans use language to communicate with others. Generally, the use of spoken language in communication is more often performed than written language. It is similar to what happenes in the classroom when interactions between teachers and students occur. This type of learning activity in the classroom that involves the interaction of teachers and students is one form of language uses for social roles. In the context of classroom learning, language has role as interactional function. Brown and Yule (1996: 14) describe the function of

language becomes transactional function and interactional functions.

Transactional function is a function to reveal the contents, while the interactional function is a function of language in social relations and personal attitudes.

Related to the use of language in certain professions and institutions, Maher and Rokos (in Santoso, 2002: 4) presents three main characteristics of the use of language. First, there is an imbalance in power relations or mutual power between the participants involved, ie between speaker and listener. The imbalance allows participants utilizing language that has the power to dominate the speaking. Second, there is a fixed set of language patterns. Third, there is the exchange of conversations that tend to reinforce a professional identity that is determined by the context.

1

Learning interaction is one form of oral discourse interactional function. Learning discourse is characterized by its existing mutual interaction between teachers and students. Interactional discourse is characterized by a reciprocal response from the speaker and listener (Yowono, 2005: 94). This opinion is in line with Hawthorn (in Mills, 1997: 5) who states that discourse is a linguistic communication between the transaction of speakers and addressees, an interpersonal activity whose form is determined by its social purpose.

In the context of classroom activities, the relationship of teachers and students affects the learning effectiveness. Teacher-student relationship is reflected in the use of language in the learning interaction. Essentially, the way of teachers’ interaction to students reflects the teacher’s view to their students’ position. Teachers can look at the student based on the concept of a superior-subordinate relation, the concept as a students’ motivator and facilitator or the concept of as a students’ partner. It is the realization of a system of thought and belief of a teacher. In other words, the use of language by teacher can influence the students’ view both to teacher and to the subject.

In the classroom, a teacher has role not only as the knowledge source, but also as the controller of teaching learning process. Teacher controls all the activities in the classroom in order to reach the goal of learning. Teacher also evaluates the teaching learning process to know how far students’ understanding to the lesson. Teacher can be as an assesor to state right or not the students’ arguments. In other words, teacher can influence and control the students’ action

in the classroom. From the explanation above, it can be inferred that teacher has more power and authority than that of students in the classroom.

Right now, most schools in Indonesia apply the communicative approach in teaching English. Students are expected have the ablility to develop their communicative competence in real situation. According to Shastri (2010: 4) communicative competence refers to the knowledge of how to use the language and the capacity to produce infinite number of sentences. In addition, communicative competence also refers to the capacity of using language according to the purpose. The purpose can be in the forms of making request, complaint, order, apology etc. This leads to the knowledge of the functions of the language. It means that students are expected not only master the English grammar, but also communicate by using English correctly in a particular context. Because of that, the students should be given more time to be active in the classroom than that of teacher. The teacher should be able as a facilitator and motivator for students. However, in application, most of the classrooms in Indonesia are still teacher-centered orientation. Teacher still dominates the teaching learning process. It means that the application of communicative approach in Indonesia still does not run well.

This is the example of the application of power in language by a teacher in the classroom.

(Utterance context in the class when a teacher gives chance to the students to answer the question)

(1) Teacher : Sandi, try to answer the question no. 9!

(2) Sandi : {Students look afraid} (context)

(4) Teacher : That’s ok if you make mistake.

(5) Sandi : gerund is ....verb sir. (the voice becomes slow and weak)

(6) Other students laugh hearing the student’s answer, because the answer is wrong and the voice becomes slow and weak (context).

(7) Teacher : Ok, no problem with your answer. The most important

thing is that you can answer.

(8) Teacher : Now, the man who laughs loudly. Answer the next

question.

From the conversation above, it can be seen that teacher dominates the class and the teacher shows his power by using the imperative sentence.

The concept of power according to Fairclough (1995: 1) is conceptualized both in terms of asymmetries between participants in discourse events, and in terms of unequal capacity to control how texts are produced, distributed, and consumed (and hence the shapes of texts) in particular sociocultural contexts. A range of properties of texts is regarded as potentially ideological, including features of vocabulary and metaphors, grammar, presuppositions and implicatures, politeness conventions, speech-exchange (turn-taking) systems, generic structure, and style. Van Dijk (2001: 300) says that power involves control from member of a people group to others in form of action, so the power group can limit the freedom of other group that will influence their mind. It implies that the people who have power can control the behaviour of people who under control.

Moreover, Brown and Gilman (1960: 255) say that the power can be in the forms of physics, prosperity, age, sex, or institutional role. Similarly, according to Thomas (1995: 127), there are three kinds of power; legitimate power (the power

by someone because he or she is admired and many people wants to be like him or her), and the expert power (the power which is gotten by someone because of his or her knowledge or skills). In the context of teacher in the classroom, a teacher has legitimate power and expert power because the teacher has the higher social status than that of students and the teacher is assumed as the source of knowledge. If the teacher is admired by students, it means that a teacher also has referent power.

The form of teacher’s power in the classroom can be seen from the teacher’s expression both explicitely and implicitely. It can be in the forms of warning, instruction, question, argumentation and etc. In other words, some of teachers’ expressions are known containing the power manifestation after analyzed deeply, for example when a teacher says “listen to me”. This sentence is not only a common argument from a teacher that students must give attention to teacher. However, according to Fairclough (1989: 125) if the sentence above is analyzed based on the context and linguistics elements such as the relationship between speaker and listener, transivity, modus, modality and active-passive, that sentence is probably the form of power owned by teacher to students.

Linguistic elements can be used to know how a sentence has power manifestation the speaker’s speech acts. One of approaches which uses linguistic elements to know the power manifestation is critical discourse analysis (CDA). Critical discourse analysis approach is not only to describe the use of language in a discourse, but also to correlate between the use of language and the power applied by a group of people who has its power. In critical discourse analysis,

language is an important factor to see the power imbalance in a society. According to Fairclough (1989: 109-111) critical discourse analysis has three dimensions that have to be analized. They are text, discourse practice and sociocultural practice. Analysis in text dimension is a descriptive analysis to know how power is manifested in text through vocabulary, grammar, and textual-structure. The result of analysis in this dimension will be interpreted in the discourse practice dimension. Then, the analysis is continued by finding the explanation in the sociocultural practice dimension.

Suharyo and Irianto (2009: 26) in their research argue that the manifestation of power in classroom has some functions: (1). Teacher can manage or control the classroom. (2). It will force students to pay attention, trust, and obey toward the teacher’s instruction. (3). In order to make students believe with teacher’s talk. (4). Students respects to teacher. and (5). It is to differentiate between the teacher’s and students’ status.

Right now, the research about the use of power in language in the English teaching classroom especially in Indonesia is still rare. While according to Fairclough, the expert of critical discourse analysis, that in classroom, there is a form of power that can be revealed by using critical discourse analysis. Because of that, the researcher is interested in conducting a reseach about the use of power and langauge in the English language Teaching (ELT) classroom and knowing which kind of language of power mostly used during ELT classroom.

B. Problem Statements

This study seeks to explore two main issues:

1. How is power in language represented in the speech acts forms?

2. To what extents are the effects of power in language on students’ learning attitude?

C. The Objectives of the Study The objectives of the study are:

1. To describe the power in language represented in the speech acts.

2. To explore the effects of power in language done by teachers on students’ learning attitude.

D. The Significance of the Study

Right now, the study or research about the language and power in organization, social and politic aspect has been popular. However, the study about the relationship between language and power in education view is rare especially in English Language Teaching (ELT) classroom. In fact, the phenomena of using power in classroom cannot be avoided as long as there are interactions between teacher and students. The perception of power in classroom perspective is how the influence of teacher’s acts or expressions toward the students’ learning attitude. The researcher expects by conducting this research, it can give contribution:

1. To Teacher

The result of this research is expected to give input to teachers on how to design the humanistic teaching learning activities. In this context, teachers can

use power to develop students’ potential maximally. Teachers can involve students actively in deciding teaching material and learning model. In the learning process, teachers must be able to create enjoyable learning atmosphere by increasing the quality of communication between teachers and students in the classroom. The good communication between teachers and students can create the good atmosphere for students in learning English. So, it is expected that the objective of language learning can be achieved. About how deep teachers’ acts to their students, so it will make them become aware on their students.

2. To Students

This research is expected to give information to students about the positive effects of power manifestation by teachers in the classroom. In addition, it is expected students’ consciousness about the application of students center learning will be emerged. Students must actively involve in teaching learning process.

3. To Other Researchers

The research about the manifestation of power in language in ELT classroom is still rare, so the researcher expects the result of this research will be the underpinning of the research in this field.

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

A. Concept of Research

The concept of this research is to analyze the implementation of power in using language by a teacher in the classroom. It is to show that the perspective of language is not only in the form of language, but also it can be seen from the fuction of language. In this context, the language is as the form of power manifestation. The form of power can be known from the teacher’s utterances in the classroom. The utterances are the form of speaker’s speech acts. To identify the power manisfestation from the teacher’s speech acts, it needs to be analyzed. To analyze it, reseracher uses the critical discourse analysis. The researcher uses the teory of critical discourse analysis from Norman fairclough.

1. Critical Discourse Analysis

a. The Nature of Critical Discourse Analysis

In daily activities, humans cannot be separated from language because language is used as a tool of communication. In a communication, there is an interaction between speakers and hearers. In this interaction, there is a tendency of unequal power relationship between speakers and hearers. It can be seen from how someone dominates in a conversation or someone can controll the other’s talk. One way to study this uneqality in language use is critical discourse analysis. According to Van Dijk (2001: 352) critical discourse analysis is a type of discourse analytical research that primarily studies the way social power abuse,

9

dominance, and inequality are enacted, reproduced, and resisted by text and talk in the social and political context. Bukhari and Xiaoyang (2013: 9) define Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as a field that is used to analyze the written and spoken texts to explore the discursive sources of power, dominance inequality and bias. With such dissident research, critical discourse analysts take explicit position, and thus want to understand, expose, and ultimately resist social inequality.

Kristina (2013: 24) mentions the term critical refers to an attempt to reveal, identify and explain implicit and explicit relation and association between language, power and ideology. According to Van Dijk (1998a) Critical Discourse Analysis is a field that is concerned with studying and analyzing written and spoken texts to reveal the discursive sources of power, dominance, inequality and bias. It examines how these discursive sources are maintained and reproduced within specific social, political and historical contexts. In a similar vein, Fairclough (1993: 135) defines Critical Discourse Analysis as discourse analysis which aims to systematically explore often opaque relationships of causality and determination between (a) discursive practices, events and texts, and (b) wider social and cultural structures, relations and processes; to investigate how such practices, events and texts arise out of and are ideologically shaped by relations of power and struggles over power; and to explore how the opacity of these relationships between discourse and society is itself a factor securing power and hegemony.

Critical Discourse Analysis can effectively be applied for exploring the educational issues in the contexts of conflict between power and social realities. It

is supported by Huckin et al., (2012) who say that Critical Discourse Analysis is useful to investigate the relationships between the teaching, learning and curriculum, and school and community role as well as ideologies and power (basic factor for educational policies) and their impacts on the classroom process and teaching – learning activity. Kristina (2013: 23) says Critical Discourse Analysis explores the unequal or hierarchical power among participants in a spoken and written interaction. Likewise, Critical Discourse Analysis focuses on revealing explicit and implicit socio-political domination, which includes social change, power abuse, ideological imposition, and social injustice by critically analyzing language as social action. From the definitions above, it can be concluded that critical discourse analysis is a type of discourse analytical research that primarily studies about the the way of social power abuse, dominance, and inequality are enacted, reproduced, and resisted by text and talk in the educational, social and political context.

b. The Approaches of Critical Discourse Analysis

There are several approaches to critical discourse analysis with different components and framework. Van Dijk (1998) puts a stronger emphasis on the study of relationship between discourse, power, dominance and social inequality. The second approcah is deliverd by Ruth Wodak. Wodak (1996) focuses her study on the issues of racism, sexims, and anti-semitism by explicating critically at the historical dimension of discourse. Wodak and Meyer (2001) cover three steps in critical discourse analysis, namely:

1. Describing the content or specific topic of a discourse.

2. Investigating discursive and argumentative strategies used.

3. Analyzing the realizations of particular written linguistics meanings in a

specific context.

Next approach is explained by Norman Fairclough. Fairclough (1989: 20) views language as a form of social practice and proposes a multi-dimensional framework for exploring discourse by employing three separates form of analysis, namely analysis of discourse (description phase), analysis of discourse practice (process of text production, distribution and consumption) which is commonly referred to as interpretation phase and analysis of discursive events as instance of socio-cultural practice (explanation phase). Fairclough (1995: 11) adds that analysis of discourse practice includes analysis of social structure will of course do badly on Schegloffs criteria for analytical relevance, including social class, power (in a social structural rather than a situational sense) and ideology.

In this research, the researcher will focus on the critical discourse analysis from the Norman fairclough. Fairclough (1998) argues that Critical Discourse Analysis has offered educational researchers ways of investigating language use within social contexts. By questioning the taken-for-grantedness of language and enabling explorations of how texts represent the world in particular ways

according to particular interests, Critical Discourse Analysis provides

opportunities to consider the relationships between discourse and society, between text and context, and between language and power (Fairclough, 2001).

As mentioned above, Fairclough developed the approach of critical discourse analysis as the the development of critical language study in Langauge and Power in 1989. Fairclough says that as the goal of critical analysis, discourse can be seen from three dimensions of discourse. They are: (1) Text in the form of oral and written. (2) discourse practice; the process of producing and interpreting the text. (3) Sociocultural practice; the context of society, institution and culture that determine the meaning and form of a discourse. Briefly, those three dimensions can be seen in the figure below.

Figure 1. The Picture of CDA Dimension (page 98)

From the figure above it can be seen that the first dimension is the description analysis step to identify how power is manifested in text. The second dimension is the link to correlate the text and sociocultural practice. Interpretation is done to the text in discourse practice. Next, the explanation about the reason how power is implemented by linking the analysis with sociocultural practice. Sociocultural practice can be seen from environtment, institution, and society.

Text Discourse Practice

2. The Nature of Langauge a. Definition of Language

Humans need language to utter their expressions, needs, desires, and etc. Language is very important for human being to communicate with others. Definition of language is very various. Brown (2000: 5) defines language as a system of arbitrary conventionalized vocal, written, gesture symbols that enables members of a given community to communicate intelligibly with one another. According to Thomas and Wareing (2005: 5) language is as a systematic way of combining smaller units into larger units for the purpose of communication. For example, when a speaker combines the sounds of language (phonemes) to form words (lexical items) according to the ‘rules’ of the speaker’s language. Those lexical items can be combined to make grammatical structures, again according to the syntactic ‘rules’ of speaker’s language. Todd (1995: 6) defines language as a set of signals by which human beings communicate. Moreover, Schiffrin (2005: 2) defines language as the ‘verbalization of thought’ and is neither straight forward to process nor to break down into manageable pieces. It means that language is an integral part of cognitive development in form of verbalisation of thought or a finite set of elements. Language is one of the greatest graces owned by humans that acquired since childhood. Besides acquiring language, humans can also produce and develop their language. By having language, humans can interact with other.

Todd (1995: 6) points out about language. First, human language is not only a vocal system of communication. It can be expressed in writing, with the

result that it is not limited in time and space. Secondly, each language is both arbitrary and systematic. It means that none of languages behave in exactly the same way yet each language has its own set of rules. The last is that there are no primitive or inferior languages. It means that, although people live in the most primitive conditions but all languages appear to be equally complex and all are absolutely adequate to the needs of their users.

In addition Fairclough (1989: 22) says that language as a form of social practice. There are three implication from this definition. First, It can be implied that language is a part of society. Second, language is a social process. The last is that language is a socially conditioned process. It is different with Coultas (2003: 5) who says that language can reflects the speaker’s personality, beliefs, attitudes and values. According to Harmer (1991: 4) language is an intesely political issues since it is bound up with identity and power. It can be concluded that language has relationship with society and it can be used as the reflection of speaker’s personality, beliefs, attitudes, identity and power.

b. Functions of Langauge

Language is an integral part of human’s existence. Human needs language for a variety of purposes of administration, commerce, education and communication. It is natural and beneficial to use mother language for the purposes of education and communication. Many experts have diffrent argumentation about the function of language. Brown and Yule (1996: 14) propose the function of language becomes transactional function and interactional

functions. Transactional function is a function to reveal the contents, while the interactional function is a function of language in social relations and personal attitudes. Besides as a communication tool, language is also used as power tool. Moreover Chouliaraki and Fairclough (1999) assume that individuals and groups use language to achieve a variety of social purposes and considers the relationship between everyday social practices (social events) and society (social structures).

Thomas and Wareing (2005: 8) describe the functions of language into two; referential function and affective impact. These two functions are the ones most clearly associated with power. The referential function is the one associated with what objects and ideas are called and how events are described (i.e. how we represent the world around us and the effects of those representations on the way we think. The affective function of language is concerned with who is ‘allowed’ to say what to whom, which is deeply tied up with power and social status. By selecting one as appropriate and not another, someone will exploite the affective aspect of language and show the sensitiveness to the power or social relationship between speaker and the person who is addressed. For example, saying ‘I think it’s time you wash your hair’ will be an acceptable comment from a parent to a young child, but it will not usually be acceptable from employees to their boss. Here are more examples:

(a) Put that bunch of flowers on the table. (b) Please put that bunch of flowers on the table.

(d) If you wouldn’t mind awfully, do you think you might put that bunch flowers on the table.

Halliday in Brown and Yule (1996: 251) outlines seven functions of language. They are:

a. The instrumental function. Language is to manipulate the environtment, to cause certain events to happen. For examples: “This court finds you guilty” and “Don’t touch the stove”. Those sentences are communicative acts that have a specific perlocutionary force; they bring about a particular condition.

b. The regulatory function. Language is as the control of events. For example: “Upon good behaviour, you will be eligible for parole in ten months”. The regulations of encounters among people- appropval, disapproval, behaviour control, setting laws and rules- are all regulatory features of language.

c. The representational function. Language is to make statements, convey facts and knowledge, explain, or report that is to represent reality as one sees it. For example: “The sun is hot” and “ the president gave a speech last night”.

d. The interactional function. Language is to ensure social maintenance. e. The personal function. The language is to express feelings, emotions, and

f. The heuristics function. Language is to acquire knowledge, to learn about the environtment. Heuristics functions are coveyed in the form of questions that will lead to answer.

g. The imaginative function. Language is to create imaginary systemsor ideas. Through the imaginative dimensions of language, someone is free to go beyond the real world to soar the heights of the beauty of language itself.

3. The Nature of Power a. The Definition of Power

The main topic of critical discourse analysis is about the power manifestation by someone or institution to another one. Talking about power, it cannot be separated from the way of someone to dominate or to controll the others, and the other ones struggle to maintain their position. The practice of power manifestation can be seen in the dialogue between a doctor and patient, teacher and students, boss and workers, government and citizens, the mass media and audiences, and so forth.

According to Fairclough (1995: 1), power is conceptualized both in terms of asymmetries between participants in discourse events, and in terms of unequal capacity to control how texts are produced, distributed and consumed (and hence the shapes of texts) in particular sociocultural contexts. A range of properties of texts is regarded as potentially ideological, including features of vocabulary and metaphors, grammar, presuppositions and implicatures, politeness conventions,

speech-exchange (tum-taking) systems, generic structure, and style. Van Dijk (2001: 300) says that power involves control from member of a people group to others in form of action, so the power group can limit the freedom of other group that will influence their mind. It means that the people who have power can control the behaviour of people who under control.

Moreover, Brown and Gilman (1960) say that the power can be in form of physics, prosperity, age, sex, or institutional role. According to Thomas (1995: 127), there are three kinds of power; legitimate power (the power which comes from role, age, or status), referent power (the power which is gained by someone because he or she is admired and many people wants to be like him or her), and the expert power (the power which is got by someone because of his or her knowledge or skills). In the context of teacher in the classroom, a teacher has legitimate power and expert power because he or she has social status higher than students and he or she is as the source of knowledge. If he or she is admired by his or her students, it can be said that a teacher also has referent power.

b. Analyzing of Power Through Critical Discourse Analysis

The understanding of language necessarily entails some understanding not only of the world, but also of the conversational ‘context’ of an utterance. Fairclough (1989) says that the power and ideology can be revealed from the language used. Theory and practice used to see the relationship between language and society is started from description analysis and continued to interpretation analysis and the last is the explanation.

1). Description

In the stage of description, all data in the form of utterance is analyzed based on vocabulary, grammar, and textual structure. In addition Fairclough (1989) describes the vocabulary analysis involves experimential value, relational values, and expressive values. Experimential value is related to classification schemes, idealogical words, rewording and overwording, meaning relations (synonymy, hyponymy, and antonymy), and metaphors. Relational values is related to euphemistics expression and formal and informal words. The last is expressive values which is related to positive and negative evaluation.

In grammatical analysis, the concept involves three aspects; experimential value, relational values, and expressive value. First, the experimential value is related to the type of process and participant predominate, normalizations, active or passive sentences, and positive or negative sentences. Fairclough (1989) argues that this concept is used to express the form of power. While the form of active and passive sentences is related to the stress of voice in expressing. The passive sentence is used because the speaker does not know the subject or does not want to describe the subject. Someone who has power tends to use active sentence by placing him or her as the subject, for example by saying “I want you to work in pairs”. To guise the power expression, someone can use passive sentence, for example by saying “Working in pairs is a must”.

The second value of grammar is relational values. This value is related to how grammar codes the both sides relation between social relationship. The aspects of relationals values includes modes sentences (declarative, grammatical

question, and imperative). This values are used to identify the relationship between members, for example where someone who has power can freely use imperative modes. In the context of in the classroom a teacher can say “Do the exercise!” to the students. Another example is the using of declarative modes in modality relational value by a teacher to students in the classroom by saying “You have to do the exercise”. The last is expressive value. It can be seen from the use of expressive modality. For example is if a teacher as a source of knowledge can say “I don’t think cheating is good”. Students may assumes that it is a kind of teacher’s ideology about the prohibitation of cheating.

The last step of description stage is textual structure analysis which involves interactional conventions and larger-scale structure. Interactional conventions involve the way of participants controls the turns of others. There are four devices used for this; interruption, enforcing explicitness, controlling topic, and formulation.

2). Interpretation

The next stage used in finding the relationship between language and society is the interpretation stage. It is related to how text is linked by the discourse process (discourse practice dimension). Fairclough (1989: 141) says that interpretation are generated through a combination of what is in the text and what is ‘in’ the interpreter. The focus of context interpretation is the relationship between situational context and discourse type. Text interpretaion will be analyzed based on four levels of interpretation domains. They are surface of utterance, meaning of utterance, local coherence, and text structure and point.

Surface of utterance is related to the process by which interpreters convert strings of sounds or marks on paper into recognizable words, phrases, and sentences. Meaning of utterance is related to how utterance represents the semantics and pragmatics aspects. Local coherence is used to see the coherence relation which tie together the parts of a whole text. The text structure and point is to see the structure and point of a text.

3). Explanation

The last stage is the explanation of the relationship between interaction and social context. The objective of the stage of explanation is to portray a discourse as part of a social process, as a social practice, showing how it is determined by social structure, and what reproductive effects discourses can cumulatively have on those structures, sustaining them or changing them. It means that explanation is a matter of seeing a discourse as a part of process of social struggle, within a matrix of relation of power. In this stage, the result of interpratation will be matched with the result of respondents’ interview about teacher profile to know their ideology.

4. The Nature of Speech Act

a. Definition of Speech Acts

According to Searle, to understand language one must understand the speaker’s intention. Since language is intentional behavior, it should be treated like a form of action. Thus, Searle refers to statements as speech acts. The speech act is based unit of language used to express meaning, an utterance that expresses

an intention (Searle 1969). Speech acts are the underlying actions performed when someone speaks. Some examples are: inform command, promise, refuse, etc. Recognizing the speech act that is being performed in the production of an utterance is important because it is the speech act that to some extent tells what the speaker intends someone to do with the propositional content of what he says. It is suitable with the definition of speech acts given by Yule (2006: 118) who defines speech acts as the action performed by a speaker with an utterance. Normally when a speaker produces an utterance, he expects that his communicative intention will be recognized by the hearer. For example in the situation of a work where a boss has a great deal of power, says “you’re fired” to his employee. The boss’s utterance of the expression is more than just a statement. The utterance can be used to perform the act of ending the employment.

Yule (1996: 48) says that the action performed by producing an utterance will consist of three related acts. They are a locutionary act, illocutionary act, and perlucotionary act. Locutionary act is the basic act of utterance, or producing a meaningful linguistic expression. Illocutionary act is performed via the communicative force of an utterance. Perlucotionary act is an utterance with a function without intending it to have an effect. Another expert, Leech (1983: 199) briefly defines them as:

 locutionary act:performing an act of saying something

 illocutionary act:performing an act in saying something

Moreover he explains that locutionary act is the basic act of utterance, or producing meaningful linguistic expression. The locutionary act can be viewed as a mere uttering of some words in certain language, while the illocutionary and perlocutionary acts convey a more complicated message for the hearer. An illocutionary act communicates the speaker’s intentions behind the locution and a perlocutionary act reveals the effect the speaker wants to exercise over the hearer.

b. The Classification of Speech Acts

Yule (1996: 53) classifies speech acts into five types: declarations, representatives, expressives, directives, and commissives.

1. Declarations are those kinds of speech acts that change the world via their utterance.

a. Priest: I now pronounce you husband and wife. b. Referee: You’re out!

2. Representatives are those kinds of speech acts that state what the speaker believes to be the case or not. It involves statements of fact, assersations, conclusions, and descriptions. For examples:

a. The earth is flat.

b. It was a warm sunny day.

3. Expressives are those kinds of speech acts that state what speaker feels. They express the psychological states and can be statements of pleasure, pain, likes, dislikes, joy or sorrow.

For examples: a. I’m really sorry! b. Congratulations!

4. Directives are those kinds of speech acts that the speakers use to get someone else to do something. They express what the speakers want. They can be in form of commands, orders, requests, and suggestions. For examples:

a. Could you lend me a pencil, please?

b. Don’t touch that!

5. Commissives are those kinds of speech acts that speakers use to commit themselves to some future action. They express what the speaker intends. They are promises, threats, refusals, and pledges. For examples:

a. I’ll be back.

b. I’m going to get it right next time.

Schiffrin (2005: 2) infers the speech act from three properties; the content of utterence, the force or mood of the utterence and the position of the utterance within a conversation.

1. The content of the utterance means the proposition expressed by the utterance. Defining what that is is not always easy. For example when a speaker says “Shut the door”. It means the speaker wants someone “Bring it about that, by some (future) action, the proposition ‘The door is shut’ becomes true in the context of the physical world”. Of course it also uses background knowledge and knowledge of the speaker to deduce the content of an utterance. It can be

assumed for simplicity’s sake that this is possible to do – although not necessarily unambiguously so.

2.The force or mood of the utterance: This is achieved by what it is called as

descriptive, prescriptive and requestive markers, which roughly correspond to

the traditional mood types declarative, imperative and interrogative.

3. The position of the utterance within a conversation. The placing of an utterance in a conversation is important because the same content can be interpreted as different speech acts depending upon its position relative to other utterances in the same context. This inevitably affects the understanding of the function of the utterance.

For example, take the following hypothetical conversation: (1) A: The door is shut. (assert)

(2) B: The door is not shut. (disagree) (3a) A: The door is not shut. (concede) (3b) A: The door is shut. (insist)

This is a very crude example of how exactly the same utterance, even uttered in the space of a couple of turns, must be interpreted as performing quite different functions in the conversation. Obviously no-one actually ever speaks with the content fully specified in this way, this is just intended to be representative; if this conversation were to take place, it would be realized in a much more natural manner. However, it is clear that the only way one can attribute different speech act meanings to the same utterance (or the same propositional content of an utterance) is by reference to the conversational context and to the order in which it

comes in the dialogue. For example if on the performance of (3a) we only consider the preceding utterance, then the act would be deemed one of agreement rather than concession. Without some method of retaining where we are in the dialogue, we would be unable to interpret the current speech act satisfactorily.

Sinclair and Coulthard (1992) develop utterance into 14 acts; marker, statement, elicitation, check, directive, informative. Moreover they say that the structure of speech in the classroom mostly is started by the teacher. Teacher initiation can be divided into two; dependence speech and independence speech. Independence speech can be in form of teacher elicit, teacher inform, teacher direct, and teacher check. Teacher elicit is speech delivered by a teacher to direct students to one topic to know whether students remember or know about the topic or not. Elicit can be done not only in pre-teaching but also during the teaching. Teacher explanation is an utterance which is used by a teacher to give the fact, opinion or information to the students. Directive is an utterance to make students do something. Check is the utterance used by a teacher to check whether students understand, do, or finish the work given by a teacher. Dependence speech happen in the form of reinitiation, listing, repeat, and reinforcement. They happen depend on teacher elicit, direct. While the students’ initiative can be divided into two; pupil elicit and pupil inform. The example of students’ elicit is when studets have difficulty and they make questions. And the example of students’ inform is when students give information related to the topic.

Verschueren (1999: 24) argues that all speech acts in any language anywhere in the world fall into five categories:

1. Assertives: expressing a belief, making words fit the world, and commiting the speaker to the truth of what is asserted.

2. Directives: expressing a wish, making the world fit the words, and counting as an attempt to get the hearer to do something.

3. Commissives: expressing an intention, making the world fit the words and counting as a commitment for speaker to engage in a future course of action.

4. Expressives: Expressing a variety of psychological states, and simply counting as expressions of a psychological state.

5. Declarations: Not expressing any psychological state, making both the words fit the world and the world fit the words, and the point of which is to bring about a change in (institutional) reality.

In this study, the researcher uses only three categories of speech acts to know teacher’s power manifestation in language classroom. It is suitable with Jumadi (2005: 9) who says that the speech acts that can represent the power manifestation of the teacher in the classroom are directives, assertives, and expressives.

5. The Nature of English Language Teaching a. Theories of English Language Teaching

The position of English in Indonesia is as foreign language means that English is not used as a means of communication by Indonesian people but it is taught in the classroom. In other words, Indonesian people uses English just as a

subject in school especially in the English lesson class. To make students have English ability, improving the role of English language teaching is very important. Widdowson (1991: 3) defines language teaching as a research activity whereby experimental techniques of instruction are designed to correspond with hypothetical principles of pedagogy. Richards and Rodgers (2002: 18) view the general principles and theories of language teaching are how languages are learned, how knowledge of language is presented and organized in memory, or how language itself is structured. While Brown (1987) argues that teaching cannot be defined on its own, it must be include learning. Language teaching is activities which are intended to bring about language learning (Stern, 1996: 21). It means that English language teaching is a set of activities generated from the principles and theories of language teaching involving how English is learned which is intended to improve students’ English skills and enriching their knowledge about English language

Moreover, Richards and Rodgers (2002: 20) say that at least there are three different theoritical views of language teaching. They are the structural view, the fuctional view, and the interactional view. The structural view states that language is the system of structurally related elements for the coding of meaning. The target of language learning is seen to be the mastery of elements of linguistic system such as phonological units, grammatical units, grammatical operations, and lexical items.

The second view is the functional view where this view claims that language is a vehicle of expressiong functional meanings. This view argues that

the focus of language teaching should be on the semantic and communicative aspects rather than grammatical aspect and leads to a specification and organization of language content by categories of meaning and function rather than by elements of structure and grammar. The focus of teaching language according to functional view is on the communicative process involving negotiating meaning, sending and receiving messages and expressing values. It is suitable with the main function of language as the communication tool. In other words, we can say that the great idea from the functional view is that the goal of learning language essentially is how to make the learners have the communicative competences.

Richards (2006: 3) sees communicative competences as understanding how to use language for a range of different purposes and functions, understanding how to adjust language depending on the setting (socio-linguistics), knowing how to produce and understand different types of texts such as interviews and conversations for instance, as well as having the ability to continue communication in spite of one’s limitations in the language through the use of different strategies. It can be concluded that after learning a language, the learners are assumed that they are able to communicate well with others, know the content of reading text, handle the job interviews, and etc rather than how to answer the grammar test.

The third view is the interactional view. This view sees language as a vehicle for the realization of interpersonal relations and for the performances of

social interaction between individuals. Areas of language teaching of this view include interactional analysis, conversation analysis, and ethnomethodology.

In the teaching learning process, designing of teaching goal is important. Meanwhile, the goal of language teaching should be planned. Cook (2002) makes an open-ended list of the goals of language teaching that includes:

1. Self-development. The student becomes in some way a 'better' person through

learning another language. This goal is unrelated to the fact that some people actually use the second language, as in the group-related dynamics of Community Language Learning.

2. A method of training new cognitive processes. By learning another language,

students acquire methods of learning or new perspectives on themselves and their societies.

3. A way-in to the mother-tongue.The students' awareness of their first language

is enhanced by learning a second language.

4. An entrée to another culture. Students can come to understand other groups in

the world and to appreciate the music and art of other cultures.

5. A form of religious observance. For many people a second language is part of

their religion, whether Hebrew for the Jewish religion, Arabic for Muslims, or indeed English for Christians in some parts of the world.

6. A means of communicating with those who speak another language. We all

need to cope with people from other parts of the world, whether for business or pleasure.

7. The promotion of intercultural understanding and peace. For some the highest goals of language teaching are to foster negotiation rather than war or changes in the society outside the classroom.

Richards (2006: 2) proposes the goals of language teaching as communicative language teaching. The purpose of communicative language teaching is teaching of language competence including the following aspects of language knowledge:

1). Knowing how to use language for a range of different purposes and functions.

2). Knowing how to vary the use of language according to the setting and the participants. For example, knowing when to use formal and informal speech.

3). Knowing how to produce and understand different types of texts. for examples, narratives, reports, interviews, and conversations)

4). Knowing how to maintain communication despite having limitations in one’s language knowledge. For example through using different kinds of communication strategies.

Indeed, the goals of communicative approach can be reached if the students have much more opportunity to produce utterances in the classroom. Teacher should be able to facilitate students to increase their English ability. Teacher is also expected able to motivate students in order to increase their self-confidence to speak English. However, in the reality teacher still has power to dominate the classroom.

b. Power manifestation in ELT Classroom

Humans learn other languages for their existance. However, learning a second language i.e. English is definitely more difficult than acquiring the mother tongue. The setting of learning between first and second language learning is also different. In acquiring first language, learners usually acquire their language spontaneously and naturally. It is different from the learning of second language where the setting is in the classroom with formal situation. The learner does not get individual attention. The atmosphere is not child friendly like their home. The exposure to the language is for a limited period of time 30 to 45 minutes or an hour a day in comparison to 24 hours of language filled atmosphere at home. The learner does not have any opportunity to use the language outside the class. Even in the class there is a very little opportunity to use the language. It is more of a passive reception of the language in the classroom than the actual production of it. Another factor that can influence the success of learning of second language is the teacher. Sometimes the teacher is not proficient in language and the learner has a poor role model to imitate. In addition, learning is very much seen as under the control of the teacher. Teacher still dominates the classroom. In other words, teacher has shown his or her power to the classroom. Meanwhile, Harmer (1990: 52) says that a teacher is a major factor in the continuance of a student’s motivation.

Teacher has the important role in the success of teaching learning process. The duty of teacher is not only to share the knowledge, but also how to motivate students to learn. Harmer (1991: 53) proposes three areas where teacher’s

behaviour can directly influence students’ continuing participation in the classroom.

(1). Goals and goal setting. Motivation is closely bound up with a person’s desire to achieve a goal. Crookes and Lehner (1998) specify that should be carefully considered as goals in the teaching of ESL and EFL. As such, three goals must be considered: (a) Simultaneous development of English communicative abilities (b) Application of knowledge to develop a critical awareness of the world (c) Ability to act on knowledge and awareness to improve matters. (2). Learning environtment. Although teacher may not be able to choose the actual

classroom, a teacher still can do a lot about the classroom physical appearance and the emotional atmosphere of lesson. Both of these can have a powerful effect on the initial and continuing motivation of students.

(3). Interesting classes. Teacher needs to provide students with a variety of subjects and exercise to keep them engaged.

However, in the reality the participation of students in teaching learning process is still low. One factor makes students’ participation in the classroom low is the teacher’s dominance in the classroom. Teacher’s dominance means the teacher has performanced the power manifestation in the classroom. The forms of teacher’s power manifestation can be seen from teacher’s speech acts. As has mentioned earlier that there are five speech acts that can represent teacher’s power in language in the classroom. Here are speech acts forms which can represent teacher’s power in the classroom context.

1. The representation of power in directive speech act.

Directive act potentially represent the power in language use. Power illocutionary speech act requires that someone is doing something in accordance with the intent of speaker’s utterances. In realization, the use of speech acts presentes the speaker’s power.

a. Representation of power in command form

As one type of directive speech acts, command has certain characteristics. In expressing a particular speech, speaker wants the listener do what the speaker expresses. In the context of classroom, the form of command can occur when teachers provide guidance on learning programs, such as the direction of the learning materials that students will learn in a semester, the evaluation system will be implemented, as well as textbooks and worksheets to prepare students. In other words, when giving directions concerning matters that are considered urgent, teachers tend to use direct commands that present the dominant power.

However, viewed from the context of the classroom discourse, this phenomenon associated with the dominating culture that is still widely used in the learning system in Indonesian school. In a culture of learning that is dominating, school rules, learning materials, evaluation systems, and textbooks tend to be determined by the school or the teacher.

b. Representation of power in request form

Besides the command, the teachers and students are also using the directive with a request form). Compared with command, requests have

lower levels of restriction so that power also tends to be more humanistic represented. In classroom discourse, besides using order acts, a teacher also used request acts to his students. Fairclough (1998: 55) says that there is a close relationship between request and power. In addition Fairclough (1998:55) devides request acts into two; direct request and indirect request. Direct requests mark the power relationship explicitly and usually in imperative form. For example a boss request to his secretary: “Type this letter for me by 5 o’clock”. On the other hands, indirect requests mark the power relationship more or less implicit. In addition indirect requests can be more or less indirect, and they typically expressed grammatically in questions of various degrees of elaborateness and corresponding indirectness. For example: (1) Can you type this letter for me by 5 o’clock?, (2) Could I possibly ask you to type this letter for me by 5 o’clock?. There are also other ways of indirectly requesting, for instance in this sentence: I would like to have the letter in the 5 o’clock post. However, compared with order acts, request acts have lower levels of restriction so that power also tends to be more humanistic represented. c. Representation of power in prohibition form

The form of prohibitation equals to command but in form of negative command. For example, a teacher prohibits students to not come late. If there is a students breaks the teacher’s rule, there will be a punishment from a teacher. Al-Saaidi, Al-Shaibani & Al-Husseini (2013) classify the prohibition acts into three levels: Prohibition in syntatic level, Prohibition

in semantic level, and Prohibition in pragmatic level. According to the syntactic point of view, there are various ways in which prohibition can be achieved. These ways are as follows:

1. Imperative sentence

The imperative can be used to forbid an action. According to Jawad quoted by Al-Saaidi, Al-Shaibani & Al-Husseini (2013), the basic difference between a ‘command’ and a ‘prohibition’ is that the former indicates instructing the addressee to do something whereas the latter indicates instructing the addressee NOT [author’s emphasis] to do a given thing. Thus, it could be claimed that a ‘prohibition’ is a kind of a negative ‘command’. For examples: keep clean!, Don’t open your book!

2. Declarative sentence

Allan (1986) confirmed that a declarative sentence can be used in performing any subcategory of speech act including prohibition to denote an actualization of the illocutionary act. This is done either through clauses containing a performative verb, or through the meaning of the predicates in such sentences as the followings:

Example 1: I forbid you to speak to him. [Clause containing a

performative verb]

3. Negative verb be with to + infinitive

Thomson and Martinet (1980) states that prohibition can be carried out through another common construction which is the negative verb be with to infinitive.

Example: You are not to come into my room without knocking.

4. Block Language

Prohibition can be expressed by another construction that is of a block language. Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech, and Svartvik, (1985) discusses that block language appears in functions as labels, titles, (some) newspaper headlines, headings, notices, and advertisements. For examples: No entry!, No smoking area!, and No camera! (the context in the fashion boutique).

According to semantic level, the prohibition can be in form of modality sentences. There are negative modal auxiliaries which can be used with prohibitive sentences such as (must not, may not, cannot, shall

not, and have not got to). For example: (1) Students must not use

dictionaries in the examination. (2) You cannot go abroad without a

passport.

According to pragmatic level, prohibition act can be classified as Prohibitive Performative Verbs and Hedges. Allan (1986) argues that the verb spells out the illocutionary force of the performative clause effectively because the meaning of the performative verb presents the essence of the illocution, e.g. I promise, I forbid, and I prohibit. While for

hedge, Fraser (1980) says that some illocutionary acts can be effectively performed by a type ofcsentence which is called “hedged performative”.

For example, to utter: “I must forbid you from saying anything” may

count as an act of forbidding, though the literal interpretation of this is only a report of obligation.

d. Representation of power in permission form

The form of permission usually happen in the classroom, when a teacher gives permission to students to do or not do something. For example, a teacher gives permission to a sick students go home earlier.

e. Representation of power in advice form

In the context in the classroom, as one who has more experience, a teacher usually gives advices to students to do positive thing or not to do negative thing. For example, when a teacher advices students to not stay up. Teacher explains the bad effect to stay up to students.

f. Representation of power in asking form

Asking is one form of directive form of power in the classroom. A teacher can give questions to his or her students, and students have to answer it. It means that by giving questions, a teacher expects students give information related to the questions. Questions can be related to the subject or not. For example, a teacher asks students the definition of simple sentence. Another example is teacher asks students why they did not come yesterday.

2. The representation of power in assertive speech acts

Assertive is one of speech acts that can represent the form of power, whether by teacher or students. According to Searle (1976), speech acts has function to inform others about something. This function is very important in the classroom context, because the process in transfering knowledge, skills, and attitude in the learning process can not be separated from the process of giving information.

3. The representation of power in expressive speech acts

The expressive speech acts is also the representation of power of teacher and students. The expressive act is the expression about psychological conditionss such as the feeling of happiness, unhappiness, like, dislike, sorrow, and etc.

6. The Nature of Attitude a. Definition of Attitude

The duty of a teacher in the class is not only to share the knowledge or skills to students but also to form the good character of students. One form of good characters must be owned by students is learning attitude, because students’attitudes will influence their learning achievement. Students’ perceptions of courses and attitudes toward learning play a significant role in retention and

enrollment (Seymour and Hewitt, 1997; Gasiewski et al., 2012). However, it

cannot be avoided that the teacher also performs power manifestation in the classroom. Consequently, it will influence to students’ learning attitude. The definitions of attitude are complex and various. Brown (2001: 61) says that

attitude is characterized by a large proportion of emotional involvement such as feelings, self, relationships in community. Gardner (1985: 91-93) claims that attitude is an evaluative reaction to some referent or attitude object, inferred on the basis of the individual’s beliefs or opinions about the referent. Moreover, Gajalakshmi (2013) says that attitude is determined by the individual’s beliefs about outcomes or attributes of performing the behavior (behavioral beliefs), weighted by evaluations of those outcomes or attributes. From the definitions above, it can be concluded that attitude is a set of beliefs developed in a due course of time as outcomes someone’s perception about something or someone. In this context, students’ learning attitude is a set of students’ belief towards teaching learning process as an accumulation from students’ perception about teacher and learning activities.

Thus, a person who holds strong beliefs that positively valued outcomes will result from performing the behavior will have a positive attitude toward the behavior. Conversely, a person who holds strong beliefs that negatively valued outcomes will result from the behavior will have a negative attitude.” Attitude concept can be viewed from these three dimensions. These dimensions are based on the three theoretical approaches of behaviorism, cognitivism and humanism. It means that people’s attitudes are believed to be the result of cognitive, affective and behavioral processes that are influence by our past and current experiences and social interactions. These processes can have an influence in the way people remember, interpret, judge, and respond to social information. This notion is based on the idea that people attitudes have a powerful impact on behavior and

attitude formation. More generally, people thoughts, actions, character and conduct do not always match our inner convictions.

b. Students’ Attitude

Attitudes toward learning are believed to influence behaviors such as selecting and reading books, speaking in a foreign language etc. Especially in education, if the students have positive attitude towards any subject, they can achieve many things in that specific area. There is an interaction between language learning and the environmental components in which the students were grown up. Both negative and positive attitudes have a strong impact on the success of language learning. Chamber (1999) asserts that learning occurs more easily, when the learner has a positive attitude towards the language and learning. However, observing students’ attitude directly is rather difficult because their beliefs tend to be hidden. It just can be inferred from their behaviour both verbal and nonverbal.

Discovering students’ attitude about language will help both teacher and student in the teaching learning process. Therefore, teacher has to consider the crucial role of affective domain. The characteristics of affective domain are:

interest, values and tendency and most of these shape our attitudes (Saracaloğlu,

2000). Valuing, belief, interest and expectations are refers to affective

characteristics. In the same work, Saracaloğlu(quoted from Bloom 1973) points out that these affective characteristics have a great impact on learning as well. Baker (1988) identifies the characteristics of attitude:

2. For Students

They should keep in mind that essentially the purpose of teacher’s power manifestation is how to make teaching learning process can run well. It needs students’ awareness to reach the teaching learning goal.

3. For Researchers

Furthermore, it is also a very good idea for the next researchers especially who are interested in teaching learning process in the classroom to use this research as one of their main references.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allan, Keith. (1986). Linguistic Meaning. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics Vol. 2.London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Al-Saaidi, Al-Shaibani & Al-Husseini. (2013). Speech Act of Prohibition in English and Arabic: A Constrastive Study on Selected Biblical and Quranic Verses.Arab World English Journal. AWEJ Vol 4.No. 4 2013 Bach, Kent and Harnish, Robert M. (1979) Linguistic communication and Speech

Acts. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Baker, Colin. (1988). Key Issues in Bilingualism and Bilingual Education. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.

Brown, H.D. (1987). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Brown, H.D. (2000). Principles of Language learning and teaching (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Brown, Gillian and Yule, George. (1988) Discourse Analysis. New York. Cambridge University Press.

Brown, Roger, and Albert Gilman. (1960). The pronouns of power and solidarity. ~Style in language, ed. by Thomas Sebeok,. Cambridge, Mass.: M.l.T. Press.

Bukhari, Nasir. H.S. and Xiaoyang Wang. Critical Discourse Analysis and Educational Research IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME) e-ISSN: 2320–7388,p-ISSN: 2320–737X Volume 3, Issue 1 (Sep. –Oct. 2013), PP 09-17 www.iosrjournals.org

Chambers GN (1999) Motivating Language Learners. Modern Languages in Practice 12. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (1999) Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking critical discourse analysis. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press. Cohen, D. J., & Crabtree, B. F. (2008). Evaluative criteria for qualitative research

in health care: Controversies and recommendations. Annals of Family Medicine, 6(4), 331‐339.

Cook, V.J. (2002). Language teaching methodology and the L2 user perspective. In V.J Cook (ed), Portraits of the L2 User, Clevedon: Multilinguage Matters.

Coultas, Amanda (2003), Language and Social Contexts. Routledge A level English guides. London. Routledge

Creswell, John W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Creswell, John W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, Conducting, and

Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Reserach, 3rd Ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education International.

Crookes, G., & Lehner, A. (1998). Aspects of process in an ESL critical pedagogy teacher education course. TESOL Quarterly, 32(2), 319-328.

Fairclough, Norman (1993). Critical Discourse Analysis and the Marketisation of Public Discourse: The Universities. Discourse & Society 4(2): 133-168 Fairclough, Norman (1989). Language and Power. New York. Longman Inc. Fairclough, Norman (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The Critical Study of

Language. New York. Longman Inc.

Fairclough, Norman (2001). Language and Power (2nd edition). London: Longman

Gajalakshmi (2013). High School Students’ Attitude Towards Learning English Language. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 3, Issue 9, September 2013

Gardner, R. C. (1972). Social Psychology and Second Language Learning. The Role of Attitudes and Motivation. London: Edward Arnold

Gardner, R.C. (1985). Language attitudes and language learning. in E. Bouchard Ryan & H. Giles, Attitudes towards language variation. Massachusets: Newbury House Publishers

Geis, Michael L (1995) Speech Acts and Conversational Interaction. New York: Cambridge University Press

Leech, Geoffrey. (1983) Principles of Pragmatics. New York: Longman Singapore Publishing.

Harmer, Jeremy. (1991). The Practice of English Language Teaching.Cambridge: Pearson Longman

Huckin et al., (2012) Critical Discourse analysis and Rhetoric and Composition. Available on www.ncte.org

Jumadi. (2005). Representasi Kekuasaan dalam Wacana Kelas. Jakarta: Pusat Balai Bahasa Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.

Korompot, Chairil Anwar (1999) Teacher-student Power Relationships in Language Classrooms: A Comparative Case Study in ESL and EFL Contexts.Adelaide: University of Adelaide Press

Kristina, Diah (2013). Current Trends in Discourse Analysis for Language Teaching. Handout of Discourse Analysis Lesson

Maftoon, Parviz and Shakouri Nima (2012). The Concept of Power in Teacher Talk: A Critical Discourse Analysis in World Applied Sciences Journal Vol 19, No. 8. http://www.idosi.org/wasj/wasj19(8)12

Martínez, Dolores Fernández (2012). Critical Learning: Critical Discourse Analysis in EFL Teaching in Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 3, No. 2.

Mills, Sara. (1997). Diskursus: Sebuah Piranti Analisis dalam Kajian Ilmu Sosial. Diterjemahkan oleh Ali Noer Zaman. Jakarta: Penerbit Qalam.

Perkins, K.K and Adams, W.K. (2003). Correlating Student Attitudes With Student Learning Using The Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey. Colorado: Department of Physics University of Colorado

Quirk, Randolph; Greenbaum, Sidney; Leech, Geoffrey; Svartvik, Jan (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Harlow: Longman. Richard, Jack (2006). Communicative language Teaching Today. New York:

Cambridge University Press

Richard, Jack and Roger, Theodore (2002). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press

Santoso, Anang (2002). “Penggunaan Bahasa Indonesia dalam Wacana Politik”. Disertasi. Malang: Program Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Malang Saracaloğlu A.S (2000). The Relation Between Traniee Teachers’ Attitudes to

Schiffrin, Amanda (2005) Modelling Speech Acts in Conversational Discourse. Leeds: University of Leeds.

Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: an essay in the philosophy of language. London: Cambridge University Press.

Searle, J.R. (1976). A Classification of Illocutionary Act. Language in Society. Vol. 5.No. 1. Cambridge University. Press. www.jstor.org/stable/4166848

Seymour and Hewitt. (1997) Talking About Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press

Shastri, Dave Pratima (2010). Communicative Approach to The Teaching of English as The Second Language. Mumbai: Himalaya Publishing House Sinclair and coulthard (1992). Towards discourse analysis. in Coulthard, M

Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis. Page 1-34. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Spradley, James P (1980)Participant Observation.New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Stern, H.H. (1992). Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Suharyo. & Irianto. (2009). Kekuasaan Sosial Dalam Bahasa (Studi Kasus Pada Komunikasi Verbal Dalam KBM Di SMPN 32 Semarang. http://eprints.undip.ac.id.

Thomas, F. Karen and Rinehart, Stevan D. (1994), Instituting Whole Language: Teacher Power and Practice inReading Horizon Journal Vol. 35

Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. London: Longman

Thomas, Linda and Wareing, Shan (2005). Language, Society and Power. New York: Routledge.

Todd, Loreto (1995). An Introduction to Linguistics. Singapore: Longman Singapore Publishers.

Tollefon, Jamew. W. (1995) Power and Inequality in Language Education. New York: Cambridge University Press

Trochim, W. M. (2006). The Research Methods Knowledge Base, 2nd Editionion. Retrieved from Internet on January 25, 2014 from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/index.php.

Van Dijk, Teun A. (1998a). Ideology: A Multidisciplianary Study. London: Sage Van Dijk, Teun A. (2001): ”Critical Discourse Analysis“. In: Tannen, D./ Van

Dijk, Teun A. Schiffrin, D./Hamilton, H. (eds.): Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.

Widdowson, H.G. (1991) Aspects of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Wodak, R. (1996). Disorders of Discourse.London: Longman.

Wodak, Ruth & Meyer, Michael (2001). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage

Yuwono, Untung. 2005. “Wacana” dalam Kushartanti, dkk (Eds.), Pesona Bahasa: Langkah Awal Memahami Linguistik. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama

Yule, George (1996). Pragmatics.New York: Oxford University Press.

Yule, George (2006). The Study of Language 3rd Edition. New York: Cambridge University Press.