GENDER SPEECH STYLES IN LAW AND POLITICAL
DEBATE OF INDONESIA LAWYERS CLUB
(A CASE STUDY)
A Thesis
Submitted to the English Applied Linguistics Study Program in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Magister Humaniora By:
FLORIDA INDRIANY BARUS
Registration Number: 8146 111 019ENGLISH APPLIED LINGUISTICS STUDY
PROGRAM POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
ABSTRACT
Barus, Florida Indriany. Gender Speech Styles in Law and Political Debate of Indonesia Lawyers Club (A Case Study). A Thesis. English Applied Linguistics Study Program. Postgraduate School. State University of Medan, 2016.
This research deals with the way of speech styles of male and female guests in law and political debate of Indonesia Lawyers Club. The objectives of this research were to identify the kinds of speech styles that exchanged in law and political debate of Indonesia Lawyers Club by male and female guests, to describe the speech styles used by male and female guests and to explain the reason of male and female guests exchanged the speech styles in the way they are. This research was conducted by applying descriptive qualitative research. The data of this study were 25 utterances of male guests and 37 utterances of female guest which were selected from segment 5 and 6 of Indonesia Lawyers Club on the hot news “Drama Eksekusi Mati: Jokowi di bawah Tekanan” on April 28th 2015 and the last segment on the hot news “DKI-1: Siapa
ABSTRAK
Barus, Florida Indriany. Gaya Bahasa Gender dalam Debat Hukum dan Politik pada Indonesia Lawyers Club (Studi Kasus). Tesis. Program Studi Linguistik Terapan Bahasa Inggris. Program Pascasarjana. Universitas Negeri Medan, 2016.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, the writer would like to thank the Almighty God Jesus Christ for
the blessing, mercy and endless love, so she has finally completed this thesis. In
writing this thesis, the writer was helped by many beloved people and therefore the
writer would like to express her greatest gratitude to:
1. Prof. Dr. Lince Sihombing, M. Pd, her first advisor and Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih,
M. Pd, her second thesis advisor for their guidance, advices, suggestions,
affection and patience in supervising and guiding the writer to finish this thesis.
2. Dr. Rahmad Husein, M. Ed, the Head of English Applied Linguistics Study
Program and Dr. Anni Holila Pulungan, M. Hum, the Secretary of English
Applied Linguistics Study Program for the invaluable suggestions and
assistance in providing the easiness while the writer studied in the faculty,
especially in the process of completing this thesis.
3. Her thesis examiners, Prof. Dr. Busmin Gurning, M. Pd, Dr. Rahmad Husein,
M. Ed and Dr. Anni Holila Pulungan, M. Hum for advices, suggestions and
constructive criticism in order to gives improvement for this thesis betterment.
4. All of her lecturers in English Applied Linguistics Study Program who have
taught and guided her during the academic year at the faculty.
5. Her beloved parents, her father Drs. D C Barus, M. Si, her mother R N Ginting
Manik, S. Pd, her beloved brothers, Andry Permana Barus, S. Pd, M. Sn,
Basten Van Barus, Piter Efraim Liasta Barus, S. E, her beloved sister in law
Sembiring, S. I. Kom for their prayers, attention, support, affection and
unconditional love. This thesis is heartily dedicated to her family who
encouraged her and prayed for her throughout her life and her studies.
6. All of her beloved extended family and friends at LTBI A3 2014, Sisca Eva,
Ayu, Kiki, Naya, Vita, Lisa, Dian, Lindry, Fii and all of her friends for the
prayers, support, love, laughs and friendship. She would never forget all the
chats and beautiful moments she shared with all of her friends and classmates.
Other close friends, Eva Perangin-angin, Sri, Melin, Avo, Wike, Frisca, Junita
and Nora who supported her in doing her thesis.
7. Mr. Farid, who has kindly helped her in providing the academic administration.
8. Those whose names cannot be mentioned one by one for their help and
support. I love you all. Thanks for everything. May the Almighty God richly
bless all of you. Amen.
Medan, August 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pages
ABSTRACT ... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... v
LIST OF TABLES ... viii
LIST OF FIGURES ... ix
LIST OF APPENDICES ... x
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Background of the Study... 1
1.2 The Problems of the Study ... 10
1.3 The Objectives of the Study ... 11
1.4 The Scope of the Study ... 11
1.5 The Significance of the Study ... 12
CHAPTER II. REVIEW LITERATURES 2.1 The Nature of Gender ... 13
2.2 Gender Differences in Social Interaction ... 17
2.3 Gender Differences in Communication ... 18
2.3.1 Male and Female’s Way of Communication... 19
2.3.2 Male and Female’sGendered Characteristics ... 28
2.3.3 Six Differences of Male and Female in Communication ... 31
2.4 The Reason of Male and Female Speak Differently ... 34
2.5 Debate ... 44
2.5.1 Law and Political Debate ... 45
2.5.3 Indonesia Lawyers Club ...51
2.6 Relevant Studies ...53
2.7 Conceptual Framework ...58
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research Design ... 63
3.2 Subject of Research ... 63
3.3 The Data and Data Source ... 64
3.4 The Instrument of Data ... 64
3.5 Technique of Data Collection ... 65
3.6 Technique of Data Analysis ... 65
3.7 Trustworthiness ... 72
CHAPTER IV. DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 4.1. Data Analysis ... 75
4.1.1. The Way of Communication used by Male and Female Guests in Indonesia Lawyers Club ... 75
4.1.1.1 The Way of Communication used by Male Guests ... 78
4.1.1.2 The Way of Communication used by Female Guest ... 88
4.1.2. The Differences between Males and Female Guests in Commenting Session in Indonesia Lawyers Club ... 99
4.1.2.1 The Characteristics that Males Guests showed in Indonesia Lawyers Club ... 99
4.1.2.2 The Characteristics that Female Guest showed in Indonesia Lawyers Club ... 105
4.1.3. The Reason of Male and Female Guests exchanged the Speech Styles in the Way they are ... 109
4.1.3.2 The Reason of Female Guest gives Comment in
Report Talk... 113
4.2. Findings ... 117
4.3. Discussions ... 119
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 5.1 Conclusions ... 123
5.2 Suggestions ... 125
REFERENCES ... 126
LIST OF TABLES
Pages
Table 2.1 The Features of Report and Rapport Talk in Communication... 20
Table 2.2 Six Differences of Male and Female in Communication ... 32
Table 2.3 The Reason of Using Report and Rapport Talk in Communication ... 35
Table 2.3.1 The Characteristics of Male and Female in Socialize Life that has provided by Maltz and Borker (1982) in Mary (2003) ... 36
Table 2.4 The Points of features “Report and Rapport Talk” in Communication... 37
Table 3.1 The Utterances of Male Guests in Indonesia Lawyers Club ... 67
Table 3.2 The Utterances of Female Guest in Indonesia Lawyers Club ... 69
Table 4.1 The Use of Report and Rapport Talk by Male Guests in Indonesia Lawyers Club ... 76
Table 4.2 The Use of Report and Rapport Talk by Female Guest in Indonesia Lawyers Club ... 77
Table 4.3 The Features of Rapport Talk ... 78
LIST OF FIGURES
Pages
Figure 2.1 The Features of Report and Rapport Talk in Communication... 20
Figure 3.1 Components of Data Analysis: Interactive Model from:
LIST OF APPENDICES
Pages
Appendix 1. The Utterances of Male and Female Guests in Indonesia
Lawyers Club ... 130
Appendix 2. The Analysis of Report Talk Used by Male Guests ... 139
Appendix 3. The Analysis of Report Talk Used by Female Guest ... 142
Appendix 4. The Analysis of Rapport Talk Used by Female Guest ... 149
123
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions
This study was concerned on gender differences on the way of
communication styles of male and female guests in law and political debate
of Indonesia Lawyers Club. It was aimed at identifying the kinds of speech
styles that exchanged in law and political debate of Indonesia Lawyers Club by
male and female guests, describing the speech styles used by male and female
guests and explaining the reason of male and female guests exchanged the
speech styles in the way they are. After analyzing the data, some conclusions
can be stated as the following:
1. The kinds of speech styles that exchanged in law and political
debate of Indonesia Lawyers Club by male and female guests are
“rapport talk” which is used by males, such as using qualifiers,
apologizing, taking blame, thanking, maintaining an appearance of
equality, downplaying qualification, establishing relationship and
downplaying authority and “report talk” that used by female, such as
direct request, longer talk in public context, giving advice to solve
problems, rarely giving praise or compliments and showing authority.
124
banter” and “mixing business and non-business talk” that belongs
to report talk were not found.
2. Both male and female guests in law and political debate of
Indonesia Lawyers Club used report and rapport talk in their way
of communication, but male guests used rapport talk more in
delivering their comment for the issue. Meanwhile, female guest
tended to use report talk more in delivering her comment for the
issue. In addition, male guests frequently showed the
characteristics of female in communication, such as: support,
intimacy, understanding, feeling, proposal and compromise, while
female guest showed the characteristics of male in
communication, such as: status, independence, advice, information,
orders and conflict.
3. The reason of male guests used rapport talk more whereas female
guest tended to use report talk more was because male treated the
language as a way in selling themselves in a debate, whereas
female did it as a way to challenge the male’s ability and
experience in law and political issue by being the more aggressive
125
5.2 Suggestions
Due to the above conclusions, it is necessary to give suggestions
as the following:
1. It is suggested to the readers to increase their understanding of how
males and females communicate in their interaction to other people
since gender differences in communication potentially create
misunderstanding.
2. It is suggested to the other researchers to enlarge their knowledge
about the ways of communication by searching what other factors that
can influence someone’s ways of communicationexcept gender itself.
3. It is suggested to other researchers especially the researchers
majoring in English Applied Linguistics to conduct further research in
other field of making communications, such as in daily conversation,
social media networking, talk show, speech and so on, in order to
develop the theory of gender differences in communication and also to
enrich the researchers and the readers’ knowledge on gender
differences theories.
4. It is suggested to the lecturers of language to introduce the theory of
gender differences in communication in teaching learning process to
their students so that it can enlarge their student’s understanding of
126
REFERENCES
Alhassan, E., & Sulemana, I. (2014). Gender Access Gap in Basic Education: Can Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) provide a Panacea in the Northern Region of Ghana?. International Journal of Education. ISSN 1948-5476, 6(3). doi:10.5296/ije.v6i3.6346. www.macrothink.org/ije
Azhar, S. and Mohindra, V. (2012). Gender Communication: A Comparative Analysis of Communicational Approaches of Men and Women at Workplaces. IQSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (JHSS), 2(1), 18-27.
Banwart, M. and McKinney. (2008). "A gendered influence in campaign debates? Analysis of mixed-gender United States Senate and gubernatorial debates."
Communication Studies 56.4 (2005): 353+. Academic Onefile.http://munews.missouri.edu/news-releases/2008/0930-mckinney-vp-debate-2008.php retrieved on 28 October 2015.
Bei Yu. (2013). Language and Gender in Congressional Speech. Journal of Literary
and Linguistic Computing. doi:10.1093/llc/fqs073
Bogdan, R & Biklen, S. (1992). Qualitative Research for Education (Second
Edition); An Introduction to Theory and Methods. United States of America:
Allyn and Bacon.
Braedyn, S. (2010). The Impact Gender has on Effective Communication. IRWIN Professional Publishing, Burr Ridge, IL.
Climate, C. (1997). Men and Women Talking: The Differential Use of Speech and
Language by Gender.
Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (2003). Language and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Edwards, R. (2008). Competitive Debate: The Official Guide. Alpha Books.
127
Federica. (2014). Language Use and Gender in the Italian Parliament. BA Foreign Languages and Literatures.
http://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/71736/1/2014formatophd.pdf
Finnis, John. (1980). Natural Law and Natural Rights. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Frankie. (2013). Gender Differences in the Use of Linguistic Forms in the Speech of Men and Women in the Malaysian Context. IOSR Journal Of Humanities and
Social Science (IOSR-JHSS). 13(3), 67-79. (Jul. - Aug. 2013). e-ISSN:
2279-0837, p-ISSN: 2279-0845. http://www.Iosrjournals.Org
Granhemat, M., & Abdullah, A.N. (2015). The Influence of Gender and Ethnicity on the Choice of Language in the Transaction Domain of Language Use: The Case of Undergraduates. International Journal of Applied Linguistics &
English Literature. ISSN 2200-3592 (Print), ISSN 2200-3452 (Online), 4(5);
September 2015. doi:10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.5p.249. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.4n.5p.249
Haas, A. (1979). Male and Female Spoken Language Differences: Stereotypes and
Evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 615-626.
Hamdi, S., & Dabaghi, A. (2012). Gender Differences in Iranian EFL Students’ Letter Writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature. ISSN 2200-3592 (Print), ISSN 2200-3452 (Online), 1(7); November 2012. doi:10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.7p.155. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.7p.155
Holmes, J. (1992). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. New York: Longman.
. (2001). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics, 2nd ed. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Jamshidirad, M., & Mukundan, J. (2012). Language Teachers’ Burnout and Gender.
International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature. ISSN
2200-3592 (Print), ISSN 2200-3452 (Online), 1(4); September 2012. doi:10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.4p.46. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.4p.46
Kaid, L. (2000). “Advertising Watchdogs: A Content Analysis of Print and Broadcast Adwatchers”.Harvard International Journal of Press/Policy, (I) 4: 76-93.
. (2004). Handbook of Political Communication Research. New Jersey: Laurence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Kamarul, A. (2010). Mars, Venus and Gray: Gender Communication. Journal of
128
Keith, G and Shuttleworth, J. (2000). Living Language. London: Hodder & Stoughton Educational.
Khalida, N., & Sholpan, Z. (2012). Language and Gender in Political Discourse
(Mass Media Interviews). Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 70 (2012),
417–422. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.079
Kuswandi, N. (2012). Motif Masyarakat Menonton Acara Indonesia Lawyers Club di
TV One (Studi Deskriptif Motif Masyarakat Surabaya Menonton Acara
Indonesia Lawyers Club di TV One).
http://eprints.upnjatim.ac.id/5125/1/file1.pdf
Lakoff, R. (1975).Language and Women’s Place. New York: Harper and Row.
Lincoln, Y & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. London: Sage Publication.
Mann, F. (1945). The Modern Law Review. Retrieved from Wiley Online Library website:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1945.tb02893.x/pdf
Merriam, S.B. ( 1998). Qualitative Research and Case Studies Applications in
Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publications.
Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M & Saldana J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis. California: Sage.
Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research.
Maltz, D. and Borker, R. (1982). A Cultural Approach to Male-Female Miscommunication. In Marry 2003, pp.122.
Mahrooqi and Tabakow. (2015). "Effectiveness of Debate in ESL/EFL-Context Courses in the Arabian Gulf: A Comparison of Two Recent Student-Centered Studies in Oman and in Dubai, U.A.E." (PDF). 21st Century Academic Forum. Retrieved on 22 October 2015.
Mardiha, M. (2012). The Role of Age and Gender in the Choice of Address Forms: A Sociolinguistic Study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics &
English Literature. ISSN 2200-3592 (Print), ISSN 2200-3452 (Online), 1(4);
September 2012. doi:10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.4p.173. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.4p.173
Pfau, M. (2002). ”Issue-Advocacy versus Candidate Advertising: Effects on Candidate Preferences and Democratic Process”. Journal of Communication 52:
129
Puspitasari, D. (2012). Kepuasan Audience pada Tayangan Talkshow Televisi (Studi Kuantitatif Uses and Gratification Kepuasan Audience pada Tayangan Indonesia Lawyers Club TV One dan Today’s Dialogue Metro TV, di Kalangan Mahasiswa Fakultas Hukum Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta). http://e-journal.uajy.ac.id/585/2/1KOM03490.pdf
Tannen, D. ( 1990). You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in
Conversation. New York: William Morrow.
. (1991). How to Close the Communication Gap between Men and
Women. Article from McCall’sMay, v.118, n.8.
Trent, J. and Friedenberg, R. (2008). Political Campaign Communication: Principles
and Practices, 6th ed. Rowman & Littlefield.
Trudgill, P. (1974). Sociolinguistics: An Introduction. Great Britain: Penguin Books Ltd.
. (2000). Sociolinguistics. An Introduction to Language and Society. London: Penguin.
Uchida, A. (1992). When Difference is Dominance: A Critique of the
Anti-Power-Based Culture Approach to Gender Difference. Language in Society, 21,
547-568.
Vinita, M., & Samina, A. (2012). Gender Communication: A Comparative Analysis of Communicational Approaches of Men and Women at Workplaces. IOSR
Journal of Humanities and Social Science (JHSS). ISSN: 2279-0837, ISBN:
2279-0845, 2(1), (Sep-Oct. 2012), PP 18-27. http://www.iosrjournals.org
Wood, J. T. (2007). Gendered Lives: Communication, Gender, and Culture. USA: Thomson Wadworth.
. (2009). Gendered Lives: Communication, Gender, and Culture, Eight
Edition. USA : Wadsworth West, C and Zimmerman, D. 1987. Doing Gender. Gender and Society, 1(2), 125-151.
Yavari, M., & Kashani, A. (2013). Gender-based Study of Metadiscourse in
Research Articles’ Rhetorical Sections. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics & English Literature. ISSN 2200-3592 (Print), ISSN 2200-3452
