POLITENESS PRINCIPLES IN THE 2014 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION DEBATE.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This thesis has been written in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Magister Humaniora in English Applied Linguistics of Postgraduate School in the State University of Medan (UNIMED). Alhamdulillah, the writer is deeply grateful to ALLAH SWT for his blessings, so this thesis could be finished. It is a great to pleasure to acknowledge her deepest thanks and gratitude to first adviser Dr. I Wy Dirgeyasa,M.Hum for suggesting, supervision of the work and for the invaluable guidance, the longtime and tremendous effort to offer every possible help to finish this thesis. And Prof.Dr.Sumarsih, M.Pd as the second adviser. for helpful discussions and lecturer of English applied linguistics study program, for his encouragements and kind care to writer for finishing this thesis. And her thanks to her reviewers Prof. Dr. Amrin Saragih, M.A. Ph.D, Dr. Zainuddin, M.Hum and Dr. Rahmad Husein, M.Ed for their suggestions, encouragements and critisms to help the writer in finishing this thesis to be better one on manuscripts during the thesis proposal seminar and the research result seminar.

He owes a deep sense of gratitude to all lecturers for their knowledge and encouragements throughout the academic study period. And he thanks peofusely to Mr. Farid and all the staffs of magister program administration for their kind help and co-operation.

(8)

ii

Finally, he realizes that this thesis is not yet perfect format. Therefore, the constructive critism from readers aimed to improve this thesis will be highly appreciated. So, it can give significant contributions to study about Politeness Principles

Medan, 22nd August, 2016 The Writer

(9)

v

REFERENCES………. 67

(11)

LIST OF TABLE

Table 4.1 ……… 43

Table 4.2 ……… 45

Table 4.3 ……… 47

Table 4.4 ……… 50

Table 4.5 ……… 52

Table 4.6 ……… 53

(12)

LIST OF APPENDIX

Appendix 1 ………. 71 Appendix 2 ………. 132

(13)

1 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1The Background of the Study

The primary function of language is for communication. Cobley (2001:5) elaborates

communication as a form of semiotics which is concerned with the exchange of any message

whatsoever from the molecular code and the immunological properties of cells all the way

through to vocal sentences. Communication deals with the process of exchanging information,

ideas, thoughts, feelings and emotions through conversation, speech, debate, signals, writing or

behavior. In communication process, a sender encodes a message and then using a medium or

channel sends it to the receiver.

Beard (2000:2) states study the language of politics is important because it helps the

language users to understand how language is used by those who wish to gain power, those who

wish to exercise power and those who wish to keep power. Moreover, language has a powerful

tool in the hands of political leaders. They manipulate this language becomes the tool to suit their

purposes. When, politics is basically about struggling to control power, it is only through

language that such could be accomplished thereby making language has big effect.

In implementation of successful democratic rule in any country language of politics is

essential. Ayeomoni and Akinkuolere (2012:461) observe that language is the conveyer belt of

power, it moves people to vote, debate. Therefore, a central explanation of political stability or

polarization. Language is essential to politicians. Beard (2000:3) elaborates that politician is a

practitioner of the art of politics, essential to the working of human society. The language of

(14)

2

language to manipulate words to persuade them. Therefore, language could be regarded as the

vehicle of politics. The candidates of president also politicians, because politics is the practice to

influence other people to achieved and exercise positions of president. One activities perform by

the politicians are done through the language like speech or debate.

In line with explanation above, in recent years political debates between candidates of

president become one of interesting case to discuss they give lip service as it is a reality that must

be ahead of the election, because basically they want to win at the time of the next competencies,

so that they will race the race to get to the heart of society so that people would choose him to be

a leader. In political debate they often tell wash corruption, the promise of providing jobs,

building infrastructure in areas not yet awakened sold by the prospective future leaders. But the

fact is happening now, sometimes contrary to what was promised on the campaign. So until now,

a case of corruption in this country is not abating, so that's the reality of the democratic party, the

party that is supposed to be an arena for people to re-discover a leader who is able to bring

Indonesia into a better direction again. in election is supposed to serve as a platform to create and

realize the hopes of passing the selection of a leader who is able to implement the mandate and

vision of their mission at the level of action and not just words. but it is time to make this

election as a platform to realize the hopes and future goals brought Indonesia better direction

again

When debate we should use language as good as possible. How when we are talking or

arguing interlocutors feel comfortable with our statement. In this case language politeness is very

important. Politeness is part of pragmatics. According to Hill (1986:349) politeness define as one

of the constraints on human interaction, whose is to consider others’ feeling, establish levels of

(15)

3

Politeness is maintaining proper etiquette and speaking properly to a person without offending

them. People must not to be rude or offensive. People must use proper words to convey

something. They have to be choosy about words while conveying something. When people are

polite, they are minimizing the conflict that may be finding in communicating but rather

avoiding interpersonal conflict that’s why being polite in communication is really important. So

people should consider about politeness especially in communicating with other people.

When we communication with the other people politeness helps us to communicate well

where good communication gives us many advantages in interacting with others. When people

being polite to others it can make them be popular and more likeable. Others are friendly towards

you. Besides them, being polite can less chance of developing enemies. Being polite is a

complicated in any language. It’s difficult to learn because it involves understanding or just the

language but also the social and cultural values of the community. We often tend to think of

politeness simply as matter of saying please and thank you in the right place. In fact it involves a

great deal more than that and many of people can not be polite to others that caused conflict in

communicating. So it needs to study politeness that’s to make good communication where in

today’s modern world and interaction require conversational skill that makes good

communication.

According to Leech (1981:15) notes characterized the present approach to pragmatics as

rhetorical. The use of this term refers to the study of effective use of language in communication

which deals with the focus it places on a goal-oriented speech situation, in which speaker uses

language in order to produce a particular effect in the mind of hearer. As a set of conversational

principles which are related by their function, it is divided into interpersonal and textual.

(16)

4

and irony principle. In this thesis, the researcher will focus on politeness principle. According to

the philosopher Leech (1983:132) there are six maxims of politeness principles: Tact maxim,

Generosity maxim, Approbation maxim, Modesty maxim, Agreement maxim, and Sympathy

maxim.

The main point of politeness principle is the effect of what the speaker said to the people.

So the speaker may speak untruth in order to make the hearer become pleased. Politeness

principle also teaches us how to produce utterances without making the hearer angry. In other

word, the speaker is allowed to speak a white lie to avoid conflict and get respect from others.

The example can be seen in presidential election debate ( jilid 5 topik: Pangan, Energi, dan

Lingkungan).

PS: Saya kaget dalam kampanye, bapak bilang petani tidak perlu koperasi, padahal koperasi

vital, sokoguru bagi kehidupan petani dan nelayan kita?

J: Mungkin bapak salah baca atau slah dengar. Saya kira semua orang tahu, koperasi adalah

sokoguru ekonomi kita. Tidak mungkin seorang jokowi mengatakan seperti itu. Hanya

masalahnya di desa ada beberapa hal yang harus kita tuntaskan….

From the example, PS as the first president candidates is given the chance by moderator

to taking his turn to asking J as second president candidates. After PS given the question and

then J answer mungkin bapak salah baca atau salah dengar. Saya kira semua orang tahu,

koperasi adalah sokoguru ekonomi kita. Tidak mungkin seorang jokowi mengatakan seperti itu.

J directly do not accept the question from PS because the question is not appropriate with what

happened. In this case J violated tact maxim which expects to minimize the expression of cost to

(17)

5

his self. Thus, in this point, J was considered as impolite since he attacks the other’s face. The

other example of this phenomenon can be seen in presidential election debate (jilid 2 topik:

Pembanguan Ekonomi dan Kesejahteraan Sosial)

PS: Apakah bapak setuju biaya wajib belajar 12 tahun karena butuh tambahan anggaran Rp40

triliun?

J: Di depan sudah saya sampaikan, pembangunan manusia dibidang pendidikan. Harus ada

evaluasi dan perubahan. Pendidikan ditingkat SD, 80% harus berbicara masalah berkaiatan

dengan pendidikan karakter, akhlak, mental baru 20% pengetahuan. SMP 60:40%, SMA

20:80%, untuk pembangunan karakter dan pengetahuan. Baru kita mempunyai manusia dengan

sikap mental, etos kerja, produktivitas dan daya saing tinggi. Pendidikan adalah hal utama

yang tidak bias kita tawar-tawar. Berapapun investasinya harus kita berikan, Rp40 triliun itu

bisa dicari. Dari BBM ke BBG bias menghemat Rp70 triliun. Masukkan saja ke pendidikan.

From the example, PS as the first president candidates is giving the question for J as

second president candidate. And then J answer the question from PS clearly, that J is agree with

Rp40 billion for education budget. In this case J as first president candidate obeyed the

agreement maxim which aims to minimize the expression of disagreement between self and

other and maximize agreement between self and other. So he is considered as polite person.

Since he had effort to minimize threat to other’s face.

When viewed from both the presidential candidates 2014, both of them come from or

support by major parties, this presidential election is very competitive because only two

candidates. Even though both of them same ethnics but they have different language when

(18)

6

emotional and high spirit. In contrast to the second candidates style of communication and

speech Jokowi not explosive, not emotional, and use everyday language simple and commonly

use by many people. So, people better understand the message of communication conveyed by

Jokowi. From the side physical, Jokowi is usual and tone delivered exceptional. However, the

topics covered by Jokowi are concrete problems. While, Prabowo used elit language when

communicate in public.

Related to the explanations above, researcher interesting to analyze politeness principle in

utterance of president candidates in presidential election Republic Indonesia 2014. Because when

they are making debates there some rules that should be obey to make the hearer is comfort

toward language that use by the candidates. How to deliver opinion, how to respond the

argument if we are not agree with statement. Each candidates should be wise to choose the

language. The candidates’ language has affect to their opponents. This research intends to find

out the politeness principle in utterance of president candidate in presidential election 2014.

1.2The Problem of the Study

The study is based on the following research questions:

1. What types of politeness principles are used by president candidates in presidential

election debate 2014?

2. How are politeness principles in the 2014 presidential election debate?

3. Why are president candidates used politeness principles the way they do in the 2014

(19)

7

1.3 The Objectives of the Study

In relation of the problems, the objectives of study are:

1. to describe the types of politeness principles are use by president candidates in

presidential election debate 2014.

2. to find out the realization of politeness principles in presidential election debate 2014? .

3. to find out the reason why politeness principles used by president candidates in

presidential election debate 2014

1.4The Scope of the Study

As state in the previous explanation that politeness principle can occur not only in daily

conversation but also in debate, like in presidential election debate 2014. And this study

attempted to find out the politeness principle in presidential election debate 2014 that use by

Jokowi-Jusuf Kalla and Prabowo Subianto-Hatta Rajasa as president candidates and vice

president. The aspects observed were the occurrences of obeying and violating the politeness

principle in presidential debate candidates proposed by Leech (1983). Actually there are

some of politeness theories like Brown and Levinson theory (1987), Robin Lakoof’s theory,

(1972) Grice’s theory (1975) but this study focused on Leech (1983) theory which introduces

six maxims, namely tact maxim, generosity maxims, approbation maxim, modesty maxim,

agreement maxim, and sympathy maxim.

1.5The Significance of the Study

The findings of this study have two general significances, theoretical and practical

significances.

(20)

8

1. The enrichment of Linguistics knowledge of the university students in the field of

Pragmatics especially in politeness principle.

2. Add up references to further studies.

Practically, the results of this research are useful for:

1. Teacher, lectures, and students of university as a reference performing politeness in their

daily life.

2. For speakers and listeners in daily communication. By obeying politeness principle, they

have a comfortable situation in communication. Then, they can create good

understanding in daily communication.

3. For other researcher as source to conduct the next further research

(21)

67

Reference

Almond, Gabriel A., Verba, Sidney The Civic Culture. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company, 1965.

Al-Rassam, E. M. (2010) Analyzing Political Discourse: Towards a Pragmatic Approach. University of Mosul

Ayeomoni, O.Moses. & Akinkuolere, O.S. (2012) A Pragmatic Analysis of Victory and Inaugural Speeches of President Umaru Musa Yar”Adua. Journal of Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 461-468

Beard, A. (2000) The Language of Politics. Routledge

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education. An introduction to theory and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Brown, Penelope; Stephen C. Levinson (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Studies in interactional sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Carnegey, D. & Esenwein, J. B. (2005) The Art of Public Speaking. Blackmask Online

Cobley, Paul 2001 “The Routledge Companion to semiotics and linguistics” Routledge

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. : Sage Production, Inc. USA.

Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., & Hyams, N. (2007). An Introduction to Language(8th ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Garth S. Jowett and Victoria O'Donnell (2006) Propaganda and Persuasion. Mohan Cooperative New Delhi

(22)

Gunarwan (1994) Polite strategy used in Jakarta. The use of Isyarat Halus ( IH) for example is not polite compared to Isyarat Kuat (IK)and both of these.

Hill, Beverly, Shachiko Ide, Shoko Ikuta, Akiko Kawasaki, and Tsunao Ogino (1986) Universals of linguistic politeness: Quantitative evidence from Japanese and American English.

Journal of Pragmatics 10: 347-371.

Isolates, P. (2011) Analyzing Presidential Debates Functional Theory and Finnish Political Communication Culture. Nordicom Review Journal No 32, pp 31-43

Kearns, K.(2000). Semantics. London: Macmillan Press.

Lakoff, R. (1973). ‘The logic of politeness; or minding your p's and q's.’ Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 292-305.

Leech, Geoffrey N. (1983) Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.

Levinson, Stephen C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-22235-4.

Lincoln, Y. & Guba, E, G (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage Publication Inc, London

Mey, Jacob, 2001. Pragmatics. Blackwell, Oxford.

Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. California; SAGE publications Inc.

Murni (2009) Politeness that used in DPRD SU, State University of Medan

Peccei, Jean Stilwell. 1999. Pragmatics. New York: Routledge

Rahardi, Kunjana. 2005. Pragmatik: Kesantunan Imperatif Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Erlangga

(23)

Spolsky, Bernard and Francis M. Hult eds. (2007) The Handbook of Educational Linguistics. [1] eISBN 9781405154109.

Suwito. 1996. Sosiolinguistik. Surakarta: UNS Press.

Tanjung (2010) in applied linguistic study program entitled Gender differences in expressing politeness in English, State University of Medan.

Trapp, R. (2007) The Debatebase Book: A Must-Have Guide for Successful Debate. IDEA Press Books

Watts, Richard J. 2003. Politeness: Key Topics in Sociolinguistics.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Westfall, M. and Jhon McCarthy. 2004. Great Debates: Language and culture skills for ESL students, Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.

Yahdi (2012) Study about the politeness strategies that are used by Javanes people, State University Medan.

Yanda Li (2013) Politeness Principles Difference in Appellations between English and Chinese.

Unpublished Thesis. Medan: English Applied Linguistics Study Program, State University of Medan

Yule, G. 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford University Press