FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
In this section, the writer presents the findings and discussion of this study. Three transcriptions of three different sections of the “HitamPutih” talk show with different guests and
topics were analyzed in this study. The transcriptions were presented in a dialogue excerpt between the guest, with an initial DC, and the guests with the initial AR, FA, PS, and BT. English translations of the transcriptions were also provided in parentheses. The writer divided the findings into three subtopics based on the theory proposed by Brown and Levinson’s (1987). They are Bald on Record, Positive Politeness, and Negative Politeness.
Bald on Record
The Bald on Record was the first most used strategy found in this study. According to Brown and Levinson (1987), Bald on Record does not attempt to minimize the threats to the listener’s face. The Bald on Record is considered as the most threatening strategy since the
interviewer directly questions the interviewee what the interviewer intends to know. In other words, there is no way for the interviewee to minimize the face threatening act. Brown and Levinson (1987) also outline several cases in which one might use the Bald on Record Strategy, including the use great urgency or desperation; speaking as if great efficiency is necessary; task oriented; little or no desire to maintain someone’s face; and doing the FTA is in the interest of the
hearer. The following excerpt showed how DC used Bald on Record strategy to question his guest in the first section of the talk show. This first section concerned about the issue of woman abuse that happened to AR, done by her ex-boyfriend.
DC: “ok. tapi, kenapa? Maksud saya kenapa kamu minta surat pernyataan maaf tertulis? Emang gunanya apa buat kamu?”
(OK, but why? I mean, why did you ask for a written statement of apology? What is the benefit to you?)
AR: “karena dulu masih mencoba untuk jangan sampai ada orang lain yang tahu, kalau ternyata aku mengalami hal-hal seperti ini.”
(Because I tried to keep it from other people so that they did not know I had experienced such a thing.)
DC: “betul… tapi, seandainya si E nulis surat permintaan maaf buat kamu, terus gunanya apa buat kamu?”
(Right…but, if E did write that statement of apology for you, then, what is the benefit to you?) AR: “karena kejadian terakhir yang aku alami, posisinya aku udah gak ada hubungan apa-apa,
kami sudah putus. Tapi, ternyata tetap mendapat perlakuan seperti itu.”
(Because from the last experience, after we broke up I was still treated like that.)
The excerpt was taken from the first section of the talk show in where AR came as the guest. Here, DC tried to gain information from AR using Bald on Record strategy by emphasizing on great efficiency. The question of “Gunanya buat kamu apa? (What is the benefit to you?)” is
used by DC to know the use of the written apologize declaration of her ex-boyfriend to AR. The question directly pointed out the intention of the interviewer to be efficiently getting the information he wanted. Another proof of the use of Bald on Record was in the excerpt below. On this second excerpt come from second section, the host talk about racial perception a personal issue of the guest, which is a hot topic on the society recently.
Excerpt 2
DC: “Apakah anda bermasalah apabila Gubernur ataupun siapa itu adalah keturunan Cina atau tidak?”
(Is it a problem for you if the Governor or whoever it was a Chinese or not?) FA: “Tidak masalah, justru saya memilih Ahok ini karena orang Cina”
(No, I chose Ahok exactly because he is a Chinese) DC: “Anda memilih Ahok karena dia orang Cina?
(You chose Ahok because he is a Chinese?)
jadi hampir lima puluh ribu. Sebagian besar orang Cina, pak; dan hampir seratus persen menghujat saya”
(A Chinese. Thus, I was surprised when I was being reported to the police as a criminal because I am racist. I said it was badly unfair, my followers on twitter which is initially only about nine thousand to eleven thousand has increased to nearly fifty thousand. Mostly are Chinese, Sir, and almost a hundred percent of them blasphemed me.)
The excerpt 2 was a dialogue with FA as the guest in the second section of HitamPutih. In this section, the topic discussed was about the regime of Ahok and Jokowi, the Governor of Jakarta and his deputy. Here, it can be seen that DC’s questions were very clear, open, and direct to FA. Thus, it can be listed as Bald on Record since DC had little or no desire to maintain FA’s face by
questioning a frontal question of sensitive racial matter like “Apakah anda bermasalah apabila Gubernur ataupun siapa itu adalah keturunan Cina atau tidak? (Is it a problem or not if the Governor a Chinese?)”. Starting his career as a mentalist has empowered DC to become a mysterious figure of interviewer, so he can perform Bald-on-record acts to his interviewee. Brown and Levinson (1987, p. 69) note that Bald-on-record acts are preformed when the speaker has significantly more power than the hearer, with this kind of power the threat involved is very small. Here, DC has the power to dominate the conversation which means that DC was adept at controlling and directing questions from each answer of the guests.
According to Brown and Levinson (1987), a frequent use of Bald on record strategy will make the addressee shocked or embarrassed, so such a strategy is frequently utilized in situations where the speaker has a close relationship with the hearer, like family or close friends. The excerpt below was the dialogue between DC and a male comedian guest. As a comedian which used to a jokes like this, DC can freely jokes around using bald on record strategy. This can’t be applied by the host when they aren’t close enough to the guest and doesn’t know the guest personality. This
the third section of the talk show. Here, DC used great urgency or desperation that is “jangan
duduk disini! (Do not sit here!)” In the dialogue that can be indicated as the Bald on Record strategy.
Excerpt 3
DC : “Jangan duduk di sini! nanti kamu bertelur.” (Do not sit here! You might spawn.)
BT : “Emangnya aku ayam? Oke pemirsa Iyya... pertanyaan selanjutnya. Eee. Kalau kau tidak berkepentingan duduk di bawah saja lah.”
(Am I a chicken? OK viewers..Right..Next question. Eee. If you do not have any business, just sit on the floor.)
Positive Politeness
Positive Politeness was found as the second most used strategy in this study. Brown and Levinson (1987) stated that Positive Politeness strategy attempts to minimize the threat to the hearer’s positive face. It is used to make the hearer feels good about himself or his possessions.
Brown and Levinson (1987) also added that in attempt to avoid conflict, some strategies of Positive Politeness can be used, such as attending to the hearer’s interests, needs, and wants; use solidarity
Excerpt 4
DC: “oh… begitu. Kalau masih pacaran, gak apa-apa tu ya?” (Oh…I see. If you still in a relationship, it is okay, isn’t it?) AR: “mestinya harus melapor.”
(I must report it.)
DC: “harus melapor. Tapi, maksudnya ini pacar bukan, apa bukan, mukul lagi. Gitu ya?”
(Must report it. But, I mean he was no longer your boyfriend or something to you, but he still hit you. Isn’t it right?)
AR: “…iya” (…yes)
DC: “kalau masih dalam pacaran kan masih ada rambu-rambu, setidak tidaknya masih ada hubungan, gitu ya? Kalau ini udah-udahan…?”
(If you are still in a relationship there must be rules in it, at least there is a relation, isn’t it right? But the thing is it was all over already?)
The excerpt 4 shows how DC avoided disagreements in his questions to AR. It was done by adding some statement that infers to seek for agreement in those questions, like “Oh… begitu. Kalau masih pacaran, gak apa-apa tu ya? (Oh…I see. If you still in a relationship, it is okay, isn’t it?)” And “Tapi, maksudnya ini pacar bukan, apa bukan, mukul lagi. Gitu ya? (But, I mean he was no longer your boyfriend or something to you, but he still hit you. Isn’t it right?)”. Here, the tag
question “ya?”(‘right?’ seems to seek agreement from the hearer to be in the same side or agree
with the intention of the speakers in a way where the threat can be minimized. Hence, in the writer analysis, the questions could be listed as Positive Politeness. Another proof can be seen in the excerpt below. This fifth excerpt come from second section, the host talk about the issue brought by the guest on the critic of the new governor of Jakarta.
DC: “Kalau dilihat kenapa anda berani sekali mengatakan bahwa Jokowi dan Ahok tidak bisa mengurusi Jakarta banjir? Saya berada di tengah mengatakan bahwa kan mereka baru gitu jadi Gubernur kenapa disalahkan mereka gitu. Gimana Anda menjawab itu?”
(Why were you so brave to say that Ahok and Jokowi were not able to overcome the problems of flooding in Jakarta? I was in the middle to say that they have just become the Governor, why did you blame them? What do you say about it?)
FA: “Kalau kita melihat yah, kenapa mereka terpilih? Harapan masyarakat adalah apabila mereka terpilih, bisa mengatasi banjir dan macet Jakarta. Nah, Mereka dengan super hero mengatakan bahwa siap, katanya begitu”
(If we look back, why were they elected? The citizens hoped that if they were elected, they would be able to overcome the problems of flooding and traffic jam in Jakarta. Well, they said that they were ready just like a super hero, like that)
In the excerpt 5, it can also be seen that DC used Positive Politeness to question FA. In the writer analysis, it was categorized as Positive Politeness because DC exaggerated interest in the hearer. Instead of using an impolite statement like “kenapa Anda kurang ajar sekali” (why were
you so saucy?), DC used compliment like “kenapa Anda berani sekali” (why were you so brave?) which sounds to be more minimizing the threat by exaggerating, in here complimenting a negative statement said by the guest. The compliment used by DC was aimed at mitigating the face threatening question. The following is the excerpt taken from the third section of the talk show with Pasha as the guest. This excerpt context concern about the song album of the guest.
Excerpt 6
PS : Kenapa diubah?
Karena dulu waktu kita pertama mau rekaman album ...
(Why was it changed? Because the first time when we were going to record the album…)
DC : Album lagu ya?
Lha wong kamu ngomong kaya berdoa
PS : Waktu itu udah ada vokalis yang namanya Sigit dari Base Jam terus mereka bilang jangan pake Sigit, pake Pasha aja.
(At that time there was already a vocalist named Sigit from Base Jam, then they said to use Pasha as a stage name instead of Sigit.)
In the excerpt 6, it showed that DC used a joke to alert the guest that his voice is too low to be clearly heard. Instead of directly said “speak louder!” the use of joke like “Lha wong kamu
ngomong kaya berdoa. (You’re singing like praying)” might create a more comfortable conversation with the guest so that he could mitigate the FTA. Therefore, in the writer’s analysis, the use of joke by DC in the excerpt above is included as the Positive Politeness.
Negative Politeness
The third most used strategy found was Negative Politeness. Negative. As stated by Brown and Levinson (1987), Negative Politeness was oriented towards the hearer’s negative face and emphasizes avoidance of imposition on the hearer. In other words, this strategy emphasizes that the hearer has a face to be respected. Brown and Levinson (1987) also noted several strategies that can be used in Negative Politeness, such as be indirect; use hedges or questions; be pessimistic; apologize, use plural pronouns; and use obviating structures like nominalizations, passives, or statements of general rules. The following was the excerpt taken from the first section. The excerpt context concern about the letter of the ex-husband guest a sensitive topic for the guest.
Excerpt 7
DC: “Saya, boleh tanya nggak? Kamu minta tulisnya seperti apa?” (May I ask you? What kind of statement did you ask for?)
AR: “Cukup untuk menyatakan bahwa, entah dia pribadi atau keluarga bahwa anak kami benar melakukan tindakan tersebut.”
In the excerpt 7, it was shown that DC used Negative Politeness to question AR. In the writer analysis, the used of question “saya boleh tanya nggak? (May I ask a question?)” is part of
indirect question. Therefore, it indicates that the interviewer (DC) tried to utilize the strategy of being indirect as it noted by Brown and Levinson (1987) as one of the strategies that can be used in Negative Politeness. Another excerpt below also showed Negative Politeness which is taken from the second section. This excerpt context concern about the racial perception of the guest which a sensitive topic for the guest and also a really hot topic for the society at that particular time.
Excerpt 8
DC: “Tapi terlepas dari anda mengatakan masalah Cina atau bukan Cina, kan di tweeter anda sendiri banyak sekali, maaf mungkin saya salah, menghujat Jokowi dan Ahok sendiri. Itu salah tidak?”
(But in spite of the problems about Chinese or not, sorry I may be wrong, on your twitter account you are blaspheming Jokowi and Ahok too much. Is it a mistake or not?)
FA: “Itu ndak masalah. Kalau dalam sistem ketatanegaraan atau demokratis demokrasi internasional, saya menemukan beberapa pasal penghinaan Kepala Negara kan dihapuskan gitu”
(That’s not a problem. I found some chapters about insulting the head of state in a democratic constitutional system or international democracy were abolished)
proof taken from the third section of the talk show. The ninth excerpt concern about cultural knowledge of the guest about outfit that should be used in a formal base.
Excerpt 9
PS : Waktu itu ... e... karena ngga pakai baju batik itu .... (It was because I did not wear Batik at that time) DC : nggak harus batik yang penting rapi ....
(It does not have to be Batik, as long as is looks neat…) PS : nggak harus batik ya mestinya ya ....?
(That’strue, it should not Batik, should it…?)
