Commissive Speech Act in Indonesian Presidential Debate

Abdulloh Husain; Hamamah Hamamah; Ika Nurhayani

doi:10.19105/ojbs.v14i1.3141

Abdulloh Husain Master Program of Linguistics, Faculty of Cultural Studies, Universitas Brawijaya, Jl. Veteran Malang, 65145, Indonesia
Hamamah Hamamah Master Program of Linguistics, Faculty of Cultural Studies, Universitas Brawijaya, Jl. Veteran Malang, 65145
Ika Nurhayani Master Program of Linguistics, Faculty of Cultural Studies, Universitas Brawijaya, Jl. Veteran Malang, 65145

https://doi.org/10.19105/ojbs.v14i1.3141

Abstract views: 1525 ,

PDF downloads: 822

Keywords: Commissive, Indonesian presidential debate, Speech act

Abstract

A presidential debate is one of the campaign media which has a function to promote a presidential candidate to be a president. A linguistics theory of meaning was used to describe the utterances of the illocutionary act. This study was aimed to find a commissive speech act and its function in the first Indonesian presidential debate in 2019. The data source of this study was a video taken from Kompas TV channel on YouTube. The data of this study were utterances produced by the candidates. The data were collected by watching and note-taking techniques. As a result, 20 utterances belonged to the commissive speech act produced by Jokowi, Prabowo, and Sandi. However, there were no commissive speech act utterances produced by Ma'ruf. The conclusion is that the candidates mostly used promise act in producing utterances. The promise acts appear in the future tense, if clause condition sentence, and expression of InsyaAllah. Meanwhile, the function of producing utterances in this study is to show the candidates' capability to gain the consideration of society to vote one of them with a good sympathy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ad-Darraji, Hadher Hussein Abbood, and Thomas Chow Voon Foo. “Offering as a Comissive and Directive Speech Act: Consequence for Cross-Cultural Communication.” International Journal of Scientific and Research Publication 2, no. 3 (2012): 1–6.

Araki, Naomi. “Speech-Act Theory.” Bull. Hiroshima Inst. Tech. Research 52 (2018): 1–5.

Austin, John. How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge: Oxford University Press, 1962.

Blumer, Herbert. Simbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood: Prentice Hall, 1969.

Chalak, Azizeh, and Samira Abbasi. “The Effects of Explicit and Implicit Pragmatic Instruction on Iranian EFL Learners ’ Production of Suggestion Speech Act in the Context of Distance Learning.” Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research 2, no. 4 (2015): 275–84.

Creswell, John W. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Boston: University of Nebraska, 2012.

Ghaedrahmat, Mehdi, Parviz Alavinia, and Reza Biria. “The Effect of Explicit vs. Implicit Instruction on Mastering the Speech Act of Thanking among Iranian Male and Female EFL Learners.” Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning 9, no. 2 (2016): 401–25. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2016.9.2.7.

Gusthini, Misyi, Cece Sobarna, and Rosaria Mita Amalia. “A Pragmatic Study of Speech as an Instrument of Power: Analysis of the 2016 USA Presidential Debate.” Studies in English Language and Education 5, no. 1 (2018): 97–113. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v5i1.6906.

Jazeri, Mohamad, Kojin, and Dwi Astuti Wahyu Nurhayati. “Pragmatics Approach in Teaching ‘Maharah Kalam’ at Pondok Modern Darul Hikmah Tulungagung.” OKARA: Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra 12, no. 2 (2018): 179. https://doi.org/10.19105/ojbs.v12i2.1949.

Juwita, Silvia Ratna. “Tindak Tutur Ekspresif dan Komisif dalam Debat Calon Presiden Republik Indonesia 2014 : Studi Analisis Wacana.” Jurnal Eduscience 3, no. 1 (2014): 37–48.

Kompas TV. Debat Pertama Capres & Cawapres Pemilu 2019, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6G85GvVdzw&t=3458s.

Kreidler, Charles. Introduction to English Semantics. London: Routledge, 1998.

Mohammed Hashim, Suhair Safwat. “Speech Acts in Political Speeches.” Journal of Modern Education Review 5, no. 7 (2015): 699–706. https://doi.org/10.15341/jmer(2155-7993)/07.05.2015/008.

Ngoan, Nguyen Quang, and Nguyen Thi Ngoc Dung. “Speech Act Types in Conversations in the ‘New Interchange’ Series.” VNU Journal of Foreign Studies 33, no. 6 (2017). https://doi.org/10.25073/2525-2445/vnufs.4210.

Noermanzah, Emzir, and Ninuk Lustyantie. “President Joko Widodo’s Rhetorical Technique of Arguing in the Presidential Speeches of the Reform Era.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature 7, no. 5 (September 1, 2018): 117–26. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.5p.117.

Paina. “Commissive Speech Acts Can Reduce Conflict.” Accessed April 14, 2020. https://ugm.ac.id/en/news/5247-commissive-speech-acts-can-reduce-conflict.

Pierce, Doris. “Promise.” Journal of Occupational Science 19, no. 4 (October 1, 2012): 298–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/14427591.2012.667778.

Rashid, Bushra Ni’ma. “A Pragmatic Analisis of Commissives in Some Selected American Political Texts.” International Journal of Current Research 7, no. 12 (December 2015): 23805–14.

Ritonga, Siti. “Speech Acts in Indonesia Independence Day Speech.” AICLL: Annual International Conference on Language and Literature 1, no. 1 (April 17, 2018): 57–61. https://doi.org/10.30743/aicll.v1i1.8.

Rosyidi, Ahmad, Mahyuni Mahyuni, and Muhaimi. “Illocutionary Speech Acts Use by Jokowidodo in First Indonesia Presidential Election Debate 2019.” International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding 6, no. 2 (May 30, 2019): 735–40. https://doi.org/10.18415/ijmmu.v6i2.760.

Searle, John R. “A Classification of Illocutionary Acts.” Language in Society 5, no. 1 (April 1976): 1–23.

Ulum, Miftakhul, and Djoko Sutopo. “A Comparison Between Trump’s and Clinton’s Commissive Speech Act in America’s Presidential Campaign Speech.” English Education Journal 8, no. 2 (2018): 221–28. https://doi.org/10.15294/eej.v8i3.21391.