MEMAKNAI TANDA-TANDA BAHASA DI RUANG PUBLIK DALAM PERSPEKTIF KORTA & PERRY

R. Kunjana Rahardi

doi:10.26499/loa.v18i2.6163

MEMAKNAI TANDA-TANDA BAHASA DI RUANG PUBLIK DALAM PERSPEKTIF KORTA & PERRY

R. Kunjana Rahardi

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to describe the manifestation of the meaning and function of the linguistic landscape in the political year in the perspective of Korta & Perry's critical pragmatics. This study applies a phenomenological approach with a qualitative descriptive method. The research data is in the form of snippets of text in which there are signs of language that contain meaning and function as a linguistic landscape in the political year. Sources of substantive data for this research are texts which contain research data as mentioned above. The source of locational data for this research is social media on various platforms that were present around the time of the implementation of this research. Data was collected by applying the observation method to data sources that could potentially contain research data. This listening method is applied with techniques, both basic and advanced in nature, especially reading and note-taking techniques. The results of reading and recording are then identified, classified, and typified. Data analysis was carried out by applying the method of analysis of equivalents, especially contextual equivalents. Such a contextual equivalent analysis is carried out based on the context of the situation which accompanies the emergence of data on language signs in the form of the linguistic landscape. The results of this linguistic landscape research in a critical pragmatic perspective are presented as follows: (1) conveying informational meaning, (2) conveying symbolic meaning, (3) conveying ideological meaning, (4) conveying the meaning of socio-political struggle, (5) conveying the meaning of struggle justice, and (6) conveying the meaning of the struggle for truth.

Keywords

Linguistic Landscape; Virtual and Cybertext Contexts; Critical Pragmatics.

Full Text:

PDF

References

Affandy, D., & Wulandari, P. (2012). An Exploration Local Wisdom Priority in Public. Ijer.

Alexander, J. C. (2006). Cultural pragmatics: Social performance between ritual and strategy. In Social Performance: Symbolic Action, Cultural Pragmatics, and Ritual. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511616839.002

Biria, R., & Mohammadi, A. (2012). The socio pragmatic functions of inaugural speech: A critical discourse analysis approach. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.05.013

Culpeper, J., & Gillings, M. (2019). Pragmatics: Data trends. Journal of Pragmatics, 145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.01.004

Duranti, A. (2001). Linguistic anthropology a reader. In Blackwell anthologies in social and cultural anthropology. https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.1991.1.1.3

Gibbon, D. (2009). Gesture theory is linguistics: On modelling multimodality as prosody. PACLIC 23 - Proceedings of the 23rd Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation, 1.

Graham, P. (2016). Halliday and Lemke: a comparison of contextual potentials for two metafunctional systems. Critical Discourse Studies, 13(5). https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2016.1213177

Gullberg, M. (2012). Bilingual multimodality in language documentation data. Language Documentation & Conservation Special Publication No. 3, 3(3).

Hasanah, M. (2011). Urgensi dan Kontribusi Sosiolinguistik dalam Linguistik Edukasional. LiNGUA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa Dan Sastra. https://doi.org/10.18860/ling.v2i2.563

Jesús, M., & Sanz, P. (2013). Multimodality and Cognitive Linguistics: Introduction to the Special Volume. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 11(2).

Kecskes, I. (2019). Impoverished pragmatics? The semantics-pragmatics interface from an intercultural perspective. Intercultural Pragmatics, 16(5). https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2019-0026

Korta, K., & Perry, J. (2010). Critical pragmatics: An inquiry into reference and communication. In Critical Pragmatics: An Inquiry into Reference and Communication. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511994869

Koyama, W. (2001). Reason, experience, and critical-historical pragmatics. Jornal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00070-9

Kunjana Rahardi, R. (2020). Building critical awareness of corona virus-related news: Cyber-pragmatic study of COVID-19 hoaxes on social media. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology.

Ledin, P., & Machin, D. (2019). Doing critical discourse studies with multimodality: from metafunctions to materiality. Critical Discourse Studies, 16(5). https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2018.1468789

Leeuwen, van T. (2005). Introducing Social Semiotics (1st ed.). Routledge.

Mahsun. (2007). Metode Penelitian Bahasa: Tahapan Strategi, Metode, dan Tekniknya (Edisi Revisi). Raja Grafindo Persada.

Mey, J. L. (2002). Symbolic domination and postcolonial contestation: Resources and conditions. In Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)80003-0

Midtgarden, T. (2012). Critical Pragmatism. European Journal of Social Theory. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431011432373

Rahardi, K. (2011). Interpretasi Konteks Pragmatik dalam Pemelajaran Bahasa. LITERASI: Indonesian Journal of Humanities, 1(2).

Rahardi, K. (2019). Pragmatic perspective on phatic functions and language dignity in a culture-based society. Asia Proceedings of Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.31580/apss.v4i1.554

Rahardi, R. K. (2020). Konteks dalam perspektif cyberpragmatics. 2, 151–163.

Rahardi, R. K. (2021). Lanskap Konteks Sosial-Sosietal dalam Pragmatik Berbasis Cybertexts Vaksinasi Covid-19 (Socio-Social Context Landscape in Cybertexts-Based Pragmatics Covid-19 Vaccination). Indonesian Language Education and Literature, 6(2), 236. https://doi.org/10.24235/ileal.v6i2.8112

Rahardi, R. K. (2022a). Lanskap konteks eksternal virtual dalam pragmatik siber. 1, 39–48.

Rahardi, R. K. (2022b). Triadicities of Indonesian Phatic Functions. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 12(12), 2641–2650. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1212.22

Rooij, R. van. (2004). Formal Pragmatics. Semantics, Pragmatics, Presupposition, and Focus. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.04.009

Salehuddin, K., Winskel, H., & Maros, M. (2011). The pragmatic functions of numeral classifiers in modern Malay written corpus. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 11(2), 137–153.

Salzmann, Z., Duranti, A., & Goodwin, C. (1993). Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon. Language. https://doi.org/10.2307/416910

Science, L., Company, P., Long, M. H., Canagarajah, S., Peterson, R. A., Nagel, J., Lu, S., Fine, G. A., Pavlenko, A., Eva Lam, W. S., Warriner, D. S., Poveda, D., Gonzalez, N., de Souza, L. M. T. M., McNamara, T., Iwasaki, S., Van Lier, leo, Lemke, L., Modern, T., … Backus, A. (2017). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(88)90022-X

Stephenson, J. (2008). The Cultural Values Model: An integrated approach to values in landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.07.003

Sudaryanto. (2015). Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa: Pengantar Penelitian Wahana Kebudayaan secara Linguistis (1st ed.). Sanata Dharma University Press.

Warami, H. (2020). Identity of Speech Community in Biak Numfor Papua: Anthropolinguistic Study Perspective. ETNOSIA : Jurnal Etnografi Indonesia, 284–303. https://doi.org/10.31947/etnosia.v5i2.11195

Waugh, L. R., Catalano, T., Al Masaeed, K., Do, T. H., & Renigar, P. G. (2016). Critical discourse analysis: Definition, approaches, relation to pragmatics, critique, and trends. In Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy and Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12616-6_4

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26499/loa.v18i2.6163