Main Article Content
This study aims to describe (1) the speech acts of adolescents as an only child in daily interactions in class, (2) the variety of politeness in speech acts in the language of adolescents as an only child in daily interactions in class, (3) supporting factors and speech act inhibiting factors in the speaking ability of adolescents as an only child in speaking ability. Data were collected through in-depth interviews, questionnaires, observation and documentation. The research approach is descriptive qualitative. Data validity analysis used triangulation. Data analysis techniques, namely using content analysis include data collection, data reduction, data presentation, and drawing conclusions. The results showed that first, based on the form of delivery, direct and indirect speech acts were found. In addition, based on the disclosure of meaning, it was found that literal and non-literal speech acts were found. There were many differences in speech acts performed between the main object and the object of comparison. Second, there are quite different kinds of politeness between the main object and the object of comparison. Third, the main object has two supporting factors, namely the work background of the parents and the use of language. Whereas in the inhibiting factor, the main object has two inhibiting factors, namely politeness and activity.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Christiandy. (2015). Analisis Tindak Tutur Kru Bus dengan Penumpang Bus Jurusan Yogyakarta-Parangtritis (Kajian Pragmatik). Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 53(9), 1689–1699. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Feist, J., & Feist, G. J. (2010). Teori Kepribadian. Edisi Ke-7. Jakarta: Salemba Humanika.
Gunarsa, S. D. (2011). Konseling dan Psikoterapi. Jakarta: Libri.
Gunarsa, S. D. & Gunarsa, Y. S. D. (2008). Psikologi Perkembangan Anak dan Remaja. Jakarta: BPK Gunung Mulia.
Hasanah, U. (2016). Pola Asuh Orangtua dalam Membentuk Karakter Anak. Elementary: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Dasar, 2(2), 72-82. Retrieved from https://e-journal.metrouniv.ac.id/index.php/elementary/article/view/pola-asuh-orangtua-dalam-membentuk-karakter-anak
Nolen-Hoeksema, S., Fredrickson, B. L., Loftus, G. R., & Wagenaar, W. A. (2009). Atkinson & Hilgard's Introduction to Psychology (15th Edition). In Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Andover: Cengage Learning EMEA.
Nurlaila, M. (2016). Pengaruh Bahasa Daerah (Ciacia) terhadap Perkembangan Bahasa Indonesia Anak Usia 2 Sampai 6 Tahun di Desa Holimombo Jaya. Retorika, 9(2), 114-119. https://doi.org/10.26858/retorika.v9i2.3801
Purba, A. (2011). Tindak Tutur dan Peristiwa Tutur. Pena: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra, 1(1), 77-92. Retrieved from https://online-journal.unja.ac.id/pena/article/view/1426
Ratnawati, I. I. (2018). Kajian Pragmatik Percakapan Guru dan Siswa dalam Pembelajaran Bahasa Indonesia di SMA Advent Balikpapan. Stilistika: Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya, 3(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.33654/sti.v3i1.499
Rokhmansyah, A., Purwanti, Ainin, N. (2019). Pelanggaran Maksim pada Tuturan Remaja Perempuan Yatim: Kajian Psikopragmatik. JP-BSI (Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia), 4(1), 47-52. https://dx.doi.org/10.26737/jp-bsi.v4i1.887
Salmani-Nodoushan, M. A. (2006). A Comparative Sociopragmatic Study of Ostensible Invitations in English and Farsi. Speech Communication, 48(8), 903-912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2005.12.001
Sari, S. L., Devianti, R., & Safitri, N. (2018). Kelekatan Orangtua untuk Pembentukan Karakter Anak. Educational Guidance and Counseling Development Journal, 1(1), 16-31. https://doi.org/10.24014/egcdj.v1i1.4947
Stukan, D. (2018). Sociopragmatic Failure: Struggling with Cross-Cultural Differences in Communication. Open Journal for Anthropological Studies, 2(1), 27-36. https://doi.org/10.32591/coas.ojas.0201.03027s
Sugiyono. (2016). Metodologi Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung: CV Alfabeta.
Walgito, B. (2010). Pengantar Psikologi Sosial. Yogyakarta: Andi.
Wardyaningrum, D. (2013). Komunikasi untuk Penyelesaian Konflik dalam Keluarga: Orientasi Percakapan dan Orientasi Kepatuhan. Jurnal Al-Azhar Indonesia, 2(1), 47-58. Retrieved from https://jurnal.uai.ac.id/index.php/SPS/article/view/110