A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF IMPOLITENESS STRATEGIES IN THE SECOND DEBATE OF INDONESIAN VICE PRESIDENT CANDIDATES 2024

Mentari Ramadanti Kusumah, - (2024) A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF IMPOLITENESS STRATEGIES IN THE SECOND DEBATE OF INDONESIAN VICE PRESIDENT CANDIDATES 2024. S1 thesis, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Baca Full Text klik disini
[img] Text
S_ING_2001115_Title.pdf
Download (304kB)
[img] Text
S_ING_2001115_Chapter1.pdf
Download (116kB)
[img] Text
S_ING_2001115_Chapter2.pdf
Restricted to Staf Perpustakaan
Download (109kB)
[img] Text
S_ING_2001115_Chapter3.pdf
Download (133kB)
[img] Text
S_ING_2001115_Chapter4.pdf
Restricted to Staf Perpustakaan
Download (304kB)
[img] Text
S_ING_2001115_Chapter5.pdf
Download (37kB)
Official URL: https://repository.upi.edu/

Abstract

This research is a pragmatic study which investigates impolite acts performed in Vice Presidents’ Debate by three candidates: Muhaimin Iskandar, Gibran Rakabuming, and Mahfud MD. It aims to describe the types and functions of impoliteness strategies and to identify the candidates’ responses toward the impoliteness strategies performed in the debate. This research employed a descriptive qualitative method in which the data were in the form of utterances. The data source was taken from the debate video of the 2nd Debate of Vice President candidates from YouTube. Drawing on Culpeper’s (2011) theory on impoliteness strategies, the results of this research reveal that all five types of impoliteness strategies are used by the three candidates with Bald on Record Impoliteness as the most dominant type used in the debate with 12 occurrences (30%). This finding indicatesthat the candidates mostly attack their candidates in a direct, clear, unambiguous, and concise way. Moreover, Positive Impoliteness, Negative Impoliteness, Sarcasm and Mock Impoliteness have the same numbers with 9 occurrences (22.5%), and Withhold Politeness is only used 1 (2.5%). Regarding functions, three functions of impoliteness strategies are discovered; namely Affective Impoliteness with 21 occurrences (52.5%), Coercive Impoliteness with 16 occurrences (40%), and Entertaining Impoliteness with 3 occurrences (7.5%). The most dominant function used by the candidates is Affective Impoliteness. This suggests that the candidates aim to make emotional explosions to each other. As for responses, the most frequently used response by the candidates is Countering the Face Attack (75%). All the candidates used this response because they responded to another candidate’s attack to defend their face from the face attack. In conclusion, this research has demonstrated that the use of impoliteness strategies in debate can impact citizens whether to vote for politicians or hate the politicians due to their performance on the debate stage. Keywords: Debate, Functions of Impoliteness Strategies, Impoliteness Strategies, Responses, Types of Impoliteness Strategies

Item Type: Thesis (S1)
Additional Information: ID SINTA Dosen Pembimbing: Ernie Diyahkusumaning Ayu Imperiani: 5978093
Uncontrolled Keywords: Pragmatic, Impoliteness Strategies, Debate, Types of Impoliteness Strategies, Functions of Impoliteness Strategies, Responses toward the Impolite Acts
Subjects: J Political Science > JA Political science (General)
L Education > L Education (General)
P Language and Literature > P Philology. Linguistics
Divisions: Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra > Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris > Program Studi Bahasa dan Sastra Inggris (nonpendidikan)
Depositing User: Mentari Ramadanti Kusumah
Date Deposited: 11 Oct 2024 06:48
Last Modified: 11 Oct 2024 06:48
URI: http://repository.upi.edu/id/eprint/127265

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item