An analysis of refusals and their responses in Indonesian context: An investigation of refusal responses expressed by University Students in UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung

Wardhana, Fanus Harsa (2007) An analysis of refusals and their responses in Indonesian context: An investigation of refusal responses expressed by University Students in UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung. Diploma thesis, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung.

Preview	Text (COVER) COVER.pdf Download (64kB) | Preview
Preview	Text (ABSTRAK) ABSTRAK.pdf Download (69kB) | Preview
Preview	Text (DAFTAR ISI) DAFTAR ISI.pdf Download (70kB) | Preview
Preview	Text (BAB I) BAB I.pdf Download (106kB) | Preview
	Text (BAB II) BAB II.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (153kB)
	Text (BAB III) BAB III.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (198kB)
	Text (BAB IV) BAB IV.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (70kB)
	Text (DAFTAR PUSTAKA) DAFTAR PUSTAKA.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (70kB)

Abstract

One expression which is discussed in illocutionary act is refusals. Refusals and its response are focused on in this research. To make them have meaning, linguistic phenomena of Students University in UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung toward refusal response to Bebee et al's Taxonomy has investigated. Later, classifications of refusals responses are presented into percentage form. The method has been used for data collection is through qualitative method because the prominent sources in this research are words and actions. Of course respondents are students of UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung from varied levels and departments. Technique for eliciting data is informal interview. Respondents are not informed of the exact purpose of the research and they are not aware of being interviewed. The topic of refusals has been conveyed by interviewer are: requests, invitation, offers, and suggestions. All the refusals and their responses has been recorder into tape recorder or jotted down immediately after the each conversation and analyze based on Bebee et al's Taxonomy. Findings were divided into two categories: Direct Refusal and Indirect Refusal. For Direct Refusals as a whole, there are 5 respondents, accounted 10% in detail: Using Performative Verb was 1 respondent (2%), Non Performative Statement "No" was 3 respondents (6%), and Negative Willingness/Ability was 1 respondent (2%). Second, 45 respondents have uttered Indirect Refusals. It accounted 90%, in detail: Statement of Regret was 5 respondents (10%), Wish was 1 respondent (2%), Excuse, Reason and explanation was the most usual utterance in response to refusals was 9 respondents (18%), Statement of Alternative was 1 respondent (2%), Set Condition for Future or Past Acceptance was 1 respondent (2%), Promise of Future Acceptance was 6 respondents (12%), Statement of Principle was 3 respondents (6%), Criticize The Request or Requester was 1 respondent (2%), Unspecific or Indefinite Replay was 1 respondent (2%), Lack of Enthusiasm was 2 respondents (4%), Avoidance Verbal-Silence was 1 respondent (2%), Avoidance Non Verbal-Topic Switch was 2 respondent (4%), Joke was 2 respondent (4%), Repetition of Part of Request was 2 respondent (4%), Postponement was 1 respondent (2%), Hedge was 2 respondent (4%).

Actions (login required)

View Item