Towards a Character Language: A Probability in Language Use

 Towards a Character Language: A Probability in Language Use

Towards a Character Language: A Probability in Language Use

Politeness and Camaraderie

 Politeness and Camaraderie Considering the summary critique of politeness theories by Gino Eelen (Eelen, 2001), and apart from various theories of politeness (Leech, 1983; Brown & Levinson, 1987; Spencer-Oatey, 1992; Lakoff, 1990; Fraser & Nolen, 1981; Gu, 1990; Ide, 1989; Blum-Kulka, 1992; Arndt & Janney, 1985; Watts, 1989; Thomas, 1996; Coupland, 2000) Jumanto is trying to define what politeness is (Jumanto, Pragmatics: Linguistic World is Broad, 2011b). Jumanto proposed a theory of politeness among Javanese speakers, advocating the theory of Gunarwan (Gunarwan, Implicatures of Linguistic Codes Selection in some dialogues of Ludruk, 2001). Many of the politeness theories above are the results of violating Grice’s Cooperative Principles (Grice, 1975), though some proposed a new atmosphere. However, few have proposed a working definition of politeness. Jumanto tried to offer a definition that politeness is everything good that has been uttered as well as acted by the speaker to the hearer within a particular context, to maintain their interpersonal face as well as their social face (Jumanto, Pragmatics: Linguistic World is Broad, 2011b). The notion of face in politeness has come into high attention and importance since it was borrowed by Brown and Levinson (Brown & Levinson, 1987) from Goffman (Goffman, 1959, 1967). 

In Goffman’s grand theory, everyone in interaction has two faces, positive face, and negative face. Face refers to the will, intention, and other associations of ideas and values in the self of the speaker. In short, positive face refers to an appreciation of the speaker’s self and negative face refers to no depreciation of the speaker’s self. The elaboration of face by Brown and Levinson has resulted in face management for two major politeness strategies, positive politeness strategies (which refer to positive face) and negative politeness strategies (which refer to negative face). Under the light of this face management theory, Jumanto (Jumanto, Pragmatics and Character Language Building, 2011c) argues that the politeness theories in verbal interactions fall into or lead to two major poles, i.e. one is directed to distancing politeness and the other is directed to closeness politeness. Distancing politeness refers to Goffman’s negative face (Goffman, 1959), Brown and Levinson’s negative politeness strategies (Brown & Levinson, 1987), Renkema’s respect politeness (Renkema, 1993), and Jumanto’s politeness (Jumanto, Phatic Communication among English Native Speakers, 2008); (Jumanto, Pragmatics: Linguistic World is Broad, 2011b). Closeness politeness, on the other hand, refers to Goffman’s positive face (Goffman, 1959), Brown and Levinson’s positive politeness strategies (Brown & Levinson, 1987), Renkema’s solidarity politeness (Renkema, 1993), and Jumanto’s friendship or camaraderie (Jumanto, Phatic Communication among English Native Speakers, 2008); (Jumanto, Pragmatics: Linguistic World is Broad, 2011b). 

This tendency has been well-strengthened and highlighted by the results of Jumanto’s research on phatic communication among English native speakers (Jumanto, 2006). From the accounts above, with high gratitude to the former theorists and researchers, we can see clearly that distancing politeness and closeness politeness are in line with distant language and close language the writer has just proposed above. Here, so far so good, we can sum up that distant language brings politeness, and close language brings friendship or camaraderie. Distant language and close language to show politeness and camaraderie finally meet the demand of language as a means of communication, i.e. a real-life everyday use of language in all situations or pragmatic use of language in a diglossic situation. 3 An inspiring opinion given by Professor Asim Gunarwan, during his pragmatic classes, at University of Indonesia, in 2002-2006. 4 Types of hearer can be further seen in Brown and Gilman (1968) or Brown and Gilman in Jumanto (2011b).

Towards a Character Language: A Probability in Language Use (scirp.org)

LIST PENDAFTAR KEANGGOTAAN INAPRA BATCH 1 & 2

LIST PENDAFTAR KEANGGOTAAN INAPRA BATCH 1 SESUAI DENGAN LIST

di https://www.inapra.org/p/daftar-anggota-pdf.html

 

1.             Syafryadin             Universitas Bengkulu

2.             Hilda Hilaliyah       Universitas Indraprasta PGRI

3.             Mariyatul Kiptiyah               STKIP PGRI Bangkalan

4.             Akmal     Sekolah Tinggi Manajemen Informatika dan Komputer Royal

5.             Sigit Apriyanto      Institut Agama Islam An Nur Lampung

6.             Uzlifatul Masruroh Isnawati               Universitas Islam Lamongan (UNISLA)

7.             Chatarini Septi Ngudi Lestari             Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Bahasa Dan Sastra Satya Widya

Vol 4, No 2 (2022) Journal of Pragmatics Research

Vol 4, No 2 (2022) Journal of Pragmatics Research

Table of Contents
Articles

A Pragmatic Analysis of Responses in Malaysian Parliamentary Discourse
DOI : 10.18326/jopr.v4i2.92-106
Najah Zainal Abidin, Jariah Mohd Jan
PDF
92-106
This article has been read 418 times.

Students' Politeness to Lecturers in WhatsApp Application Measured Using Leech Maxim
DOI : 10.18326/jopr.v4i2.107-121
Netty Nurdiyani, Sasongko Sasongko

CONVENTIONAL & CONVERSATIONAL IMPLICATURE: RELEVANCE THEORY

Dr. Ita Fitriana

Universitas Jendral Soedirman Purwokerto

Abstract

The study entitled "Analysis of Conversation Implicature and Conventional Implicature is a discourse analysis of dialog. In daily conversation, people are used to an implicature. The discourse of daily implicatures contains particular messages or implied meanings. This happens because each other often happens a miscommunication. In other words, the lack of awareness of implicatures in daily life. The problem studied in this research is how the picture implicatures discourse of everyday conversation. To answer this research problem, use the descriptive method that describes and reveals facts. The finding of this study, in particular, can be used as a means for the public understanding of the language's daily conversation containing implicatures.

Keywords: conversation, implicatures, conventional.

1. Background

Communication is one aspect that is very important for human life in maintaining life. Human life cannot be separated from communication activities because humans are social creatures who need other people to sustain their lives. Relationships between humans are created through communication, be it verbal communication which is usually related to language, or nonverbal, which is usually related to symbols, images, or other communication media. In addition to sustaining life, communication also plays an essential role in maintaining relationships and gaining happiness. Aristotle explained that social creatures are zoon politicon, which means that humans are naturally living in society and interacting with each other. As social beings, humans need other humans to survive and are required to work together. In the process of interaction between humans, communication is created. Understanding communication means understanding what happens during communication and why it happens.

11 interesting topics in the discussion of Pragmatics

  

1. Muka dalam Perspektif Pragmatik

2. Analisis Meta-Pragmatik atas Beberapa Warisan Verbal Tradisi Lisan Penutur Bahasa Jawa

3. IMPLIKATUR PERCAKAPAN DAN KONVENSIONAL: TEORI RELEVANSI

4. Acting the Intangible: Hints of Politeness in Non-Verbal Form

5. ON SPEECH ACTS

6. Pragmatics is a Matter of Probabilities in Language Use

7. Periodisasi Perkembangan Studi Pragmatik

8.Antara Jokowi dan Joko Widodo

9. Pragmatika R. A. Kartini

10. Politeness and Camaraderie: Finding a Seat within Pragmatics Academia

11. On Javanese Riddles

Guru Besar Linguistik Udinus Terpiilih Jadi Presiden Inapra 2022-2027

 SEMARANG, suaramerdeka.com - Guru Besar bidang linguistik, Prof. Dr. Drs. Jumanto, M.Pd., terpilih sebagai Presiden Indonesian Pragmatics Association (Inapra) periode 2022-2027.

Rencana jangka pendek hingga jangka panjang sudah dipersiapkan dengan cukup matang oleh Guru Besar Universitas Dian Nuswantoro (Udinus) Semarang itu.

Pelantikan Presiden Asosiasi Keilmuan Pragmatik Indonesia dilaksanakan saat ‘Rembug Nasional Daring Indonesian Pragmatics Discussion Forum’, pada Rabu 13 Juli 2022.
Kegiatan yang disiarkan langsung oleh TVKU itu diikuti seluruh pengurus dan anggota Inapra.