CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background
The objective of the English teaching program is to equip students with the
four basic language skill, listening, speaking, reading, and writing. To achieve the
objective, it is necessary to consider the English discourse anlysis and its
contribution to the teaching of English.
The practical treatment of Enlish discourse analysis will help us attain the
competence of perception and production of English in real use, both in the
classroom and out of it.
The practical discussion cover four basic concept, they are:
1. The basic concept of discourse in relation to its theoritical linguistic
background.
2. The relation between discourse analysis concept and language, particulary
second and first language teching- learning activities.
3. The relation between discourse and language function in their social
contexts
4. The application of the theoritical principles and practical procedures to the
various kind of discourse.
English is taught from yunior high school up to university that is known as
tertiarry level as compulsory subject. This means that the students have had
opportunities to learn English for many years and some still beyond informal
classes, but they still perform low ability in analyzing it. Some researches have
Page | 1
found that English students that dedicated much time foer English could not
analyze English discourse as well as expected. It means that students learning out
come is still considered as unsecsessfull teaching of English in Indonesia
So, in this case, it is important to discuss the practical aspect of discourse.
The practical aspect of discourse will make us competent enough to pick up some
example of discourse from the real life around us and analyze systimatically. We
have, of course, to apply the teoritical principle we have learned from the
teoritical treatment of discourse.
The practical experiences that stand on the background of their theoritical
basis will become very significant for us because in this special mode of human
interaction, we must need to comprehended perfectly when we communicate wth
our fellow native speakers or foreign counterparts. Also we must need to catch
clearly and correctly when somebody means something to us with his his
utterence or discourse.
English teachers have many handicaps. One of them is the students low
ability in English discourse analysis. It means that the mastery of English
discourse analysis needs much time to practice it. Realizing such condition in
English class, English teachers should be more creatively look for the best way for
communicative activities that urge and motivate the students to improve their
ability to master English discourse.
We are not supposed to forget our prospective profession. In this sphere, a
touch from concept of discourse in the study of language teaching learning
Page | 2
processes is very significant. This is why a discussion on this writing becomes
inevitable. Ashort and compact deal with it organized a bit early.
This study, with the name “ discourse analysis of an English narrative
discourse”, is a final assigment of discourse analysis lecture. It has a very close
relationship to some courses. They are:
1. Introduction to linguistics
2. Sosiolinguistics
3. Advance listening
4. Advance speaking
5. Advance reading
6. Advance writing
7. Cross-culture understanding
English language teaching should be targeted at developing students’ ability to
understans and express meanings. In understanding and expressing meaning of
course use the form of linguistic units. The forms of linguistic units may have
meaning only if they meet certain rules.
This study will lead us to the ability of identifying the main characteristics of a
discourse. Beside, it will also gves us the capability of identifying the similarities
and dissimilarties between discourse as a structured ofunit and a unit consisting of
ununfied sentences in terms of those main characteristis.
A discourse is claimed to be unit of language in a real communication(
Widiati, et. Al 2006). In connection with it, this study will also provide us with a
Page | 3
chance to observe how a discourse plays its important role in the reals verbal
communication.
In using sentences in speaking and writing, we are concerned with language
use at the discouse level which involve form, meaning, and language function.
Thus, language learning would be meaningfull if the students learn expression at
the discourse level as opposed to words in isolation. In using sentences in speaking
and writing, the mastery of structure and focabulary are very important to support
the process of the meaningfulness of the English communication. Thus, the mastery
of using sentences in speaking and writing must take discourse analysis into
consideration.
The study of discourse lies on the bacground of the broarde field of the study
of language, i.e. theoritical linguistics. To achieve a well-grounded compregension
of this study, we would better start from the overview of language.
Language is a system of signs (Chaer;1994). The key word in this
identifcation is the term sign. A sign is understood as something that stands for
something. The first something is the formal aspect of sign,whereas the second one
is the meaning aspect.
The professional English teacher has to prossess the adequacy of system of
signs competence in English. He should be able to use the result of linguistic
studies into the language teaching models. Some of the result linguistic studies talk
about English discourse analysis.
In this case, it is important to consider the formal aspect of sign. The formal
aspect is physical so that we will have to use our sensories to sense it. We use our
Page | 4
ayes if it is visual, our ears if auditive, our feelings if tactile, and our nose if
elfactory,
It is also important to consider the meaning aspect of signs. The meaning
aspect is psychological. It is an image of thing, or a state, or an activity that
underlies the formal aspect. It is also social in the sense that the relation between
the formal aspect and its underlying meaning is determined by the agreement from
the society.
In linguistic studies we study on phonems, syllable, morphemes, allomorph,
lexicon, words, phrases, clauses, sentences, and discourse. (Ba’dulu 2003 ) they are
related to the cases of discourse analysis. In the proficiency of discource analysis
garantees to produce sentences in speaking and wrting.
Bse on the desccription above, the writer wants to caarry out a study entitled
The Discourse Analysis of anEnglish Narrative Discourse.
B. Problem Statement
Based on the background above, the writer formulated the research question as
follow:
1. How English narrative discourse is analyzed based on Thurman chart.
2. Are there anykinds of information in the English narrative discourse.
C. Objective of the Research
The objective of this reseach are as follows:
1. To discribe The English narrative discourse based on Thurman chart.
2. To discribe that kind of information in the English narrative discourse.
Page | 5
D. Significance of the Research
The result of the research is expected to give:
1. The input to language teachers, especially English teachers, in adding their
comprehension on one of the linguistics features, that is in this case
English narrative discourse baesd on the Thurman chart.
2. The input to the English instuctor to create their course in leading the
English teacher training.
3. The concept of English narrative discourse based on the Thurman chart as
well as its contibution to English teaching
4. The input for further reseaches related to English discourse analysis.
Page | 6
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A. Theoretical Framework
1. The Meaning of Discourse Analysis
According to Keith Johnson and Helen (1999:99-105) cited in Ba’dulu
(2007), discouse analysis is the study of how streches of language used in
communication assume meaning, purpose and unity for their users: the quality of
coherence. There is now a general consensus that coherence doesn’t derivr
solely from the linguistic forms and propositional content of a text, though these
may contribute to it. Coherencederives from an interaction of text with given
participants, and is thus not an absolute property, but relative to context. Context
includes participants’ knowledge and perception of paralangue, other text, the
situation, the culture, the world in general and role, intensions and relationships
of participants Early attempts to find linguistic rule operating across sentences
boundaries, or to create text grammars specifying rules for generating possible
sequences of propositionhave generally been replaced or supplemented by
theories and techniques allowing the examination for text in context. Prominent
among such theories and techniques are functional analysis, Pragmatic theories
of speech acts and converational principles, conversatio analysis, schema
theories, genre theory and critical discourse analysis.
Discourse may be define as language that is doing some job in some
context, i.e. in some contextof social situation (Nuryanto, 20006). Thus,
discourse anlysis is essential attempt to analyze and describe how language
Page | 7
performs its role in various contexts of social situation, i.e. in various social
activities. As the role of language cannot be separated from its context of social
situation.
There are a number of different approches to discourse analysis and there
is often some of disagreement and confusion about the meaning of both terms “
discourse” and “ discourse analysis”. The approach describe above may be
characterized as the British- American School, and has been the most significant
in applied linguistics and language teaching. It is, broadly speaking, an approach
which has merge from detailed study of language. Confonted with the absence of
lingustic or semantic explanations for coherence, it has sought help from other
diciplines. Historiclly, it has moved from consideration of most local textual
phenomena, such as cohesion, towards more global concepts such schemata and
genre.
From the difinition of discourse as language doing some job in some
context ( of social situation) we can draw the conclution that a discourse is a of
language use that fulfills a certain fuction in acertain social activity. In
practically of all our social activities we involve language to fulfill a certain
function. In performing such social activities as education, bussiness
transections, scientifie investigation, religious services, or even in playing games
we have to use language. Each of these social activities can be accomplished
only by involving language.
Page | 8
2. Historical Background of Discourse Analysis
Discourse analysis is both and old and a new dicipline. Its origin can be
traced back in the study of language, public speech, and literature more than 2000
years ago (Ba’dulu.2007). One major historical undoubtly classical rhethoric, the
art of good speaking. Whereas the gramatical antecedent of linguistic, was
concened with the normative rules correct language use, its sister dicipline of
rhetorica dealt with the concept for the planning, organization, specific operatons,
and performances of public speech in political and legal settings. Its crucial
concern, therefore, was persuasive effectiveness. In this sense, classical rhetoric
both anticipates contemporary stylistic and structural analysis of discourse and
contain intuitive cognitive and social psychlogical notions about memory
organization and attitude change in communicative contest.
Discourse in communicative contest implieds that discourse is primarily
language; however, it is language that exist independently, apart from the daily
life of its speakers. Discourse is language that is functional in some context of
social activity. Indeed, discourse may be viewed as the VERBAL. EXPRESSION
OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY
Whereas the 1960s had brought various scattered attempts to apply
semiotic or linguistic methodes to the study of texts and communicative events,
the early 1970s say the publication of the first monographs and collections wholly
and explicitly daling with systimatic discourse analysis as an independent
orientation or research within and across several diciplines.
Page | 9
3. Discourse-Level Structure
According to Cristal (1980) cited in Ba’dulu (2007 ) discourse is a term in
linguistic to refer to a countinous stretch of ( especially spoken) language larger
than a sentences- but within this broard notion, seveal different applictions may be
found. At this most general, a discourse is a behavioral unit which has a pretheoritical status in linguistic; it is a set of uttarances which constitute any
recognizable speech events (viz. Reference being made to its linguistic structuring
if any); e.g. a conversation. A joke, a sermon, an interview. A clasification of
discourse functions, with particular refrence to type of subject – matter, the
situation, and behavior of the speaker, is often carried out in sociolinguistic
studies ( of permitive societies in particular), e.g.,distinguishing dialogues, or
morespecially, oratory, ritual, insults, narrative, and so on. In recent years, several
linguistic have attempted to discover linguistic regularities in discourse (discourse
analysis), using gramatical, phonological, and semantic criteria ( e.g. cohesion,
anaphora, inter- sentences connectivity ). It is now plain that there exist important
linguistic dependences between sentences, but it is less clear how far these
dependences between sentences are systimatic to anable linguistic units higher
than the sentences to be estabilished.
Some linguistics would like to use the termtext and discourse
intechangeble. Some use text consistenly including the idea of discpurse. Some
others would like to make distiction between text and discourse,. Cook(1989),
forinstance defines a discourse” stretch of language precieved to meaningful,
unified, and purposive.
Page | 10
Longacre (1981 ) cited in Ba’dulu (2007) state that the term” discourse” as
currently used, covers two areas of linguistic concern: the analysis of dialogue
especially of live conversation- and the analysis monologue. In the parlance of
many, discourse covers the former, and with at least some of us, discourse covers
thel latter. Actually, the two matters- analysis of monologue are sepeable but
related concerns. Dialogue analysis can properly be applied to both.
4. Discourse Typology in National and Surface Stuctures
We can classify all possible discourses according to two basic parameter:
Contingent temporal succession and Agent orientation. Contngent temporal
succession ( hanceforth contingent conteporal) refers to a framework of temporal
succession in which some ( often most) of the events of doings are contingent on
previous events or doings. Agent orientation refers to orientation towards agents
with at least a partial identity of agents refrence running through the discourse.
These two prameters intersect so as to give us a four way classification of
discourse type; narrative discourse ( how to do it, how it was done, how it takes
place) is in respect to contingent succession ( the steps of a procedure are orderd)
but minus in respect to the agent orientation ( attention is on what is done, or
made, not on who does it). Behavioral discourse ( a broard category including
exhortation, eulogy and political speeches of candidates) is minus in regard
contingent succession, but plus in regard to agent orientation ( it deals with how
people did or should behave). Expository discourse in minus in respect to both
parmeters.
Page | 11
For the purposes of surface stuctute classification, the two parameters can
be redifined. Thus, rather than speaking in the abstract of contingent succession,
we can speak more concretly of chronological linkage as characteristics of all sort
of narrative and procedural discourse, but non- characteristics of behavioral and
expository discourse which have instead logical( including topical) linkage.
Likewise, we can look to narrative and behavioral discourse for lines of agent
refrence( or, to speak more broadly). Participant refrence while in procediral and
expository discourse this feature is absent. ( Procedural discourse is goal or
activity focused, while expository discourse has theme rather than participants)
5. Narrative Discourse
Bal ( 1997) cited in Fairclough(2003 ) approaches the analysis of narrative
in terms of an anlysitical distiction between: The faula, story ( this distiction
originates in Russian formalism). And narrative text. The fabula is the material or
content that is worked into a story, a series of logically and chronologically
related events. The story is a fabula that is presented in a certain manner, this
involves for instance the arrangement of events in in asequence which can be
different from their actual chronological order, providing the social agents of
actual events with distict traits which transform them into characters and
focalizing the story in terms of partcular points of view. The same stoy can appear
in a range of narrative text, texts in which a narrator realated the story in particular
medium for instance a story in coversation, a radio news story, a documentary, or
a film.
Page | 12
Narrative discourse is the easiest discourse to acquire. A narrative
discourse is a stotry told to entertain the listeners, and sometimes to teach social
mores ( Ba’dulu, 2007)
There are at least three varieties of narrative discourse. The easiest one to
find is legendary narratives, folktales told; tales told so often that everyone known
them. The second kind of narrative, and the most valuable kind of, is the narration
of past events in the speaker’s life or family. Here we get account of the time I
(someone) get lost or hurt badly, or got denounced before the law; what happened
when we moved o got married, or went to school, etc. The third kind of narrative
is an episodic narrative; the story of a tip, for example, where there is not one
ovearall plot but a series of scenes, each with descriptive materal and a few
events. After one scene, the action goes on another palced and another scene
Contenwise, narrative discourse do not consist of only narratio. Most
culture like to have the narration broken up by quoted convesation. The array of a
culture lof a narrative discourse is follow:
Narrative discourse = + Title + Aperture: sent/par/cl + stage:
Par/dise/sent + Narrative episode: par/ dise/sent +
Narrative peak: par/disc/sent + Narrative Post Peak:
Par/ disc/sent + Closure: sent/par + Finis: cl/sent
phr.
: Read: A narrative discourse consist of the opotional title shot filled by a clause,
sentence, or phrase followed by the optional aperture slot filled by sentence,
paragraph, or clause, the optional stage slot filled by a paragraph, discourse, or
Page | 13
sentence, the obligatory narrative peak slot filled by paragraph, discourse, or
sentence, the optional closure slot filled by a sentence or paragrph, and the
optional finish slot filled by aclause, sentence, or phrase.
6. Paragraph-Level Structures
A paragraph is a cluster of sentences held together by a single
theme or setting and organized according to some pattern ( Ba’dulu, 2007). Or,
looking at a paragraph, from the larger perspective of discourse level, it is a small
chink of discourse that function as a single consituent, Paragraph in written
English are usually set up on ortographfic- appereance criteria as such as on
structure. In fact, some writers can write without forming structurally well-formed
paragraph, and have their text broken into paragraphs two or three inches a long,
rather arbitrarily.
Paragrpah boundaries in narrative discourse are marked by a change of
activity, time, place, and cast of participants. They may be marked also by special
sentence introducers, recapitulation, sentence time margin, location margins, and
sentence topics. Some times, in the absence of clear gramatical signals, paragraph
boundaries have to be ditermined by the patterens of inter sentence relationship,
the scripts or frame of paragraph structure.
7. Narrative Paragraph
Narrative paragrphs are similar to narrative discourse and to the narrative
sequence sentence. They encode sequences of events in narrative time ordering.
The stucture of a narrative paragraph is given below:
Page | 14
Narrative paragraph = + setting sent/ par + buildup(s): sent/par + buildupp: sent/par + terminus: sent/ par
Read: A narrative paragraph consist of the optional setting slot filled by a
sentence of paragraph followed by the obligatory buildup(s) slot filled by a
sentence or paragraph, the obligatory buildup- peak slot filled by a sentence or
paragraph, and the optional terminus slot filled by a sentence or paragraph.
The component of setting is usually a sentence or paragraph containing
descriptive clauses, action clauses, existence clauses and the like. The exponent of
the setting is not a pat of the story line and doesn’t encode any action of the
narrative. The exponent of the buildups are narrative or sentence or compound,
alternative, or repetation sentences or paragraphs. They endoce events in the story
line. Buildup-p is the climatic, peak bulidup. Since it is on paragraph level, it is ot
as high a climax as in the climax at a narrative discourse. The teminus is
conclution to the paragraph and is usually brief or absent. It encode evaluation
material, subsequent secondary events.
Quatation sentences may expound narrative build- ups. Such quotation
sentence may be quite important an narrative structure, or important to narrative
style.
In narrative paragraph, some of the build-ups may be expounded by an
explanatory paragraph. The text of explanatory paragraph would expound the
buildup by itself, but it has some explonatory sentence following it, so the wouldbe exponent of the buildup plus the explanatory sentence constitute an
explanatory paragaph that expounds the buildup. And some times, an exposition
Page | 15
tagmeme in an explanatory paragraph is expounded by a narrative parragraph
which served to reinforce the text of the paragraph.
8. Events and Participants in Discourse
To analyze discourse from a linguistic point of view reuires a starting
point. The work of Gleason and his group has provided such an entering wedge.
The distiction among different kinds of information is most obvious in narrative
discourse as opposed to the procedures, explanation, exhortations of Longacre’s
typology. Procedure, which like narrative are based on the nation of temporal
sequence, are the next most productive.
a. Events
The first distiction made in the analysis of discourse events and non
events. In Garner, the halfback, made six yard aaround end we are told two kinds
of things: a particular persson is named Garner and is a halfback( neither of which
is an event). Some times entire paragraph are devoted to non- events, as in the
description of a scane or a person. Gleason, who pionered in explaining the
difference between events and non events, pointed out that different languages
approach the time sequences between neigboring events in different ways. In
Kate, for example, events that are continguous in time are distinguished from
those that are separated by lapse may be long or short; but if it is noticable in
terms of the steam of notion of the narrative, it must be mentioned.
We can envinsion logical possibilities for temporal relation between two
events that are reported as a siquence. If we take A as the earlier of the two events
and B as the later, we can distinguish several cases: A finishes significantly long
Page | 16
before B begins. A finishes by the time B begins, A finishes just as B begins, and
A does not finish by the time B begins. In the last case we mibht have to spcify
further whether A ends during B, A ends when B ends or A contains all of B and
continues on after B is finished.
Robert Litteral applied the matematical notion of topology the linguistic
treatment of time. He notes first that when time is handled by language, it is
measured only rarely. It is also characteristic of the linguistic handling of time that
the boundaries between events ae rarely clear cut. Litteral takes the events as subas for the topology of the time line. This means that each events that is in the
narrative is presented by an open set are a base for the topology that expresses the
linguistic organization of time.
Another kind of sequences between events is what Roland Husman has
characterized as tigh vs. In Angaataha, a language of the eastern Highlands of
Papua New Guinea, Huisman reported two kinds of sequencing temporal and
logical ech of which may be tigh or loose. The time sequence of a narrative is
rarely expressed as though events simply followed one another like beads on
astring. Instead, There is usually a grouping of events into smaller sequences; then
each of these smaller sequence as unit is put together with pther sub- sequences
from the herarchical groupng of linguistic elements, Litteral has eliminated the
nation of temporal sequences as one of several rhetorical relations. Instead he has
moved temporal sequences into the area of refrences.
Another grouping principle that partition events in a single temporal
sequence could called the principle of common orientation. A sequence of events
Page | 17
in distinguish from a later part of the same time sequence in that all the actions in
each part involve uniform relation among their participants. Beside common
setting and orientation, some event sequences appear to be grouped together by
the law that relate to plot structures. Not all events, or course, are sequence.
Language is capable of communicating of fork action as in you take the high road
and I’ll take the law road, which is not a descriptive of sequence of event. In other
cases a language may mark certain stretch within which sequence is irrelevant.
b. Participants
The information that identifies the participants in an event not only links
participants to event, but also links one mention of a participant with other
mention of the same participants. It obeys rule of its own in addition to combining
wit event information.
The role ranking gives a scale of relative involvement in an action, from
deliberate involvement expressed by the agent, to being acted upon in the patient
and instrument, and from there on down to zero involvement. This ranking might
make it possible to divide the things mentioned in a text into those that never
appear in the more active semantic role, the props, and those that do, the
participants. The distinction between participants and props does seem to be
related to plot, possibly in the sense just mentioned. That is, even if activity is not
relative to the role system as such, yet it take place.
A forth possibility for distinguishing between participant and props is
suggested by the study of orientation system. If we assume that changes in the
orientation of participants to ward sections are systematic than any elements that
Page | 18
would break the regularity of orientation patterns if considered as participants are
probably props. This notion combines two things; the relative involvement in the
more comprehensive categories, and relative involvement in the more
comprehensive categories of plot.
Reference to whom and what is involved in an event is particularly
independent of the means used to identify each referent. Participants are referred
to as individuals or groups. Reference to individuals presents relatively few
problems. Group reference, on the other hand, take a number of forms. Sometimes
reference shift during the course of a text. There are three kind of shift:
introduction and deletion. recombination, and scope change. Introduction and
deletion involve expanding and contracting reference by adding or subtracting
individuals from a group.
Where there is a shift in the spatial view point from which events are
reported there may also be a shift reference. When a narrator has been speaking as
though he was omniscient
and knows everything that goes on both inside and
outside the heads of the participants, he may shift, for example, to presenting
events as a certain one of the participants sees them, or vice versa. When he shifts,
what at first he had treated as reference to individuals may change to reference to
groups or one pattern of grouping may be replaced by another through margin and
splitting.
The basic problems in identification are first, establishing reference
sufficiently well that the hearer is clear about who is being talked about, and
Page | 19
second, informing or maintaining it sufficiently well to keep the hearer from
becoming confused.
From this point of view of discourse studies the striking thing about the
identification
information that goes with participants in events is the different
grammatical forms that are used to communicate that different kind of
information. Whereas events tend to be communicated by independent verbs in
most languages, transform from underlying predicate whose role sets include
nearly anything, identification tend to involve the embedding of sentences.
Identification is also maintained through the use of anaphoric elements.
Pronouns are common of maintaining identification. How efficient they
are depends on the richness of categories off the categories of appropriateness of
reference that are available within the pronominal system. Identification reference
is closely enough related to pronouns that the two are sometimes discussed
together. From the point of view identification, however, it is important to notice
that the categories that appropriateness of reference for inflectional system are
never more finely divided than those of the pronouns with which they may stand
in cross reference.
9. Non-Event in Discourse
a. Setting
Where, when, and under what circumstance take place a separate kind of
information constitute called setting. Setting is important in the study of discourse
not only because it characteristically involve distinctive grammatical construction
Page | 20
like locative, but also because it is a common basis for segmentation of sequential
text into their component part.
It is tricky to distinguish setting from the range role. Either may, for example,
take the form of a locative like a prepositional phrase. One text that seems to work
in a number of languages is the test of spare ability
Setting in space is frequently distinguished from settings in time. All
languages probably have the capability for defining a spatial setting by
description. Spatial setting may redefined during the course of a text either by
describing where each new setting is located, as seems normal in English, or by a
relative redefinition that takes the most recent settings as its point of departure.
The scope of a spatial setting may be broad or narrow.
Settings in time are equally important. Temporal properties inherent in
particular action. Whether an action follow it predecessor immediately or after a
lapse, whether its effects are said to persist, all are dependent of general time
frame work of narrative, just as the place where as action happens is independent
of those elements of location ( rang) that are an integral part of the definition of
the action.
Descriptive definition of time usually with reference to some kind of calendar
reference.
Another kind of time definition makes use of reference to memorable events.
This can shade off into a calendar system of its own in the case of dynastic or
definitions of years by outstanding events.
Page | 21
b. Background
Some of information in narrative is not part of the narrative themselves,
but stand outside them and clarifies them. Event, participant, and setting are
normally the primary components of narrative, while explanation and comments
about what happens have a secondary role that may be reflected in the use of
grammatical patters
Much of the secondary information that is used to clarify a narrative
(called background for convenience, even though, the form may be misleading for
non- consequential texts when explanatory information could be thought of as
being the foreground) has a logical sounding structure, frequently tied together
with words like because and there. It is an attempt to explain. It has this
explanatory from even when the logic in it invalid or when it falls a short of really
explaining what it purports to explain. Explanations, either as secondary part of
narrative or as a central theme of text, often involve premises that the speaker
feels are generally accepted and there for can be left unsaid. Some times what is
unstated brings concentrations to linguists from another culture who is not yet in a
position to supply the missing pieces of the argument
The handling the structure of explanations actually sheds light on the
depth and sensitivity of the speaker’s of who hear estimate who hearer is. Because
even in cultures where nearly all parts of an explanation or argument are assumed,
if the hearer make it sufficiently clear that he doesn’t follow, most speakers will
restate themselves in an attempt to make up for his lack of understanding. This is
less likely o hold in relatively homogeneous and isolated cultures, where many of
Page | 22
life’s activities depend upon the assumption that everyone shares the same fund of
information.
c. Evaluation
Not only do speakers report the state of the word: they also tell they feel
about it. The addition internal feeling to other information (which is not the same
as a simple reporting of what one’s internal feeling are ) involves specific modes
of linguistic expression.
Often evaluation are imputed to hearer or to the other people referred to in
the discourse. Any participant in a discourse can be assumed to have his own
opinion of things, and the speaker may feel that he knows what those opinions are
sufficiently well to include them. There is, however, a restriction that is pointed
out in manuals of short story writing.
Another kind of evaluation is that of the culture within which the speaker
is speaking, the conversation of the society he represents. Not everything in a
discourse has to be evaluated. For this reason, it is useful to recognize that scope
of an evaluation statement. It may be global, embracing an entire discourse, if so,
it is likely to be found either at he beginning as an introductory statement that tells
why the rest of the discourse is being told, or at the end as a moral to be story of
the tag line in table. Evaluation bring the hearer more closely into the narrative;
they communicate information about feelings to him that goes beyond the bare
cognitive structure of what happened or what deduction is to be made. In
conversation, and even monologues, the hearer may be pressed to give his own
evaluation: what do you suppose they took that?
Page | 23
Evaluative information shades off into background or even into setting in
cases where it serves to build up the psychological tone of series of events.
d. Collateral
Some information in narrative, instead of telling what did happen, tells
what did not happen. It ranges over possible events and in so doing sets off what
actually does happen against what might have happened.
Collateral information, simply stated, relates non-events, By providing a
range of no-events that might take place. It heightens the significance of the real
events.
The information about what actually does happen, then, may take several
forms. If none of the collateral expressions give what really happened as one of
the alternatives it must be stated as distinct event. If it was mentioned ahead of
time, however, then it is not necessary to repeat the content that was mentioned as
part of the collateral, but only to affirm which of the possibilities took place.
10. The Speaker and Hearer in Discourse
Both the form and the content of any discourse are influenced by who is
speaking and who is listening. The speaker-hearer-situation factors can be
represented in linguistic theory of performative information
There are, however, restrictions on per formative utterances. They must be
in the first person and present tense. Certain per formative are quite common and
are free of special limitation on their use. The recognition of implicit per
formatives behind commands, question, and statements, as well as explicit per
formatives, paves the way for linguistic handling of situational factors in
Page | 24
discourse. Specially, it gives a place in linguistic analysis for what are
conventionally known as deictic (pointing) elements like” this” and “that” or
“here” and “ there”, and for person categories like ”one” and “ you”.
In the case of persons ( and for that matter, object ) the recognition of the
speaker-hearer axis in communication is the basis for assignment of person
categories. This seems trivial or obvious for a discourse that has a single per
formative. Per formative are pertinent in the identification of participants in other
cases besides direct discourse, but in a different way. Indirect discourse, person
assignments are taken from some per formative more remote than the one that
dominates the statement immediately; that is, the one that constitutes the nearest
verb saying that dominates direct discourse higher up the three of questions. This
show up if we paraphrase the example just given in such a way as to show the per
formative elements.
In addition to the identification that relates to performatives, the there are
other less easily recognizable factors whose effect can be seen in the outer from of
language and that find their place in the conceptual scheme of linguistics by virtue
of their relation to per formative. Here, first of all, is where the speaker’s entire
image of himself as a person is accessible to the linguistic system. The per
formative element not only serves to relate persons to the discourse, but also sets
the zero point for time reference.
Page | 25
11. Kinds of Information in Discourse
a. A Work Sheet
The idea of different kind of information in a text is ore easily put to use if
there can be a display of text that lay out each kind of information in a way that
can be seen at glance.
Event
Figure. 11. 1. A Blank Thurman Chart
The vertical columns on the chart correspond to the various kinds of
information distinguished in the text: events, identifications setting, background (
which to save space includes both explanations and evaluation), collateral, and per
formative. To keep the chart from being crowded, we can use the conversation
that information of particular kind begins under the corresponding heading, but
Page | 26
may be carried as far to the right as needed; this is more convenient that trying to
squeeze everything into narrow vertical columns
The parallel vertical lines are for the participant, one line per participant.
For each event in line is drawn from the lexical elements that represent the event
to the vertical lines that represent the participants in the event. Where
identification is given for the participant lines are also drawn from the other side
to show which identification belongs with which participant.
The most comfortable working format is to match a Thurman chart with a
page of text. The text is written out, double spaced, at about one clause per line.
Some clause more than one line, and it may not be clear exactly what clause is
until after the analysis is finished; but in general the clause is convenient chunk to
work with. The next page is fastened to the Thurman chart with the text on the left
and the chart on the right.
b. Span Analysis
From the Thurman chart is possible to go on to another level of abstraction
further removed the text itself, namely the plotting of spans. Spans represent
stretches of text within which there is some kind of uniformity. Certain kind of
uniformity have already tured out to be useful for characterizing discourse
structure in several languages.
If we take a page and write clause numbers on the Thurman chart, though
more closely spaced, we have a framework for a plot of the spans in a text. Each
span is represented by a vertical line, Sometime broken by a horizontal line or
Page | 27
interspersed by symbols. This representation makes it possible to put many spans
on a single page so that they can be compared with one another.
Setting spans are the most obvious ones for to look for in narratives. One
vertical line indicates all the actions that take place in a single spatial location, and
another vertical line indicates all the actions that take place in a single time
sequence. A horizontal line that shows where a spans is broken is useful for
matching spans across the page, If a time index back up to repeat a sequence. Or if
there is a resetting of the time of an action in terms of another hour o day, this
starts a new time span.
B. Conceptual Framework
Discourse analysis is the study of how stretch of language used in
communication
meaning, purpose and unity for their users: the quality of
coherence. Whereas discourse itself may be defined as language that is doing
some job in some context, i.e., in some context of social situation. Discourse in
communicative context implies that discourse is primarily language; however, it is
not language that exist independently, apart from the daily life of its speakers.
Discourse is term in linguistic to revert a continuous stretch of ( especially
spoken) language larger than a sentence- but within this broad nation, several
different applications may be found.
A narrative, discourse is a story told to entertain the listeners, and
sometimes to teach social mores. Paragraph boundaries in narrative discourse are
marked by change of activity, time, place, and cast of participants.
Page | 28
A narrative discourse consist of seven important components: events,
identification, setting, background (which to save space includes both
explanations and evaluation), collateral, and per formative.
The first distinction made in the analysis of discourse events and noevents. The information that identifies the participants in an event not only link
participants to event, but also links one mention of participants with other mention
of the same participants. From the point of view of discourse studies the striking
thing about thing about the identification information that goes with participations
in events is the different grammatical form that are used to communicate the
different kinds of information.
Where, when, and under what circumstance called setting. The component
of the setting is usually a sentence or paragraph containing descriptive clauses,
existence clauses and the like.
Background is some of information in narrative which is not part of the
narratives themselves, but stands outside them and clarifies them.
Often evaluation are imputed to the hearer or to the other people referred
to in the discourse. Another kind of evaluation is that of the culture within which
the speaker is speaking, the conversation of the society he represents.
Some information in narrative, instead of telling what did happen.
Collateral information, simply stated, relates non-events to events.
Both the form and the content of any discourse are influenced by who is
speaking and who is listening. The speaker-hearer-situation factors can be
represented in linguistic theory of performative information.
Page | 29
The idea of different kind of information in narrative text is more easily
put to use if there can be display of text that lays out each kind of information in a
way that can be seen at a glance. From the Thurman chart it is possible to go on to
another level of abstraction further removed from the text itself, namely the
plotting of spans.
The conceptual framework of this research as follows:
Narrative Discourse
(Text/written Form
Analyzing the Main Part of
the Story
Analyzing Kinds of Information
in the text through a work sheet
(Thurman Chart)
Analyzing the Structure of
the text
Page | 30
CHAPTER III
METHOD OF THE RESEARCH
A. Research Design
The design of this research uses qualitative research (Marshal and
Rosman, 1995). Qualitative research method have become increasingly important
modes of inquire for the social science and applied field.
Qualitative research is the collection data, analysis, and interpretation
of comprehensive narrative and visual data in order to gain insight into a
particular phenomenon of interest.
The purpose of qualitative research are to analyze feel of story with
finding or to know setting background, event, collateral, performative, evaluation
and to identify dependent clause and independent clause
B. Sources of Data
Talking about source of data, this data is taken from the book of More
Favourite Stories from Indonesia, that is the story of The Clever Pottala. The
author this book is Marguerite Siek and the second printing in 2005, and
published by PT. Rosda Jayaputra .
C. Data collection
The procedures of collecting data in this research is observation the
book where the writer look for the book that is suitable to be analyzed and making
Page | 31
fieldwork. Fieldwork includes field note, the writer will collect writing several
note that relate to this analyzing, besides, the book that relate to this analyzing.
D. Data analysis
Data is taken from the story of The Clever Pottala by observation. The
data is analyzed based on the story, to find or to know dependent clause and
independent clause in sentence, setting, background, evaluation, event, collateral
and performative.
Page | 32
CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
A. Findings
1. The Narrative Text
The Clever Pottala
Once upon a time there was a headman lent a sum of money to a peasant
called Pottala. When the time came to return the money, the headman came to
visit Pottala and asked him for the money. Pottala had no money. He said to the
headman, “I haven’t got the money yet. Somebody else has borrowed it from me.
Please wait a few more days, so that I will have time to collect what people owe
me.”
The headman agreed and said that he would return in four day’s time. But
when the fourth day came, Pottala still did not have the money. He decided to
treat the headman. Early in the morning, he went to the river and caught a fish. He
boiled the fish in a pot of water and when the soup was ready, he took out the fish
and put an iron axe into the pot instead. When the headman arrived, Pottala
politely invited him into the house and served him a bowl of the delicious fish
soup.
“Hm, that’s very nice,” said the headman. “What did you make the soup
with, Pottala?”
“Oh, just this axe,” Pottala said pointing to the axe in the pot. “Just…this
axe? Nothing else?”
Page | 33
“Nothing else. This is a soup-axe. Would you like another bowl? I made
plenty of soup.” After the two men had finished the soup, the headman asked for
his money. “I haven’t got the money. Please give me some more time, sir,” said
Pottala. “You know what,” said the headman, just pay me with that soup-axe.”
Pottala agreed, and the headman went happily home with the axe. He gave the axe
to his wife and told her to make soup with it for the evening meal. His wife
obeyed, but although the axe was boiled for hours and hours, the water remained
just water.
The next day, the headman returned the axe to Pottala. “You lied to me,
Pottala,” he said angrily. “This is an ordinary axe. It can’t make soup.”
“But sir, you saw yourself that there was only this axe in the pot yesterday,
and you liked my soup,” said Pottala. “I don’t want your axe anymore, Pottala.
Give me back my money,” said the angry headman. “I haven’t got your money
yet, sir. Please give me some more time,” answered Pottala. The headman agreed
to give him another three days.
After three days he came back to Pottala’s house. “Where’s my money,
Pottala?” he asked. “Please sir, come in. I’m just going to prepare my lunch. Why
don’t you eat with me?” said Pottala. The headman agreed and climbed up onto
the verandah. Then Pottala took a blowpipe and pointed it to the sky. “What are
you doing?” asked the headman. “I’m shooting a wild duck for our lunch, sir,”
answered Pottala. “But there’s no wild duck to be seen,” said the headman.
“They’re flying over the sea, sir. This blowpipe can shoot as far as the sea,” said
Page | 34
Pottala. He pointed it once more at the sky and blew as hard as he could. “Let’s go
into the kitchen now. The duck will be on the table,” Pottala said to the headman.
Together they entered the kitchen and sure enough, there was a wild duck
lying on the kitchen table. “There she is,” said Pottala. “This is a special
blowpipe. Not only can it hit a duck far away, but it brings it back to the kitchen,
too.”
“Oh, let me have that pipe, Pottala,” said the headman. “Give me the
blowpipe and you need not give me back the money.”
“Well, if that’s what you wish, sir, of course you may have the blowpipe,”
said Pottala. The excited headman went home with his blowpipe. He was so
impatient to try it out that he did not want to wait for Pottala to cook the wild
duck. As soon as he arrived home, the headman aimed the blowpipe at the sky and
blew in it. Then he ran to the kitchen. But to his great disappointment, there was
no duck on the table. He ran back to the verandah and blew and blew till he was
red in the face. But still no duck appeared. The whole day, the poor man ran to
and from his verandah to the kitchen, until he fell exhausted on the floor. And still
no duck appeared on the kitchen table. Then the headman understood that again
he had been cheated by Pottala.
The next day, he went back to the peasant and demanded his money. “But
sir, I’ve paid you with the blowpipe,” said pottala innocently. “Here’s your
blowpipe. I don’t want it. Give me my money!” shouted the headman angrily.
“You’ve cheated me Pottala!”
Page | 35
“But sir, you saw yourself that I killed a duck with it yesterday,” answered
Pottala. “Give me back my money!”
“Please sir, I haven’t got the money yet. Can you give me some more
time?” Although he was angry, the headman agreed to give Pottala another two
days to find the money. This time, Pottala caught a dog and put a silver coin under
its tail. When the headman came and asked for his money, he said, “Sir, I haven’t
got the money yet. The people who bought my rice and fruit have not paid me yet.
But I was given a rather special dog who might be able to help a bit. Would you
like to see this dog, sir?”
“Yes,” said the headman, “just bring him here.”
Pottala took the dog out of the house and put him on a mat. He stroked the animal
and said, “Come now, give me a coin.” The dog wagged his tail and Pottala took
the silver coin from it.
“There you are, sir,” he said, offering the coin to the headman. “Can I give
this coin to you? The dog only gives a coin at a time.” The headman was
delighted. “Oh, Pottala,” he said, “give me that dog and you need not pay me the
rest of the money.”
“As you wish, sir,” said Pottala obediently.
So the headman took the dog home. At home, he tied the dog under his
bed and waited impatiently for several hours. Then, when he thought the dog had
rested long enough, he stroked his back and said, “Come now, give me a coin.”
The dog wagged his tail happily, but that’s all it did. And again the headman
understood that he had been tricked by the clever peasant.
Page | 36
“That’s it! Now I’m going to arrest him!” he shouted. He ordered two
guardsmen to go to Pottala, put him in the bag, and throw him into the river. The
men went to Pottala’s hut and carried out his orders. Fortunately, Pottala had his
knife with him, and he was thrown into the river, he cut a hole in the bag and
swam to safety. He left his village and went into the forest where he opened a new
field. After some time, when his field had grown some sweet potatoes, he went
back to the village to sell them. At the market, he met the headman who stared at
him at amazement.
“Pottala! I thought my guardsmen threw you into the river,” he called out.
“Yes, sir, I was thrown into the river,” answered Pottala, “but when I reached the
bottom, the water folk rescued me. I lived with them for a while, but I got
homesick for my village, so I asked them to take me back up to land.”
“Is it beautiful down there?” asked the headman curiously. “Oh, it’s the
most beautiful place one could ever see,” answered Pottala. “Then put me in a bag
and throw me into the river, because I want to see the place where the water folk
live,” said the headman. “As you wish, sir,” said Pottala. He put the headman in a
bag and threw the bag into the river, where the headman drowned. Pottala went
back to his field in the forest and lived peacefully for the rest of his life.
Page | 37