CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
This
chapter covers the discussion of, background of the study, statement of the problems, objective of the study, scope
and limitation of the study, significance
of the study, and definition of the key terms are discussed.
1.1 Background of the Study Language is the most important means of
communication it is needed by all
people. In the world human being as social creature cannot live alone in this world. They live in society in which the group
of them who are drawn together for a
certain purposes. Therefore, they need tool to communication and interaction with other people around us. In the process of
interaction and communication.
We understand that every group of people in
society has languages which are
different from others. Though there is a language used by more than one society. It does not indicate that the
language usehas a similar vocabulary or pattern.
There are many different patterns of language use called as a variation of language and it is closely tighten to the
culture of the society. A classical issue in the study of language is the measurement of
stylistic variation. As Labov (1972) noted,
"the most immediate problem to be solved in the attack on sociolinguistic structure is the quantification of the
dimension ofstyle" (1972: 245). Stylistic variation results from the fact that different
people express themselves in different ways,
and that the same person may express the sameidea quite differently when addressing different audiences, using different
modalities, or tackling different tasks.
The number of possible variations is so large, though, that Labov's problem seems unsolvable as a whole. Latief (in
Rahardjo, 2002: X) says that language also
functions as a medium of communicate to others. The words themselves are actions but not the cause of the attitudes.
They just reflect them. An uttered word is
an action because it takes place in time, performs by some people, and requires
physical movement (of the vocal organs).
In line with the statement, Chaika (1982:
195) says that the vocabulary of language reveals underlying attitudes of the society. It correlates with both social
situation and attitudes.
Furthermore, language and society are not
independent definition. As Saussure (1988:
6) states, language is a social fact. It means that language is a social product of language ability and the
whole convention, which is influenced by
a social group that uses the language ability. Besides, Saussure (in Chaer and Agustina,1995:80) led us to distinguish
between langue as language that has a system
and subsystem which can be understood by allspeakers and parole as variety of individual’s language use in
everyday living which exhibits a great deal of internal variation Another source of variation in and
individual’s speech occurs based on the sentence
structure and it differs from the gradation of speech style from the formal to the informal and to the very colloquial
one. In this case, the language style is the selection of linguistic forms that differs
in the sentence structure in the form of words. The problem may be substantially
simplified by focusing on just one aspect
or dimension of style. Perhaps the most frequently mentioned of these aspects is formality. Everybody makes at least
an intuitive distinctionbetween formal,
informal and colloquial manners of expression. A prototype of formal language might be the sentence read out by a
judge at the end of a trial.
Prototypical informal speech
would be produced in arelaxed conversation among close friends or family members. Colloquialism
include popular words and idiomatic
construction; they also include learned words with popular meanings, and constructions which are not strictly
idioms, especially abbreviated or clipped forms of more formal words, such as ad for
advertisements.
The Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics
(Richards, Platt & Weber, 1987: 109)
defines "formal speech" as follows: "the type of speech used in situations when the speaker is very careful
about pronunciation and choice of words
and sentence structure. This type of speech may be used, for example, at official functions, and in debates and
ceremonies".This definition gives an idea of what a formal situationis, but does not define
formal speech as such; it just offers a
hypothesis of what a speaker pays attention to incertain situations. The main criterion for formality in speech is thus
non-linguistic. In a similar vein, according to Labov (1972) and Tarone (1988), the
presence of channel cues: "modulations of the voice production which affect speech as
a whole" (1972: 95) would indicate an
informal style, but, again, these characteristics reveal nothing about the intrinsic structure of (in) formal language.
In that perspective, speakers would pay more
than the normal attention to form, if they would want to make sure that their expressions are not misunderstood. That would
be necessary in those situations where effective
communication is for some reasons more difficult or more important than in ordinary circumstances. The
prototypical examples we noted earlier
seem to confirm this intuition: in the court situation, it is essential that no
part of the verdict be misinterpreted;
in the informal talk among friends, on the other hand, precise understanding is neither
difficult to achieve nor very important.
To recognize the stylistic aspect of it, the
way the author expresses his idea in
making the boor, in this matter the levels of language style used init, as a
good stylistic analysis approach is the
appropriate one to be used in this study as far as to gain the author’s style in expressing her
idea through language used in the text of
the Boor. As stated by Malmkjaer (1991) that, “a full stylistic analysis of a given spoken or written text would describe
the text at all the traditional levels of linguistic description,i.e sound, form,
structure, and meaning”. In this study the writer intends to identify are the forms or
levels and functions of language style used
in the text of the Boor.
Schuster (1965) states that “style” in
language isthe manner of expressing whatever
are expressed”. Explicitly he says that style in general is widely used in every aspect of life. In language, style is
used toexpress idea both spoken and written
forms. In the same matter, Geasons (1965) states the language and of the literary form”. A similar opinion also comes
from Chaika (1982) he says,” style refers
to the selection of the linguistic forms to convey social or artistic effects”.
Based on that opinion, it can be
said that style inlanguage refers to or deals with choices, manner of expressing, patterning of
choices, option, and selections of linguistic
forms in order to convey what the writeror speaker wants to express.
In using style everyone has his or her own
way. Itdepends on how he or she
expresses his or her idea, the habits of using language, and the circumstances where he or she is and the purposes of the
communication he or she makes. Levels of
education of someone also influence the languagestyle he or she uses. Related to this, Jordan (1965) claims that,” everyone
has astyle, just as anyone has a shadow”.
Furthermore, he says that the style of some writers, like Helming way’s style and Faulkner’s style are more popular
than others because of their personalities
are stronger, and these writers more successful because they have better command of the devices of one self
expression.
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar