POLITENESS STRATEGIES USED IN DIRECTIVE SPEECH ACTS IN CLASSROOM INTERACTION.
POLITENESS STRATEGIES USED IN DIRECTIVE SPEECH ACTS IN
CLASSROOM INTERACTION
A Thesis
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
By:
KHAIRINA DEWI
Registration Number: 809125011
ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2014
1
POLITENESS STRATEGIES USED IN DIRECTIVE SPEECH ACTS IN
CLASSROOM INTERACTION
A Thesis
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
By:
KHAIRINA DEWI
Registration Number: 809125011
ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2014
1
ii
iii
ABSTRACT
Khairina Dewi: Politeness Strategies Used in Directive Speech acts in
Classroom Interaction. A Thesis. English Applied Linguistics Study
Program. Postgraduate School. State University of Medan. 2014.
This descriptive qualitative research deals with politeness strategies used in
directive speech acts in classroom interaction. It specially focused on types of
politeness strategies which were used by teachers and students in directive speech
acts, how those types were realized and why those types were realized the way
they were. The approach used in this research was based on politeness theory
proposed by Brown and Levinson (1987) who classified politeness strategies into
bald on record, positive politeness, negative politeness, and off record. The data
were the transcriptions of the recorded observation and interview taken by using
audio visual recorder in the classroom interaction of SMAN 1 Talawi, Batu Bara.
The findings showed that all types of politeness strategies were applied in
directive speech acts in classroom interaction of SMAN 1 Talawi. However, they
were not used by all participants in the classroom interaction. Off record was not
used in student to student interaction. The most dominant type of politeness
strategies used was bald on record. It was used because of the limited vocabulary
of the students when they speak in English, because of efficiency, to avoid the
misinterpretation on the participants, to show the teacher’s power when they
commanded the students to do something and to show their firmness when they
forbad or admonished the students not to do something.
iii
ABSTRAK
Khairina Dewi: Politeness Strategies Used in Directive Speech acts in
Classroom Interaction. A Thesis. English Applied Linguistics Study
Program. Postgraduate School. State University of Medan. 2014.
Penelitian deskriptif kualitatif ini berhubungan dengan strategi kesantunan yang
digunakan dalam tindak tutur direktif di dalam interaksi kelas. Penelitian ini
secara khusus mengkaji jenis strategi kesantunan yang digunakan oleh guru dan
siswa dalam tidak tutur direktif, bagaimana jenis – jenis strategi tersebut
direalisasikan dan mengapa jenis – jenis strategi tersebut direalisasikan seperti itu.
Pendekatan yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini didasarkan pada teori kesantunan
yang dikemukakan oleh Brown dan Levinson (1987), yang menggolongkan
strategi kesantunan ke dalam bald on record, positive politeness, negative
politeness dan off record. Data dalam penelitian ini adalah hasil rekaman dari
observasi dan interview yang diperoleh dengan menggunakan perekam audio
visual di dalam interaksi kelas di SMAN 1 Talawi, Batu Bara. Hasilnya
menunjukkan bahwa semua jenis strategi kesantunan digunakan dalam tindak
tutur direktif di dalam interaksi kelas SMAN 1 Talawi. Namun, strategi-strategi
tersebut tidak digunakan oleh semua partisipan yang berada didalam interaksi
kelas tersebut. Off record tidak digunakan dalam interaksi siswa ke siswa. Bald on
record digunakan karena pembendahaaan kata siswa yang terbatas saat mereka
berbicara dalam bahasa Inggris, karena efisiensi waktu, untuk menghindari salah
penafsiran diantara partisipan, untuk menunjukkan kekuasaan guru ketika mereka
memerintahkan siswa untuk melakukan sesuatu dan untuk menunjukkan
ketegasan guru ketika mereka melarang atau mengingatkan siswa untuk tidak
melakukan sesuatu.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, the writer would like to thank Allah SWT, the most gracious
and the most merciful for blessing him to write this thesis. This study is concerned
with politeness strategies used in directive speech acts in classroom interaction . It
is submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program of the
Postgraduate School, the State University of Medan in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Magister Humaniora.
In particular, the writer would like to address her deep thankfulness to the
Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S., her first Adviser for her time spent in guiding,
correcting, and supporting her to complete this thesis, Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing,
M.Pd., her second Adviser for her super attention in giving the support,
suggestions, comments and ideas from the beginning of writing of this thesis until
the present.
The writer also expresses her great gratitude to Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning,
M.Pd. and Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S., Head and Secretary of the English Applied
Linguistics Study Program for their assistance in completing the administrative
procedures. She is deeply grateful to lecturers who have given the valuable
knowledge and experiences during her study in this university.
Special thanks are expressed to her examiners: Prof. Berlin Sibarani,
M.Pd., Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd., and Prof. Dr. Sumarsih, M.Pd. for their
criticisms and suggestions in improving this thesis.
iii
iii
A very special gratitude is given for her beloved husband and child: Ali
Yusafri Saman, S.ST and Nasywan Abdillah, her beloved parents: Ramli and
Lismah, her beloved sisters: Irmayani Ramlis, S.Pd and Rahmi Pratiwi for their
sincere prayers, love and support during her academic years in completing her
study. May Allah SWT always bless them.
Then, thanks to the principal of SMA Negeri 1 Talawi, located in Desa
Pahang, Kecamatan Talawi, Kabupaten Batu Bara and all participants for giving
her permission and time to observe the classroom interaction as source of data in
this thesis. Finally, she would like to thank to her classmates and those whose
name can not be mentioned here for giving the valuable support in finishing this
thesis.
Batu Bara,
The writer,
December 2014
Khairina Dewi
Registration Number: 809125011
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ..................................................................................... i
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................... iii
ABSTRAK ............................................................................................................ iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... v
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................... ix
LIST OF APPENDICES ...................................................................................... x
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION .................................................................
1
1.1 The Background of the Study ...........................................
1
1.2 The Problem of the Study .................................................
4
1.3 The Objectives of the Study .............................................
5
1.4 The Scope of the Study .....................................................
5
1.5 The Significance of the study ..........................................
6
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...............................................
7
2.1 Speech Acts ......................................................................
7
2.2 The Element of Speech Acts ............................................
8
2.3 Types of Illocutionary Acts .............................................. 10
2.2.1.1 Representative ........................................... 10
2.2.1.2 Commisive ................................................ 11
v
vi
2.2.1.3 Expresive ................................................... 14
2.2.1.4 Declarative ................................................ 14
2.2.1.5 Directive .................................................... 15
2.3 Politeness .......................................................................... 15
2.3.1 Types of Politeness Strategies ................................ 19
2.3.1.1 Bald on Record ...................................... 20
2.3.1.2 Positive Politeness ................................. 21
2.3.1.3 Negative Politeness ............................... 22
2.3.1.4 Off Record ............................................. 23
2.3.2
The Realizations of Politeness Strategies .......... 23
2.3.2.1 Realization of Bald on Recod Strategy ..... 23
2.3.2.2 Realization of Positive Politeness
Strategy ..................................................... 25
2.3.2.3 Realization of Negative Politeness
Strategy ..................................................... 31
2.3.2.4
Realization of Off Record Strategy......... 34
2.3.3 The Reasons Of Politeness Strategies Usage ......... 39
2.3.3.1 The Reasons of Bald on Record Usage ..... 39
2.3.3.2 The Reasons of Positive Politeness Usage 40
2.3.3.3 The Reasons of Negative Politeness
Usage........................................................ 40
2.3.3.4 The Reasons of Off Record Usage ............ 40
2.4 Classroom Interaction ................................................ 41
vi
vii
2.4.1 Types of Classroom Interaction ............................. 42
2.4.1.1 Teacher to Student ................................... 42
2.4.1.2.tudent to Teacher ..................................... 43
2.4.1.3 Student to Student .................................... 44
2.5 Politeness Strategies in Directive Speech Acts ................ 44
2.6 The Relevant Studies ........................................................ 48
2.7 Conceptual Framework..................................................... 51
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................ 53
3.1 The Research Design ........................................................ 53
3.2 The Source of the Data ..................................................... 54
3.3 The Technique of Data Collection.................................... 54
3.4 The Technique of Data Analysis ...................................... 55
3.5 The Thrustworthiness of the Study ................................... 56
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ..... 58
4.1 Data Analysis .................................................................... 58
4.1.1 Politeness Strategies Used by in Classroom
Interaction .............................................................. 58
4.1.2 The Realization of Politeness Strategies in Classroom
Interaction ........................................................................ 69
vii
viii
4.1.3 The Reasons of Politeness Strategies Usage in
Classroom Interaction ............................................ 94
4.2 Findings ............................................................................ 105
4.3 Discussion ......................................................................... 107
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ............................ 110
5.1 Conclusions ...................................................................... 110
5.2 Suggestions ...................................................................... 111
REFERENCES .................................................................................................. 112
APPENDICES ................................................................................................... 115-196
viii
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
4.1 The Occurrence of Politeness Strategies Used by Teacher to student ...... 61
4.2 The Occurrence of Politeness Strategies Used by Student to Teacher ..... 64
4.3 The Occurrence of Politeness Strategies Used by Student to Student ...... 67
4.4 The Comparison of Politeness Strategies Used by All Participants ......... 68
ix
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
Page
1.
Observation Sheet ....................................................................... 115
2.
Transcript of Teacher to Student Interaction .............................. 116
3.
Transcript of Student to Teacher Interaction .............................. 156
4.
Transcript of Student to Student Interaction ............................... 165
5.
Interview transcripts .................................................................... 173
6.
The Data of the Informants ......................................................... 195
x
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Background of the Study
Interaction is commonly defined as a kind of action that occurs as two or
more objects have an effect upon one another. It is used to share information from
one to others and to make social relationship among them. According to Rivers
(1987: 6), it is the collaborative exchange of thoughts, feelings or ideas, between
two or more people affecting each of them. Therefore, interactions do not occur
only from one side. There must be mutual influence between the participants
through giving and receiving messages in order to achieve communication.
Interaction takes an important role in teaching learning process. It
functions to build a pleasant atmosphere in the classroom with friendly
relationship among the participants and encourages students become effective
communicators especially in second language learning (Dagarin, 2004: 128). It
enhances the development of the two important language skills which are
speaking and listening among the learners. Rivers (1987: 9) states that through
interaction, students can increase their language store as they listen to ‘authentic
linguistic material’, or even the output of their fellow students in discussions, joint
problem-solving tasks, or dialogue. In interaction, they can use all they possess of
the language, all they have learned or absorbed in real life exchanges. It helps the
learner to be competent enough to think critically and share their views among
their peers.
1
2
Classroom interaction refers to the verbal exchanges between teacher and
students in reciprocal process. Allwright and Bailey (1991: 25) assert that through
classroom interaction, the teacher’s plan produces outcomes (input, practice
opportunities, and receptivity). The effectiveness of classroom interaction
between the teacher and students will influence the students’ achievement in
communicative competence as stated by Long (1996: 413) that interaction
facilitates mastery because of the conversational and linguistic modifications that
occur in such discourse and it provides students with the input they need. Through
the interaction, students have opportunities to understand and use the language
that was incomprehensible. Therefore, teacher and students should arrange well
classroom interaction in order to achieve educational objectives. It can be done
through various ways; by implementing different students’ and teacher’s roles, by
involving students to varied classroom discussions, and by employing a variety of
activities.
One of speech acts which is mostly used by teacher and students in
classroom interaction is directive speech act. It is a speech act which makes the
listener does something. It includes requesting, commanding, admonishing,
permitting, questioning, dismissing, excusing, forbidding, suggesting, begging,
challenging, and warning (Finch, 2000: 96). It causes the listener to take a
particular action.
In directive speech act, the speaker asks the listener to do what s/he wants.
According to Brown and Levinson (1987: 65), directive speech act may cause
face threatening act (FTA) to the listener. FTA is an act that threatens the listener’
3
face. ‘Face’ means the public self-image that everyone wants to claim for himself.
That is why directive speech act should be conveyed as polite as possible to avoid
conflict among the participants involved in the conversation. Thus, politeness is
needed to create a good environment for teacher and students including harmony
between teacher and students, solidarity among students, and comfortable
atmosphere in the classroom.
Politeness becomes one of important issues in Indonesian education
recently. Nuh (2012), the education minister of Indonesia, asserts that politeness
of Indonesian students is in a state of decline. Most students speak impolitely and
they prefer to use slang or informal language at school. Therefore, a teacher has a
responsibility to teach their students how to speak politely and admonish them if
they speak impolitely at school especially during classroom interaction.
Moreover, a teacher also needs to speak politely in front of the students in order to
influence them to speak politely too. In addition, the implementation of politeness
strategy is relevant which curriculum 2013 which emphasize on good character
because politeness strategy deals with someone’s ability to show his good
character. Therefore, the teacher is obliged to implement it in the language
learning activities along with language usage.
Politeness is a way to communicate politely by using appropriate
utterances or strategies in society. Brown and Levinson (1987) divide four types
of politeness strategies, namely bald on record, positive politeness, negative
politeness and off record. However, in a research conducted by Jane (1989) in an
elementary school, most students apply negative politeness strategies when
4
interacting with their teachers and they avoid to apply positive politeness in their
classroom because they worry the solidarity resulted from the positive politeness
will indicate that they are less polite to their teacher. Positive politeness strategies
are mostly used by the teachers to make students relaxed and comfortable to the
lesson. Moreover, Xiaoning (2004) found that students in university preferred to
use negative politeness strategies in requests. It means that there is possibility that
not all of four types of politeness strategies stated by Brown and Levinson occur
in directive classroom interaction.
The facts above motivated the researcher to conduct a study dealing with
politeness strategies used in directive speech acts in classroom interaction to know
whether teachers and students of senior high school especially in SMA Negeri 1
Talawi use the four types of politeness strategies stated by Brown and Levinson in
their directive speech acts.
1.2 The Problems of the Study
In relation to the background of the study, the problems are formulated as
the following.
1) What types of politeness strategies are used by teachers and students in
directive speech acts in classroom interaction?
2) How are those types of politeness strategies realized by the teachers and
students in directive speech acts in classroom interaction?
3) Why are the types of politeness strategies realized the way they are?
5
1.3 The Objectives of the Study
In relation to the problems, the objectives of the study are:
1) to investigate the types of politeness strategies used by teachers and
students in directive speech acts in classroom interaction
2) to explain how those types of politeness strategies are realized by teachers
and students in directive speech acts in classroom interaction
3) to find out the reasons why the types of politeness strategies are realized
the way they are?
1.4 The Scope of the Study
This study attempt to investigate the politeness strategies used by teachers
and students in directive speech acts in English classroom interaction. It analyzed
verbal interaction done by teacher to student, student to teacher and student to
student. The main aspects observed were directive speech acts and types of
politeness strategies stated by Brown and Levinson (1987), namely (1) bald on
record, (2) positive politeness, (3) negative politeness, and (4) off record strategy .
The data were taken from students and teachers of SMA Negeri 1 Talawi, located
at Desa Pahang, Kecamatan Talawi, Kabupaten Batu Bara. Their utterances were
analyzed based on the types of politeness strategies they used in directive speech
acts.
6
1.5 The Significance of the Study
The findings are expected to be significant theoretically and practically.
Theoretically, the research findings are useful for:
1) Linguists to enrich their knowledge about the theory of linguistic
politeness, especially the realization of politeness strategies in directive
speech acts in classroom interaction.
2) Other researchers to get information of what politeness strategies used in
classroom interaction, so that it can be a reference in conducting relevant
studies.
Practically, this research is useful for:
1) Teachers to know how to apply appropriate politeness strategies especially
in directive speech acts in classroom interaction, in order that they can
practice it in their classroom and influence their students to speak politely.
2) Sociolinguistics lecturers to know the development of linguistic politeness
theories, specifically about politeness strategies, so that they can inform it
to their students when teaching politeness.
110
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions
After analyzing the data in the classroom interaction of SMAN 1 Talawi,
some conclusions are drawn as the following.
(1) All types of politeness were applied in classroom interaction, but the
proportion of their occurance was not in the same number. Bald on record
was the type of politeness strategies used frequently in the classroom
interaction, while off record was not used in student to student interaction.
(2) Bald on record was used in two ways namely in cases of nonminimalization of the face threat and cases of FTA-oriented bald on record
usage. The both ways were used in teacher to student interaction, while in
student to teacher, and in student to teacher interaction, they just bald on
record in cases of non-minimalization of the face threat.
(3) Bald on record was used because of the limited vocabulary of the students
when they speak in English, because of efficiency, to avoid the
misinterpretation on the participants, and to show the teacher’s power to
the students so that they could command the students to do something they
wanted regardless of the students’ face, and to show their firmness when
they forbad or admonished the students not to do something.
110
111
5.2 Suggestions
In relation to the conclusions, suggestions are offered. They are:
(1) It is suggested to the lecturers of sociolinguistics to introduce the theory of
politeness strategies in the classroom interaction to their students so that it
can be trigger for the students to conduct a research related to the field.
(2) The teachers of secondary level are suggested to use appropriate
politeness strategies related to their intentions especially in directive
speech acts in classroom interaction due to its befefits, such as to make
teaching learning process more effective, to create a good environment for
teacher and students, and to soften students’ character.
(3) It is suggested to other reseachers to conduct futher research in other
schools to compare the use of politeness strategies used by teacher to
student, student to teacher, and student to student to enrich the theory of
politeness strategy
112
REFERENCES
Allwright, R. (1984). The importance of interaction in classroom language
learning. Applied Linguistic Journal 5: 156-171
Allwright, R. & Bailey, K.M. (1991). Focus on the Language Classroom. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Austin, J. L. 1962. How to do things with words. Cambridge Mass: Harvard
University Press.
Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. 1982. Qualitative research for education (2nd ed).
Boston: Allan and Bacon.
Brown, P. & Levinson, S. 1987. Politeness, some universal in language usage.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cruse, A. 1978. Meaning in language: an introduction to semantics and
pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cutting, J. 2002. Pragmatics and discourse: A research book for students.
London: Longman.
Dagarin, M. 2004. Classroom interaction and communication strategies in
learning English. Journal of Studies in the English language and literature
in Slovenia I: 1-2
Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. 1994. Handbook of qualitative research.
California: Sage Publication.
Ellis, R. and Fotos, S. (1999). Learning a second language through interaction.
Oxford: Oxford University Press
Finch, G. 2000. Linguistics terms & concept. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.
Goody, E.N. 1978. Questions and politeness; Strategies in social interaction.
London: Cambridge University Press.
Grundy, P. 1995. Doing pragmatics. New York: E. Arnold.
Harmer, J. (2009). How to Teach English. London: Longman.
Holmes, J. 1986. An introduction to sociolinguistics. London: Longman.
112
113
Hufford, J. and Heasly, G. 1983. Semantics: A course book. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Jane, J.W. 1989. The power of politeness in the classroom-cultural codes that
create and constrain knowledge. Jounal of Curriculum and Supervision 14
(4): 298-231
Kess, J. 1992, Psycholinguistics and study of natural language. Amsterdam:
Benyamin Publishing Press.
Lakoff, R. 1990. Talking power: The politics of language. New York: Harper and
Row.
Leech, G. 1983. Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Cuba, E. G. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. California: Sage
Publication.
Long, M. 1996. The role of the linguistic environment in second language
acquisition. In Ritchie, W. and Bhatia, T., Handbook of research on
second language acquisition. New York: Academic.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. 1984. Qualitative data analysis. Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage
Mills, S. 2003. Gender and politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nababan, M.L.E. (2012). Verbal and non-verbal politeness in directive speech
acts in the learning process at Junior High School of Taman Rama
National Plus Jimbaran. Published M.Hum Thesis. Bali: English
Education Study, University of Ganesha Education.
Nuh, M. 2012. Raih Prestasi, Junjung Tinggi Budi Pekerti. Jakarta:
Kemendikbud.
Browsed
on
July
5
on
http://118.98.166.62/content/berita/utama/raih-prestas-2-2-2.html.
Naegle, P. (2002). The new teacher’s complete sourcebook. USA: Scholastic
Professional Book.
Rivers, W.M. 1987. Interactive language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Thomas, J. 1983. Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. New York: Basil Blackwell.
Thurmond, V. A. (2003). Examination of interaction variables as predictors of
students' satisfaction and willingness to enroll in future Web-based
114
courses while controlling for student
Dissertation. USA: University of Kansas.
characteristics.
Published
Wanli, Z. 2000. An investigation and analysis of politeness strategies employed in
college English teachers’ classroom feedback. Published M.A Thesis.
China: School of Foreign Languages, Xianyang Normal University.
Wagner, E.D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. The
American journal of distance education 8 (2), 6-26.
Wanqi. 2008. A Study on Teachers’ Polite Behaviors in EFL Classroom
Interaction in Senior High School. Published M.A Thesis. China: Foreign
Linguistics and Applied Linguistics, Central China Normal University.
Xiaoning, Z. 2004. Politeness strategies used in English requests and refusals by
Chinese college EFL learners. Published M.A Thesis. China: English
Department, School of Foreign Studies, Nanjing University
Yanfen, L. and Yuqin, Z. 2010. A study of teacher talk in interactions in English
classes. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics 33 (2), 76-86
Yule, G. 1996. Pragmatics. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
CLASSROOM INTERACTION
A Thesis
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
By:
KHAIRINA DEWI
Registration Number: 809125011
ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2014
1
POLITENESS STRATEGIES USED IN DIRECTIVE SPEECH ACTS IN
CLASSROOM INTERACTION
A Thesis
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
By:
KHAIRINA DEWI
Registration Number: 809125011
ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2014
1
ii
iii
ABSTRACT
Khairina Dewi: Politeness Strategies Used in Directive Speech acts in
Classroom Interaction. A Thesis. English Applied Linguistics Study
Program. Postgraduate School. State University of Medan. 2014.
This descriptive qualitative research deals with politeness strategies used in
directive speech acts in classroom interaction. It specially focused on types of
politeness strategies which were used by teachers and students in directive speech
acts, how those types were realized and why those types were realized the way
they were. The approach used in this research was based on politeness theory
proposed by Brown and Levinson (1987) who classified politeness strategies into
bald on record, positive politeness, negative politeness, and off record. The data
were the transcriptions of the recorded observation and interview taken by using
audio visual recorder in the classroom interaction of SMAN 1 Talawi, Batu Bara.
The findings showed that all types of politeness strategies were applied in
directive speech acts in classroom interaction of SMAN 1 Talawi. However, they
were not used by all participants in the classroom interaction. Off record was not
used in student to student interaction. The most dominant type of politeness
strategies used was bald on record. It was used because of the limited vocabulary
of the students when they speak in English, because of efficiency, to avoid the
misinterpretation on the participants, to show the teacher’s power when they
commanded the students to do something and to show their firmness when they
forbad or admonished the students not to do something.
iii
ABSTRAK
Khairina Dewi: Politeness Strategies Used in Directive Speech acts in
Classroom Interaction. A Thesis. English Applied Linguistics Study
Program. Postgraduate School. State University of Medan. 2014.
Penelitian deskriptif kualitatif ini berhubungan dengan strategi kesantunan yang
digunakan dalam tindak tutur direktif di dalam interaksi kelas. Penelitian ini
secara khusus mengkaji jenis strategi kesantunan yang digunakan oleh guru dan
siswa dalam tidak tutur direktif, bagaimana jenis – jenis strategi tersebut
direalisasikan dan mengapa jenis – jenis strategi tersebut direalisasikan seperti itu.
Pendekatan yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini didasarkan pada teori kesantunan
yang dikemukakan oleh Brown dan Levinson (1987), yang menggolongkan
strategi kesantunan ke dalam bald on record, positive politeness, negative
politeness dan off record. Data dalam penelitian ini adalah hasil rekaman dari
observasi dan interview yang diperoleh dengan menggunakan perekam audio
visual di dalam interaksi kelas di SMAN 1 Talawi, Batu Bara. Hasilnya
menunjukkan bahwa semua jenis strategi kesantunan digunakan dalam tindak
tutur direktif di dalam interaksi kelas SMAN 1 Talawi. Namun, strategi-strategi
tersebut tidak digunakan oleh semua partisipan yang berada didalam interaksi
kelas tersebut. Off record tidak digunakan dalam interaksi siswa ke siswa. Bald on
record digunakan karena pembendahaaan kata siswa yang terbatas saat mereka
berbicara dalam bahasa Inggris, karena efisiensi waktu, untuk menghindari salah
penafsiran diantara partisipan, untuk menunjukkan kekuasaan guru ketika mereka
memerintahkan siswa untuk melakukan sesuatu dan untuk menunjukkan
ketegasan guru ketika mereka melarang atau mengingatkan siswa untuk tidak
melakukan sesuatu.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, the writer would like to thank Allah SWT, the most gracious
and the most merciful for blessing him to write this thesis. This study is concerned
with politeness strategies used in directive speech acts in classroom interaction . It
is submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program of the
Postgraduate School, the State University of Medan in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Magister Humaniora.
In particular, the writer would like to address her deep thankfulness to the
Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S., her first Adviser for her time spent in guiding,
correcting, and supporting her to complete this thesis, Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing,
M.Pd., her second Adviser for her super attention in giving the support,
suggestions, comments and ideas from the beginning of writing of this thesis until
the present.
The writer also expresses her great gratitude to Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning,
M.Pd. and Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S., Head and Secretary of the English Applied
Linguistics Study Program for their assistance in completing the administrative
procedures. She is deeply grateful to lecturers who have given the valuable
knowledge and experiences during her study in this university.
Special thanks are expressed to her examiners: Prof. Berlin Sibarani,
M.Pd., Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd., and Prof. Dr. Sumarsih, M.Pd. for their
criticisms and suggestions in improving this thesis.
iii
iii
A very special gratitude is given for her beloved husband and child: Ali
Yusafri Saman, S.ST and Nasywan Abdillah, her beloved parents: Ramli and
Lismah, her beloved sisters: Irmayani Ramlis, S.Pd and Rahmi Pratiwi for their
sincere prayers, love and support during her academic years in completing her
study. May Allah SWT always bless them.
Then, thanks to the principal of SMA Negeri 1 Talawi, located in Desa
Pahang, Kecamatan Talawi, Kabupaten Batu Bara and all participants for giving
her permission and time to observe the classroom interaction as source of data in
this thesis. Finally, she would like to thank to her classmates and those whose
name can not be mentioned here for giving the valuable support in finishing this
thesis.
Batu Bara,
The writer,
December 2014
Khairina Dewi
Registration Number: 809125011
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ..................................................................................... i
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................... iii
ABSTRAK ............................................................................................................ iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... v
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................... ix
LIST OF APPENDICES ...................................................................................... x
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION .................................................................
1
1.1 The Background of the Study ...........................................
1
1.2 The Problem of the Study .................................................
4
1.3 The Objectives of the Study .............................................
5
1.4 The Scope of the Study .....................................................
5
1.5 The Significance of the study ..........................................
6
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...............................................
7
2.1 Speech Acts ......................................................................
7
2.2 The Element of Speech Acts ............................................
8
2.3 Types of Illocutionary Acts .............................................. 10
2.2.1.1 Representative ........................................... 10
2.2.1.2 Commisive ................................................ 11
v
vi
2.2.1.3 Expresive ................................................... 14
2.2.1.4 Declarative ................................................ 14
2.2.1.5 Directive .................................................... 15
2.3 Politeness .......................................................................... 15
2.3.1 Types of Politeness Strategies ................................ 19
2.3.1.1 Bald on Record ...................................... 20
2.3.1.2 Positive Politeness ................................. 21
2.3.1.3 Negative Politeness ............................... 22
2.3.1.4 Off Record ............................................. 23
2.3.2
The Realizations of Politeness Strategies .......... 23
2.3.2.1 Realization of Bald on Recod Strategy ..... 23
2.3.2.2 Realization of Positive Politeness
Strategy ..................................................... 25
2.3.2.3 Realization of Negative Politeness
Strategy ..................................................... 31
2.3.2.4
Realization of Off Record Strategy......... 34
2.3.3 The Reasons Of Politeness Strategies Usage ......... 39
2.3.3.1 The Reasons of Bald on Record Usage ..... 39
2.3.3.2 The Reasons of Positive Politeness Usage 40
2.3.3.3 The Reasons of Negative Politeness
Usage........................................................ 40
2.3.3.4 The Reasons of Off Record Usage ............ 40
2.4 Classroom Interaction ................................................ 41
vi
vii
2.4.1 Types of Classroom Interaction ............................. 42
2.4.1.1 Teacher to Student ................................... 42
2.4.1.2.tudent to Teacher ..................................... 43
2.4.1.3 Student to Student .................................... 44
2.5 Politeness Strategies in Directive Speech Acts ................ 44
2.6 The Relevant Studies ........................................................ 48
2.7 Conceptual Framework..................................................... 51
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................ 53
3.1 The Research Design ........................................................ 53
3.2 The Source of the Data ..................................................... 54
3.3 The Technique of Data Collection.................................... 54
3.4 The Technique of Data Analysis ...................................... 55
3.5 The Thrustworthiness of the Study ................................... 56
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ..... 58
4.1 Data Analysis .................................................................... 58
4.1.1 Politeness Strategies Used by in Classroom
Interaction .............................................................. 58
4.1.2 The Realization of Politeness Strategies in Classroom
Interaction ........................................................................ 69
vii
viii
4.1.3 The Reasons of Politeness Strategies Usage in
Classroom Interaction ............................................ 94
4.2 Findings ............................................................................ 105
4.3 Discussion ......................................................................... 107
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ............................ 110
5.1 Conclusions ...................................................................... 110
5.2 Suggestions ...................................................................... 111
REFERENCES .................................................................................................. 112
APPENDICES ................................................................................................... 115-196
viii
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
4.1 The Occurrence of Politeness Strategies Used by Teacher to student ...... 61
4.2 The Occurrence of Politeness Strategies Used by Student to Teacher ..... 64
4.3 The Occurrence of Politeness Strategies Used by Student to Student ...... 67
4.4 The Comparison of Politeness Strategies Used by All Participants ......... 68
ix
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
Page
1.
Observation Sheet ....................................................................... 115
2.
Transcript of Teacher to Student Interaction .............................. 116
3.
Transcript of Student to Teacher Interaction .............................. 156
4.
Transcript of Student to Student Interaction ............................... 165
5.
Interview transcripts .................................................................... 173
6.
The Data of the Informants ......................................................... 195
x
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Background of the Study
Interaction is commonly defined as a kind of action that occurs as two or
more objects have an effect upon one another. It is used to share information from
one to others and to make social relationship among them. According to Rivers
(1987: 6), it is the collaborative exchange of thoughts, feelings or ideas, between
two or more people affecting each of them. Therefore, interactions do not occur
only from one side. There must be mutual influence between the participants
through giving and receiving messages in order to achieve communication.
Interaction takes an important role in teaching learning process. It
functions to build a pleasant atmosphere in the classroom with friendly
relationship among the participants and encourages students become effective
communicators especially in second language learning (Dagarin, 2004: 128). It
enhances the development of the two important language skills which are
speaking and listening among the learners. Rivers (1987: 9) states that through
interaction, students can increase their language store as they listen to ‘authentic
linguistic material’, or even the output of their fellow students in discussions, joint
problem-solving tasks, or dialogue. In interaction, they can use all they possess of
the language, all they have learned or absorbed in real life exchanges. It helps the
learner to be competent enough to think critically and share their views among
their peers.
1
2
Classroom interaction refers to the verbal exchanges between teacher and
students in reciprocal process. Allwright and Bailey (1991: 25) assert that through
classroom interaction, the teacher’s plan produces outcomes (input, practice
opportunities, and receptivity). The effectiveness of classroom interaction
between the teacher and students will influence the students’ achievement in
communicative competence as stated by Long (1996: 413) that interaction
facilitates mastery because of the conversational and linguistic modifications that
occur in such discourse and it provides students with the input they need. Through
the interaction, students have opportunities to understand and use the language
that was incomprehensible. Therefore, teacher and students should arrange well
classroom interaction in order to achieve educational objectives. It can be done
through various ways; by implementing different students’ and teacher’s roles, by
involving students to varied classroom discussions, and by employing a variety of
activities.
One of speech acts which is mostly used by teacher and students in
classroom interaction is directive speech act. It is a speech act which makes the
listener does something. It includes requesting, commanding, admonishing,
permitting, questioning, dismissing, excusing, forbidding, suggesting, begging,
challenging, and warning (Finch, 2000: 96). It causes the listener to take a
particular action.
In directive speech act, the speaker asks the listener to do what s/he wants.
According to Brown and Levinson (1987: 65), directive speech act may cause
face threatening act (FTA) to the listener. FTA is an act that threatens the listener’
3
face. ‘Face’ means the public self-image that everyone wants to claim for himself.
That is why directive speech act should be conveyed as polite as possible to avoid
conflict among the participants involved in the conversation. Thus, politeness is
needed to create a good environment for teacher and students including harmony
between teacher and students, solidarity among students, and comfortable
atmosphere in the classroom.
Politeness becomes one of important issues in Indonesian education
recently. Nuh (2012), the education minister of Indonesia, asserts that politeness
of Indonesian students is in a state of decline. Most students speak impolitely and
they prefer to use slang or informal language at school. Therefore, a teacher has a
responsibility to teach their students how to speak politely and admonish them if
they speak impolitely at school especially during classroom interaction.
Moreover, a teacher also needs to speak politely in front of the students in order to
influence them to speak politely too. In addition, the implementation of politeness
strategy is relevant which curriculum 2013 which emphasize on good character
because politeness strategy deals with someone’s ability to show his good
character. Therefore, the teacher is obliged to implement it in the language
learning activities along with language usage.
Politeness is a way to communicate politely by using appropriate
utterances or strategies in society. Brown and Levinson (1987) divide four types
of politeness strategies, namely bald on record, positive politeness, negative
politeness and off record. However, in a research conducted by Jane (1989) in an
elementary school, most students apply negative politeness strategies when
4
interacting with their teachers and they avoid to apply positive politeness in their
classroom because they worry the solidarity resulted from the positive politeness
will indicate that they are less polite to their teacher. Positive politeness strategies
are mostly used by the teachers to make students relaxed and comfortable to the
lesson. Moreover, Xiaoning (2004) found that students in university preferred to
use negative politeness strategies in requests. It means that there is possibility that
not all of four types of politeness strategies stated by Brown and Levinson occur
in directive classroom interaction.
The facts above motivated the researcher to conduct a study dealing with
politeness strategies used in directive speech acts in classroom interaction to know
whether teachers and students of senior high school especially in SMA Negeri 1
Talawi use the four types of politeness strategies stated by Brown and Levinson in
their directive speech acts.
1.2 The Problems of the Study
In relation to the background of the study, the problems are formulated as
the following.
1) What types of politeness strategies are used by teachers and students in
directive speech acts in classroom interaction?
2) How are those types of politeness strategies realized by the teachers and
students in directive speech acts in classroom interaction?
3) Why are the types of politeness strategies realized the way they are?
5
1.3 The Objectives of the Study
In relation to the problems, the objectives of the study are:
1) to investigate the types of politeness strategies used by teachers and
students in directive speech acts in classroom interaction
2) to explain how those types of politeness strategies are realized by teachers
and students in directive speech acts in classroom interaction
3) to find out the reasons why the types of politeness strategies are realized
the way they are?
1.4 The Scope of the Study
This study attempt to investigate the politeness strategies used by teachers
and students in directive speech acts in English classroom interaction. It analyzed
verbal interaction done by teacher to student, student to teacher and student to
student. The main aspects observed were directive speech acts and types of
politeness strategies stated by Brown and Levinson (1987), namely (1) bald on
record, (2) positive politeness, (3) negative politeness, and (4) off record strategy .
The data were taken from students and teachers of SMA Negeri 1 Talawi, located
at Desa Pahang, Kecamatan Talawi, Kabupaten Batu Bara. Their utterances were
analyzed based on the types of politeness strategies they used in directive speech
acts.
6
1.5 The Significance of the Study
The findings are expected to be significant theoretically and practically.
Theoretically, the research findings are useful for:
1) Linguists to enrich their knowledge about the theory of linguistic
politeness, especially the realization of politeness strategies in directive
speech acts in classroom interaction.
2) Other researchers to get information of what politeness strategies used in
classroom interaction, so that it can be a reference in conducting relevant
studies.
Practically, this research is useful for:
1) Teachers to know how to apply appropriate politeness strategies especially
in directive speech acts in classroom interaction, in order that they can
practice it in their classroom and influence their students to speak politely.
2) Sociolinguistics lecturers to know the development of linguistic politeness
theories, specifically about politeness strategies, so that they can inform it
to their students when teaching politeness.
110
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions
After analyzing the data in the classroom interaction of SMAN 1 Talawi,
some conclusions are drawn as the following.
(1) All types of politeness were applied in classroom interaction, but the
proportion of their occurance was not in the same number. Bald on record
was the type of politeness strategies used frequently in the classroom
interaction, while off record was not used in student to student interaction.
(2) Bald on record was used in two ways namely in cases of nonminimalization of the face threat and cases of FTA-oriented bald on record
usage. The both ways were used in teacher to student interaction, while in
student to teacher, and in student to teacher interaction, they just bald on
record in cases of non-minimalization of the face threat.
(3) Bald on record was used because of the limited vocabulary of the students
when they speak in English, because of efficiency, to avoid the
misinterpretation on the participants, and to show the teacher’s power to
the students so that they could command the students to do something they
wanted regardless of the students’ face, and to show their firmness when
they forbad or admonished the students not to do something.
110
111
5.2 Suggestions
In relation to the conclusions, suggestions are offered. They are:
(1) It is suggested to the lecturers of sociolinguistics to introduce the theory of
politeness strategies in the classroom interaction to their students so that it
can be trigger for the students to conduct a research related to the field.
(2) The teachers of secondary level are suggested to use appropriate
politeness strategies related to their intentions especially in directive
speech acts in classroom interaction due to its befefits, such as to make
teaching learning process more effective, to create a good environment for
teacher and students, and to soften students’ character.
(3) It is suggested to other reseachers to conduct futher research in other
schools to compare the use of politeness strategies used by teacher to
student, student to teacher, and student to student to enrich the theory of
politeness strategy
112
REFERENCES
Allwright, R. (1984). The importance of interaction in classroom language
learning. Applied Linguistic Journal 5: 156-171
Allwright, R. & Bailey, K.M. (1991). Focus on the Language Classroom. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Austin, J. L. 1962. How to do things with words. Cambridge Mass: Harvard
University Press.
Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. 1982. Qualitative research for education (2nd ed).
Boston: Allan and Bacon.
Brown, P. & Levinson, S. 1987. Politeness, some universal in language usage.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cruse, A. 1978. Meaning in language: an introduction to semantics and
pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cutting, J. 2002. Pragmatics and discourse: A research book for students.
London: Longman.
Dagarin, M. 2004. Classroom interaction and communication strategies in
learning English. Journal of Studies in the English language and literature
in Slovenia I: 1-2
Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. 1994. Handbook of qualitative research.
California: Sage Publication.
Ellis, R. and Fotos, S. (1999). Learning a second language through interaction.
Oxford: Oxford University Press
Finch, G. 2000. Linguistics terms & concept. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.
Goody, E.N. 1978. Questions and politeness; Strategies in social interaction.
London: Cambridge University Press.
Grundy, P. 1995. Doing pragmatics. New York: E. Arnold.
Harmer, J. (2009). How to Teach English. London: Longman.
Holmes, J. 1986. An introduction to sociolinguistics. London: Longman.
112
113
Hufford, J. and Heasly, G. 1983. Semantics: A course book. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Jane, J.W. 1989. The power of politeness in the classroom-cultural codes that
create and constrain knowledge. Jounal of Curriculum and Supervision 14
(4): 298-231
Kess, J. 1992, Psycholinguistics and study of natural language. Amsterdam:
Benyamin Publishing Press.
Lakoff, R. 1990. Talking power: The politics of language. New York: Harper and
Row.
Leech, G. 1983. Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Cuba, E. G. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. California: Sage
Publication.
Long, M. 1996. The role of the linguistic environment in second language
acquisition. In Ritchie, W. and Bhatia, T., Handbook of research on
second language acquisition. New York: Academic.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. 1984. Qualitative data analysis. Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage
Mills, S. 2003. Gender and politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nababan, M.L.E. (2012). Verbal and non-verbal politeness in directive speech
acts in the learning process at Junior High School of Taman Rama
National Plus Jimbaran. Published M.Hum Thesis. Bali: English
Education Study, University of Ganesha Education.
Nuh, M. 2012. Raih Prestasi, Junjung Tinggi Budi Pekerti. Jakarta:
Kemendikbud.
Browsed
on
July
5
on
http://118.98.166.62/content/berita/utama/raih-prestas-2-2-2.html.
Naegle, P. (2002). The new teacher’s complete sourcebook. USA: Scholastic
Professional Book.
Rivers, W.M. 1987. Interactive language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Thomas, J. 1983. Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. New York: Basil Blackwell.
Thurmond, V. A. (2003). Examination of interaction variables as predictors of
students' satisfaction and willingness to enroll in future Web-based
114
courses while controlling for student
Dissertation. USA: University of Kansas.
characteristics.
Published
Wanli, Z. 2000. An investigation and analysis of politeness strategies employed in
college English teachers’ classroom feedback. Published M.A Thesis.
China: School of Foreign Languages, Xianyang Normal University.
Wagner, E.D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. The
American journal of distance education 8 (2), 6-26.
Wanqi. 2008. A Study on Teachers’ Polite Behaviors in EFL Classroom
Interaction in Senior High School. Published M.A Thesis. China: Foreign
Linguistics and Applied Linguistics, Central China Normal University.
Xiaoning, Z. 2004. Politeness strategies used in English requests and refusals by
Chinese college EFL learners. Published M.A Thesis. China: English
Department, School of Foreign Studies, Nanjing University
Yanfen, L. and Yuqin, Z. 2010. A study of teacher talk in interactions in English
classes. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics 33 (2), 76-86
Yule, G. 1996. Pragmatics. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.