ANAPHORIC AND CATAPHORIC FUNCTION ON PERSONAL REFERENCES USED IN ENGLISH POLITICAL NEWS ARTICLES “(A Comparative Study between Indonesian and American Authors)” A GRADUATING PAPER Submitted to the Board of Examiners as a Partial Fulfillment of the Require

  

ANAPHORIC AND CATAPHORIC FUNCTION

ON PERSONAL REFERENCES USED IN ENGLISH

POLITICAL NEWS ARTICLES

“(A Comparative Study between Indonesian and American Authors)”

A GRADUATING PAPER

  

Submitted to the Board of Examiners as a Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan (S.Pd.)

  

English Education Department of Teacher Training and Education Faculty

State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Salatiga

By: NOVI KHOFIDOH 11313135 ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY STATE INSTITUTE FOR ISLAMIC STUDIES (IAIN) SALATIGA 2017

  

MOTTO

“Allah does not change the condition of people, therefore they

change it themselves”

  (QS. Ar- Ra’d: 11)

If you believe you can, you might. If you know

you can, you will.

  

(Steve Maraboli)

  

DEDICATION

  This study is dedicated for: 1.

  My lovely Allah SWT who is always with me and gives me strength.

  2. My lovely mother, Konidah and my lovely father Wasjan, who always love, take care and pray for me.

  3. Someone who will give me a true love, care, trust, and spirit of my life.

  

ABSTRACT

Khofidoh, Novi. 2017.

  “ANAPHORIC AND CATAPHORIC FUNCTION ON PERSONAL REFERENCES USED IN ENGLISH POLITICAL NEWS ARTICLES (A Comparative Study between Indonesian and American Authors)”. Graduating Paper. English Education Department, Faculty

  of Teacher Training Education, State Institute for Islamic Studies of Salatiga. Advisor: Noor Malihah, Ph.D.

  Keywords: Reference, Political News, Anaphoric Reference, Cataphoric Reference.

  This research compared and analyzed the use of anaphoric and cataphoric function on personal references used in English political news articles written by American and Indonesian authors. It aimed to 1) understand the types of personal references mostly used by Indonesian and American authors, 2) describe do Indonesian authors use anaphoric function on personal references as frequent as the American ones, 3) describe do Indonesian authors use cataphoric function on personal references as frequent as the American ones, 4) see the percentage of comparison between Indonesian and American authors in writing political news articles. Thus, 40 political news articles from International and national online newspapers were selected from July to August 2017. Those news articles included 20 on Indonesian political news and 20 on American ones. The instrumentation that was used is from Gorjian, et al (2015: 20) in classifying types of references and Azzour, B. (2009:29) in classifying whether anaphoric and cataphoric function. Descriptive qualitative showed that the comparison between them in both personal references and anaphoric function used are very low. The most

  rd

  personal references used by both groups is 3 person male “he”, and the least is addressee “you”. Thus, both American and Indonesian authors are almost equal in using personal references, in types and quantity. Similarly, both also almost same in using anaphoric function, yet Indonesian underuse cataphoric function and overuse other function (exophoric).

  TABLE OF CONTENT TITLE PAGE ………………………………….………………………..…..…i ATTENTIVE COUNSELOR NOTES…………………………........…....….ii GRADUATING PAPER ……………..……………….……..…….….….….iii DECLARATION……………………………………….…………..…….…iv

  MOTTO……………………………………………..……………….….….…v DEDICATION……………………………….……………..…………….... .vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

  ……………………………………….….......…vii ABSTRACT…………………………………………………….……………iv TABLE OF CONTENT ……………………….…………..……..……………x LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURE ……………..…..………….….…..……xiii LIST OF GRAPHIC.. …………………………………..…………..……….xiv LIST OF APPENDICES……………………………...…………....………..xv

  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Research…………………….…..………….….….1 B. Problems of the Research………………..………..……..……..….….4 C. Limitation of the Research………………………………..…...……....5 D. Objective of the Research…………………………....…..……...…… 5 E. Significances of the Research………………………...…………..…...6 F. Clarification of the Key Terms…………………..…………..….….…7 G. Paper Organization…………………..…………..……….......…….…9 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE A. Previous Research……………..…………………….……..……..…10

  B.

  Theoretical Background on Cohesion and Cohesive Devices….……13 1.

  Cohesion………………………………….…….….…......….13

  2. Classification of Cohesive Devices………….…….……...…14 3.

  Reference………………..………………….….……....….…16 3.1.

  Endophoric and Exophoric references……...……..…17 a. Anaphoric references……….....……………………..20 b.

  Cataphoric references……………………...……...…21 3.2.

  Types of reference………………….………………..22 a. Personal References………………….…….………...22 b.

  Demonstrative References……………………..……23 c. Comparative References…………………….……….24

  CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY A. Types of Research……………………..……….…………….…..….25 B. Object of the Research……………………………..………....……..26 C. Source of Data Collection………………………….…..….....……...26 D. Technique of Data Collection…………………………….……..…...29 E. Technique of Data Analysis…………………………..….……….....31 CHAPTER IV DATA ANALYSIS A. Personal references mostly used by American and Indonesian authors…………………………………………..…………….......….32 B.

  Anaphoric of Personal references used by American and Indonesian authors…………………………………………….…………........….47 C.

  Cataphoric of Personal references used by American and Indonesian aut hors………………………………………………….….……........48 D.

  The percentage of comparison between Indonesian and American authors in writing p olitical article……………………..........….……59

  CHAPTER V CLOSURE A. Conclusions………………………………………………….........…59 B. Suggestions…………………………………………………..........…60 REFERENCES APPENDICES

  LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1: Cohesive

  Devices…………………………………….........…..……...15 Table 2.2: Personal references……………………………...………..….….……23 Table 2.3: Demonstrative reference………………………………...….….……..23 Table 2.4: Comparative reference………………………………...…….....……..24 Table 4.1: Personal references used by American authors………………...…….32 Table 4.2

  : personal references used by Indonesian authors……………….…….39

  rd

  Table 4.3: American and Indonesian authors in using 3 personal references ….45 Table 4.4: Anaphoric function used by American and Indonesian authors

  ……...47 Table 4.5: Cataphoric function used by American and Indonesian authors……. 48 Table 4.6: Distribution of personal references used by American and Indonesian authors……………………………………………………………………...…….49 Table 4.7: Distribution of anaphoric and cataphoric function used by American and Indonesian authors……….…………………………………………….……54

  LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Types of reference based on general rule………………….…..……17

  rd

  Figure 4.2: types of the 3 personal male used by American authors………..…36

  rd

  Figure 4.4: types of 3 person male used by Indonesian authors…………….…44

  LIST OF APPENDICES

  1. Data Sheets

  2. Author’s biographies

  3. Data Analysis

  4. Political news articles

  5. Counselor Letter

  6. Consultation’s sheet

  7. SKK

  8. Curriculum Vitae

  9. Permission for publication

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION In this chapter the researcher tries to present the introduction of the

  research. It consists of the background of the research, problems of the research, limitation of the research, objectives of the research, significant of the research, clarification of key terms, and paper organization.

A. Background of the Research

  As it is widely known that language is a primary necessary in our life since by the use of language people are able to tell their messages as well as to express their feeling and willing to others. Language also can help everyone to do an interaction to others, particularly, in their social life, as the members of society. Language is created as a vital instrument to deliver a message or information by the use of speaking, writing (verbal communication) as well the body gesture and face (non-verbal communication).

  Almost in everyday live, people can not escape from the use of language. Since the use of speaking and writing included into verbal communication, people should give any connection as ties or signal from one sentence to another or within their utterences to avoid misscommunication. Those ties or signals commonly known as cohesion.

  A text or discourse is not just a group of words or sentences for introducing different random topics. It should combine each sentences or words in logical way according to their meaning. Therefore, cohesion as the important principle within the creation of text is the connections to manifest the interpretation of a textual element in a text.

  Dooley and Levinson (2001: 15) state that cohesion is linguistic signals in the text as clues to assist the hearers in coming up with an adequate mental representation. This can be defined briefly as the use of linguistic signals which means the connections that links up between sentences which bring about the concept of mental representation of the hearer as the reaction of the speaker’s utterances (interlocutors).

  Some discourse devices which function to make a text be cohesive and understandable are named cohesive devices. The effect of these discourse devices in writing is very strong since they provide some types of appropriate devices to make any piece of discourse be cohesive. On the one hand, since the traditional grammar of English focuses on forms and not syntax, means students should not confuse to have sentences in combination to make a cohesive texts or discourse. Furthermore, as foreign language students writing a text is one of an obligation task which commonly occurs. On the other hand, it is not easy to non native students (Indonesians) in creating a text as real native students (Americans).

  As non-native students, Indonesian should not be a native in other language, because it seems to be impossible. Meanwhile, being a near- native of a learned language is the best choice to take. However, in learning foreign language almost all of students do not aware about grammatical structure of their text, particularly in the connections or links between texts to make the text meaningful. Then, even if they use correct grammatical structure, they may confuse in using the cohesive devices in composing a text. Besides, since English as the foreign language of Indonesian learners, they may have different way in choosing as well as using cohesive devices with American learners. It is can be seen on the way of using cohesive devices of references between Indonesian author in The Jakarta post and American author in The Washington times in the politic fields. For example:

  (1) Representing the organization is senior lawyer and former law and human rights

minister Yusril Ihza Mahendra, who in his first statement to the court asked the justices to

decide who should file the complaint in the first place.

  (2) In a 10-minute interview on the Russian news program Vesti, Natalia

Veselnitskaya said she sought the meeting as part of her efforts to help Russian

businessman Denis Katsyv, a client who was accused of money laundering after the U.S.

imposed new financial sanctions on Moscow in 2012.

  In point (1) Indonesian author composes 38 words with 1 personal reference there. That perso nal reference occurs in pronouns “his” as head of modifier which refers back to “Yusril Ihza Mahendra”. This means the personal reference there includes in Anaphoric references, because it refers back to the left.

  Meanwhile, on point (2) American author only uses 2 personal references on 47 words. They are “she, her”. “She” comes as the subject whether “her” as the possessive pronouns from “she” functions as modifier. However, both of them includes in anaphoric references, because they refers back to the l eft antecedent “Vesti, Natalia Veselnitskaya”. Those differences represent how Indonesian and American students use cohesive devices of references, particularly in personal reference based on their antecedent to refer to on their texts.

  Therefore, considering the reality which being shown above, the researcher takes the digital newspaper as samples to carry out the topic of the research by the title: ANAPHORIC AND CATAPHORIC FUNCTION ON PERSONAL REFERENCES USED IN ENGLISH POLITICL NEWS ARTICLES (Comparative study between American and Indonesian authors)

B. Problems of the research

  Based on the background of the research, the researchers would like to compose the problems as follows:

1. What types of personal references mostly used by Indonesian and

  American authors in writing political article? 2. Do Indonesian authors use anaphoric function on personal references as frequent as American authors?

  3. Do Indonesian authors use cataphoric function on pesonal references as frequent as American authors?

  4. What is the percentage of comparison between Indonesian and American authors in writing political article?

  C. Limitation of the Research

  The researchers would like to limit the scope of the research on the following problems in order to avoid misinterpretation of the problem.

  They are:

  1. The researcher limits the study only in analyzing the personal references, as well comparing the anaphoric and cataphoric of personal references used by Indonesian and American authors in their political articles.

  2. This research only held on digital political news articles which is published weather nationally or internationally, yet it is not articles which is published on international journals.

  3. The object of the research here are those political news which is published on july to Agust in 2017. Furthermore, only political news which mention their author’s name are selected.

  D. Objectives of the Research

  The general objective of this research is to analyze and compare the differences between Indonesian and American authors in using cohesive devices of references in their political news. The specific objectives of this research are:

  1. To understand the types of peronal references mostly used by Indonesian and American authors in their political news.

  2. To describe do Indonesian authors use anaphoric of personal frequent as significant as the American ones in the political articles

  3. To describe do Indonesian authors use cataphoric of personal references as frequent as the American ones in the political articles

  4. To see what is the percentage of comparison between Indonesian and American authors in writing political article.

E. Significances of the Research

  Through this research, the researchers hope that it can give advantages. This research is expected to give theoretical and practical benefits.

  1. Theoretical benefits The result of the research can be used as the additional reference forthose who want to make a research in English language especially in semantics term. The finding of this research also can enrich the reference of linguistics research.

  2. Practical benefits.

  a.

  For Other Authors The result of the research can be a reference in linguistics dealing with semantics and grammatical research in using cohesive devices of references, particarly in anaphoric and cataphoric function on personal references used by american or Indonesian authors.

  b.

  For English Students The result of research can enrich student’s knowledge about the types of references commonly used as well the differences between Indonesian and American authors in choosing whether anaphoric or cataphoric function on their articles which can emerge the way they think best.

F. Clarification of the Key Terms.

  1. Cohesive Devices

  A good text or discourse needs term to refer to a single instance of cohesion to create a cohesive text. Cohesive devices are used to tie pieces of text together in a specific way. Harmer (2004) states the aim of cohesive devices is to help the reader understand the items referred to, the ones replaced and even the items omitted (Azzouz, 2009: 25). Therefore, cohesive devices are some linguistics features which aim to give connections that link up words or sentences and give signal of the unity of text.

  2. Reference

  The traditional view of reference, Lyons (1968: 404) in Yule (1983: 28) says that 'the relationship which holds between words and things is the relationship of reference: words refer to things'.

  Furthermore, Yule (1983: 28) states in discourse analysis, reference is treated as an action on the part of the speaker / writer. Overall, the researcher concluded that reference is one of grammatical cohesive devices types which bring an appropriate interpretation that links between sentences which refers to any thing and able to force the interlocutors to do something as the speaker will.

  3. Political News Munroe (2002: 31) defines politics as anything that has to do with the government of a country. This definition is in the same line with that found in the Concise Oxford Dictionary

  (ninth edition) “the art and science of government”. In spite of those, this definition has become inadequate in academic point of view because of the developments and the change of political life in recent study only concern with government. Therefore, t he word “political newspapers” means a newspaper which provides information or news in the term of politics which describes political life in government.

  4. Anaphoric References

  According to Azzouz (2009:28) anaphoric relation is all kinds of activities which involve looking back in texts to find the referent. It means, when the relations of any cohesive devices of references located in the left; the antecedent has mentioned before, it named anaphoric references.

  5. Cataphoric References

  Cataphoric relation looks forward for their interpretation (Azzouz, 2009: 28). This interpret that a cataphoric references always look forward. It is because their referent is located on the right one.

G. Paper Organization

  The paper organizations of the research are as follow:

  Chapter I is introduction. It consists of the background of the research, problems of the research, limitation of the research, objectives of the research, significances of the research, clarification of the key terms, and paper organization.

  Chapter II is about the review of related literature. It consists of previous research, and theoretical framework on cohesion and cohesive devices.

  Chapter III is about the methodology of the research. It consists of types of research design, source of the data, technique of data collection, and technique of data analysis.

Chapter IV is finding of this research: it describes personal references

  mostly used by american and indonesian authors, anaphoric funtion on personal references used by American and Indonesian authors, cataphoric function on personal references used by American and Indonesian authors, and the percentage of comparison between Indonesian and American authors in writing political article.

  Chapter V is about conclusion based on the analysis result. The researchers also propose some suggestions to improve this research for further research in linguistics

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE In this chapter, the researcher tries to present about the review of

  related literature of the research. It consists of previous research and theoretical framework on cohesion and cohesive devices.

A. Previous Research

  A research of cohesive devices was held by many researchers in general and Hallidian researchers in particular.

  Recently, the comparative research framework has been applied to the analysis of Korean EFL writers' texts in comparison to native speakers' texts. For example, Eun and Jeon (2009) analyzed research articles written by advanced Korean EFL writers and English native writers in an attempt to investigate the similarities and differences in the use of the two cohesive devices between two language groups. They found that there was not much difference in the overall use of the selected cohesive devices between the two groups. They attributed the reasons for the similarities to high English proficiency of Korean writers, and their hyper-correction, indicating that advanced Korean writers are as good as native speakers of English at using cohesive devices and that they seemed to overcome the L1 interference and successfully convert cohesion devices between L1 and English. These studies, taken together, support the notion that the effectiveness of L2 written texts may be impaired or enhanced by the writer’ use of cohesive devices. Other research by Na, Y.H. (2011) has compared the use of cohesive devices which is employed in Computer- Mediated Communication (CMC) texts of native speakers (NSs) and non-native speakers (NNSs) of English. She presents the study on American and Korean EFL writers of 161 CMC texts. The study indicates that NNSs employer certain cohesive devices (conjunction & lexical cohesion) at significant frequency rates than do NSs. It also indicates that Korean EFL learners relay on cohesive features as well display it in constructing CMC texts. Therefore, the use of cohesive devices may depend on the grammatical structures used in learners or writers first language.

  Some comparative studies also held to see the similarities and differences of the use of cohesive devices of references, for example the study in 200 political news article written by Persian non-native authors and American native authors. The study shown that there was a vast difference between the natives’ and the non-natives’ use of cohesive devices such as reference weather in frequent, variety as well control. The study also described some factors may influence the result such as: lack of mastery on cohesive markers, teacher competences, as well their first language (Gorjian et al: 2015).

  More recently, a growing number of studies have been conducted not only on how non-native writers use cohesive devices differently from their native, but also on why they use these different devices, and what kind of teaching might be helpful for them (Aktas & Cortes, 2008; Eun & Jeon, 2009; Hinkel, 2001). From these more qualitatively oriented studies, various misuses of cohesive devices were reported and analyzed, then potential reasons for the misuses were speculated including the low proficiency of English of L2 writers, interference by the mother tongue, insufficient knowledge about the readers and discourse community, and hyper-corrections, etc.

  Jaya, in her works on 2013 has analyzed some types of personal references used in the prose entitled “Calon Arang”. The result study indicates that the writer of Calon Arang prose used some types of personal references such as: I, her, he, you, their, we, and one. The study also find that the author of “Calon Arang” prose prefer to use Anaphoric references rather than cataphoric references. Another studies in anaphoric references by Genc & Bada (2006) which aimed to compare the use of reference forms

  

in the oral narratives of Turkish EFL learners and native speakers of English;

particularly the study examines the similarities and differences between the

use of anaphoric references illustrated that native and non-native productions

have rather similar nature in terms of type and quantity of anaphoric

references.

  Therefore, since there have been virtually no studies that analyzed the use of cohesive devices in English political news written by Indonesian authors and American authors, this study is conducted to add the growing number of comparative studies on cohesion, focusing on personal references used in political news articles. Hopes this study can inspire the teachers as pedagogical organizer to let the focus on the importance of a good writing cohesively.

B. Theoretical Background on Cohesion and Cohesive Devices

1. Cohesion Cohesion has been studied in various aspects of linguistics.

  Halliday and Hasan (1976: 6) define cohesion as the “set of semantic configuration that is typically associated with a particular class of context of situation, and defines the substance of text”. They argue that the function of cohesion is to relate between texts, paragraphs, sentences to another part of them. Furthermore, Azzouz (2009:24) states that Cohesion is a semantic property of a text sticking together in some way; it means a cohesive text tends to link its sentences together semantically. Besides, most of scholars (Beaugrande & Dressler, 1981; Halliday & Hasan, 1976, 1989, Kreidler, 2002) define cohesion as the network or links of lexical, grammatical, and other linguistics relations (Gorjian, B. et al, 2015: 15).

  Osisanwo (2005:31) remarks that a text is said to be cohesive when the linguistic means by which a text function is held together as a single unit.

  In the same line, Martutik et al. (2006: 88) states cohesion is a connections within a text which signaled by the use of linguistics means. This means, cohesion as the important principle on the creation of a text gets a responsibility in the term of text unity which signaled by linguistics means.

  The term “cohesion” is sometimes confused with “coherence” which has to do

  

with sense. Osisanwo (2005:43) explains that cohesion differs from

coherence. He illustrates with these sentences: (3) {He phoned the police} Coherent but not cohesive (4) {The midnight guests had come} (5) {He phoned the police because the midnight guests had come} Cohesive and coherent.

  The cohesive device used in the above text is “because” it gives the

reason why the police was phoned. Thus, this makes a complete text. The

parts are well connected and it’s meaningful (Akindele, 2011: 99). Overall,

the researcher determines that cohesion usually occurs within text which is

characterized by linguistics means. Meanwhile, coherent usually comes with

the sense and context at the time a text is composed.

2. Classification of Cohesive Devices

  The classifications of cohesive devices in academic discourse are distinguished into grammatical cohesion, lexical cohesion and more sub categories within them. Generally people classify the cohesion into two categories.

  Table 2.1: Cohesive Devices

  Category Function Examples Grammatical Help to guide reader through a text Cohesion Reference Create link between These/her/similar/it/otherwise/ sentences

  Replace a particular Substitution One/ones/same/do/so item Leave out particular

  Ellipsis item from sentences Conjunction Show relationship Moreover/and/but/or/ for between sentences instance

  Lexical Cohesion Involve the reader in the argument Repetition Restate the same e.g., money for money lexical item General nouns Refer back to e.g., table (inanimate), peole animate and (human)

inanimate nouns

  Synonymy Express similar e.g., slope = incline

meaning on item

Super Involves the use of e.g., “vehicle” for “car” Ordinates general class words Collocation Tendency of some e.g., fruit, skin, citrus, etc.

words to co-occur

  (Gojian B, et al 2015: 16 adapted from Halliday & Hasan, 1976) Meanwhile, the researcher focuses only on grammatical cohesion and personal references in particular.

3. Reference

  Brown & Yule (1983: 27-28) see the basis of reference in a text as an action of the writer/speaker. It means, when people say about something they are doing something. It is because reference always shows the connection between the real situation and the entity.

  People can’t refer to something which doesn’t exist in the real world. However, referencing items do not have to match the grammatical class, yet they must have semantic properties (Halliday & Hasan, 1976: 31).

  Some of phrase or discourse which consist a referent tie is known as referring expression. A referring expression is a piece of language that

  as if

  is used it is linked to something outside language, some living or dead entity or group of entities or concepts. Yule (1996) and Lyons (1995) point out that not all referring expression have identifiable physical referents, they may exist imagery (Gorjain, B. et al, 2015: 17). This means, a references should implies the use of language to point toward something or entity. The entity also may come from outside the text. Thus, Reference function to create links between sentences which refers to anything and able to force the interlocutors to do something as the speaker will.

3.1. Endophoric and Exophoric references

  Based on its function, reference is divided into two types. They are exophoric reference and endophoric reference. Exophoric reference is also known as situational references. It means referring to a thing as identified in the context of situation. Meanwhile, endophoric reference commonly named as textual reference. It means referring to a thing as identified in the surrounding text. It can be explain in brief that endophoric reference usually appears when the interpretation is within a text. Meanwhile, exophoric references occur when the interpretation lies on the outside of text which relates to the context of situation. Those endophoric relations then form cohesive devices within the text. Therefore, when people look up cohesive devices means they discuss endophoric references. Then, to give better understanding, see the figure below:

  

Textual

to following text

  

(endophora)

(cataphora) to preceding text References

  (anaphora)

Situational

(exphora)

  Figure 2.1: Types of reference based on general rule. Adapted from Azzouz, B (2009:23) supported by some scholars (Halliday & Hasan; 1976, Huddleston, R; 1978, Osisanwo; 2005 and Iqbal, M., Mehmood, A., Jabeen, I; 2013)

  Furthermore, since main purpose of cohesion is to create the unity of a text to gain a good interpretation of the interlocutors, then the prior function of references is to links up between the utterances or texts to the contexts of situation which rely on the speaker point of view. Thus, the references relate to the situation is the prior function of references itself while reference to another item within the text is formed as the secondary references because it is derived from the situation happened.

  The scope of exophoric references is not as simple as its definition. In some cases, a complex situation may occur when distinguish a reference whether its endophoric or excophoric references. In solving this situation, there should be a presupposition that must be satisfied; the thing that really possible as the reference’s relation based on the context of situation without breaking the interpretation of a text or sentence itself, so the main message of a text can be appropriate. Other situation that forces a reference be an exophoric references are; at the time when a text build ungrammatically or it is incomplete. Besides, in conversational text somehow, people who act as the speaker may changes his/her position as

  rd rd

  the 3 person or act as the speaker and 3 person, this automatically changes endophoric to exophoric references due to the change situation itself. Therefore, pronouns we, our, us often used as exophoric references because they refers to the speaker and other person at once. Similarly they sometimes used to refer to people in general.

  Exophoric references also may assume by the speaker/writer as the part of the shared world, either in term of knowledge or experience. This means speaker/ writer often use exophoric references regardless their cultural background. For example: the government refers to Indonesian government, Jakarta refers to the city etc. because it depends on the speaker’s cultural background and knowledge.

  In addition, Akindele (2011: 101) claims, when the interpretation is within the text, this is an “endophoric‟ relation but in a situation where the interpretation of the text lies outside the text, in the context of situation, the relationship is “exophoric‟. Therefore, in some case exophoric may occur within text which has no references there makes reader to focus on their readings, if they want to get appropriate interpretation. This case can be seen on the example below:

  (6) “Ah, now I understand how she became a victim of patriarchy, anger and fury consuming her. No need for a holy priest, she burned with such vengeance, her brittle body engulfed by fire.” (Heraty;2006:4) (7)

  “Again we glimpse the kingdoms history eight centuries ago Singosari, Majapahit and Kediri embodying the enchantment of bygone days. Priest Baradah giving counsel to Erlangga to divide his kingdominto Kediri and

  Jenggala.” (Heraty;2006:13) th

  In the 8 example,

  ‘I’ is referring to something by specifying its

  function or role in the situation. In one hand, people commonly known ‘I’ should refers to a person. In this situation ‘I’ relates to the first speaker on personal pronouns. On the other hand, in the prose entitled “Calon Arang”, the word

  ‘I’ is referring to the writer, since it refers outwards this personal reference can be categorized as exophoric reference (Jaya, 2013: 4). th

  Similarly the 9 example, ‘We’ is categorized as exophoric reference since it refers outwards. The source of identification not lies in the text. The meaning of we in the text is referring to the writer and the reader of the book (Jaya, 2013: 6) .

  Endophoric references are devided into two types, anaphoric and cataphoric references.

a. Anaphoric references

  Anaphoric references are those which look back in the text for their interpretation or references which refers to the antecedent which placed in the left (anaphoric references). For example:

  (8) Other Trump allies maintain that the president, who ran as an outsider candidate, will ultimately be an outsider president. They have publicly and privately complained about the persistence of the “deep state” six months into Trump’s administration, even as Trump has grown more vocal in his criticism of his own party for failing to repeal and replace Obamacare and restricting his ability to alter sanctions aimed at Russia.

  (The Washington Times, August 4 at 7:00 PM) In the 8

  th

  example, the f irst “his” refers to Trump as well the second and the third “his”. Those kind of references are anaphoric references because it referring back or to the left one.

  Usually items like she/he and them can be identified without any difficulties. It is because they are not as complex as it, this and that which have more than one function. For example:

  (9) It rained day and night for two weeks. The basement

  flooded and everything was under water. It spoilt all our calculations. Here, it may refer to “the events of two weeks” or “the fact that it rained and flooded “. Thus, the situation seems as a whole rather than any one specified that situation.

  However, the differences between “it” and

  “that” usually occur on their focus of attention. It always used to refer to one focus of attention, while that have different focus of attention more than one. For example:

  (10) And the living room was a very small room with two windows that wculdn't open and things like that. And it looked nice. It had a beautiful brick wall. (11) You entered into a tiny little hallway and the kitchen was off that. _th In the 10 example, it shows that “it” refers to “living room”, or one _th focus of attention. In the contrary, in 11 example, “that” may refer to “the kitchen” and “little hallway”. Thus, “that” seems to have more than one focus.

  

Finally, “it” can only be used as the focus of attention when the entity is marked

by several deictic words such as a, the, or my, or this/that as the example

below.

  

(12) The introduction is lengthy: it covers 56 pages.

(13) This introduction is fine. It is brief and precise.

(14) My introduction was too short. It had to be rewritten.

  All of the examples above explain that it refers to one focus

  th

  attention. The first it in the 12 example refers to “the introduction”, and

  th

  the 13 example, it refers to “this introduction”, and the last example, it refers to “my introduction”

  b.

  Cataphoric references Cataphoric references are those which look forward to the text in their interpretations or references which refers to the word which placed in the right (cataphoric references). For example:

  (12) “She was terribly afraid .All kinds of black memories of her childhood came up to her mind. She could not fight against them as had been her custom because simply Mary Brown was dying at that moment”. ( Adapted from McCarthy 1991: 36). th