Comparison Of Taxis And Logical Semantic Systems In Indonesian And Malaysian Newspapers About Airasia Qz8501 Accident

(1)

COMPARISON OF TAXIS AND LOGICAL SEMANTIC SYSTEMS IN

INDONESIAN AND MALAYSIAN NEWSPAPERS ABOUT AIRASIA

QZ8501 ACCIDENT

A THESIS BY:

YUDHA SYAHPUTRA REG.NO.110705056

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH

(2)

COMPARISON OF TAXIS AND LOGICAL SEMANTIC SYSTEMS IN INDONESIAN AND MALAYSIAN NEWSPAPERS ABOUT AIRASIA QZ8501 ACCIDENT

A THESIS BY:

(3)

(4)

approved by the Department of English, Faculty of Cultural Studies, University of Sumatera Utara (USU), Medan as a thesis for the Sarjana Sastra Examination.

Head, Secretary,

Dr. H. Muhizar Muchtar, M.S. Rahmadsyah Rangkuti, M.A, Ph.D.

(5)

accepted by the Board of examiners in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Sarjana Sastra from the Department of English, Faculty of Cultural Studies, University of Sumatera Utara, Medan

The examination is held in Department of English, Faculty of Cultural Studies, University of Sumatera Utara, on July 2, 2015.

Dean of Faculty of Cultural Studies University of Sumatera Utara

Dr. H. Syahron Lubis, M.A. NIP.19511013 197603 1 001

Board of Examiners:

Dr. H. Muhizar Muchtar, M.S. ………

Rahmadsyah Rangkuti, M.A, Ph.D. ………

Prof. Hj. T. Silvana Sinar, M.A, Ph.D. ………

(6)

AUTHOR’S DECLARATION

(7)

COPYRIGHT DECLARATION

NAME : YUDHA SYAHPUTRA

TITLE OF THESIS : COMPARISON OF TAXIS AND LOGICAL

SEMANTIC SYSTEMS IN INDONESIAN AND

MALAYSIAN NEWSPAPERS ABOUT

AIRASIA QZ8501 ACCIDENT

QUALIFICATION : S-1/SARJANA SASTRA

DEPARTMENT : ENGLISH

I AM WILLING THAT MY THESIS SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR REPRODUCTION AT THE DISCRETION OF THE LIBRARIAN OF DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH, FACULTY OF CULTURAL STUDIES, UNIVERSITY OF SUMATERA UTARA ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT USERS ARE MADE AWARE OF THEIR OBLIGATION UNDER THE LAW OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA.

SIGNED :……….

(8)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

(9)

ABSTRACT

This study seeks to describe the comparative portion of taxis and logical semantic systems between Malaysian and Indonesian newspapers’ articlesabout AirAsia QZ8501 accident. The data are clause complexes in Indonesia naval captain says may have located missing plane tail’s section’s New Straits Times (Text A) and AirAsia tail section located, blackbox still missing’s The Jakarta Post (Text B) articles. This study uses qualitative-descriptive method. As the result, both parataxis and hypotaxis are obtained. The dominant taxis relation in both newspapers’ articles is hypotactic relation by 68.89% and 70.59%. In this respect, it is found that both articles contain more complex structures of sentences rather than the compound ones. The logical semantic relations obtained are all relations except paratactic idea relation. The dominant logical semantic relation in text A is hypotactic locution relation by 28.89%, whereas text B acquires 8.82%. It indicates that text A contains more projected verbal information or argumentations compared to text B. The argumentations are mostly in reported speeches. On the other hand, the dominant logical semantic relation in text B is hypotactic elaboration relation by 26.47%, whereas text A acquires 13.33%. It shows that text B presents more information by specifying it into dependent secondary clauses which are in a greater detail, restatement, exemplification, or comment compared to text A.

(10)

ABSTRAK

Skripsi ini fokus mencari dan menggambarkan porsi perbandingan sistem taksis dan hubungan semantik logis antara artikel dalam surat kabar Malaysia dan Indonesia tentang kecelakaan AirAsia QZ8501. Data yang digunakan adalah klausa kompleks dalam artikel Indonesia naval captain says may have located missing plane tail’s section surat kabar New Straits Times (Teks A) dan artikel AirAsia tail section located, blackbox still missing surat kabar The Jakarta Post (Teks B). Desain penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode deskriptif-kualitatif. Sebagai hasilnya, kedua hubungan parataksis dan hipotaksis didapat. Hubungan taksis yang dominan dalam artikel kedua surat kabar adalah hipotaksis dengan persentase 68.89% dan 70.59%. Hal ini diketahui bahwa dalam kedua artikel terdapat lebih banyak struktur kalimat kompleks daripada kalimat majemuk. Hubungan semantik logis yang didapat adalah semua hubungan kecuali hubungan ide parataksis. Hubungan semantik logis yang dominan dalam teks A adalah hubungan lokusi hipotaksis dengan persentase 28.89%, sedangkan teks B mendapatkan persentase 8.82%. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa teks A berisi lebih banyak informasi verbal yang diproyeksikan atau argumentasi. Argumentasi-argumentasi ini paling banyak dalam kalimat tidak langsung. Di sisi lain, hubungan semantik logis yang dominan dalam teks B adalah hubungan elaborasi hipotaksis dengan persentase 26.47%, sedangkan teks A mendapatkan persentase 13.33%. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa teks B menyajikan lebih banyak informasi dengan men-spesifikasikannya kedalam klausa sekunder terikat dalam detil yang lebih luas, pengulangan, eksemplifikasi, atau pendapat daripada teks A.

Kata Kunci: hubungan semantic logis, taksis, parataksis, hipotaksis, deskriptif-kualitatif, New Straits Times, The Jakarta Post

(11)

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1. Conclusions ... 53 5.2. Suggestions... 54

REFERENCES... 56

(14)

LIST OF TABLES

Table.1... 15

Table.2... 20

Table.3... 22

Table.4... 34

Table.5... 36

Table.6... 37

Table.7... 38

Table.8... 40

Table.9... 40

Table.10... 41

Table.11... 42

Table.12... 43

Table.13... 44

Table.14... 44

Table.15... 45

Table.16... 46

Table.17... 47

Table.18... 48

(15)

LIST OF FIGURES

(16)

ABSTRACT

This study seeks to describe the comparative portion of taxis and logical semantic systems between Malaysian and Indonesian newspapers’ articlesabout AirAsia QZ8501 accident. The data are clause complexes in Indonesia naval captain says may have located missing plane tail’s section’s New Straits Times (Text A) and AirAsia tail section located, blackbox still missing’s The Jakarta Post (Text B) articles. This study uses qualitative-descriptive method. As the result, both parataxis and hypotaxis are obtained. The dominant taxis relation in both newspapers’ articles is hypotactic relation by 68.89% and 70.59%. In this respect, it is found that both articles contain more complex structures of sentences rather than the compound ones. The logical semantic relations obtained are all relations except paratactic idea relation. The dominant logical semantic relation in text A is hypotactic locution relation by 28.89%, whereas text B acquires 8.82%. It indicates that text A contains more projected verbal information or argumentations compared to text B. The argumentations are mostly in reported speeches. On the other hand, the dominant logical semantic relation in text B is hypotactic elaboration relation by 26.47%, whereas text A acquires 13.33%. It shows that text B presents more information by specifying it into dependent secondary clauses which are in a greater detail, restatement, exemplification, or comment compared to text A.

(17)

ABSTRAK

Skripsi ini fokus mencari dan menggambarkan porsi perbandingan sistem taksis dan hubungan semantik logis antara artikel dalam surat kabar Malaysia dan Indonesia tentang kecelakaan AirAsia QZ8501. Data yang digunakan adalah klausa kompleks dalam artikel Indonesia naval captain says may have located missing plane tail’s section surat kabar New Straits Times (Teks A) dan artikel AirAsia tail section located, blackbox still missing surat kabar The Jakarta Post (Teks B). Desain penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode deskriptif-kualitatif. Sebagai hasilnya, kedua hubungan parataksis dan hipotaksis didapat. Hubungan taksis yang dominan dalam artikel kedua surat kabar adalah hipotaksis dengan persentase 68.89% dan 70.59%. Hal ini diketahui bahwa dalam kedua artikel terdapat lebih banyak struktur kalimat kompleks daripada kalimat majemuk. Hubungan semantik logis yang didapat adalah semua hubungan kecuali hubungan ide parataksis. Hubungan semantik logis yang dominan dalam teks A adalah hubungan lokusi hipotaksis dengan persentase 28.89%, sedangkan teks B mendapatkan persentase 8.82%. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa teks A berisi lebih banyak informasi verbal yang diproyeksikan atau argumentasi. Argumentasi-argumentasi ini paling banyak dalam kalimat tidak langsung. Di sisi lain, hubungan semantik logis yang dominan dalam teks B adalah hubungan elaborasi hipotaksis dengan persentase 26.47%, sedangkan teks A mendapatkan persentase 13.33%. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa teks B menyajikan lebih banyak informasi dengan men-spesifikasikannya kedalam klausa sekunder terikat dalam detil yang lebih luas, pengulangan, eksemplifikasi, atau pendapat daripada teks A.

Kata Kunci: hubungan semantic logis, taksis, parataksis, hipotaksis, deskriptif-kualitatif, New Straits Times, The Jakarta Post

(18)

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the Study

Basically, a clause is the central processing unit in the lexico-grammar in the specific sense that it is in the clause that meanings of different kinds are mapped into an integrated grammatical structure (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004:10). It is known that a clause has contained a complete unit of grammatical structure in which the meaning of the message is able to be acquired.

Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) views a clause as the highest unit of grammar and if there is a group of words consisting of two or more clauses, then it is called as a clause complex. Clause complexes are not limited to two clauses. They can be extended to more clauses, both in written and spoken discourse. Regarding to clause complex and its relation to meaning, Halliday (1985:193) states “we shall interpret the relations between clauses in terms of logical component of the linguistic

system: the functional-semantic relations that make up the logic of natural

language”. It concludes that a clause complex should have a cohesive unit in which there is a logical relation regarding to a semantic view mentioned as logical semantic relation.

(19)

logical function. Those are taxis and logical semantic systems between clauses in a clause complex.

Clause complexity is related to inter-clausal relations (logico-semantic relation), coordination (parataxis) and subordination (hypotaxis) (Matthiessen & Thompson, 1988:275-329). These three meaning relations are main points of studying a clause complex proposed by many linguists. Gerot & Wignell (1994:89) outline that a clause complex is a sequence of processes which are logically connected. These processes are verbs linked between clauses. The clauses can be combined through one of two logico-semantic relations: expansion or projection. Expansion links processes by providing additional information. It involves three types of relationship: elaboration, extension, and enhancement while projection links clauses by having one process projected another either by quoting or reporting. Both meanings (ideas) and wordings (locutions) can be projected. This projection closely relates to the system of transitivity or a clause as a representation.

Gerot & Wignell (1994:92) also argue that expansion and projection combine with systems of interdependence, or taxis, to make up the systems for joining clauses. This taxis is divided into two kinds of relationship: parataxis and hypotaxis. Parataxis is a logical interdependency between clauses where the interdependences are of equal status meanwhile hypotaxis is logical interdependency between clauses where the independences are of unequal status (Halliday, 1994:216). In this regard, logical semantic relation focuses on the relationship: causality and projection of clauses, and taxis: parataxis and hypotaxis focuses on the interdependency and equality of clauses but both taxis and logical semantic relation are relatable.

(20)

facts or opinions that holds interest of importance, or both for a considerable number of people. This news is a product of journalism. Journalists are constantly faced with problems of reporting facts and opinions. They must be able to distinguish between them. This is important in both gathering and writing news. It affects how it deals with anything it is told and also how it passes the information on to readers or listeners (Henshall & Ingram, 1991).

The logical semantic relation of a clause complex brings some problems. These problems relate to the facts and opinions contained in newspaper texts. Based on a preliminary observation, there is a different distribution of logical semantic relation between articles of Malaysian newspaper and Indonesian newspaper reporting about AirAsia QZ8501 accident. A Malaysia’s New Straits Times’ article Indonesia naval captain says may have located missing plane tail’s section shows more hypotactic locution of projection type relation rather than the other types. This relation is shown by a verbal process say connecting an independent clause and a dependent clause. For instance, in a clause complex Singapore’s civil aviation authority and its Changi Airport Group said AirAsia has the necessary approvals to

operate a daily flight between Surabaya and Singapore, hypotactic locution is

(21)

the description of logical semantic relation both newspaper texts. However, it is commonly but unrestrictedly known that the logical semantic relation technically relate to the facts and opinions in newspaper texts. The facts tend to be expanded or elaborated in experiential information using expansion type. Otherwise, the opinions are commonly argumentations and realized in reported speeches using projection type of logical semantic relation.

So, this study is important to see the portion of facts and opinions in both newspaper texts and to see the grammatical construction of messages which are realized in clause complexes. However, if this logical semantic is not figured out well, the problem will go to the practical issue that the readers will not understand how to distinguish the facts and opinions in newspaper texts. On the other hand, the writers or the editors of the news will find difficulty to produce good works through constructing sentences regarding to logical semantic relation.

1.2. Problem of the Study

By considering the main focus and the whole elements of this research, the study answers the following questions:

1. What type of taxis and logical semantic systems does appear in both Indonesian and Malaysian newspapers about AirAsia QZ8501 accident? 2. How is the dominant type of taxis and logical semantic systems interpreted in

(22)

1.3. Objective of the Study

The study serves the following objectives:

1. To describe type of taxis and logical semantic systems appears in both Indonesian and Malaysian newspapers about AirAsia QZ8501 accident? 2. To describe how the type of taxis and logical semantic systems is interpreted

in both Indonesian and Malaysian newspapers about AirAsia QZ8501 accident?

1.4. Scope of the Study

This research primarily focuses on two fundamental relationships of logical semantic relation: expansion and projection. Since this relationship closely relates to the systems of interdependence, taxis relation is also elucidated within the analysis.

(23)

Figure.1. System Network of Clause Complex (Halliday 1985; Gerot & Wignell, 1994:93)

The network system explains a paradigm at which expansion and projection combined and cross-classified with taxis or interdependence systems, it is:

(24)

1.5. Significance of the Study

Over the objectives of the study realized as the visible outcomes, this research is theoretically expected to be useful and be significant that this analysis may help and support a study of logical semantic relation of clause complexes in the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). This research is also expected to give a deeper understanding to everyone who wants to learn about clause complexes.

(25)

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Functional Grammar

Halliday (1985:xiii) argues that functional grammar is essentially a natural grammar, in the sense that everything in it can be explained, ultimately by the reference to how language is used. In this explanation, a grammar becomes a tool to figure out a meaning or a message obtained in a language.

Gerot & Wignell (1994:6) add that functional grammar views language as a resource for making meaning. These grammars attempt to describe a language in an actual use and so focus on texts and their contexts. They are concerned not only with the structures but also with how those structures construct a meaning. So, the meaning of a text is construed grammatically and functionally by following the context.

(26)

Ideational function, unlike two other functions, is the meanings by which people make sense of reality. They are meanings of phenomena about things, about goings on and the circumstances surrounding these happenings and doings. These meanings are realized in wordings through participants, processes, and circumstances. Meanings of this kind are most centrally influenced by field of discourse (Gerot and Wignell, 1994:120).

This function is concerned with building and maintaining the theory of experience. It includes experiential function and logical function. Grammatically, the experiential function shows the process of making meaning from experience that language evolves through clauses, whereas the logical function is the systems of construing logical meaning between clauses. This logical function is realized through logical semantic relation and systems of interdependence combining clauses into a clause complex. The framework drawn is as follows:

(27)

2.2. Clause and Clause Complex

In Systemic Functional Grammar, a clause is functioned as a unit in which a transitivity, mood, and theme-rheme are considered to be mapped into its system. This clause is considered as the largest unit that its function and meaning are cohesively structured.

Gerot & Wignell (1994:89) state that a clause complex is comprised of two or more clauses logically connected, or put another way, a clause complex is a sequence of processes which are logically connected. From this viewpoint, it is clear that logical semantic relation is that logical connection used to construct a clause complex by having two or more processes engaging one another. This clause complex is also known as the more complex structure of clauses. The connection between clauses also has an equality or interdependency. For examples:

A1. You may come to my house

A2. You may come to my house whenever you want

Example A1 shows a simple sentence and is identified as a clause because this sentence only has one single clause which contains one subject (bold typed) and one predicate (underlined). Whereas, example A2 is a clause complex which the secondary clause whenever you want (bold typed and underlined) is a dependent clause and attached to expand the primary clause. The clause complex has two clauses and each clause has its own predicate.

2.2.1. Minor Vs Major Clauses

(28)

found in both written and spoken language. Some elements in minor clauses may be implied in some contexts.

Structurally, a minor clause does not have a predicator, on the other hand, a major clause does. For examples:

Address (vocatives) B1. Rhonda, sweety cakes Greeting B2. Hi! Good afternoon! Exclamations B3. Oh water!

The three examples above show minor clauses which have no predicator. Example B1 is a vocative (underlined) which is used to appoint something or someone. This clause does not have a complete form of a simple sentence and neither does example B2 (greeting) nor B3 (exclamation).

B4. Diana asked Annie to stay in her house B5. But she refused

B6. Which made Diana rather disappointed B7 As she had thought

B8. She was her best friend

(29)

C2. Angelina studied hard. C3. However, she failed.

An independent clause is seen as a clause which can stand alone whereas a dependent clause cannot. At the example C1, although Angelina studied hard (bold typed) is a dependent clause because the clause cannot stand alone and is a member of a clause complex. If the clause is separated (example C2 and C3), both clauses are independent. In a clause complex, this independent clause is also called a primary clause whereas the dependent clause is called secondary clause.

There is a possibility of a clause to not being counted in a clause complex as a dependent clause if the clause does not function as a dependent clause but more likely a word which qualify or modify something. This occurrence is called as an embedded clause. For further explanation, look at the example:

Non-embedded clause C4. The prisoner, who was a serial killer, escaped. Embedded C5. The prisoner who was a serial killer escaped.

The clause who was a serial killer (underlined) in the example C4 preceded by a comma is identified as a dependent clause. This is also a non-restricted relative clause. Otherwise, in the example C5 (bold typed) are just words qualifying the meaning of the prisoner.

2.2.3. Taxis

(30)

clause is dependent to the primary clause. The term parataxis is used when one clause follows another. It is called as coordination because both primary and secondary clauses are independent. Either the dependent or independent status determines whether clauses in a clause complex can stand individually when being separated.

2.2.3.1. Parataxis

Parataxis refers to clauses as being initiating or continuing. The relation between clauses in a paratactic clause complex is equal. It means when clauses in a clause complex are separated, those clauses can stand alone. Paratactic clauses are marked by number: 1, 2, 3 and so on. For example:

Paratactic 1 Diana asked Annie to stay in her house 2 but she refused

The relation of clauses is paratactic, each clause is equal and can stand individually. The secondary clause but she refused is attached by a coordinate conjunction but.

2.2.3.2 Hypotaxis

(31)

The relation of the above projection is hypotactic. The primary clause is an independent clause and the secondary clause is dependent on it.

2.2.4. Logical Semantic Relation

This logical semantic relation has been known as the relation between clauses in a clause complex, the relation between primary and secondary clauses. Halliday (1985:196) argues that semantic relation is a wide range of different logico-semantic relations any of which may hold between primary and secondary member of a clause complex. But it is possible to group these into a small number of general types, expansion and projection. The followings are logical semantic relations and their interdependency brought by Gerot & Wignell (1994:89-97) and Halliday (1985, 1994, & 2004) which become the main theoretical background of this research.

2.2.4.1. Expansion

(32)

[image:32.595.143.527.165.351.2]

The markers which join the clauses of logical semantic relation of expansion and their interdependence are as follows:

Table.1. Markers Which Join Clauses in Expansion (Gerot & Wignel, 1994:94)

No Taxis Relation Markers

Elaborating Extending Enhancing 1 Paratactic that is to say, or

(rather), in other words, for example, for instance, in fact, like

and, but, not only, but also, except, or, yet

so, then, for thus, or else, still, otherwise

2 Hypotactic Which whereas, while,

instead,

besides, rather than

as, while, when, where, because, if, even though, despite

2.2.4.1.1. Elaboration

This type of logical semantic relation elaborates the clauses by specifying or describing it. This involves four relationships: specifying in greater detail, restatement, exemplification, and comment. Elaboration is shown through the sign =. The types of logical relationships covered under this category are the ‘i.e.’, ‘e.g.’ and ‘namely’ type or also called as exposition or restatement, exemplification and clarification or comment.

a) Exposition or Restatement

(33)

(primary clause) = for instance you do not understand us (secondary clause). The secondary clause is obviously an example provided for the primary clause.

c) Clarification or Comment

This elaboration type clarifies the primary clause by adding an explanatory comment. For example: I’ve played in several orchestras (primary clause) = I’ve played in the Darwin symphony and the Brisbane Sinfonia (secondary clause). The

secondary clause is a clarification or information of the primary clause. a) Paratactic Elaboration

When a clause complex contains clauses which the secondary clause is elaborating the primary clause and equal to the primary clause is called as Paratactic Elaboration. While elaboration is marked as = and parataxis is marked as number 1, 2, .., so, paratactic elaboration is marked as:

1 = 2 For example:

1 I tidied up my messy desk

= 2 it needed it

The relation between the clauses above is paratactic elaboration because the secondary clause specifies the primary clause and both clauses are independent. b) Hypotactic Elaboration

This hypotactic elaboration happens when a clause complex contains clauses in which the secondary clause is elaborating the primary clause and dependent to the primary clause. While elaboration is marked as = and hypotaxis is marked as Greek lettersα ,β , .. , so, hypotactic elaboration is marked as:

(34)

For example:

α I tidied up my messy desk,

= β which took the better part of the morning

The relation between the clauses above is hypotactic elaboration because the secondary clause specifies the primary clause and the secondary clause is dependent to the primary clause.

Hypotactic elaboration also comes through finite and non-finite clauses. The finite hypotactic elaboration is seen by the use of relatives who, whom, which, whose, when, where, why, and how. The dependent clause must be preceded by a comma to show it is not an embedded clause. It also happens to non-finite category which the dependent clause is in the form of present participle, past participle or gerund. For examples:

Finite D1. This is Nadya, whom you are looking for

Non-finite D2. He always does his daily activity, watering the garden

2.2.4.1.2. Extension

(35)

+ but I’m less rapt with biola

I could follow a course

+ or I could practice myself

In this case, the second clause adds a new, but related meaning to the first. It could be considered that extensionis as the ‘moreover’ or ‘furthermore’ relationship. a) Paratactic Extension

In paratactic extension, it is divided into two types: addition and variation. In addition type, it is by adjoining the clauses using additive and adversative conjunctions. Variation type is a replacement of other clause and using alternative and substractive conjunctions. This paratactic extension is marked as:

1 + 2 For example:

+ 2 and I finished revising a paper

The relation between the clauses above is paratactic extension because the secondary clause is an addition or something new different from the primary clause, using a paratactic additive conjunction and and both clauses are independent.

b) Hypotactic Extension

Additive conjunction used for this type is beside. Some other conjunctions used are comparative (on the other hand, instead, whereas, while) conjunctions. This hypotactic extension is symbolized as:

α + β

For example:

(36)

The relation between clauses above is hypotactic extension because the secondary clause is a variation or something new different from the primary clause, using a comparative conjunction whereas and the secondary clause is dependent to the primary clause.

The finite category comes when the secondary clause uses a contrastive dependency while non-finite category applies for non-finite-formed dependency such as present participle, past participle or gerund. For example:

Finite E1. Sandra is a good student in her school, while Nadya is a troublemaker

Non-finite E2. The Indian was shot by the hunter, injured by an air gun

2.2.4.1.3. Enhancement

This involves circumstantial relationship where the circumstantial information is coded as a new clause rather than within a clause. This can be temporal, conditional, causal, concessive, spatial or manner. It is marked through an “x” sign. For example:

I went to rehearsal

x after I lectured all day (temporal)

You don’t have time to practice

x if you teach both day and night (conditional)

(37)

x where we always rehearse (spatial)

I’m developing a more pleasing sound

x by changing my embouchure (manner)

a) Paratactic Enhancement

[image:37.595.115.532.356.739.2]

Like extension, enhancement also does need the role of conjunctions. Some conjunctions used for paratactic enhancement are: temporal (meanwhile, when,), spatial (and there), manner (in that way, thus), causal (therefore), conditional (otherwise), and concessive (yet, still). The types of marker used are summarized below:

Table.2. Markers of Paratactic Enhancement (Saragih, 2007)

No Category Meaning Markers

1 Temporal -same time

-different time: later -different time: earlier

A meanwhile B A subsequently B A previously B

(and) meanwhile, (when)

(and) then, and + afterwards

and/but + before that/first

2 Spatial

-same place A there B and there

3 Manner -means -comparison

A is via/by means of B

A is like B

(and) in that way, (and) thus

(and) similarly, (and) so, thus

4 Causal-Conditional -cause ^ effect -effect ^ cause -condition: positive -condition: negative -concession ^ consequence -consequence ^ concession

because A so result B

because intention A so action B if A then B if not A then B if A then contrary to expectation B

contrary to

expectation A then B

(and) so, (and) therefore

for, because

(and) then, (and) therefore

(38)

This type of enhancement is marked as: 1 x 2 For example:

x 2 so I have somewhere to write again

The secondary clause of enhancing relationship above is independent so both clauses can stand alone. This paratactic enhancement is attaching a causal conjunction so. b) Hypotactic Enhancement

Hypotactic enhancement is sometimes seen as an adverbial clause because the secondary clause qualifies the process in the primary clause. In deciding whether a clause complex is paratactic or hypotactic, it can be done by changing the order of the clauses. If the conjunction moves with the clause, it is most likely hypotactic. Hypotactic enhancement is symbolized as:

α x β

For example:

α I tidied up my messy desk

x β because I couldn’t find the meeting agenda

or x β because I couldn’t find the meeting agenda

α I tidied up my messy desk

(39)

[image:39.595.112.522.109.630.2]

Table.3. Markers of Hypotactic Enhancement (Saragih, 2007)

No Category Finite Non-Finite

Conjunctions Preposition 1 Temporal

-same time: extend

-same time: point -same time: spread -different time: later -different time earlier

as, while

when, as soon as, the moment whenever, every time after, since before, until/till while when since until

in (in the course/process of on after before 2 Spatial

-same time: extend -same time: point -same time: spread

as far as where wherever, everywhere 3 Manner

-means

-comparison as, as if, like, the way

like by (means of)

4 Causal-Conditional -cause: reason -cause: purpose -condition: positive -condition: negative -condition: concessive

because, as, in case, seeing that, considering in order that, so that

if provided that, as long as

unless

even if, although

with, through, by, at, as a result, because of, in case of (in order/so as) to, for (the sake of), with the aim of, for fear of

in the event of but, for, without

despite, in spite of, without

2.2.4.2 Projection

A clause He said “I’ll come to your house” and the clause I’ll cometo your house have the same meaning but the first clause is a projection or representation of

(40)

links clauses by having one process projected through another either by quoting or reporting. Both meanings (ideas) and wordings (locutions) can be projected. A projected wording is marked with (“) and a projected idea is marked with (‘). Either propositions (information) or proposals (goods and services) can be projected. Projection occurs through Mental (idea projection) and Verbal Processes (locutions projection). For example:

Verbal:

The conductor said

“ The next concert is in July

Mental: I thought

‘ the next concert is in July

In the cases above, said is a verbal process and thought is a mental process, so the first clause is locution and the second clause is idea.

2.2.4.2.1. Idea

(41)

a) Paratactic Idea

Paratactic idea is commonly seen as a quoting projection because each clause can stand individually or independent. In addition, it mostly uses mental process of cognition. This type of projection is also reversible. Paratactic idea is marked as:

1 ‘ 2 For example:

1 I thought

‘ 2 ‘I can’thave dinner with you

Mental process thought is used.I can’t have dinner with you is an independent clause which follows the primary clause.

b) Hypotactic Idea

This type of projection is said as a hypotactic idea if a dependent status is attached in the secondary clause. It is marked with:

α ‘ β

For example:

Idea: proposition

α I thought

‘ β that I couldn’tmeet you again

α I decided

‘ β to meet you again

Idea: proposal α I don’t want

‘ β to meet you again

(42)

process of cognition but also mental process of reaction (want, desire). That is why both proposition (information) and proposals (goods and service) can be projected.

The finite category happens when both clauses are finite or in the indicative mood, while the non-finite category occurs if the secondary clause is non-finite or in the form of gerund or to infinitive. For example:

Finite F1. They considered that the animals would be preserved Non-finite F2. He thought to finish it all

2.2.4.2.2. Locution

Locution is simply a classification of projection where verbal processes are required to be involved. Halliday (1994:252) explains that types of verbal processes are: (a) General process (say), (b) Specific verbs of statements (tell, observe, repot, announce) and Questions (ask, demand, inquire), (c) Verb say combined with circumstantial element such as explanation (explain), response (reply), reservation (protest) (d) Verbs with a connotation to various actions and feelings such as shout (say loudly), insist (say emphatically), complain (say irritably).

Based on the use, verbal processes are divided into reporting and quoting. Some verbs like insinuate, deny, imply, maintain are used only for reporting and others such as say, tell, remark, shout, demand, protest, announce are used for both reporting and quoting.

(43)

1 “ 2 For example:

1 I said

“ 2 “I can’tmeet you again

In this case, a clause I said is a projecting clause and I can’t do this assignmentis a projected clause. Since both projecting and projected clause are reversible, the clause complex above is identified as paratactic locution.

b) Hypotactic Locution

It is not enough to differ between paratactic and hypotactic projection only by seeing at the dependent status of each. In fact, there is a type of a clause complex of hypotactic projection which both clauses are independent. An absolute identification is done by determining whether the clause is reversible or not. Then the role of quotation mark is also needed to make sure if the projection is quoting or reporting. This kind of condition is applicable towards both idea and locution type.

If the hypotactic locution has been identified accurately, then it is marked as: α “ β

For example:

α I said

“ β that I couldn’t meet you again

α He said

“ β He wouldn’t meet you again

(44)

2.3. Previous Work

In supporting this research, it is needed to look at the previous similar researches to work upon. The similar researches taken are presented to know what the study is all about, the method used, the findings, what they contribute to, and the difference between those works and this research.

Marchelina (2014) writes a thesis entitled, “Taxis and Logico-semantic Relation Consisting in Clause Complexes in Business Articles on The New York

Times Newspaper: A Study of Functional Grammar “. Her work is about the taxis relation and the relationship of logico-semantic relation in a selected newspaper text. This research uses a qualitative descriptive method and focuses on both taxis and logico-semantic relation. The results are 9 data of expansion relationship and 4 data of projection relationship. This research gives a good understanding for the writer on how to formulate the problems. Her research only puts one newspaper as the data source and separates logical semantic relation from taxis relation, whereas this current research takes two newspapers and combines logical semantic relation and its interdependence.

Maryam (2007) writes a thesis entitled, “Clause Complex Analysis in “No Greater Love”. This thesis analyzes the relationships of logical semantic relation in

(45)

parataxis always brings extending relationships and hypotaxis always brings up the elaboration and enhancing relationships. This thesis gives a direction to put both types of logical semantic relations and to choose another form of data. The scope of the study in her research is only limited to expansion relationship since she believes that this relationship would give a significant result, meanwhile in this research, both expansion and projection are involved and the data are taken from newspaper texts.

Rukmini (2010) writes a thesis entitled “The Logico-Semantic Relation of Clause Complexes in the Abstracts of the Final Project Reports Produced by the

(46)

CHAPTER III METHOD OF RESEARCH

3.1. Research Design

In this research, the design used is a qualitative descriptive method. This design is known relates to grounded-theory, data analysis, and qualitative research method. The research design is qualitative due to the descriptive data which is in the form of words, in this analysis, newspaper texts. Then, this is also descriptive because it obtains information by describing the phenomena through descriptive data, generally characterized by simultaneous data collection and analysis.

Regarding to qualitative research method, Lexy (2005) argues that qualitative research is all about exploring issues, understanding phenomena, and answering questions. These things will eventually lead to the goal of the research. The goal of qualitative research is to “better understand human behavior and experience...grasp the processes by which people construct meanings and to describe what those

meanings are” (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998:38). So, by describing the phenomena, the goal of the research is achieved to understand what the phenomena are meant to be.

(47)

b) The primary instrument used to collect and analyze data is the researcher himself.

c) This research method is regarded as an inductive process as it is often being used to gather evidence in order to establish a theory and a hypothesis that previous research has neglected.

d) This research method provides highly descriptive data in the form of words and pictures rather than the numbers.

So, the qualitative descriptive method identifies and describes the phenomena regarding to the topics and brings it to human experience in order to achieve a better understanding towards the issue.

Qualitative findings are sometimes presented together with quantitative result to facilitate interpretations of the instances. The analysis of data involves the constant comparing of instances of one category with another in an attempt to “saturate” (Creswell, 1994:156). Therefore this qualitative descriptive method also counts the data percentage in order to merely obtain the presentation of the analysis result.

3.2. Source of Data

The object of the research is the clause complexes in sentences. The sources of data are both Indonesian and Malaysian newspapers. Indonesian newspaper chosen is a printed The Jakarta Post whereas Malaysian newspaper is an online New Straits Times. The number of texts collected is two articles, or one article from each newspaper. The articles are similar texts commenting about AirAsia QZ8501. They are:

(48)

b) AirAsia tail section located, blackbox still missing (Jong, 2015), The Jakarta Post, January 8, 2015.

The case of AirAsia accident killing all the passengers on December 28 brought many questions and speculations on how the accident happened and what made the airplane crashed. People tried to search facts and created their own perspectives. This is why it is important to see the decision of media in presenting their report. It is whether they tend to expand the information they got or project people’s opinion on their works in order to serve the better information to the readers.

From the heading of the articles, both articles show a logical relation in the sentence. Indonesia naval captain says may have located missing plane tail’s section’s New Straits Times shows a projection relation marked by the verbal

process says, while AirAsia tail section located, blackbox still missing’s The Jakarta Post shows an expansion relation. It is also very interesting to see whether the headings of the articles determine the whole or the dominant logical relations appeared in the text.

(49)

The articles are determined based on preliminary observation. Both articles are about similar topic. The number of sentences in each article is 30 sentences. 2. Collecting the Data

The first article is an online article taken from newspaper website www.nst.com.my, an official website of New Straits Times. On the other hand, the

second article is collected from printed The Jakarta Post which is published daily. The data collected are clause complexes from valid sentences contained in both articles.

3. Classifying the Data

Both articles are then re-observed. Each sentence of the text is then classified either it is a clause or a clause complex of two, three or more clauses. Both clauses and clause complexes are presented.

3.4. Data Analysis

In analyzing the data, the techniques used are based on procedures for a Systemic Functional Linguistic analysis, an investigation into clause complexing relations. The data analysis includes:

a) Displaying all the clause complexes in a table, b) Numbering each clause complex,

c) Identifying taxis relation

d) Identifying logical semantic relation and each marker,

e) Counting all the identified elements using a simple percentage formula. The formula is:

F

(50)

P = Percentage of logical semantic relation or taxis type F = The number of particular type found in clause complexes N = The number of clause complexes (data)

After the type of logical semantic relation and its interdependence are identified, the dominant type of logical semantic relation and interdependence is obtained. It is to know why that type of particular logical semantic relation appears rather than other types. Furthermore, it is interpreted to see the characteristics of the newspaper text based on logical semantic relation and its interdependence.

3.5. Research Procedure

This research goes through a procedure. They are: 1. Preparation

This preparation includes the theory, the data, research procedure and data analysis.

2. Collecting the data

The data are collected from the data source by following the data collection procedure. It includes classifying between clauses and clause complexes. After that, all the data are displayed onto the workplace.

3. Analyzing the Data

(51)

[image:51.595.177.520.112.284.2]

Table.4. Labeling of Articles

Source Data Label Topic/Title

New Straits Times, January 5, 2015

A

Indonesia Naval Captain Says May Have Located Missing Plane’s Tail Section

The Jakarta Post, January 8, 2015

B

AirAsia Tail Section Located, Blackbox Still Missing

b) Each sentence is numbered for each ranking clause, for example, A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, etc.

c) Some items are excluded from the analysis of the data. They are: the titles, sub-titles, reviews, images, captions of images, diagrams, timeline, authors’ name and source description.

d) Each clause in each sentence is displayed in a table to ensure both clauses and clause complexes. Embedded clauses are put in double square brackets. e) Verbal elements or processes are underlined.

f) The interdependence relation is identified in each clause complex.

g) Both markers and logical semantic relation of each clause complex is identified. The markers are typed in bold.

h) After precisely occupying its position, a symbol of each category such as “2 (paratactic locution), = (elaboration), xβ (hypotactic enhancement), etc is given to each clause complex.

(52)

4. Making Conclusions and Suggestions

(53)

CHAPTER IV

DESCRIPTION AND FINDINGS

[image:53.595.165.476.250.338.2]

4.1. Data Description 4.1.1. Taxis

Table.5. Distribution of Interdependence Relation

Interdependence Text A Text B

Parataxis 14 10

Hypotaxis 31 24

In text A, 14 clause relations are paratactic while 31 clause relations are hypotactic. Single parataxis links occur in 3 clause complexes while single hypotactic links occur in 12 clause complexes. 3 multi clause complexes contain more than one paratactic link whereas 7 multi clause complexes make more than one hypotactic link. Meanwhile, 7 multi clause complexes occur both paratactic and hypotactic links. Six clauses are not credited as having either interdependence or logical semantic relation because they are single clauses and with an embedded clause(s).

(54)

[image:54.595.175.476.139.340.2]

4.1.2. Logical Semantic Relation

Table.6. Distribution of Logical Semantic Relation

Logical Relation Type Text A Text B

Elaboration 8 9

Extension 10 9

Enhancement 9 6

Locution 18 9

Idea - 1

Total 45 34

Text A does not contain any idea relation but many locution relations. They are showed through 16 of 24 clause complexes. The number of elaboration, extension, and enhancement is closely equal. The elaboration relation makes 8 links, extension relation makes 10 links and enhancement relation makes 9 links. Single logical semantic relations of either expansion or projection also make 11 links of the entire clause complexes.

(55)

[image:55.595.165.512.136.453.2]

Table.7. Distribution of Logical Semantic Relation Combined with Systems of Interdependence

Logical Relation Text A Text B

Paratactic Elaboration 2

-Hypotactic Elaboration 6 9

Paratactic Extension 6 3

Hypotactic Extension 4 6

Paratactic Enhancement 1 1

Hypotactic Enhancement 8 5

Paratactic Locution 5 6

Hypotactic Locution 13 3

Paratactic Idea -

-Hypotactic Idea - 1

(56)

Hypotactic elaboration in text B leads the distribution through 7 clause complexes. There is no paratactic elaboration identified. The number of hypotactic extension in 6 clause complexes is two times of paratactic extension in 3 clause complexes. It also happens for hypotactic locution. It occurs in 3 clause complexes. Otherwise paratactic locution occurs in 6 clause complexes. Hypotactic enhancement is seen in 4 clause complexes while paratactic enhancement is seen only in 1 clause complex. Hypotactic idea only appears in 1 clause complex while paratactic idea does not at all.

4.2. Findings

The analysis produces a clear identification on the number of clause relations found in the two articles. In text A, 24 of 30 sentences are found to have logical semantic relations and interdependences. This number is more compared to text B which has 17 of 30 sentences. Nevertheless, the exact number of logical semantic relation and interdependence can be more because some sentences contain more than two ranking clauses. The followings are the answers of the analysis:

4.2.1. Interpretation of Taxis

(57)

[image:57.595.162.474.111.201.2]

Table.8. Distribution of Taxis Relation

Parataxis 31,11% 29.41%

Hypotaxis 68,89% 70.59%

Both paratactic and hypotactic relations play their significant role in those two text. From the result above, it is undeniable that the portion of hypotactic links is bigger than paratactic ones. The comparative percentage of each text shows an evenly close number from any interdependence category. This number describes that the use of hypotactic links is two times from the use of paratactic links in text A, and almost three times in text B. It is also known that hypotactic relation is the dominant interdependence appeared in the analysis. It means that both texts use more clause complexes which utilize subordinate or dependent clauses to either expand or project.

Further comparative presentation between the two texts is explained on the representative analysis below:

a) Paratactic Relation

Table.9. Distribution of Paratactic Relation

Parataxis 14 31,11% 10 29.41%

[image:57.595.209.501.613.677.2]

(58)

which construct independent clausal relations. The examples of paratactic relation from both texts are as follows:

Data A.7 1 …...seasonal tropical storms probably contributed to the Dec. 28 crash

2 and the weather has persistently hamperedefforts……… Data B.28 1 We found matching antemortem and postmortem data

2 and we also found a necklace with a pendant with the initial L on her body,

Both primary and secondary clauses in data A.7 and B.28 above are independent clause. The independent secondary clauses are marked by conjunction and and and also, so it makes up a paratactic relation.

[image:58.595.208.502.473.537.2]

b) Hypotactic Relation

Table.10. Distribution of Hypotactic Relation

Hypotaxis 31 68,89% 24 70.59%

(59)

β while Soetikno Sia was a 60-year-old male.

Both texts have a dependent secondary clause. It is indicated by a non-finite clause with gerund in data A.21 and a conjunction while in data B.24. So, the dependent clause makes up a hypotactic relation

4.2.2. Interpretation of Logical Semantic Relation

[image:59.595.175.475.414.589.2]

Logical semantic relations of expansion and projection are found in single relations as well as in sub-complexes or multi clause complexes. The identification is helped by conjunctions and verbal elements of a clause. The analysis is also focused on finite and non-finite type of relation but neglecting embedded clauses. The number of expansion and projection type is summarized as follows:

Table.11. Distribution of Logical Semantic Relation

Logical Relation Type Text A Text B

Elaboration 17.78% 26.47%

Extension 22.22% 26.47%

Enhancement 20% 17.65%

Locution 40% 26.47%

Idea - 2.94%

(60)

In other case, text B shows a more supportive distribution of elaboration and extension type compared to enhancement relation. It shows that clause complexes in text B expand using less circumstantial features. In projection relation, locution relation from text B is as strong as elaboration and extension type. In indicates that the clause complexes which are projected are as equal as being elaborated and extended.

[image:60.595.177.452.415.504.2]

Incredibly, locution relation sits at the highest position with 40% in text A compared to text B. Contrary to its partner, idea relation represents least contribution with only 2.94% in text B and none in text A. It shows that text A contains more projected clauses rather than text B. The projections are more in form of wordings rather than ideas.

Table.12.Total Percentage of Logical Semantic Relation

Logical Semantic Relation A (%) B (%)

Expansion 60% 70.59%

Projection 40% 29.41%

(61)

[image:61.595.147.510.166.227.2]

4.2.3. Interpretation of Taxis and Logical Semantic Systems a) Paratactic Elaboration

Table.13. Distribution of Paratactic Elaboration Relation

Paratactic Elaboration 2 4.44% -

-Text A has covered only a small number of paratactic elaboration relations whereas text B does not contain any. It shows that text A minimally has little more clause complexes which the independent secondary clause elaborates the meaning of the primary clause. The example of paratactic elaboration relation from text A is as follows:

Data A .17 1 …..- the largest [Ø] about 18 metres (59 feet) long

=2 - [Ø] have been located in shallow waters by ships using sonar.

Even if there are occurrences of ellipsed subject and predicate, both of the clauses in data A.17 are independent. It is also showed by a dash (-) in the secondary clause.

b) Hypotactic Elaboration

Table.14. Distribution of Hypotactic Elaboration Relation

Hypotactic Elaboration 6 13.33% 9 26.47%

[image:61.595.153.510.639.696.2]

(62)

secondary clause elaborates the meaning of the primary clause. The examples of hypotactic elaboration relation from both texts are as follows:

Data A.29 α Indonesia AirAsia is 49 percent [[owned by Malaysia-based budget carrier AirAsia]],

=β whose shares fell nearly 5 percent today.

Data B.11 α The second priority zone, which is 10 by 10 nautical miles in size,

=β is outside the initial search area.

Both secondary clauses are dependent and they form a hypotactic elaboration relation. It is showed by a non-restrictive relative clause with a marker whose and which.

[image:62.595.152.511.472.529.2]

c) Paratactic Extension

Table.15. Distribution of Paratactic Extension Relation

Paratactic Extension 6 13.33% 3 8.82%

(63)

Data B.6 1 “Then Iasked about the weather condition there +2 and they turned up to be conducive.

Data A.19 produces two parallel relation by markers but and then, while data B.6 only makes one relation by a marker and. This relation is paratactic extension due to additive and adversative conjunctions.

[image:63.595.151.511.305.363.2]

d) Hypotactic Extension

Table.16. Distribution of Hypotactic Extension Relation

Hypotactic Extension 4 8.89% 6 17.65%

For hypotactic elaboration relation, text B has a significantly higher number compared to text A. It shows that text B has more clause complexes which dependent secondary clause extends the meaning of the primary clause by adding something new rather than text B. The examples of hypotactic extension relation from both texts are as follows:

Data A.8 α The recorders are housed in the tail section of the Airbus, +β making retrieval of that part of the aircraft crucial. Data B.24 α Jou Christine Yuanita was a 62-year-old female,

+β while Soetikno Sia was a 60-year-old male.

(64)

[image:64.595.154.511.141.198.2]

e) Paratactic Enhancement

Table.17. Distribution of Paratactic Enhancement Relation

Paratactic Enhancement 1 2.22% 1 2.94%

Both text A and text B have the same number of paratactic enhancement relation. It simply shows that both texts have the same number of clause complexes which the independent secondary clause is a circumstantial information enhancing the meaning of the primary clause. The paratactic enhancement relations from both texts are as follows:

Data A.15 1 that pilots must have a face-to-face briefing with a flight operation officer

x2 so the briefing officer will know [[the pilot is in a healthy condition and so on]],”

Data B.3 1 ….using its side-scan sonar system

x2 and then the image from the side-scan sonar was confirmed by multibeam echosounder,”

(65)

[image:65.595.156.511.141.198.2]

f) Hypotactic Enhancement

Table.18. Distribution of Hypotactic Enhancement Relation

Hypotactic Enhancement 8 17.78% 5 14.70%

In text A, the number hypotactic enhancement relation is higher compared to text B. It indicates that text A has more clause complexes which dependent secondary clause is a circumstantial information enhancing the meaning of the primary clause. The examples of hypotactic enhancement relation from both texts are as follows:

Data A.6 α He was speaking

xβ after his ship returned to the port in Surabaya today,

Data B.20 α Also on Wednesday, the East Java Police’s Disaster Victim Identification (DVI) identified eight more bodies [[found near the site]]

xβ where the AirAsia jet was thought to have crashed

The hypotactic relations are identified from markers after and where. The relations are also an enhancement because the secondary clauses are circumstantial information. They are both a temporal relationship.

g) Paratactic Locution

Table.19. Distribution of Paratactic Locution Relation

[image:65.595.151.511.693.751.2]

(66)

Text B has more paratactic locution relation compared to text A. It shows that text B has more clause complexes which the independent primary clause projects the independent secondary clause by using a verbal process rather than text A. The examples of paratactic locution relation from both texts are as follows:

Data A.26 1 “Pleasedifferentiate between the probe into flight licenses and the air crash investigation,

“2 he said.

Data B.14 1 “(The blackboxes are kept) at the bottom part of the tail section of the plane,”

“2 Ruth told the Jakarta Post on Wednesday.

The data obviously shows a locution relation from a verbal process said and told. The relation is paratactic since the secondary clauses are projected by being

quoted and the clauses are reversible.

[image:66.595.149.511.525.586.2]

h) Hypotactic Locution

Table.20. Distribution of Hypotactic Locution Relation

Hypotactic Locution 13 28.89% 3 8.82%

(67)

=β it was tightening rules on pre-flight procedures.

Data B.12 α Former KNKT investigation Ruth Hanna Simatupang said =β the discovery of tail section could make it easier for the SAR

team [[to locate the plane’s blackboxes]].

The data above also obviously shows a locution relation from a verbal process announced and said. The relation is hypotactic since the secondary clauses are projected by being reported and the clauses are irreversible.

i) Paratactic Idea

Both text A and text B do not have any paratactic idea relation. It simply indicates that there is no clause complex which the independent primary clause projects the independent secondary clause by using a mental process.

[image:67.595.152.511.472.529.2]

j) Hypotactic Idea

Table.21. Distribution of Hypotactic Idea Relation

Hypotactic Idea - - 1 2.94%

Text B has covered only a small number of hypotactic idea relations whereas text A does not contain any. It shows that text B minimally has little clause complexes which the independent primary clause projects the dependent secondary clause by using a mental process while text A does not have any. The hypotactic idea relation from text B is as follow:

(68)

[image:68.595.165.511.220.539.2]

The data above shows an idea relation from a mental process thought. The relation is hypotactic since the non-finite secondary clauses are projected by being reported and the clauses are irreversible.

Table.22. Distribution of Logical Semantic Relation Combined with Systems of Interdependence

Paratactic Elaboration 4.44%

-Hypotactic Elaboration 13.33% 26.47%

Paratactic Extension 13.33% 8.82%

Hypotactic Extension 8.89% 17.65%

Paratactic Enhancement 2.22% 2.94%

Hypotactic Enhancement 17.78% 14.70%

Paratactic Locution 11.11% 17.65%

Hypotactic Locution 28.89% 8.82%

Paratactic Idea -

-Hypotactic Idea - 2.94%

(69)

8.89% than text B by 17.65%. It shows that text A has paratactically more extended clause complexes and text B has hypotactically more extended clause complexes.

Hypotactic enhancement is identified as the second highest number of logical semantic relation in text A but less appeared in text B. It is then known that clause complexes in text A are hypotactically more enhanced by using circumstantial information compared to text B.

The absence of paratactic idea in both texts weakens the position of projection relation. It is known that both texts do not really project clause complexes by a mental process.

The number of hypotactic elaboration in text B is very significant. It is a dominant relation. It presents almost 2 times from the number in text A. It is enough to say that text B presents hypotactically more elaborative clause complexes compared to text A.

(70)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

An investigation of types of logical semantic relation combined with systems of interdependence has been made. The conclusions and suggestions are drawn as follows:

5.1. Conclusions

(71)

2. The dominant relation in both newspapers is hypotactic relation by 68.89% in text A Indonesia naval captain says may have located missing plane tail’s section’ New Straits Times and 70.59% in text B AirAsia tail section located, blackbox still missing’s The Jakarta Post. In this regard, the information about

AirAsia QZ8501 accident in both articles is more constructed in complex sentences rather than compound sentences because they contain at least one dependent secondary clause attached to an independent primary clause. Combined with the taxis systems, dominant logical semantic relation appeared in text A is hypotactic locution relation by 28.89%. This percentage is higher than hypotactic locution found in text B. It shows that the article presents more projected verbal information or argumentations. The argumentations are mostly in reported speeches. On the other hand, text B is dominated by hypotactic elaboration relation by 26.47%. This percentage is higher than hypotactic elaboration found in text A. It simply shows that article in text B presents more information by specifying it into dependent secondary clause which is in a greater detail, restatement, exemplification, or comment. Furthermore, both texts have insignificant paratactic and hypotactic idea relations. It indicates that both articles do not sufficiently gather people’s cognitive opinion, although text B shows an effort to do so.

5.2. Suggestions

(72)

(73)

REFERENCES

Bogdan, R.C. & Biklen, S.K. (1998). Qualitative Research in Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods (3rdedn.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn

& Bacon.

Charnley, M.V. (1975). Reporting. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Creswell, J.W. (1994). Research Design: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches.