A study of adverbs of stance in Barack Obama and Bill Clinton speeches.

(1)

i ABSTRACT

Raka, Gde Birama Anuraga. (2016). A Study of Adverbs of Stance in Barack Obama and Bill Clinton speeches. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Department of Language and Arts, Faculty of Teachers Training and Education, Sanata Dharma University.

The way people interact plays a key role in sharing information in communication. Discourse analysis is an interactively developing activity between speakers, who express not only factual information in the form of spoken words but also their feelings and judgments. In daily communication people communicate in certain way that they react to one another’s ideas or feelings in the conversation. Often this means that they take a “stance”.

There are two research problems in this study, they are “How is the discoursal distribution of adverbs of stance used in both Obama’s and Bill Clinton’s?” and “How is the sentential distribution of adverbs of stance like in both Obama’s and Bill Clinton’s? Therefore, the objectives of this study are to explain how is the discoursal distribution and sentential distribution of adverbs of stance found in Obama’s and Clinton’s speeches

As for method this study used qualitative method. The source of the data was Youtube.com and then the data were transcripted. Therefore, the data are inform of transcripts. To analyze the data researcher implemented cross tabulations of adverbs of stance in discoursal and sentential distribution.

The findings suggested that for the discoursal distribution of adverbs of stance were located almost in every paragraph, and each of them conveys different meanings such as expressing certainty, doubt, limitation, attitude and actuality. On the other hand, the findings about sentential distribution of adverbs of stance suggested that in matter of sentential distribution, adverbs of stance were mostly occupying initial position as setting.

(2)

ii

ABSTRAK

Raka, Gde Birama Anuraga. (2016). A Study of Adverbs of Stance in Barack Obama and Bill Clinton speeches. Yogyakarta: Pendidikan Bahasa Ingris, Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Cara manusia dalam berinteraksi memegang peran yang penting dalam komunikasi. Discourse analysis adalah situasi dimana pembicara tidak hanya menyampaikan informasi faktual tetapi juga perasaan dan penilaian mereka. Dalam komunikasi sehari-hari manusia berreaksi dengan cara tertentu dalam menanggapi pendapat atau perasaan manusia lainnya, hal ini disebut “stance”.

Penelitian ini memiliki dua pertanyaan yaitu “Bagaimanakah penggunaan adverbs of stance dalam pidato Obama dan Clinton” dan “Bagaimanakah penyebaran adverb of stance dalam tingkat kalimat pada pidato Obama dan Clinton?” Sehingga tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk menjelaskan penggunaan adverbs of stance dalam pidato Obama dan Clinton serta untuk menjelaskan bagaimana adverbs of stance di distribusikan dalam tingkat kalimat.

Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kualitatif. Data didapatkan dari Youtube.com lalu di transkripsikan. Data yang diperoleh menggunakan dua cross tabulations.

Berdasarkan analisis ditemukan bahwa untuk distribusi adverbs of stance dan maknanya, mereka terletak hampir di semua paragraf dan memiliki fungsi sebagai penunjuk ekpressi keyakinan, keraguan, batasan, sikap, dan kenyataan. Di sisi lain, dalam hal distribusi averbs of stance dalam kalimat, berdasarkan hasil analisis ditemukan bahwa adverbs of stance sebgaian besar terletak di awal kalimat.

(3)

(4)

A STUDY OF ADVERBS OF STANCE

IN BARACK OBAMA AND BILL CLINTON SPEECHES

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By

Gde Raka Birama Anuraga

Student Number: 121214118

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ART EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

(5)

i

A STUDY OF ADVERBS OF STANCE

IN BARACK OBAMA AND BILL CLINTON SPEECHES

A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By

Gde Raka Birama Anuraga

Student Number: 121214118

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ART EDUCATION FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

vi ABSTRACT

Raka, Gde Birama Anuraga. (2016). A Study of Adverbs of Stance in Barack Obama and Bill Clinton speeches. Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Department of Language and Arts, Faculty of Teachers Training and Education, Sanata Dharma University.

The way people interact plays a key role in sharing information in communication. Discourse analysis is an interactively developing activity between speakers, who express not only factual information in the form of spoken words but also their feelings and judgments. In daily communication people communicate in certain way that they react to one another’s ideas or feelings in the conversation. Often this means that they take a “stance”.

There are two research problems in this study, they are “How is the discoursal distribution of adverbs of stance used in both Obama’s and Bill

Clinton’s?” and “How is the sentential distribution of adverbs of stance like in

both Obama’s and Bill Clinton’s? Therefore, the objectives of this study are to

explain how is the discoursal distribution and sentential distribution of adverbs of

stance found in Obama’s and Clinton’s speeches

As for method this study used qualitative method. The source of the data was Youtube.com and then the data were transcripted. Therefore, the data are inform of transcripts. To analyze the data researcher implemented cross tabulations of adverbs of stance in discoursal and sentential distribution.

The findings suggested that for the discoursal distribution of adverbs of stance were located almost in every paragraph, and each of them conveys different meanings such as expressing certainty, doubt, limitation, attitude and actuality. On the other hand, the findings about sentential distribution of adverbs of stance suggested that in matter of sentential distribution, adverbs of stance were mostly occupying initial position as setting.

(11)

vii

ABSTRAK

Raka, Gde Birama Anuraga. (2016). A Study of Adverbs of Stance in Barack Obama and Bill Clinton speeches. Yogyakarta: Pendidikan Bahasa Ingris, Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Cara manusia dalam berinteraksi memegang peran yang penting dalam komunikasi. Discourse analysis adalah situasi dimana pembicara tidak hanya menyampaikan informasi faktual tetapi juga perasaan dan penilaian mereka. Dalam komunikasi sehari-hari manusia berreaksi dengan cara tertentu dalam menanggapi pendapat atau perasaan manusia lainnya, hal ini disebut “stance”.

Penelitian ini memiliki dua pertanyaan yaitu “Bagaimanakah penggunaan adverbs of stance dalam pidato Obama dan Clinton” dan “Bagaimanakah penyebaran adverb of stance dalam tingkat kalimat pada pidato Obama dan

Clinton?” Sehingga tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk menjelaskan penggunaan adverbs of stance dalam pidato Obama dan Clinton serta untuk menjelaskan bagaimana adverbs of stance di distribusikan dalam tingkat kalimat.

Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kualitatif. Data didapatkan dari Youtube.com lalu di transkripsikan. Data yang diperoleh menggunakan dua cross tabulations.

Berdasarkan analisis ditemukan bahwa untuk distribusi adverbs of stance dan maknanya, mereka terletak hampir di semua paragraf dan memiliki fungsi sebagai penunjuk ekpressi keyakinan, keraguan, batasan, sikap, dan kenyataan. Di sisi lain, dalam hal distribusi averbs of stance dalam kalimat, berdasarkan hasil analisis ditemukan bahwa adverbs of stance sebgaian besar terletak di awal kalimat.

(12)

viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to thank Lord for all the blessings that I have

received in my life. He had surrounded me with good people, provided me with

the strength, patience and health that I really needed, and stayed with me in every

single day.

I would like to express my gratitude to my thesis advisor, Dr. Emanuel

Sunarto, M.Hum., for his time, patience, and kindness. He had shown his valuable support during my thesis progress by providing meaningful feedback and

never ending motivation. I would also like to thank him for believing in me and

bringing out the best in me.

My deepest gratitude goes to my parents, I Nyoman Wija and Ini Ary

Dibyono, for their unconditional love, affection, support and prayer. I would like to thank them for always being there for me and convincing me that I deserved the

best things in my life. I also thank my younger sister, Niluh Cikara. They were

the reason why I kept striving and working on my goals.

Furthermore, I thank my friend, Shella, Niko, and Galih who

accompanied, helped, and motivated me when I was working on my thesis. I also

thank my classmates, Nenny, Marcell, Ansel, Indira, who encouraged me to

keep working on my thesis. Then, I thank the people in my class D group,

Penguins. I appreciated the four year of togetherness. I learned a lot of meaningful things from them. They had shown me that family was not limited to

(13)

ix

Finally, I would like to show my gratitude to all PBI students and all my

friends whose names cannot be mentioned one by one in this section. I was

grateful for every help, support, and motivation that they had given to me.

(14)

x

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1. Discoursal Distribution of Adverbs of Stance ... 23

(18)

xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES

Page

Appendix A Obama’s Speech Transcript ... 45

(19)

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This part consists of the research background, problem formulation,

research objectives, benefits and significance, problem limitation, and assumption.

Furthermore the definition of terms is also presented to explain essential key

terms of this research in order to clarify the meaning.

A. Research Background

Speaking is a matter of how to deliver ideas verbally. When people speak,

they will use many expressions and one of them is adverb of stance. The problem

is how to make use of them appropriately and where to place such expression in

the speech. This study is about the adverbs of stance used by Barrack Obama and

Bill Clinton in their speeches. Adverb of stance is the expression used by the

speaker that can show opinion, condition or attitude and evaluation (Biber, 1999).

In this era, public speaking is essential. Therefore, we have to be able to make and

deliver a good speech. For English learners the understanding of the use of

adverbs is undeniable.

Adverbs of stance are used to show personal judgment or feeling (Biber,

1999). In a speech for example, we cannot be one hundred percent sure about

something. Statements always involve some kind of evaluation or judgment. We

(20)

2

Biber and Finnegan suggest that adverbs of stance mean the lexical and

grammatical expression of attitudes, feelings, judgments, or commitment

concerning the propositional content of a message (1989). Biber et al. suggest that

adverbs of stance could be used to show personal feelings, attitudes, judgments, or

assessments that a speaker or writer has about the information in a proposition and

stance is the expression of one’s personal viewpoint concerning proposed

information (1999). All the definitions focus on the expression of individual

speakers or writers rather than on interactive relations. It is the characteristic of an

affective style that spontaneously develops or is strategically employed in the

interaction with a person or a group of persons, coloring the interpersonal

exchange in that situation. The examples are being polite, distant, cold, warm, and

supportive (Scherer, 1998.P38). Therefore, the understanding of these adverbs is

needed to be brought and learned for English learners especially English as

second language. Adverbs of stance can occupy multiple positions in a sentence.

So, to put or distribute the adverb of stance sometimes can be problematic, each

part has its own reasons or results. Understanding the distribution in paragraphs or

sentences can help English learners to have better understanding of these adverbs.

The arrangement of the adverb of stance may be vary depending on the context.

To see how adverbs of stance are used and put together, and analyze sentential

(21)

3

B. Problem Formulation

There are two research problems this research, which are formulated as

follows.

1. How is the discourse distribution of adverbs of stance used in both Obama’s

and Bill Clinton’s speeches?

2. How is the sentential distribution of adverbs of stance like in both Obama’s and

Bill Clinton’s speeches?

C. Research Objectives

The researcher analyzes the sentential distribution and paragraph

distribution of adverbs of stance. There are two research objectives formulated as

follows.

1. To explain the discoursal distribution of adverbs of stance in Obama’s and

Clinton speeches.

2. To explain the sentential distribution of adverbs of stance in Obama’s and

Clinton’s speeches.

D. Benefits and Significance

The benefits and significance of the study of explaining the discoursal and

sentential distribution in Obama’s and Clinton’s speeches are elaborated as

(22)

4

1. For English teachers

This study provides information for teachers so that they would be aware

of the importance of adverbs of stance. Furthermore, this study also gives some

real examples in order to give factual context which covers positioning of adverbs

of stance.

2. For English Learners

This research aims not only to introduce adverbs of stance but also to

show adverbs of stances that are used in practical use. Adverbs of stance are

important to be introduced because these adverbs are used in daily life. English

learners could use this research as a reference to learn about adverbs of stance

especially in discoursal and sentential distribution. English learners will be able to

use adverbs of stance in actual situation.

3. For future researchers

This research provides information related to adverbs of stance

classification and position. Future researchers could use this research as additional

data in conducting a research related to principles of adverbs of stance.

Furthermore, this research is also useful for future researchers who conduct the

same researches in different fields related to adverbs of stance.

E. Problem Limitation

The researcher focused on analyzing positions of adverbs of stance in

sentences and paragraphs in Obama’s and Clinton’s speeches. The topic was

(23)

5

The speeches were obtained from Youtube and then transcripted. The transcripts

were analyzed and broken down into two tables.

F. Definition of Terms

This part exposes the key terms of this research namely discourse analysis,

speech, adverbs of stance, and sentence linearity. The key terms are defined as

follows.

1. Discourse Analysis

According to Brown and Yule (1983) discourse analysis is typically based

on the linguistic output of someone other than the analyst. The type of linguistic

material is sometimes described as performance data and may contain features

such as hesitations, slips, and non-standard forms.

2. Speech

Speech is one technique of public speaking. It is about delivering ideas,

opinions, or persuasions verbally in front of public or audiences ( Dwiwibawa,

2008).

3. Adverbs of Stance

Biber and Finnegan (1998) suggest that stance is the lexical and

grammatical expression of attitudes, feelings, judgments, or commitment of a

message. Adverbs stance markers can be characterized with respect to two major

parameters, which are semantic class and placement in the clause. In addition,

most stance adverbs are similar in becoming setting in clause and presenting the

(24)

6

4. Sentence Linearity

In the theory of informative language structure, adverbs of stance are

(25)

7

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

This part exposes the theories used by the researcher. This part consists of

previous studies, theoretical description, and theoretical framework.

A. Previous Studies

Adverbs of stance have been studied previously by Douglas Biber,

Dolezalova, Kristen Precht, and Francisco Alonso Almeida - Nila Vázquez.

The study by Biber (2004) about study of stance covers the analysis of

linguistic choices in discourse, which may express meanings other than literal.

Biber (2004) studies the stance in multi-register aspects from a historical

perspective to conclude that stance marking varies across some conditions: Stance

strategies with similar function may be different from one condition to another,

and they may also increase or decrease in frequency. Furthermore, for the

conclusion, the majority of works generally based on historical texts deals with

modal verbs.

The study by Doležalová (2010) deals with sentence adverbials in

newspaper reports. She seeks for adverbial stances in the newspaper and focuses

on characteristic features of individual sentence adverbials, their semantics, form

and position. The findings were the semantic category of stance adverbials, the

(26)

8

of the analysis. With 31 occurrences it constitutes 43 % of all the stance

adverbials analyzed (72 samples). The adverbials perhaps and probably appeared

with high frequency in the analyzed articles. It was expected that these adverbials,

which show doubt about the proposition and express predictions and suppositions

that have not been clearly proven, would occur commonly in news.

The study by Krirsten Precht (2003) discusses about Stance moods in

spoken English, her interest was on British and American English. The study was

about the analysis in the attitude, emotion, certainty and doubt (stance) in a large

corpus of British and American conversation. The findings are assessed through

an automated procedure for identifying stance, lexical items, occurring in

particular grammar frames. The frequencies were analyzed with a multi-variants

statistical procedure known as factor analysis which identifies co-occurrence

patterns (factors). The conclusion from the study was in general conversation

among adults, the Americans tended to use much more affect, and tended to use a

small, pat set of affect markers as evaluations at the end of stories. The British

tended to use more evidential overall, and seemed to increase the number and

intensity of evidential to show involvement.

The study from Francisco Alonso Almeida - Nila Vázquez (2006) aims to

find stance and the way stance is expressed through modal verbs. This study uses

qualitative method and analyses about 350,000 words from eleven different

English books. The main conclusion is that adverbs of stance expressed through

modals are not systematically used, and the function may be affected and

(27)

9

Different from the previous studies, this study aims to explain discoursal

distribution and sentential distribution of adverbs of stance in political speeches to

be more specific this study uses Obama’s and Clinton’s speeches. This study also

exposes the sentence linearity of adverbs of stance.

B. Theoretical Description

In this part, the researcher exposes the theories used in this study. There

are several theories about discourse analysis, speech, adverbs of stance and

placement of adverbs. The theories are as follows:

1. Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis is a broad term for the study of the ways in which

language is used in texts and contexts (Nordquist, 2005). According to Taylor

(2013) discourse analysis is concerned with language use as a social phenomenon

and therefore goes beyond one speaker or one newspaper article to find features

which have a more generalized relevance. Another theory from Wood and Kroger

(2000) suggest that discourse analysis is not only about method, it is also a

perspective on the nature of language and its relationship to the central issues of

the social sciences.

2. Speech

Speech is about expressing and delivering the speaker’s ideas and feelings

(Lucas, 2009). There are three main types of speech namely informative,

(28)

10

to convey information to the audience about something new or important. There

are a few types of informative speeches: speeches about objects, speeches about

events, speeches about processes speeches about concepts. The Persuasive Speech

challenges beliefs or assumptions. Persuasive speeches usually deal with

controversial topics. There are three main types of persuasive speeches namely

speech of fact, speech of value and speech of policy. The occasional speech is

used in certain occasion (Baumeyer, 2006).

3. Adverbs of Stance

Adverbs stance markers can be characterized with respect to two major

parameters semantic class and placement in the clause. In addition, most stance

adverbs are similar in having scope over an entire clause and presenting the

speaker's attitude or framing towards the proposition in that clause (Hunston &

Thompson, 2001).

First the semantic class of adverbs of stance. Biber et al (1999, pp.

854-857) distinguish three main types of stance adverbs, based on semantic criteria,

epistemic adverbs, attitudinal, and stylistic. These adverbs express meanings

associated with the speaker or writer's attitude, or stance, towards what s\he is

saying. Epistemic stance adverbs indicate how certain the speaker or writer is, or

where the information comes from. Attitudinal stance adverbs indicate feelings or

judgments about what is said or written. Style stance adverbs indicate how

something is said or written (Hunston&Thompson, 2001). The term ''stance'' is

used here as a cover term for the three major domains epistemic stance

(29)

11

including comment on the source of information. Attitudinal stance adverbs

convey the speaker's attitude, feelings, or value judgments. Biber et al (1999,

p.854). Style stance adverbs describe the manner in which the information is

being presented

Adverbs of stance base on epistemic criteria. Epistemic stance adverbs

provide speakers comment on the status of the information presented in the main

clause. Under epistemic stance adverbs, it is possible to distinguish among several

sub- class. They are adverbs of stance showing certainty, doubt, actuality, source

of knowledge, limitation and attitudinal.

Adverbs of stance showing doubt and certainty show the speaker's

certainty or doubt about the proposition in the clause. They include both absolute

judgments of certainty and indication of belief in various levels of probability

Biber et al (1999, p.854) Certainty can be seen as a variety of epistemic modality

expressed through epistemic comments. One type of epistemic comment is

certainty expressions (e.g., probably, perhaps, undoubtedly) that provide clues to

the writer‘s certainty or assessment of the truth of a statement and qualify a

writer‘s attitude towards expressed knowledge (Coates, 1983). Actuality and

reality adverbs comment on the status of the proposition as real life fact (Biber et

al. 1999).The adverbs of the second group indicate reality or possibility

(allegedly, certainly, presumably, seemingly, supposedly). The adverbs of the

third group, 'assuming hearer's agreement', include once more the adverb

apparently of the first group and the adverbs clearly, obviously of second group,

(30)

12

the source of the information reported in the associated proposition .These

adverbs include adverbs such as evidently, apparently, reputedly, reportedly

which allude to evidence supporting the proposition (Biber et al, 1999). Evidential

primarily indicate sources of knowledge. They show the source of the information

or the evidence of what the writer proposes, which offers the reader high

reliability and objectivity. It refers to the speaker or writer‘s expressed attitudes

towards knowledge, more specifically, to how they obtain and evaluate

knowledge (Marin-Arrese et al., 2004). Epistemic stance adverbs can mark the

limitation of the proposition. Stance adverbs commonly used to mark limitation

include: generally, largely, mainly, typically (Biber et al., 1999). A variety of

linguistic expressions can be used to describe a speaker‘s attitude; one of them is

so-called evaluative adverbs. Attitudinal stance adverbs convey speakers‘ personal

attitudes or feelings towards the proposition e.g. likes and dislikes, evaluations of

events and personal experiences, value judgment ,or assessment of expectations

(e.g. fortunately, happily, interestingly, oddly, strangely, unfortunately) (Biber et

al., 1999, Conrad and Biber ,2000).

4. Placement of Adverbs.

In their function as modifier, adverbs occupy several positions.

Therefore,they are more mobile occupying initial, medial or end position, as in

(Downing and Locke, 2002)

(31)

13

Stance adverbs are placed in initial position as adjuncts, their scope extend to the

whole clause. Their meaning express the speaker's attitude to the content of the

clause or comment on its truth value (ibid 1998) as in:

(3) Hopefully, the new plan will lead to some improvements.

Biber et al., (1999, p. 872) state that semantic category of stance adverbs can be

placed in medial position. Adverbs conveying certainty, likelihood, actuality,

limitation are often placed immediately before and after the verb. In this position,

the adverbs indicates their relationship to the state or action described by the verb

as in:

(4) For some months Wallace had actually practiced law. (5) The primary lesion is generally treated with pituitary surgery.

Attitude and style adverbs also occur in medial position, often immediately the

following subject.

(6) At the time my mother fortunately never thought of selling her books.

Unlike other types of adverbs like degree, manner, stance adverbs sometimes are

not used at the end of the sentence as in the following example:

(7) She will leave definitely.

On the other hand, many stance adverbs function as adjuncts, and they may appear

at the end of the sentence of internally, set off by a comma, as the following

example illustrates:

(32)

14

C. Theoretical Framework

Obama and Clinton as we know experienced public speaking, because

their job required them to do so. They can express their personal feelings in their

speeches to convince people about their ideas. Therefore, language device is

needed in order to express their feelings. One of language devices available is

adverbs of stance. Discourse analysis plays role in this study as G brown and G

yule suggest that discourse analysis typically uses data taken from written texts or

tape recordings (1983).

The classifications are generated form Biber et al theories that say there

are three main types of stance adverbs, epistemic adverbs, attitudinal, and stylistic

(1999, pp. 854-857). Therefore the classification would be adverbs of stance

showing doubt, certainty, source of knowledge, limitation and attitudinal. Even

though there are many terms can be used, the researcher referred to Biber’s

theories.

The sentential distribution of adverbs of stance is more or less similar with

other adverbs. As modifier in group structure, adverbs occupy fixed positions.

However, they are more mobile, occupying initial, medial or end position, as in

(Downing and Locke, 2002). Therefore, the researcher uses these three positions

as the classification in sentential distribution. Furthermore, Firbas also suggests in

(33)

15

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This research aims to analyze adverbs of stance used by Obama and

Clinton in their speeches. The results are expected to show the comparison and

frequency from both speakers. This chapter consists of research method, research

objects, research instruments, and data gathering techniques, data analysis

techniques, and research procedure.

A. Research Method

Since this research connects verbal description, checklists and comparison

of adverbs together this research refers to qualitative research. The data from this

study are taken from Youtube videos and then trasncripted into documents.

According to Neuman (2011), qualitative research usually consists of written or

spoken words rather than data in the form of numbers. Myers (1997) also suggests

that data of qualitative research are in a form of descriptive data. This study

focuses on Obama’s and Clinton’s national speeches. The researcher chose health

care issues as the topic of the speeches. According to Fraenkel and Wallen (2006)

argue that qualitative researchers go directly to the particular setting of interest to

observe and collect their data. The research is conducted with descriptive analysis

to analyze checklist tables. The majority data analyzed in this study are in the

(34)

16

The data were gathered from Youtube and the transcripted, methods

applied in this research is document analysis. According to Wahyuni (2012),

content analysis is one of numerous methods used to analyze text data. Further,

Kondracky and Wellman (2002) point out that the text data might be in verbal,

print, or electronic form which might obtained from articles, books or manuals (as

cited in Wahyuni, 2012). Documents become the text data in this research. In this

case, the transcripts are observed and analyzed.

B. Research Objectives

There are two objectives in this study, which are to explain discoursal

distribution and to explain sentential distribution in Obama’s and Clinton’s

speeches.

C. Research Instruments

The research instruments applied in this study are cross tabulations. The

cross tabulations are developed based on the focus of this research. Therefore, the

cross tabulations are divided into two parts namely table 1 and table 2. The first

cross tabulation is about comparisons of adverbs of stance in discoursal

distribution. The cross tabulation generated based on adverbs of stance

classification. Table 2 is the cross tabulation related to adverbs of stance sentential

distribution. The cross tabulation is developed based on Firbas’ (1998) theories. In

this research, there are six category used in the checklists to analyze the adverbs

of stance, Adverbs of stance showing doubt, certainty, limitation, attitude, source

(35)

17

D. Data Gathering Techniques

In this study, the researcher analyzes speeches as the main source, they are

in form of descriptive data. The speeches are collected from Youtube. The data

were collected based on the topics of the speeches. The videos were transcripted

into two written speeches. The adverbs were collected by using Microsoft Words

tools. The researcher uses “find” tools to locate the adverbs. The topic is about

health care issue. The researcher choose such topic referring to Mecola (2014)

health care issue has been discussed by several presidents and yet this issue has

not been solved. This topic has been center of attention for several years. The

speakers are both male, this is to make sure that gender doesn’t affect the results

later on. This decision was taken referred to Lakoff (1973) that suggests “women

language” and “men language” is different.

E. Data Analysis Techniques

This study focuses on adverbs of stance discoursal and sentential

distribution of adverbs of stance. The first objective is to explain adverbs of stance

discoursal distribution. For this objective, the researcher conducted several steps.

First, the researcher determine the text segmentations in form of paragraph then

these paragraph orders are numbered. In order to clarify the location of adverbs of

stance the researcher also employs line numbering. Each line is numbered

alongside the paragraph numbering. Second, the researcher observe the data and

find adverbs of stance with a program in Microsoft Words namely Find. Next, the

researcher employs orthographic device by bolding adverbs of stance found in

(36)

18

of stance. There are three main types of stance adverbs, based on semantic criteria

which are epistemic adverbs, attitudinal, source of knowledge and stylistic Biber

et al.(1999, pp. 854-857). Furthermore, epistemic stance can be divided into

stance showing doubt and certainty. Before adverbs of stance were placed in the

table, the researcher analyze what are adverbs of stance present in both speech

based on Biber theories and then code them based on their categories. Table 1

which is the discoursal distribution of adverbs of stance are developed as follows.

Table 1.1 Comparative Cross Tabulation of Discoursal Distribution of Adverbs of Stance

Adverbs of Stance Obama’s Totals Clinton’s Totals Grand Totals Sub Types Expressions

Certainty ∑ Expression

Doubt ∑ Expression

Actuality ∑ Expression

Source knowledge Limitation ∑ Expression

Attitudinal ∑ Expression

The table above shows six types of adverbs of stance according to Biber’s

theories. The left side of the table consists of list the classification and the

expression found in both speeches. The expressions are divided based on their

classifications. There are also rows for total expressions found in both speeches.

This rows are to indicate the totals expressions of adverbs of stance found in

(37)

19

In the middle section, there are Obama and Clinton columns. These

columns where the researcher put the check marks. The check mark indicates the

expression used by the speakers. There are also totals columns. These columns

shows the total of adverbs of stance used by each speakers.

Meanwhile at the right hand of the table, there is grand total row. This row

shows the totals of adverbs of stance used by both speakers. In other words, this

row show which adverbs of stance are mostly used by both speakers.

In conclusion, discoursal distribution of adverbs of stance discussed about

types of adverbs of stance, their frequency and their functions in both speeches.

2. Comparative Cross Tabulation of Sentential Distribution of Adverbs of Stance

The second objective of this study is to explain the sentential distribution

of adverbs of stance. In order to fulfill this objective the researcher divided the

data into sentence segmentations. Each sentence containing adverbs of stance is

labeled based on its syntactic function. From this segmentation the researcher

analyses the position of adverbs of stance and counts their frequency. There will

be shown how adverb of stance occupy several positions. Adverbs of stance can

occupy initial, medial and last position (Biber et all., 1999). Therefore, Table 2 is

(38)

20

Table 2.1 Cross Tabulation of The Adverbs of Stance: Sentential Distribution Adverbs of Stance Adverbs of Stance Distribution in Sentences

Sub Types

Expressions _{Adv + S + V} _{S + Adv + V} _{S + V + Adv} _{S + V + O +}

Adv

Obama’s Clinton’s Obama’s Clinton’s Obama’s Clinton’s Obama’s Clinton’s

EC

∑

Position ED

∑

Position AC

∑

Position SK

LI

∑

Position AT

∑

Position Grand

∑

Table 2 consists of classifications of adverbs of stance, totals positions, and the

position of adverbs of stance itself. Table 2 aims to find the position adverbs of

stance can occupy, and also to show both findings in both speeches as

comparison. Adverbials are mobile and can occupy several positions. Therefore,

the researcher divided the positions into four types.

First adverbs of stance are occupying initial position. This position is pictured

as Adv+S+V. Second, adverbs of stance occupying medial position. The

researcher also divided this position into two subs, which are adverbs of stance

occur before or after the verb Firbas (1992, p. 84). The positions are pictured as

S+Adv+V and S+V+Adv. Third, adverbs of stance occupying final position. This

(39)

21

totals. These totals are to find the most frequent position occupied by adverbs of

stance in each speeches. In contrast the grand total is to show the most frequent

position occupied by adverbs of stance in both speeches.

F.Research Procedure

This research begins with observations. The researcher observes the speech

transcripts from both speakers. Then from the observations the researchers

categorize any adverbs of stance found in both speeches. Adverbs of stance found

in both speeches are analyzed in order to find their discoursal and sentential

(40)

22

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter, the results of this research would be explained. Besides,

another finding related to this research would also be revealed so that the results

would be compared. This section is intended to analyze adverbs of stance found in

Obama’s and Clinton’s speeches. Adverbs of stance are not as popular as other

adverbs. Despite their unpopular use, adverbs of stance have decent use in

showing personal judgment about the proposition. Therefore, adverbs of stance

are also important to be introduced. In analyzing the adverbs of stance in Obama’s

and Clinton’s speech, the researcher made classification tables, figures and

checklist tables. The criteria of adverbs of stance and their position in a sentence

were put and employed in the tables to analyze the data and to get the research

results and other findings.

A. Discoursal Distributions of Adverbs of Stance

This following part shows the analysis of Adverbs of Stance in Obama’s

speech. Table 1 shows that both speakers have different tendency in using

adverbs of stance. Obama was more likely to use adverbs of stance showing

(41)

Table 1 shows the classification and distribution of adverbs of stance in

Obama’s and Clinton’s speeches. The researcher used Biber’s theories. Based on

semantic criteria, there are three main types of stance adverbs, which are

epistemic adverbs, attitudinal, source of knowledge and stylistic (Biber et al.,

1999, pp. 854-857). Epistemic adverbs consist of adverb of stance showing doubt

and certainty.

Table 1 shows several adverbs of stance used by Obama and Clinton.

Based on the table above, there are six classifications of adverbs of stance.

However, there are only five types of adverbs of stance found in both speeches.

First, Table 1 shows adverbs of stance showing certainty. According to

Biber (2006) this particular adverbs are used to express someone’s attitudes or

personal feelings, about how certain they are about its truth, and what perspective

they are taking. Take closer look in this following example:

(1)

Obama: “Since health care represents one-sixth of our economy, I believe it makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn't, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch. (Applause) And that is precisely what those of you in Congress have tried to do over

the past several months.” (P3, L142)

Clinton: “I believe it because of the conversations I have had with thousands of health care professionals around the country, with people who are outside this city but are inside experts on the way this system

works and wastes money.” (P3, 153)

These expressions show that both Obama and Clinton were certain about

(42)

25

decision not to rebuild new system from scratch but to fix the old system makes

more sense. In Clinton’s side, he was certain about his idea after having a

conversation with many professionals. From table 1, it shows that Obama was

more certain that Clinton. The comparison is Obama used eleven times adverbs of

stance, and Clinton only used six times. And Obama’s speech has larger varieties

of adverbs of stance. It has eight different expressions. On the other hand,

Clinton’s speech only has three types of expressions showing certainty. However,

both of them had similarity in some expressions. They used the expressions of “I

believe” and “indeed”. The expression of “I believe” is frequently used by both

speakers.

Second, both of Obama and Clinton also used adverbs of stance expressing

doubt. Unlike adverbs of stance showing certainty, these adverbs show doubt or

uncertainty towards their ideas. It makes sense if both speaker used adverbs of

stance showing doubt since in real life, it is possible to be less certain or even

doubtful about something. The examples are presented as follows.

(2)

Obama: “(applause) I know that the Bush administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these ideas. I think it's a good idea, and I'm directing my Secretary of Health and Human Services to move forward on this initiative today.” (P8, L533)

(43)

26

These sentences contain adverbs of stance showing doubt. The expression

of “I think” signals the attitude of uncertainty or doubt (Biber, 1999, p. 89). Even

though they were doing public speaking and trying to convey their ideas, they felt

necessary to put such adverbs. Obama’s line shows that he was uncertain whether

or not his idea was good enough in his action to overcome health care issue.

Clinton’s line also has similar attitude. He was also uncertain about his idea to

simplify health care program. He was uncertain that such idea could actually

reduce the cost of health care and make it even more available to most Americans.

His attitude was pictured by his adverbs of stance. Furthermore, it gives the

audience more information about what he really felt.

According to Biber (1999) actuality and reality adverbs comment on the

status of the proposition as real life fact. It means that these adverbs indicate

someone’s perspective about something as a fact or thing that usually happens.

The examples are as follows.

(3)

Obama: “So tonight, I return to speak to all of you about an issue that is central to that future -- and that is the issue of health care. Obviously, I am not the first President to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last. (Applause) It has now been nearly a century since Theodore Roosevelt first called for health care reform and ever since, nearly every President and Congress, whether Democrat or

(44)

27

Those examples contain Adverbs of stance expressing actuality. The

expressions of “obviously” and “basically” are categorized as actuality adverbs. It

shows what Obama and Clinton thought about the situation as a fact. Obama saw

the fact as he was not the first president who tried to solve health care problems.

Surely he was not the first president struggling to solve the issues. By using that

expression, Obama showed that he was aware of that and he saw those

phenomena as real life fact. Clinton had different attitude. He saw the increase of

health care did not decrease the quality. Instead, it would enhance the

development. By using such expression, Clinton tried to convey his idea that it

would be the beginning or the foundation of the development. Table 1 shows that

Obama’s speech contains more varieties of the expression compared to Clinton’s.

Obama’s speech contains four different types and Clinton’s only contains one

type. Obama saw this problem as something more personal and factual more than

Clinton did.

Next, the adverb of stance showing limitation. Epistemic stance adverbs

can mark the limitation of the proposition Biber (1999). It means that adverbs of

stance can indicate how the speakers limit their prepositions. The expression

shows what their perspectives are. The examples are as follows.

(4)

Obama: “We'll do this by creating a new insurance exchange – a marketplace where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices. Insurance companies will generally have an incentive to participate in this exchange because it lets them compete for

millions of new customers.” (P5, L251)

(45)

28

bureaucratic and too wasteful. It has too much fraud and too much greed. At long last, after decades of false starts, we must make this our most urgent priority,

giving every American health security, health care that can never be taken away”

(P1, L43)

In the speeches above both contain the similar expressions indicating

adverb of stance showing limitation. Both Obama and Clinton used the expression

of “generally”. Obama’s line is about insurance companies that take part in the

exchange. The preposition “to participate” is limited as something usual or

common to be done. Adverb of stance sets a limitation towards the preposition. In

other words, Obama assumed that participation from insurance companies was

something common to be done in order to get customers. Clinton’s line tells about

how uncertain and expensive health care service was. The adverbs of stance limit

the preposition of “millions of talented professionals”. It shows that Clinton

referred to many people who were considered as professionals. He didn’t refer to

specific professionals in a specific place or time. It means that he referred to all of

them.

The last classification is adverb of stance expressing attitude. Attitudinal

adverbs convey speaker’s personal attitudes or feelings towards the proposition. It

can be pictured as likes and dislikes, evaluations of events, personal experiences,

value judgment, or assessment of expectations (Biber et al., 1999 and Biber

,2000). The examples found in their speeches are as follows.

(5)

(46)

29

Clinton: “Luckily for me and for our Nation, I didn't have to look very far. Over the last months, Hillary and those working with her have talked to literally thousands of Americans to understand the strengths and

the frailties of this system of ours.” (P2, L70)

Even though both of the sentences contain adverbs of stance showing

attitude, Obama and Clinton showed different attitude. Obama’s line shows the

feeling of disappointment expressed by the adverb. He used the expression of

“unfortunately”. It shows his personal feelings about the issues. Obama saw this

particular issue as something bad. The expression gives us bigger picture of what

he felt at that time. In other hand, Clinton’s line shows his positive attitude

towards the issue. He used the expression of “luckily”. It is immediately followed

by preposition. In this case, he also gave bigger picture of what he and Americans

thought at that time. He believed that he was in an advantageous position because

of what happened recently. Based on the table, it shows that Clinton put more of

his feelings or judgmental values towards the health care issues than Obama did.

In total there are eight times Clinton used adverbs of stance showing attitude and

Obama only used five times. Clinton used six types of adverb of stance and

Obama only used three types of adverb of stance showing attitude.

In conclusion, both Obama and Clinton had different approach in their

speeches. In a matter of discourse distribution, from Table 1 it shows that adverbs

of stance are located almost in every paragraph. The most frequent adverb of

stance used by Obama based on the table is adverbs of stance showing certainty. It

means that he is certain and sure about his ideas and thoughts. Compared to

adverb of stance showing doubt, we can conclude that Obama felt less uncertain

(47)

30

determined to be the man who solved the issues. Despite Obama’s certainty,

Clinton had different approach. He used Adverbs of stance showing attitude more

frequently. It means that Clinton put more his judgmental value towards the issue.

It shows how meaningful this issue for him. Even though he used adverbs of

stance showing attitude more frequently, he also used adverbs of stance showing

certainty. Both speakers were actually similar in terms of using adverbs of stance

to describe their personal judgments. But Obama is more certain than Clinton and

Clinton put more of his feelings compared to Obama. Adverbs of stance showing

source of knowledge is not found. It is because both Obama and Clinton deliver

their very own ideas, so they didn’t feel necessary to quote from someone’s idea

or maybe books.

B. Sentential Distributions of Adverbs of Stance

Adverbs of stance are similar with other adverbs. They are mobile, can

occupy initial, medial or last position (Biber et all, 1999, p. 855). Despite its

mobility, adverbials are best to be put initially as the setting of the sentence.

(Firbas, 1992). In other words adverbials are usually placed initially. However,

not all of the adverbials in the initial position pictures the setting, some may also

picture the perspective of the sentence. (Firbas, 1992, p. 48) Adverbials can also

be placed medially. If this happens, adverbials which are placed before the verb

have less communicative degree than those which are placed after the verb

(Firbas, 1992). Table 2 shows that mostly adverbs of stance found in both

speeches occupy initial position. Adverbs of stance occupying medial and last

(48)

(49)

32

From the Table 2, it shows that there are multiple position occupied by

adverbs of stance in both Obama’s and Clinton’s speech. There are four

classifications used in the table. Theory of sentence linearity from Firbas (1992)

indicates that position can affect the meaning of the sentence, the further the word

is placed the more communicative it will be. The locations are initial, medial

(before or after verb), and final position.

First, let’s begin with the adverbs of stance showing certainty. According

to the table these adverbs mostly occupy initial position but there is also adverb

occupying medial and last position. The examples are as follows.

(6) Obama’s (P3, L142)

I believe It makes more sense(…)

Adv. Certainty S V O

Clinton’s (P3, L150)

I believe we all understand That

Adv. Certainty S V O

Those are the examples of adverbs of stance expressing certainty located

initially. Obama and Clinton put the adverbs initially in order to give their

sentence setting of their personal’s feeling. Using the theory of sentence linearity,

adverbs occupying initial position are less communicative and they are not the

focus of the sentence. The idea is to give setting of feelings not to interfere the

(50)

33

here is the example of adverb of stance showing certainty occupying medial

position.

(7) Clinton’s (P2, L117)

The principles that i believe must embody our effort to reform America

S Con Adv.

Certainty

Mod V O Prep

The example shows that all of them are located medially before the verb,

which means that they are less communicative and they are not the focus of the

sentence. The adverb gives specification of what Clinton felt. Since it is not

located initially, it doesn’t play as the setting, but the specification instead. Based

on the table the adverbs of stance showing certainty not only occupy initial and

medial, but also last position. The example as follows.

The choice will be left to the worker(…) and certainly not some government bureaucrat

S V O Adv. Certainty

This example shows that adverbs of stance showing certainty can also be

placed in the last part. It means that Clinton wanted to focus on government

bureaucrat together with his feeling of certainty. Based on sentence linearity,

because the adverb is placed further it has more communicative values. (Firbas

1992, p. 53). In other words, Clinton tried to convey his strong level of certainty

through his line.

Next, the adverbs of stance showing doubt. The table shows that these

(51)

34

Adverbs of stance showing doubt were placed initially by both speakers. The

examples are:

(9) Obama’s (P8, L524)

I think that is good idea

Adv. Doubt S V O

I think we can save money

Adv. Doubt S V O

The example shows how adverbs of stance showing doubt are placed

initially. Both sentences shows that these adverbs act as the setting of the

sentences. They show the setting of Obama’s and Clinton’s personal feelings.

Being placed initially makes them less communicative and still not the focus of

the sentence. It indicates that Obama and Clinton did not want their doubt to be

the focus. Compared to another position, adverbs of stance showing doubt mostly

placed initially. However, there are some which were placed medially. These are

the examples:

Both sides I think understand the literal ethical imperative (…)

S Adv. Doubt V O

The example shows how adverb of stance showing doubt are placed

medially right before the verb. It shows that the adverb acts as the specification of

the sentence. It adds extra information about what Clinton felt about the issues.

Because it is located medially, it doesn’t have a strong communicative level. It is

(52)

35

Adverbs of stance showing actuality becomes the next subject. In both

speeches, some adverbs of stance showing actuality located initially and medially

before the adverb. These are the examples of adverbs of stance located initially by

both speakers:

(11) Obama’s (P1, L33)

Obviously i am not the first president

Adv. Actuality S To be N

Basically it may enhance them

Adv. Actuality S V O

The examples show adverbs of stance expressing actuality are placed

initially. They provide the sentence setting of both Obama’s and Clinton’s attitude

towards the issue. By placing these adverbs initially both speakers gave their line

setting of actuality. Mostly, these adverbs are located initially. Despite its

appearance in initial positions, some appeared in medial positions. Those adverbs

appearing in the medial position belong to Obama’s. The example analyzed as

follows.

(12) Obama’s (P8, L375)

A budget that would essentially have turned (…)

S Mod Adv. Actuality V

The example above indicates that the adverb was located medially before

the adverb. It has a less communicative level, and acts as specification in which

proved further ideas or information about the sentence. In this case, Obama added

(53)

36

the expression before the verb in order to lift up the communicative level. In

contrast with Clinton, he put the adverbs only in initial position.

Next, the adverbs of stance showing limitation. Based on the table, these

adverbs are located only in initial and medial position. Both speakers used the

adverb differently. Obama placed the adverb medially but Clinton placed it

initially. The examples are analyzed as follows.

(13) Obama’s (P5, L251)

Insurance Company will generally have an incentive (…)

S Mod Adv. Limitation V

(…) Generally millions our health care is too uncertain (…)

Adv. Limitation S To be Adj

The examples above show different locations of adverbs of stance showing

limitation. Obama put his adverb medially right before the verb and Clinton put

his adverb initially. It indicates that adverb of stance showing limitation in

Obama’s line is more communicative than that in Clinton’s line. Based on the

theory sentence linearity, initial adverbs have less communicative level. In

Clinton’s line, the adverb acts as the setting of the preposition. In Obama’s line,

the adverb acts as specification and gives further information about the limitation

of his line.

The last is adverbs of stance showing attitude. From the table, it shows

that these adverbs is mostly mobile. These adverbs are placed either in an initial, a

medial and the final position. Both speakers used the adverbs differently. These

(54)

37

(14) Obama’s (P2,L83)

Unfortunately it happens everyday

Adv. Attitude S V Adv. Time

Someone in your family unfortunately has had an illness

S Adv. Attitude V N

The example above shows two different positions of the adverbs of stance

showing attitude. Obama placed the expression initially but Clinton placed it

medially. In this sense, Clinton’s line consists of more communicative adverb of

stance compared to Obama’s. It shows that Clinton put more of his feeling in his

line. Obama just put the adverb initially, as mean of setting. However based on the

table we learned that both Obama and Clinton also put their adverbs of stance in

the last part. In that sense, both Obama and Clinton showed high level of personal

feeling in their lines.

In conclusion, the adverbs of stance can occupy different positions such as

initial, medial, and final position. The examples of adverbs of stance in initial

position could be found in example (6), (9). The examples of adverbs of stance in

medial position could be found in example (7), (10), and (12). The examples of

adverbs of stance in final position could be found in example (8). Adverbs of

stance are predominantly located in initial position. The Finding shows that there

are twenty five adverbs of stance located in initial position. The finding is in line

with Firbas theory that said adverbs are mostly located initially (1992). They act

as the setting and have low communicative level. However, some adverbs appear

(55)

38

communicative level and only show the speaker’s feeling, attitude, or judgment

(56)

39

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS

This chapter consists of two parts, they are conclusions and suggestions. The first

part is the conclusions which reveals the answers of the research questions.

Furthermore, related findings are also presented. The second part is about

suggestions for English teachers, English Learners, and future researchers who are

interested in conducting research related to Adverbs of Stance.

A. Conclusions

This research is conducted in order to explain how adverbs of stance used

in discourse level speech and to show how the sentential distribution of adverbs of

stance in both speeches is. After analyzing the data, the researcher found out that

adverbs of stance can be used differently in discourse level. There are several

roles and positions occupied by these adverbs.

The findings show that adverb of stance can be used to show certainty.

According to Biber (2006, p. 87) this particular adverbs are used to express

someone’s attitudes or personal feelings, how certain they are about its truth, and

what perspective they are taking. The findings show that Obama was more certain

compared to Clinton. Obama used adverbs of stance showing certainty eleven

times and Clinton only did six times. It also indicates that Obama has more

A study of adverbs of stance in Barack Obama and Bill Clinton speeches.

ABSTRAK

ABSTRAK

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF APPENDICES