An Analysis of Social Deixis in the Madness of King George Movie
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52690/jadila.v1i1.15Keywords:
Social Deixis, Social Stratification,, MovieAbstract
This research was aimed at finding out the kinds of social deixis and to explain the social stratification factors in each kind of social deixis in The Madness of King George movie. The type of this research was descriptived qualitative research. Instrument of research that used in this research is the documentation (library research). The matrix table used to collect the data about social deixis in the Madness of King George Movie. According to the matrix table, there are 965 kinds of Relational Social Deixis and 504 kinds of Absolute social deixis used in this movie. The dominant type of Relational Social Deixis is first personal pronoun which refers to the speaker itself. It was used 279 times from total of social deixis used in this movie. In Absolute Social Deixis category, the dominant type was “Sir” which was used 144 times. It was also explained that Relational Social Deixis category is dominant with the frequency of usage around 965 times more than Absolute Social Deixis with the frequency of usage around 504 times from total of social deixis used in this movie. Third, there were three factors of social stratification used in all utterances contained social deixis in this movie. It was found that the dominant social deixis, whether Relational or Absolute Social Deixis, refered to the male characters than the female characters. Because in the 19th century, the man held more power to lead the society and dominant in public relations, especially in Kingdom territory.
Downloads
References
Bernard, Bloch and Trager. (1984). Outline of linguistic analysis, in Henry Guntur Taringan, Psikolinguistik. Bandung: Angkasa.
Bodgan, Robert. (1998). Introduction to research. In Halimah, L.N. 2007. Deixis used in “This Odd Word” of “the Jakarta Post”. Malang: UIN Malang.pdf.
Brennan, S.E. (2010). Conversation and dialogue. In press, SAGE Publications.pdf.
Bright, William. (1966). Language, social stratification and cognitive orientation. The Hague: Mouton.
Chesire, Jenny. (1982). Linguistic variation and social function. In Suzanne Romaine (ed.) Sociolinguistic Variation in Speech Communities. London: Edward Arnold.
Cook, G. (1989). Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cruse, D Alan. (2000). Meaning in language: An Introduction to semantics and pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crystall, David. (2010). The Cambridge encyclopedia of language: Third Edition. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Cutting, Joan. (2002). Pragmatics and discourse. London: Routledge.
Diani, I., Yunita, W., & Syafryadin, S. (2019). Interferensi Bahasa Indonesia terhadap Kemampuan Berbicara Bahasa Inggris Mahasiswa Universitas Bengkulu. In Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra (pp. 164-173).
Effendi. (2002). A Study of deictic expression in Hemmingway’s “The Killer” and Austin’s Emma through a Discourse Analysis. Unpublished S-1Thesis. Universitas Negeri Surabaya
Faizah, Anely. (2008). Analyzing the deixis found in surah al-dukhan. Malang: State Islam University Malang. Pdf.
Fuanda, Nofiyanti. (2012). The symbols of vampire and werewolf in romance fantasy movie: the Twilight Saga. Yogyakarta: UIN SUKA Yogyakarta.
Hails, Aarti R. (2013). Four types of communication. accessed on 9/15/2014 in http://www.buzzle.com/articles/four-types-of-communication.html.
Hamidah, Lilik Nur. (2007). Deixis used in “This Odd World” of “The Jakarta Post. Malang: State Islam University. Pdf.
Hidayat, Asep Ahmad. (2009). Filsafat bahasa. Bandung, PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
Holmes, Janet. (1992). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. New York: Addison Wesley Longman Inc.
Horn, Laurence R. and Ward, Gregory. (2006). The Handbook of Pragmatics. The United Stated: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Hornby, A.S. (1995). Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary. London: Oxford University Press.
Jakobson, Roman. (1971). Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb. The Hague: Mouton.
Krasnoukhova, O. (2007). Social deixis and classifiers. Radboud University Nijmegen. Pdf.
Levinson, Stephen C,. (1979). Pragmatics and social deixis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Levinson, Stephen C,. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nicholson, William and Hirst, Michael. (2006). Elizabeth: The golden age. Accessed on November 30, 2014.
Noermanzah, N., Syafryadin, S., Castrena, O. W., & Abid, S. (2020). Rhetoric structure of the master of ceremony and the function of the akikah event in Lubuklinggau City. Journal of English Education and Teaching, 4(2), 232-247.
Noermanzah, et al. (2020). The rhetorical structure of the Lubuklinggau Mayor's speech in building community trust. International Journal of Progressive Sciences and Technologies (IJPSAT), 19(2), 146-154.
Nurman, K., & Arsyad, S. (2019). Discourse markers in argumentative essay by the English education study program’s students of Universitas Bengkulu: A cross-sectional study. Journal of English education and teaching, 3(1), 29-41.
Syafryadin, I. N. R., & Widiastuti, R. (2013). Improving grade X students’ speaking achievement under Round Robin technique. International Journal on Education, 1(1).
Syafryadin, Dian, E. C. Wardhana., Eka Apriani., & Noermanzah. (2020). Maxim Variation, Conventional, and Particularized Implicature on Students’ Conversation. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 9(2) https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/cza8y.
Syafryadin, S. (2020). Students’ strategies in learning speaking: experience of two indonesian schools. Vision: Journal for Language and Foreign Language Learning, 9(1), 34-47. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.21580/vjv9i14791
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Zovi Dwi Putra, Dedi Sofyan, Barnabas Sembiring
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
_1.png)
