Students’ Perspectives on The Classroom Discourse Analysis (Criticizing Lecture’s Politeness In Teaching Activities)
(1) School Of Postgraduates Studies, Linguistics S3 Indonesia University Of Education Universitas Indraprasta PGRI
(2) Indonesia University Of Education
(3) Indonesia University Of Education
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract
Discourse is frequently understood as the largest and most complete unit of language structure, structurally, it means that discourse is part of a series of language components. It is defined and viewed from many different perspectives, ranging from a very linguistic- oriented to a political- one. This perspective discourse has been analyzed for its role in expressing ideologies, power, dominance, inequality, and bias (Van Dijk, 1998). In Linguistics, discourse has also been viewed from different perspectives, referring to other types of languages used in various sorts of social situation such as newspaper discourse, advertising discourse, classroom discourse, and the discourse of medical consultation (Fairclough, 1992:3). This study focuses on lecturer’s politeness, speech acts and cooperative principles in the classroom. It will also bring to a broad band of disciplined questioning of the ways in which power works through the discursive practices and performances in schooling and lecturing. The research method applied in this study is a descriptive qualitative approach based on the transcription among models of classroom discourse- the Sinclair and Coultrhard (1975) model, performative utterances from J.L Austin, Roger Searle, and pragmatics from George Yule was selected as a sign post of this classroom on discourse analysis. All the data were analyzed in the form of a description. As the result of this study, observing classes, finding out some information from students, then applying the use of interaction- scheme undoubtedly results in a much better understanding of classroom aims and events, particularly in terms of lecturer talking and behaving to the students and classroom activities.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Anshori, D.S.(2017). Analisis Wacana (Teori, Aplikasi, dan Pembelajaran). Bandung: UPI Press.
Austin, J.L.(1984). How To Do Things with Words. Oxford University Press.
Brown, G. And Yule, G.(1996). Analisis Wacana (Terjemahan) Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
Fairclough, N.(1999). Critical Discourse Analysis. United Kingdom: Longman.
Heracleous, L.(2006). Discourse, Interpretation, Organization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heryanto, A.(1996). Bahasa dan Kuasa (Latif dan Ibrahim, ed).Bandung: Mizan.
Leech, G.(1983). Principle Of Pragmatic. London: Longman Group.
McCarthy,M.(1991) Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D.(2003). Practical English Language Teaching. New York: McGraw Hill Inc.
Sinclair, J., and Brazil,D.(1982) Teacher Talk. Oxford University Press.
Sinclair, J. & Coulthard, R.M.(1975). Toward an Analysis of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Suherdi, D.(2010). Classroom Discourse Analysis (A Systemiotic Approach). Bandung: Celtics Press.
Van Dijk, A.T.(1997). Discourse as Structure and Process of Discourse Studies. A Multidiscplinary Introduction, Volume 1, SAGE Publication, London.
Yule, G.(2005). The Study Of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30998/deiksis.v16i3.24378
Article Metrics
Metrics powered by PLOS ALM
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Kokok Djoko Purwanto, Wawan Gunawan, Syihabuddin Syihabuddin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Publisher: Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat Universitas Indraprasta PGRI Address: Jl. Nangka No. 58 C (TB. Simatupang), Kel. Tanjung Barat, Kec. Jagakarsa, Jakarta Selatan 12530, Jakarta, Indonesia. |
|
Deiksis is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |