Lubis, Sofia Idawati (2015) POLITENESS PRINCIPLE IN INTERRUPTIONS IN INDONESIA LAWYERS CLUB. Masters thesis, UNIMED.
1. NIM. 8136111054 COVER.pdf - Published Version
Download (54kB) | Preview
2. NIM. 8136111054 APPROVAL SHEET.pdf - Published Version
Download (208kB) | Preview
3. NIM. 8136111054 ABSTRACT.pdf - Published Version
Download (74kB) | Preview
4. NIM. 8136111054 PREFACE.pdf - Published Version
Download (76kB) | Preview
5. NIM. 8136111054 TABLE OF CONTENT.pdf - Published Version
Download (91kB) | Preview
6. NIM. 8136111054 TABLES.pdf - Published Version
Download (48kB) | Preview
7. NIM. 8136111054 APPENDICES.pdf - Published Version
Download (47kB) | Preview
8. NIM. 8136111054 CHAPTER I.pdf - Published Version
Download (152kB) | Preview
12. NIM. 8136111054 CHAPTER V.pdf - Published Version
Download (67kB) | Preview
13. NIM. 8136111054 BIBLIOGRAPHY.pdf - Published Version
Download (122kB) | Preview
Abstract
This study was aimed at examining the politeness principle in interruptions in Indonesia Lawyers Club. The objectives of this study were 1) to find out the types of politeness principle occurred in the talk show, 2) to find out the dominant type of politeness principle occurred, and 3) to find out the reasons of those types of politeness principle occurred the ways they were. This research was conducted by qualitative method. The source of data were Indonesia Lawyers Club. They were chosen randomly. The technique of data collection was documentary technique. The instrument of data collection was observation from the video recordings of four episodes of Indonesia Lawyers Club. They were analyzed by qualitative content analysis. The findings showed that 1) there were five types of politeness principle occurred, namely: tact maxim (obedience 3.13%, violation 51.56%), generosity maxim (obedience 23.44%, violation 0.00%), approbation maxim (obedience 1.04%, violation 2.08%), modesty maxim (obedience 1.04%, violation 0.00%), agreement maxim (obedience 11.98%, violation 5.73%), and sympathy maxim (obedience 0.00%, violation 0.00%). 2) The violation of tact maxim was dominantly occurred in interruptions. 3) The reasons for obeying and violating of politeness principle were to reduce competition between addressee’s purpose and what politeness claimed, to find out affable, to cause offence, to tease others, and to make a joke or humorous interruptions
Item Type: | Thesis (Masters) |
---|---|
Additional Information: | 401.9 Lub p |
Keywords: | Pragmatics; Speech acts; Television talk show; Indonesia lawyers club; Interruptions |
Subjects: | B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology > BF309 Consciousness. Cognition P Language and Literature > P Philology. Linguistics > P95 Oral communication. Speech P Language and Literature > PN Literature (General) > PN1990 Broadcasting |
Divisions: | Program Pasca Sarjana > Linguistik Terapan Bahasa Inggris |
Depositing User: | Mrs Siti Nurbaidah |
Date Deposited: | 08 May 2016 18:01 |
Last Modified: | 08 May 2016 18:01 |
URI: | https://digilib.unimed.ac.id/id/eprint/5105 |