A Thesis
Submitted to Letter and Humanities Faculty In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for
The Degree of Strata One
RAINY NUR NORRA 1111026000058
ENGLISH LETTERS DEPARTMENT ADAB AND HUMANITIES FACULTY
STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH JAKARTA
i
University (UIN) Syarif Hidayatullah, Jakarta. 2016.
This thesis is the study of pragmatics on the use of politeness strategy in movie entitled ‘Her’. It is a qualitative research. The theory used in this thesis is Brown and Levinson’s Negative Politeness Strategy, and supported by Ronald Wardaugh Politeness and Solidarity theory. The writer also analyzes the relation between distance and the choice of strategy and how the strategy works in the conversation.
By applying the theories, the writer knows that the characters use the politeness strategy as we know that politeness strategy have several sub-strategies that have a different purpose. Those sub-strategies are bald on record, positive
politeness, negative politeness, off record, and don’t do FTA. They uses those
strategies relates to the context of the conversation and the situation.
Furthermore, Wardaugh theory about solidarity and politeness are not necessarily main reflection about how the character behavior to each other. Their relation is close but they still polite although the tension of the situation heat up.
iv
I hereby declared that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person nor the material which to substantial extent has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma of the university or other institute of higher learning, except where due acknowledgment has been made in the text.
Jakarta, January 15, 2015
v Merciful.
First of all the writer would like to give all majesty and praise to Allah Subhana Wa
Ta’aalaa who is always give her strength, patients, blessing in completing this thesis.
May blessing, peace and salutation be upon the most honorable prophet and messenger of Allah Subhana Wa Ta’aalaa, Muhammad Solalluhu Alaihi Wassalam, his families, companion, and congregations.
The writer would like to express her deep and sincere gratitude to her advisor, Sholikatus Sa’diyah, M.Pd. who had guided and supported her to accomplish this thesis. The writer recognizes that without her guidance, critic, and constructive comment and support during the writing of this thesis, it will not be fulfilled.
The writer would like to express her special gratitude to her beloved parents, Abdul Azis and Kholifah, who never stop praying for her, their financial support, their mentally support, their contribution in the writer’s life especially in finishing
this thesis. Deep gratitude also to the writer’s sister Rizki Amalia and her husband,
vi
who given their participation and support in finishing this thesis. They are as follows:
1. Prof. Dr Syukron kamil M.Ag, the Dean of Adab and Humanities Faculty. 2. Drs. Saefudin, M.Pd, the Head of English Letters Department.
3. Elve Oktaviyani, M.Hum, the Secretary of English Letters Department.
4. All lecturers of English Letters Department, who gave the writer knowledge by taught and educated the writer during her studies at the English Letters Department.
5. All the staff of main library of UIN Jakarta, PKBB UNIKA ATMAJAYA, and Faculty of Adab and Humanities library that helped the writer in finding so many references.
6. The writer’s group of KKN ‘GEMA PERMATA’, what a great month with
them and hopefully they have another great month ahead..
7. The writer’s best friend since junior high school Njo, Adry, Raden, Topik,
Randy, thank you for the laugh and for the unbreakable friendship. They are not best friend anymore, they are partner in crime.
8. The writer’s best friend since high school Icha, Widy, Pietrajaya, Eko,
Fauzan, thank you for sharing any thought with them, they are the real MVP.
9. The writer’s best friend in the same struggle Farah Noor Syalies, Yuni Asri
vii
And for those that the writer could not mention one by one, for their outstanding contribution, material and immaterial assistance, it was so great having them all. May Allah SWT blessed and protects them.
Amin
Jakarta, September 2015
viii
APPROVAL SHEET ... ii
LEGALIZATION ... iii
DECLARATION ... iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... v
TABLE OF CONTENT ... viii
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ... 1
A. BACKGROUND OF STUDY ... 1
B. FOCUS OF STUDY ... 5
C. RESEARCH QUESTION ... 5
D. SIGNIFICANT OF STUDY ... 5
E. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 6
CHAPTER II THEORETICAL DESCRIPTION ... 8
A. PREVIOUS RESEARCH ... 8
B. CONCEPT ... 12
1. Politeness ... 12
2. Brown and Levinson Politeness Theory ... 16
2.1. Bald On Record ... 18
2.2. Positive Politeness... 19
2.3. Negative Politeness ... 24
2.4. Off Record... 27
2.5. Don’t Do FTA ... 31
3. Sociological Variable ... 31
CHAPTER III DATA ANALYSIS ... 35
A. Data Description ... 35
ix
1 A. Background of Study
“Language is a communication tool between members of society in the
form of a symbol of the sound produced by the human vocal organs. Communication tool is intended as a means to interact or are interconnected with the other person.”1
As a member of the community would someone need to interact with others through the medium of language. Language is an arbitary system which uses in society to cooperate, communicate, and to identify them.2 Language used in order to reach what the purpose of the communication. In short, language is medium to communicate in order to interact with society in life.
Moreover, communication happens in almost all aspect of life and it is not only as a communication to each other, but also it uses in social aspects such as one's relationship with others, religion, and politics, economics and culture. In addition, in the terms of entertainment, such as movies, soundtracks, and scripts use language either. However the language used within them are certainly to convey the purpose of the creator regardless any linguistics intention. It means that the usage of language is unconsciously contained with linguistics element.
1
Didin Saefudin Buchori. Bahasa Indonesia Untuk Mahasiswa. (Bogor: Granada sarana pustaka. 2012), P.1
2
Indeed, in the movie definitely are played by various characters that could represent the hidden intention in the film. As the part of storyline, the characters have a conversation delivered by the expression. It means, the language usage effects the expression from the speaker, in this case is the characters.
A movie as one of the creative arts arguably has a lot of demands from its spectacle. Especially movie are made by the foreign, precisely by Hollywood industry which mastered cinema networks around the world. The story itself has its own uniqueness; in this case the writer highlights a movie entitled Her. This movie serves an extra ordinary love story, which the main female character in the movie is only a digital voice from computer program. The story tells about the difficult situation the main male actor and the digital voice character who are falling in love to each other. The voice character named Samantha and the male named Theodore. The director, succeed plays the emotion of the writer through the love story between Samantha and Theodore.
Nevertheless, as I mention earlier that the script is conducted for the sake of the story regardless the linguistic element itself. In the other hands, there is a strategy contained in every communication. According to Georgia Green that quoted by Yule in his book that is to understand of intention in human action, it involves interpretation in order to accomplish some purpose in communication. It also includes belief, intention (or goal), plan, and act.3 The interpretation is based on what we might have intended to convey and includes evaluation as „rude‟ and „inconsiderate‟, or „considerate‟ and „thoughtful‟. This impact of these evaluations
became the investigation and it called politeness.4 Politeness has been triggered by
3
Georgia Green. Pragmatic and Natural Language Understanding. Lawrence Erlbaum1989, p. 3 in George Yule. Pragmatic. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996) p. 91
4
Ibid p. 60.
5
some linguists that which are Robin Lakoff, Stephen C. Levinson and Penelope Brown, Geoffrey Leech, Yueguo Gu, Sachiko Ide, Shosana Blum-Kulka, Bruce Fraser and William Nolen, Horst Arndt and Richard Janney, and finally Richard Watts.5 However, the writer chose the theory proposed by Brown and Levinson, although not the first, Brown & Levinson‟s theory is certainly the most influential – witness the innumerable reactions, applications, critiques, modifications and revisions their 1987 publication has triggered, and still does.6 In their book entitled Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage suggests that in conversation, speaker and hearer both have positive and negative face7, where the face should be kept. Brown and Levinson define face as the public self-image that every member wants to claim for himself.8 This face has two aspects: positive and negative.
Negative face: the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, right
to non-distraction – i.e. to freedom of action and freedom from imposition
Positive face: the positive consistent self-image or ‘personality’ (crucial including the desire that his self-image be appreciated and
approved of) claimed by interactants.9
In short, this theory focuses to analyzed the strategies as follows (1) bald on record, (2) Positive politeness, (3) Negative politeness, (4) Off Record, (5) Don‟t do FTA. Those strategies are applied in order to uncover the linguistics elements within the human and the computer device character‟s interaction.
6
Ibid p. 3
7
Penelope Brown and Stephen C. Levinson, Politeness: Some Universals In Language Usage, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), p. 59
8
Ibid. p. 61
9
However, the writer limited this research by only analyzing the negative politeness strategy. According to Brown and Levinson, the negative politeness itself is redressive action addressed to the adressee‟s negative face: his want to
have his freedom of action unhindered and his attention unimpeded. In short, to minimize the particular imposition that the FTA unavoidably effects to hearer.10
Furthermore, unconsciously we can learn linguistic deeper through the movie. We can find out when and what one's goals using politeness strategies through the movies we watch from the characters who plays the movie through their utterances which relates to the context and situation in the scene of the movie. This study aimed to find out when and what strategies should be used in any context of the conversation that if we can apply in our daily lives that will ultimately have an impact on our relationships with others.
In addition, this research also uses a supporting theory from Ronald Wardaugh to attempt discovered the closeness relationship between the speaker and the hearer. His theory called solidarity and politeness. In short, the closer the relationship between the speaker and the hearer the less politeness level and vice versa. This theory conveyed about how the relationship of a person to another person influenced their utterance and in this case is politeness. Wardaugh also conveyed about address term that use in order to be polite and friendly. 11
Those explanations above are the reasons of the writer to do this analysis with a movie entitled Her as the research by using the Brown and Levinson as the main theory to analysis the language phenomenon. Also theory by
10
Ibid p.129
11
Wardaugh is applied as the supporting theory to attempt the analysis more accurate.
B. Focus of Study
In this thesis, the writer will focus on politeness strategy by Brown and Levinson in Her movie. The thesis will be analyzed each scene to know what strategy that use in the movie and how it works and why characters in the movie use those strategies.
C. Research Questions
In accordance with the background research that has been described beforehand, some research questions that will be explored in depth can be formulated as follows:
1. How are the strategies used by the character in the movie Her using politeness strategies?
2. Why do the characters in the movie Her use politeness strategies in their utterances?
D. Significance of Study
expected to increase repertoire of linguistics studies but also to learn about politeness strategy in more depth through the film that became the object of this study, so it can be applied in real life.
E. Research Methodology 1. Objectives of Research
The aims of this research are:
1. To know how the strategies used by the character in the movie.
2. To know the purpose related to the context of conversation of the character use of politeness strategy of Brown and Levinson's theory in the movie entitled Her
2. The Method of Research
This thesis is a qualitative research. Qualitative research is descriptive.12 The writer noted meticulously the data that in the form of words13 and in this case is movie script. From these data, the writer analyzing the data to make generalizations or conclusions of the research subjects.14
3. The Technique of Data Analysis
The Writer search data in the selected movie script then look for scenes in the movie that is suitable as a data afterwards writer wrote on the data card for makes analysis easier. The data has already collected is analyzed qualitatively by performing the following steps:
12
Edi Subroto. Pengantar Metoda Penelitian Linguistik Struktural. (Surakarta: Sebelas Maret University Press, 1992). p. 7
13
Ibid.
14
a. Determining the topic and the objective of the thesis. b. Reading the related literature data.
c. Determining of the object of the thesis and the theory to solved the problem.
d. Watching the movie Her and reading the script.
e. Marking and giving notes on the politeness utterances found. f. Identifying and analyzing based on related theory.
g. Concluding the research findings.
4. The Instrument of Research
The writer is the primary instrument for data collection and analysis.15 Data have been obtained by the author are written into a card called a data card, the data card contains data that has been taken in the script of the film.16 Then, the data card used as instrument also besides the writer herself.
5. The Unit of Analysis
This thesis uses movie entitled Her as the corpus which the movie cast by Joaquin Phoenix as the main male character and Scarlet Johanson as main female character, but her role in this movie is only a voice heard from computer. Moreover, the genre of this movie is drama. This movie was released in 2013. This movie won Academy Award in 2014 for best writing original screenplay, and Golden Globe Award for Best Screenplay, Motion Picture. These awards are very prestigious in the movie industry.
15
Sharan B. Miriam. Qualitative Research: A guide to Design and Implementation, (San Fransisco: Jossey Bass, 2009) p. 15
16
8 A. Previous Research
Before writer doing this thesis about politeness in the movie 'Her', the study by previous writers have been done with different units of analysis. The writer found four writers who wrote thesis about politeness, here are previous writers:
1. This thesis was written by Yuliana Prameswari in 2012, entitled Negative Politeness Strategy in Diplomacy Meeting at UN Security Council Summit on
Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Nuclear Disarmament. She used several theories to analyzed the unit analysis, the theories are Brown and Levinson’s negative politeness strategy, supported by other theories such as John Searle’s indirect speech act, Grice’s cooperative principle dimensions -non-spuriousness, relevance, and perspicuosness, Leech’s tact maxim, Agha’s honorification, Ross’s degrees of nouniness and Scollon’s politeness system.
From this research, the writer found the fact that by applying the theories, the writer knows that negative politeness strategy regularly implies in spokesman’s utterances to not infringe the hearer’s negative face and to
maintain the harmonized atmosphere among them. In brief, negative politeness as the heart of respect behavior has greatly contribution to the success of international diplomacy. With negative politeness strategies, diplomats from different states can represent their own policy and resolution without infringement to territory of hearer’s freedom.1
16
The differences between the thesis above and this thesis is the corpus exist in real life and the situation is formal because the speech from the head of government take place in international diplomacy about nuclear that the topic of the meeting is very important. Indeed, the utterances from the head of government who involve in the meeting must be used politeness strategy not only to maintain the ‗face’ of the audiences who are the head of government
but also to maintain their country relationship. Besides, she also uses a different supporting theory like Agha’s Honorification because of the corpus
itself. Contrast, the writer uses Ronald Wardaugh politeness and solidarity as supporting theory because she uses movie as the corpus that the character in the movie uttered in informal situation.
FTA as a general rule there are 3 utterances (9,68%), strategy 9 and 10 there are only one utterance (3,23%). Rachael Ray as the object of analysis mostly used strategy 2. Question, hedge that shows speaker tend to using simple strategy to applied word or phrase to minimize a risk of wrong in delivering the utterances.2
The differences between the thesis above and this thesis are in the methodology they used, if Resi Novira used Quantitative method with a percentage of the strategy uses. In contrast, the writer use Qualitative method, then there are no percentage in the result of her thesis.
3. This thesis written by Siti Nurzanah in 2012, entitled An Analysis of Negative
Politeness Strategy Used by Harry Potter In JK Rowling’s Novel ‘Harry Potter and The Chamber Of Secret”. The aim of this research are to find out
the analysis of negative politeness strategy used by Harry Potter in J.K. Rowling’s novel ‗Harry Potter and The Chamber of Secret’, to know in what
situation Harry Potter used Negative Politeness, and to know with whom Harry used the Negative Politeness. This research was conducted through discourse analysis methodology. The researcher collecting data by reading the novel and analyzed the data by using technique: data reduction, data display, and analysis according to the theory of Miles and Huberman. As the result of this research, the researcher found the negative politeness strategy used by Harry Potter in J.K. Rowling novel Harry Potter and The Chamber of Secret are seven of ten types of negative politeness: be conventionally indirect,
2
question-hedge, be pessimistic, minimize the imposition, give deference, apologize, go on record as incurring a debt or as not indebting in the certain situation and setting. There is no utterance which belong to impersonalize S and H, state FTA as general rule, and nominalize.3
The differences between this thesis and the thesis written by Siti Nurzanah are this thesis is about politeness strategy but she also conducted with Discourse Analysis, and the corpus is novel and uses Miles and Huberman as a technique of data analysis. Otherwise, the writer use qualitative method and the result explained descriptively. And the data conducted used data card as introduced by Subroto.
4. This journal written by Rosina Marquez Reiter from University of Sheffield, entitled Politeness Phenomena in British English and Uruguayan Spanish: The case of Requests. The aim of this journal is to present and analysis and interpretation of the realization patterns of requests in British English (BE) and Uruguayan Spanish (US), establishing the similarities and differences between the conceptualization of politeness by native speaker of both languages. This journal use Brown and Levinson’s Politeness Theory, and
other supporting theories such as Whorfian hypothesis and its view on the relationship between language and thought, Gricean conversational maxims, Austin’s and Searle’s speech act theory and Goffman’s notion of ‗face’, and
the major politeness theories such as Lakoff (1973), Brown and Levinson (1987) and Leech’s (1983). The result of this journal is the major difference
between US and BE request is a matter of orientation. Uruguayans appear to
3
be more inclined towards positive politeness when requesting as opposed to the British, who seem to be more inclined to negative politeness.4
The differences between the journal above and this thesis are this journal is specific in request and the researcher did this research in real life situation and the unit of analysis are the British English native speaker and Uruguayan Spanish Native speaker, and used Whorfian hypothesis as supporting theory different from the writer of this thesis, she used movie as the corpus and related them with Politeness and solidarity which known in sociolinguistics.
B. Concept
In this section explains the concept of politeness and impoliteness that can affect a person to use politeness strategies and also theories to support from the sociolinguistic namely solidarity and politeness theory initiated by Ronald Wardaugh and politeness theory initiated by Brown-Levinson. Indeed, other theories that support the main theory.
1. Politeness
In daily conversation, we as civilized human beings would certainly think about what we uttered, to whom we uttered or who our partners, in a situation like what we said so as not to offend hearer. It is necessary for us said the sentences that polite.
In the other hand, according to Thomas, the only reason is that people have discussed five separate sets of phenomena (deference, register, a real-world
4
goal, a surface level phenomenon and an illocutionary phenomenon) under the heading of politeness.5 It is intepreted in everyday life as the use of deferential language and expression of gratitude and apology.6
Furthermore, politeness is a concept in English that assessed in pragmatic and sociolinguistics in Anglo-Saxon tradition of linguistics. In fact, this concept is also subject of social theory. In general, politeness relates to the idea of such thoughtful, humble, and considerate in term of relationship with others.7
Politeness is an area of interactional pragmatic which has experienced and explosion of interest over the past quarter of a century and in which empirical studies have proliferated, examining-individually and crosses culturally-languages and language varieties from around the world.8 It is a pragmatics phenomenon which lies not in the form and the words themselves, but its function and its intended social meaning.9 Pragmatically, politeness is interpreted as a strategy used by a speaker to achieved variety goals, such as promoting or maintaining harmonious relations.10
Then, in the pragmatics we recognize the principle of politeness. Some theories about politeness principle introduced by some linguist one of them is Penelope Brown and Stephen C. Levinson, better known as Brown and Levinson's theory of politeness. According to them, the concept of politeness is universal and
5
Jenny Thomas, Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics (Edinburgh: Longman, 1995), p. 149.
6
Helen Spencer-Oatey, Culturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory, 2nd ed. (Cornwall:Continuum, 2008), p. 2.
7
Richard J. Watts, Politeness (Cambridge : CUP, 2003), p.10
8
Leo Hickey and Miranda Stewart, Politeness in Europe (Great Britain: Cromwell Press, 2005) p.1
9
Joan Cutting, Pragmatic and Discourse, (New York: Routledge, 2002), pp. 51-52
10
equal in all speech communities in the world. Member of society have the same way to show politeness to the hearers conceptualized as face.11 Goffman defines face as the positive social value a person effectively claims for himself by the line other assume he has taken during a particular contact.12 George Yule defines the concept of face as a social and emotional sense owned by anyone and hoped to be recognized by the others.13 According to Janney Thomas, the concept of face is the best understood as every individual’s feeling of self-worth within politeness
theory. This image can be damaged, maintained or enhanced through verbal interaction with others.14 Brown and Levinson defines it as the public self image that every member want to claim for himself. 15In their book entitled Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage suggests that in speaking, speaker and hearer both have positive and negative face16, where the face should be kept. This face has two aspects: positive and negative.
Negative face: the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, right to non-distraction – i.e. to freedom of action and freedom from imposition Positive face: the positive consistent self-image or ‗personality’ (crucial including the desire that his self-image be appreciated and approved of) claimed by interactants.17
As quoted by Helen Spencer-Oatey in their book entitled Culturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory that in Brown and Levinson seminal work on politeness, proposed that face is the key of motivating
11
Brown and Levinson. Op.cit. pp.61-62
12
Erving Goffman. Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face to Face Behavior (New Jersey: Transaction Publisher, 2005), p. 5.
13
George Yule. The Study of Language, 3rd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2006), p.119.
14
Thomas. Op.cit. p. 169.
15
Brown and Levinson. Loc. Cit.
16
Ibid. p.59
17
force for ‗politeness’, and they maintain that it consist of two related aspects, negative face and positive face. In their model, negative face is a person’s want to
be unimpeded by others, the desire to be free to act as s/he choose and not be imposed upon; positive face is person’s want to be appreciated and approved of
by selected others, in terms of personality, desires, behavior, values and so on. In other words, negative face represents a desire for autonomy, and positive face represents a desire approval.18
Additionally, Robin Lakoff could be well called of mother of modern politeness theory; she was the first to examine it from a decidedly pragmatic perspective. Eelen quoted Lakoff in her book that according to Lakoff, politeness is a system of interpersonal relations designed to facilitate interaction by minimizing the potential for conflict and confrontation inherent in all human interchange. 19 Lakoff used politeness to point out certain weaknesses of traditional linguistics theory, and did this by connecting politeness with Grice’s Cooperative Principle (CP).
Of course, it is possible to treat politeness as a fixed concept, as in the idea of ‗polite social behavior’, or etiquette, within a culture. It is also possible to specify a number of different general principles for being polite in social interaction within particular culture.20
According to Arndt and Janney, as quoted by Eelen, politeness is a matter of using the right words in the right context as determined by conventional rules of appropriateness.21
18
Helen Spencer-Oatey. Culturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory. (London: Continuum, 2000). pp. 12-13
19
Eelen, Op. cit. p. 2
20
George Yule, Pragmatics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), p.60
21
It can be conclude that politeness then defineas activity serving to enhance, mintain or protect face.22 It can also be define as showing awareness and consideration for another person’s face.23
Finally, based on all perspective, politeness use in order to makes communication between speaker and hearer well.
2. Brown and Levinson Politeness Theory
Politeness theory initiated by Penelope Brown and Stephen C. Levinson in his book entitled Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. In the book, they mention that as a speaker and hearer, they both have two face that is positive and negative that can be selected to satisfy both at the end of the conversation. Here is a resume of politeness concept initiated Brown-Levinson:
‗S’ stands for ‗speaker’ and ‗H’ stands for ‗addressee’. In this outline S
and H are MPs. In their book, MP is model person. Among MPs, it is mutual knowledge that for all MPs:
(i) All MPs have positive face and negative face, and all MPs are rational agents – i.e. choose means that will satisfy their ends.
(ii) Given that face consists of a set of wants satisfiable only by the action (including expressions of wants) of others, it will in general be to the mutual interest of two MPs to maintain each other’s face. So S will want to maintain H’s face, unless he can get H to maintain S’s without recompense, by
coercion, trickery, etc.
22
Florian Coulmas.(ed.). The handbook of Sociolinguistics (Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publishers, 2000). p. 378
23
(iii)Some acts intrinsically threaten face: these ‗face-threatening acts’ will be referred to henceforth as FTAs.
(iv) Unless S’s want to do an FTA with maximum satisfiable (defined as bald on record) is greater than S’s want to preserve H’s (or S’s) face to any degree,
then S will want to minimize the face threat of the FTA.
(v) Given the following set of strategies, the more an act threatens S’s or H’s face, the more S will want to choose a higher-numbered strategy; this by virtue of the fact that these strategies afford payoffs of increasingly minimized risk:
Circumstances determining
Choice of strategy 1. Without redressive action, baldly
lesser on record 2. Positive politerness estimation of do the FTA risk of face loss with redressive action
3. Negative Politeness 4. Off Record
5. Don’t do FTA
Greater
Since i-v mutually known to all MPs, our MP will not choose a strategy less risky than necessary, as this may be seen as an indication that the FTA is more threatening than it actually is.24
Politeness is fundamental to the very structure of social life and society, in that it constitutes the ‗expression of social relationships’ and provides a verbal
way to relieve the interpersonal tension arising from communicative intentions that conflict with social needs and statuses. Because of this fundamentally social functionality, Brown and Levinson claim that their theory to the universally valid, which is captured by their concept of a universal speaker or hearer or model person.25
24
Brown and Levinson, Ibid, pp. 59-60
25
In the other words, the concept of politeness belong two tradition: one primarily, concerned with conventional courtesy, etiquette or good manners, the other more interactionally pragmatic or face-saving, as developed in Brown and Levinson model. This model does not necessarily view language in term of a polite / impolite cline but rather in term of extent to which speakers strategically deviate from Gricean maxims in order to save their own face and/or that of the others.26
2.1. Bald On Record
Bald on record is one of the strategies in Brown-Levinson politeness principle that in short is the imperative sentence. In his book, Brown and Levinson said that the strategy of bald on record can be treated like a maxim that was initiated by Grice (1975). This maxim is intuitive characteristics of the cooperative principle which is a guideline to get the maximum efficient communication.27 Bald on record, are to be found where the power differential is great. In such cases the powerful participant will often employ no indirectness at all.28
The prime reason for using bald on record may be stated simply: in general, whenever S wants to do an FTA with maximum efficiency more than he wants to satisfy H’s face, even to any degree, he will choose the bald on record
strategy. There are, however, different kinds of bald on record usage in different circumstances, because S can have different motives for his want to do the FTA with maximum efficiency.29 Direct imperative sentence is very clear example of the use of bald on record.
26
Hickey and Stewart. Op.cit. p.3
27
Brown and Levinson. Op.cit. p.95
28
Thomas. Op.cit. p.170
29
There are two main strategies that not stated as strategy, the first is cases of non-minimization of the face threat define as maximum efficiency is very important that there is no redress face is necessary both to speaker or hearer, it would be decrease the urgency of communication, for example:
e.g. Help! (Compare the non urgent ‗please help me, if you would be so
kind) Watch out!
And the second is cases of FTA-oriented bald-on record usage define as the use of bald on record oriented to the face of speaker and hearer, for examples:
Have some cake more.
Don’t Worry about me.
Leave it to me.
2.2. Positive Politeness
For some reason, a positive politeness technique can be used not only to improve the FTA, but in general as a social acceleration, where S, using this strategy, indicating that he wanted to be closer to H.30 Features that distinguish between positive politeness strategy and other strategy is exaggeration elements where this element as a aspect marker of positive politeness expression, by indicating that even if S cannot with total sincerity say “I want your wants”, he can at least sincerely indicate “I want your positive face to be satisfied”. 31
Strategy 1. Notice, attend to H (his interest, wants, needs, goods)
In this strategy the speaker must be aware of the hearer condition such as noticeable changes, remarkable possessions, anything which looks as though H would want S to notice and approve it.
30
Ibid. p.103
31
You cut your hair! By the way, I came to to borrow some flour.
You must be hungry; it’s a long time since breakfast. How about some
lunch?
Strategy 2. Exaggerate (interest, approval, sympathy with H)
To exaggerated the intonation, stress, and other aspect of prosodic as well as with intensifying modifiers.
What a fantastic garden you have!
Strategy 3. Intensify interest to H
Making a good story is the way in this strategy, S is to communicate to H that he shares some of his wants is to intensify the interest of his own contribution to the conversation.
last night, I went to cinema, and you know what? I found my ex dated with a different girl that I saw last week. How can….
Strategy 4. Use in-group identity markers
In this strategy, S can implicitly claim that the common ground with H that is carried by that definition of the group. These include in group usages of address forms, of language or dialect, of jargon or slang, and of ellipsis.
Here mate, I was keeping this seat for a friend of mine… Got any Winston?
Strategy 5. Seek agreement
Another ways to claim a common ground with H are raising the safe topic in order to be agreeing with H opinions; and agreement also stressed with repetition or repeating what all the preceding speaker said.
Isn’t your new car a beautiful color! A: john went to London this weekend!
B: to London!
Strategy 6. Avoid disagreement
In this case, the S must be agree with H in order to main the H’s face. The
strategies are token agreement is pretending agree with H; Pseudo-Agreement is the use of then as a conclusory marker; white lies is where S is confronted with the necessity to state opinion want to lie rather than damage H’s positive face; and
hedging opinions is S may be vague about his opinion in order to not to be seen disagree.
a: can you hear me?
b: barely
I’ll meet you in front of the theater just before 8.00, then. Yes, I do like your new hat.
It’s really beautiful, in a way!
Strategy 7. Presuppose/raise/assert common ground
of deixis; time switch is a tense shift from past to present tense; place switch is use proximal (here, this, rather than there, that); avoidance of adjustment of reports to H’s point of view is direct quoted speech is is the very general usage;
presupposition manipulations is S presuppose something when he presumes that it is mutually taken for granted; presuppose knowledge of H’s wants and attitude is
with negative question which presume yes answer is indicated that S know H’s want, taste, habit; presuppose H’s values are the same a S’s value is using of
scalar predicates; presuppose familiarity in S’H relationship the use of familiar
address form like honey; presuppose H’s knowledge is the use of in group codes
-language, dialect, jargon, local terminology.
Wouldn’t you like a drink?
Harry took me to the movies the other day.
Strategy 8. Joke
S May joke or a joke may minimize an FTA of requesting. Ok if I tackle those cookie?
Strategy 9. Assert or presuppose S’s knowledge of and concern for H’s
wants
Put pressure on H to cooperate with S is to assert or imply knowledge of H’s wants and willingness to fit one’s own wants with them.
I know you can’t bear parties, but this one will be really good- do
Strategy 10. Offer, promise
To redress the potential of FTAs, S may choose to stress his cooperation with H in another way. He may claim that whatever H wants, S wants for him and will help to obtain.
I’ll drop by sometimes next week.
Strategy 11. Be optimistic
S is assume that his want is H’s want too, and H will help to obtain them.
I’ve come to borrow a cup of flour.
Strategy 12. Include both S and H in the activity
Using inclusive form ‗we’ instead of ‗you’ or ‗me’ when S want to doing
something.
let’s have a cookie, then. (I.e. me)
give us break (i.e. me)
Strategy 13. Give (or ask) reasons
Including H in practical reasoning and assuming reflexivity, H is thereby led to see the reasonableness of S’s FTA.
why not lend me your cottage for the weekend?
Strategy 14. Assume or assert reciprocity
Strategy 15. Give gift to H (goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation)
S satisfy H’s face by action, not only giving tangible gift, but also
sympathy, understanding and so on.
2.3. Negative Politeness
Negative politeness is redressive action addressed to the addressee's negative face: his want to have his freedom of action unhindered and his attention unimpeded. Where positive politeness is free-ranging, negative politeness is specific and focused; it performs the function of minimizing the particular imposition that the FTA unavoidably effects.32 In this strategy, speaker should be minimizing imposition to the hearer, through distancing style like apologies.
We should stressed that negative politeness are not the only motivation a speaker may have for using the linguistics realizations characteristics of negative politeness. The outputs are all forms useful in general for social distancing, not like positive politeness realization are forms for minimizing social distance, they are therefore likely to be used whenever when speaker wants to put a social brake on to the course of his interaction.33
Strategy 1: Be Conventionally Indirect
Speakers must express his desire indirectly to the hearer. In this strategy a speaker faced with opposing tensions: the desires to give hearer and ‗out’ by
being indirect and he desires to go on record. Indirect speech acts are certainly the
32
Brown and Levinson. Op.cit. p. 129
33
most significant form of conventional indirectness.34According to Searle (1975), conventional indirectness refers to the sentences that maybe “standardly” used to
make indirect request. These utterances in certain grammatical forms are conventionally employed to perform the function of getting the addressee to do something.35 With regard to request, the intention to get someone to do something is commonly conveyed by a form which is not directive, such as interrogative sentence or a declarative sentence.36
can you pass the salt? (which can be only indirect request an not concievably a question about the adddressee’s potential ability)
I’m looking for a comb.
Strategy 2: Question, Hedge.
This strategy is using almost the same question as indirect speech and also using particles, words or phrases that modify levels of predication or 'noun phrase'. Modification can be expressed level or more correct and more complete than previously thought.
bill is a regular friend I rather think it's hopeless. Strategy 3: Be Pessimistic
If the previous strategy, speaker must be optimistic about the response of the hearer, the speaker's strategy this time should be pessimistic about the hearer's response.
could you do X?
34
Ibid. p. 132
35
John Searle, Indirect speech act. In: Cole & Morgan (Eds.). Syntax and Semantics: Speech Act (Vol.3). New York Academic press, 1975, p.53
36
Strategy 4: Minimize the Imposition, Rx
If the speaker asks hearer to do something, or give her something to the speaker, it means that the speaker was 'impose', as if the speaker gives hearer 'burden' to obey what was uttered.
I just want to ask you if you could lend me a single sheet of paper.
Strategy 5: Give Deference
Show respect and respect for others through utterances. we look forward very much to dining with you.
Strategy 6: Apologize
Apologized before revealing the real purpose to the hearer, Apologizing does not always explicitly with the words 'forgive' or 'apologize', but also implicitly by using a verb.
I hesitate to trouble you, but ...
Strategy 7: Impersonalize S and H
Not mention the speaker or hearer in a utterances. For example, by using the word 'it' that serves impersonal not pronoun.
it is so (I tell you that it is so)
Do this for me (I ask you to do this for me)
Strategy 8: State the FTA as a General Rule
passengers will please refrain from flushing toilets on the train (you will
please refrain from flushing toilets on the train). Strategy 9: Nominalize
It is quite astonishing is nominalizing expression, express it in the form of a noun, not a verb and others.
a. guide on the examinations performed well and we were impressed favorably.
b. your performing well on the examinations impressed us favorably. c. your good performance on the examinations impressed us favorably.
Here, (c) a more formal look like a formal letter from the (b), and (b) more than in (a).
Strategy 10: Go on Record as Incurring a Debt. Or as Not Indebting H Speakers is in order to express what they want directly, but with as if indebted to hearer if indulged (request), or as if it does not feel burdened by someone if asked to do anything (offer).
I'll be never repay you if you would ... Easily I could do it for you.
2.4. Off Record
This strategy uses indirect language and removes the speaker from the potential to be imposing. Off the Record itself is the strategy of politeness on the application, the speaker does not explicitly say the words, and the hearer can speculate on speaker’s utterance. Speaker’s utterance is not addressed directly to
The notion of Off Record is refers not simply to formal types of indirection but rather to such linguistic strategy in context. Clearly, many of the classic off record strategy-metaphor, irony, understatement, rhetorical question, etc.- are very often actually on record when used, because the clues to their interpretation (the mutual knowledge of S and H in the context; the intonational, prosodic and kinesic clues to the speaker’s attitude; the clues derives from conversational sequencing) add up to only one really viable interpretation in the context.37
In short, off record is do FTA but be indirect. Invite conversational implicatures, via hints triggered by violation of Gricean Maxims. For example, speaker say “it’s cold in here. (c.i. Shut the window). Make someone doing
something for speaker by using utterance implicitly. Strategy 1. Give hints
It is like speech act, S saying something implicitly want to H doing something for him.
it’s is hot in here (i.e. turn on the fan) Strategy 2. Give association clues
S and H have mutual knowledge of their interactional experience.
oh God, I’ve got a headache again (i.e. give me an aspirin)
Strategy 3. Presuppose
An utterance can be almost wholly relevant in context and yet violate maxim relevance just at the level of its presuppositions.
I washed the car again today (he presuppose that he has done it
last week).
37
Strategy 4. Understate
The speaker violate the quantity maxim.
A: what do you think about Jocelyn new dress?
B: yeah good. (i.e. I don’t think it is very good)
Strategy 5. Overstate
S says more than is necessary, exaggerating or choosing a measurement higher than actually is.
there were a million people in the party tonight, so come in!
Strategy 6. Use tautologies
By using tautologies, S encourage H to look for an informative interpretation of non informative utterance.
war is war
Boys will be boys
Strategy 7. Use contradiction
S violated quality maxim with using contradiction in the utterance, S force H to find assumption about his feeling.
A: are you upset about that?
B: well, I am and I’m not. Strategy 8. Be ironic
Strategy 9. Use metaphors Use connotations of the metaphor.
harry is real fish (c.i. he (drinks/ swims/ is slimy/ is cold blood) like
a fish)
Strategy 10. Use rhetorical question
Asking a question but leave the answer hanging in order to S want to H to provide him with the indicated information.
How many times do I have to tell you? (too many times)
Strategy 11. Be ambiguous
Ambiguity may be achieved through metaphor it is not clear what S means.
John’s pretty (sharp/ smooth) cookie ( it could be compliment or insult,
depending on which of the connotations)
Strategy 12. Be vague
S being vague about what object of the FTA.
I’m going ( you-know-where/ down the road for a bit. (c.i. to the
local pub)
Strategy 13. Over-generalize
Strategy 14. Displace H
S redress an FTA to whom it would not threaten in order to the real target will know that he is the actual target who FTA aimed to him. For example, teasing someone in playful way.
(asking someone to go out) would you rather get your foot stuck in a bear trap or hang out this weekend?
Strategy 15. Be incomplete, use ellipsis
Leaving the FTA undone, S can leave the implicature hanging. And this strategy much violated quantity maxim as of manner maxim.
oh sir, a headache…
2.5. Don’t Do FTA
This strategy is simply that speaker avoids offending hearer at all with this particular FTA. Speaker also fails to achieve his desired communication.38
3. Sociological Variable
Besides the strategy above, to apply the politeness strategy in the real life, there are three sociological variables:
The social distance (D) of S and H (a symmetric relation) The relative power (P) of S and H (an asymmetric relation) The absolute ranking (R) of impositions in the particular culture.
Thus these are not intended as sociologist’ rating of actual power, distance,
etc, but only as actors’ assumption of such ratings, assumed to be mutually
assumed, at least within certain limits.39
38
Ibid. p. 72
39
Absolutely, those three sociological variable influence the weightiness of FTA. Brown and Levinson have calculated the weightiness of FTA. For each FTA, the seriousness or weightiness of a particular FTA x is compounded of both risk to S’s face and risk H’s face, in a proportion relative to the nature of the FTA.
Thus apologies and confession are essentially threats to S’s face, and advice and
orders are basically threats to H’s face, while request and offers are likely to
threaten the face of both participants. The weightiness of FTA is calculated thus: Wx = D(S,H) + P(H,S) + Rx
Where Wx is the numerical value that measures the weightiness pf the FTA x, D(S,H) is a measure of the power that H has over S, and Rx is a value that measures the degree to which the FTA x is rated an imposition in that culture.
For instance, P(H,S) may be assessed as being great because H is eloquent and influential, or is a prince, a witch, a thug, a priest; D(S,H) as great because H speaks another dialect or language, or lives in the next valley, or is kinsman.
D is a symmetric social dimension of similarity/difference within which S and H stand for the purpose of this act. It is based on an assessment of the frequency of interaction and the kinds of material or non-material goods (including face) exchanged between S and H (or parties representing S or H, or for whom S and H are representatives).
P is an asymmetric social dimension of relative power, roughly in Weber’s
unauthorized- material control (over economic distribution and physical force) and metaphysical control (over the actions of others, by virtue of metaphysical force subscribed to by those others),
R is a culturally and situationally defined ranking of imposition by the degree to which they are considered to interfere with an agent’s want of self -determination or of approval (his negative- and positive-face wants).
In the other hand, we also know that politeness also be taught in sociolinguistics. In sociolinguistics, politeness always connects with relationship between person to person.
In sociolinguistics, we know Ronald Wardhaugh who initiated politeness and solidarity. In his book, Wardhaugh write about solidarity and politeness, he suggests that politeness is associated with closeness between speaker and hearer. In short, the closer relationship between speaker and hearer makes them having less polite and vice versa if the far relationship the more polite the utterances.
In English, we can eliminate the use of first names with no title at all. We can utter such good morning like good morning Sir/ Madam/ Mr Smith. But in other language, for example French, we cannot separate address term with name because it is not polite in French. For example, we cannot simply utter Bonjour, Au Revoir, Merci or Pardon without address term, for example Merci Pierre, Bonjour Monsieur.
Knowing and using the first name of a person would be a sign of closeness or at least want to be closer. Using nicknames or pet names indicate closeness deeper.
In English, it is impossible uses the address term or a choice between the intimate or close and polite. One simple test to separate the closeness, the informal term of address polite and formal in the English language can be seen from conjunctions with informal and formal greeting and farewell. For example, Hi, Bye, and So long in comparison with a Good Morning and Goodbye. Hi Sally, Bye Honey, and So long, just like Good Morning Mr Smith and Goodbye sir. However, there is a bit of awkwardness when using Hi Colonel John, Bye Professor, Good morning mate, and Goodbye Pussykins.40
40
35 A. Data Description
The data for this thesis was collected from utterance who uttered by characters in the movie. Movie 'Her' was produced, directed, written by Spike Jonze. The film, released in 2013 this genre of romantic drama starring Joaquin Phoenix as Theodore, Scarlett Johansson as Samantha, and also by some of famous Hollywood actresses like Amy Adams, Rooney Mara, and Olivia Wilde. With duration of 125 minutes, the film tells the story of an unusual love between Theodore, who was divorced from his wife Catherine but refused to sign a letter of divorce, with Samantha that only a woman's voice heard from the computer that he installed with the advanced OS (operating system)1.
The writer analyzes the data to find the meaning and what strategy that used in the data and what the purpose of the speaker use those strategy. Below are the utterances that writer found in the script that implied politeness strategy.
B.Data Analysis
These data will be analyzes one by one in more depth by each scene, that involved main character, Theodore, with other characters. These are the following analysis:
1
DATA 1 Scene 1
THEODORE’S OFFICE-EARLY EVENING
Theodore walks through the reception area. The office is almost empty except for him and receptionist, Paul. Theodore begins to scan each letter through a scanner on the front desk, then puts them in the outgoing mailbox.
Paul is sitting at a desk across the room, reading handwritten letters on a computer monitor.
Paul : Theodore! Letter writer 612. Theodore : hey, Paul.
Paul : even more mesmerizing stuff today. (re: letter on his screen) Who knew you could rhyme so many words with the name Penelope? Badass.
Theodore : thanks, Paul, but they’re just letters. (beat) hey, that’s a nice shirt.
Paul is wearing a bright yellow button down shirt.
Paul : (lighting up) oh, thank you. I just got it. It reminded me of someone suave.
Theodore : well, now it reminds me of someone suave. Have a good night, paul.
Paul : Buh-bye.
Analysis
Theodore also uses the last strategy Don’t Do FTA to keep Paul’s face and tries not to be rude because he cut the conversation.
DATA 2 Scene 2
THEODORE’S APARTMENT LOBBY – EVENING
Theodore, carrying a bag and a smoothie, enters the lobby and is greeted by a couple in their 30s, Amy and Charles, who are waiting for the elevator.
Theodore : hey, you guys, how’s it going?
Amy : hey, Theo. Hey, why didn’t you call me back last week? Theodore : uh yeah, um, I guess cause I’m a kook?
Amy : that sounds about right. Theodore : hey Charles.
Charles : good to see you, Theodore. Theodore : you too.
Charles : you went shopping. Get anything good? Theodore : just some cables. And a fruit smoothie.
Charles : always the fruit! Come on, you know what they say – you should and juice your vegetables.
Theodore : I didn’t know that. The elevator doors open and they get in.
THEODORE’S APARTMENT ELEVATOR – EVENING – CONTINUOUS
Charles : (proselytizing) by juicing the fruits, you lose all the fibers, and that’s what your body wants. That’s the important part. Otherwise, it’s just all sugar, Theodore.
Theodore nods sincerely, interested. Theodore : oh, that makes sense.
Amy : (pleasant but firm) or maybe he just likes the way it tastes and if it gives him pleasure, that’s good for his body, too.
Charles : am I doing it again?
Amy : maybe…
Amy : I have a little bit cut together but I haven’t touched it in a few months.
Theodore : I’d love to see what you got sometime.
Charles : you know it’s always hard to find balance between a full-time career and a hobby. It’s important to prioritize.
Theodore : yeah. I can’t even prioritize between video games and internet porn.
Amy : I would laugh if that weren’t true.
Charles laugh awkwardly. The elevator doors open. Theodore : see you guys.
Analysis
In this scene, Amy and Charles stand in front of elevator. Then, Theodore comes and greets them. Amy asked Theodore why he didn’t call her back last week. In this case, Amy uses positive politeness strategy with sub-strategy number 13: Give (or ask) reason. Then Theodore replies with positive politeness strategy with sub-strategy number 8: Joke, in this situation Theodore avoid FTA from Amy and also makes a joke in order to blur his real reason why he does not call Amy back. Then, Amy answers with ‗that sounds about right’, Amy uses negative politeness strategy with sub-strategy number 7: Impersonalize S and H, specifically impersonal verb, by uses the strategy, Amy minimize threaten face of Theodore rather than Amy replies directly.
After Theodore and Charles involve conversation about what Theodore buy, and Charles give his opinion about that, and as if he patronizes Theodore, Amy cut the conversation and says ‗or maybe he just like the way it tastes and if it gives him pleasure, that’s good for his body, too’, in this case Amy use off record
strategy with sub-strategy number 14: Displace H, Amy redress and FTA to Charles but in polite way. Then Charles replies with ‗am I doing it again?’, he feels the FTA from Amy and she replied ‗maybe’, in this situation, Amy uses positive politeness strategy with sub-strategy number 6: Avoid disagreement, Amy blur her real opinion about Charles to kept Charles’ positive face.
Afterward, Theodore tries to break the tension of the situation and switch the topic about their documentary project and make some jokes to warms up the situation after a little debate between Amy and Charles.
DATA 3 Scene 3
AMY’S APARTMENT – LATE AFTERNOON
Theodore is sitting on Amy’s couch.
Amy : it’s not where it should be, where it’s going to be.
Theodore : obviously, I know.
Amy : okay, but I don’t even know if this is the one. I’ve tried like six
years, but… I don’t know. Whatever.
Amy starts setting up the monitor. Theodore : I’m going on a date.
Charles walks in holding a mug.
Charles : hey, what are you guys doing? Theodore : Amy was gonna show me some of—
Amy : Theo’s forcing me to show him some of the footage I’ve shot.
Charles : you’ve never shown me any of it. I wanna see. Charles walks over and sits next to Theodore.
Theodore : (to Charles) I’m going on a date.
Charles gives Theodore a gentle squeeze on his shoulder.
Amy : this is so unformed it’s not even worth looking at.
Theodore : just push play. On the monitor we see:
AMY’S MOTHER BEDROOM Amy’s mother sleeps.
AMY’S APARTMENT – CONTINUOUS
Theodore and Charles stare at the monitor, waiting for something more to happen. It doesn’t.
Theodore : is that your mom?
Charles : Is she gonna wake up and do something?
Amy : (pressed stop, annoyed) no, that’s the point. Oh never mind. It’s
supposed to be about how we spend a third of our life asleep and actually maybe that’s the part when we’re the most free, and – oh that doesn’t come across at all, does it?
Theodore : no, that sounds good.
Charles : what if you interview your mom about what her dreams are about and hire actor to act them out that might show your thesis more clearly.
Amy : it might, but then it wouldn’t be a documentary. You understand
that, right?
Just then, Theodore’s device chimes.
Theodore : oh, excuse me.
Samantha : I’m sorry to bother you. Theodore : that’s okay.
Samantha : you got three emails and they seem pretty urgent. They’re from your divorce attorney and I wanted to know if you needed to get back to him.
Theodore : hold on a second. (to Amy, distracted) Amy, I’m sorry, I wanna talk more about this, but I gotta grab this- it’s about Catherine thing.
Amy : don’t worry about it. We’ll talk later.
Analysis
I this scene, Amy says ‗it’s not where it should be, where is it going to be.’ And Theodore replies ‗obviously, I know’ Theodore uses negative politeness strategy with sub-strategy number 2: Question, hedge, Theodore is strengthen his answer, then Amy replies with positive strategy with sub strategy number 6: Avoid disagreement, in this situation, Amy tries to keep Theodore positive face because in her first statement to Theodore, she doing FTA that makes Theodore face is lost. Therefore, she uses positive politeness strategy to keep the relation with Theodore still close.
Then, after the awkward situation, to break the ice between them, Theodore said ‗I’m going on a date’, in this statement Theodore uses positive politeness strategy with sub-strategy number 3. Intensify interest to H, beside to melt down the situation, he also want to share about what he is going to do. Then, Amy replied with off record strategy with sub-strategy number 15: Be incomplete, use ellipsis. In this sentence, Amy shows her surprise about what Theodore says.
Theodore to show him a footage that she has shot. Then, Charles protests that he never show by Amy and he want to see. In this situation, Charles uses positive politeness strategy with sub-strategy number 11. Be optimistic, he makes minimal assumption about Amy respond.
Theodore tells Charles that he is going on a date but Charles just replies with non-verbal action. In the other hands, Amy stuck with her monitor. After that, the monitor works and in the monitor they seen Amy’s mother sleep, Charles and Theodore stares at monitor and nothing happen with Amy’s mother that they saw on the monitor. Theodore and Charles asked is her mother wake up or do
something and it makes Amy’s face loss because Charles did FTA. Amy annoys
and replies uses negative politeness strategy with sub-strategy number 2: Question, hedge. In this situation, Amy use tag question ‗does it?’. It is shows that Amy look unfriendly because her project does not work properly, then Amy statement seems as if her project is terrible. After that, Theodore replies gently with negative politeness strategy with sub –strategy number 7: Impersonalize S and H, in order to keep Amy’s positive face. Then, Charles gives his opinion about her project and tries to give alternative about Amy’s project, in this statement Charles uses positive politeness strategy with sub-strategy number 15: Give gift to H (goods, sympathy, understanding, cooperation) but Amy refused.
grab the email because it is urgent, in this situation, Theodore uses negative politeness strategy with sub-strategy number 6: Apologize.
DATA 4 Scene 4
ASIAN-FUSION RESTAURAAN – EVENING
Theodore and the blind date are sitting in the restaurant.
Blind date : this place is amazing. I’ve wanted to come here for so long. I love Asian-fusion!
Theodore : yeah, me too.
Blind date : really? It’s the best. And the bartender here is supposed to be incredible.
Theodore : yeah, you took a mixology course, right?
Blind date : (surprised) I did, I did. Did you look that up? That’s so sweet. You’re so romantic.
He smiles awkwardly.
Theodore : so, should we get drink? Blind date : yes, let’s!
ASIAN-FUSION RESTAURANT – LATER
They’re both pretty drunk now. There are lots of food dishes and drinks on the table.
Theodore : so I’m trying to get this little alien kid to help me find my ship so I can get off the planet and go home. But he’s such a little fucker, I want to kill him.
Blind date : aw, no!
Theodore : but at the same time I really love him. He’s so lonely. It feels like he doesn’t have any parents or anyone to take care of him.
He laughs at himself. She laughs flirtatiously. She grabs his hand and her fingernails press slightly into his skin. He studies her long, painted fingernails. Blind date : you’re like a little puppy dog. You are – you’re just like this little
fucking cute, and he just wanted to be hugged all the time. He was so cuddly.
(whispering)
But so horny! But anyway, what kind of animal am I? Theodore : umm… tiger?
Blind date : a tiger, really. (she growls) I’m sorry, am I being crazy? Theodore : yes
Blind date : am I? I’m sorry! I’m just a little drunk and I’m really having a good time with you. I’m having a really lovely evening.
Theodore : me too. I’m a little drunk, and I’m having a really good – yeah. (beat) wait a second, I don’t wanna be a puppy. That’s like being a wet noddle or something.
Blind date : fuck you, puppies are good.
Theodore : no, fuck you, I wanna be a dragon that can rip you to pieces and destroy you… but I won’t.
Blind date : no, don’t! I don’t. you can be my dragon. OVERPASS – EVENING
They walk up a pedestrian overpass overlooking cars and city lights. She bumps into him lightly. He bumps back. She bumps again and suddenly he grabs her and lifts her off her feet, spinning her around. She squeals, laughing. He kisses her. After a minute of making out, she stops and looks at him.
Blind date : (with a slight smile) no tongue. Theodore : what?
Blind date : don’t use your tongue so much. Theodore : (eagerly) ‗kay, we’re good.
They resume making out. Theodore tries not to use his tongue. Blind date : use your tongue a little bit. But mostly your lips.
He pushes her against the fence and takes the dominant position. He tries kissing her better/more with his lips. Pulls her hair.
She slides her hand down his pants. He likes it. She looks at him and stops.
Blind date : wait, you’re not gonna fuck me and then not call me like the other guys, are you?
Theodore
