The Emergence of Tense Atmosphere Due To The Miscalculation of The Weightiness of The FTA in 'Prison Break' Season 1 and 2.

(1)

Maranatha Christian University

ABSTRACT

Dalam tugas akhir ini, saya menganalisis salah perhitungan bobot FTA

(Face Threatening Act) dalam penggunaan strategi kesantunan yang menimbulkan

terjadinya ketegangan suasana dalam percakapan. Data yang saya gunakan

diambil dari film seri berjudul Prison Break.

Teori kesantunan termasuk dalam teori Pragmatik. FTA (Face

Threatening Act) adalah tindakan mengancam muka. Salah perhitungan bobot

FTA dapat berakibat pada terjadinya ketegangan suasana dalam percakapan. Ada

empat strategi kesantunan yang harus diperhatikan penutur dalam berkomunikasi

dengan mitra tutur untuk meminimalisasi FTA. Sebelum menggunakan salah satu

dari empat strategi tersebut, penutur harus mengenal dan mempertimbangkan

Weightiness of the FTA (bobot FTA) yang berdasar pada tiga parameter, yaitu

Power (kuasa), Distance (jarak), Rate of Imposition (tingkat imposisi). Setelah

mengetahui parameter yang digunakan dalam perhitungan bobot FTA, penutur

baru dapat menentukan jenis strategi kesantunan yang sebaiknya diterapkan untuk

menyampaikan maksud atau berkomunikasi dengan mitra tutur.

Dalam data yang diambil dari film seri Prison Break, semua salah

perhitungan FTA tersebut berujung pada terciptanya suasana tegang antara

(2)

Maranatha Christian University penutur yang berbicara dengan nada tinggi seperti sedang marah dan mimik muka

kesal, dan gestur tubuh seperti ingin menampar atau memukul.

Membahas topik ini sangatlah menarik bagi saya karena ada rasa

keingintahuan selama pencarian data dalam film ini. Tidaklah mudah menemukan

data yang tepat karena terkadang saya tidak dapat membedakan antara ketegangan

suasana yang diakibatkan oleh konteks dan ketegangan suasana yang diakibatkan

oleh salah perhitungan bobot FTA. Yang terakhir inilah yang saya bahas dalam

(3)

Maranatha Christian University

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

People are social beings who need to communicate with others in daily

life. The ways we communicate with one another can be seen in our utterances.

By producing an utterance, we are able to show our intention such as to command

someone to do something. An utterance uttered in a polite way will be better

accepted than in a rude way. Therefore, politeness has an important role in a

social relationship interaction.

In order to know the meaning of what is said in an interaction, we have to

look at various factors which relate to social distance or closeness. They typically

involve the relative status of the participants, which is based on social values such

as age and power. For example, speakers who regard themselves to have a lower

status usually will consider themselves to have wide social distance between

themselves and higher status speakers and also with strangers if they use address

forms that include a title and last name. For instance: When communicating with a

(8)

2 Maranatha Christian University Mr. Kennedy, Dr. Cameron, Mrs. Peterson, etcetera. Their purpose for doing that

is actually to respect their status as well as to prevent them from losing their faces.

Face means a self-image of a person that need to be appreciated.

The investigation of that impact is normally carried out by the term of

politeness strategy. It is said by two linguists named Brown and Levinson. They

find that politeness strategy is needed to preserve the stability in the relationship

with others. Politeness, in an interaction, can then be defined as the means

employed to show awareness of another person’s face. (Yule 60). In this sense,

politeness can be used in situations of social distance or closeness. Showing

awareness of another person’s face when that other seems socially distant is often

described in terms of respect or deference. So, in order to avoid the threat to the

addressee’s face, one of the persons needs to apply the appropriate politeness

Weightiness of the FTA. Disturbing one another’s face within an utterance means

threatening someone else’s face. This is known as Face Threatening Act (FTA).

The FTA is expressed by Weightiness (W) based on three parameters: the Rate of

imposition (R), the social Distance (D) between the speaker and the person

addressed, and Power (P). The three parameters are hereby formulated into:

(9)

3 Maranatha Christian University solved by choosing an appropriate politeness strategy. Politeness strategy is

needed to strive for stability in the relationship with others.

My topic belongs to Pragmatics, which means the study of speaker’s

meaning. It is concerned with the utterance produced by speaker and the

interpretation of the utterance by the hearer. And my specific theory is politeness

strategy, which means “the expression of the speakers’ intention to reduce face

threats carried by certain face threatening acts to another.” The motives of

politeness were in the consideration of “face”. Face is viewed as a positive public

self-image of a person. It refers to emotional and social sense of self that everyone

has and expects everyone else to recognize. (Yule 60)

The source of data for my analysis is the miscalculation of utterances in

Prison Break movie series. The series tells about rebellion and complicated life

which occur in prison. It is usually done by the prisoners to the officers or

between prisoners. I decide to take this movie series because it obviously shows

the conversations that lead to the emergence of tense atmosphere. It is because

most of the prisoners miscalculate the appropriate politeness strategy to be applied

in this movie. For instance they often say directly to the officers or to the other

prisoners, which makes them angry. I choose this movie series in order to be able

to find conversations in which the speakers miscalculate the weightiness of the

FTA.

The significance of my study is that it may help the readers will be more

aware of using appropriate politeness strategy in order to avoid the emergence of

tense atmosphere in conversations.

(10)

4 Maranatha Christian University Statement of the Problem

1. What is the speech event of the analyzed scene of the Prison Break

movie series?

2. How does the miscalculation of the Weightiness of the FTA emerge

between the characters in the speech event?

3. How does the miscalculation of the Weightiness of the FTA lead to the

emergence of tense atmosphere in the story?

Purpose of the Study

1. To describe the speech event of the analyzed scene of the Prison Break

movie series.

2. To expose how the miscalculation of the Weightiness of the FTA

emerges between the characters in the speech event.

3. To show how the miscalculation of the Weightiness of the FTA lead to the emergence of tense atmosphere in the story.

Method of Research

In doing this analysis, the first step is I search and try to understand the

general theory of politeness from Pragmatics book and other books source. The

next step is I observe the movie series that contain of miscalculation of the FTA.

Finally, I find Prison Break movie series as my appropriate data. When watching

the series, I find out the utterances which contain miscalculation of the

(11)

5 Maranatha Christian University Organization of the Thesis

This thesis contains four chapters. The first chapter is the Introduction,

which consists of the Background of the Study, Statement of the Problem,

Purpose of the Study, Method of Research, and Organization of the Thesis. The

second chapter is the theories used to analyze the data. The third chapter is the

analysis of the data consists of the discussion of the Weightiness of the FTA.

Finally the last chapter is the conclusion of the analysis. This thesis ends with the

(12)

29 Maranatha Christian University

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCLUSION

In this chapter, I am going to make some conclusions about the

miscalculations of the Weightiness of the FTA which convey to the emergence of

tense atmosphere in Prison Break movie series. After doing my analysis, I find

that most of the speakers in this movie miscalculate the Weightiness of the FTA,

which makes them choose inappropriate politeness strategy. I find that applying

inappropriate politeness strategy in order to show the speaker’s intention during

the conversation will threat the hearer’s face.

Politeness Strategy is included in Pragmatics that involves performing

bald-on-record strategy, positive politeness strategy, negative politeness strategy,

and off-record strategy. Those strategies are used to reduce Face Threatening Act

(FTA).

Based on the data analysis, performing bald-on-record strategy is applied twice

by the speakers in the conversation. This strategy is performed when one is more

powerful than the other in the emergency situation. Most of the speakers choose to

(13)

30 Maranatha Christian University and Distance. They usually use this strategy without being aware of the use of an

identity mark. On the contrary, when it is applied by a speaker to a hearer who is

equal or more powerful, it will threat the hearer’s face. As can be seen in data 3,

when Owen Kravecki asks Trixie uses such direct way several times: First, “Who

is he?”Second, “And how’s he involved in this situation?” Third, “Wait, wait,

wait. You picked the son of the company man to be our patsy. The company

now.” The last, “How about you elaborate on that?” and in data 5, when Nick

Savrinn asks John: “Why don’t you just step back?”, Owen Kravecki and Nick

Savrinn miscalculate the Weightiness of the FTA by using inappropriate

politeness strategy. As a result, these speakers threat the hearers’ faces.

The miscalculation of FTA by using bald-on-record strategy can be solved

by substituting it with a different strategy. Generally, the appropriate strategy to

replace it is negative politeness strategy. If the speakers in data 3 and 5 keep using

bald-on-record strategy, they will make the hearers feel their face threatened

which leads to the emergence of tense atmosphere.

Of the nine data, two show that performing positive politeness strategy is

applied by the speakers. The speakers usually miscalculate the parameters of

Power and Distance in using this strategy. This strategy emphasizes the closeness

between the speaker and the hearer. Besides, this strategy involves the use of

nicknames and shared dialects or slang expressions. As can be seen in data 1,

when Jack says: “Mind if I lamp with you cuzzo?” and “Brother, I’m just

launching” and in data 4, when Jack addresses Bolz by saying: “Avocado”.

(14)

31 Maranatha Christian University be liked, claims the common ground, and seeks agreement. By applying this

strategy, the speakers in these data threaten the hearers’ faces.

The miscalculation of the FTA by using positive politeness strategy in data

1 and 4 can be substituted by negative politeness strategy. If the speakers use

negative politeness strategy to the hearers, it will minimize the imposition

between them. This strategy is appropriate to be used to eliminate the emergence

of tense atmosphere.

Based on the data analysis, negative politeness strategy is performed by

the speakers twice. The speakers usually miscalculate the parameter of Rate of

Imposition in applying this strategy. It is used to be conventionally indirect and to

show hedge. In data 2, Warden applies this strategy by saying: “Governor.

Appreciate you coming. Since our conversation, the situation has escalated.

But, we’re making good progress.” This strategy is also used in data 7, when

Kate says: “Mr.Bellick” to Brad. Both of their utterances show deference.

Generally, negative politeness strategy can be substituted by

bald-on-record strategy and positive politeness strategy. In data 2, negative politeness

strategy is replaced by bald-on-record strategy without omitting negative

politeness strategy. In data 8, negative politeness strategy is not substituted by

bald-on-record strategy but with positive politeness strategy. This is done due to

address someone with an identity marker. If the speakers keep using negative

politeness strategy, it will lead to the emergence of tense atmosphere.

Off-record strategy is applied two times in the data by the speakers. In

performing this strategy, the speakers usually miscalculate the parameter of Rate

(15)

already given orders for all the CO’S, Sir” and in data 8, when Paul says:

“There was a tactical error” and “There was unforeseen circumstances things

that could not be predicted” This strategy indicates hints, metaphor, and

ambiguity.

Off-record strategy is generally replaced by using bald-on-record strategy

as can be seen in data 6 and 8. The speakers in data 6 and 8 try to be polite to the

hearers by using this strategy. They show their intention indirectly because they

feel afraid and do not want to make the hearers angry with them.

Miscalculating the Weightiness of the FTA is often done by the speakers

in this movie because they perform inappropriate politeness strategies to the

hearers. This practice may lead to the emergence of tense atmosphere between the

speakers and the hearers. The emergence of tense atmosphere can be seen from

the response of the hearers after the speakers performing inappropriate politeness

strategy to them. These responses involve the utterances and the gestures of the

FTA that leads to the emergence of tense atmosphere because watching this movie

makes me curious to find the data. It is not easy to find the appropriate data

because sometimes I cannot distinguish between the tense atmosphere that is

caused by a real context and the other, which is caused by the real miscalculation

(16)

33 Maranatha Christian University using different movies as the data, such as comedy movies or tragedy movies. If

researchers choose comedy movies are used, the FTA will lead to the emergence

of humor atmosphere. If researchers choose tragedy movies are used, the FTA

will lead to the emergence of sad or ironic atmosphere.

Words : 1066

(17)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

References:

Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C Levinson. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1987

Thomas, Jenny. Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. London:

Longman Group Limited, 1995.

Yule, George. Pragmatics. London: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Internet Source:

http://www.aresearchguide.com/12biblio.html

Data Source:

Season One Prison Break. Dir. Fred Gerber and Greg Yaitanes. Writ. Paul

Scheuring. Prod. Marty Adelstein, Steve Beers, and Garry A. Brown.

Perf. Dominic Purcell, Wenworth Miller, Robin Tunney, Petter

Stormare, and Amaury Nolasco. Twentieth Century Fox, 2006.

The Continue Second Season Prison Break. Dir. Fred Gerber and Greg Yaitanes.

Writ. Paul Scheuring. Prod. Marty Adelstein, Steve Beers, and Garry A.

Brown. Perf. Dominic Purcell, Wenworth Miller, Robin Tunney, Petter