1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Discourse analysis is concern with the study of the relationship between language and

the contexts in which it is used. Discourse analysts study language in use: written text of all

kinds, and spoken data by conversation to highly institutionalized forms of talk. The word

“Discourse” is a general term for examples of language use which has been produced as the

result of an act of communication. Whereas the word grammar, which cannot be separated

from the discussion of discourse, refers to the rules a language uses to form grammatical units

such as clauses, phrases, and sentences. Discourse analysis can be defined as the study of

how sentences in spoken and written language form larger meaningful units such as

paragraphs, conversations, and interviews.

Discourse analysis has grown into a wide ranging and heterogeneous discipline which

finds its unity in the description of language the sentence and an interest in the contexts and

culture influences which affect language in use. Discourse analysis is not concerned with the

description and analysis of spoken interaction, but the term Discourse analysis to cover the

study of spoken and written interaction.

In relation to the development of discourse analysis, there are two main approaches

to discourse analysis that need to be discussed. One of these approaches is Discourse

analysis, which concentrates on the structure of naturally occurring spoken language. This is

exemplified by such discourse as conversations, interviews, commentaries, and speeches. The

second approach is related to text analysis, in which the structure of written language

becomes the main concern of the analysis. Text analysis, in this respect, includes such things

as the analysis of essays, notices, road signs, and chapters.

These approaches have a common concern. They highlight the need to see language

as a dynamic, social, interactive phenomenon. This phenomenon can happen between speaker

and listener or writer and reader.

2

CHAPTER II

FINDING AND DISCUSSION

A. Halliday

According to Halliday (1976), discourse is a unit of language large than the sentence

and which firmly rooted in a specific context. This definition of discourse emphasizes the

way in which social context who is speaking, who is listening and where and when the

instance of language occurs determine the nature enunciation.

Cohesion is one of the important elements in creating discourse that communicate

effectively and naturally: only a text, spoken and written, of whatever length that forms

unified whole is called discourse. Cohesion is a linguistic phenomenon in a discourse which

assists the hearer to understand and perceive the text as a single unit. Hasan and Halliday

(1976: 24) explained that cohesion occurs where interpretation of some elements in the

discourse is dependent on that of another element and that one presupposes the other, in the

sense that it cannot be effectively decoded except by recourse to it. There are five sources of

cohesion can be found in English such as cohesion through reference, cohesion through

substitution, cohesion through ellipsis, cohesion through conjunction and cohesion through

lexical items.

1. Cohesion through Reference

Reference is a specific nature of the information that is signaled for retrieval and

the cohesion lies in the continuity of reference. There are three types of reference such

as: Personal reference, demonstrative reference, and comparative reference.

a. Personal reference is a reference by means of function in speech situation,

through the category of person.

Example:

Grammatical Function Head Modifier

Class Noun (Pronoun) Determiner

I me mine my

You yours your

she her hers her

we us ours our

3

b. Demonstrative reference is achieved by means of location, on a scale of

proximity.

Example:

Grammatical

function

Head Adjunct Modifier

Class Determiner Adverb Determiner

Proximity:

near

far

neutral

this these

that those

here (Now)

there then

the

c. Comparative reference involves identity or similarity. The reference may be

anaphoric or cataphoric depending on its referent point. Anaphoric or

cataphoric is a usually abstract reference item points forward to a specific

element within the subsequent text for its interpretation. For example: “There it

is my so much admired watch”. In the reader has to look at the whole sentence

to make sense of second word “it” which refers to the specific item “watch” at

the end.

2. Cohesion through Substitution

Substitution as another type of cohesive relation is the process in which one item

within a text or discourse is replaced by another. Substitution is a relation on the

lexicogrammatical level (level of grammar and vocabulary) between linguistic

items, such as words or phrase.

Example: Jack’s car is very old and ugly. He should get a nicer one

The Substitution is that the substituted items are always exchangeable by the items

they stand for. Word “one” could easily be replaced by “car” without changing the

meaning of the sentence. The difference between reference and substitution is that

reference the presupposed items can almost never replace the items which refer to

them.

4

3. Cohesion through ellipsis

Ellipsis as a type of cohesive relation is very similar to substitution. While

substitution referred to the replacement of one textual element by another and

ellipsis is simply characterized by the omission of an item. The process can,

therefore be interpreted as that form of substitution by zero.

Example:

Marry ate some chocolate chip cookies and Robert (blank) some gummi

bears

The predicator “ate” is left out in the second half of the sentence and is

presupposed because it already occurred before. It would of course, also be

possible to repeat the predicator again at the position where it has been left

out.

4. Cohesion through Conjunction

Conjunction is the fourth type of grammatical cohesion, but forms the borderline to

the field of lexical cohesion since it also includes lexical features. It is not very easy

to give precise explanation if the way in which conjunction create cohesion.

Conjunctions are different in the sense, that they are a specification of the way in

which what is to follow is systematically connected to what has gone before.

Example:

Are you listening to me or not?

That sentence means that connect different possibilities of something

5. Cohesion through Lexical Items or Lexical Cohesion

Lexical Cohesion is generally understood as the cohesive effect achieved by the

selection of vocabulary. This type cohesion can be subdivided into the categories

such as reiteration and collocation. Reiteration has to do with the use of general

nouns to create a cohesive effect by replacing one element by another in the

ongoing text/discourse. Example:

Repetition I met some young ladies at the conference. The

ladies were good looking

5

Synonym I was served with a good meal yesterday at the

party. The food was delicious

Hyponym (Superordinate) I bought plenty of fruits yesterday at the market.

These fruits are oranges, pineapples, apple, grapes

and mango.

And Collocation are lexical item that regular occur and by doing so create cohesion

within a give text / discourse. Moreover Collocations is this is achieved through the

association of lexical items that regularly occur. It also involves pairs of words

drawn from the same order series .Example:

pair of opposite husband – wife, nephew – niece

antonyms black – white, full – empty

converses order – obey

part – whole relationship air plane – wing, pants – pocket.

part to part relationship nose – ear

B. David Nunan

According to Nunan (1993: 20), discourse analysis is study these text – forming re

the devices. However we do so with reference to the purpose and functions for which the

discourse was produced, as well as the context within which the discourse was created. Their

purpose is to show how the linguistic elements enable language user to communicate in

context. In considering the purpose for language is used, we can divided between two such as

‘transactional language’ means that language used to obtain goods and services and

‘interpersonal language’ means that language used for socializing. For example:

Interpersonal Transactional

A: It’s a worry isn’t it? A: Where do you keep your stuff?

6

B: What?

A: Your boyfriend. When you want to marry

with him?

B: I don’t know. Maybe if I have good career.

A: You’re in it?

B: What?

A: You’re in it. It means that you have good

career?

B: I might get better in five years. Be . . .

A: Be a miracle (laughter)

B: What? What did you say?

A: Be a miracle, you just stay at home. Never do

something for your career or just wait for a long

time.

B: Be a thrill.

B: Next aisle, in middle row of shelves.

A: Oh, yeah, got it. Is this the smallest

you have got?

B: Yeah, why?

A: It is a bit

B: Hmmm… the Olympic brand’s on

special.

A: Right, there one million and still not

cheap.

Moreover there some elements in discourse such as:

1) Cohesion

Cohesion that is sequences of sentence which seem united, contain what are called

text-forming devices.According to Halliday and Hasan (1976) in Nunan (1993) state

that the most comprehensive descriptive and analysis of these divides into four such

as reference, substitution and ellipsis, conjunction, and lexical cohesion.

a. Reference

Reference means that mention of something with another something that

coming up before or after. There are three kinds of reference such as personal

reference, demonstrative reference and comparative reference.

Personal Demonstrative Comparative

Mia didn’t have

money. She

could buy new

To admit that his

country had to change,

Andra could have

become a wary music in

A: would you like

these seats?

B: No, thanks. I’d

like the other

7

cloth the Korea music and

promoting music. This

didn’t happen

seats.

Form Written Written Spoken

Meaning In this case Mia

as a subject of

the sentence and

she express

pronouns of

name Mia.

Andra could have

become a wary music in

the Korea music and

promoting music means

that the sentence

represents the word to

change.

A talk that she/he

offer many seat

(these seats) to B to

choose one of them.

Function To identify

individual and

objects those are

named at some

other point in

the text.

Expressing through

determiner and adverbs.

These items can

represent a single word

or phrase or much

longer of the sentence.

Express after

adjective and adverb

to compare items

within a text in terms

of similar.

b. Substitution and ellipsis

Substitution is something of another thing and ellipsis is described as a form of

substitution in which the original item is replaced by zero. There are 3 types of

substitution such as nominal, verbal and clausal substitution.

Nominal substitution Verbal substitution Clausal substitution

Example:

There are some new

tenis balls in the bag.

These ones have

lost.

Example:

A: Kusuma says

you drink too

much.

B: So do you!

Example:

A: Is it going to

rain?

B: I think so

Form Written Spoken Spoken

8

Meaning Ones mean show

some tennis ball in

bag is lost.

Do means to avoid

repeating a verb

(drink too much).

So means that

mentioned earlier

(going to rain).

Function To interpreted in

relation to what was

gone before.

To interpret in

relation what has

happened before.

To interpreted in

relation what it can

be happened.

And 3 types of ellipsis such as nominal, verbal and clausal ellipsis

Nominal ellipsis Verbal ellipsis Clausal ellipsis

Example:

My kids play an awful

lot of sport. Both (0)are

incredibly energetic

Example:

A: have you been

working?

B: Yes, I have (0)

Example:

A: Why did you

only set three

places? Paul’s

staying for

dinner, isn’t he?

B: Is he? He didn’t

tell me (0)

Form Written Spoken Spoken

Meaning “0” means that Both of

them (lot of sport) are

incredibly energetic

“0 means that

”Yes, I have work

in post office

“0” means that He

did not tell me to

join for dinner

Function To show the question is impossible to answer.

c. Conjunction

Conjunction different with substitution and ellipsis, it means that it signal

relationships that can only be all understood to other parts of the text. There

are four different types of conjunction such as temporality, causality, addition

and adversity.

Adversity Addition Temporality Causality

Example: Example: Example: Bali is

9

I’m afraid I will be

come late to the

party. However, I

won’t have to go

until tomorrow. On

the other hand, I

hate it

The popular

magazine

suggests that the

reader to read

all page of

choosing style.

And isn’t that

what any

publisher

wants?

Green tea is a

blend that has

been

compressed

into a cake. It is

taken mainly

by the minority

group in China.

First, it is

ground to a

dust. Then it is

usually cooked

in milk.

become

famous

tourism place

in the world.

This is

because of the

unique

culture belief

that it has

several

functions.

Form Text Text Text Text

Meaning A difficult or

unlucky situation

or event.

Extra reason or

situation of

something.

Relating to

practical

material things.

The principle

that there are

is cause of

something

Function The relationship

signaled by

however and on the

other hand is

adversative

because the

information in the

second sentence of

each text moderates

the information in

the first.

To show second

sentence as

adding to first

sentence.

To show

relating to

practical matter

or material

thing

In this type of

conjunction,

the

relationship is

one of cause

and effect.

d. Lexical cohesion

10

Lexical cohesion happens when two words in a text are semantically related

in some way, in other word and they are related in terms of their meaning.

There are divided into 2 types such as reiteration and collocation

Reiteration Collocation

Example:

A: did you try the

steamed corn?

B: yes, I didn’t like the

things much.

Plants obtain their food by

producing food by themselves through

photosynthesis process. However, not all

plants can photosynthesize since not all

plants have chlorophyll.

Different with animal get their food

from the result of the photosynthesis

done by plants (food reserve of plants) or

from other animal.

Form Spoken Written

Meaning The word steam corn

and the things has same

meaning related with

the previously sentence.

This is example of lexical collocation

because they all belong the scientific

field of biology: photosynthesis,

photosynthesize chlorophyll.

Function To repeat something

with synonym or near

synonym or general

word in each text refers

back to the previously.

Cause major problem for discourse

analysis because it include all those

items in text that are semantically.

2) Theme and rheme

Theme is a formal grammatical category which refers to the initial element in a

clause and rhemeis everything that follows the theme is knows. Example:

The cat ate the hamster The hamster was eaten by the cat

Form Written Written

11

Meaning Theme is the cat. It is the cat and

what the cat does that is of

primary interest.

It is the bad luck of the hamster that

is of primary interest.

Function Explain same information that can be organized in different ways

within the sentence.

There are 3 types of themes are topical themes (have to do with the information

related in the discourse), interpersonal themes (to expose something of the attitude of

the speaker or reader) and finally textual themes( link a clause to the rest of the

discourse

Frankly, the movie was a waste

of money

However, you should see it and

make up your mind

Interpersona

l theme

Topical

theme

Textual

theme

Topical

theme

3) Genre

Genre has been used for many years to refer to different style of literary discourse

such as tragedies and romances. Moreover, different types of communicative event

result in different types of discourse and each of these will have its own different

characteristic.

C. Mc. Carthy

Discourse Analysis is concerned with the study of the relationship between language and

the contexts in which it is used. Discourse Analysis study language in use: written text of all

kinds, and spoken data, from conversation to highly institutionalized forms of talk.

The linguistic philosopher such as Austin (1962), Searle (1969) and Grice (1975) were

also influential in the study of language as social action, reflected in speech-act theory and

formulation of conversational maxims, alongside the emergence of pragmatics, which is the

study of meaning in context.

12

British discourse analysis was greatly influenced by Halliday’s functional approach to

language, which in turn has connexions with the Prague school of linguist. Halliday’s

framework emphasizes the social function of language and the thematic and informational

structure of speech and writing. Also important in Britain were Sinclair and Coulthard (1975)

at the University of Birmingham, who developed a model for description of teacher-pupil

talk, based on hierarchy of discourse units. Other similar work has dealt with doctor-patient

interaction, service encounters, interviews, debates and business negotiations, as well as

monologue. Novel work in the British tradition has also been done on intonation in discourse.

American discourse analysis has been dominated by working within the

ethnomethological tradition, which emphasizes the research method of close observation of

groups of people communicating in natural setting. It examines types of speech event such as

storytelling, greeting rituals and verbal duels in different cultural and social setting. What is

often called conversation analysis within the American tradition can also include under the

general heading of discourse analysis. In conversational analysis, the emphasis is no upon

building structural model but on the close observation of the behavior of the participants in

talk and on patterns which recur over a wide range of natural data. It’s important in study of

conversational norms, turn taking and other aspect of spoken interaction. Oral story telling

have also contributed to long history of interest in narrative discourse. The American work

has produced a large number of descriptions of discourse types, as well as insight into the

social constraints of politeness and fact-preserving phenomena in talk, overlapping with

British work pragmatics.

Discourse Analysis has grown into a wide-ranging and heterogeneous discipline which

finds its unity in the description of language above the sentence and an interest in the contexts

and cultural influences which affect language in use. it also now, increasingly, forming a

backdrop to research in Applied Linguistics an second language learning and teaching in

particular.

Discourse analysis is a primarily linguistic study examining the use of language by its

native population whose major concern is investigating language functions along with its

forms, produced both orally and in writing. Moreover, identification of linguistic qualities of

various genres, vital for their recognition and interpretation, together with cultural and social

aspects which support its comprehension, is the domain of discourse analysis. To put it in

another way, the branch of applied linguistics dealing with the examination of discourse

attempts to find patterns in communicative products as well as and their correlation with the

13

circumstances in which they occur, which are not explainable at the grammatical level (Carter

1993:23).

Form and Function

Grammatical forms depends on a number of factors, some linguist, some purely

situational. One linguist feature that may affect out interpretation in the intonation. The

intonation does not inherently carry the function of question either, any more than the

invention of auxiliary verb and subject did. Grammatical forms and phonological forms

examined separately are unreliable indicators of function; when they are taken together, and

looked at in context, we can come to some decision about function. So decision about

communicative function cannot solely be the domain of grammar phonology. Coherence,

which has to do with the meaning of the text. Here we may refer to elements of knowledge or

to cognitive structures that do not have a linguistic realization but are implied by the language

used, and thus influence the reception of the message by the interlocutor. Discourse analysis

is not entirely separate from the study of grammar and phonology, but discourse analysis are

interested in lot more than linguistic forms

Wide range of different types of spoken interaction: phone calls, buying things in

shops, perhaps an interview a job, or with a doctor, or an employer, talking formally at

meeting or in class room, informally in café or on buses, or intimately with our friends and

loved ones. These situations will have their own formulae and conventions which we follow;

they will have different ways to opening and closing the encounter, different role

relationship, different purposes and different setting. Discourse analysis is interested in all

these different factors and tries to account for them in rigorous fashion with a separate se of

descriptive labels from those used by conventional grammarians. The first fundamental

distinction we have noted is between language and form and discourse functions; one we

have made this distinction a lot of other conclusions can follows, and the labels used to

describe discourse need to clash at all with those we are all used to in grammar.

Example:

� Ann : would like to turn off the AC?

Bella : sorry

: sorry

14

Two variables in Bella’s delivery change. First, the tone contour like the direction of

her pitch, whether rises of falls. Secondly, her voice jumps higher pitch level means

that she didn’t hear or unclear about Anna’s say (what did you say?) or lower pitch

means that she didn’t do it (no, I don’t want to do it)

Discourse Analysis - Its Origins and Development

Discourse analysis is a primarily linguistic study examining the use of language by its native

population whose major concern is investigating language functions along with its forms,

produced both orally and in writing. Moreover, identification of linguistic qualities of various

genres, vital for their recognition and interpretation, together with cultural and social aspects

which support its comprehension, is the domain of discourse analysis. To put it in another

way, the branch of applied linguistics dealing with the examination of discourse attempts to

find patterns in communicative products as well as and their correlation with the

circumstances in which they occur, which are not explainable at the grammatical level (Carter

1993:23).

2.1 Starting point of discourse analysis

The first modern linguist who commenced the study of relation of sentences and coined the

name 'discourse analysis', which afterwards denoted a branch of applied linguistics, was

Zellig Harris (Cook 1990:13). Originally, however, it was not to be treated as a separate

branch of study - Harris proposed extension of grammatical examination which reminded

syntactic investigations (2).

The emergence of this study is a result of not only linguistic research, but also of researchers

engaged in other fields of inquiry, particularly sociology, psychology, anthropology and

psychotherapy (Trappes-Lomax 2004:133). In 1960s and 1970s other scholars, that is

philosophers of language or those dealing with pragmatics enormously influenced the

development of this study as well. Among other contributors to this field the Prague School

of Linguists, whose focusing on organization of information in communicative products

15

indicated the connection of grammar and discourse, along with text grammarians are worth

mentioning (McCarthy 1991:6).

A significant contribution to the evolution of discourse analysis has been made by British

and American scholars. In Britain the examination of discourse turned towards the study of

the social functions of language. Research conveyed at the University of Birmingham fruited

in creating a thorough account of communication in various situations such as debates,

interviews, doctor-patient relations, paying close attention to the intonation of people

participating in talks as well as manners particular to circumstances. Analysis of the factors

essential for succession of decently made communication products on the grounds of

structural-linguistic criteria was another concern of British scholars. Americans, on the other

hand, focused on examining small communities of people and their discourse in genuine

circumstances. Apart from that, they concentrated on conversation analysis inspecting

narratives in addition to talks and the behavior of speakers as well as patterns repeating in

given situations. Division and specification of types of discourse along with social limitations

of politeness and thorough description of face saving acts in speech is also American

scholars' contribution (McCarthy 1991:6).

Sphere of interest of discourse analysts.

The range of inquiry of discourse analysis not only covers linguistic issues, but is also

concerned with other matters, such as: enabling computers to comprehend and produce

intelligible texts, thus contributing to progress in the study of Artificial Intelligence. Out of

these investigations a very important concept of schemata emerged. It might be defined as

prior knowledge of typical situations which enables people to understand the underlying

meaning of words in a given text. This mental framework is thought to be shared by a

language community and to be activated by key words or context in order for people to

understand the message. To implement schemata to a computer, however, is yet impossible

(Cook 1990:69).

Discourse analysts carefully scrutinize universal circumstances of the occurrence of

communicative products, particularly within state institutions. Numerous attempts to

minimize misunderstandings between bureaucrats and citizens were made, resulting in user-

friendly design of documents. The world of politics and features of its peculiar

communicative products are also of concern to discourse analysts. Having carefully

16

investigated that area of human activity scholars depicted it as characterized by frequent

occurrence of face saving acts and euphemisms. One other sphere of life of particular interest

to applied linguists is the judicature and its language which is incomprehensible to most

common citizens, especially due to pages-long sentences, as well as peculiar terminology.

Moreover, educational institutions, classroom language and the language that ought to be

taught to enable learners to successfully comprehend both oral and written texts, as well as

participate in real life conversations and produce native-like communicative products is the

domain of discourse analysis. Last but not least, influence of gender on language production

and perception is also examined (Renkema 2004, Trappes-Lomax 2004).

2.2.1 Spoken language analysis

The examination of oral discourse is mainly the domain of linguists gathered at the

University of Birmingham, who at first concentrated on the language used during teacher -

learner communication, afterwards altering their sphere of interest to more general issues.

However, patterns of producing speech characteristic of communities, or members of various

social classes within one population were also of ethno methodologists' interest. A result of

such inquiries was discovering how turn taking differs from culture to culture as well as how

standards of politeness vary. In addition, manners of beginning discussions on new topics

were described (McCarthy 1991:24).

What is more, it was said that certain characteristics are common to all societies, for instance,

indicating the end of thought or end of utterance. The words that are to point the beginning or

the closing stages of a phrase are called 'frames'. McCarthy (1991:13) claims that it is thanks

to them that people know when they can take their turn to speak in a conversation. However,

in spite of the fact that frames can be noticed in every society, their use might differ, which is

why knowledge of patterns of their usage may be essential for conducting a fluent and natural

dialogue with a native speaker. Moreover, these differences are not only characteristic of

cultures, but also of circumstances in which the conversation occurs, and are also dependent

on the rights (or 'rank') of the participants (McCarthy 1991:13).

Apart from that, it was pointed out that some utterances are invariably interrelated, which can

enable teachers of foreign languages to prepare learners adequately to react as a native

17

speaker would. Among the phrases whose successors are easy to anticipate there are for

instance: greeting, where the response is also greeting; apology with the response in the form

of acceptance or informing - and acknowledging as a response. Such pairs of statements are

known as adjacency pairs. While the function of the reply is frequently determined by the

former expression its very form is not, as it depends on circumstances in which the

conversation occurs. Learners of a foreign language should be aware of such linguistic

devices if they want to be skillful speakers (McCarthy 1991:121).

Example:

“Mia, this is my secretary,

Agnez Monila.” said Ben.

“I’d like to introduce you to my secretary,

Agnez Monila” said Ben.

Form Informal situation Formal situation

Meaning Introducing someone else

Functio

n

The language expression use

when Ben meets his friends in

informal situation like Party.

He can use casual language

The language expression use when Ben

introduces his secretary in formal situation like

Meeting.

2.2.2 Written texts analysis

Since the examination of written language is easier to conduct than the scrutiny of oral texts,

in that more data is available in different genres, produced by people from different

backgrounds as well as with disparate purposes, it is more developed and of interest not only

to linguists but also language teachers and literary scholars. Each of them, however,

approaches this study in a different way, reaching diverse conclusions, therefore only notions

that are mutual for them and especially those significant for language methodology are

accounted for here. What is worth mentioning is the fact that in that type of analysis scholars

do not evaluate the content in terms of literary qualities, or grammatical appropriateness, but

how readers can infer the message that the author intended to convey (Trappes-Lomax

2004:133).

18

Apart from differences between written and spoken language described beforehand it is

obviously possible to find various types and classes of discourse depending on their purpose.

Written texts differ from one another not only in genre and function, but also in their

structure and form, which is of primary importance to language teachers, as the knowledge of

arrangement and variety of writing influences readers' understanding, memory of messages

included in the discourse, as well as the speed of perception. Moreover, written texts analysis

provides teachers with systematic knowledge of the ways of describing texts, thanks to which

they can make their students aware of characteristic features of discourse to which the

learners should pay particularly close attention, such as cohesion and coherence. In addition,

understanding these concepts should also improve learners' writing skills as they would

become aware of traits essential for a good written text (3).

One of the major concerns of written discourse analysts is the relation of neighboring

sentences and, in particular, factors attesting to the fact that a given text is more than only the

sum of its components. It is only with written language analysis that certain features of

communicative products started to be satisfactorily described, despite the fact that they were

present also in speech, like for instance the use of 'that' to refer to a previous phrase, or clause

(McCarthy 1991:37). As mentioned before (1.2.1) written language is more integrated than

the spoken one which is achieved by more frequent use of some cohesive devices which apart

from linking clauses or sentences are also used to emphasize notions that are of particular

importance to the author and enable the reader to process the chosen information at the same

time omitting needless sections (3, Salkie 1995:XI).

Example:

Political factions at the House were given one week to decide whether they

would support the move before a decision is taken at plenary session next

Tuesday. The 2009 Legislative Bodies Law says an interpellation proposal is

eligible to bring to a House plenary meeting if supported by at least 25 law

makers from more than one political party. (Jakarta Post: Wednesday,

2012/3/21)

Form Formal situation

Meaning In our knowledge of house as a building which people, usually live in family. But

in this sentence above, house means that a member of an organization which

19

makes laws (DPR)

Moreover the word “party” as a social event where a group of people met to talk,

eat, drink, dance often in order to celebrate a special occasion. But in this way

party means that an organization of people with particular political (partai politik)

Function Giving information about something (news) by written form

D. Van. Djik

Theory of Discourse Analysis by Van Djik is Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). CDA

is a type of Discourse Analytical research that primarily studies the way social power abuse,

dominance, and inequality are enacted, reproduced, and resisted by text and talk in the social

and political context. With such dissident research, critical discourse analysis takes explicit

position, and thus wants to understand, expose, and ultimately resist social inequality.

What is discourse?

It is a fuzzy concept and in fact the whole discipline answers to that question. Van Dijk

starts by characterizing the phenomena studied by Discourse studies (or Discourse

analysis) and sketching the general principles shared by most approaches to discourse.

From common sense to theory

The common use of the word refers to public speeches or to a system of thought. The

modern study of discourse tries to analyze not only language use, but also who, how, why

and when language is used. A useful concept to do this is communicative event, which tries

to explain those functional aspects in the framework where they occur, i.e. phone calls,

lessons, doctor visits, and to emphasize the fact that people do things with words, they engage

in verbal interaction. These are discourse’s main dimensions: language use, communication

of beliefs (cognition) and interaction in social situations. Therefore, discourse studies try to

describe the mutual influences of all three dimensions and formulate theories that explain

such relationships.

Text and talk

20

After a first characterization of discourse we have to extend concepts, since language

use involves also written instances. This has its complications, since written texts seem to be

a product of verbal acts and not of interaction. Nonetheless, they also have users or

participants and, although they interact differently, they share many similarities and are

studied together in context.

The ambiguity of ‘Discourse’

We may also use the word to refer to specific domains of language use, like ‘medical

discourse’, ‘political discourse’ we should be careful not to mingle discourse as ‘a social

phenomenon’ and as ‘a concrete token of text or talk’. Words Meaning 1 Meaning 2 Book A

number of sheets of paper To buy or reserve Interest Curiosity, attention. Money paid in

return for borrowing usually large sum of money. Example:

- the word “attitude” means opinion about something or position

Opinion Position

I don’t like your attitude she lay sprawled across the sofa, in an

attitude of complete abandon

Sound, sight and body

Discourse analysis may begin with sounds and visual marks. Then focus on sound

structures (phonology) and how they contribute to discourse; thus sounds relate sentences,

mark verbal acts like questions, and help sort out change of speaker. But sounds don’t occur

alone, gestures, body language, laughs usually and relevantly accompany talk and claim their

analysis, although they have been neglected so far.

Sound A: Please turn off the radio

B: Sorry (means that B didn’t want to do it)

Sorry (means that what did A’s say)

Sight Sound the Sheep use expression to make something like

laugh, cry, etc.

Body Gesture like movement of hands, arms or head or express an

idea or feeling.

Meaning

21

Crucial in many discourse descriptions is meaning as observed by semantics, what

many call semantic representations. Cognitive linguists emphasize that meaning is

assigned to a discourse by language users (through interpretation and understanding).

Social scientists claim that such meanings are social and shared. All these account for

discursive relativity that is: all levels have influence on the rest.

Fundamental in discourse semantic analysis is the concept of coherence: ‘how

words/propositions hang together’ (micro and macro levels) and why a discourse is

different from an arbitrary set of sentences. Depending on coherence as well are concepts

like topic –whether and how information is placed in and out of focus- and reference –

the way discourse and meanings are related to real elements they talk about. A simple

rule for local coherence is that sentences talk about related events or situations, at least

for the speaker. In a macro level of analysis we leave traditional linguistics and grammar

behind us and find concepts like topic or theme. Topics are the global meanings of

discourse and in a way they summarize at a higher and more abstract level its most

important information.

For example the word mother, its mean a female parent..

Style

Style is the component of the verbal structure of a discourse related to variation and

most often evinced in word choice. Are students in conversation between teachers referred to

as “members,” “collaborators,” or “participants”? Such distinctions are usually a product of

the context (who is speaking, their role, the medium, etc.). As van Dijk (1997, p. 12) notes “a

stylistic analysis may also define a collection of typical discursive characteristics of a genre

(story vs. report), a speaker (calm vs. emotional), a group (women vs. men), a social situation

(formal vs. informal)”

Formal Informal

A: How do you do? I am Buda.

B: Pleased to meet you. My name’s Kartika

A: Hello, my name’s Buda

B: Nice to meet you. I am Kartika.

Rhetoric

Close to style is the discourse dimension of rhetoric. Going back to Antiquity, rhetoric is now

much more focused and comprises all stylistic figures used to make discourse more

22

persuasive. Persuasive type speech structures such as metaphor, irony, or hyperbole are

among the types of rhetorical devices.

Metaphor Book is the window of world Irony You came very timely, our goal is 5 cars

passing by Hyperbole My anger has become, so to my head almost exploded.

Schemata

Another discourse level is that of superstructures or schemata. Just like discourse has

a general meaning or topic, it also has a structure where it fits in. Thus, we may decompose

texts and talk into conventional components or categories and analyze their function and

order. Must direction hold sentence and make conclusion in the last.

• Discourse as action and interaction in society

With each step into discourse we go further from traditional linguistics and into the

social sciences. Discourse does not only consist of sounds or graphics with local and global

meaning, because with it language users accomplish actions in society and culture.

Example:

Hortatory Exposition

a. Thesis (the main idea of the paragraph)

b. argument (opinion that supporting the main idea)

c. suggestion (to influence the reader or listener)

Speech acts

The study of language use as action was initiated by language philosophers and proposes that

users not only produce sounds or communicate meaning, but do so in a social context and

attain or achieve some result by doing so (illocutionary/illocutionary act). Speech acts must

satisfy appropriateness conditions that depend on socio cultural context, and are studied by

pragmatics. In an analogy with discourse semantics, we may say that sequences of speech

acts conform a global speech act or macro speech act, like an editorial may function as a

macro accusation or a news report as a macro assertion.

• Cognition

23

Making sense, understanding and interpretation all belong to the realm of mind; users are

capable of these actions because they have knowledge, they share much of their beliefs and

opinions, and these have been thoroughly studied by cognitive psychology: sociocultural

cognition. As in the interactional approach to discourse, psychologists are interested in real

users, and focus on the strategic processes applied by them; and in this approach mental

processes are constructive and context-sensitive, which also means that understanding is an

ongoing, tentative process that allows for reinterpretation and repairs. During understanding

we get not actual words but our interpretations of them; conversely, when we say something,

a model is the base for the production of new messages. The same goes for interaction: users

have a context model which they constantly update.

• Discourse and society

Most of discourse studies take place in form, meaning, interaction and cognition; however,

context takes an important role in the explanation of text and talk and most scholars use the

concept although it has no special theory. It also has a local and global dimension: for

example, participants are part of local context if they speak for themselves, but of global

context if they act as part of a social category (women/men, white/black, young/old…)

Example:

- It is hot in here! (location), meaning: I want some fresh air! (illocution). So

someone opens the window (perlocution).

24

CHAPTER III

CONCLUSION

Discourse analysis is study of how sentences in spoken and written language form

larger meaningful units such as paragraph, conversation, and etc. The aims of study discourse

analysis to show how the linguistic elements enable language users to communicate in

context. Moreover, different communicative purpose is to show reflected in discourse itself.

Discourse analysis is study of how sentences in spoken and written language form

larger meaningful units such as paragraph, conversation, and etc. The aims of study discourse

analysis to show how the linguistic elements enable language users to communicate in

context. Moreover, different communicative purpose is to show reflected in discourse itself.

Halliday (1976) David Nunan (1993) Mc. Carthy (1991) Van Djik (1997)

Focus on

Lexicogrammatical

Continuation of

Halliday’s theory

(Lexicogrammatical)

Social Phenomenon Critical Discourse

Analysis (CDA)

Theory of

discourse analysis

is only text,

spoken and

written.

There are five

sources of

cohesion can be

found in English

as important

elements in

creating discourse

such as Cohesion

through

Reference,

Cohesion through

Substitution,

Theory of

discourse analysis

is discourse and

text.

Discourse

Analysis is study

these text –

forming the

devices.

The purpose for

language is use

such as

transactional

language and

interpersonal

language.

There are 3

Theory of

discourse analysis

is spoken and

written.

Discourse

Analysis study

language in use:

written text of all

kinds, and spoken

data, from

conversation to

highly

institutionalized

forms of talk

Element of

discourse form,

function and

Theory of

discourse analysis

is text and talk.

It is a fuzzy

concept and in

fact the whole

discipline answers

to that question.

There are some

aspect in

discourse analysis

such as from

common sense to

theory, text and

talk, the

ambiguity of

discourse, sound,

25

Cohesion through

Ellipsis, Cohesion

through

Conjunction and

Cohesion through

Lexical items.

elements of

discourse such as

cohesion, genre,

theme and rheme.

meaning. sight and body,

meaning, style,

rhetoric,

schemata, and

speech act.

Based on explained above, we can conclude that discourse is a general item for

example in language used which has been produced as a result of an act of communication.

Whereas the word grammar, which cannot be separated from the discussion of discourse.

26

References

Hasselgard Hilde. The Role of Multiple Themes in Cohesion. University

of Oslo

Nunan, David. (1993). Introducing Discourse Analysis. Harmondsworth,

Middlesex: Penguin Books.

McCarthy, M. (1991) Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers,

Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Tannen Deborah, Deborah Schiffrin and Heidi E. Hamilton. The

Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Blackwell Publisher.

http://www.glottopedia.de/index.php/Cohesion