EXTRALINGUISTIC CONTEXT ROLES IN DETERMINING MEANINGS OF JAVANESE PHATIC EXPRESSION MBOTEN: A SOCIOPRAGMATIC PERSPECTIVE

Kunjana Rahardi(1*),

(1) Sanata Dharma University
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


The indirect expression of intention in the Javanese culture-based speech community requires the speaker and the hearer to understand the importance of contexts in communication. Failure to understand the context of interaction will definitely impede communication and interaction, or even worse it may cause misunderstanding in the communication and interaction process. In the Javanese speech community, people may say mboten or no without intending to negate or to express falsity. On the contrary, people may say inggih or yes which does not necessarily mean to affirm or to express an assertion. Therefore, it is clear that in the Javanese speech community, the extralinguistic contexts in the communication is very important and defines the purpose of utterances. Based on the research background, the research on extralinguistic contexts to determine the meaning of mboten was carried out. The objective of the research was to elaborate the extralinguistic contexts which determine the meaning of mboten. The data consists of excerpts containing Javanese phatic mboten. The technique of collecting data was recording and note-taking. Besides, interview or speaking method was employed to gather the data. The data analysis was done using the distributional and content analysis methods. This research results in five functions of extralinguistic contexts to determine the meaning of the utterance. The five functions are: (1) the extralinguistic contexts to affirm the intention of negation; (2) the extralinguistic context as the background of negation; (3) the extralinguistic contexts to confirm the meaning of negation; (4) the extralinguistic contexts to affirm the intention of negation; (5) the extralinguistic contexts to affirm the phatic function. The result of the research is very important and contributes significantly to the development of linguistics, especially the development of pragmatics embedded in culture-specific concepts.

Keywords


extralinguistic contexts; pragmatic meaning; culture-based phatic

Full Text:

PDF

References


Allan, K. (2007). The pragmatics of connotation. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.08.004

Anderson, B. (1972). The Idea of Power in Javanese Culture. Culture and Politics in Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Blackledge, A., & Pavlenko, A. (2001). Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts. International Journal of Bilingualism. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069010050030101

Chen, J. (2017). Research Trends in Intercultural Pragmatics. Australian Journal of Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2016.1204903

Chen, R., & Yang, D. (2010). Responding to compliments in Chinese: Has it changed? Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.006

Clyne, M. (2006). Some thoughts on pragmatics, sociolinguistic variation, and intercultural communication. Intercultural Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1515/IP.2006.005

Coupland, J., Coupland, N., & Robinson, J. D. (1992). How are you?: Negotiating phatic communion. Language in Society. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500015268

Culpeper, J. (2010). Historical sociopragmatics. In Historical Pragmatics.

Dippold, D. (2012). Pragmatics for Language Educators. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.01.011

Eckert, P. (2008). Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2008.00374.x

Gretsch, C. (2009). Pragmatics and integrational linguistics. Language and Communication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2009.02.010

Gu, Y. (1998). Doing pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)82074-7

Gumperz, J. J. (2008). Interactional Sociolinguistics: A Personal Perspective. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470753460.ch12

Hassall, T. (2012). Sociopragmatics is slower: A reply to Chang. Language Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2011.12.001

Irawanto, D. W., Ramsey, P. L., & Ryan, J. C. (2011). Challenge of leading in Javanese culture. Asian Ethnicity. https://doi.org/10.1080/14631369.2011.571829

Izadi, A. (2016). Over-politeness in Persian professional interactions. Journal of Pragmatics, 102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.06.004

Kulkarni, D. (2014). Exploring Jakobsons phatic function in instant messaging interactions. Discourse and Communication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481313507150

Lee, B. P. H. (2001). Mutual knowledge, background knowledge and shared beliefs: Their roles in establishing common ground. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00128-9

Leech, G. (2007). Politeness: Is there an East-West divide? Journal of Politeness Research. https://doi.org/10.1515/PR.2007.009

Limberg, H. (2009). Impoliteness and threat responses. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.02.003

Mahsun, M. (2005). Metode Penelitian Bahasa. Jakarta: PT Raja Gra?ndo Persada. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.1991

Mey, J. L. (2006). Focus-on issue: Intercultural pragmatics and sociolinguistics. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.002

Mey, J. L. (2017). The pragmatics of metaphor: An ecological view. In The Routledge Handbook of Ecolinguistics. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315687391

Mey, J. L. L., Brown, K., & Mey, J. L. L. (2006). Pragmatics: Overview. In Encyclodpedia of language and linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal1338

Norrick, N. R. (2009). Interjections as pragmatic markers. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.08.005

Onwuegbuzie, A., & Leech, N. (2005). On becoming a pragmatic researcher: The importance of combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570500402447

Rahardi, R. K. (2016). Personal and Communal Assumptions to Determine Pragmatic Meanings of Phatic Functions. Lingua Cultura, 10(10(2)), 9598. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.21512/lc.v10i2.897

Rahardi, R. K. (2017a). Kefatisan Berbahasa: Kajian pragmatik tutursapa keseharian warga masyarakat. In KOLITA 15 (pp. 711). Jakarta: Atmajaya Catholic University.

Rahardi, R. K. (2017b). Linguistic Impoliteness in The Sociopragmatic Perspective. Jurnal Humaniora. https://doi.org/10.22146/jh.v29i3.24954

Rahardi, R. K. (2017c). Pragmatic Phenomena Constellation in Specific Culture Dimension Language Study. International Journal of Humanity Studies, 1(1), 8492. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.24071/ijhs.2017.010109

Rahardi, R. K. (2018a). Elemen dan Fungsi Konteks Sosial, Sosietal, dan Situasional dalam Menentukan Makna Pragmatik Kefatisan Berbahasa. In Prosiding Seminar Tahunan Linguistik Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia (SETALI 2018) (pp. 654658). Bandung: Sekolah Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Bandung.

Rahardi, R. K. (2018b). Konstelasi Kefatisan dalam Teks-teks Natural Religius dengan Latar Belakang Kultur Spesifik. In Prosiding Kongres Internasional Masyarakat Linguistik Indonesia 2018 (pp. 274279). Manokwari, Papua Barat: MLI.

Recanati, F. (2008). Pragmatics and Semantics. In The Handbook of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756959.ch20

Robbins, J. (2008). Introduction: Cultural and Linguistic Anthropology and the Opacity of Other Minds. Anthropological Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1353/anq.0.0005

Science, L., Company, P., Long, M. H., Canagarajah, S., Peterson, R. A., Nagel, J., Backus, A. (2017). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(88)90022-X

Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (2001). Intercultural Communication. A discurse Approach. SocioLinguistics. https://doi.org/10.1128/EC.00123-08

Senft, G. (2014). Understanding pragmatics. Understanding Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203776476

Spencer-Oatey, H., & Jiang, W. (2003). Explaining cross-cultural pragmatic findings: Moving from politeness maxims to sociopragmatic interactional principles (SIPs). Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(03)00025-0

Streeck, J. (1984). Embodied contexts, transcontextuals, and the timing of speech acts. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(84)90067-5

Subandi, M. A. (2011). Family Expressed Emotion in a Javanese Cultural Context. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11013-011-9220-4

Sudaryanto. (2016). Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa (1st ed.). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press.

Sukarno, S. (2015). POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN RESPONDING TO COMPLIMENTS IN JAVANESE. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v4i2.686

Travis, C. E. (2004). The ethnopragmatics of the diminutive in conversational Colombian Spanish. Intercultural Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X10000136

Van Dijk, T. A. (1977). Context and cognition: Knowledge frames and speech act comprehension. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(77)90035-2

Verschueren, J. (1997). Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)84203-8

Waugh, L. R., Catalano, T., Al Masaeed, K., Do, T. H., & Renigar, P. G. (2016). Critical discourse analysis: Definition, approaches, relation to pragmatics, critique, and trends. In Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy and Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12616-6_4

Yang, Z., Cai, K., Tang, J., Zhang, L., Su, Z., & Li, J. (2011). Social context summarization. In Proceedings of the 34th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in Information - SIGIR 11. https://doi.org/10.1145/2009916.2009954

Yu, K. A. (2011). Culture-specific concepts of politeness: Indirectness and politeness in English, Hebrew, and Korean requests. Intercultural Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1515/IPRG.2011.018

Yusuf, M., Adams, C., & Dingley, K. (2014). Research philosopy and methodologies of e-Government: Update From ECEG and ICEG. In Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Government, ECEG.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/ijhs.v3i1.1898

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Kunjana Rahardi




Indexed and abstracted in:

 

         

 

IJHS Sinta 3 Certificate (S3 = Level 3)

International Journal of Humanity Studies (IJHS) has been nationally accredited Sinta 3 by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia based on the decree  No. Surat Keputusan 158/E/KPT/2021. Validity for 5 years: Vol 4 No 1, 2020 till Vol 8 No 2, 2024

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 

p-ISSN: 2597-470X (since 31 August 2017); e-ISSN: 2597-4718 (since 31 August 2017)

Flag Counter

Notice: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the editorial team or publishers.

International Journal of Humanity Studies (IJHS) is a scientific journal in English published twice a year, namely in September and March, by Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.