15 Mei 2015
Introduction
Discourse Analysis is concerned
with the study of the relationship between language and context in which it is
used. It grew out of work in different disciplines in the 1960s and early
1970s, including linguistics, semiotics, psychology, anthropology and sociology.
Discourse analysts study language in use: written text of all kinds, and spoken
data, from conversation to highly institutionalized forms of talk.
British discourse analysis was
greatly influenced by M.A.K. Halliday’s functional approach to language (e.g.
Halliday 1973), which in turn has connections with the Prague school of
linguists. Halliday’s framework emphasizes the social functions of language and
the thematic and informational structure of speech and writing. Also important
in Britain were Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) at the University of Birmingham,
who developed a model for the description of teacher-pupil talk, based on a
hierarchy of discourse units. The British work has principally followed
structural-linguistic criteria, on the basis of the isolation of units, and
sets of rules defining well-formed sequences of discourse.
On the other hand, American
discourse analysis has been dominated by work within the etnomethodological
tradition, which emphasizes the research method close of close observation of
groups of people communicating in natural settings. The American work has
produced a large number of descriptions of discourse types, as well as insights
into the social constraints of politeness and face-preserving phenomena in
talk, overlapping with British work in pragmatics.
This paper would elaborate a brief
explanation about spoken discourse as well as writing one. While the spoken
discourse would concern more on the analysis of form-function, and speech
acts-discourse structures, the writing discourse would be analyzed based on the
text and its level of interpretation which are cohesive and coherence, and
recognizing textual patterns.
Review of Literature
1.
Spoken
Discourse
1.1. Form and Function
The famous British comedy duo,
Eric Morecambe and Ernie Wise, started one of their shows in 1973 with the
following dialogue:
Ernie : Tell ‘em about the show
Eric (to the audience) : Have we got a show for you tonight folks!
Have
we got a show for you!
(aside
to Ernie) Have we got a show for them?
This short dialogue raises a
number of problems for anyone wishing to do a linguistic analysis of it. Most
people would agree that it is funny because Eric is playing with grammatical
structure that seems to be ambiguous: ‘Have we got a show for you!’ has an
inverted verb and subject. Inversion of the verb and its subject happens only
under restricted condition in English; the most typical circumstances in which
this happens is when questions are being asked, but it also happens in
exclamations (‘Wasn’t my face red!).
Eric’s
inverted grammatical form in its first two occurrences clearly has the function
of an exclamation, telling the audience something, not asking them anything,
until the humorous moment when he begins to doubt whether they do have a show
to offer, at which point he uses the same grammatical form to ask Ernie a
genuine question. By the same token, in other situations, an inverted
declarative form (subject before verb), typically associated with ‘statements’,
might be heard as a question requiring an answer:
A: You’re
leaving for London.
B: Yes,
immediately.
So how we
interpret grammatical form depends on a number of factors, some linguistic,
some purely situational. One linguistic feature that may affect our
interpretation is the intonation.
Eric (to
the audience): Have we got a SHOW for you tonight folks!
Have
we got a SHOW for you! (aside to Ernie)
HAVE
We
got a show for them?
Two variables in Eric’s delivery change. Firstly, the tone
contour, the direction of his pitch, whether it rises of falls, changes.
Secondly, his voice jumps to a higher pitch level.
1.2. Speech acts and Discourse Structures
In one sense we are talking about
‘functions’: we are concerned as much with what Eric and Ernie are doing with
language as with what they are saying. Speech acts defined as a request
of an instruction or an exemplification we are concentrating on what that piece
of language is doing, or how the listener/reader is supposed to react
(Austin, 1962 and Searle, 1969). Here is an example of speech acts happened in
casual setting.
A: Well, try this spray, what I
got; this is the biggest they come.
B: Oh . . .
A: … little make-up capsule.
B: Oh, right. It’s like these
inhalers, isn’t it?
A:
And I’ve found that not so bad since I’ve been using it, and it doesn’t
make you so grumpy.
B:
This is up your nose?
A:
Mm.
B:
Oh, wow! It looks like a bit sort of violent, doesn’t it? It works well,
does it?
(Birmingham
Collection of English Text)
Our immediate reaction is that
conversation can often begin with well, but that there is something odd about
‘try this spray…’ Suggesting to someone ‘try X’ usually only occurs in response
to some remark or event or perceived state of affairs that warrants
intervention, and such information is lacking here.
The dialogue is structured in the
sense that it can be coherently interpreted and seems to be progressing
somewhere, but we are in the middle of a structure rather than witnessing the
complete unfolding of the whole. In is in this respect, the interest in whole
discourse structures, that discourse analysis adds something extra to the
traditional concern with functions/speech acts.
Here are other examples of spoken
discourse happened in the classroom.
(T=Teacher, P=Pupil who speaks)
T: Now then… I’ve got some things
here, too. Hands up. What is that,
what is it?
P: Saw
T: It’s a saw, yes this is a saw.
What do we do with a saw?
P: Cut wood
T: Yes. You’re shouting out
though. What do we do with a saw?
Marvelete.
P: Cut wood.
T: We cut wood. And, erm, what do
we do with a hacksaw, this hacksaw?
P: Cut trees.
T: Do we cut trees with this?
P: Cut wood.
T: Do we cut wood with this?
P: No.
T: What do we do with that then?
P: Cut wood.
T: We cut wood with that. What do
we do with that?
P: Sir.
T: Cleveland
P: Metal
T: We cut metal. Yes we cut metal.
And, er, I’ve got this here. What’s that
Trevor?
P:
An axe
T:
It’s an axe yes. What do I cut with the axe?
P:
Wood, wood.
T:
Yes, I cut wood with the axe. Right …Now then, I’ve got some more things
here…(etc).
The teacher, in this case, gives
the pupils a clear signal of the beginning and end of this mini-phase of the
lesson by using the words now then and right in a particular way (with
falling intonation and a short pause afterwards) that make them into a sort of
‘frame’ on either side of the sequence of questions and answers. Framing
move is precisely what Sinclair and Coulthard call the function of such utterances.
Then, the two framing moves, together the question and answer sequence that
falls between them can be called transaction, which again captures the
feeling of what is being done with the language here.
In order to capture the similarity
of the pattern in each case, Sinclair and Coulthard (1975: 26-7) called the
first move on each exchange an opening move, the second an answering move and
the third a follow-up move. Sinclair and Brazil (1982: 49) prefer to talk
initiation, response and follow-up.
Move
|
Exchange 1
|
Exchange 2
|
Exchange 3
|
Initiation
|
A: What time is it?
|
A: Tim’s coming tomorrow
|
A: Here, hold this.
|
Response
|
B: Six thirty.
|
B: Oh yeah.
|
B: (takes the box)
|
Follow-up
|
A: Thanks
|
A: Yes
|
A: Thanks
|
So far we have looked only at one
model for the analysis of spoken interaction, the Sinclair-Coulthard
‘Birmingham’ model. We have argued that it is useful for describing talk in and
out of the classroom; it captures patterns that reflect the basic functions of
interaction and offers s hierarchical model where smaller units can be seen to
combine to form larger ones and where the large units can be seen to consist of
these smaller ones. The bare bones of the hierarchy) or rank scale) can be
expressed as follows:
TRANSACTION
EXCHANGE
MOVE
ACT
Sinclair
and Coulthard’s model is very useful for analyzing patterns of interaction
where talk is relatively tightly structured, such as between doctors and
patients, but all the complications arise when we try to apply the model to
talk in more informal, casual and spontaneous contexts.
2.
Written
Discourse
In order to have a deep
understanding regarding written discourse, take a look at to the passage
follows:
The parents of seven-year-old
Australian boy woke to find a giant
Python
crushing and trying to swallow him.
The
incident occurred in Cairns, Queensland and the boy’s mother,
Mrs.
Kathy Dryden said: It was like a horror movie. It was a hot
night
and Bartholomew was lying under a mosquito net. He suddenly
started
screaming.
We
rushed to the bedroom to find a huge snake trying to strangle
him. It was coiled around his arms
and neck and was going down his
body. Mrs. Dryden and her husband,
Peter, tried to stab the creature with
knives
but the python bit the body several times before escaping.
(From the
Birmingham Post, 12 March 1987, p.10)
The text requires us to activate
our knowledge of pythons as dangerous creatures which may threaten human life,
which strangle their prey and to whose presence one must react with certain
urgency. The ‘creature’ must be taken to be the python rather than the boy
(which creature could well refer to in another next), since parents do not
normally stab their children in order to save their lives.
On the one hand, it is possible
for us analyzing the text based on its cohesive and coherence. The sentence ‘The
parents of seven-year-old Australian boy woke to find a giant Python crushing
and trying to swallow him’ are cohesive (the parents of seven-year-old
Australian/him), but it will be coherent if only this sentence is followed by
the next sentence and has a cause-effect relationship.
On the other hand, another level
of interpretation which we are involved in as we process text is that
recognizing textual patterns. Certain patterns in text reoccur time and
time again and become deeply ingrained as part of our cultural knowledge. The
patterns manifested in regularly occurring functional relationship between bits
of the text. The bits may be phrases, clauses, sentences, or groups of
sentences; we shall refer to them as textual segments to avoid confusion
with grammatical elements and syntactic relations within clauses and sentences.
An example of segments coinciding
with sentences is these two sentences from a report on a photographic
exhibition:
The stress is on documentary and rightly
so. Arty photography are a bore.
(the
Guardian, 27th October 1988:24)
The
interpretation that makes most sense is that the relationship between the
second sentence and the first is that the second provides a reason for
the first. The two segments are therefore in a phenomenon-reason relationship
with one another.
The phenomenon-reason relation
which united the two sentences above, along with cause-consequence and instrument-achievement,
can be brought under the general heading of logical sequence relations. When
segments of a text are compared or contrasted with one another, then we may
talk of matching relation, which are also extremely common. Logical
sequencing and matching are the two basic categories of the
clause-relational approach.
Conclusion
We have seen in this chapter that discourse
analysis is a vast subject area within linguistics, encompassing as it does the
analysis of spoken and written language over and above concern concerns such as
the structure of the clause or sentence. In this brief introduction we have
looked at just some ways of analyzing speech and writing and just some aspects
of those particular models we have chosen to highlight. This and further of the
approaches outlined here will form the background to reassessment of the basics
of language teaching as they are conventionally understood: the levels of
language description (grammar, lexis and phonology) and the skills of
language use (reading, writing, listening, speaking). There will be also be
suggestions concerning teaching materials and procedures whenever it seems that
discourse analysis has some direct bearing on these matters.Reference
McCarthy, M. 1991. Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
06 Februari 2014
Azhar Aziz Lubis, S.Pd.
Faculty of Languages and Arts, Universitas Negeri
Medan, Indonesia
Dedi Sanjaya, S.Pd
Faculty of Languages and Arts, Universitas Negeri
Medan, Indonesia
Abstract
The objective of
the paper was to find out solutions of the tourism problems in Indonesia
especially in potential rural areas. The problems comprised inhabitants’
disabilities in English, system management of the places and language usage in
promoting the sites. It was found that most of people at rural areas in
Indonesia are not really care about the way in increasing the tourism. Even
though our excursionists increased 8,8 percent from January to September 2013,
it does not mean that the increasing implied in rural areas too (http://antaranews.com). The
increasing number applied only in several famous cities such as Bali and
Lombok. The main problem in fostering tourism in Indonesia is inhabitants’
disabilities in English. The method that applied in writing the paper started
from the foreword which gave a brief explanation about problems of tourism in rural
areas in Indonesia then its’ solutions and benefits in applying writer’s
thought. Moreover, the writer also elaborates a tourism current situation in some
places. Based on the review of the literature, it was suggested that tourism
problems can be solved by strengthening the curriculum for students (KTSP)
which based on its’ culture and creating cultural council in every province.
Keywords: tourism, English, cultural council.
Foreword
Indonesia
is an archipelago country which has 17.504 islands. Those beautiful islands
consist of 9.634 unnamed and 7.870 named-islands (http://id.wikipedia.org). The 17.504
islands exist in the thirty three provinces all over Indonesia. Each island has
its beauty and uniqueness to be enjoyed. In other words, Indonesia is one of
the diamonds in the world. This paper will compare, contrast and analyze the
inhabitants’ disabilities in English, system management of the places and
language usage in promoting the sites. Afterwards, the writer would pose an
applicable solution in developing tourism in Indonesia.
Based
on the data of the United Nation Development Program (UNDP), Indonesian Human
Development Index (IHDI) improved 1,3 percent per year. It was stated that the Human
Development Index in year 2011 was at 0,624 and slightly improved to 0,629 in
2012 (http://tempo.com). Furthermore, the director of UNDP for
Indonesia, Beate Trankman, stated that Indonesia still far from the average
point of Human Development Index in developing countries. Trankman stated that
mostly the Human Development Index in developing countries reached 0,640. While
Indonesia gained only 0,629, the Asia pacific countries gained 0,683 for human
development index. In other words, the human development index in Indonesia
needs much more government attention. From the UNDP data about Human
Development Index, we can infer that our education especially in reading
interest is very weak. In 2012, Indonesia occupied in the 124th of
187 countries in the world for Human Development Index which focused on
inhabitants’ basic needs, education, health and literacy (http://metro.kompasiana.com).
Even
though the government of Indonesia has implemented the Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan
Pendidikan (KTSP), which is created based on Indonesian culture; it has not run
well yet. It is because the curriculum needs much more revision especially in
tourism and culture. This problem adversely affected to the inhabitants
disabilities in English. Surprisingly, most students in primary and secondary
school do not know well about their traditional dances, songs, foods and
tourism areas. They love much more about other culture rather than theirs which
considerably impact in their daily life. This situation impacts so much to
their disabilities in exploring their culture which English is used as tool of
communication.
On
the other hand, Indonesia as an archipelago country faces a crucial problem in
management the tourism sites and lack of facilities. In Lake Toba, North
Sumatera for instance, the management of tourism sites and its’ facilities are quite
miserable. Water pollution, illegal lodging and transportation are the most solicitous
problem until now. Otherwise, the head of Tourism Promotion Department of North
Sumatera, Arthur Batubara, stated that actually we already made a forum consisted
of eleven district-officers to discuss deeply about a good management for Lake
Toba (http://travel.kompas.com). Whereas, the constitution
number 32 in 2004 allows the local governments to plan, implement and evaluate
the utilization of natural and human resources in their areas in order to
improve public welfare. Moreover, based on the government regulation number 50 in
2011 about the master plan of national tourism from 2010 to 2025, stated that
national tourism comprised tourism destination, marketing, tourism industry and
tourism board which is involved local government. We already have good
regulations in maintaining our national tourism but unfortunately our human
resources are not ready to implement it yet. It is because the government does
not really concern more on how to revitalizes human resources by empowering the
education, in this case empowering the curriculum.
Yet,
in 2003 World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) declared that the development
of tourism needed three aspects; 1) a coherent partnership among stakeholders,
2) delivery of profitable tourism product commercially but still gives benefits
to the stakeholders, and 3) focused on tourists, society, environment, social
and culture. Theoretically, tourism divided into three; 1) Natural resources such as waterfall, lake, forest etc, 2) Man-made resources such as ancient
buildings, masjid, museum, monument, etc, and 3) Human resources such as art performances, rituals, festival etc
(Anoviar, 2012). From the theory above, it can be infer that Indonesia is a
country which is rich in natural resources but not human resources. We have all
the three parts of tourism which classified by the experts previously.
Unfortunately,
there is a difference between Indonesia and five countries in Southeast Asian
with respect to foreign exchange earnings. While five countries in Southeast
Asia occupy a high number in foreign exchange earnings, Indonesia exists in the
lowest rate. Thailand for instance, occupied the highest income from its’
international tourism in 2005. It is because the government of Thailand
intensively gives more attention to their tourism.
The
main crucial problem is about English language usage in promoting the tourism
sites. It seems a simple problem but it has a great impact to the tourists. In
2007 the government of Indonesia, in this case the ministry of culture and
tourism, launched official website of Indonesia at http://www.indonesia.travel.
It was a government effort to promote Indonesia tourism sites massively to the
world. Unfortunately, it was not ran optimally because 1) there is no
interaction among visitors so that the communication runs passively, 2) there
is no integration of information to the local government so that the potency of
local tourism does not explored well and 3) there is no a dynamic information
about tourism (Anoviar, 2012). From the data, it can be concluded that
government efforts in fostering the tourism needs much more attention for human
development particularly in English achievement.
Discussion
Based
on the review of literature, it can be stimulated that our national tourism
need much more attention in order to improve public welfare. Indonesia with
its’ islands, considerably has much more chance to take the opportunity than
other countries in South East Asia. However, if the government focused only on
natural resources and ignored its’ attention to human resources especially in
education, the next generation of the country will lose its’ ability to
maintaining the country. Students in primary and secondary school should be
noticed much more than others. Developing national tourism means actualizing
and synchronizing the potency of natural and human resources which can be
applied by revitalization the curriculum (KTSP) and creating a controlling
tourism board and culture.
Revitalization
of curriculum (KTSP) by revising some aspects in it especially on culture and
tourism sites is a smart solution. Perhaps, it will not impact directly to the
public welfare nationally but it can be trusted that this planning will give
positive feedback in the future. The government should concern more on how to
make the inhabitants are able to communicate in English. We need to train and
familiarize our society especially those who lived in tourism sites by English.
Hopefully in the future, English is not only restricted as a subject in the
class but also it is a tool of communication among people. Nowadays, the usage
of English as a tool of communication spreads only in cities. Most of
inhabitants in rural areas cannot communicate well in English even only to
describe their house living. Therefore, empowering the curriculum (KTSP) by
adding some aspects of tourism in it, is an applicable solution to solve the
problem.
Surprisingly,
based on writer’s observation on the internet, there is no more website that promotes
Lake Toba which uses English except at http://www.indonesia.travel. It happened to the other tourism sites
too such as Bali and Lombok. The details of the tourism websites will elaborate
as follow:
No
|
Name of
Tourism Place
|
Official
Website / Information
|
Language Use
|
1
|
Lake
Toba
|
Bilingual
|
|
2
|
Bali
|
Bilingual
|
|
3
|
Lombok
|
Bilingual
|
If
we pay attention to the website, we would find that English language is not
optimally used. The official website seems has no attraction to grab the tourists.
It appears from its English language usage which is very normative. Even it
shows photos and description about tourism sites such as Lake Toba, it has no
sense of language that simplifies people to remember about Lake Toba.
Furthermore,
the government should empower stakeholders and the society especially those who
lived in the tourism rural areas to work together in order to foster our
tourism and increase the foreign exchange earnings.
The
last but not least, we can learn from other tourism areas in Indonesia which
had created cultural council such as Bali. We already know that Bali is the
most favorite tourism site to visit. It is not only caused of government
supports but also a good human and natural resources. Learning from Bali in
maintaining their tourism sites is a good experience. On the one hand, Bali as
a tourism site had a reputable name which recognized internationally so that we
do not have to think too much on how to foster its’ tourism anymore. On the
other hand, we should think deeply on how to create other potential tourism
sites in Indonesia to be similar as Bali. The writer believes by creating
cultural council in every state especially those tourism sites, would impact
positively to the culture and tourism of its area.
However, our national tourism and culture need
much more attention, not only from the government but also its society. Cultural
council, in writer’s opinion, will impact positively especially in 1)
protecting tourism sites, 2) to train inhabitants’ ability in speaking English,
3) promoting tourism sites, 4) empowering the society to make a better
handicraft of its area and 5) loving the motherland. Hopefully, these
recommendations would be able to familiarize significantly English as a tool of
communication among people in Indonesia especially in rural areas. Because the
writer believes that a good communication is an authorized capital to develop
our national tourism in our beloved country Indonesia.
In
conclusion, mastering English as a tool of communication is very important. In
order to foster our national tourism sites overseas, our inhabitants should
have a fair enough skill to communicate in English and should be familiar in
our society. English should be familiarized in order to improve our national
tourism sites.
References
Anoviar, Alia
Noor (2012), Implokasi Otonomi Daerah
Terhadap Eksistensi Kepariwisataan Nasional Melalui Revitalisasi Produk
Pariwisata Lokal Guna Mengoptimalkan Potensi SDM di Indonesia, Depok:
Management Department of Universitas Indonesia.
http://id.wikipedia.org. Accessed on
December 4, 2013
http://www.ambonekspres.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=449:pengelolaan-objek-wisata-belum-optimal&Itemid=648. Accessed on
December 4, 2013
http://www.bppaudnireg1.com/buletin/read.php?id=47&dir=1&idStatus=0.
Accessed on December 4, 2013.
Peraturan Pemerintah
Republik Indonesia No. 50 Tahun 2011 tentang Rencana Induk Pembangunan
Kepariwisataan Nasional Tahun 2010-2025.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)
