CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1. 1. Background of the Study Talks
(conversation) are a
central activity in
social life .
That is why; studying
or investigating conversation is not only interesting, but also meaningful.
As the
phenomenon of language
in use, conversation
is studied by
one of the branches of
linguistics that is
discourse analysis. Language is
the medium of conversation.
As the definition of language, it is a set of meaningful sound. People use
it for conversation.
In the development
of language and
conversation, sometimes language
is a very complicated thing either in national or international language.
It can be
spoken or written
language. Language used
by the human being expresses
the idea, feeling,
whishes, opinion, and
very common people debate their friends by language, although
their reasons are false.
One of the phenomena that show
studying language isinteresting are each of people have common language and, the
differencesof how the language is used by
the people in certain area. But we just observe the phenomenon physically. We never discuss or study it on the component of
theirlanguage. We are never aware about
it. Because of that, the researcher interested in studying about it, as Yule
has pointed out in his book entitled ‘An
Introduction to Language’ as below.
Ian
Hutchby and Robin
Wooffitt. 1988. Conversation
Annalysis:Principle,
Practice and Aplication. Cambridge:Black Well Publisher.
Ltd. P.1.
In the
study of language, some of the most interesting questions arise in connection with the way language is used,
rather than what its components are. We
have already introduced one of those questions when we discussed pragmatics.
We were, in
effect, asking how
it is that
language-users interpret what
other language-users intend to convey. When we carry this investigation
further and ask how
it is that
we, as language-users, make sense of
what we read
in texts. Understand
what speaker mean
despite what they say, recognized
connected as opposed to jumbled or incoherent discourse,
and successfully take
part in that
complex activity called conversation, we are undertaking what is known
as discourse analysis .
The discourse analysis becomes
very important because it relates with how the
language is applied.
Our understanding about
it influences the way
people make a conversation,
because we apply our language in that conversation process.
In here, conversation is a kind
of discourse, whichis in spoken form. Because of that,
discourse analysis presents
the criteria of
discourse. It is
consisting of seventh criteria; they are coherence,
cohesion, situational, acceptable, informative, intentional, and intertextual. But, not all of
themare required in the discourse, but it
depends on the kind of discourse.
Between all of the criteria above
which had to be required on the debate are cohesion,
coherence, and intertextuality. In
the cohesion, each
of statement should be in good structure. In coherence each
of statement should be connected George
Yule. 1994. The
Study of Language:An
introduction. Great Brittain:Cambridge University Press. P:104.
each other,
and in intertextuality each
of the statement
should be truth
as the reality.
The discourse
analysis shows that
analytic access can be gained
to the situated achievement of intersubjective by
focusingon the sequential organization turn
taking. In addition, the relation with the discourse, conversation as a type of
a discourse, so, both of them are in
relationship that cannot be separated. It is very important
to pay attention
to the conversation
process; further more
for the debaters or the participants, the quality of
discourse become a special point that will
be considered in the scoring.
Because of those, it is very
important to discuss about the good quality in discourse.
We as the
language-users often make
mistakes in conversation.
It causes our
conversation is not
successful, and in
addition we often
get misunderstanding with our
partner. Therefore, we may also see it as a proof that the understanding to the language in use is
declining and that people simply do not
know to speak by his or her own language. So, when we want to speak, we must think first with the language or our
sentencesthat we want to say. As the explanation
before, it determines the quality and the success of speaking. Dealing with
English language, Bex
and Watts stated
that as Standard
English, a conversational text
of this kind
draws attention to the
point of classifying
it as being either in standard or non-standard
English .
To study the quality of
discourse, the researcher uses the data from "Java Overland
English Debate" 2007.
The researcher takes this
object because in
a Tony Bex and Richard J. Watts(Eds). 1999.
Standard English.New York and London:Routledge.
P: 24.
debate, the
participants often ignore
the criteria of
a good discourse.
The important for the
participants are speaking fast and debate to the other arguments.
They ignore the grammaticality,
intertextuality andalso the coherent. From this debate,
the researcher whishes
it will become
one of source
of knowledge in linguistics
study and we will know how our quality
of the discourse in speaking English
can be proofed.
1.2. Problem Statement The
general problem of
this study is
about the quality
of the discourse.
Then, the problem derived into
three points that isstated as follows.
1. How is the cohesiveness of the discourse
developed by the participants of Java
Overland English Debate 2007? 2. How is the coherent of the discourse
developed by the participants of Java Overland
English Debate 2007? 3. How is the intertextuality of the discourse
developed by the participants of Java
Overland English Debate 2007? 1.3.
Research Objectives Based on the problem
statement above, the objectiveof the study of this research is: 1. To
identify the cohesiveness of the discourse developed by the participants of Java Overland English Debate 2007.
2. To
identify the coherence
of the discourse
developed by the
participants of Java Overland English Debate 2007.
3. To identify the intertextuality of the
discourse developed by the participants of Java Overland English Debate 2007.
1.4. Significance of The study This
research has two
significances; they are
theoretical and practical significances.
Theoretically, this research
will enrich the
knowledge on the standard
quality of discourse. It also informs about any kinds of element that is needed in discourse. Therefore, we can apply
it well in our interaction.
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar