THE ANALYSIS OF TEACHER’S SPEECH ACT ON THE STUDENTS’ RESPONSE DURING LEARNING PROCESS AT SMAN 3 SERANG

Ina Mutmainah, Yudi Juniardi, Siti Hikmah

Abstract


This qualitative study aimed to find out the speech acts produced by the teacher, the illocutionary and perlocutionary acts uttered by the teacher, the illocutionary force of the teacher’s speech acts towards the students’ responses in the learning process, the implementation and the violation of cooperative principle  in the learning process. The subjects of this study were one English teacher and the students of XI MIPA 7 at SMAN 3 Serang. Observation, interview, and questioner were conducted to get the data for this study.  The results of the study show that the total of two meetings are  268 utterances, 150 of them are identified as directives, 10 commissives,  59 assertive, and 36 expressive and 13 declaratives. It means that 55,97of them are declarative, 3,73% are commissives, 22,01% are assertive,  13,43% are expressive and 4,85 are declaratives. The further finding of the research is that there are 35 types of illocutionary acts and 23 types of perlocutionary acts from the classification of speech acts. From the relationship between the teacher’s speech acts and the students’ responses, it was found that most of the teacher utterances were responded appropriately by the students. Besides, the researcher found that the implementation of Grice’s cooperative principles was found in learning process. The maxim that mostly occurred was maxim of quantity, continued by maxim of relevance, maxim of quality, and maxim of manner. On the other hand, the violent happened between the teacher’s and the students’ speech acts. Cooperative principles in the learning process become an important role in order to make the clearness and congruency and make the learning process become effective and efficient.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Austin, J. (1962). How to do things with words. London: Oxford University Press.

Basra, S., & Thoyyibah, L. (2017). A Speech Act Analysis of Teacher Talk in EFL Classroom. International Journal of Education, 75.

Collinge, N. E. (2005). An Encyclopedia of Language. London and Newyork: Routledge.

Crewsell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and mixed design approach 4th edition. United Stated of America: Sage.

Enyi, A. U. (2016). Pragmatic analysis of Nigeria’s President Mohammadu Buhari’s Maiden Coup Address of January 1, 1984 and His Inaugural Address of May 29, 2015. British Journal of English Linguistics, 4(2), 38.

Elo , S., & Kynga¨ s, H. (2007). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 107.

Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. Syntax and Semantics, 3, 41-58

Horn, L., & Gregory , W. (2006). The Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell .

Ihwanudin, M. (2012). The Types of Students' Response to the English Teaching and Learning Process by Using Multimedia in Grade X of SMA 2 Kebumen in the Academic Year of 2009/2010. Yogyakarta: Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.

Kartika, D. (2016). Teacher's and Students' Speech Acts During Correcting Work in SMA 8 Bandar Lampung. Lampung: Lampung University.

Kulatunga, U., Amaratunga, R., & Haigh, R. (2007). Structuring the Unstructured Data: The Use of Content Analysis. Salford: University of Salford Manchester.

Kurdghelashvil, T. ( 2015). Speech Act and Politeness Strategies in an EFL Classroom Georgia. International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic and Business and Industrial Engineering.

Kusumo, D. W. (2015). A Pragmatic Analysis of Illocutionary Acts in English Teaching-Learning Process at SMA N 1 Wates Kulon Progo. Yogyakarta: Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.

Kutlu, M. O., & Korkmaz, Ş. (2013). Student Perspectives on Study Skills in a Turkish State Secondary Sample from Adana. World Journal of Education , 20.

Leech , G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman Group Limited.

Leech, G., & Thomas, J. (2005). Language, Meaning and Context: Pragmatics. In N. E. Collinge, An Encyclopedia of Language (p. 94). New York: Routledge.

Merdana, Sekek, & Adi, J. P. (2013). An Analysis of Speech Acts Produced by Elementary School Teachers and Students to Facilitate Teaching and Learning at SDN 10 Pringgasela East Lombok . e-Journal Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, 1.

Sadeghi, B., Ansari, F. J., & Rahmani, R. (2015). The Effect of teacher Talk on EFL Learner. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 187.

Searle, J. (1971). The Philosophy of Language. London: Cambridge University.

Shafa. (2014). Karakteristik Proses Pembelajaran Kurikulum 2013. Dinamika Ilmu, 80.

Shahpouri, S. (2012). A Study of Directive Speech Acts Used by Iranian Nursery School. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 163.

SThomas, D. R. (2011). A general Inductive Approach for Analyzing Qualitative Evaluation Data. American Journal of Evaluation, 239.

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30870/aiselt.v2i2.10953

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
PROCEEDING AISELT (Annual International Seminar on English Language Teaching) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Copyright @2024 Universitas Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa [Untirta]. All rights reserved.