The Realizations Of Self-Reference Among Young Adults In Indonesia.

(1)

Hanifa Muslima, 2014

The Realizations Of Self-Reference Among Young Adults In Indonesia Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu | perpustakaan.upi.edu

THE REALIZATIONS OF SELF-REFERENCE AMONG YOUNG ADULTS IN INDONESIA

(A Case Study in Bandung, West Java)

A Research Paper

Submitted to the Department of English Education in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for SarjanaSastra Degree

By:

HanifaMuslima

1006322

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

THE FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE EDUCATION

INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION

(2)

THE REALIZATIONS OF SELF-REFERENCE

AMONG YOUNG ADULTS IN INDONESIA

(A Case Study in Bandung, West Java)

Oleh HanifaMuslima

Sebuah skripsi yang diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat memperoleh gelar Sarjana pada Fakultas Pendidikan BahasadanSastra

Oktober 2014

Hak Cipta dilindungi undang-undang.

(3)

THE REALIZATIONS OF SELF-REFERENCE AMONG YOUNG ADULTS IN INDONESIA

(A Case Study in Bandung, West Java)

A Research Paper

By

HanifaMuslima

1006322

Approved by:

Main Supervisor Co-Supervisor

IwaLukmana, M.A., Ph.D. EriKurniawan, M.A., Ph.D.

NIP. 196611271993031002 NIP. 198111232005011002

The Head of English Education Department

The Faculty of Language and Literature Education

Indonesia University of Education

Prof. Dr. DidiSuherdi, M.Ed.

(4)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION ... i

ABSTRACT ... ii

PREFACE ... iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... v

LIST OF TABLES ... viii

LIST OF APPENDICES ... ix

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1 Background ... 1

1.2 Research Questions ... 2

1.3 Aims of the Research ... 3

1.4 Significance of the Research ... 3

1.5 Clarification of Key Terms ... 3

1.6 Organization of the Paper ... 4

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW ... 7

(5)

2.2 Classification of Language Varieties ... 7

2.2.1 Formal and Informal Language Varieties ... 8

2.2.2 Women and Men’s Language Varieties ... 9

2.2.3 Ethnic Language Varieties ... 13

2.3 Language and Culture ... 14

2.3.1 Kinship Terms ... 14

2.4 Person Reference ... 15

2.5 The Use of Personal Pronouns in Indonesia ... 16

2.5.1 Self-Reference (First Person Pronoun) ... 17

2.5.2 Address Terms (Second Person Pronoun) ... 21

2.5.3 Third Person Pronoun ... 23

2.6 Previous Studies ... 24

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 26

3.1 Research Design ... 26

3.2 Procedures of Data Collections ... 26

3.2.1 Subjects of the Research. ... 26

3.3 Procedures of Data Analysis ... 27

3.3.1 Questionnaire ... 27

(6)

3.4 Data Analysis... 29

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ... 30

4.1 The Use of Self-Reference ... 30

4.1.1 Saya. ... 31

4.1.2 Zero Anaphora ... 35

4.1.3 Abdi (Ethnic) ... 38

4.1.4 Urang (Ethnic) ... 41

4.1.5 Aing (Ethnic) ... 43

4.1.6 Proper Names ... 45

4.1.7 Aku ... 48

4.1.8 Kinship Terms ... 51

4.1.9 Gue ... 54

4.2 Gender and Self-Reference ... 57

BAB V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ... 60

5.1 Conclusions ... 60

5.2 Suggestions... 61

REFERENCES ... 62

(7)

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Indonesian Pronouns 16

Table 3.1 Types of Context Combinations 28

Table 4.1 The Use of Self-Referring Terms 30

Table 4.2 The Use of Saya in Different Situations 31

Table 4.3 TheRealization of Sayain Each Context 33

Table 4.4 TheApplication of Zero Anaphora in Different Situations 35

Table 4.5 TheRealization of Zero Anaphorain Each Context 36

Table 4.6 The Use of Abdi in Different Situations 38

Table 4.7 TheRealization of Abdiin Each Context 39

Table 4.8 The Use of Urang in Different Situations 41

Table 4.9 TheRealization of Urangin Each Context 42

Table 4.10 The Use of Aing in Different Situations 43

Table 4.11 TheRealization of Aingin Each Context 44

Table 4.12 The Use of Proper Name in Different Situations 45

Table 4.13 TheRealization of Proper Namein Each Context 46

Table 4.14 The Use of Aku in Different Situations 48

Table 4.15 TheRealization of Akuin Each Context 49

Table 4.16 The Use of Kinship Terms in Different Situations 52

Table 4.17 TheRealization of Kinship Termsin Each Context 53

Table 4.18 The Use of Gue in Different Situations 54

Table 4.19 TheRealization of Guein Each Context 55

(8)

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 The Model of Questionnaire

(classification of situations)

Appendix II The Input of Questionnaire Data

Appendix III The List of Data Questionnaire (sample)

Appendix IV The Model of Interview

(9)

ABSTRAK

REALISASI KATA ACUAN ORANG PERTAMA DI KALANGAN ANAK MUDA INDONESIA

(StudiKasus di Bandung, Jawa Barat)

HanifaMuslima (1006322)

PembimbingSatu: IwaLukmana, M.A., Ph.D.

PembimbingDua: EriKurniawan, M.A., Ph.D.

Penelitianinibertujuanuntukmengetahuirealisasi kata acuan orang pertamadalamkonteks yang berbedasertapengaruhataukecenderungan gender dalampenggunaannya. Data diambildari 12 mahasiswaBahasaInggris yang berasaldariJawa Barat (Sunda), terdiridari 6 wanitadan 6

priadenganmenggunakankuesioner DCT

sertawawancarasertadianalisissecarakualitatifdenganmenggabungkanstatistikdes kriptif. Temuanmenunjukkanbahwaterdapat 9 kata acuan orang pertama yang digunakanolehresponden. Kata acuantersebutterdiridarisaya, aku, gue, abdi (ethnis), urang (ethnis), aing (ethnis),nama personal, istilahkekerabatan (aa, teteh) dan zero anaphora (penghindaranataupenghilangan kata acuan orang

pertama). Penggunaandarimasing-masing kata

acuantersebutdirealisasikandalamkonteks yang berbeda yang terdiridariformalitas, keintimansertahubungankekerabatan.Lebihlanjut, gender jugamempengaruhirealisasi kata acuan orang pertama.Wanitacenderunglebih informal, intim, dandomestikdibandingdenganpria,

(10)

ABSTRACT

The Realizations of Self-Reference among Young Adults in Indonesia (A Case Study in Bandung, West Java)

HanifaMuslima (1006322)

Main Supervisor: IwaLukmana, M.A., Ph.D.

Co-Supervisor: EriKurniawan, M.A., Ph.D.

The present study seeks to investigate the realization of self-reference across contexts and whether or not gender influences the realizations of self-reference among young adults in Indonesia. Data were taken from 12 English students originated from West Java (Sundanese) including six males and six females by using DCT questionnaire and interview. Data were analyzed qualitatively supported by descriptive quantification. The findings show that there are 9 self-referring terms used by the respondents. These terms are saya, aku, gue, abdi (ethnic), urang (ethnic), aing (ethnic), proper name, kinship terms (e.g. aa, teteh), and zero anaphora. The use of each term is apparently affected by contextual factors including formality, intimacy, and kinship relations in which formality appears to be the most influential. Furthermore, gender also appears to influence the realization of self-referring terms. Females tend to be more informal, intimate, and domestic than males do.

(11)

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the introduction of the present study that covers background,

research questions, aims of the research, significance of the research,clarification

of key terms, and organization of the paper.

1.1 Background

There is a phenomenon of self-reference which occurs among young adults in

Indonesia. Indonesian young adult speakers have several alternatives for saying

„I‟,such asaku, saya, gua/gue, proper names, kinship terms (e.g. aa ‟older

brother‟, teteh „older sister‟), ethnic terms (e.g. Sundanese pronouns such as abdi, urang,andaing), and the avoidance self-referring term, or zero anaphora.

Those self-referring terms are realized by Indonesian speakers in different

contexts or situations including formality, intimacy, and kinship relations. In

terms of formality, self-reference (first person pronoun) is divided into formal and

informal pronouns (Mintz, 1994). Meanwhile, in terms of intimacy, self-reference

falls into two classifications including close (intimate) and distant pronoun forms.

For example, sayais considered a formal form which indicates distant

relationships while akuis considered an informal form which indicates intimate

relationships between speakers and interlocutors (Djenar, 2007; Mintz, 1994).

In relation toformality and intimacy, kinship relations appear to influence

the use of self-reference among Indonesian speakers (Djenar, 2007; Sneddon,

2006). For instance, when talking with family, the speakers tend to use informal

pronoun forms such as aku, proper names and kinship terms (e.g. teteh, aa) rather

than the formal forms such as pronoun sayaas self-reference.

Furthermore, within the same speech situation, variation can occur

between speakers as well as by the same speaker. Djenar (2007) examined the use

(12)

proper names by using examples from the speech of celebrities. The variation of

self-reference is also associated with the issue of power and politeness. Saragih

(2012) identified how Papuan Malay speakers use self-reference,

address-reference and third party address-reference in their daily conversation and why they do

that.

Another factor underlying the phenomenon of self-reference is gender.

Gender is one of the social variables which influences the use of language

variation and indicates the characterization of gender markings, namely men‟s

language variety and women‟s language variety (Jendra, 2012). The factors that

influence the varieties found between men‟s and women‟s language are believed

to be more of social than biological nature (Jendra, 2012). In accordance with the

statement, Wardhaugh (2006) also stated that gender is socially constructed,

involving the whole scope of psychological, social and cultural differences

between males and females.

Among those previous studies, none of them investigatedthe use of

self-reference across contexts and gender influence towards the use of self-self-reference in

Indonesian. Therefore, the present research aims to examine how young adults

realize self-reference in different contexts of conversation including formality,

intimacy, and kinship relationsand also to identify gender influence (i.e. gender

preferential) among young adults in using self-referring terms.

1.2 Research Questions

There are two questions underlying this study:

1. How do young adults realize self-reference in conversation within

different contexts and or situations?

2. Does gender influence the realization of self-reference? If so, what are the

(13)

1.3 Aims of the Research

This research aims to:

1. Investigate the realization of self-reference in different contexts or

situations including formality, intimacy, and kinship relations among

young adults by using DCT questionnaire

2. Identify gender influences (i.e. gender preferential) in using self-referring

terms and the underlying reasons.

1.4 Significance of the Research

This research is useful to investigate how social variables such as formality,

intimacy, kinship relations, and gender influence the realization of self-reference

among young adults. Henceforth, itmay give some contributions to the study of

sociolinguistics in Indonesia.

1.5Clarification of Key Terms

To avoid misunderstanding, some of important terms are clarified as follows:

a) Self-Reference

Self-reference is the way in which a person refers to him/herself. Self-reference

is realized in pronoun „I‟ or its equivalence. In Indonesia, there are several

pronouns „I‟ used as self-reference, such as saya, aku, gue, proper names and so forth (Djenar, 2007).

b) Formality

Formality refers to one of the language varieties.This language variety falls

into two classifications, namely formal and informal language varieties. Formal

language variety is referred to the language used in official occasions such as

in college lecturers, academic seminars, and so on, while informal language

variety is used in everyday situations and or casual conversations (Jendra,

(14)

c) Intimacy

Intimacy is defined as “a relational process in which we come to know the innermost, subjective aspects of another, and are known in a like manner”

(Chelune et al., 1984 as cited in Djenar, 2007, p. 26). Intimacy also refers to

the personal relationships between the speaker and the interlocutor in which the

speaker considers the interlocutor as a member of a social group, a friend or a

person, who shares some commonalities with the speaker (Moghadam et al.,

2013).

d) Kinship Relations

Kinship relations refer to people who are members of the same family (Yule,

2010). Related to kinship relations, there are terms used by speakers to refer to

relatives, namely kinship terms. The terms describe how people in various

parts of the world refer to relatives by age, blood, gender, generation and

marriage (Wardhaugh, 2006).

e) Gender Preferential

Gender preferential is defined as the features of language which can be used by

both sexes but are preferred by one of them (Holmes, 2001; Meyerhoff, 2006).

These features consist of lexical varieties, the pitch of speech, and the standard

use of language features of male and female speech (Yelkenac, 2001).

1.6 Organization of the Paper

The research paper consists of five chapters. The first chapter introduces the

present studies that provide the background of the research, research questions,

aims of the research, significance of the research, clarification of key terms, and

organization of the paper. The second chapter presents literature review that

covers the related concepts and theories relevant to the research questions. The

third chapter discusses the research design and procedures for data collection and

analysis. The fourth chapter presents the analysis, findings, and interpretation of

the findings. Finally, chapter five concludes the present study and offers some

(15)

26

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METODHOLOGY

This chapter presents the methodology used in the study. As mentioned in Chapter

I, this study seeks to examine the realizations of self-reference in different

contexts and or situations including formality, intimacy, and kinship relations and

whether or not gender influences the realization of self-reference, also the

underlying reasons. The rest of this chapter presents the design, procedures of data

collections and procedures of data analysis.

3.1 Research Design

This research applied a descriptive study containing mostly qualitative description

supported by some descriptive quantification. The studywasappliedto describe

how young adults realize self-reference in different contexts or situations and to

find out whether or not gender influences the use of self-reference, also the

reasons.

3.2 Procedures of Data Collections

This part consists of subjects of the research, questionnaire, and interview. Further

descriptions can be seen in the following sections.

3.2.1 Subjects of the research

In determining the subjects of the research, this research employs a purposive

adequate size to produce reliable results. That is to determine the number

of respondents as well as the variation of age, gender, and social class

giving effect to the language used. Third, the sample must be designed in

(16)

27

There were 27 English students who participated in this research by

answering the questionnaire. However, this research only chose 12 students who

qualified some criteria including age, gender, and ethnic. They were six males and

six females, originated from West Java (Sundanese), whose age ranges between

21 and 23 year old. By choosing only 12 respondents, the data analysis would be

simpler, more convenient, and more focused.

3.2 Procedures of Data Analysis

This part consists of questionnaire and interview. Further descriptions can be seen

in the following sections.

This research employed questionnaires in the form of Discourse

Completion Task (DCT) to find out what they would say in that situation

regarding the use of self-referring terms. DCT is used to “elicit data in responding

to problematic, contextually specific prompts especially the studies of metaphorical conceptualizations” (Parvaresh&Tavakoli, 2009, p. 366).

Furthermore, the questionnaire consists of the respondents’ identity

includes name, contact number, age, and gender (this information is confidential).

Besides the identity, there are 16 items which explore the combinations of social

variables including formality, intimacy, and kinship relations. There are eight

types of contexts resulting from the combination of the three aspects, as shown in

(17)

28

Table 3.1 Types of Context Combinations

Type Formality Intimacy Kinship Relation

1. Formal Distant Yes

The context combinations above are formulated into 16 situations (2 items

for each situation). The respondents were asked to answer the questions in given

situation of conversations written in Indonesian. The conversations used in the

questionnaire are mostly between a speaker and an interlocutor rather in a group

conversation. The model of questionnaire is shown as follows.

 Ayahmubarusajapulangdariluarkota.

Iameneleponsertamemintamuuntukmenjemputnya di stasiunkeretaapi,

akantetapikamusedangsibukdantidakdapatmenjemput.

Bagaimanakamumengatakannya?

Jawaban:

Ba, enipgabisajemputlagirevisiskripsidikumpulinbesok.

 <Eng> Your dad has just arrived from downtown. He called and asked you to pick him in rail station; unfortunately you are busy and cannot make it.

How would you say (to him)?

Answer:

(18)

29

3.2.2 Interview

Interviews are particularly useful for getting the story behind a respondent’s

experiences. The interviewer can get in-depth information around the topic.

Interviews may be useful as confirmation to certain respondents to questionnaires,

e.g., to further confirm and investigate their responses (McNamara, 1999in

Valenzuela &Shrivastava, 2002).

In this research, interviews were conducted to identify respondents’ claim about the use of certain self-referring term and also the reasons. The interviews

were held directly on September, 23rd 2014 and via phone on September, 24th

2014. The interview data can be seen in Appendix.

3.3Data Analysis

The data were analyzed in the following steps. First, self-referring terms were

identified from each utterance. Second, self-referring terms are classified. Third,

the data were quantified by determining the percentage for each classification of

the terms. Fourth, the data were observed to see trend of the data in the contexts. Fifth, the identification of respondents’ claim concerning certain self-referring terms (i.e. whether or not they use certain self-referring terms) by conducting

interviews. This information was used to confirm the terms that they used in DCT

questionnaire. They were also asked about the reasons. Sixth, the data were

analyzed to investigate the realizations of self-reference across contexts and the

influence of gender on the use of self-reference. The last was drawing conclusion

from the whole analysis of the research.

In order to determine the percentage of each self-reference classification,

the researcher needed to compute numerical data by using a simple scaling

composed by Thorsten (1992 in Salma, 2013).

P = �� %

� Note:

(19)

30

(20)

60

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter is the last part of the paper. It presents conclusions and suggestions

related to the present research. Some suggestions are offered to next researchers

who are interested in analyzing the realizations of self-reference in Indonesia.

5.1 Conclusions

The research investigates self-referring terms used by young adults in Indonesia.

It focuses on how young adults realize self-reference in different contexts of

conversation including formality, intimacy, and kinship relations. Besides, it also

examines the influence of gender on the use of self-reference.

There are nine self-referring terms used by young adults in this research.

These terms are saya, aku, gue, abdi (ethnic), urang (ethnic), aing (ethnic), proper

names, kinship terms (e.g. aa and teteh), andzero anaphora. Each term has been

realized in different contexts or situations.

If it is seen from each context, formality appears to be the most influential

context in the realization of self-referring terms, as can be observed in the use of

terms saya, abdi, and zero anaphora. Other contexts, i.e. intimacy and kinship

relations are also likely to affect the use of self-referring terms even though not as

strong as formality. The influence of intimacy can be seen in the use of informal

pronoun forms such as aku, gue, and ethnic terms (e,g. urang, aing). The use of

these terms is realized mostly when the respondents are talking to people with

close relationships such as peers. Meanwhile, the influence of kinship relation can

be seen on the use of proper names and kinship terms in which the speakers tend

to use these terms when talking to family.

Furthermore, the research also reveals the influence of gender (i.e. gender

preferential) towards the use of self-reference.Females tend to be more informal,

intimate, and domestic than men do. It can be seen from the use of self-referring

(21)

61

Overall, the present study shows that the use of self-referring terms is

affected by various social variables and it confirms previous discussions by

Djenar (2007), Flannery (2010), Mintz (1994), Saragih (2012), Sneddon (1996;

2006), and Ulum et al., (2013). It suggests that the use of reference ‘I’, including

self-reference is one of the important aspects in communication.

5.2 Suggestions

The present research investigates the realizations of several self-referring terms

used among young adults in several contexts including formality, intimacy, and

kinship relations and the influence of gender in the use of self-reference. There are

some suggestions for further research regarding the investigation of self-reference.

First, further research may focus on the use of self-reference by the

respondents in different age grading such as children, teenagers, and adults who

are located in different region or ethnic by using other instruments besides DCT

and interview such as natural instruments (e.g. recording) and likert scale. Second,

it also may add other social variables besides formality, intimacy, and kinship

relations such as age and power relations to find out the realization of

self-reference in Indonesia. The writer assumes that the realizations of self-self-reference

may be different among different users in different region or ethnic with different

(22)

63 Hanifa Muslima, 2014

References

Chaer, A.&Agustina, L. (1995).Sosiolinguistik: PerkenalanAwal. Jakarta: RinekaCipta Indonesian.Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 29(2). 22.1-22.16. DOI:10.2104/aral0622.

Djenar, D.N. (2007). Self-reference and its variation in Indonesian. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 4(1). 23-40. Retrieved from http://e-flt.nus.edu.sg/v4sp12007/djenar.pdf

Ewing, M.C. (2005). Colloquial Indonesian.In A.K. Adelaar& N.P. Himmelmann (Eds.), The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar (pp. 227–258). London: Routledge.

Flannery, G. (2007). Open and closed systems of self-reference and addressee-reference in Indonesian and English: A broad typological distinction. Macquarie University.Retrieved from

http://www.als.asn.au/proceedings/als2009/flannery.pdf

Holmes, J. (2001). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics 2nd Edition. London: Pearson Education Limited.

Holmes, J., &Meyerhoff, M. (2003).The Handbook of Language and Gender [ebrary Reader version].Retrieved from ebrary database.

Hudson, R. (1984). Sociolinguistics and Theory of Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.

Jendra, Made, I.I. (2010).Sociolinguistics: The Study of Societies’ Languages. Yogyakarta: GrahaIlmu.

Mashiri, P. (2004). The sociolinguistics of personal address and reference in urban Shona society. (Published thesis), University of Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe. Retrieved from

http://ir.uz.ac.zw/jspui/bitstream/10646/758/3/03thesis-body.pdf

(23)

Mintz, M. W. (1994). A Students’ Grammar of Malay and Indonesian. Singapore: EPB Publishers.

Moghadam, S.A., Yazdanpanah, L., &Abolhassanizadeh, V. (2013).The analysis of Persian address terms based on the theory of politeness.SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics [online]. 2013, 10(3). Retrieved from

http://www.skase.sk/Volumes/JTL24/pdf_doc/04.pdf

Ningrat, R.R. (2009). An analysis of address terms among military members and their influencing factors. (Unpublished thesis), Indonesia University of Education, Indonesia.

Parvaresh, V. &Tavakoli, M. (2009). Discourse completion tasks as elicitation tools: How convergent are they?Retrieved from

http://www.medwelljournals.com/fulltext/?doi=sscience.2009.366.373

Salma.A. (2013).Gender influence on slang used by teenagers in their daily life Conversation at school: A comparative study on male and female early teenagers in one of Islamic boarding schools, Lembang. (Unpublished thesis), Indonesia University of Education, Indonesia.

Saragih, C.F.(2012).The practical use of person reference in Papuan Malay.(Doctoral thesis), Universtity Nijmegen, Holland.

Sneddon, J.N. (2006). Colloquial Jakartan Indonesian. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, TheAustralian National University.

Sneddon, J.N., Adelaar, A., Djenar, D,N., & Ewing, M.C. (2012). Indonesian Reference Grammar 2nd Edition. Retrieved from

https://www.scribd.com/document_downloads/direct/80681106?extension= pdf&ft=1413849727&lt=1413853337&user_id=129145775&uahk=p8eR8b ZPr0Df1kVYFJBwHgjDhro

Spolsky, B. (1998). Sociolinguistics.London: Oxford University Press.

Trudgill, P. (1999). Language Contact and the Function of Linguistic Gender. Poland: University of Fribourg. Retrieved from

http://ifa.amu.edu.pl/psicl/files/35/10Trudgill.pdf

(24)

Valenzuela, D. &Shrivastava, P. (2002).Interview as a Method for Qualitative Research.Retrieved from

http://www.public.asu.edu/~kroel/www500/Interview%20Fri.pdf

Wardaugh, R. (1986). An introduction to sociolinguistics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Yelkenac, S. (2001).Language and sex difference.University of Mersin.Retrieved from http://www.lingate.8k.com/serap.html