i
A STUDY OF POLITENESS STRATEGY IN REFUSAL
USED BY ENGLISH TEACHERS IN MADIUN
REGENCY
THESIS
Submitted to
Postgraduate Program of Language Study
of Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta
as a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Getting
Magister Degree of Language Study of English
Written by:
MAYA HARTUTI
NIM. S. 200. 120. 033
POST-GRADUATE PROGRAM of LANGUAGE STUDY
MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY of SURAKARTA
i
NOTE OF ADVISOR 1ST
Prof. Dr. Endang Fauziati, M. Hum
The lecturer of language study of Muhammadiyah University Surakarta - Official Note on This Thesis Student’s Thesis.
Dear,
The Director of Graduate Program of Muhammadiyah University.
Assalamu’alaikum wr. wb.
Having read, examined, corrected and necessarily revised towards the thesis:
Title : A STUDY OF POLITENESS STRATEGY IN REFUSAL USED BY ENGLISH TEACHERS IN MADIUN REGENCY
written by
Name : Maya Hartuti
Nim : S200120033
Focus on : Pragmatics
I approve that the thesis is to be examined by board of examiners in the language
study of Graduate Program of Muhammadiyah University Surakarta.
Wassalamu’alaikum salam Wr. Wb
Surakarta, … August, 2014
Advisor 1
ii
NOTE OF ADVISOR 2nd
Agus Wijayanto, Ph.D.
The lecturer of language study of Muhammadiyah University Surakarta - Official Note on This Thesis Student’s Thesis.
Dear,
The Director of Graduate Program of Muhammadiyah University.
Assalamu’alaikum wr. wb.
Having read, examined, corrected and necessarily revised towards the thesis:
Title : A STUDY OF POLITENESS STRATEGY IN REFUSAL USED BY ENGLISH TEACHERS IN MADIUN REGENCY
written by
Name : Maya Hartuti
Nim : S200120033
Focus on : Pragmatics
I approve that the thesis is to be examined by board of examiners in the language
study of Graduate Program of Muhammadiyah University Surakarta.
Wassalamu’alaikum salam Wr. Wb
Surakarta, … August, 2014
Advisor 2
iv
M OTTO
" Do w hat you can, wit h w hat you have, w here you are." - Theodore Roosevelt
v
DEDICATION
This t hesis is dedicat ed t o:
M y beloved parent s, M y beloved husband, And All my friends, classmat es and family
vi
PRONOUNCEMENT
I hereby certify that this thesis, entitled “A Study of Politeness Strategy in Refusal
Used by English Teachers in Madiun Regency” has been composed by Maya Hartuti. It is not
a plagiarism or made by others. Anything related to others’ work is written in quotation, the
source of which is listed on the bibliography.
If then this pronouncement proves incorrect, I am ready to accept any academic
punishment, including the withdrawal of my academic degree.
Surakarta, August, 2014
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Alhamdulillahirabbil’alamin, praise to Allah SWT, The Most gracious, and the Most
Merciful. First of all, I would like to praise to Allah for the blessings endowed to me so that I
can accomplish this piece of work entitled “A Study of Politeness Strategy in Refusal Used
by English Teachers in Madiun Regency” as the requirement for getting master degree of
language study in English at Post-graduate Program of Language Study of Muhammadiyah
University of Surakarta. Secondly, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my
beloved mother, Gijastuti and father, Hartojo who always support and back me up through
their never ending prayers and also their care. Thank you very much for everything. You are
my strength and this thesis is dedicated to you.
Although there are many difficulties, I realize that those are the ways to get success.
Therefore, I would like to express my special gratitude to:
1. Prof. Dr. Khudzaifah Dimyati, S.H., M.Hum, as a director of post graduate program of
Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta for giving me permission to write the thesis.
2. Prof. Dr. Markhamah, M, Hum, the head of post graduate program of Language Study.
3. Prof. Dr. Endang Fauziati, M. Hum my thesis supervisor who has patiently given me her
precious help, comments, as well as suggestions for improvement my thesis during the
process of the writing.
4. Agus Wijayanto, M.A, Ph. D as my second thesis supervisor, for his helpful guidance
and corrections during the process of writing this thesis. His insightful comments and
suggestions have shown the way to enhancement of my thesis.
5. All English teachers of junior high school in Madiun regency as research participants, for
viii
6. Last but not least my special appreciation to all of the lecturers of Magister program of
English education for giving me such priceless knowledge and experience.
7. Thanks to beloved my husband, Jaiman for his patient, support, help, and pray. Thanks
also to all of my classmates for togetherness, kindness, the encouragement and
motivation. To all of them I dedicate this piece of work.
I understand well that this thesis is far from being perfect. I accept constructive
comments and suggestions from the readers. Hopefully, this thesis will to useful for everyone
who concerns with action research.
Surakarta, August 2014
ix
CHAPTER II : REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Previous Study ………
a. Grice’s Cooperative Principle………... b. Lakoff’s Politeness Rule ………..………... c. The Principle of Politeness of Leech ……….……... d. Brown and Levinson’s Face-Saving Strategy ………,……... e. Watts’ conceptual distinction between Impoliteness and Politeness f. Javanese politeness (Sopan-Santun) ……….……...
22
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A. Type of Study………...…...
CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDING AND THE DISCUSSION
A. DATA ANALISIS ……….…...….... 1. Refusal Strategies...………...…....
a. Refusal Strategies in Invitations ………...……….………... 1) Refusal Strategies in an Invitation to a Collocutor of Higher Status... 2) Refusal Strategies in an Invitation to a Collocutor of Equal Status...
x
3) Refusal Strategies in an Invitation to a Collocutor of Lower Status... b. Refusal Strategies in Offers ………...
1) Refusal Strategies in an Offer to a Collocutor of Higher Status…... 2) Refusal Strategies in an Offer to a Collocutor of Equal Status…… 3) Refusal Strategies in an Offer to a Collocutor of Lower Status…... c. Refusal Strategies in Suggestions ...……… 1) Refusal Strategies in a Suggestion to a Collocutor of Higher Status... 2) Refusal Strategies in a Suggestion to a Collocutor of Equal Status... 3) Refusal Strategies in a Suggestion to a Collocutor of Lower Status.... 2. Politeness Strategies in Refusals ………...
a. Politeness Strategies to Decline Invitations ….………... 1) Bald-on-Record Strategy Used in Declining Invitations………... 2) Positive Politeness Strategies Used in Declining Invitations …….. 3) Negative Politeness Strategies Used in Declining Invitations...….. 4). Off Record Strategies Used in Declining Invitations ………. b. Politeness Strategies to Decline Offers ……….
1) Bald-on-Record Strategy in Declining Offers ……….. 2). Positive Politeness Strategies in Declining Offers ……….. 3). Negative Politeness Strategies in Declining Offers …………...…. 4). Off Record Strategies in Declining Offers ………...…………... c. Politeness Strategies to Decline Suggestions ……….…... 1). Bald-On-Record Strategy in Decline Suggestions …………..……. 2). Positive Politeness Strategies in Declining Suggestions ……….… 3). Negative Politeness Strategies in Declining Suggestions ……….... 4). Off-Record Strategies in Declining Suggestions ………... 3. Politeness Strategies in Refusals across Status Levels ………...… a. Politeness Strategies in Declining Invitations across Status Levels...
1). Politeness Strategies in Declining an Invitation to a collocutor of Higher Status………...………... 2).Politeness Strategy in Declining an Invitation a collocutor of Equal Status ……….. 3).Politeness Strategy in Declining an Invitation to collocutor of
Lower Status ………... b. Politeness Strategies in Declining Offers across Status Levels ...…..…..
1). Politeness Strategy in Declining an Offer to Collocutor of Higher Status ……….….. 2). Politeness Strategy in Declining an Offer to Collocutor of Equal Status... 3). Politeness Strategies in Declining an Offer to Collocutor of Lower Status ………... c. Politeness Strategies in Declining Suggestions across Status Levels...
1). Politeness Strategies in Declining a Suggestion to Collocutor of Higher Status ………... 2). Politeness Strategies in Declining a Suggestion to Collocutor of Equal Status ...………... 3). Politeness Strategies in Declining a Suggestion to Collocutor of Lower Status ………... 4. Politeness Strategies in Refusals across Different Genders ………...
xi
b. Politeness Strategies in Declining Offers conducted by Males and Females... c. Politeness Strategies in Declining Suggestions conducted by Males and Females ………... 5. Findings ………... a. Refusal Strategies ………... b. Politeness Strategies ………... c. Politeness Strategies in Refusals across Status Level ………..…... d. Politeness Strategies in Refusals across Different Genders …………... B. Discussion of Findings ………..
1. Refusal Strategies ………. a. Refusal Strategies to Invitations ………... b. Refusal Strategies to Offers ……….…. c. Refusal Strategies to Suggestions ……….….... 2. Politeness Strategies ………...
a. Politeness Strategies to Decline Invitations ………... b. Politeness Strategies to Decline Offers ……….. c. Politeness Strategies to Decline Suggestions ………. 3. Politeness Strategies in Refusals across Status Level ………... a. Politeness Strategies to Decline Invitations across Status Levels ……... b. Politeness Strategies to Decline Offers across Status Levels …………... c. Politeness Strategies to Decline Suggestions across Status Levels …..….. 4. Politeness Strategies in Refusals across Different Genders ………..…..
a. Politeness Strategies in Declining Invitations conducted by Males and Females ... b. Politeness Strategies in Declining Offers conducted by Males and
Females …... c. Politeness Strategies in Declining Suggestions conducted by Males and Females ...
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
xii
4 4 The use of Refusal Strategy in an Offer to a Collocutor of Higher
Status on DTC 4 99
5 5 The use of Refusal Strategy in an Offer to a Collocutor of Equal
Status on DTC 5 103
6 6 The use of Refusal Strategy in an Offer to a Collocutor of Lower
Status on DTC no 6 107
7 7 The use of Refusal Strategy in a Suggestion to a Collocutor of
Equal Status on DTC 7 111
8 8 The use of Refusal Strategies in a Suggestion to a Collocutor of
Equal Status on DTC 8 114
9 9 The use of Refusal Strategy in a Suggestion to a Collocutor of
Lower Status on DTC 9 112
10 10 Politeness Strategies in Declining Invitations across Status
Levels 117
11 11 Politeness Strategies in Declining Offers across Status Levels 146
12 12 Politeness Strategies in Declining Suggestions across Status
Levels 150
13 13 Politeness Strategies in Declining Invitations Conducted by
Males and Females 155
14 14 Politeness Strategies in Declining Offers Conducted by Males
and Females 160
15 15 Politeness Strategies in Declining Suggestions Conducted by
Males and Females 162
xiii
LIST OF CHART
NO NO CHART NAME OF CHART PAGE
1 1 Positive Politeness Strategies Used in Declining Invitations 126 2 2 Negative Politeness Strategies Used in Declining Invitations 128 3 3 Positive Politeness Strategies Used in Declining Offers 133 4 4 Negative Politeness Strategies Used in Declining Offers 135 5 5 Positive Politeness Strategies Used in Declining Suggestions 140
6 6 Negative Politeness Strategies Used in Declining Suggestions
143
7 7 Off-Record Strategies Used in Declining Suggestions 145 8 8 Politeness Strategies in Declining Invitations 172 9 9 Politeness Strategies in Declining Offers 173 10 10 Politeness Strategies in Declining Suggestions 173 11 11 The Use of Politeness Strategies in the Acts of Refusal 174
12 12 Politeness Strategies in Declining Invitations across Status Level
175
13 13 Politeness Strategies in Declining Offers across Status Level 176
14 14 Politeness Strategies in Declining Suggestions across Status Level
177
15 15 Politeness Strategies in Refusal across Status Level 178
16 16 Politeness Strategies in Declining Invitations across Different Genders
179
17 17 Politeness Strategies in Declining Offers across Different Genders
180
18 18 Politeness Strategies in Declining Suggestions across Different Genders
180
xiv
LIST OF APPENDICES
No NAME OF APPENDICES
1 Appendix 1: DCT items in the questionnaire research 2 Appendix 2: Refusal strategies used by the participants
3 Appendix 3: Politeness Strategies in Refusal used by the participants 4 Appendix 4: The Result of questionnaire research
5 Appendix 4: Attending List
xv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Apo apology/regret
Acc acceptance
Ass asking for assurance
Alt statements of alternative
Avo avoidance
Awk expressing awkwardness
BOR Bald on Record
Dis dissuasion
DCT discourse completion task
Exc excuse/explanation
Fil fillers
Fut future acceptance
Gra gratitude
Ina inability
No No directly
NP Negative Politeness
OR Off-Record
Phi statement of philosophy
Prin statement of principle
Pos positive opinion/feeling, and agreement
PP Positive Politeness
Set future acceptance with condition
xvi
xvii
ABSTRACT
MAYA HARTUTI, A Study of Politeness Strategy in Refusal Used by English Teachers in Madiun Regency. Thesis, Surakarta, Post-Graduate Program of Language Study Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta, 2014
The study investigated politeness strategy in refusal conducted by the English teachers in Madiun regency relating to different social status levels and gender. The data were elicited, using discourse completion tasks (DCT), from 38 English teachers, 14 male and 24 female who teach in Junior high schools in Madiun regency. The collected data are analyzed by using Brown and Levinson’s theory of politeness strategy. The refusal strategies were classified based on modified refusal taxonomy by Beebe et al. (1990).
The findings of the research are described in line with the problem statements as follows: first, The English teachers of junior high school in Madiun regency applied two semantic formulae indirect and direct strategies in conjunction to adjunct identified by Beebe
et al. (1990) across three refusals acts (invitations, offers and suggestions). The indirect strategy was the prominent refusal strategy especially in declining offers and suggestions where as the direct strategy was the highest strategy used in declining invitations. The second, the English teachers used all four politeness strategies (BOR, positive politeness
(PP), NP, and OR) of Brown and Levinson (1987) across three refusals acts in more or less the same frequency, except in declining offers they did not use OR strategy. In declining invitations and suggestions, most of the English teachers applied PP strategy and the dominant type was PP 13 Give reasons. The dominant strategy in declining offers was BOR which most of them expressed gratitude. The third, the influence of social distance on politeness strategy used by the English teachers in declining invitations, offers, and suggestions was not significant. The most prevalent strategy in declining three acts of refusals across status levels was PP strategy. PP strategy mostly dominated the refusals to collocutors of equal and lower status but in refusals to collocutors of higher status, most of English teachers used NP strategy. The last, gender differences virtually has no influence on the choices of politeness strategy in three refusals acts across status levels. Both male and female English teachers conducted the same politeness strategies of Brown and Levinson (1987) in declining invitations, offers, and suggestions in more or less the same frequency. They used PP significantly the highest and OR was the least dominant strategy. Females used PP and NP little bit more often than males but males used BOR and OR little bit more often than females.
