VARIATIONS OF SPEECH ACT REALIZATIONS IN THE JAKARTA POST READERS’ FORUM.

(1)

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.0Introductory Remarks

This research investigated variations of speech act realized by the contributors to The Jakarta Post readers‟ forum commenting to the topic about a lack of religious

tolerance by using speech act theories. The investigation focused on: 1) categorizing the speech acts found in the readers‟ forum and 2) distinguishing the variations made when a speech act was realized. This chapter will present respectively: background of the research (1.1), statements of problems (1.2), purposes of the research (1.3), research methods (1.4), clarifications of key terms (1.5) and organization of the research (1.6).

1.1Background of The Research

Language is human‟s basic needs of communication. Using the language, a speaker

conveys meaning that is inferred or concluded by a hearer. One of subfield in linguistics – study of language – which concerns on investigating meaning based on context is pragmatics. According to Cipollone et al (1998: 234), context can be divided into four, which are „physical context‟ (related to place, objects and actions); „epistemic context‟ (related to background knowledge); „linguistic context‟ (related to

(4)

means a request for silence. It considers a physical context (library), an epistemic context (the library is a silent place), a linguistic context (the utterance is said sarcastically) and a social context (there is distant relationship between the stranger and the visitors). Thomas (1995: 22) defined pragmatics as „meaning in interaction‟ due to the negotiation among context, speaker and hearer in assigning meaning of utterances. Assigning meaning based on context has a close relationship with performance of „speech acts‟. Considering physical and social contexts are needed to

analyze speech act since meaning is assigned from interaction (among context, speaker and hearer) (Paltridge 2005:60).

In the previous illustration, the stranger was not merely uttering a sort of words but he also performs an act of requesting, in this case requesting the visitor to be silent. Acts that are performed when uttering words are called speech acts. The theory of speech acts was firstly introduced by J.L. Austin (1962). The stranger‟s utterance is an indirect speech act (Searle 1969). It is because the utterance does not contain „performative verb‟ and it meets „felicity conditions‟ of requesting.

(5)

Commisives, Expressives, Declaration). Unfortunately, defining speech act based on rules brings some weaknesses.

Using rules to define speech act seems inappropriate because it tends to be grammatical instead of pragmatic descriptions (Thomas 1995). Aziz (2000) argued that a speech act will not be effective if any reactions do not come from interlocutors. Thus, a corresponding attitude on the part of the hearer is more important than rules to determine successfulness of a speech act performance. Bach and Harnish (1979) paid attention to this important aspect. They theorized speech acts based on the speaker‟s expressed attitudes which form the hearer‟s corresponding attitudes. The corresponding attitudes are derived from hearer‟s inferential process toward the speaker‟s attitudes. The inferential process is comprehensively described in a speech

act schema (SAS). The SAS, as their influential contribution, has made a clear pattern of inference done by the hearer. A product of the SAS used by this research is the taxonomy of communicative illocutionary acts. It is a classification of speech acts which categorizes speech acts into four kinds (Constatives, Directives, Commisives, Acknowledgments). The classification is used to categorize speech acts realized in the readers‟ forum due to its detail and comprehensiveness. Besides, it seems

reasonable to prefer the expressed attitudes-based speech acts theory since the rules-based theory brings lots of weaknesses.

(6)

categorized speech acts on speeches; the former on precedential speeches while the latter on evangelical Christian religious speeches. Unlike the others, Andor (2008) paid attention to investigate the usage factors, structural types of occurrence and functionality of expression “No problem” by way of dictionary-based identifications,

corpus-based investigations and native speaker testing. Nonetheless, all of them took advantages of Bach and Harnish‟s (1979) speech acts classification. Noticeably,

categorizations of speech acts on a readers‟ forum has not found yet. So, this research fills the gap by categorizing speech acts in The Jakarta Post reader‟s forum.

The Jakarta Post has claimed itself as „the largest English newspaper in Indonesia‟ (available at www.thejakartapost.com). The data of this research was

obtained from The Jakarta Post online edition which serves both local and international audiences. Consequently, contributors to the readers‟ forum were

Indonesians (who are not native speakers of English) since the local readers are Indonesians. Besides, the contributors were possibly foreigners who (stay or do not stay in Indonesia) are native speakers of English and interested in events held in Indonesia. Samples of the readers‟ forum were taken narrowly to a topic regarding a lack of religious tolerance. The topic seems a „hot button‟ issue in Indonesia because touching ethnic, race and religious issues (isu SARA) is often highly sensitive. In fact, more than 50 % of the latest 60 titles within the readers‟ forum carried the topic out.

(7)

Henceforth, the realizations of the contributors‟ speech acts showed the functions of the readers‟ forum itself. Specifically, this research examined following problems: 1)

categorizing the speech acts found in The Jakarta Post readers‟ forum 2) distinguishing the variations made when a speech act was realized.

1.2Statements of Problems

The researcher formulated problems in this research into two following questions: 1) What speech acts are found in The Jakarta Post readers‟ forum?

2) What variations are made when a speech act was realized?

1.3Purposes of The Research

This research aims at investigating:

1) speech acts found in The Jakarta Post readers‟ forum; and 2) variations made when a speech act was realized.

1.4 Research Methods

1.4.1 Research Design

This research mainly used descriptive-qualitative methods. According to Vanderstoep and Johnston (2009: 7), a qualitative research relies on text rather than number to describe phenomenon which is studied. The purpose of a qualitative research is descriptive because it aims at describing the research participants‟ point of view

(8)

study. The result of a case study is descriptions and interpretations of the case (Vanderstoep and Johnston 2009:210 and Yin 2003 cited in Creswell 2007:245). The case carried by this research was the realizations of speech act in The Jakarta Post readers‟ forum.

1.4.2 Data Source

Data of this research were a readers‟ forum available at official website of The Jakarta Post (thejakartapost.com). The readers‟ forum contains pages which are contributed by the readers. Each page is labeled by several headings (such as Letter, Comment, Issue and Text Your Say) followed by certain topic to be responded by the readers. Commonly, they respond to articles published by the newspaper beforehand. Otherwise, they are invited to respond a topic announced below the page. The topic chosen by this research is about a lack of religious tolerance.

1.4.3 Data Collection

Six pages of the readers‟ forum were picked out to analyze. The length of the pages‟

publication was between the period of May, 2012 and August 2012. Samples of the readers‟ forum were limited to a topic regarding a lack of religious tolerance. It was

because more than 50 % of the latest 60 titles within the readers‟ forum carried the topic. The picked pages contained comments responding to the following issues: 1) „Adzan with lowered voices‟; 2) No Sunday service for churchgoer; 3) Gramedia

(9)

or else; 5) Raid on Café; and 6) Pig heads hung outside mosque in France. Those issues were appropriately picked out since issues number 1, 3, 6, showed, at a glance, that non-Muslims who have a lack of religious tolerance. On the other hand, issues number 2, 4, 5 showed that Muslims who have a lack of religious tolerance.

1.4.4 Data Analyses

Stages of analyses were divided into two. The first step of analyses was the speech acts analysis. Speech acts realized by the readers‟ forum contributors were categorized in the light of the taxonomy of communicative illocutionary acts proposed by Bach and Harnish (1979). The categorization of speech acts referred to four major categories of communicative illocutionary acts (Constatives, Directives, Commisives and Acknowledgments).

(10)

1.5Clarifications of Key Terms

There are some key terms which are needed to be clarified including:

1) Speech Acts: The notion which explains that language can do a lot instead of giving only meaning from its words or phrases. Furthermore, saying things through language means simultaneously performing actions. It is simply defined to say something is to do something; or in which by or in saying something we are doing something (Austin 1962).

2) Speech Acts Schema (SAS): Bach and Harnish‟s proposal of the schematization of how the hearer making inference of illocutionary force potential within the speaker utterances (Bach and Harnish 1979: xv).

3) A Taxonomy of Communicative Illocutionary Acts: A detailed grouping of illocutionary acts which is categorized in terms of the kind of attitude expressed (Bach and Harnish 1979: xv). It classifies speech acts into four kinds namely Constatives, Directives, Commisives and Acknowledgments.

1.6Organization of The Research

(11)

acts (2.1.3) and review of previous research (2.2). Chapter III explains research methods. It consists of five sub chapters which are research questions (3.1), research design (3.2), data source (3.3), data collection (3.4) and data analyses (3.5). Chapter IV presents findings (4.1) and discussions (4.2). Lastly, Chapter V gives conclusions (5.1) of the research and suggestions (5.2) for the next researcher.

1.7Concluding Remarks

(12)

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODS

3.0. Introductory Remarks

This chapter explains procedures to resolve problems in this research. Therefore, a formulation of problems is presented before others (3.1). It is followed by research design (3.2), data source (3.3), data collection (3.4) and data analyses (3.5).

3.1Formulation of Problems

The problems were formulated in the following questions:

1) What speech acts are found in The Jakarta Post readers‟ forum? 2) What variations are made when a speech act was realized?

3.2Research Design

This research mainly used descriptive-qualitative methods. According to Vanderstoep and Johnston (2009: 7), a qualitative research relies on text rather than number to describe phenomenon which is studied. Berg (2001: 7) asserted that a qualitative research takes advantages of people‟s personal files (like letters, newspaper, diary etc.) to trace unquantifiable facts about them. He claimed that it tends to works in natural settings rather than fully controlled settings. It is line with Woods (2006) who stated that “Qualitative researchers are interested in life as it is lived in real situations”.

The purpose of a qualitative research is descriptive because it aims at describing the research participants‟ point of view thoroughly (Vanderstoep and

(13)

rather than generalization. In fact, however, this research sought for generalization or tendency. It generalized speech act realizations of a part of contributors of a readers‟

forum to represent speech act realizations of the whole contributors of the readers‟ forum. Maxwell (2010: 478) believed that using number in qualitative research allows „internal generalization‟ that is the generalization to a collection of participants

as a whole. Therefore, few quantitative methods are involved here.

The focus of quantitative methods are generalizing a great number of population (Vanderstoep and Johnston (2009: 167). This research focused on categorizing speech acts and variations of each speech acts category found in the readers‟ forum. The categorizing process was equal with „content analyses‟ in a

quantitative research. The content analyses allow this research to set up categories and count occurrences belong to each category (Silverman 2006:20). Thus, the use of simple statistics („quasi statistics‟) is recommended to count simple things. So,

quantitative data complemented qualitative data in terms of giving precise frequency of speech acts occurrences.

(14)

3.3Data Source

Data of this research was taken from The Jakarta Post online edition. Printed edition of the newspaper appeared by the year 1983. It makes the newspaper becoming the largest English newspaper in Indonesia (available at www.thejakartapost.com). Then, it is available on the Web started from June 1994. The online edition is a reaction to developments of technology resulting much socioeconomic impacts (Boczkowski 2004: 4). As a significant progress, going online not only benefits for business, but also benefits the newspaper‟s readers. Due to the unrestricted spaces, more features

are available in the online edition for instance a readers‟ forum.

The readers‟ forum is one of rubrics in The Jakarta Post online edition which is not found in the printed edition. By providing the rubric, the newspaper has kept its products interactive (Manohar 2012). The readers‟ forum contains pages which are

contributed by the readers. Each page is labeled by several headings (such as Letter, Comment, Issue and Text Your Say) followed by certain topic to be responded by the readers. Commonly, they respond to articles published by the newspaper beforehand. Otherwise, they are invited to respond a topic announced below the page. The topic chosen by this research is about a lack of religious tolerance.

Having religious tolerance is needed when living in Indonesia since this country acknowledges five different religions. Majority of Indonesia citizens are Muslims. The rest of them can be Christians (either Protestant or Catholic), Hindus or Buddhists. It can be a serious matter when the majorities‟ group shows superiority

(15)

They commit violence over people who break Islamic laws. Feeling of superior was also shown by proponents of Jakarta governor candidate in the latest Pilkada. They rejected their city to be governed by non-Muslims. Actually, issues regarding a lack of religious tolerance not only appeared in Indonesia. Recently, a film released in America defamed the Muslims‟ prophet. The film triggered anger of the whole

Muslims in the world. Being a worldwide issue, that topic was also carried by The Jakarta Post readers’ forum to be commented.

In fact, more than 50 % of the latest 60 titles within the readers‟ forum carried

the topic about a lack of religious tolerance. Choosing the topic for the data seems interesting because having a talk touching ethnic, race and religious issues (isu SARA) in Indonesia is often highly sensitive. Thus, this research revealed how Indonesians, who are Muslims as majority, view the topic by doing speech act analyses. They were confronted with foreigners who are (commonly) non-Muslims or even Indonesians believing religions other than Islam. Both of them were placed on different sides in „face-threatening situations‟. Thus, politeness motivation in performing certain

speech act was easily identified. At the last, speech acts realized by the readers‟ forum contributors showed the functions of the readers‟ forum itself.

3.4Data Collection

To collect the data, this research did not use special instrument. The data had been available on the web that was The Jakarta Post.com. Thus, this research used an approach namely „web as corpus‟ approach (de Schryver 2002 cited in Muniroh

(16)

manually by using „copy paste‟ procedures to obtain „offline‟ corpus (Muniroh 2011:

58). Therefore, a sort of documents acquired from the web was the data of this research.

Analysis of documents or written texts is one of data collection techniques (Vanderstoep and Johnston 2009: 189). Similarly, Woods (2006) stated that a documentary analysis is one of method in qualitative research. In addition, Alwasilah (2002: 155) mentioned a newspaper as a kind of document data in qualitative research. According to Alwasilah (2002: 156), using document as a data source is affordable and easier to get. The documents (as the data in this research) were six pages of The Jakarta Post readers’ forum under headings of the topic regarding a lack of religious tolerance.

A readers‟ forum was chosen because this research categorized kinds of speech acts. Instead of daily articles (written by the newspaper‟s editorial staffs)

which majorly perform acts of informing, the readers‟ forum contains more various acts since the public who contribute in the readers‟ forum respond certain topic.

According to Muniroh (2011: 58), the data used should be representative and reliable. An effort to make the data representative and reliable can be done by topics limitation.

A technique named „purposive sampling‟ was used to limit the topics.

(17)

characteristics in order to gain equal representation of a group. In contrast, Glassner et al. (1983 cited in Berg 2001: 32) argued that the samples are not collected randomly due to the researchers use their expertise to choose noteworthy samples representing a population. Since this research analyzed speech act realizations in a readers‟ forum, the speech act realized by the readers‟ forum contributors was limited

to a topic regarding a lack of religious tolerance. It was because more than 50 % of the latest 60 titles within the readers‟ forum carried the topic about a lack of religious tolerance.

Among pages inside the readers‟ forum carrying the topic, six pages were picked out to analyze. The length of the pages‟ publication was between period of

May, 2012 and August, 2012. It was the period when some nationwide issues regarding a lack of religious tolerance were spread out, such as proponents of a Jakarta governor candidate in the latest Pilkada who rejected their city to be governed by non-Muslims and a film released in America defaming the Muslims‟ prophet. The picked pages contained comments responding to the following issues: 1) ‘Adzan with lowered voices’; 2) No Sunday service for churchgoer; 3) Gramedia burns books

‘defaming’ Prophet; 4) Saudi warns non Muslims: Respect Ramadhan, or else; 5)

(18)

3.5Data Analyses

As Vanderstoep and Johnston (2009: 185) stated that “… some qualitative studies are

theory driven”, this research fully relied on speech act theories to analyze speech act realized by the readers‟ forum contributors. The first step of analyses was

categorizing kinds of speech act. Since unit of analysis was an utterance, the utterances made by the readers‟ forum contributors were categorized based on the kinds of speech act performed. The categorization of speech acts in this research was in the light of the taxonomy of communicative illocutionary acts proposed by Bach and Harnish (1979). This taxonomy classifies speech acts according to the speaker‟s expressed attitudes that are recognized by the hearer (see R-intend). The expressed attitudes itself are homogeneous with speech acts schema (SAS) that has been discussed in the second chapter. Hence, every illocutionary act listed in the taxonomy respectively is the point identified in the last step of inferential process done by the hearer described in the schema. The categorization of speech act in this research referred to four major categories of communicative illocutionary acts provided in the taxonomy namely Constatives, Directives, Commisives and Acknowledgments. A distribution of kinds of speech act occurrences was displayed in from of table completed with each percentage respectively. Thus, the first research question had been answered.

(19)

Harnish (1979) also specified verbs falling under each subcategory. According to Lazuka (2006), the verbs take a role as clues of interpretation. Therefore, the verbs were used to mark the acts performed by certain variation of speech acts. The verbs were differentiated based on the strength of the speaker‟s intention or desire, for

instance in differentiating the act of „urging‟ and „suggesting‟ within Advisories

variation (Bach and Harnish 1979:40).

„Head acts‟ and „supportive moves‟ of locutions were also analyzed to identify acts performed by certain variation of speech act. A head act is “… that part

of the sequence of (utterances) which might serve to realize (a particular) act independently of other elements; while supportive moves are the elements which can occur either before or after a head act” (Blum Kulka 1989:17 cited in Aziz 2000).

Actually, the supportive moves correspond to illocutionary acts indicating devices (IFIDs) initiated by Searle (1969). In short, variations were made by each category of speech acts were determined by the analysis of expressed attitudes along with investigation of the head act and the supportive moves simultaneously. A distribution of a speech act variations along with the acts performed under the variations was displayed in form of tables. The tabulation was needed in order to present occurrences of the variations precisely with percentage. Thus, the second research question had been answered.

(20)

(21)

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS and SUGGESTIONS

5.0 Introductory Remarks

This last chapter presents conclusions and suggestions based on findings presented in the previous chapter. The conclusions are formerly presented (5.1) while suggestions are presented latter (5.2).

5.1Conclusions

This research investigated variations of speech act realizations in The Jakarta Post readers’ forum. Problems in this research were formulated into two questions which

were: 1) what kinds of speech act found in The Jakarta Post readers’ forum and 2) what variations made when a speech act was realized. The categorization of speech acts was in the light of the taxonomy of communicative illocutionary acts proposed by Bach and Harnish (1979).

(22)

Assentives (4,4 %), Dissentives (4,4 %) and Suggestives (2,3 %). Meanwhile, two variations were made when Acknowledgments was realized, namely Reject (97,3 %) and Congratulate (2,3 %). The last was Directives varying five variations which were Requestives (21%), Questions (10,5%), Requirements (31,5%), Prohibitives (10,5%) and Advisories (26,5%).

From the findings above, the research concludes that the readers’ forum has

been used to serve several functions in accommodating its contributors’ beliefs,

feelings and desires. In the research, the beliefs can be the contributors’ statement of attitude towards a proposal to control acts showing a lack of religious tolerance or a habit of the contributors’ mind that has been held for a long time and still continued.

Another essential function is to accommodate the contributors’ feelings. The feelings of dislike in form of anger and hatred expression towards agents which are considered to cause the less-tolerance acts were dominated the locutions. The last function is to accommodate the contributors’ desires that the hearer(s) do future acts. In the research, the acts were commonly orders for the hearer(s)’ change their behavior to

have religious tolerance.

(23)

last part of the comments. In addition, the contributors provide reasons in form of beliefs to encourage a reasonableness of the blaming/complaint/critique or even an urgency of the order/asking/advice.

Since politeness is one of motivation for the speaker in performing certain speech act (Searle 1969), the contributors’ speech act realizations were also examined

from politeness aspects. The contributors’ comments which were very often actualized in anger and hatred expression showed that most contributors spoke impolitely. Being commentators of a topic about a lack of religious tolerance, the contributors were placed in a face-threatening situation. A large amount of disappointment and hatred expressions damaged either positive or negative faces of the hearer (Brown and Levinson 1978). They mostly performed on-record impoliteness (Culpeper 2005) that explicitly assaulted the hearer’s faces without considering the hearer’s rights to maintain their faces at all. Being impolite,

contributors obviously did not observe the praise maxim (Leech 1983). They did not minimize dispraise to the hearer while formulating the comments.

Since impoliteness is a more ‘marked’ phenomenon than politeness (Muniroh

2011), the contributors’ purposes of speaking impolitely due to obviously express

their dislike towards agents behind acts showing a lack of religious tolerance. In addition, the contributors’ expectations that the hearer(s) change their behavior to

(24)

5.2Suggestions

The research was limited to categorize speech acts as well as its variations found in a readers’ forum by using Bach and Harnish’s (1979) speech acts classification. The

next research can choose a speech acts in the classification and then dig it deeply like examining strategies in performing the speech act. Moreover, the classification was relatively newly applied in on the studies of speech acts, especially for skripsi. Thus the next researchers who are interested in investigating speech act can consider strengths of an intention-inference based speech theory to conduct future research. Besides Bach and Harnish, the theory of speech acts on the basis intention-inference approach was proposed recently by Allan (1998). So, the further research can explore it as a framework of the study.

This research used written data. The next research can use spoken data complied by an interview or an observation method. Otherwise, other special instruments can be used like Discourse Completion Test (DCT). It is due to know more the research participants’ background. So, combining speech act analyses with other social aspects (such as gender analyses and power relations) can be done.

(25)

REFERENCES

Allan, K. (1998). Meaning and Speech acts. [Online]. Available at: http://www.arts.monash.edu.au/ling/speech_acts_allan.html [27 September 2010].

Alwasilah, A. Chaedar. 2002. Pokoknya Kualitatif. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya. Andor, József. (2009). No Problem.Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Austin, J.L. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Aziz, E.A. (2000). Realisasi Tindak Tutur Menolak dalam Masyarakat Indonesia: Kajian Dari Perspektif Kesantunan Bahasa. A Thesis on Lingistic Departement of Monash University Australia: Unpublished.

Aziz, E.A. (2000). Indonesian Speech Act Realisation in Face-threatening Situations. Published in Monash University Linguistic Paper (MULP).

Aziz, E.A. (2006). Mutual Consideration as a Principle for Doing Politeness. Journal of Asian Studies, 2, 15, pp 186-231

Aziz, E.A. (2008). Horison Baru teori Kesantunan Berbahasa: Membingkai yang Terserak, Menggugat yang Semu, Menuju Universalisme yang Hakiki. A Speech by Drs. E. Aminudin Aziz, M.A., Ph.D. as a Professor of Linguistics in Faculty of Language and Arts Education, Indonesia University of

Education.

(26)

Boczkowski, Pablo. (2004). Digitizing the News. Innovation in Online Newspaper. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Bousfield, Derek. 2008. Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Cipollone et al. [eds.]. 1998. Language Files 7th edition. Ohio: Dept. of Linguistics, The Ohio States University.

Collins Cobuild Advance Dictionary of English: 2009

Creswell, J. W., Hanson W. E., Plano,V. L.C. & Morales, Alejandro. “Qualitative Research Design: Selection and Implementation”. Journal of Counseling Psychologist. SAGE. 35, 236-264.

Culpeper, Jonathan. (2005). “Impoliteness and Entertainment in the Television Quiz Show: The Weaknest Link”. Journal of Politeness Research Language, Behavior, Culture. 1, (1), 35-72. ISSN. [online]: 1613-4877 January 2005.

Grice, H.P. (1957;1975). “Logic and Conversation”, in Peter Cole dan J.L. Morgan

[Eds.]. Syntax and Semantics Vol 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press. Goffman, Erving. (1967). Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-face Behavior. New

York: Doubleday.

Harnish, Robert M. (2005). Commitments and Speech Acts. Philosophica ed. pp. 11-41.

Lazuka, Anna. (2006). Communicative Intention in George W. Bush’s Presidential Speeches and Statements form 11 September 2001 to 11 September 2003. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Leech, Geoffrey N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.

Manohar, Uttara. (2012). What is the Importance of Public Opinion in Media. Available at:

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/what-is-the-importance-of-public-opinion-in-media.html

Maxwell, Joseph A. (2010). “Using Numbers in Qualitative Research”. Journal of Qualitative Inquiry. SAGE. 1 6 (6), 475-482.

(27)

Merriam Webster Dictionary: 2012

Muniroh, Dian D. 2011. Realisasi Tindak Tutur Mengeluh Pihak Ketiga dalam Wacana Tulis: Studi Kasus Pada Rubrik Surat Pembaca di Laman

www.kompas.com. A Thesis on Department of Linguistics Indonesia University of Education: Unpublished.

Paltridge, Brian. (2006). Discourse Analysis An Introduction. London: Continuum. Riddle, Marnie. 1997. A Philosophical Discourse on Language. [online]. Available

at: http://www.duke.edu/~pk10/language/philosophy.htm

Sadock, Jerrold M. (2008). Toward a Linguistic Theory of Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press.

Searle, John R. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in The Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Searle, John. R. (1979). Expression and Meaning: Studies in Theories of Speech Acts. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Silverman, David. (2006). Interpreting Qualitative Data: Method for Analyzing Talk, Text and Interaction. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Smith, Barry [ed.]. 2010. John Searle: From Speech Acts to Social Reality. [Online].

Available at:

assets.cambridge.org/97805217/92882/.../9780521792882_excerpt.pdf. [12 Februari 2011].

Thomas, Jenny. (1995). Meaning in Interaction: an Introduction to Pragmatics. New York: Longman.

Vanderstoep, S & Johnston, D. (2009). Research Methods for Everyday Life: Blending Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. San Francisco: Jossey-bass.

Wood, Peter. (2006). Qualitative Research. [Online]. Available at: http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/qualitative%20methods%202/qualrsh m.htm

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