eprintid: 56884
rev_number: 10
eprint_status: archive
userid: 1193
dir: disk0/00/05/68/84
datestamp: 2018-05-09 02:44:28
lastmod: 2019-01-30 16:24:16
status_changed: 2018-05-09 02:44:28
type: thesis
metadata_visibility: show
contact_email: indahutamich@gmail.com
creators_name: Chaerunnisah, Indah Utami
creators_id: indahutamich@gmail.com
title: A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF FACE THREATENING DISAGREEMENT ACTS IN PONSLODT’S THE SPECTACULAR NOW
ispublished: pub
subjects: E4
divisions: fbs_jurdik_inggris_bahasa_sastra_inggris
full_text_status: restricted
keywords: face threatening disagreement act, realizations, response, The Spectacular Now
abstract: This research aims at describing how the face threatening disagreement acts are realized by the characters in Ponslodt’s The Spectacular Now, and at identifying the type of responses shown to the face threatening disagreement acts in the movie.
This study applies descriptive qualitative method to analyse the data. Furthermore, the form of the data are utterances spoken by the characters of The Spectacular Now. The context of this research are dialogues of the movie, and the main source of the data is the movie itself. The primary instrument of this research is the researcher herself while the secondary instrument is the data sheet used to help the researcher collect and analyse the data. Trustworthiness of this study is gained through triangulation by the supervisor, other researchers, and by theories.
The result of the research are as follows. First, the characters in the movie realize their face threatening disagreement acts in three ways: 1) using a short direct opposite orientation, 2) employing a sarcastic remark, and 3) asking a short rude question. A short direct opposite orientation comes out as the most dominant one. This is because it is more direct and simple, and it has denotative meaning which reveals the opinion of the speaker immediately. Second, there are three types of responses employed by the characters: 1) accepting the face threatening disagreement act, 2) countering the face threatening disagreement act: a) offensive strategy, and b) defensive strategy, and 3) choosing not to respond. Countering the face threatening disagreement acts is revealed as the most dominant type of response employed. This is influenced mainly by the type of disagreement they encounter. Encountering a face threatening disagreement act, the characters in the movie choose to respond with another face threatening act.
date: 2018-05-03
date_type: published
institution: Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
department: Sastra Inggris
thesis_type: skripsi
referencetext: REFERENCES

Bousefield, Derek. 2008. Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing.
Ching Hei, .2011.Communicating Disagreements among Malaysians: Verbal or Non-verbal? Language in India: Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow 11: 1930-2940 
Culpeper, J., Bousefield, D., & Wichmann. A. 2003. Impoliteness Revisited: With Special Reference to Dynamic and Prosodic Aspect. Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1545-1579.
Edstrom, A. 2004. Expressions of disagreement by Venezuelans in conversation:reconsidering the influence of culture. Journal of Pragmatics 36, 1499–1518.
Goodwin, Charles & Heritage, John. 1990. Conversation Analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 19, (1990), pp. 283-307
Grundy, Peter. 2000. Doing Pragmatics. London: Arnold.
Jensen, Klaus Bruhn & Jankowski, Nick. A Handbook of Qualitative Methodologies for Mass Communication Research. London: Routledge.
Locher, M.A. 2004. Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreement in Oral Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Levinson, S.C. 1983. Pragmatics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mey, J. 2001. Pragmatics: An Introduction (Second Ed.). London: Blackwell.
Nur Pratiknyo, Kuweira. 2016. A Pragmatic Analysis of Positive and Negative Politeness Strategies of Refusals in Richard Linklater’s Boyhood. Thesis. Yogyakarta: English Literature, FBS Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.
Panic-Kavgic, O. 2013. “Patterns of Dispreferred Verbal Disagreement in Dialogues from American and Serbian Films”. Languages and Cultures Across Time and Space, pp. 445-459. 
Pomerantz, A. 1984. “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes". In: Atkinson, J.M. and Heritage, J. (Eds.), Structures of Social Action, pp. 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ramadhani, Dwiansari. 2015. A Pragmatic Analysis of Disagreement Act in the Fault in Our Stars Movie. Thesis. Yogyakarta: English Literature, FBS Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.
Sifianou, M. 2012. “Disagreements, Face, and Politeness”. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, pp. 1554–1564.
Vanderstoep, S.W., and D. Johnston. 2009. Research Method of Everyday Life. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
Watts, R.J. 2003. Politeness. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Yule, G. 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
____, G. 2010. The Study of Language. New York: Cambridge.
citation:   Chaerunnisah, Indah Utami  (2018) A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF FACE THREATENING DISAGREEMENT ACTS IN PONSLODT’S THE SPECTACULAR NOW.  S1 thesis, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.   
document_url: http://eprints.uny.ac.id/56884/1/8_Indah%20Utami%20C_14211144011_a%20thesis.pdf