Skripsi

The use of discourse markers to mitigate FTAs in classroom interaction / Irawan Anggadi Rachman

Abstrak
ABSTRACT Rachman Irawan Anggadi. 2017. The Use of Discourse Markers to Mitigate FTAs in Classroom Interaction. Sarjana s Thesis. Universitas Negeri Malang Department of English. Advisors (1) Dr. Emalia Iragiliati Sukarni M.Pd. (2) Maria Hidayati S.S. M.A. Key words Discourse markers face face-threatening acts (FTAs) classroom interaction Discourse markers have received much attention in recent years in spoken conversation. This means that the use of discourse markers plays an important role in the spoken conversation. Many researchers have different arguments on the use of discourse markers. As a result there remain several unanswered questions regarding the function of discourse markers as a mitigator of Face-Threatening Acts (henceforth FTAs). This study aims at investigating the use of discourse markers to mitigate FTAs in classroom interaction e.g. the discourse markers used by the speakers during the classroom interaction the possible reasons using the discourse markers and the description of the background of participants to the use of the discourse markers. The researcher used a descriptive qualitative method to analyse the data. The data were derived from in-group conversations consisting of three to four students aged 20 at average and a questionnaire. The data were collected in the form of digital recordings using a cellphone. The transcribed conversations were then coded to make the data analysis easier to point out which discourse markers belong to the participant s sentence. The questionnaire consisted of eight questions asking about the background of the participants along with their knowledge about discourse markers. The findings show that the discourse markers used by the participants of the study are oh well and but or so because now then I mean you know oh yeah mhm mhm uhh okay I think in my opinion and then yeah oh okey by the way and I know. One of the possible reason using the discourse markers is to connect the speaker and hearer s ideas. It justifies that the background of the participants describes discourse markers used in speaking. The use of but and in my opinion vividly shows that those discourse markers can function as an FTA mitigator. The discourse marker yeah is used to lessen the speaker s confidence and not to violate the addressee s face. The use of oh and well is to control emotional and adjust of social relationship (Liu 2006) and to mitigate the FTAs during the conversation (Jucker 1997). The discourse marker I think expresses difference or saving face (Brinton 1996). The use of I mean can also reduce the social distance between the speaker and the hearer. When asking a opinion the speaker inserts so in order not to threaten the hearer s face. The participants of this study present the possible reasons to use the discourse markers. It turns out that the background of the participants of this study correlates with the use of discourse markers. This study concludes that there are some discourse markers that can be used as an FTAs mitigator during the speaking class interaction viewed from Schiffrin s (1987) inventory of items. This study justifies that the background of the participants describes their way of speaking since they cannot be separated from politeness. Based on the researcher s analysis the discourse markers that can perform as an FTAs mitigator are I think I mean yeah oh well so but and in my opinion. Therefore not all perhaps function to mitigate the FTAs and their function to do so is closely related to the context or the social function or any relevant topics when having interaction. This study provides benefits both theoretically and practically. Theoretically it provides with the use of discourse markers to mitigate FTAs in classroom interaction. Practically this study can help linguistics students figure out the deep functions of discourse markers when they are engaged in interactions. This study can also be further developed and discussed by lingustics researchers more on sociopragmatic contexts.

Informasi Detail

DDC

Rs 420.7 RAC u

Prodi

Universitas Negeri Malang. Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, 2017.

Deskripsi Fisik

xii, 71 lembar : il. , tab. ; 30 cm

Bahasa

No Reg

05535/KI/17

Edisi

Skripsi (Sarjana)--Universitas Negeri Malang. 2017

Subjek

1. BAHASA INGGRIS - PEMBELAJARAN
2. ENGLISH LANGUAGE - STUDY AND TEACHING

Pembimbing

1. Emalia Iragiliati Sukarni ; 2. Maria Hidayati

Lampiran Berkas