The Study of Speech Act Sets of Refusal on Indonesian Students Speaking English

Candra Cahyani Gani, Muhammad Sukirlan, Ari Nurweni

Abstract


Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui apakah ada perbedaan produksi ujaran dalam menolak undangan antara siswa yang memiliki kemampuan Bahasa Inggris yang tinggi dan rendah. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian kualitatif dengan menggunakan purposive sampling. Sasaran penelitian ini adalah 4 siswa dengan nilai IELTS lebih dari atau sama dengan 6.5 dan 4 siswa dengan nilai IELTS kurang dari atau sama dengan 5. Tes berbicara dengan metode roleplay digunakan sebagai alat pengambilan data. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa siswa dengan kemampuan Bahasa Inggris yang tinggi mampu memproduksi ujaran yang lebih bervariasi dalam menolak undangan dan mampu menggunakan strategi penolakan yang berbeda dalam situasi sosial yang berbeda.

The aim of this study was to find out whether there was a difference of speech act set of refusal between high proficiency and low proficiency students. This research was qualitative research using purposive sampling. The subjects were 5 students who have 6.5 IELTS score or higher and 5 students who have 5 IELTS score or lower. Speaking test and roleplay method were used to collect the data. The result of this research showed that high proficiency students produce more uterances to express refusal than the those with low proficiency. This indicates that higher proficiency students produce various uterances in the different social contexts.

Keywords: speech act, refusal, high proficiency, low proficiency.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Austin, John Langshaw. 1975. How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Beebe, Leslie M., Tomoko T, and Robin U. 1990. Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. New York: Newbury House Publishers.

Blum-Kulka, Shoshana. 1987. Indirectness and politeness in requests: same or different?. Journal of Pragmatics, 11(2), 131-146.

Canale, M. and M. Swain. 2003. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1- 14.

Canale, M and Swain, M. 1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing'. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 19 30.

Cohen, A. and Olshtain, E. .1981. Developing a measure of sociocultural competence: The case of apology. Language Learning, 31(1), 113-134.

Hymes, D.H. 1972. Toward ethnographies of communication, language and social context. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Jones, Leo. 1983. Functions of American English: communication activities for the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, Jack C. 1981. Communicative needs in foreign language learning. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu.

Setiyadi, Ag. Bambang. 2006. Metode penelitian pengajaran bahasa asing. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.

Tannen, Deborah. 1984. The pragmatics of cross-cultural communication. Applied Linguistics, 5(3), 189-195.

Terrell, T. D. 1980. A natural approach to the teaching of verb forms and function in Spanish. Foreign Language Annals, 13(2), 129-136.

Umale, Jaishree. 2012. Pragmatic failure in refusal strategies: British versus Omani interlocutors. Arab World English Journal, 2 (1), 18-46.

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


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018 U-JET

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.