IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION AMONG FACEBOOK USERS
THESIS
Submitted as Partial Fulfillment as the Requirements for the Sarjana Degree of English Department Faculty of Letters and Humanities UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya
By:
Veva Desi Nalalia
Reg. Number A73213136
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LETTER AND HUMANITIES
STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY OF SUNAN AMPEL SURABAYA
IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION AMONG FACEBOOK USERS
THESIS
Submitted as Partial Fulfillment as the Requirements for the Sarjana Degree of English Department Faculty of Letters and Humanities UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya
Supervised by:
Dr. Mohammad Kurjum, M. Ag. NIP: 196909251994031002
By:
Veva Desi Nalalia
Reg. Number A73213136
ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LETTER AND HUMANITIES
STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY OF SUNAN AMPEL SURABAYA
2017
xiv
ABSTRACT
Nalalia, V. D. 2017. Identity Construction Among Facebook Users. English Department, Faculty of Arts and Humanities. State Islamic University of Sunan Ampel Surabaya.
The Advisor: Dr. Mohammad Kurjum, M. Pd
Key words: identity construction, stance, style of language
Identity is something unique of someone that can make person different with others. In addition, identity is the most important thing for someone which can indicate who she/he is. Linguistically, identity can be indexed through labels, stance, implicature, style and entire language and varieties. This study is aimed to examine stance and style of Facebook users’ personal identity construction through the language use.
In conducting the study, the researcher applies Bucholz and Hall’s (2005) principle about identity construction with supporting theory from Du Bois (2007) about stance triangle (evaluation, positioning and alignment) and Joss Martin (1967) about style of language. Qualitative Content Analysis is selected in order to identify, classify and describe Facebook users’ utterances. Meanwhile the collecting data are analyzed by observing the activity of Facebook users, then choosing, identifying the utterances, classifying and describing the data and drawing the conclusion.
INTISARI
Nalalia, V. D. 2017. Identity Construction Among Facebook Users. Sastra Inggris, Fakultas Adab dan Humaniora. Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Ampel Surabaya.
Pembimbing: Dr. Mohammad Kurjum, M. Pd
Kata Kunci: pembentukan identitas, cara berpendirian, gaya bahasa
Identitas adalah sesuatu hal unik dari seseorang yang membuat orang tersebut berbeda dengan yang lainnya. Selain itu, identitas merupakan hal terpenting bagi seseorang yang dapat mengindikasikan siapa dia. Secara linguistik, identitas dapat diindeksikan melalui pemberian nama, cara berpendirian, implikatur, gaya dan seluruh bahasa dan macam-macamnya. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji sikap dan gaya pembentukan identitas pribadi pengguna Facebook melalui penggunaan bahasa.
Dalam melakukan penelitian ini, peneliti menerapkan prinsip Bucholz and Hall (2005) tentang konstruksi identitas dengan teori pendukung dari Du Bois (2007) tentang cara berpendirian yang meliputi (evaluasi, penentuan posisi dan keselarasan) dan Martin Joss (tentang gaya bahasa). Analisis Isi Kualitatif dipilih untuk mengidentifikasi, mengklasifikasikan dan menggambarkan ucapan pengguna Facebook. Sedangkan data pengumpulan dianalisis dengan mengamati aktivitas pengguna Facebook, kemudian memilih, mengidentifikasi ujaran, mengklasifikasi dan menggambarkan data dan menarik kesimpulan.
xii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Inside Cover Page……… i
Inside Title Page……….. ii
Declaration Page………. iii
Motto……… iv
Dedication Page……….v
Thesis Advisor’s Approval Page………..vi
Thesis Examiner’s Approval Page………...vii
Acknowledgement………...viii
Table of Contents………. x
List of Appendices……….. xiii
Abstract………... xiv
Intisari……….. xv
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study……… 1
1.2 Research Problems………. 5
1.3 Research Objective………. 6
1.4 Significant of the Study………... 6
1.6 Definition of Key Terms……….7
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 2.1 Theoretical Framework………9
2.1.1 Identity………..9
2.1.2 Framework for Analysis Identity……….11
2.1.3 Stance………...13
2.1.4 Style……….17
2.1.5 Facebook………..22
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD 3.1 Research Design……….24
3.2 Subject of the Study………...25
3.3 Data and Data Source……….25
3.4 Research Instrument………...26
3.5 Technique of Data Collection………26
3.6 Technique of Data Analysis………...28
CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Findings………....32
xii
4.1.2 Style………..45
4.1.2.1 Frozen Style………...46 4.1.2.2 Formal Style………..47 4.1.2.3 Consultative Style……….48
4.1.2.4 Casual Style………..50
4.1.2.5 Intimate Style………....51
4.2 Discussion………...53
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION 5.1 Conclusion………..56
5.2 Suggestion………..58
REFERENCES
LIST OF APPENDICES
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The fundamental concepts on Identity Construction Among Facebook Users are provided in this chapter. Those are background of the study, statement of the problems, objectives of the study, significant of the study, scope and limitation and definition of the key terms.
1.1Background of the study
Language is the most important thing in the daily life. Human needs language not only for unifier the nation, but also for interaction with others. It means that human can build their relationship from their interaction. The way to do interaction is by holding communication. Communication itself is the process of some people who connect each other by using their language. Basically, language is used not only to communicate but also to reflect personality and to construct identity. According to Krotz (2003) individuals do not have identity but they build their identity when they communicate with others. Identity is considered as ability of individual to be him/herself. Meriam-Webster’s Dictionary (2011) defines identity as the set of behavioral or personal characteristic by which an individual is recognizable as a member of a group. Bucholz and Hall (2005) define identity as the social positioning of self or other.
2
field to be investigated in the last few decades (Edward, 2009:15). Some studies of identity construction were ever done by several scholars in different areas: metaphor and symbolism (Dowling, 2011); trust and privacy (Durante, 2011); academic writing (Burke, 2010); women focus group discussion (Mango, 2010); request e-mail (Ho, 2010); communities (Bucholtz and Hall, 2005; Batory, 2010; Karp and Helgo, 2009); and online networking (Larsen, 2008). In Indonesia, identity construction has received many attentions from some researchers. Prihantoro (2012) focused on group identity. He examined the use of pronoun in blog posting. Syahrial (2014) focused on identity of place and Fatmawati (2015) focused on personal identity construction.
In the recent research, there are two researchers that had chosen identity construction in their research. Those are Ma’rifatul Ilmi (2017) who focused on social identity construction and the second one is Nafilaturif’ah (2017) who
focused on personal identity construction. By following Fatmawati (2015) and Nafilaturif’ah (2017), the researcher chooses personal identity construction as
3
(2015), this present study centralizes the analysis by utilizing Bucholz and Halls’ (2005) indexicality principle by investigating the stances and style of
language. Meanwhile Nafilaturif’ah (2017), connects between linguistic features-gender stereotypes and personal identity construction. She also uses indexicality principle-labels to create personal identity. Both of them (Fatmawati and Nafilaturif’ah) utilize the novel as the object in their study.
Dissimilar with both of them, the researcher linked to the social cases in this time. One of the ways is observingthe surrounding of the researcher about how the way people create or build their identity. With that social case which connects with people in the real life, that is easy way to get the data. Unlike those previous studies, this present study combines both of style and stance to build personal identity. The researcher analyzes about both of them because there is a relation which shown that style is a part of stance. In addition, if they (Fatmawati and Nafilaturif’ah) take one of the characters (major or minor
character) from the novel in their research, the researcher intends to take this neglected genre by studying personal identity construction in social networking. One of the social networking sites that has important roles in communication is Facebook. Hence, the researcher takes people in Facebook as the object of this research.
4
process of constructing identity through Facebook profile and profile picture. From those previous studies, this present study investigates from the other side. The researcher focuses on how Facebook users create their expression and create their identity through style of the language.
Facebook users are chosen as the object of this research because of some reasons. Firstly, the researcher is an active user in Facebook. It makes possible to get the data. Secondly, there are so many friends who have different characteristics. Thus, the researcher analyzes not only one user but also some users in different characteristics to know what the best way of each person in showing him/herself in Facebook is, in the other word, to investigate how people constructhim/her identity on Facebook. The selection of the subject in this research basically refers to the researcher’s friends who have relation in daily life of the researcher, such as in university, at home, school, etc. Actually, the researcher chooses some Facebook users with different status (college students and non-college students). Normally, they are the Facebook users who have university lecture revolve between nineteen years old up to twenty-three years old. Adolescent is chosen because the researcher defines that adolescent is the greatest number of Facebook users. This present study is also only taken from status updates of Facebook users by being randomly chosen in 2016.
5
stances, implicatures, styles and entire language and varieties. However, the researcher limits this study on stance and style of language on Facebook users’ personal identity construction as explained previously. The limitation is not the weakness of this study but it gives the researcher great opportunities to deeply analyze about stance and style. The researcher utilizes Du Bois’s (2007) theory about stance. Stance is the individual’s expression of someone
which includes personal feelings, judgement or assessment concerning proposed information. He stated that there are three types of stance, they are evaluation, positioning (epistemic and affective) and alignment. The researcher also uses Martin Joss (1967) theory about style of language that can be divided into five types: frozen style, formal style, consultative style, casual style and intimate style.
Based on the explanation above, the researcher intends to study Facebook users’ personal identity construction by applying Bucholz and Hall’s principle
with supporting theories about stance (e.g. Du Bois, 2007) and style of language (e.g. Martin, 1967).
1.2Statement of the problems
Referring to the background of the research, this study is conducted to answer the problems formulated in the following questions:
a. What are the stances used by Facebook users in their status updates? b. What are the styles used by Facebook users to construct their personal
6
1.3Objectives of the research
Based on the statement of the problems described above, the objectives of the study are pointed:
a. To know the stances which are used by Facebook users in their status updates.
b. To know the types of language styles used by Facebook users which can represent their personal identity.
1.4Significant of the study
This research is hoped to be completely useful for either the researcher or the reader. In another matter, this study is proposed for giving both theoretical and practical contributions. Theoretically, this research is hoped to give the information for language learners in sociolinguistics field to improve their knowledge about personal identity construction in term of the stance and the use of style, so as to other researchers can develop this case better later.
Moreover, this research is practically expected to bring some evidences that personal identity establishes our existence in society. In other word, personal identity construction can influence every single person’s position in
7
1.5Scope and limitation
Over all, the scope for this study basically, focuses on the construction of personal identity of Facebook users. The subject here is Facebook users who are exactly the researcher’s friends in the social medium (Facebook). They include 3 accounts of collegian and 3 accounts of non-collegian. The data is taken from the status updates of each account in 2016 and it is randomly chosen.
The researcher applies Bucholz and Hall’s indexical principle for
analyzing identity. Based on indexical principle, linguistically identity constructions include labels, stances, implicatures, styles and entire language and varieties. The limitation for this study is that it only focusses on stances and styles. The researcher also applies Du Bois theory (2007) about stance and Martin Joss’ (1967) explanation about language style. The limitation is
planned to make the researcher only focuses on the linguistics unit and language use in investigating Facebook users’ personal identity construction.
1.6Definition of the key terms
Identity is something unique of someone that we regard more or less constant (and hence the same) over time. (Buckingham: 2008)
8
Construction identity is the building of the characteristic of people to that involves life experience, relationships and connection, a solid mental or emotional stamp on a human. (Dowling: 2011)
Personal identity construction is the way an individual builds his/her identity which can make him/her be unique in society. (Goffman in Clarke, 2008: 513).
Stance is an expression of person in their relationship to the others that they talk and an expression of person in their relationship to their interlocutor. (Kiesling: 2009)
Style is the way of people to express their idea with the special language which can show the writer’s soul, spirit and concern. (Keraf: 1991)
9
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This chapter briefly contains some related theories and related studies which can support this study.
2.1Theoretical Framework
In this part, the researcher reviews some theories on the personal identity construction which are related to the statement of the problems. All of the theories are used to assist in answering the research problems. Thus, this chapter presents several theories dealing with the issues analyzed in this study. These theories consist of the definition of identity, framework for analysis identity, explanation of stance, style’s explanation and explanation of Facebook.
2.1.1 Identity
Buckingham (2008) stated that identity is something unique of someone that we regard more or less constant (and hence the same) over time. It means that identity is something that can make a person different with others. Identity is the most important thing for someone which can indicate who she/he is. By having identity, people can know each other who they are. In other word, identity as a symbol of someone that can define who someone is like.
10
an object (Rosenberg, 1986). Identity also can define as the part of self by which are known to other (Altheid, 2000). Actually, the term
“self” and “self-concept” differ. Self refers to the process of
reflexivity which is originated from the dialectic the “I” and “Me”. Self is reflexive phenomenon that develops in social interaction and it is based on the social character of human language while self-concept becomes the product of this reflexive activity. It is the concept which individual has for himself as a physical, social and spiritual or moral being (Gecas, 1982). Demo (1992) also states that self-concept is susceptible to change as the individual encounters new roles, situations and life transitions. Related to the Goffman’s stigma in Clarke (2008), identity is classified into three types:
a. Personal identity construction: the uniqueness of person’s
biography which differentiates person to other.
b. Ego identity construction: the subjective sense of who we are and how we are exist in the world.
c. Social identity construction: the classification or characteristics that person is considering to influence in relation to the others. Based on the explanation above, the researcher examines deeply about personal identity construction because that is a small unit of the human’s characteristic that exist in the several phenomena in the
11
2.1.2 Framework for analysis identity
Meriam Webster dictionary defines that identity is the distinguishing character or personality of individual with other individual. Identities are the traits and characteristics, social relations, roles and social group memberships that defines who one is (Leary and Tangrey, 2012). The construction of identity has been explored and used broadly in various social science disciplines and is defined in different ways (Varelas, 2012). Constructing identity is different from
constructing self. “In general, the self-concept is the set of meanings
we hold for ourselves when we look at ourselves. It is based on our observations of ourselves, our inferences about who we are, based on how others act toward us, our wishes and desires and our evaluations of ourselves” (Stets & Burke, 2002, p.130). However, identities are
parts of self that are defined by the different position we hold in different society.
Constructing identity literally involves life experience, relationships and connection, a solid mental or emotional stamp on a human (Dowling, 2011). Constructing identity also involves symbolical representation of thought and feeling in an expressive way. Through the act, people simultaneously produce, create and construct
their identity. Bucholz and Hall’s (2005) also explain that identity
12
1. The emergence principle: the view of someone which is related to the individual thought by the language use that reflects
individual’s internal state. It suggests that identity is a discursive
construct that emerges in interaction.
2. The positionality principle: the correlation of individual’s social
behavior with macro identity categories such as age, gender and social class. It expands traditional views of identity that include macro-level demographic categories, local and cultural position. 3. The indexicality principle: the mechanism of how identity is
constructed based on linguistic forms that are used which the meaning depends on interactional context. It explains the types of linguistic resource whereby people indexically position self and other in discourse.
4. The relationality principle: identity as relational phenomenon which attaches with how an individual acquire social meaning in relation to the other individual and take the simple identity relations as in each view either sameness or differences.
5. The partialness principle: identity of relation which is created partially by self and others through contextual situation. It considers the limits and constraints on individual intentionally in the process of identity construction.
13
principle is chosen because the researcher aims to explore the constructing identity through language use that people used. Linguistically, identity construction is indexed through labels, stances, implicatures, styles and entire language and varieties. However, the researcher only used stances and styles in conducting the research.
2.1.3 Stance
Kiesling (2009) argues that stance as an expression of person in their relationship to the others that they talk (epistemic stance) and an expression of person in their relationship to their interlocutors (their interpersonal stance). Stance also can define as a public act by a social actor, achieved dialogically through overt communicative means, of simultaneously evaluating objects, positioning subjects (self and others), and alignment with other subjects, with respect to any silent dimension of the socio-cultural field (Du Bois, 2007). Chindamo (2012) also argues that stance is the reaction of someone to one another’s multimodal positioning when they have interaction in face
to face communication.
Stance can be defined as an individual’s expression of someone or
one’s personal viewpoint which includes personal feelings, attitudes,
14
a. Evaluation: is the process where stance taker (speaker) evaluates an object of stance and classifies it into some specific qualities or values. For example, “You are beautiful”, “You are handsome”,
“You are ugly” that are taken from different utterances, the stance
predicates beautiful, handsome, and ugly refer to evaluate something. The thing evaluated refers to the pronoun “You” while the evaluative target can be called the stance object.
b. Positioning: the act of situation of social actor with respect to responsibility for stance and for invoking socio cultural value. In addition, stance taker positions a subject (usually the self and others). Positioning can divide into two types:
1. Affective positioning (presupposition)
Affective positioning is related to emotional feelings about the object of discourse. Affective stance refers to a mood, attitude, feeling and disposition, as well as degrees of emotional intensify (Ochs, 1996). Affective positioning can be identified by looking at the kinds of lexical features of Facebook users’ affective stance. They are nouns, verbs and
adjectives. The lexical features are categorized as follow: • Nouns: love, state, sadness, sympathy.
15
2. Epistemic positioning (speaker’s degree of commitment to
a presupposition).
Epistemic positioning is related to the degree of certainty concerning the object of discussion (e.g. the certainty or uncertainty shown while answering the question). Epistemic stance refers to knowledge or belief (Georgalou, 2016). Lexical features of Facebook users’ epistemic stance include
noun, verb, adjective, adverb, conjunction, modal, preposition and pronoun. The detail explanation can be seen in the following below:
• Noun: reason
• Verb:
- Expressing certainty: know, realize, say, understand, see, tell, believe, find, happen, notice
- Expressing uncertainty: doubt, think, suggest • Adjective:
- Expressing certainty: sure, possible, familiar, necessary - Expressing uncertainty: impossible
• Adverb:
- Expressing certainty: really, exactly, of course, in fact, always, completely, obviously
16
• Modal: may, can, will, might, could, would, must
• Preposition: according to, rumor has it
• Pronoun: all, everyone, anyone, no one
c. Alignment: the act of calibrating the relationship between two stances and by implication between two stance takers (aligning with other subjects). Stance alignment can be relatively positive or negative pole. Alignment is in play whether the direction is convergent, divergent or perhaps happens ambiguous between the two participants. Thus, two participants must understand the alignment process when they converge or diverge to vary degrees. Alignment consists of alignment and disalignment. Facebook users take alignment via imitation, feedback, and agreement. Meanwhile for disalignment, they take the stance via changing the topic, disagreement and refusal.
In sum, we can informally gloss that explanation as follows: “I
evaluate something, and thereby position myself, and thereby align with you” (Du Bois, 2007). The three acts above are known as Stance
17
Figure 1. The Stance Triangle
The three angle of stance triangle above represent the three keys information in the stance act. They are named the first subject, the second subject and the stance object. The first subject and the second subject are known as stance taker (the speaker/the writer) while the object is something that they are talking about. The stance triangle comprises the three acts of evaluating, positioning and aligning. The first evaluative vector originates from the first subject and the second evaluative originates from the second subject. The third sides of triangle represent alignment between two subjects. Thus, concomitant to evaluate a stance object, stance takers position themselves. Concomitant to position themselves, stance takers define alignment with each other.
2.1.4 Style
Style may be characterized as “manner of expression” (Isaac,
18
to express their idea with the special language which can show the writer’s soul, spirit and concern. It is the way of people to convey
their expression through language that they used. It is also clear that style is usually evaluative and as a choice entails a conscious selection of particular linguistic features from the available repertoire.
Kiesling (2009) also argues that styles are originated from social group. It happens where the solidarity among participants influence our speech style. Many factors may contribute in solidarity between people which include relative age, sex, social roles, whether people work together, or are part of the same family, and so on (Holmes, 1992). Most people use language differently to the very young and the very old. We can speak very formally or very informally, our choice is governed by circumstance (Wardhaugh, 2006). Actually, people have own style. Martin Joss (1967) in his book “The Five Clocks” classified language style into five types.Those are frozen style, formal style, consultative style, casual style and intimate style.
a. Frozen style
19
intonation is somewhat exaggerated, and numerous rhetorical devices are appropriated.
The structure of the sentence is long and complete and also uses grammatical sentence. Because it needs high skills, only educated people use this style, such as professors, specialists, lawyers and preachers. Frozen style usually tends to be monologue, but there are some expressions for this case. It also can be involved in conversation if each member of the interaction has certain of fix verbal role to be played. For example, in court, there are judges, witnesses, juries and so on. The simple example of frozen style sentence: “My beloved parent has just passed to his
20
sentence with good grammatical. Formal style is also symbolized with the word “may”. For example, “May I present Mr. Jimmy?”,
“My dear father has just expired”.
c. Consultative style
Consultative style is a style that is used in semi-formal communication. This style is used among strangers or distant work colleagues, in the other word, people who do not share the same immediate knowledge. This style is actually used in some group discussion, regular conversation at school, companies, trade speech conversation, everyday business transaction, particularly between chance acquaintance, etc. One of the characteristics of consultative style is tendency of average speed, which is higher than formal style. For example information where provides answer to such request in consultative, like: seller-buyer conversation, doctor-patient conversation, and so on. The example for consultative style is: “would you stay in your seats?”, “My father
has just passed away”.
d. Casual style
21
are two characteristics of casual style. Firstly, it is ellipsis (omission) that shows the differences between casual grammar and consultative grammar, for example:
• “I believe that I can find one” (consultative grammar)
“Believe I can find one” (casual grammar)
• “Thank you” (consultative grammar)
“Thanks” (casual grammar)
• “My dad has died”. (casual style)
As the result, sentence structure of casual style becomes incomplete.
Secondly it is slang which is a prime indication of group relationship. People often use slang language where the sentences tend to be shortened and disappearing word. Slang is known as non-standard word and used by certain groups like group of teenagers. For example, in formal language we call young female as “girl” but in slang language it can be call “chick”.
e. Intimate style
22
the other names and nicknames. For the example: “Honey, I’m so
really miss you”, “My old man just kicked the bucket”.
Actually, the choosing of language style can be influenced by some factors, such as the various social, age and other differences that exist between the participants. Thus, it is clear that the use of language style in various types is influenced by the level of formality.
2.1.5 Facebook
With the advent of technology, people have started using internet. This happens due to the increasing of human needs and intelligent. The internet is already the center of mass media (Adhalina, 2011). It becomes the medium that can be accessed almost anywhere. Actually, there are many sites that can be accessed for many people in the world. But one of the social networking sites that can be easy to reach is Facebook. In the other word, Facebook always connects with another social networking.
23
is the one of application that can be connected in the other site such as BBM, Instagram, google account and so on.
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHOD
This chapter presents the method of the research for conducting the study. It is written in several discussions. Those are research design, subject of the study, data and data source, research instruments, technique of data collection, and technique of data analysis.
3.1Research Design
In conducting the study, the researcher used qualitative content analysis design. Qualitative content analysis is the method used to analyzed text data (Hsieh and Shannon, 2005:2). The data that are analyzed can use coding categories which are derived in the text data. Elo and Kyngas (2008) also define that qualitative content analysis is the method that may be used with either qualitative or quantitative data and in inductive or deductive way.
25
The method for collecting qualitative data include observation, participant observation, interviewing, focus groups and case studies. Observation is the systematic observation, recording, description, analysis and interpretation of people’s behavior. This method can be loosely structured or tightly structured
with precise coding methods of behavior patterns.
3.2Subject of the Study
The subject of this study is Facebook users that includes three accounts of college students and three accounts of non-college students. Those six subjects are various incase of background of knowledge. It was applied to know the stance and style in various utterances of Facebook users. The detail of subjects in this study are explaining in the appendix.
3.3Data and Data Source
The data source that analyzed for this study was taken from Facebook users’ status updates. The researcher took 6 accounts of researcher’s friends in
Facebook who include 3 accounts of college students and 3 accounts of non-college students. Status updates taken by the researcher from Facebook users are the status updates in 2016 which was randomly chosen. The data source that researcher took is from screen picture (laptop) or screenshot (from gadget, e.g. Phone) of Facebook users’ status updates.
The data for this research was taken from Facebook users’ utterance in
26
style of language in the status updates are the way of the researcher to know how Facebook users construct their identity.
3.4Research Instruments
Instrument is any device which used to collect the data (Tavakoli, 2012). There are two kinds of instrument that used in this research: human instrument and non-human instrument. The main instrument for this research is human. In other word, the researcher herself becomes an instrument was frequently used to describe the researcher’s significant role in collecting and analyzing the
data (Polit and Hungler, 2004). In addition, the researcher also uses other supporting instruments (non-human instrument) such as laptop, Wi-Fi, Flash disk, pen, book, mobile phone and others to help in the process of collecting the data.
3.5Technique of Data Collection
The details of data collection technique can be illustrated as follows:
1. Observing
Observing is the first activity of the researcher. It means that before collecting and analyze the data, the researcher observes the activity of Facebook users. Observation method is the way to collect data by analyzing an object systematically (Arikunto, 1998). Collecting data was taken based on the phenomena that exist in status updates’ Facebook users
27
researcher can identify the different stance and style that Facebook users used in order to constructing identity.
2. Choosing
After observing some Facebook users, the researcher was choosing 3 accounts for college students and 3 accounts for non-college students with the different educational background of each account of Facebook users in order to know the stance and style that they used to represent their identity in social medium. It was chosen because according to the researcher, the most number of users in Facebook actually is teenager with the average of the age is same with the researcher.
3. Screen shooting
Screen shooting is the next step to collect the data. After choosing Facebook users, the researcher takes documentation with screen shoot or print screen status updates of Facebook user. In addition, the researcher also crops the part which shows the stance and style. Therefore, it is just status updates which contain stance and style in constructing their identity.
4. Selecting the data
28
3.6Technique of Data Analysis
The researcher used the following steps to analyze the data that were sketched in the details below:
1. Identifying the data.
The first step of identifying data is by reading and understanding the status updates of each Facebook user that have been selected as the research sample. Identifying data were done by coding the selected status updates. The coding used abbreviation that indicate what stance that they used or what style that they used in their status updates.
29
underline if needed in analyzing the data. One of the examples can be seen as follow:
Figure 3.1 The example of evaluation stance
- For analyzing style: the researcher used abbreviation Fz for indicating frozen style, Fr for indicating Formal style, Cns for indicating Consultative style, Cs for indicating Casual style, and I for indicating Intimate style.
30
Figure. 3.3 The example of casual style
31
2. Classifying the data
In this step, the researcher determines these status updates based on stance (evaluating, positioning and alignment) and style (frozen, formal, consultative, casual and intimate) that Facebook users used to represent themselves in social medium. Classifying the data can facilitate the researcher to provide the evidences for the reader concerning the kinds of stance and the types of style of language. The classification was sketched in the form of table:
3. Describing and concluding the data.
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter presents the findings obtained from the research and discussion of the result. It deals with the analysis of Facebook users stances and styles.
4.1 Findings
This present study eventually creates the result of analyzing the data. Based on the analysis, the researcher finds linguistic form, stance and style which represent constructing of identity of Facebook users. Stance is divided into three types, those are evaluation, positioning (affective and epistemic) and alignment. Meanwhile, style is divided into five types. Those are frozen, formal, consultative, casual, and intimate style. The researcher has found some utterances of some Facebook users that show indexicality principle through stance and style. The detail of data illustrated as follow:
4.1.1 Stance
In this part, the researcher presents the analysis of Facebook users’
33
(self and others), and alignment with other subjects, with respect to any silent dimension of the socio-cultural field (Du Bois, 2007). There are three types of stance acts. Those are evaluation, positioning (affective and epistemic) and
alignment. The following figure illustrates the findings in term of Facebook users’
stance takings.
Figure 4.1 Facebook users’ stance takings.
In Figure 4.1, it can be seen that positioning stance is the most frequently used. It constitutes 218 utterances or 79%. It consists of two other types of positioning stance, those are affective positioning stance (68 utterances or 25%) and epistemic positioning stance (150 utterances or 54%). Meanwhile evaluation stance is in the middle frequency which constitutes 51 utterances with the percentage 18%. And the stance which often used by Facebook users is alignment. It just constitutes 7 utterances or 3%.
34
The data that had been collected above is divided into two. The first data from college students and the second data from non-college students.
A. College Students:
1. The data from Miko Permana (College student at Indonesian
Naval Academy)
From the data that had been taken in Miko’s utterance in his status
updates, the researcher has found that there are 15 utterances or just 26% of evaluating stance. One of the evaluative stance can be shown from this status updates:
The stance predicate “valuable” is referred to evaluate something.
The thing that evaluated is refer to the pronoun “You”. “You” who
Miko mean is his girlfriend (@shintamwn). He tells about his loving,
his feeling to @shintamwn through the word “valuable”. This word
can symbolize that Miko really loves hers without must to express his
feeling through the sentence “I love you” to the @shintamwn. Based
35
Miko actually more dominant to create his status updates with positioning the stance. Positioning stance which Miko uses divided into two, affective (11 utterances or 19%) and epistemic (32 utterances or 55%). Miko performs affective stance in order to express his feeling and position himself along affective the scale. It can be shown in this example below:
In above utterance, there is affective stance taken by Miko, “I love
you”. There is index personal pronoun “I” as the stance taker which is
followed by affective verb “love” which indicates affective predicate.
It expresses Miko’s feeling that he really loves. And the stance object
in that status refer to pronoun “You”. While epistemic stance, Miko
36
The use of modal “will” in sentence “This story will never end”
indicates Miko’s degree of certainty by prediction in the future. He
assumes that the story never ends. Therefore, modal can be signaled as epistemic stance in analyze the data. From this utterance, it can be shown that Miko is a person with conviction in himself.
2. Dewi Novitasari (College student in Midwifery Academy
Nahdlatul Ulama Surabaya)
From all the utterance in Dewi’s status updates, it found 4
utterance of evaluation stance (13%), 27 utterances of positioning stance (84%) which consist of 9 affective stance utterances (28%) and 18 epistemic stance utterances (56%), and alignment just only 1 utterance or 3%. The data can be defined as follows:
37
The highlight words below index an affective stance. Pronoun
“me” is refer to the stance taker (Dewi Novitasari). The object of
stance is “you” who can refer to everyone that Dewi means. Dewi uses
a noun “love”, with lexical feature “like” to express her affection
feeling. It can show that Dewi is a lover woman.
The sentence “believe in yourself” belongs to epistemic positioning
stance. Epistemic verb “believe” refers to previous sentence which talk
about the choice of life. With the sentence “believe in yourself” Dewi
positioning herself, how to be herself. It shows that Dewi is a believer.
By uttering those sentences, Dewi aligns parable life. This
alignment takes via imitation from Albert Einstein. She supposes “life”
38
3. Damara Alif Pradipta (College Student at Department of Fine Art
State University of Surabaya)
The researcher has found that there are 58 utterances about stance. The most stance which often used by Alif is epistemic positioning stance. There are 29 utterances with percentage 50%. Almost a half of the percentage Alif uses epistemic positioning stance in his status
updates. One of the example of Alif’s epistemic positioning stance can
be defined as follows:
Based on the utterance above, Alif shows epistemic stance by
uttering “I see clearer”. He expresses his degree of certainty that he can
39
From Alif’s status updates above, the evaluation stance can be seen
from the sentence “My Cat was a war veteran”. He shown his cat to
the public as a war veteran. A war veteran evaluates Alif’s cat. He uses
pronoun “Mycat” in order to tell that the cat is belongs to Alif.
Affective positioning stance also found in Alif status updates, it is about 12 utterances or it is 21% of percentage. Affective positioning stance in that utterance shown by the lexical feature “afraid”. And the stance rarely used by Alif in his utterances is alignment. It just 10% of percentage or just found 6 utterances in his status updates. From some
utterances of Alif’s status updates, it can show that Alif is a person
who has self-reliant in himself.
B. Non-College Student
1. Resvicha Leonita Maharaniy (works at flight attendant in Batik
Air Indonesian)
Epistemic stance that was found in Vicha’s utterance in her status
updates are about 31 utterances or about 60%. It is the most frequently
stance that Vicha’s used in her status updates. The example of
40
In that utterance above, Vicha show her trust to the God. She is a
believer. She believes that God “Allah” will always beside “you”.
“You” which Vicha means is for someone that she loves. The word
“believe” is belong to epistemic stance. Other than epistemic
positioning stance, Vicha also often uses affective positioning stance in her status updates. It can be shown by this utterance:
This utterance shows about Vicha’s feeling, how she positioning
herself when she was a sick. It can be called that Vicha is a stiff
woman. Although she was a sick, but she always did her work “on
duty”. It is also referred to Vicha’s mood by showing emoticon like
printed on sentence above. She shows that actually she was very tired. But she still positioned herself that she is a great worker. Affective
positioning stance which found in Vicha’s status updates are 14
utterances or 27%. Another example is from evaluation stance which
41
“The mirror is a good friend”. It is the expression of Resvicha in
her status update. The predicate “good friend” is evaluate something.
Something that Vicha mean is refer to the “Mirror”. The reason of
Vicha’s statement that “mirror is a good friend” is because when Vicha
is crying, mirror is never laugh. It is a satire for other people in Facebook who often laugh at her when she was in a sad or worse condition. From that sentence can be defined that Vicha is a strong woman. The percentage of evaluation stance in Vicha’s utterance is 13% or just 7 utterances.
2. Ersa Marditicha (College Student at Private University of Wijaya
Putra Surabaya)
In Echa’s status updates, she uses the word “Smile” to evaluate
42
can express our feeling (happiness) through our smile. It can be shown that Echa is a strong woman.
From the whole of Echa’s utterance in her status updates,
evaluation stance which found are 7 utterances or 15%. Positioning
stance is the most frequent of Ersa’s utterance in her status updates. It
is about 85% of 39 utterances. It consists of affective positioning stance (15 utterance or 33%) and epistemic positioning stance (24 utterances or 52%) but from the all status updates of Ersa Marditicha, there is no found alignment stance. The example data of positioning stance can be shown by screenshot below:
3. Yefrita Maharani (A housewife and she works at PT Intie Tehnik
Pompa as a staff purchasing)
Based on the investigation to Yefrita’s utterances about style, it
43
In that utterance shows that Yefrita is a doordie. She was promoting one of the company which needed an employee. The
predicate stance that Yefrita state: “a company that serves a variety of
44
The utterance above symbolized degree or Yefrita certainty about object discussion. It is mean that she sure to the man who can make her world to be happy. The frequency of epistemic positioning stance in
Yefrita’ utterance are 16 times or 54% of the percentage.
As a result, Facebook users successfully found their own community and becomes their spiritual leader because of their tendency to position themselves along epistemic scale certainty. In
sum, Facebook users’ evaluative stance object covers people, things
and social phenomena. Their evaluations consist of positive and negative value. It depends on their viewpoint toward the object.
Facebook users’ positioning stance covers subject to self/other.
Positioning stance are divided into two, the first is affective positioning stance which showing emotional feelings about object that refers to a mood, attitude, and feeling. While the second is epistemic positioning stance which express degree/certainty to object discussion.
And the last stance’s type is alignment which alignment with other
45
From the findings above about stance which found in some utterances in status updates of Facebook users, Facebook users construct their personal identity through stance taking by evaluating the object, positioning themselves along affective scale or epistemic stance and alignment with his interlocutor. The researcher concludes that both of college students and non-college students actually more use positioning stance. From 276 utterances, the researcher has found that there are 51 utterances (18%) which show evaluation stance, just 7 utterances for alignment (3%), and the most frequency of positioning stance, it is about 218 utterances with percentage 79% which consist of affective positioning stance (68 utterances or 25%) and epistemic positioning stance (150 utterances or 54%).
4.1.2 Style
Keraf (1991) stated that language style is the way of the people to express
their idea with the special language which can show the writer’s soul, spirit and
46
Figure 4.2 Style of Language
In Figure 4.2, it can be seen the percentage of Style of language that used by Facebook users. Style of language itself has many types. Those are frozen style, formal style, constitutive style, casual style and intimate style. From the diagram above, the percentage of frozen style is 6% it constitutes 16 utterances, formal style 18% or 50 utterances, consultative 9% or 25 utterances, casual style 38% or 105 utterances and intimate style is 29% or 80 utterances.
4.1.2.1 Frozen style
47
which include to the frozen style. The examples of the data that showing frozen style is illustrated as followed:
Frozen style in the military world:
The word which related to the military world can be classified to the frozen style. It is usually used by people who works in the military field such as a commander, lieutenant, sergeant, etc. From this style, people can identify as an army or navy, because not many people know about this language. It is also can be defined as register. Not only used in military field, but frozen style also can be found at the religious
proselytizing man’s speech.
4.1.2.2 Formal Style
Formal style is a style which use in formal condition. Formal style is usually used in speech, student books, newspaper, and discussion in the classroom. The characteristics of this style are its careful and standard
speech, low tempo speech. Formal style which found in Facebook users’
48
In the status above, can be seen that Alif uses a formal language to share his argument about religion. In that utterance, looks that Alif is religious man. He uses careful word with the grammatical pattern. That sentence was also seriously impressed. So, it is can be categorized that this utterance belongs to formal style.
4.1.2.3 Consultative Style
49
The data which takes from Resvicha utterance in her status updates shown consultative style. It can be seen from the content of the information that she was shares on Facebook. The information contains about job vacancy that needed by Emirates Airlines. There is a description about salary and some requirements of the register. It is included the promotion of Emirates Airlines that Vicha share on Facebook. the
language that Vicha’s used is include a consultative style because there is
50
has found 25 utterances or 9% of the percentage that including to consultative style.
4.1.2.4 Casual Style
Basically, casual style is used in informal situation for example the conversation between friends and family. It is usually applied in daily conversation, in relaxed situation that appropriate to the conversation with our friends such as when they have a picnic or sport, etc. Casual style is the most style that often used by Facebook users. Not only Facebook users, but also people in daily activities more often use this style because this style easy to pronounced and get a great role in daily life. The choice of casual style also influenced by the environment. As the examples, the researcher showing some of data covered under this:
Ersa’s utterances in her status updates shows the colloquial words.
There are ellipsis (omission) that shown in the word “We’re” which
originated from the word “We are”, the word “I can’t” with originate from
the word “I cannot”, the word “I’ll never” from the originated “I will
never” and the word “I’m” it’s from the originated word “I am”. This style
51
the status updates. It is about 38% of the percentage or exactly 105 utterances.
4.1.2.5 Intimate Style
Intimate style is the completely private language used within family and very close friends. Normally, intimate style is used in pair. It is not public assumption, means that intimate style has private vocabularies with the addressee. The word that generally signal intimacy such as
“dear”, “darling” and even “honey” or in the other names and nicknames.
Although is not a public assumption, but some Facebook users instead using this style in order to share their feeling to their pair. There are 80
utterances of Facebook user’s intimate style or 29%. It can be the most
frequency also after casual style. The data can be seen from some utterances that they share on Facebook. One of the example can be seen as follows:
52
Miko profile. Intimate style can be seen from the word “dear my love”. In addition, the intimate style can be identified through the words of love or through the person tagged in the status updates.
53
In figure 4.3 above, each type of Facebook users’ Style of
Language is drawn. Casual style is the biggest frequency among all types. It is portrayed for 105 utterances or 38%. On the contrary, frozen style
The result of the present study implies that Facebook users’ stance taking
index their personal identity construction and style attached to Facebook users’ manner expression. Facebook users take the stance in order to position themselves among others. Meanwhile styles attached to the way of Facebook users to express their expression.
Regarding the three kinds of stance, Facebook users’ epistemic positioning stance achieves the highest frequently used (150 times or 54%). It is followed by affective positioning stance (68 times or 25%), evaluation stance (51 times or 18%) and alignment (7 times or 3%). The relation between stance and identity construction relies on its functions in displaying subjectivity which Du Bois (2007) defines as relation between stance taker and the object of stance and
intersubjectivity (e.g. evaluation and positioning), the relation between one actor’s
subjectivity and another’s (e.g. alignment). Facebook users construct their
54
him/herself along affective scale or epistemic scale, and aligning with his/her interlocutor.
Based on the findings, Facebook users evaluate people, things and social issues. Their evaluations consist of positive and negative value depend on their view toward the object. Facebook users perform affective positioning stance in order to express his feeling and position themselves along the affective scale. The use of affective predicate is varied including noun, verb, adjective and adverb
(Biber as cited in Chindamo et al, 2012). The object of Facebook users’ stance
includes the things and people. Facebook users perform epistemic positioning stance in order to degree or certainty to object discussion and positioning themselves along the epistemic scale. The use of epistemic predicate is varied including noun, verb, adjective, adverb, conjunction, modal, preposition, and pronoun. Facebook users calibrates his relation to their interlocutor by taking alignment and dis-alignment. Facebook users take alignment stance via imitation, feedback and agreement. Meanwhile dis-alignment, they take the stance by changing the topic, dis-agreement or refusal.
According to data that are founded, the dominant type of language style in
Facebook users’ utterances in their status updates is casual style. From the
55
percentage 6% (16). The casual style mostly appears and used in the Facebook
users’ status updates. The researcher begins to answer the second research
question which is formulated as following question: “What the dominant style are used by Facebook users to construct their personal identity in Facebook?”.
Based on Martin Joss theory about language style, there are five kinds of language style. The first is frozen style which the characteristic of the sentences is very formal situation. The sentences are complicatedly related this style requires high skill. The second style is formal which used in formal situation where there is the least amount or shared background knowledge. The characteristic of this style is standard form with low intonation, and present in the important information. The third style is consultative style which sometimes combines the formal and informal language. It takes place in business transaction or daily life. The fourth style is casual style. It is the most commonly used in the numerous of
Facebook users’ utterances. This style occurs in an informal situation and
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This chapter outlines the conclusion of the analysis. The conclusion consists of the findings that deal with the answering the research question. It also presents the recommendation for the other researcher in order to analyze the study related to this field.
5.1 Conclusion
Buckingham (2008) stated that identity is something unique of someone that we regard is more or less constant (and hence the same) over time. Meanwhile personal identity is the characteristic and social position belonging to a particular person which make that person different with other. Bucholz and Hall explain that identity construction was proposed a mechanism which used to construct identity that can called indexicality principle. Indexicality principle can be indexed through labels, implicature, stance, style and entire languages and varieties. Based on the analysis, the researcher conclude that stance and style has a relation. In addition, that style is a part of stance.
57
The evaluative stance covers people, things and social issues. It consists of either positive or negative value depend on Facebook users view on the object. the positioning stance is divided into two, affective and epistemic. Facebook users perform affective positioning stance in order to express his feeling and position themselves along the affective scale. The use of affective predicate is varied including noun, verb, adjective and adverb. Facebook users perform epistemic positioning stance in order to degree or certainty to object discussion and positioning themselves along the epistemic scale. The use of epistemic predicate is varied including noun, verb, adjective, adverb, conjunction, modal, preposition, and pronoun. The alignment stance is divided into two, they are alignment and dis-alignment. Facebook users take alignment stance via imitation, feedback and agreement. Meanwhile dis-alignment, they take the stance by changing the topic, dis-agreement or refusal.
Based on the analysis for the second research question, the researcher has found five types of style of language. The dominant type of language style in
Facebook users’ utterances in their status updates is casual style. From the
analysis, the casual style is founded 105 utterances or 38%. Whereas intimate style is the second frequency with the percentage 29% (80). In the middle frequency, the researcher has found formal style with the percentage 18% (50). Consultative style becomes the fourth level of frequency with the percentage 9% (25). And the last frequency is frozen style with the percentage 6% (16).
58
very formal situation. The sentences are complicatedly related this style requires high skill. The second style is formal which used in formal situation where there is the least amount or shared background knowledge. The characteristic of this style is standard form with low intonation, and present in the important information. The third style is consultative style which sometimes combines the formal and informal language. It takes place in business transaction or daily life. The fourth style is casual style. It is the most commonly used in the numerous of
Facebook users’ utterances. This style occurs in an informal situation and
occurred between friends or family. And the last style is intimate style which commonly used by people who have close relationship and known well each other such as in conversation between father and daughter, husband and wife and the couple. Basically, the choice of language style not only can be influenced by some factors, such us age, gender, and sex but also by background of knowledge each account of Facebook users.
In conclusion, Facebook users construct their personal identity by taking stance to evaluate the object, positioning either affective or epistemic scale and alignment with their interlocutor. Facebook users also construct their personal identity by using some of style that occurs in their utterances of status updates.
5.2 Suggestion
This present study concentrates the analysis on the use of stance and style
of language to analyze Facebook users’ identity construction. Stance and style are
59
REFERENCES
Adhalina, N. 2011. The Different Language Style and Language Function Between Students and Teachers in Updating Their Status in Facebook
Webpage. (A Case Study of the Topic National Final Examination 2011).
Published Undergraduate Thesis, Faculty of Humanities Diponegoro University, Semarang.
Altheide, D. L. 2000. Identity and the definition of the situation in a mass-mediated context. Symbolic Interaction, 23 (1), 1-27.
Batory, A. M. 2010. Dialogicality and The Construction of Identity. International Journal for Dialogical Science, 4 (1): 45-66.
Bois, J. W. 2007. The Stance Triangle. In R. Englebretson, Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K. 2005. Identity and interaction: a sociocultural linguistic
approach. Discourse Studies, 7 (4–5): 585–614.
Buckingham, D. 2008. Introducing Identity. Youth, Identity and Digital Media.
Institute of Education, University of London, Centre for the Study of
Children, Youth and Media.
Burke, S. B. 2010. The Construction of Writer Identity in the Academic Writing of Korean ESL Students: A Qualitative Study of Six Korean Students in the
US. Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Chindamo, et al. 2012. Some Suggestion for the Study of Stance in Communication.
SCCIILL Interdisciplinary Center, Dept of Applied IT name University of
Gothenburg Goteborg, Sweden.
Demo, D. H. 1992. The Self-Concept Over Time: Research Issues and Directions.
Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 18, pp. 303-326. Department of Human
Development and Family Studies, University of Missouri Columbia,
Columbia, Missouri 65211.
Dobrowsky, D. 2012. Construction identity on social networks. An analysis on competences of communication constituted on Facebook.com. Central
European Journal of Communication, 1: 91-103. Doucet, A., & Mauthner, N. S. 2005. Feminist Methodologies and Epistemology.
Dowling, S. J. 2011. Constructing Identity Identity Construction. Art and Design Theses. Georgia State University.
(http://scholarworks.gsu.edu/art_design_theses/88)
Du Bois, J. W. 2007. The Stance Triangle. In Englebretson, R. Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
John Benjamin Publishing Company.
Durante, M. 2011. The Online Construction of Personal Identity through Trust and Privacy. University of Torino, Law School, via s. Ottavio 20, Torino 10124,
Italy.
Edward, J. 2009. Language and Identity. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Elo, S. & Kyngas, H. 2008. The Qualitative Content Analysis Process. Journal of Advanced Nursing 62 (1), 107-115.
Fatmawati. 2015. Mikhail’s Personal Identity Construction in Paulo Coelho’s the Zahir. Published Undergraduate Thesis. State Islamic University of Sunan
Ampel Surabaya.
