An Analysis of Speech Act Ability Conducted by the Students of English Department in Muhammadiyah University of Metro

Dedy Subandowo, Mezia Kemala Sari


This research is entitled The An Analysis of Speech Act Ability Conducted by the Students of English Department at Muhammadiyah University of Metro. It aims to analyze the language strategy and the usage of language politeness toward students’ speech act ability in speaking interaction in Muhammadiyah University of Metro. This is a descriptive qualitative analysis. The population of data is taken from the students of the fifth semester in Muhammadiyah University of Metro. The data collecting technique used in this research is noting technique and participative observation technique. Data analysis technique uses pragmatic identity method. The result of data analysis is presented with informal forms. The results show that there are three kinds of speech act strategy in language communication; namely, 1) locutionary 2) illocutionary, and 3) perlocutionary act. The politeness language usage, however, can be divided into direct and indirect speech and it covers reason, apology, gratitude, and request. 

Keywords: Language Politeness Strategy, Sociopragmatics, Speech Act

Full Text:



Acts, T. S. (2011). Margo Milleret . Journal of the National Council of Less Commonly Taught Languages 4: , 29-52.

Arikunto. (1993). Prosedur Penelitian, Suatu Pendekatan Praktek. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Boblett, N. (2002). Negotiating Participant Status in Participation Frameworks. Teachers College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL and Applied Linguistics , 45 - 47.

Brown, D., & Hippisley, A. (2012). Network Morphology: A Defaults-based Theory of Word Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chomsky, N. (2002). Syntactic Structures. Berlin & New York: Mouten de Gruyter.

Dean, N. (2006). Discovering Voice: Voice Lessons for Middle and High School. Florida: Maupin House.

Dirgantara, Y. A. (2012). Pelangi Bahasa Sastra dan Budaya Indonesia: Kumpulan Apresiasi dan Tanggapan. Yogyakarta: Garudhawaca.

Djajasudarma, F. (1993). Metode Linguistik Ancangan Metode Penelitian dan Kajian. Jakarta: Refika Aditama.

Face, T. L. (2004 ). Laboratory Approaches to Spanish Phonology. Berlin : Walter de Gruyter.

Goodwin, J. (2014). Conceptions of Speech Acts in the Theory and Practice of Argumentation : A Case Study of A Debate about Advocating. STUDIES IN LOGIC, GRAMMAR AND RHETORIC , 79 - 93.

Hayati, A. M. (2010). Notes on Teaching English Pronunciation to EFL Learners: A Case of Iranian High School Students . English Language Teaching , 121.

Hersen, M. (2004). Comprehensive Handbook of Psychological Assessment, Intellectual and Neuropsychological Assessment. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Ismari. (1995). Tentang Percakapan. Surabaya: Airlangga University Press.

Kreidler, C. W. (2001). Phonology: Critical Concepts in Linguistics, Volume 3. New York: Routledge.

Mattiello, E. (2013). Extra-grammatical Morphology in English. Berlin: Hubert & Co.KG.

Melcuk, I. A. (2012). Semantics: From Meaning to Text, Volume 1. Amsterdam : John Benjamin Publishing Company .

Nadar, F. (2009). Pragmatik & Penelitian Pragmatik. . Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.

Pârlog, H. (2015). The Semantics of Heart: Translation Problems. English Language Overseas Perspectives and Enquiries , 77.

Rahardi, R. K. (2005). Pragmatik: Kesantunan Imperatif Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Sudaryanto. (1993). Metode Dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa :Pengantar Penelitian Wahana Kebudayaan Secara Linguistis. . Yogyakarta: Duta Wacana University Press.

Tallerman, M. (2014). Understanding Syntax 2nd Edition. New York : Routledge .



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2017 Journal of English Language Studies

Creative Commons License
Journal of English Language Studies is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright @ 2023 Journal of English Language Studies.

View My Stats