Modalitas Epistemik sebagai Wujud Lingual Tuturan Berpagar Mahasiswa Multikultural di Surabaya
Abstract
The use of hedges in student speech varies greatly depending on the situation and conditions of use, both in casual situations and in formal situations, it is stated that the use of adequate hedges must take into account the context. The purpose of this study was to determine the epistemik modality as a form of lingual speech by multicultural students in Surabaya. Hedges are a group of words whose function is to communicate, the communication function of language cannot be used properly without context. One group of words in question is in the form of an epistemik modality. This study aims to describe the epistemik modality as a form of hedges in multicultural students. The approach used is qualitative. This approach is considered relevant because it emphasizes the natural role, uses descriptive data, and uses inductive means because it does not test hypotheses. The data in this study is the verbal speech of multicultural students. The data sources of this research are multicultural students from four universities in Surabaya. The data retrieval technique used is the listening, recording, engaging, proficient, and note-taking technique. Analysis of the data used is the technique of sorting, turning, and connecting. The results of this study indicate that the epistemik modalities used as a form of hedges by multicultural students are the modality of predictability, modality of possibility, and modality of necessity.
Abstrak
Penggunaan hedges dalam tuturan mahasiswa sangat bervariasi tergantung situasi dan kondisi penggunaannya, baik itu dalam situasi santai maupun dalam situasi resmi dinyatakan bahwa penggunaan hedges yang memadai harus mempertimbangkan konteks. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui modalitas epistemik sebagai wujud lingual tuturan berpagar mahasiswa multikultural di Surabaya. Hedges adalah sekelompok kata yang fungsinya untuk melakukan komunikasi, fungsi komunikasi bahasa tidak dapat digunakan dengan semestinya tanpa konteks. Sekelompok kata yang dimaksud salah satunya berupa modalitas epistemik. Penelitian ini bertujuan mendeskripsikan modalitas epistemik sebagai wujud hedges pada mahasiswa multikultur. Pendekatan yang digunakan adalah kualitatif. Pendekatan ini dianggap relevan karena menonjolkan peran alami, menggunakan data deskriptif, dan menggunakan sarana induktif karena tidak menguji hipotesis. Data dalam penelitian adalah tuturan verbal mahasiswa multikultural. Sumber data penelitian ini adalah mahasiswa multikultural dari empat perguruan tinggi di Surabaya. Teknik pengambilan data yang digunakan adalah teknik simak, rekam, libat, cakap, dan catat. Analisis data yang digunakan adalah teknik pilah, balik, dan hubung. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa modalitas epistemik digunakan sebagai wujud hedges oleh mahasiswa multikultural adalah modalitas keteramalan, modalitas kemungkinan, dan modalitas keharusan.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)References
Alwi, H. (1992). Modalitas dalam Bahasa Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Pearson Education Limited.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. . (1987). Politenes. In Some universals in language usage (Vol. 4). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085
Crompton, P. (1997). Hedging in Academic Writing: Some Theoretical Problems. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 271-287. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97) 00007-0
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00007-0
Fand, R. J. (1989). Deductive Bias in Newspapers: Implications for Teaching ESL. Reading in a Foreign Language, 6(1), 315-321.
Finegan, E. (2010). Corpus Linguistics approach to 'legal language': adverbial expression pf attitude and emphasis in Supreme Court opinions. In In M. Coulthard and A. Johnson (eds), The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics. (pp. 65-77). Abingdon: Routledge.
Fraser, B. (2010). Pragmatic Competence: The Case of Hedging. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Gabrielatos, C., & Tony, M. (2005). Epistemik modality in MA. Dissertation: Universidad de Lancaster.
Getkham, K. (2016). Authorial stance in Thai students' doctoral dissertations. English Language Teaching, 9(3), 80-95. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n3p80
https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n3p80
Gosselin, L. (2010). Les modalités en français (Chronos studies 1). Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi.
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789042027572
Hinkel, E. (2005). Hedging, Inflating, and Persuading in L2 Academic Writing. Applied Language Learning, 15(1 & 2), 29-53. Retrieved from http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~prokofieva/CandidacyPapers/Hinkel_Hedging.pdf
Holmes, J. (1995). Women, men and politeness. London: Longman.
Hyland, K., & Milton, J. (1997). Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students' writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6(2), 183-205. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.469.8770&rep=rep1 &type=pdf
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(97)90033-3
Hyland, K. (1998a). Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 18(3), 349-382. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1. 1998.18.3.349
https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1998.18.3.349
Hyland, K. (1998b). Hedging in scientific research articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.54
Journet, N. (2009). Evrenselden özele kültür [La Culture: De L'universel au Particulier]. İstanbul: İz Yayıncılık.
Kastoryano, R. (2009). Avrupa'ya kimlik çokkültürlülük sınavı [Quelle Identité Pour L'Europe? Le Multiculturalisme a l'épreuve]. Ankara: Bağlam Yayıncılık.
Lakoff, G. (1973). Hedges: A study of in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2(4), 458-508. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00262952
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00262952
Lewin, B. A. (2005). Hedging: an Exploratory Study of Authors and Readers identification of 'toning down' in scientific texts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(2), 163-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2004.08.00
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2004.08.001
Lyons, J. (1995). Linguistic Semantics: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511810213
Markkanen, R., & Schröder, H. (1997). Hedging: A challenge for pragmatics and discourse analysis. In In R. Markkanen & Schröder (Eds.), Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts (pp. 3-18). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110807332
Matsushita, K. (2006). A Study of Proposition and Modality Focusing on Epistemik Modals in the Japanese Language. Dissertation. Australian: National University.
Meyers, H. P. (1997). Introductory Solid State Physics. In Second Edition. London: Taylor & Francis.
https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429320286
Mulyana, D., & Rakhmat, J. (2009). Komunikasi Antarbudaya: Panduan Komunikasi dengan orang-orang berbeda Budaya. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.
Mulyana, D. (2004). Komunikasi populer: kajian komunikasi dan budaya kontemporer. Bandung: Pustaka Bani Quraisy.
Niam, E., K. (2009). Koping Terhadap Stress Pada Mahasiswa Luar Jawa Yang Mengalami Culture Shock di Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta. Indegenius: Jurnal Ilmiah Berkala Psikologi, 11(1), 69-77.
Palmer. (2007). Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge.
Peng, Liu, F. X. and L. (2014). A case study of college teacher's politeness strategy in EFL classroom. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(1), 110-115.
https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.4.1.110-115
Salager-Meyer, F. (1994). Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 13(2), 149-170. https://doi.org/10.1.1.566.2410&rep=rep1&type=pdf
https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(94)90013-2
Skelton, J. (1988). Comments in academic articles. In In P. Grunwell (Ed). Applied linguistics in society (pp. 98-108). London: CILT/British Association of Applied Linguistics.
Suhadi, J. (2011). Epistemik Modality and Deontic Modality: Two Sides of a Coin. JULISA, 11(1), 156-179. https://doi.org/10.31227/osf.io/wv7zx
https://doi.org/10.31227/osf.io/wv7zx
Teramura, H. (1982). Nihongo no shintakusu to imi Ⅰ (Syntax and Meaning in Japanese, Ⅰ). Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan.
Wilamova, S. (2005). On the Function of Hedging Devices in Negatively Polite Discourse. Brno studies in English. 2005, vol. 31 = Sborník prací Filozofické fakulty brněnské univerzity. Řada S, anglistická. 2005, vol. 54, iss. S11. 31, 85-93. Retrieved from https://digilib.phil.muni.cz/bitstream/handle/11222.digilib/104205/1_BrnoStudiesEnglish_31-2005-1_10.pdf?sequence=1
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26499/rnh.v10i2.4044
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.