CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
This
chapter deals with background of the study, statement of the research problems, objectives of the study, scope and
limitation of the study, significance of
the study, and definition of the key terms.
1. 1. Background of the Study In
the society, human being can not live alone. They need to interact with other people around them. So, they need
language to communicate each other beside
to build social contact, think and have an action as they want. And also, we can offer something, refuse something and show
what in our mind in spoken and written
forms.
In this case, we can understand
that people communicate by using language.
Indeed, it is different from other creations that are created by our God.
They do not need language in
their communication because they can use their instinct on their feelings to make
relationship with other.
A proper understanding of
‘verbal’ in ‘verbal communication’ requires an understanding of certain characteristic
features of language. One of the earlist works on language, Plato’s Cratylus (a
dialogue on the origin of language), describes
speech as a form of action and words as instruments with which actions can be performed (Renkema, 1993: 07).
Language users apply text to
convey their messages to other people. Sobur (2001: 53) states that text is a set of sign,
which is transmitted from the sender to receiver
through the specific codes. Furthermore, there are two kinds of texts; spoken and written texts. Spoken texts deal
with the verbal communication, where the
speech as a form of action can be performed (Renkema, 1993: 07). Besides, written texts deal with the printed record
which has function to permit communication
over time and space beside shift language from the oral to the visual domain, as found in such; text book,
newspaper, advertisement, road signs, etc
(Brown and Yule, 1993:13).
An explicature is a propositional
form communicated by an utterance, which
is pragmatically constructed on the basis of the propositional schema or template (logical form) that the utterance
encodes; its content is an amalgam of linguistically
decoded material and pragmatically inferred material (Carston, 1999: 12). This means that we have to try to
understand an utterance based on the certain
context.
In determining the explicit
content of an utterance, Grice in Carston (1997: 17) states that disambiguation is considered
essential to comprehend the utterance.
The necessity of disambiguation
is mentioned to identify “what is said” of an utterance.
Furthermore, free enrichment is
defined to recover the missing material of grammatical matter or the emptiness of
syntactic categories are embedded to an utterance
as they are considered retrieval knowledge respectively. In this case, Carston (2002: 11) states that the existence
of sub sentential utterances, which are
the fact that single words or
phrases, can be used to express a proposition (or make an assertion). This provides the evidence
for a process of free enrichment.
Explicature is the theory to
explain the process of utterances understanding.
This theory appears when Sperber and Wilson are not satisfied with Grice’s theory, because they find Grice’s
distinction between what is said and
what is implicated in adequately. They also want a theory that goes beyond the probabilistic and enables addressees to be
sure that they have recovered the most
relevant of a potentially infinite set of inference (Grundy, 2000: 01). So, Sperber and Wilson proposed and enrichment
that is called explicature.
Carston explains that we must
consider the content of what is said explicitly
in an utterance in order to fully understand implicature. She marks a clear distinction between explicature, which
is what is explicitly conveyed, and implicature,
which is all other meaning. These two types of meaning do not overlap in content, a property which Carston
calls ‘functional autonomy’. She cautions
readers against forming a parallel between the semantic/pragmatics split, and explicature/implicature split. She argues
that there is often some pragmatic reasoning
necessary in order to determine part of the explicature. For example, the results of disambiguation and reference
assignment are relegated to the explicature,
but are also calculable and cancelable. In the case of sentence fragments, she claims that the entire sentence
is part of the explicature although the
gaps in what is explicitly stated must be called by pragmatics. For example, the response\On the table” to the question
\where are my keys?” has for it is explicature
the complete proposition \[Your keys are] on the table”.
Carston takes up the problem of
differentiating between implicature (what is implied) and explicature (what is expressed
as a proposition). He proposes a relevance-theoretic
framework for the differentiation, and uses this explanation to claim some traditional examples of implicature
as explicature. The relevancetheoretic framework also calls into question the
truththeoretic semanticists’ assumption
that the domain of their field is natural language sentences and not mental language sentences. He calls for a
distinction between linguistic semantics and truththeoretic semantics.
In this research, the researcher
studies about Explicature of Warning Signs
in Juanda Airport Surabaya Viewed from Carston. The researcher chooses the warning sign which is located in Juanda
Airport Surabaya located in Sidoarjo is
the most relevant airport to be researched. In addition, Juanda Airport mostly the warning use English language because it is
supported by international flight that
the passengers are from abroad. In other words, there are warning signs that use in Juanda in order to the passengers and
visitors feel comfort, safety, and pleasure
because it is one of the missions in Juanda Airport.
Warning is caution, advice about
danger, or advance notice. A sign is anything
that stands for anything else. A sign represents something an idea, an experience, a feeling, an object, and etc. The
object referred by a sign does not need
to be presented for the meaning of the sign can be understood. In this case, context helps to define the specific meaning
of a sign.
Sign is mark; symbol; indication;
and hand movements (commonly used by the
hearing impaired). We can find a uniqueness of the words in the warning sign. The words are very simple but they have
full meaning.
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar