The sociopragmatic study of speech acts in Go’et Ira in the We’e Mbaru cultural rite

Gabriel Fredi Daar

Abstract


We’e Mbaru is a cultural rite of entering a new house in the Manggarai speech community speaking the Pasat-Ruis dialect in Flores Island, East Nusa Tenggara Province, Indonesia. Ira is one of the phases in this cultural tradition. At this stage, a Tongka (spokesperson) and participant representatives conduct cultural interactions using go’et (expression or proverb). This study aimed to analyze the speech acts of go’et in the Ira phase. The study used a qualitative method with a phenomenological approach. Data were collected using in-depth interviews with seven key informants, taken purposively with the main criteria of having adequate knowledge of Manggarai culture, good ability to use go’et, and experience as a Tongka. The results showed that the speech acts of go’et in the Ira phase included representative and directive acts (illocutionary acts). The study also found that the expressive speech act of gratitude, prayers, and hopes, and the speech act of giving financial support are categorized as perlocutionary speech acts. The use of go’et by a Tongka and participant representatives is considered a language politeness strategy effective for refining the language used, especially for avoiding face-threatening acts. Tongka and participant representatives need to understand the context and situation of the speech so that the choice of go’et is appropriate and conveyed judiciously.

Keywords


cultural rite; go’et; Ira phase; Manggarai; speech acts; We’e Mbaru

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abels, M., Kilale, A., & Vogt, P. (2021). Speech acts addressed to Hadza infants in Tanzania: Cross-cultural comparison, speaker age, and camp livelihood. First Language, 41(3), 294–313. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723720972000

Adhiguna, I. M. P., Susrawan, I. N. A., & Erawan, D. G. B. (2019). Analisis tindak tutur lokusi, ilokusi, dan perlokusi dalam proses pembelajaran Bahasa Indonesia di kelas XI MIPA 7 SMA N 7 Denpasar Tahun Pelajaran 2018/2019 [Analysis of locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary speech acts in the Indonesian language learning process in grade XI MIPA 7 SMAN 7 Denpasar academic year 2018/2019]. Jurnal Bakti Saraswati, 8(2), 204–211.

Apriastuti, N. N. A. A. (2017). Bentuk, fungsi dan jenis tindak tutur dalam komunikasi siswa di kelas IX Unggulan SMP PGRI 3 Denpasar [Forms, functions and types of speech acts in student communication in grade IX Unggulan SMP PGRI 3 Denpasar]. Jurnal Imiah Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 1(1), 38–47.

Austin, J. (1975). How to do things with words: The William James lectures delivered at Harvard University in 1955. Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001

Barinaga, E. (2009). A performative view of language: Methodological considerations and consequences for the study of culture. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 10(1), Article 24. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-10.1.1226

Bouchara, A. (2015). The role of religion in shaping politeness in Moroccan Arabic: The case of the speech act of greeting and its place in intercultural understanding and misunderstanding. Journal of Politeness Research, 11(1), 71–98. https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2015-0004

Brown, A. (2019). African American enslavement, speech act theory, and the law. Journal of African American Studies, 23(3), 162–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12111-019-09431-z

Brown, P. (2015). Politeness and language. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd ed., Vol. 18). https:// doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.53072-4

Brown, S., & Matusitz, J. (2019). U.S. church leaders’ responses to the Charleston Church shooting: An examination based on speech act theory. Journal of Media and Religion, 18(1), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348423.2019.1642008

Chejnová, P. (2021). Apology as a multifunctional speech act in Czech students’ e-mails to their lecturer. Journal of Pragmatics, 183, 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.07.006

Coulmas, F. (2006). Sociolinguistics: The study of speaker’s choice. Cambridge University Press.

Dawson, G. (2015). Interpreting voluntary exchange: Markets, speech acts and communicative action. Economic Affairs, 35(2), 240–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecaf.12122

Dejarnette, G., Rivers, K. O., & Hyter, Y. D. (2015). Ways of examining speech acts in young African American children: Considering inside-out and outside-in approaches. Topics in Language Disorders, 35(1), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1097/tld.0000000000000042

Deki, K. T. (2011). Tradisi lisan orang Manggarai [Oral tradition of the Manggarai people]. Parrhesia Institute.

Dewi, I. A. P. A., Kardana, I. N., & Muliana, I. N. (2020). Functions of speech acts in “Critical Eleven.” RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa, 6(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.22225/jr.6.1.1275.1-6

Fauzia, S. D., Abdullah, W., & Purnanto, D. (2022). Tradition of Sesaji Rewanda at Goa Kreo as local wisdom. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 255–265. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v12i1.46537

Gąsior, W. (2015). Cultural scripts and the speech act of opinions in Irish English: A study amongst Irish and Polish university students. ELOPE: English Language Overseas Perspectives and Enquiries, 12(1), 11–28. https://doi.org/10.4312/elope.12.1.11-28

Geng, X. (2010). Cultural differences influence on language. Review of European Studies, 2(2), 219–222. https://doi.org/10.5539/res.v2n2p219

Gerstenberg, A. (2020). Pragmatic development in the (middle and) later stages of life. In K. Schneider & E. Ifantidou (Eds.), Developmental and clinical pragmatics (pp. 209-234). De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110431056-008

Govea, J. M. (2007). The cultural influence of ‘Power Distance’ in language learning [Course module]. The University of Birmingham. https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/documents/college-artslaw/cels/essays/languageteaching/govealtmessay.pdf

Green, M. (2009). Speech acts, the handicap principle and the expression of psychological states. Mind & Language, 24(2), 139–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2008.01357.x

Green, M. (2015). Speech acts. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2015 ed.). Stanford University.

Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge University Press.

Hanna, N., & Richards, D. (2019). Speech act theory as an evaluation tool for human-agent communication. Algorithms, 12(4), Article 79. https://doi.org/10.3390/A12040079

Hymes, D. (1972). Toward ethnographies of communication. In J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics (pp. 1-34). Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Jiang, L. (2015). An empirical study on pragmatic transfer in refusal speech act produced by Chinese high school EFL learners. English Language Teaching, 8(7), 95–113. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n7p95

Kádár, D. Z., & House, J. (2020). Ritual frames: A contrastive pragmatic approach. Pragmatics, 30(1), 142–168. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.19018.kad

Kuo, M.-M., & Lai, C.-C. (2006). Linguistics across cultures: The impact of culture on second language learning. Journal of Foreign Language Instruction, 1(1), 1–10.

Labov, W. (2005). Sociolinguistics study. Routledge.

Lakoff, R. & Sachiko, I. (2005). Broadening the horizon of linguistic politeness. John Benjamins.

Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. Longman.

Ludwig, K. (2020). What are group speech acts? Language and communication, 70, 46–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2019.04.004

Mahadi, T. S. T., & Jafari, S. M. (2012). Language and culture. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2, 230–235.

Maros, M., & Rosli, L. (2017). Politeness strategies in Twitter updates of female English language studies Malaysian undergraduates. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 23(1), 132–149. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2017-2301-10

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Data analysis qualitative: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage.

Moafian, F., Yazdi, N. & Sarani, A. (2019). The refusal of request speech act in Persian, English, and Balouchi languages: A cross-cultural and cross-linguistic study. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 60(2), 255–285. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2018-0357

Moses, F. (2019). Retorika puisi sastra Go’et masyarakat Manggarai: Sebuah kajian retorika dan puitika lisan [The rhetoric of the Go’et literary poetry of the Manggarai people: A study of rhetoric and oral poetry]. Ceudah: Jurnal Ilmiah Sastra, 9(1), 56–66.

Mugford, G. (2022). Politeness in professional contexts: Foreign-language teacher training. Journal of Politeness Research, 18(1), 151–172. https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2020-0006

Musriyono, A. A., & Saptono, S. (2018). Pragmatic functions of perlocutionary act in F-3 leveled reading book. Journal of Primary Education, 7(3), 348–355.

Nadar, F. X. (2013). Pragmatik dan penelitian pragmatic [Pragmatics and pragmatic research]. Graha Ilmu.

Ndung, Y. (2019). Etos dan spirit hidup orang Manggarai [The ethos and spirit of life of the Manggarai people]. Universitas Negeri Malang.

Ordenes, F. V., Grewal, D., Ludwig, S., Ruyter, K. De, Mahr, D., & Wetzels, M. (2019). Cutting through content clutter: How speech and image acts drive consumer sharing of social media brand messages. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(5), 988–1012. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucy032

Payong, M. R. (2022). Adaptasi nilai-nilai budaya lokal dalam pendidikan: Studi penggunaan go’et dalam pendidikan agama Katolik [Adaptation of the local cultural values in education: Study of the use of go'et in Catholic religious education]. Dunamis: Jurnal Teologi dan Pendidikan Kristiani, 7(1), 384–400. https://doi.org/10.30648/dun.v7i1.753

Prykarpatska, I. (2008). Why are you late? Cross-cultural pragmatic study of complaints in American English and Ukrainian. Revista Alicantina De Estudios Ingleses, 21, 87–102. https://doi.org/10.14198/raei.2008.21.05

Qalyubi, I. (2017). The implementation of Hymes “Speaking” theory on ethnography of communication. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on English Language Teaching, 1(1), 13–24.

Rachmawati, I. (2020). Language and culture in multicultural society of English language course. NOBEL: Journal of Literature and Language Teaching, 11(1), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.15642/nobel.2020.11.1.55-68

Sanjaya, F. O., & Rahardi, R. K. (2021). Kajian ekolinguistik metaforis nilai-nilai kearifan lokal upacara pernikahan adat Manggarai, Flores, Nusa Tenggara Timur [Metaphorical ecolinguistic study of local wisdom values of traditional Manggarai wedding ceremonies, Flores, East Nusa Tenggara]. Deiksis: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, 7(2), 12–28. https://doi.org/10.33603/deiksis.v7i2.3283

Schnurr, S., & Zayts, O. (2017). Language and culture at work (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315541785

Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge University Press.

Sutam, I. (2016). Ca leleng do, do leleng ca [One is equal to many, many is equal to one]. Penerbit STKIP St. Paulus Ruteng.

Wannaruk, A. (2008). Pragmatic transfer in Thai EFL Refusals. RELC, 39(3), 318–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688208096844

Wardhaugh, R. (2006). An introduction to sociolinguistics (5th ed.). Blackwell Publishing.

Watts, R. J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge University Press.

Weigand, E. (2016). The dialogic principle revisited: Speech acts and mental states. In A. Capone & J. Mey (Eds.), Interdisciplinary studies in pragmatics, culture and society: Perspectives in pragmatics, philosophy & psychology (Vol 4., pp. 209–232). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12616-6_7

Witek, M. (2021). Self-expression in speech acts. Organon F, 28(2), 326–359. https://doi.org/10.31577/orgf.2021.28204

Yaqin, L. N., Shanmuganathan, T., Fauzanna, W., Jaya, A., Rinjani, U. G., Andalas, U., Hamzanwadi, U. (2022). Sociopragmatic parameters of politeness strategies among the Sasak in the post elopement rituals. Studies in English Language and Education, 9(2), 797–811. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v9i2.22569

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




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v10i2.26545

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Print ISSN: 2355-2794, Online ISSN: 2461-0275

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


View Journal Stats