The Shifts of Conventional Context Element Aspects: Towards a Cyberpragmatics Perspective
Main Article Content
Keywords
Conventional, virtual, external context, cyber-pragmatics
Abstract
This study aims to describe the forms of shifting conventional context elements to a virtual external context in the cyberpragmatics perspective. The data of this study were manifestations of the shifts in the contexts. The substantive data source of this study was various kinds of utterances and the formulation of the context containing realizations of the shifts in the conventional external context. The locative data source was social media that published a variety of utterances and the context in which there was a shift in the context elements that could be collected by the researcher around the time of the study. The data collection method applied was the listening method, focusing on the free engaged and profound method of listening. The technique used in applying the listening method was the note-taking technique. The data were then classified and verified further. The verified data were then triangulated to experts of pragmatics, especially cyberpragmatics. Data analysis was carried out by applying distributional method to cover the linguistic dimension of this study. As for the non-linguistic dimension, the researcher applied the extralingual equivalent method. The results of this study were the manifestations of the context shifts as follow: (1) shifting aspects of context element of speech setting, (2) shifting aspects of context element of objectives of speaking, (3) shifting aspects of context element of speech participants, (4) shifting aspects of context element of speech atmosphere, (5) shifting aspects of context element of speech channel, (6) shifting aspects of context element of speech genre and (7) shifting aspects of context element of verbal acts.
Downloads
References
Bara, B. G. (2011). Cognitive pragmatics: The mental processes of communication. Intercultural Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1515/IPRG.2011.020
Giordano, C. (2016). Pragmatic Competence and Relevance. System. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.12.009
Guthrie, K. L., & McCracken, H. (2010). Reflective pedagogy: Making meaning in experiential based online courses. Journal of Educators Online. https://doi.org/10.9743/JEO.2010.2.2
Halliday, M. A. K. (2015). Language as social semiotic. In Soziosemiotik. Grundlagentexte. https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(81)90015-4
Hassall, T. (2012). Sociopragmatics is slower: A reply to Chang. Language Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2011.12.001
Ishihara, N. (2010). Instructional pragmatics: Bridging teaching, research, and teacher education. Linguistics and Language Compass. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00242.x
Kampf, Z. (2008). The pragmatics of forgiveness: Judgments of apologies in the Israeli political arena. Discourse and Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508092244
Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (1999). Pragmatics and SLA. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190599190056
Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. Journal of Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700010367
Leech, G. (2007). Politeness: Is there an East-West divide? Journal of Politeness Research. https://doi.org/10.1515/PR.2007.009
Limberg, H. (2009). Impoliteness and threat responses. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.02.003
Locher, M. A. (2013a). Cyberpragmatics: Internet-Mediated Communication in Context. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.12.002
Locher, M. A. (2013b). Relational work and interpersonal pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.014
Locher, M. A. (2013c). Relational work and interpersonal pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.014
Locher, M. A., & Graham, S. L. (2010). Interpersonal pragmatics. Interpersonal Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214338
Mahsun, M. (2005). Metode Penelitian Bahasa. Jakarta: PT Raja Graï¬ndo Persada. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.1991
Malinowski, B. (1935). Coral gardens and their magic: a study of the methods of tilling the soil and of agricultural rites in the Trobriand Islands. Discourse & Society. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.10.001
Mao, L. (2003). Pragmatics: An introduction. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)90073-x
Mey, J. L. (2003). Context and (dis)ambiguity: A pragmatic view. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00139-X
Nunberg, G. (2008). The Pragmatics of Deferred Interpretation. In The Handbook of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756959.ch15
O’Driscoll, J. (2013). The role of language in interpersonal pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.008
Rahardi, R. K. (2009). Pragmatik: Kesantunan imperatif bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Erlangga.
Rahardi, R. K. (2017a). Language Phatic in Specific Culture Perspective. In 1st International Conference on Education, Language, and Arts (pp. 1165–1174). Jakarta: Universitas Negeri Jakarta.
Rahardi, R. K. (2017b). Linguistic Impoliteness in The Sociopragmatic Perspective. Jurnal Humaniora. https://doi.org/10.22146/jh.v29i3.24954
Rahardi, R. K. (2018a). Elemen dan Fungsi Konteks Sosial, Sosietal, dan Situasional dalam Menentukan Makna Pragmatik Kefatisan Berbahasa. In Prosiding Seminar Tahunan Linguistik Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia (SETALI 2018).
Rahardi, R. K. (2018b). Pragmatik: Kefatisan berbahasa sebagai fenomena pragmatik baru dalam perspektif sosiokultural dan situasional (1st ed.). Jakarta: Erlangga.
Schilling, J. (2006). On the Pragmatics of Qualitative Assessment. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.22.1.28
Spencer-Oatey, H., & Ruhi, Åž. (2007). Identity, face and (im)politeness. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.12.003
Sudaryanto. (2016). Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa (1st ed.). Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press.
Taguchi, N. (2015). “Contextually†speaking: A survey of pragmatic learning abroad, in class, and online. System. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.09.001
Unger, C. (2012). Cognitive Pragmatics. The Mental Processes of Communication. Journal of Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.12.001
Wei, R. (2012). The effect of study abroad on L2 pragmatic development: A longitudinal investigation . Applied Linguistics.
Wijana, I. D. P. (2014). Bahasa, Kekuasaan, dan Resistansinya: Studi tentang nama-nama badan usaha di Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. Jurnal Humaniora.
Wildner-Bassett, M. (2004). Context and Culture in Language Teaching and Learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263104290040
Yu, K. A. (2011). Culture-specific concepts of politeness: Indirectness and politeness in English, Hebrew, and Korean requests. Intercultural Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1515/IPRG.2011.018
Yus, F. (2011). Cyberpragmatics, Internet-mediated communication in context. (A. Fetzer, Ed.) (1st ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing Company. Retrieved from https://benjamins.com
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.