AN ANALYSIS ON THE STUDENTS’ COMPETENCE IN PRAGMATICS
AN ANALYSIS ON THE STUDENTS’ COMPETENCE IN PRAGMATICS
Urai Annisa Tyfani, Luwandi Suhartono, Wardah
English Education Study Program FKIP UNTAN Pontianak
Email : [email protected]
Abstract
The research aimed to know the students’ competence to understand indirect speech act in
pragmatics by the sixth semester students of English Education study program in academic
year 2016/2017. This study used descriptive method as form of research. The research used
test and questionnaire as tools of data collecting. The participant of this research is the sixth
semester students of English Education Study Program Class B regular B at FKIP
Tanjungpura University in academic year 2016/2017, which consists of 20 students. The result
of the research showed that the average score of 20 students is 67.6% while the minimum
score of the subject is 70.0. It is indicated that the score of sixth semester students of English
Education Study Program of Teacher Training and Education Faculty Tanjungpura University
Pontianak in academic year 2016/2017 are not as expected. The conclude of this research is
the sixth semester students of English Education Study program has not very well understood
indirect speech acts.
Keywords: Pragmatics, Students’ Pragmatic Competence, Indirect Speech Act.
INTRODUCTION
The first thing which is necessary to
consider before coming into the discussion of
pragmatics is the definition of pragmatics in
general. Yule (1996) states that Pragmatics is
concerned with the study of meaning as
communicated by speaker or writer and
interpreted by a listener or reader. Simply,
pragmatics studies language that is not directly
spoken. Instead, the speaker hints at or suggests
a meaning, and the listener assumes the correct
intention. In a sense, pragmatics is seen as an
understanding between people to obey certain
rules of interaction. In everyday language, the
meanings of words and phrases are constantly
implied and not explicitly stated. In certain
situations, words can have a certain meaning. In
this way, the role of understanding Pragmatics is
needed. An important feature of language is that
the meaning of a sentence is more than a
combination of the meaning of the words it
contains to understand fully. We also use
information from the situation where the
sentence is used.
The most important of activity are
pragmatics as a tool for communication, and
conversation structure or how what one speaker
says can influence the next speaker’s response.
Due to reviews those conditions, the researcher
will take this research. Actually, Failure in
understanding the intention of the speakers will
lead to failure in responding to the intended
message and, thus, failure in using the language.
The study of how language is used in a
particular context or situation is the focus of
pragmatics. In understanding illocutionary act in
pragmatic meaning between speaker and hearer,
sometimes the failure occurs. The failure of
pragmatic, does not mean that the conversation
verbally error, but rather in the meaning of the
utterance. In this case a lot of communication
error occurs between the listener and the speaker
1
can cause misunderstanding. Worse than that,
between the listener and the speaker cannot
understand the purpose of the talks, resulting in
communication that do not have a goal in
another sense this communication will be in
vain.
In everyday life, communication also
occurs in the collage environment, most
communication happens in the classroom
between lecturers and students. When teaching
and learning activities take place, a lot of
communication happens when the lecture
explains, discuss, and question answer activities.
The communication will not run properly if the
speaker and the listener does not comply with
the rules of the principle of cooperation.
Learning result will not be satisfactory if the
communication between lectures and students
are not operating effectively and efficiently.
From the statement above, the writer is
interested in researching on pragmatics
competence. She is interested in conductive a
research on students’ competence in pragmatics,
especially in indirect speech act on the sixth
semester of FKIP Tanjungpura University in
academic year 2016/2017. This research may
also help to look at the quality of the how well
could the sixth semester students of English
Education Study Program of Regular B
understand indirect speech act.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research is pragmatic analysis
represented in qualitative descriptive way.
Qualitative is research that intended to
understand the phenomenon of what is
experienced by subject such as behavior,
perception, motivation, action, etc. Best and
Kahn, (2006:23) argue that descriptive research,
unlike assessment and evaluation, is concerned
with all of the following: hypothesis formulation
and testing, the analysis of the relationships
between non manipulated variables, and the
development of generalization. The result of
data analysis are reported in the form of a
phenomenological description, which means that
the analysis presented in accordance with the
finding in the field without any associated with
certain variables.
Cresswell (2013:204) argues that the size of
this population, if size can be determined, and
the means of identifying individuals in the
population. The population of this research is the
sixth semester students of FKIP Tanjungpura
University in Academic Year 2016/2017. And
the sample is a small proportion of the entire
population of the research is less than 20. This
research applied chooses cluster random
sampling and chooses class B with 20 students
as sample of the research.
This research uses test and questionnaire as
a tool of data collecting. According to Rogers
(1929) cited in Spolsky (2000), in an early
reference to authenticity, concluded that “The
test can be criticized on the score that it departs
from the real situation, but nevertheless it is
useful in enabling the teacher to discover
stumbling blocks in the way of achievement”.
This research used the activities scale of
instrument including two scales that measure the
quality of students’ competence in using
institutional resources that are provided for their
learning outcomes. The college activities test has
30 items and 10 items for questionnaire. The test
is a multiple choice with 4 (four) options and
consists of 30 items. In addition, the
questionnaire consists of 10 items.
Technique of Data Collection
In this research the researcher used the test
and questionnaire for technique of collecting
data : (1) The first procedure is the researcher
was created 30 questions with multiple choice
and 10 questionnaires that have been compiled
systematically; (2) The test will be administered
to the sixth semester of the class B in attempt to
get the students’ competence in pragmatics with
monitoring when they are filling the test; (3)
2
After giving the test, the researcher gives the
questionnaire as an additional tool of data
collecting. The researcher was collected the
results of the students, the answer sheet, and the
test items; (4) The researcher was scored the test
by giving 1 (one) for true answer and 0 (zero)
for the wrong answer; (5) The researcher
analyzed whether the sixth semester students
have the competence to what extent they
understand the pragmatics; (6) The table of
students’ scores made by the researcher and the
researcher put the data into table. On the other
hand, the research also wants to know how far
the students’ competence in pragmatics; (7)
Conclusion and suggestion made by researcher.
The conclusion is drawn from the analysis of
students’ competence score and the addition
information was taken from the questionnaire.
Data Analysis
Technique of data analysis is a way to
identify the data as processing analysis. Hence,
the data will be presented by describing context
or situation, and turn of the utterance that
appears in the conversation. Then, the data of
this research will be analyzed by using the
following steps: (1) The first step is scoring the
students’ competence. In this case, the students
given a test to find out how well could the sixth
semester students of English Education Study
Program of Regular B class B understand
indirect speech act. The test is a multiple choice
with 4 (four) options and consists of 30 items.
The researcher will score the test by giving 1
(one) for true answer and 0 (zero) for the wrong
answer; (2) The second step is calculating the
average of student test scores. To clarify the
data, the writer provided following measurement
score:
Table 1
Table of Specification Total Score and
Category of Analysis in Test Items
Total
Score
Category
Qualification
80-100
A
Good-Excellent
70-79
B
Average-Good
50-69
C
Bad-Average
0-49
D
Poor-Bad
Modified from Heaton (1975, p.98)
(3) Scoring the students’ response. Scoring the
students’ response on the college activities and
aspect of indirect speech act questionnaire was
based on the Likert Scale. The researcher wants
to know how often they use indirect speech acts
in their daily life, after which they given a test to
determine how much they understand the
indirect speech. Scoring the students response on
the college activities and understanding of
indirect speech act. The students responded the
point items within each range a quality of effort,
where students indicate the frequency that they
had engaged in various college activities and
students learning development.
The response option represents the degree of
agreement as shown in table below:
Table 2
Table of Students’ Response of College
Activities and Aspect of Indirect Speech Act
Questionnaire
Score (n)
Scale
1
Never
2
Occasionally
3
Often
Modified from Riduwan (2010, p.13)
(4) After all the data have been arranged and
analyzed, the researcher describe the utterances
that were classified into students’ competence
and concluding all the findings.
3
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Research Findings
The findings of this research are the result
of the data that has been collected and analyzed:
(1) The first finding in this research is about the
result of the test. The finding was collected from
the test which consists of 30 questions
distributed to students from 20 students. Only 8
students whose value meets the standard, the
remaining 12 people do not reach the standard.
The lowest score is 53. And the highest score is
83. The data has been calculated with percentage
of each item. The formula has been stated in
Chapter III on page 24. Furthermore, the result
of the test showed that from 20 students scored
an average of 67.6%. From 20 students get the
average 67.6%, the writer considered that the
students’ competence in pragmatics especially
for indirect speech act is not passed; (2) The
second finding in this research is about the result
of the dominant aspects of indirect speech act
questionnaire by the sixth semester students.
There are 10 statements in the aspect of indirect
speech act questionnaire. Each item has a
different question and different goals as well.
From 10 statements 20 students many answered
occasionally. Based on the result of
questionnaire response statements numbers 10
attract the writer's attention because from 20
students answered often on item 10 as their
choice, which amounted to 11 people. We can
see that it contains 10 items on appendix 2 (on
page 52). For more information the writer can
explains more in discussion (on page 32) From
the sentence above, the writer can be concluded
that the sixth semester students use statement in
everyday speech, so students prefer to talk
directly rather than using terms or indirect
speech act. If associated with modesty it can be
said that the student likes to speak impolitely in
everyday life, into the category of less
understanding of the condition of others.
Discussion
This research was conducted on May25th
2017. The subject of this research is the sixth
semester of English education study program in
academic year 2016/2017 of Tanjungpura
University. The study conducted only one
meeting with time allocation 2x45 minutes. The
writer will describe one by one about the result
of the test. The first rank was categorized as the
incorrect answered by the students. There were
30 numbers of the test. For number one 18
students who answered incorrectly. The question
is “Can I get you aspirin?”. According to
pragmatics view the question about interrogative
to make an offer. After the writer analyze, it
turns out they do not know the meaning of
aspirin and they think it is a request not an offer.
Furthermore, many students mistakenly answer
at number six. The question is about
interrogative to make a direction. Half of them
assume that this is an interrogative to make a
question because of the answer to the "yes"
option. If a question of the answer is there are
only two, i.e. yes or no. But if analyzed more
deeply only answer “D” that shows the
direction. According to writer, they are less
careful in understanding the matter.
On this number about 12 students answered
incorrectly on number 10. The question is about
“declarative to communicate objection”. We can
see number 10 when the woman says "well, I'm
in the middle of watching a program”. What
does the woman imply? The correct answer is
“B” the man should go. Here, half of the
students guessed “she’ll watch television later”.
Students do not understand what the woman’s
imply. Next, the last number the students
answered incorrectly. The question is “your
friend has just left”. We can see number 30, (on
the appendix 1). The question is about
“declarative to give information”. The students
do not know the meaning. The result of the test
showed that from 20 students scored an average
of 67.6%. It is not reach a predetermined score.
4
The second rank was categorized as the correct
answered by the students. There were 30 number
of the test. For number two all of the students
who answered correctly. The question is “Come
to our dinner”. The question is about “an
imperative to make invite”. The writer thought
all of student understood about invite. Because,
from junior high school to senior high school
has been taught. For number eight the writer
took in the book. The question is “Can you pass
the salt?”. The question is about “interrogative
to make a request”. At several times the writer
has entered the class and attended the lesson.
The writer considers that they know the answer
because their lecturers often used this as
examples and this example that they can reads in
the book.
On the other side, this is the result of the
questionnaire responses from 10 statements. Out
of 20 students many of them answered
“occasionally”. Here, how many people
answered “occasionally” on each items. The
writer will describe one by one in order the
reader to understand. In the item one asked
about “How often do you use indirect speech in
daily activities?". From 20 students who are
answered “occasionally” used there were 16
students, half of them often answer. From those
statements have been confirmed they
occasionally use indirect speech in everyday
activities, this is related to the results of those
tests that did not reach the target. Because they
often using direct speech acts, they do not
understand indirect speech acts.
Questionnaire item two is almost similar to
item one. There are 16 students who are
answered “occasionally”. But the question is
different. The questions is "Have you ever used
an imperative to make a request?”. Different
from the other, item three asking about "Have
you ever used an imperative to make a
command?". Almost all students ever make a
command that is equal to 17 students. Item four
the question is "Have you ever used an
imperative to make an offer?". Here, 12 students
answered “occasionally”.
The question of item 5 “Have you ever used an
imperative to give a direction?” From 20
students about 13 students who are answered
“occasionally” on this item. Item 6, “Have you
ever used an imperative to make a promise?".
There are 15 students answered “occasionally”.
Item 7, “Have you ever used an imperative to
make a compliment?" Students make
compliment using indirect speech as many as 12
students.
Item 8, "Have you ever used an imperative
to give advice?” As many as 13 students
answered “occasionally“, they use imperative to
give advice. Item 9, "Have you ever used an
imperative to make an invitation?" On this item
students occasionally used an imperative to
make an invitation indirectly. As many as 16
students answered it. Item 10 the question is
“Have you ever used a declarative to make a
statement?" In contrast to other numbers only a
few that “occasionally” answered as many as 7
people. Half of them are answered often. On the
other hand, students often used a declarative to
make a statement of indirect speech act in
everyday life.
Based on the result, the test showed that 20
students scored an average of 67.6%. It had not
reached a predetermined score. In addition to
use the test writer also use the questionnaire to
determine whether there is a relationship
between the test results with the results of the
questionnaire.
The higher their score the more they used
indirect speech act in everyday life. It turns out
the research results show true the existence of
the previous statement. That the highest score of
the test, the more often they used indirect speech
acts in everyday life. According to Yule
(2010:133) Speech act to describe actions such
as “requesting,” “commanding,” “questioning”
or “informing.” We can define a speech act as
the action performed by a speaker with an
5
utterance. This is the same as the result of
answers from students who often use direct
speech. Most of the students mistakenly answer
at number six. The question is about
interrogative to make a direction. Half of them
assume that this is an interrogative to make a
question because of the answer to the "yes"
option. If a question of the answer is there are
only two, i.e. yes or no. But if analyzed more
deeply only answer “D” that shows the
direction. According to writer, they are still lack
understanding in pragmatics especially for
indirect speech act.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
Conclusion
Regarding the research findings it can be
concluded that the sixth semester students of
English Education Study Program of Teacher
Training and Education Faculty Tanjungpura
University Pontianak in academic year
2016/2017 have not well understood pragmatics
especially indirect speech act. The students
prefer do the activities in daily life used direct
speech act. The writer was assumed there are
two causes they use direct speech acts: (1) They
do not really understand about indirect speech
act; (2) They are lazy to use indirect speech acts
because students always communicate to their
friends rather than older people or lecturers.
From the causes above, it can be conclude that.
If the students want to communicate with
lecture, the students should use indirect speech
act. The item 10 showed clearly from the data
percentage there was 65% students answered
“often”. The question is "Have you ever used a
declarative to make a statement?". This proves
that students prefer to communicate directly at
the core of the conversation without invisible
meaning. The students’ average competence on
pragmatics in 67.6% is low. The result has
answered all the research questions. It is
indicated that the sixth semester students of
English Education Study Program of Teacher
Training and Education Faculty Tanjungpura
University Pontianak in academic year
2016/2017 have not well understood pragmatics
especially for indirect speech act.
Suggestion
The writer gives some suggestions for
those who are interested in analysis this
research. The findings of this research revealed
that there is result of the students’ competence to
understand indirect speech act in pragmatics on
the sixth semester of English Education Study
Program class B regular B at Tanjungpura
University in academic year 2016/2017. The
conclusion brought some suggestions. They
are:(1) The students who have less competence
in understanding indirect speech act in
pragmatics should motivate themselves to learn
more; (2) The students have to persist toward
their effort in achieving goals; (3) For the other
researchers who are interested in analyzing of
speech act, they could use this research as a
reference to conduct relevance research; (4)
The lecturers should create the good and
creative learning and teaching atmosphere to
help students having more competence to
understand indirect speech act in pragmatics. It
is used to maximize and to achieve the goal of
each subject as soon as possible with the
facilities provided.
REFERENCES
Best, John W & Kahn, James V. (2006).
Research in education. america: Pearson
Education Inc.
Cresswell, j. W. (1994). Research designed
qualitative
and
quantitative
approaches.Thousand
Oaks:
Sage
Publication Inc.
DRS. Riduan, M. (2010). Skala Pengukuran
Variable-Variable Penelitian. Bandung:
Alfabeta.
Heaton, J. (1988). Writing English Language
Tests. New York: Longman Group UK
Limited.
6
Spolsky, B. (2000). Language Testing in The
Modern Language Journal .
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Hongkong:
Oxford University Press.
7
Urai Annisa Tyfani, Luwandi Suhartono, Wardah
English Education Study Program FKIP UNTAN Pontianak
Email : [email protected]
Abstract
The research aimed to know the students’ competence to understand indirect speech act in
pragmatics by the sixth semester students of English Education study program in academic
year 2016/2017. This study used descriptive method as form of research. The research used
test and questionnaire as tools of data collecting. The participant of this research is the sixth
semester students of English Education Study Program Class B regular B at FKIP
Tanjungpura University in academic year 2016/2017, which consists of 20 students. The result
of the research showed that the average score of 20 students is 67.6% while the minimum
score of the subject is 70.0. It is indicated that the score of sixth semester students of English
Education Study Program of Teacher Training and Education Faculty Tanjungpura University
Pontianak in academic year 2016/2017 are not as expected. The conclude of this research is
the sixth semester students of English Education Study program has not very well understood
indirect speech acts.
Keywords: Pragmatics, Students’ Pragmatic Competence, Indirect Speech Act.
INTRODUCTION
The first thing which is necessary to
consider before coming into the discussion of
pragmatics is the definition of pragmatics in
general. Yule (1996) states that Pragmatics is
concerned with the study of meaning as
communicated by speaker or writer and
interpreted by a listener or reader. Simply,
pragmatics studies language that is not directly
spoken. Instead, the speaker hints at or suggests
a meaning, and the listener assumes the correct
intention. In a sense, pragmatics is seen as an
understanding between people to obey certain
rules of interaction. In everyday language, the
meanings of words and phrases are constantly
implied and not explicitly stated. In certain
situations, words can have a certain meaning. In
this way, the role of understanding Pragmatics is
needed. An important feature of language is that
the meaning of a sentence is more than a
combination of the meaning of the words it
contains to understand fully. We also use
information from the situation where the
sentence is used.
The most important of activity are
pragmatics as a tool for communication, and
conversation structure or how what one speaker
says can influence the next speaker’s response.
Due to reviews those conditions, the researcher
will take this research. Actually, Failure in
understanding the intention of the speakers will
lead to failure in responding to the intended
message and, thus, failure in using the language.
The study of how language is used in a
particular context or situation is the focus of
pragmatics. In understanding illocutionary act in
pragmatic meaning between speaker and hearer,
sometimes the failure occurs. The failure of
pragmatic, does not mean that the conversation
verbally error, but rather in the meaning of the
utterance. In this case a lot of communication
error occurs between the listener and the speaker
1
can cause misunderstanding. Worse than that,
between the listener and the speaker cannot
understand the purpose of the talks, resulting in
communication that do not have a goal in
another sense this communication will be in
vain.
In everyday life, communication also
occurs in the collage environment, most
communication happens in the classroom
between lecturers and students. When teaching
and learning activities take place, a lot of
communication happens when the lecture
explains, discuss, and question answer activities.
The communication will not run properly if the
speaker and the listener does not comply with
the rules of the principle of cooperation.
Learning result will not be satisfactory if the
communication between lectures and students
are not operating effectively and efficiently.
From the statement above, the writer is
interested in researching on pragmatics
competence. She is interested in conductive a
research on students’ competence in pragmatics,
especially in indirect speech act on the sixth
semester of FKIP Tanjungpura University in
academic year 2016/2017. This research may
also help to look at the quality of the how well
could the sixth semester students of English
Education Study Program of Regular B
understand indirect speech act.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research is pragmatic analysis
represented in qualitative descriptive way.
Qualitative is research that intended to
understand the phenomenon of what is
experienced by subject such as behavior,
perception, motivation, action, etc. Best and
Kahn, (2006:23) argue that descriptive research,
unlike assessment and evaluation, is concerned
with all of the following: hypothesis formulation
and testing, the analysis of the relationships
between non manipulated variables, and the
development of generalization. The result of
data analysis are reported in the form of a
phenomenological description, which means that
the analysis presented in accordance with the
finding in the field without any associated with
certain variables.
Cresswell (2013:204) argues that the size of
this population, if size can be determined, and
the means of identifying individuals in the
population. The population of this research is the
sixth semester students of FKIP Tanjungpura
University in Academic Year 2016/2017. And
the sample is a small proportion of the entire
population of the research is less than 20. This
research applied chooses cluster random
sampling and chooses class B with 20 students
as sample of the research.
This research uses test and questionnaire as
a tool of data collecting. According to Rogers
(1929) cited in Spolsky (2000), in an early
reference to authenticity, concluded that “The
test can be criticized on the score that it departs
from the real situation, but nevertheless it is
useful in enabling the teacher to discover
stumbling blocks in the way of achievement”.
This research used the activities scale of
instrument including two scales that measure the
quality of students’ competence in using
institutional resources that are provided for their
learning outcomes. The college activities test has
30 items and 10 items for questionnaire. The test
is a multiple choice with 4 (four) options and
consists of 30 items. In addition, the
questionnaire consists of 10 items.
Technique of Data Collection
In this research the researcher used the test
and questionnaire for technique of collecting
data : (1) The first procedure is the researcher
was created 30 questions with multiple choice
and 10 questionnaires that have been compiled
systematically; (2) The test will be administered
to the sixth semester of the class B in attempt to
get the students’ competence in pragmatics with
monitoring when they are filling the test; (3)
2
After giving the test, the researcher gives the
questionnaire as an additional tool of data
collecting. The researcher was collected the
results of the students, the answer sheet, and the
test items; (4) The researcher was scored the test
by giving 1 (one) for true answer and 0 (zero)
for the wrong answer; (5) The researcher
analyzed whether the sixth semester students
have the competence to what extent they
understand the pragmatics; (6) The table of
students’ scores made by the researcher and the
researcher put the data into table. On the other
hand, the research also wants to know how far
the students’ competence in pragmatics; (7)
Conclusion and suggestion made by researcher.
The conclusion is drawn from the analysis of
students’ competence score and the addition
information was taken from the questionnaire.
Data Analysis
Technique of data analysis is a way to
identify the data as processing analysis. Hence,
the data will be presented by describing context
or situation, and turn of the utterance that
appears in the conversation. Then, the data of
this research will be analyzed by using the
following steps: (1) The first step is scoring the
students’ competence. In this case, the students
given a test to find out how well could the sixth
semester students of English Education Study
Program of Regular B class B understand
indirect speech act. The test is a multiple choice
with 4 (four) options and consists of 30 items.
The researcher will score the test by giving 1
(one) for true answer and 0 (zero) for the wrong
answer; (2) The second step is calculating the
average of student test scores. To clarify the
data, the writer provided following measurement
score:
Table 1
Table of Specification Total Score and
Category of Analysis in Test Items
Total
Score
Category
Qualification
80-100
A
Good-Excellent
70-79
B
Average-Good
50-69
C
Bad-Average
0-49
D
Poor-Bad
Modified from Heaton (1975, p.98)
(3) Scoring the students’ response. Scoring the
students’ response on the college activities and
aspect of indirect speech act questionnaire was
based on the Likert Scale. The researcher wants
to know how often they use indirect speech acts
in their daily life, after which they given a test to
determine how much they understand the
indirect speech. Scoring the students response on
the college activities and understanding of
indirect speech act. The students responded the
point items within each range a quality of effort,
where students indicate the frequency that they
had engaged in various college activities and
students learning development.
The response option represents the degree of
agreement as shown in table below:
Table 2
Table of Students’ Response of College
Activities and Aspect of Indirect Speech Act
Questionnaire
Score (n)
Scale
1
Never
2
Occasionally
3
Often
Modified from Riduwan (2010, p.13)
(4) After all the data have been arranged and
analyzed, the researcher describe the utterances
that were classified into students’ competence
and concluding all the findings.
3
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Research Findings
The findings of this research are the result
of the data that has been collected and analyzed:
(1) The first finding in this research is about the
result of the test. The finding was collected from
the test which consists of 30 questions
distributed to students from 20 students. Only 8
students whose value meets the standard, the
remaining 12 people do not reach the standard.
The lowest score is 53. And the highest score is
83. The data has been calculated with percentage
of each item. The formula has been stated in
Chapter III on page 24. Furthermore, the result
of the test showed that from 20 students scored
an average of 67.6%. From 20 students get the
average 67.6%, the writer considered that the
students’ competence in pragmatics especially
for indirect speech act is not passed; (2) The
second finding in this research is about the result
of the dominant aspects of indirect speech act
questionnaire by the sixth semester students.
There are 10 statements in the aspect of indirect
speech act questionnaire. Each item has a
different question and different goals as well.
From 10 statements 20 students many answered
occasionally. Based on the result of
questionnaire response statements numbers 10
attract the writer's attention because from 20
students answered often on item 10 as their
choice, which amounted to 11 people. We can
see that it contains 10 items on appendix 2 (on
page 52). For more information the writer can
explains more in discussion (on page 32) From
the sentence above, the writer can be concluded
that the sixth semester students use statement in
everyday speech, so students prefer to talk
directly rather than using terms or indirect
speech act. If associated with modesty it can be
said that the student likes to speak impolitely in
everyday life, into the category of less
understanding of the condition of others.
Discussion
This research was conducted on May25th
2017. The subject of this research is the sixth
semester of English education study program in
academic year 2016/2017 of Tanjungpura
University. The study conducted only one
meeting with time allocation 2x45 minutes. The
writer will describe one by one about the result
of the test. The first rank was categorized as the
incorrect answered by the students. There were
30 numbers of the test. For number one 18
students who answered incorrectly. The question
is “Can I get you aspirin?”. According to
pragmatics view the question about interrogative
to make an offer. After the writer analyze, it
turns out they do not know the meaning of
aspirin and they think it is a request not an offer.
Furthermore, many students mistakenly answer
at number six. The question is about
interrogative to make a direction. Half of them
assume that this is an interrogative to make a
question because of the answer to the "yes"
option. If a question of the answer is there are
only two, i.e. yes or no. But if analyzed more
deeply only answer “D” that shows the
direction. According to writer, they are less
careful in understanding the matter.
On this number about 12 students answered
incorrectly on number 10. The question is about
“declarative to communicate objection”. We can
see number 10 when the woman says "well, I'm
in the middle of watching a program”. What
does the woman imply? The correct answer is
“B” the man should go. Here, half of the
students guessed “she’ll watch television later”.
Students do not understand what the woman’s
imply. Next, the last number the students
answered incorrectly. The question is “your
friend has just left”. We can see number 30, (on
the appendix 1). The question is about
“declarative to give information”. The students
do not know the meaning. The result of the test
showed that from 20 students scored an average
of 67.6%. It is not reach a predetermined score.
4
The second rank was categorized as the correct
answered by the students. There were 30 number
of the test. For number two all of the students
who answered correctly. The question is “Come
to our dinner”. The question is about “an
imperative to make invite”. The writer thought
all of student understood about invite. Because,
from junior high school to senior high school
has been taught. For number eight the writer
took in the book. The question is “Can you pass
the salt?”. The question is about “interrogative
to make a request”. At several times the writer
has entered the class and attended the lesson.
The writer considers that they know the answer
because their lecturers often used this as
examples and this example that they can reads in
the book.
On the other side, this is the result of the
questionnaire responses from 10 statements. Out
of 20 students many of them answered
“occasionally”. Here, how many people
answered “occasionally” on each items. The
writer will describe one by one in order the
reader to understand. In the item one asked
about “How often do you use indirect speech in
daily activities?". From 20 students who are
answered “occasionally” used there were 16
students, half of them often answer. From those
statements have been confirmed they
occasionally use indirect speech in everyday
activities, this is related to the results of those
tests that did not reach the target. Because they
often using direct speech acts, they do not
understand indirect speech acts.
Questionnaire item two is almost similar to
item one. There are 16 students who are
answered “occasionally”. But the question is
different. The questions is "Have you ever used
an imperative to make a request?”. Different
from the other, item three asking about "Have
you ever used an imperative to make a
command?". Almost all students ever make a
command that is equal to 17 students. Item four
the question is "Have you ever used an
imperative to make an offer?". Here, 12 students
answered “occasionally”.
The question of item 5 “Have you ever used an
imperative to give a direction?” From 20
students about 13 students who are answered
“occasionally” on this item. Item 6, “Have you
ever used an imperative to make a promise?".
There are 15 students answered “occasionally”.
Item 7, “Have you ever used an imperative to
make a compliment?" Students make
compliment using indirect speech as many as 12
students.
Item 8, "Have you ever used an imperative
to give advice?” As many as 13 students
answered “occasionally“, they use imperative to
give advice. Item 9, "Have you ever used an
imperative to make an invitation?" On this item
students occasionally used an imperative to
make an invitation indirectly. As many as 16
students answered it. Item 10 the question is
“Have you ever used a declarative to make a
statement?" In contrast to other numbers only a
few that “occasionally” answered as many as 7
people. Half of them are answered often. On the
other hand, students often used a declarative to
make a statement of indirect speech act in
everyday life.
Based on the result, the test showed that 20
students scored an average of 67.6%. It had not
reached a predetermined score. In addition to
use the test writer also use the questionnaire to
determine whether there is a relationship
between the test results with the results of the
questionnaire.
The higher their score the more they used
indirect speech act in everyday life. It turns out
the research results show true the existence of
the previous statement. That the highest score of
the test, the more often they used indirect speech
acts in everyday life. According to Yule
(2010:133) Speech act to describe actions such
as “requesting,” “commanding,” “questioning”
or “informing.” We can define a speech act as
the action performed by a speaker with an
5
utterance. This is the same as the result of
answers from students who often use direct
speech. Most of the students mistakenly answer
at number six. The question is about
interrogative to make a direction. Half of them
assume that this is an interrogative to make a
question because of the answer to the "yes"
option. If a question of the answer is there are
only two, i.e. yes or no. But if analyzed more
deeply only answer “D” that shows the
direction. According to writer, they are still lack
understanding in pragmatics especially for
indirect speech act.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
Conclusion
Regarding the research findings it can be
concluded that the sixth semester students of
English Education Study Program of Teacher
Training and Education Faculty Tanjungpura
University Pontianak in academic year
2016/2017 have not well understood pragmatics
especially indirect speech act. The students
prefer do the activities in daily life used direct
speech act. The writer was assumed there are
two causes they use direct speech acts: (1) They
do not really understand about indirect speech
act; (2) They are lazy to use indirect speech acts
because students always communicate to their
friends rather than older people or lecturers.
From the causes above, it can be conclude that.
If the students want to communicate with
lecture, the students should use indirect speech
act. The item 10 showed clearly from the data
percentage there was 65% students answered
“often”. The question is "Have you ever used a
declarative to make a statement?". This proves
that students prefer to communicate directly at
the core of the conversation without invisible
meaning. The students’ average competence on
pragmatics in 67.6% is low. The result has
answered all the research questions. It is
indicated that the sixth semester students of
English Education Study Program of Teacher
Training and Education Faculty Tanjungpura
University Pontianak in academic year
2016/2017 have not well understood pragmatics
especially for indirect speech act.
Suggestion
The writer gives some suggestions for
those who are interested in analysis this
research. The findings of this research revealed
that there is result of the students’ competence to
understand indirect speech act in pragmatics on
the sixth semester of English Education Study
Program class B regular B at Tanjungpura
University in academic year 2016/2017. The
conclusion brought some suggestions. They
are:(1) The students who have less competence
in understanding indirect speech act in
pragmatics should motivate themselves to learn
more; (2) The students have to persist toward
their effort in achieving goals; (3) For the other
researchers who are interested in analyzing of
speech act, they could use this research as a
reference to conduct relevance research; (4)
The lecturers should create the good and
creative learning and teaching atmosphere to
help students having more competence to
understand indirect speech act in pragmatics. It
is used to maximize and to achieve the goal of
each subject as soon as possible with the
facilities provided.
REFERENCES
Best, John W & Kahn, James V. (2006).
Research in education. america: Pearson
Education Inc.
Cresswell, j. W. (1994). Research designed
qualitative
and
quantitative
approaches.Thousand
Oaks:
Sage
Publication Inc.
DRS. Riduan, M. (2010). Skala Pengukuran
Variable-Variable Penelitian. Bandung:
Alfabeta.
Heaton, J. (1988). Writing English Language
Tests. New York: Longman Group UK
Limited.
6
Spolsky, B. (2000). Language Testing in The
Modern Language Journal .
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Hongkong:
Oxford University Press.
7