LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Previous Study
Previous study is needed because it is very helpful for the researcher in order to do the proper analysis. Thus, since previous studies provide the examples of how to do the analysis and to conduct good research, it has function to regard new research finding. Further, in conducting this research, the writer has reviewed four previous studies which can be seen as follow:
Table of Previous Studies
No Name Objective Method Findings
1. Evayani &
Rido (2019)
To reveal how social actors are represented in news reporting of sexual violence.
Descriptive Qualitative Method
The finding shows that to detach the actor (exclusion), both of the newspapers are presented mostly the actor especially the victim as a passive agent and the perpetrator as an active agent.
2. Eklesia and Rido (2020)
The research aims to understand representational meanings from the transitivity choices used by news report from The Jakarta Post and Jakarta Globe in reporting people with HIV- positive cases and exposing the underlying
Descriptive Qualitative Method
The findings revealed that both news media dominantly report
people with
HIV/AIDS through material process, then followed by verbal process and relational process. Furthermore, the study also found that people with
HIV/AIDS are
represented as discriminated and
ideology behind the representation.
threatened group in The Jakarta Post, while they represented as a mistreated group in Jakarta Globe.
3. Ichsan (2020)
To describe how the host (Noah) is used satire in the Daily Show with Trevor Noah.
Descriptive Qualitative Method
The result shows that there are three types of satire occurred in the daily show, they are:
Horation satire (26 data), Juvenalian satire (27 data) and Manippean satire (10 data). Here, the host used irony, parody, comparison and humor in satire to criticize for the cluster of ideas and people’s behavior occurred in the Daily Show with Trevor Noah.
4. Sipra and Rashid (2013)
The research aims examined the speech of Martin Luther King “When I Have Dream”, how the speech explicates the term like social, cultural and political inequalities in the light of text and framework. based
on Norman
Fairclough's CDA
Descriptive Qualitative Method
The research finds out that there are certain textual and stylistic devices have been used very frequently in order to achieve some specific purposes. The speech syntactically well-organized with frequent repetitions emphasizing the main theme which is inequality of socio- cultural rights and racial discrimination on the basis of color and creed.
5. Firmansyah and Agustina (2020)
The research examined the sarcasm and cynicism in political discourse on 2017 DKI Jakarta Regional
Descriptive Qualitative Method
The result shows that the language style of the community in the social media in discussing the politics of the 2017 DKI regional elections that
election on Social Media.
emerged such as sarcasm and cynicism can indicate the increasingly high level
of community
rudeness in expressing their opinions on social media and this can cause frictions in the community.
The analysis done by Evayani and Rido (2019) entitled Representation of Social Actors in Sexual Violence Issue in The New York Times and The Jakarta Post Newspapers: A Critical Discourse Analysis has objective to reveal how social actors are represented in news reporting of sexual violence. In doing the analysis the researcher conducts Van Leeuwen’s theory of social actor representation. As the result of the research, the researcher finds out that to detach the actor (exclusion), both of the newspapers are presented mostly the actor especially the victim as a passive agent and the perpetrator as an active agent. Further, the significant differences were found in the uses of inclusion strategy which confirms that The Jakarta Post presented the actor as specific individual such as by their gender, age and occupation. Meanwhile The New York Times presented them by their surname and title such as “Professor”.
A journal from Eklesia and Rido (2020) entitled Representation of People with HIV/AIDS in The Jakarta Post and Jakarta Globe: A Critical Discourse Analysis examined representational meanings from the transitivity choices used by news report from The Jakarta Post and Jakarta Globe in reporting people with HIV- positive cases and exposing the underlying ideology behind the representation. In
doing the analysis, the researchers applied Fairclough’s three-dimensional model (1995) of critical discourse analysis. The findings revealed that both news media dominantly report people with HIV/AIDS through material process, then followed by verbal process and relational process. Furthermore, the study also found that people with HIV/AIDS are represented as discriminated and threatened group in The Jakarta Post, while they represented as a mistreated group in Jakarta Globe.
Thesis from Ichsan (2020) entitled Satire in the Daily Show with Trevor Noah investigated how the host is using satire in the Daily Show with Trevor Noah. In this research, qualitative method is applied and the researcher is using Abrams’
theory (2012) of types of satire. As the result of the research, it indicates that there are sixty-three (63) utterances found in the Daily Show with Trevor Noah that correlated to types of satire, namely: Juvenalian satire (27 data), Horation satire (26 data) and Manippean satire (10 data). Further, the host (Trevor Noah) is using irony, parody, comparison, humor in satire in order to give critics and satire for the cluster of ideas and people’s behavior that can be noticed in the Daily Show with Trevor Noah.
A Journal from Sipra and Rashid (2013) entitled Critical Discourse analysis of Martin Luther King’s Speech in Socio-Political Perspective examined the speech of Martin Luther King “When I Have Dream”, how the speech explicates the term like social, cultural and political inequalities in the light of text and framework.
Further, the research is applying Fairclough’s theory of 3D model (text, context, discourse practice and socio-political aspect of speech). The result of the research shows that in the speech, there are certain textual and stylistic devices have been used very frequently in order to achieve some specific purposes. The speech was
syntactically well-organized with frequent repetitions emphasizing the main theme which is inequality of socio-cultural rights and racial discrimination on the basis of color and creed. The choice of the lexemes is not well ordered according to situation but also recapitulating background and indicating the relational and expressive values of the speaker. Luther king very impressively and successfully with the help of metaphors and other devices identifies the relationship between the powerful and oppressed.
Lastly, a journal from Firmansyah and Agustina (2020) entitled Sarcasm and Cynicism in Political Discourse on The 2017 DKI Jakarta Regional Election on Social Media examined the sarcasm and cynicism language in political discourse on 2017 Jakarta Regional Election on social media. Here, the researchers are using semantic-pragmatic theory and applying descriptive qualitative method. Further, the result of the research indicated that the language style of the community in the social media in discussing the politics of the 2017 DKI regional elections that emerged such as sarcasm and cynicism can indicate the increasingly high level of community rudeness in expressing their opinions on social media and this can cause frictions in the community. In this case, the use of satire such as sarcasm and cynicism also affected the community in making choices in the DKI Jakarta Regional Head Election and it also faded out the role of social media that should be carried out by the public in carrying out its function as a platform to express opinions in a democratic country.
Further, regarding to the previous studies above, it can be noticed that the similarity from this recent study comes from the approach and theory applied where both of the previous studies and the recent study is applying critical discourse analysis
(CDA) approach and using Fairclough’s theory of three-dimensional framework.
Moreover, the difference can be seen from the object of the research where the previous studies, the objects of the research are in the form of political speeches, newspapers and different episode of the Daily Show with Trevor Noah (on the third previous study). Meanwhile in this recent study, the writer uses different topic or episode of the Daily Show with Trevor Noah than the third previous study.
However, the major gap between the previous studies and the recent research is that in this research, the writer is applying critical discourse study in order to describe, interpret and explain sarcasm that is uttered by the speaker (Trevor Noah) which make the research can be analyzed more deeply and critically.
2.2 Critical Discourse Analysis
Critical linguistic also known as Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) firstly originated in Britain in 1980s when the work Language and Control was published (Van Dijk in Amerian & Esmaili, 2015). CDA is a type of discourse analytical research that primarily studies the way social power abuse, dominance, and inequality are enacted, reproduced, and resisted by text and talk in the social and political context (Van Dijk in Tanen et al, 2015).
Meanwhile Fairclough in Rahimi and Riasati (2011) stated that CDA is fundamentally concerned with analyzing bias as well as transparent structural relationship of dominance, discrimination, power and control as manifested in language. In that case, it can be said that CDA is a study of linguistic that is able to finds out the correlation of language and power. Later on, Van Dijk in Yunus, 2017) also added that the function of CDA is to uncover the relationship between
language, society, power, ideology, values and opinions. The object of CDA is public speech, such as advertisement, newspaper, political propagandas, official documents, laws and regulations and many others (Fairclough in Vahid and Esmae’li, 2012).
Fairclough in Vahid and Esmae’li (2012) gives his statements on the actual nature of discourse and text analysis. In his view, there are three levels of discourse, firstly, social conditions of production and interpretation, i.e. the social factors, which contributed or lead to the origination of a text and at the same time, how the same factors effect interpretation. Secondly, the process of production and interpretation, i.e. in what way the text was produced and how this effects interpretation. Thirdly, the text, being the product of the first two stages, commented on above. Fairclough subsequently gives three stages of CDA, which are in accord with the three above mentioned levels of discourse:
1. Description is the stage which is concerned with the formal properties of the text.
2. Interpretation is concerned with the relationship between text interaction by seeing the text as a product of a process of production, and as a resource in the process of interpretation.
3. Explanation is concerned with the relationship between interaction and social context –with the social determination of the processes of production and interpretation, and their social effects.
2.3 Fairclough's Three-Dimensional Framework
Fairclough's model for CDA consists of three inter-related processes of analysis tied to three inter-related dimensions of discourse (Fairclough, 2010). These three dimensions are:
1. The object of analysis (including verbal, visual or verbal and visual texts).
2. The processes by means of which the object is produced and received (writing/speaking/designing and reading/listening/viewing) by human subjects.
3. The socio-historical conditions which govern these processes.
Figure 1. Fairclough’s Dimension of Discourse and Discourse Analysis (adapted from Fairclough, 2010)
Fairclough (2010) stated that, each of these dimensions requires a different kind of analysis;
1. The first dimension represents “the object of analysis (including verbal, visual or verbal and visual texts)”. The term text, however, is not only linguistic units of sentences or clauses. All semiotic indications such as images, different colors,
signs, sounds, etc. are considered as text. This first dimension also known as description analysis. Look at the example:
No Parking!
On the simple phrase above, it can be seen that from the textual dimension, the phrase is not started by using subject but adjective (No) and verb added by suffix -ing (Parking) closed by using exclamation mark which represented an order or prohibition. In that case, the textual dimension above shows that the phrase has systemic function as an order or prohibition for the readers so that they are not parking on that area near that sign.
2. The second dimension can be described as “the processes by which the object is produced and received (writing/speaking/designing and reading/listening/viewing) by human subjects" where this is done by using questions like “who are the producers?” and “what are their objectives?".
Therefore, this processing analysis also known as interpretation. Example:
On the phrase No Parking! above, it can be noticed that the producer of this text can be from police department in some district and the objective of the text is to prohibit the locals who own vehicles to not park their vehicles near that sign.
Furthermore, the text (or sign) can be found on the freeway or highway where drivers really must not stop so there will be no traffic jam and interestingly, the text that is put as the sign also represented the police department as announcement for the drivers as the receiver to notice the prohibition for stopping and parking their vehicles near that sign when they are looking at it.
3. Finally, the third dimension of discourse could be described as "power behind discourse‟ or as social practices (explanation), because it is containing “the socio-historical conditions that dominate these processes [of production and reception]”. It seeks to answer questions like: “with what kind(s) of discourse(s) or social practice(s) is the object of investigation interrelated?”. Example:
Still on the phrase of No Parking! above, it can be noticed that there must be some kind of historical event of why the producer (police department) make the prohibition for the drivers to not parking their vehicles near that sign. In this case, since the text is to prevent traffic jam on either high way or freeway, it can be said that the reason of the text comes after there was a traffic jam because of careless drivers who stop their vehicles without any emergency state.
Moreover, regarding to the sociocultural practice, Fairclough in Mintarsih et al (2020) also stated that the social structures can be from various dimensions, such as economic, political, cultural, ideological and others and discourse may be implicated in all of those without being reduced to the discourse itself. In other word, the important aspect of this dimension is not limited in the social, but can be in other social structures such in politics, economic, cultural and even ideological.
Further, the reason why the writer uses Fairclough’s approach as the tool of critical discourse analysis is because it is very useful in providing multiple points of analytic entry. Fairclough (2010) explained that it does not matter which kind of analysis one begins with, as long as in the end they are all included and are shown to be mutually explanatory. In addition, the writer also noticed that by using
Fairclough’s three dimensional framework, the patterns of discourse found in the data source can be described, interpreted and explained vividly.
2.4 Sarcasm
The term sarcasm comes from the Greek “sarcasmos” which was revealed from the verb “sarcasein” which means “tear up the flesh like a dog”, “biting the lips out of anger” or “talking with bitterness” (Karoui et al, 2017). In other word, sarcasm is a complex linguistic phenomenon where the meaning of the intended speech is not similar with the literal meaning and it is also a figurative language that is used to convey meaning or messages verbally and in writing with the intention of delivering satire directly and openly to an object, person or certain group (Sperber and Wilson, 2012). In other word, sarcasm is a figurative language that can be used or applied to convey meaning or messages verbally where it contains with satire directly and openly to a person or certain group/community.
Sperber and Wilson (2012) explained sarcasm as form of messages (opinions of sarcasm, criticism that are conveyed from the content or texts of sarcasm), person who delivers or conveys the sarcasm, tragedy (a phenomenon that happened to exploit sarcasm) and media that is used to deliver or convey sarcasm. However, although sarcasm is a very complex linguistic phenomenon and contains with ironical words, a general form of sarcasm is actually aimed at aligning positive sentiments attached to negative situations and/or vice versa.
Furthermore, Attardo in Anolli et al (2001) explained that there are at least six purposes of sarcasm based on how and when they are used in conversations, they are:
2.4.1 Sarcasm as Group of Affiliation
Sarcasm works in two ways, firstly, highlights the boundary of a group by stating the standards or values that the group has and secondly, it expresses an understatement about outsider of the group that does not meet the standards of the group.
2.4.2 Sarcasm as Sophistication
In this case, sarcasm is not only used for humor, but also in some cases, it expresses the speaker’s level of emotion.
2.4.3 Sarcasm as Evaluation
Sarcasm can avoid negative effects of the criticism that may emerges, but at the same time, it also can mute the positive effects of the praise that it may conveyed.
In other word, in using sarcasm as evaluation, the speaker does not really want to show negativity in criticizing someone or show overexaggerated in giving compliment.
2.4.4 Sarcasm as Politeness
Although sarcasm seems aggressive, but it can be used as a tool for politeness so that the hearer/listener will be less offended.
2.4.5 Sarcasm as Persuasive Aspect
Sarcasm also can be used as powerful rhetorical tool in order to persuade other and it can be achieved in three ways. Firstly, the sarcasm needs to provide the evident for the utterance to be accepted as a truth. Second, it must be easy to memorize and lastly, it must be informative.
2.4.6 Sarcasm as Retractability
Sarcasm lets someone “take a noncommittal attitude towards what he/she was said or it can be said that the sarcasm can be used to avoid any responsibility for the mistake that the speaker said.
