Email this article PERSONAL DEIXIS USED IN MALCOLM X’S “THE BALLOT OR THE BULLET” SPEECH
(1) Universitas Negeri Gorontalo
(2) Universitas Negeri Gorontalo
(3) Universitas Negeri Gorontalo
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract
This study aims to observe and describe the types of personal deixis used in Malcolm X’s “The Ballot or The Bullet” speech using the theory of Yule (1996). In collecting the data, this qualitative descriptive method was used by watching the video documentation, downloading the transcript, and reading the script that contain personal deixis in the speech. The theory of Miles and Huberman (1994) was used in this study as the steps to analyze the data which consists of data reduction, data display, and data drawing. The result of this study found out there was 662 deixis that consisted of three types of person deixis which are first-person, second-person, and third-person divided into 14 types of personal deixis use, i.e 222 first-person deixes, 211 second-person deixis, and 229 third-person with second-person deixis You (174 times use), They (84 times use) and We (79 times use) as the most often used type in the speech. In addition, Malcolm X used personal deictic expressions as a way to motivate and influence the African-American community in empowering the important philosophy of black nationalism against the racism issue of the African-American community in the 20th-century era.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Abdullah, M. (2015). Deixis: A pragmatics analysis. Language in India, 15(12), 3-9.
Agung, W. K. S. (2017). Personal deixis as addressing system to express solidarity at campus community. Journal of Linguistics, Literature & Language Teaching, 3(1), 11-29.
Astria, A., Mujiyanto, J., & Rukmini, D. (2019). The realization of deixis in students’ writing at Sekolah Tinggi Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Muhammadiyah Pringsewu Lampung. English Education Journal (EEJ), 9(4), 517 – 526. https://doi.org/10.15294/EEJ.V9I4.32170
Azar, B. S. (2002). Understanding and using English grammar with answer key (3rd Ed.). New York: Pearson Education.
French, P. A., Uehling Jr., T. E., & Wettstein, H. K. (Eds.). (1979). Contemporary perspectives in the philosophy of language. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Grundy, P. (2013). Doing pragmatics. London: Routledge.
Gutzmann, D. (2014). Semantics vs. pragmatics. In D. Gutzmann, L. Matthewson, C. Meier, H. Rullmann, & T. E. Zimmerman (eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to semantics. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118788516.sem049
Ilmi, H. Z. (2018). Deixis analysis on the song lyrics of Ed Sheeran "Divide" album (Undergraduate Thesis). Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang, Indonesia. http://etheses.uin-malang.ac.id/id/eprint/13169
Kusumaningrum, W. R. (2016). Deixis analysis on Indonesian Shakespeare’s comics strip of Julius Caesar. Transformatika, 12(2), 73-82. https://doi.org/10.31002/transformatika.v12i2.191
Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. New York: The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
Lyons, J. (2000). Pengantar teori linguistik. Jakarta: Gramedia.
Miles, M. B., Huberman. A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd Ed.). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Novianty, F., Saleh, N. J., & Sukmawati. (2018). A comparative study on personal deixis of English. ELS Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies on Humanities, 1(2), 226-231. https://doi.org/10.34050/els-jish.v1i2.4394
Purba, R. (2015). Deixis in inauguration speech of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. Jurnal Mantik Penusa, 17(1), 75-85. Retrieved from https://e-jurnal.pelitanusantara.ac.id/index.php/mantik/article/view/125
Rahayu, K. (2015). The use of person deixis in Mata Najwa Talk Show (Doctoral dissertation). Diponegoro University, Semarang.
Rosmawaty. X. (2013). Analysis the use of the kind of deixis on ‘Ayat-Ayat Cinta’ novel by Habiburrahman El-Shirazy. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3(17), 57-66. Retrieved from https://www.ijhssnet.com/journal/index/2066
Sari, R. (2015). Deixis analysis through the interaction among the sstudents with different culture. Transformatika, 11(2), 41-48. https://doi.org/10.31002/transformatika.v11i2.208
Schiffrin, D. (1990). Between text and context: Deixis, anaphora, and the meaning of then. Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for The Study of Discourse, 10(3), 245-270. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1990.10.3.245
Szabó, Z. G. (2005). The distinction between semantics and pragmatics. In E. Lepore & B. C. Smith (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy (pp. 361-390). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199552238.003.0017
Verschueren, J. 2004. Understanding pragmatics. London: Arnold.
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v26i1.4268
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2023 Fakhirah Gobel, Kartin Lihawa, Hasanuddin Hasanuddin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Indexed and abstracted in:
LLT Journal Sinta 2 Certificate (S2 = Level 2)
We would like to inform you that LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching has been nationally accredited Sinta 2 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 23 No 1, 2020 till Vol 27 No 2, 2024
This work is licensed under CC BY-SA.
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt, e-ISSN 2579-9533 and p-ISSN 1410-7201, is published twice a year, namely in April and October by the English Language Education Study Programme of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.