ELLIPSIS AND AMBIGUITY FOUND IN THE TWEETS ON TWITTER.
ELLIPSIS AND AMBIGUITY FOUND IN
THE TWEETS
ON TWITTER
A THESIS
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
By:
IRMA SARI NASUTION Registration Number: 809111034
ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2014
(2)
ELLIPSIS AND AMBIGUITY FOUND IN
THE TWEETS
ON TWITTER
A THESIS
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of
Magister Humaniora
By:
IRMA SARI NASUTION Registration Number: 809111034
ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY PROGRAM
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2014
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
i
ABSTRACT
Nasution, Irma Sari, Registration Number, 809111034, Ellipsis and Ambiguity Found in the Tweets on Twitter. A Thesis. English Applied Linguistics Study Program. Postgraduate School, State University of Medan. 2014.
The objectives of this qualitative research were to describe (1) the types of ellipsis found in the tweets on twitter, (2) the types of ambiguity found in the tweets on twitter, and (3) how are the tweets on twitter realized as ellipsis. The tweets in this research were written in English. The data of the research were 100 tweets typed by twitter users, taken from www.twitter.com in February 2014. Descriptive method was used to analyze the data. The research findings show that (1) types of ellipsis found in the tweets on twitter were three types, namely: nominal, verbal and clausal, (2) there were three types of ambiguity found in the elliptical tweets on twitter, they were 3 Lexical ambiguity, 9 Structural ambiguity and 15 Referential ambiguity, and (3) It is realized that there was 30% elliptical tweets on twitter consist of 12% Nominal, 10% Verbal and 8% Clausal ellipsis which were explained by using Halliday and Hasan’s theory. Nominal ellipsis has high frequency in tweets on twitter, it means that in sharing their feelings, idea, and comments twitter users mostly type the tweets by omitting the repetition of nominal element. Referential ambiguity also has high frequency in the tweets. It means that twitter users mostly type the tweets by using unclear referring expression, it was unclear for the readers that to whom the words or expression refer to. Finally, the findings of this study can be used for twitter followers to help overcome the difficulties in interpreting tweets containing ellipsis and ambiguity. Moreover, the findings of this study are expected to be useful for further researchers as reference to conduct in-depth research about linguistic development in social media.
(7)
ii
ABSTRAK
Nasution, Irma Sari, Nomor Registrasi, 809111034, Ellipsis dan Ambiguitas ditemukan dalam Kicauan Twitter. Tesis. Linguistik Terapan Bahasa Inggris, Program Pascasarjana, Universitas Negeri Medan. 2014.
Tujuan dari penelitian kualitatif ini adalah untuk mendeskripsikan (1) jenis elipsis ditemukan dalam kicauan twitter, (2) jenis ambiguitas ditemukan kicauan twitter, dan (3) bagaimana kicauan twitter direalisasikan sebagai elipsis . Kicauan twitter dalam penelitian ini adalah kicauan berbahasa Inggris. Data dari penelitian ini adalah 100 kicauan diketik oleh pengguna twitter, diambil dari www.twitter.com pada bulan Februari 2014. Metode deskriptif digunakan untuk menganalisis data. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa (1) jenis elipsis ditemukan dalam kicauan twitter ada tiga jenis, yaitu: nominal, verbal dan klausul, (2) juga ditemukan tiga jenis ambiguitas dalam kicauan elipsis di twitter, yaitu 3 ambiguitas leksikal, 9 ambiguitas struktural dan 15 ambiguitas Referential, dan (3) disadari bahwa ada 30% kicauan elipsis di twitter terdiri dari 12% Nominal, 10% Verbal dan 8% Klausal ellipsis yang dijelaskan dengan menggunakan teori Halliday dan Hasan. Elipsis Nominal memiliki frekuensi tinggi dalam kicauan di twitter, itu berarti bahwa dalam berbagi perasaan, ide, dan komentar pengguna twitter kebanyakan mengetik kicauan dengan menghilangkan pengulangan unsur nominal. Ambiguitas referensial juga memiliki frekuensi tinggi dalam kicauan twitter. Ini berarti bahwa pengguna twitter kebanyakan mengetik kicauan dengan menggunakan ungkapan yang tidak jelas, tidak jelas bagi pembaca bahwa kepada siapa kata-kata atau ungkapan itu ditujukan. Akhirnya, temuan penelitian ini disarankan agar digunakan oleh pembaca twitter untuk membantu mengatasi kesulitan dalam mengartikan kicauan yang mengandung elipsis dan ambiguitas. Selain itu, temuan penelitian ini juga diharapkan dapat berguna bagi peneliti selanjutnya untuk memperkaya pengetahuan mengenai teori tentang ambiguitas dan ellipsis, dan juga untuk memberikan dasar untuk melakukan penelitian mendalam tentang perkembangan linguistik dalam media sosial.
(8)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all the writer would like to express her very special gratitude to Allah SWT, the Almighty His Blessing and Mercy, until this can be completed in due course. It should be admitted that a number of people have directly helped the process in many varied and thought provoking ways. She would like to express sincere gratitude to them.
Her thankfulness is directed to Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd, as the First Adviser and Head of English Applied Linguistic Study Program whose advice, encouragement, constructive criticisms, and suggestions have been a feature of the writing process from its very beginning.
Next, Dr. T. Thyrhaya Zein, M.A, her second adviser, deserves her special gratitude for being so helpful in assisting her to build up ideas and thoughts to finish up this thesis.
She would like to extend her sincere thankfulness to Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M.S, the secretary of the department, for her helps in all administration matters and deep mental support and all the lecturer who have taught a lot of knowledge to her.
To Prof. Amrin Saragih, M.A, Ph.D, Dr. Rahmad Husein, M.A, and Dr. Sri Minda Murni, M. S, as reviewers and examiners for their valuable feedback,
To her lovely parents, Drs. H. Syaiful Bahri Nst and Hj. Warnidah Lubis, and her father in-law, M. Sidik, mother in-law, Hj. Yusnawaty Siregar, her
(9)
brothers and sisters M. Faisal Ansari Nst, M.Pd, and Latifah Nst, S.Pd. for their full support, endless love, prayers, and motivation in carry out this academic task.
Finally, her very special thanks is directed to her beloved husband, Putra Kamal Sidik, S.H, and dearest son Akhtar Al-Farabi Kamal for the very special love, care, encouragement, understanding and motivation given to her for the success of her study, and to all of her friends in LTBI (XVII) class A.
May Allah SWT Bless Us !
Medan, August 2014 The Writer,
Irma Sari Nasution
Registration Number: 809111034
(10)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT...i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS………...………..v
LIST OF TABLE...ix
CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Background of the Study….……….…………...1
1.2 The Problems of the Study…….……….…..4
1.3 The Objectives of the Study….……….…4
1.4 The Scope of the Study….……….…5
1.5 The Significances of the Study………...5
CHAPTER II : REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 2.1 Semantics………...6
2.2 Ellipsis…………..……….………....7
2.2.1 Types of Ellipsis……….10
2.3 Ambiguity……….………...17
2.3.1 Types of Ambiguity………...18
2.4 Theories of Text and Context………..22
2.5 Social Media Networking…….………...26
(11)
2.7. The Contents of Twitter………...……...28
2.8 Related Studies………31
CHAPTER III : RESEARCH METHOD 3.1 The Research Design……….………..33
3.2 The Source of Data and The Data..……….34
3.3 The Instruments of Data Collection………..…..34
3.4 The Technique of Data Collection………...…………34
3.5 The Technique of Data Analysis...………...35
3.6 The Trustworthiness of The Study………...36
3.7 Triangulation……….37
CHAPTER IV : DATA PRESENTATIONS, DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS, AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Data Presentation...………..39
4.1.1 Types of Ellipsis……….39
4.1.2 Percentage of Ellipsis in Tweets on Twitter....…..42
4.2 Data Analysis...………...43
4.2.1 Analysis of Tweets on Twitter...………...43
4.3 Findings...………...64
4.4 Discussions..……….65
CHAPTER V : CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1 Conclusions...………..67
5.2 Suggestions...………...67
(12)
(13)
i
List of Tables
Table Page
2.2 Yes/No Questions Ellipsis…..…..….………...……….18
4.1 Three Types of Ellipsis………...……….…40
4.2 Percentage of Ellipsis in The Tweets on Twitter....………43
4.3. Types of Nominal Ellipsis Found in The Tweets on Twitter..………44
4.4 Types of Verbal Ellipsis Found in The Tweets on Twitter..………..…….50
4.5 Types of Clausal Ellipsis Found in The Tweets on Twitter………55
(14)
1 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Background of the Study
People in carrying out all activities always involve language as a means to interact with each other. The main function of language is as a communication tool used by every human in life . In communicating people can express their ideas, thoughts , desires , opinions and information which are expressed through language differently in a community and culture. It is considered that there are four reasons of communication, namely: entertainment, integration into community, relationship maintenance, and identity construction (Patrick, 2010: 1). In communication, people assign various attributes to language forms; they may feel that a language or variety of a language is ‘elegant’, ‘expressive’, ‘vulgar’, ‘guttural’, or ‘musical’, or that one language form is ‘more polite’ or more ‘aesthetically leasing or displeasing’ than another one (Thomas, 1999:194).
This communication will be effective if people are able to master and understand language in spoken and written way. In spoken language, speaker communicates directly to the listeners using pauses, hesitations, tone of voices, stress, and intonations. Different from spoken language, written language does not use direct communication but only some written documents with more complex grammmar to deliver the words to the readers. It can make the readers confuse in determining the meaning of the written sentences with omitted words called ellipsis that can be interpreted more than one meaning called ambiguity.
(15)
2
Ellipsis occurs when sentence of word, phrase, clause needed to complete the construction of meaning is omitted from a sentence or clause in order to avoid repetition. The example of ellipsis can be found in the texts below:
1. Santi suka pelajaran Bahasa Inggris lebih dari Sinta suka pelajaran Bahasa Inggris.
Santi likes English lesson more than Sinta likes English lesson. Ellipsis :
Santi suka pelajaran Bahasa Inggris lebih dari Sinta. Santi likes English lesson more than Sinta does.
In the sentence above, the phrase pelajaran Bahasa Inggrisis omitted, referring to sentence Santi suka pelajaran Bahasa Inggris, in order to avoid repetition.
2. Perampok berlari ke halaman sekolah secepat polisi berlari ke halaman sekolah.
The robber runs to school yard as fast as the policeman runs to school yard.
Ellipsis:
Perampok berlari ke halaman sekolah secepat polisi berlari. The robber runs to school yard as fast as the policeman runs.
In sentence 2 , the phrase ke halaman sekolahis omitted, referring to the sentence Perampok berlari ke halaman sekolah, in order to avoid repetition.
Repeating words can often sound clumsy or inelegant. People try to avoid repeating the same word in a single sentence and also in a response to a previous sentence. When writer omit words this way, it must be possible for reader to reconstruct the full sentence by implication or context. Sometimes reader need to have read to what was written immediately before the complete sentence. But, in reading an elliptical sentence, a reader should realize in what context is the text written, in order order to avoid ambiguous meaning.
(16)
3
Ambiguity appears when there are two or more meanings belong to a word or phrase. It occurs not only in oral but also in written sentences. There are four types of ambiguity namely: lexical ambiguity, structural ambiguity, phonetic ambiguity and referential ambiguity. People convey information from a text by a variety of means. One unclear sentence can be interpreted differenly by different people. They give positive and negative reaction due to their understanding about the meaning of the unclear sentence. That’s why, in order to communicate meaning precisely, it is important to write the sentence in clear meaning to avoid ambiguity.
Nowadays, some problems of ambiguity tend to appear in social media network such as twitter and it causes a miscommunication and different interpretation to the readers about what the writer’s meaning in the text written in tweets on twitter. Each person must have a reason for every action, as well as twitter every tweet has the intent and purpose.
Twitter is one of popular social media network beside Facebook that can be accessed via internet by using modern gadget such as laptop and desktop computers, though the brevity of tweets makes the application particularly suited to mobile devices, with users providing a running commentary on their daily routines. It has more than 300 million worldwide users (http://wikipedia.org/wiki/twitter). It is very popular in the U.S., Indonesia, Brazil, Japan, Venezuela, Netherlands. Twitter can be considered as microblogging, users can post as many as 140 characters of text, called tweets, which are distributed to everyone who has elected to receive them. Here the tweets on twitter will be
(17)
4
taken as a kind of text which will be analyzed. At the time of observing the texts used in tweets on twitter, it is found that there are ellipsis and ambiguity.
Recently, the number of twitter users grows rapidly every day. Based on the researcher own experience in using twitter, it was found that most of twitter users tend to type the tweets by omitting some words and phrase or it is called as ellipsis. The tweets are not only about the user’s privacy but also information to be read by other people. If it is written in ellipsis, it can raise misunderstanding to the outsider readers or followers because of ambiguous meaning of the word or phrase .The fact of this phenomenon atrracted the researcher to conduct a research concern with the analysis on ellipsis and ambiguity found in tweets on twitter.
1.2 The Problems of the Study
Based on the explanation above, these problems of the study are formulated as the following.
1) What types of ellipsis are found in the tweets on twitter? 2) What types of ambiguity are found in the tweets on twitter? 3) How are the tweets on twitter realized as ellipsis?
1.3 The Objectives of the Study
In relation to the problem of the study, the main objectives of this study are to:
1) describe the types of ellipsis found in the tweets on twitter, 2) describe the types of ambiguity found in the tweets on twitter, and 3) describe how the tweets on twitter are realized as ellipsis
(18)
5 1.4 The Scope of the Study
This study focuses on the analysis on ellipsis and ambiguity found in the tweets on twitter which were written in English. The limitation of the study is only the investigation of the types of ellipsis and types of ambiguity found in the tweets on twitter and also the investigation of how the tweets on twitter realized as ellipsis.
1.5 The Significances of the Study
The significance of the study is generally to give great theoritical and practical contribution to researchers as well as readers. The findings of this study are expected to be useful theoritically and practically. Theoritically, the findings of this study are expected to enrich knowledge of theories on ambiguity and ellipsis. Therefore, the findings of this study can provide basis for further researchers of different stages who want to do in depth research in linguistic development as the follow – up of this study.
Practically, the findings of this study are expected to be useful for twitter users and followers as information to help overcome the difficulties in interpreting sentences containing ellipsis and ambiguity. Thus, the findings of this study are expected to significantly contribute to researcher for future research about ellipsis and ambiguity.
(19)
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions
The objectives of this study are to describe types of ellipsis and ambiguity found in the tweets on twitter. In addition, the study attempted to describe the occurrences of ambiguity in types of ellipsis. In order to gain the objectives, the data collected for this study were one hundred tweets typed by twitter users. It can be conluded that:
1. Types of ellipsis found in the tweets on twitter are Nominal, Verbal and Clausal.
2. Types of ambiguity found in the tweets on twitter are 3 Lexical ambiguity, 9 Structural ambiguity and 15 Referential ambiguity. Not all ellipsis can cause ambiguity.
3. It is realized that there is 30% elliptical tweets on twitter consist of 12% Nominal, 10% Verbal and 8% Clausal ellipsis explained by using Halliday and Hasan’s theory.
5.2 Suggestions
In relation to the conclusion, some suggestions are presented as follows: It is expected that the findings of the study will be useful and give beneficial for the following:
(20)
1) The findings of this study can be used for twitter followers to help overcome the difficulties in interpreting tweets containing ellipsis and ambiguity.
2) The findings of this study are also suggested to be used for further researchers as reference to conduct in-depth research about linguistic development in social media.
(21)
REFERENCES
Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian. Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. 4th edition. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta
Arceneaux, Noah, and Amy Schmitz Weiss. 2010. Seems Stupid Until You Try It: Press Coverage of Twitter, 2006-9. New Media and Society. Journal. Ary, D. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education. New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston.
Beaugrande, R. & Dressler, W. An Introduction to Text Linguistics, London, Longman, 1981 paper of XIV Congress of Linguists, Berlin 1987
Brown, Keith.2006. The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edition. Oxford: Elsevier.
Dash, Niladri Sekhar. 2008. Context and Contextual Word Meaning. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics. 2008, vol. 5, no. 2. (pp.21-31)
Denzin,N.K, Lincoln,Y.S. 1994. Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
Fortin, Catherine R. 2007. Verb Phrase Ellipsis in Indonesian. Journal of Proceedings of thirty-seventh Western Conference of Linguistics. Vol 18, (pp.44-55).
Gibbs, G. 2002. “Qualitative analysis with Nvivo”, Open University Press, Buckingham.
Grenat, H. Mohammed, Dr. & Taher, M. Mohammed, Dr. On The Translation of Structural Ambiguity. Journal of Al- Satil, (pp.9-20).
Halliday, M.A.K. 1978. Language as a Social Semiotic. London: Longman. Halliday, M., & Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English.New York: Longman Johnson, R.B. 1997. Examining the validity structure of qualitative research.
Education,Vol. 118, No.2, (pp.282-292).
Kaplan, Andreas M.,Michael Haenlein.2010.Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons 53 (1): (pp.59–68). Journal.
Katz, J.J. 1972. Semantic Theory. New York: Massachusets Institute of Technology.
(22)
Kusumawati. 2001. The Study of Ambiguity in the Articles of Hello Magazine. Thesis. Unpublished Thesis. Medan : English Applied Linguistics Program. State University of Medan.
Leech, G. 1981. Introducing English Semantic. New York: Routledge. Lincoln, Y., Guba, E. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Malia, Ema. 2013. Headlines News of The Jakarta Post . Thesis. Unpublished Thesis. Medan : English Applied Linguistics Program. State University of Medan.
Martin, J. 1992. Process and Text: Two Aspects of Human Semiosis. Norwood: NJ.
Miller, G. 2001. Ambiguous Words. IMP Magazine. March 22, 2001.
Madjdi, Hilai A. 2009. Discourse Analysis” dan Kegunaannya Dalam
Pengajaran Tatabahasa dan Kosakata. http://www.jurnal.umk.aci.id.
Accessed on 3thJuly 2012.
Merriam-webster.2012. An Ensyclopedia Britannica Company. http://www.merriam-webster.com. Accessed on 17thApril 2012.
Nieuwland, S.Mante & Berkum, J.A. Van Jos. 2008. The Neurocognition of Referential Ambiguity in Language Comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass 2/4 (pp :603–630). Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Nunan, David .1993. Introducing Discourse Analysis. London: Penguin English. O’Neill, Mark. The Complete Guide to Twitter. http://www.makeuseof.com.
Accessed on 3th July 2012.
Oxford Dictionary. 2012. http://oxforddictionaries.com. Accessed on 17th April 2012.
Palmer, J. 1983. Semantic. New York: Longman.
Patrick, K. 2010. Finding Meaning in Facebook. Unpublished thesis. Butler University
Puotinen, L. Sara. 2011. Twitter Cares? Using Twitter to Care About, Care for
and Care With Women Who Have HadAbortions. Journal of IRIE Vol. 16.
No:12 (pp. 80-83)
Rees, C. 1996. Qualitative & Quantitative approaches to research , British Journal of Midwifery , Vol. 4, No: 7 (pp. 374-377)
(23)
Rusche, Harry. 2002.Ambiguity. English Department. Emory University Rusche. Saragih, Amrin. 2007. Introducing Systemic Functional Grammar. State
University of Medan.
Shenton K. Andrew. 2004. Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects: Newcastle
Thomas, Linda. 1999. Language, Society and Power. London: Routledge.
Wisudawanti. 2010. Ambigous Meaning Used in Headlines of the Daily Jakarta Post . Thesis. Unpublished Thesis. Medan : English Applied Linguistics Program. State University of Medan.
Http://online.sfsu.edu/~kbach/ambguity.html. Accessed on 10thApril 2012. Http://wikipedia.org/wiki/twitter. Accessed on Accessed on 10thApril 2012.
(1)
5 1.4 The Scope of the Study
This study focuses on the analysis on ellipsis and ambiguity found in the tweets on twitter which were written in English. The limitation of the study is only the investigation of the types of ellipsis and types of ambiguity found in the tweets on twitter and also the investigation of how the tweets on twitter realized as ellipsis.
1.5 The Significances of the Study
The significance of the study is generally to give great theoritical and practical contribution to researchers as well as readers. The findings of this study are expected to be useful theoritically and practically. Theoritically, the findings of this study are expected to enrich knowledge of theories on ambiguity and ellipsis. Therefore, the findings of this study can provide basis for further researchers of different stages who want to do in depth research in linguistic development as the follow – up of this study.
Practically, the findings of this study are expected to be useful for twitter users and followers as information to help overcome the difficulties in interpreting sentences containing ellipsis and ambiguity. Thus, the findings of this study are expected to significantly contribute to researcher for future research about ellipsis and ambiguity.
(2)
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions
The objectives of this study are to describe types of ellipsis and ambiguity found in the tweets on twitter. In addition, the study attempted to describe the occurrences of ambiguity in types of ellipsis. In order to gain the objectives, the data collected for this study were one hundred tweets typed by twitter users. It can be conluded that:
1. Types of ellipsis found in the tweets on twitter are Nominal, Verbal and Clausal.
2. Types of ambiguity found in the tweets on twitter are 3 Lexical ambiguity, 9 Structural ambiguity and 15 Referential ambiguity. Not all ellipsis can cause ambiguity.
3. It is realized that there is 30% elliptical tweets on twitter consist of 12% Nominal, 10% Verbal and 8% Clausal ellipsis explained by using Halliday and Hasan’s theory.
5.2 Suggestions
In relation to the conclusion, some suggestions are presented as follows: It is expected that the findings of the study will be useful and give beneficial for the following:
(3)
1) The findings of this study can be used for twitter followers to help overcome the difficulties in interpreting tweets containing ellipsis and ambiguity.
2) The findings of this study are also suggested to be used for further researchers as reference to conduct in-depth research about linguistic development in social media.
(4)
REFERENCES
Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2006. Prosedur Penelitian. Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. 4th edition. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta
Arceneaux, Noah, and Amy Schmitz Weiss. 2010. Seems Stupid Until You Try It:
Press Coverage of Twitter, 2006-9. New Media and Society. Journal. Ary, D. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education. New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston.
Beaugrande, R. & Dressler, W. An Introduction to Text Linguistics, London, Longman, 1981 paper of XIV Congress of Linguists, Berlin 1987
Brown, Keith.2006. The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edition. Oxford: Elsevier.
Dash, Niladri Sekhar. 2008. Context and Contextual Word Meaning. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics. 2008, vol. 5, no. 2. (pp.21-31)
Denzin,N.K, Lincoln,Y.S. 1994. Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
Fortin, Catherine R. 2007. Verb Phrase Ellipsis in Indonesian. Journal of Proceedings of thirty-seventh Western Conference of Linguistics. Vol 18, (pp.44-55).
Gibbs, G. 2002. “Qualitative analysis with Nvivo”, Open University Press, Buckingham.
Grenat, H. Mohammed, Dr. & Taher, M. Mohammed, Dr. On The Translation of
Structural Ambiguity. Journal of Al- Satil, (pp.9-20).
Halliday, M.A.K. 1978. Language as a Social Semiotic. London: Longman. Halliday, M., & Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English.New York: Longman Johnson, R.B. 1997. Examining the validity structure of qualitative research.
Education,Vol. 118, No.2, (pp.282-292).
Kaplan, Andreas M.,Michael Haenlein.2010.Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons 53 (1): (pp.59–68). Journal.
Katz, J.J. 1972. Semantic Theory. New York: Massachusets Institute of
(5)
Kusumawati. 2001. The Study of Ambiguity in the Articles of Hello Magazine.
Thesis. Unpublished Thesis. Medan : English Applied Linguistics Program. State University of Medan.
Leech, G. 1981. Introducing English Semantic. New York: Routledge. Lincoln, Y., Guba, E. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Malia, Ema. 2013. Headlines News of The Jakarta Post . Thesis. Unpublished Thesis. Medan : English Applied Linguistics Program. State University of Medan.
Martin, J. 1992. Process and Text: Two Aspects of Human Semiosis. Norwood: NJ.
Miller, G. 2001. Ambiguous Words. IMP Magazine. March 22, 2001.
Madjdi, Hilai A. 2009. Discourse Analysis” dan Kegunaannya Dalam
Pengajaran Tatabahasa dan Kosakata. http://www.jurnal.umk.aci.id. Accessed on 3thJuly 2012.
Merriam-webster.2012. An Ensyclopedia Britannica Company.
http://www.merriam-webster.com. Accessed on 17thApril 2012.
Nieuwland, S.Mante & Berkum, J.A. Van Jos. 2008. The Neurocognition of Referential Ambiguity in Language Comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass 2/4 (pp :603–630). Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Nunan, David .1993. Introducing Discourse Analysis. London: Penguin English. O’Neill, Mark. The Complete Guide to Twitter. http://www.makeuseof.com.
Accessed on 3th July 2012.
Oxford Dictionary. 2012. http://oxforddictionaries.com. Accessed on 17th April 2012.
Palmer, J. 1983. Semantic. New York: Longman.
Patrick, K. 2010. Finding Meaning in Facebook. Unpublished thesis. Butler University
Puotinen, L. Sara. 2011. Twitter Cares? Using Twitter to Care About, Care for and Care With Women Who Have HadAbortions. Journal of IRIE Vol. 16. No:12 (pp. 80-83)
Rees, C. 1996. Qualitative & Quantitative approaches to research , British Journal of Midwifery , Vol. 4, No: 7 (pp. 374-377)
(6)
Rusche, Harry. 2002.Ambiguity. English Department. Emory University Rusche. Saragih, Amrin. 2007. Introducing Systemic Functional Grammar. State
University of Medan.
Shenton K. Andrew. 2004. Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects: Newcastle
Thomas, Linda. 1999. Language, Society and Power. London: Routledge.
Wisudawanti. 2010. Ambigous Meaning Used in Headlines of the Daily Jakarta Post . Thesis. Unpublished Thesis. Medan : English Applied Linguistics Program. State University of Medan.
Http://online.sfsu.edu/~kbach/ambguity.html. Accessed on 10thApril 2012. Http://wikipedia.org/wiki/twitter. Accessed on Accessed on 10thApril 2012.