CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1. The Background of Analysis.
New thoughts demand new words. This is the
message of Immanuel Kant in the
introduction of his second book “Critique”. This message, however, should not be viewed as an expression of philosophical
courage of creativity. It was inspired by the
need of Kant
to defend himself
against the accusation
of introducing a new language. Kant essentially notices that it is
really critical to acquire new words firstly ahead of acquisition of new knowledge or new
thought.
The
acquisition of knowledge
as explained above
affects the ability
of interpreting meaning
in some discourses.
The ability of
acquiring meaning is supported by
some particular fields
in language science.
To sum it up,
a
simple sentence is presented here
as a case of interpreting meanings.
Father
: Are you hungry? Kid : I
had my lunch at 2 pm.
That is a kind of abstract
meaning which the second speaker is involved in that short conversation
do not express
the real as
expected by the
first speaker. In
that conversation, father sends
an interrogative statement to his kid and father expects for the clear answer in a package of “Yes “ or
“No”, since the question was delivered in a simple way that only needs one of those couple answers. Interestingly, however, the
Kid does not
send a direct
answer as expected
by his Father.
Instead, the Kid said,
“I had my lunch at 2 pm”. In a glance, it is hard to see the connection between
the question and the answer. But, the
communication still works. Even though, the 2 meaning
was sent in an abstract way, father still could figure it out and would not buy a meal for his kid.
A
simple case above
has proven the
statement “being meaningful
is really essential
in a linguistic
expression”. In linguistics,
meaning is deeply
studied by using
semantics theories. According
to Locke, semantics
is a branch
of linguistics that
deals with the
study of meaning.
In studying meanings,
semantics deals with prior
types of expression and not focus on the
properties of speakers’ utterance.
It means semantics study focuses
to observe a construction of each sentence and then after
observing it, the
meaning included in
could be found.
Hence, when doing
a study of
meaning by using
semantics approach, recognizing
the units of
language that constructs
a text is the first
step that should
be done. Those
units could be phonemes, syllable,
morphemes, and words
and so on.
They are some
of units of language
that involved in building a text.
As other fields of study, semantics also has a
branch of sub-unit of study that supports
semantics in doing an observation of various meanings in every text. The branch
named pragmatics. Pragmatics,
like semantics, is
also a study
that treats meaning as its major observation. However, the
thing that distinguishes pragmatics from
semantics is pragmatics deals with meanings included in a speaker’s utterance or conversation while semantics deals with
pure linguistics concern such as the units of language, types of expressions, and so on.
Based on its use, pragmatics is often called as
the speakers’ meaning.
When someone utters
he delivers two
meanings, surface and
deep structure of
meanings. Here pragmatics
is required to
help us in understanding
the deep meaning of the speaker since it usually occurs that the deep meaning has a different understanding than its
surface structure. A clear example of 3 this case is shown above in the conversation
between father and his kid. In this case the problem arises since the listener is not
able to catch the meaning intended by the speaker because the speaker puts his intention
beyond the linguistic structure of his speech.
In solving this problem, pragmatics as a field
of study offers some theories that may
be used in analysis of sentences. In this thesis, a particular theory to solve this problem is appeared. The theory named
hedges. Hedge is one of the theories in pragmatics focusing
to analyze level
of sureness or
vagueness in someone’s speeches.
Hedge is a
part of maxims
theories in which
this theory deals
with endeavoring meanings through
abstract words. Hedge is also commonly called as the truthfulness-theory since as it has been
explained above that hedges may measure the vagueness of someone, whether he or she doubts
or not with his own utterances. By reflecting
to the hedges results it is easily known the level of sureness from someone to his own sentences.
The
analysis is focused
on some selected
speeches of world
figure. The option is based on a common consideration that
whatever the situation is, a leader should
not tell even a single hesitation in his or her utterances since it easily says
that every single
word from a
leader gives significant
and big impacts
to his people.
When a
leader delivers a
single hesitation in
his or her
speech ahead, his
or her reliability will go down as a consequence. By
reflecting on that fact, a leader needs much
consideration before delivering his speech. As a leader, his position is much like someone standing on the highest perch on
a hill. Everyone easily sees him and also
judges him simultaneously. A leader cannot avoid that thing. That is the risk
of being a leader. All he can do is
preparing, collecting, verifying, and the reconsidering 4 his
speech. When she or he meets their confidence about their speeches, then they may move and deliver it. Long consideration
and good-persuasive words will place a leader
to the most comfort place in his people’s heart.
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar