An Analysis of Politeness Rules in Teacher-Students Classroom Interaction

Siti Nur Kamilah

doi:10.30762/ireell.v1i2.2063

Authors

Siti Nur Kamilah Institut Agama Islam Negeri (IAIN) Kediri

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30762/ireell.v1i2.2063

Keywords:

politeness rules, students’ utterances, classroom interaction

Abstract

The practical application of manners or etiquette to avoid offending and to make others feel comfortable is known as politeness. Since it is a culturally determined phenomenon, what is considered to be respectful in one society may occasionally be viewed as extremely impolite or strange in another. This descriptive qualitative study seeks to investigate the rules of politeness by Lakoff (1973) in teacher-students utterances during classroom interaction. However, an English teacher and 36 students of MAN 2 Kota Kediri became the sample of this research. As the data was a speech-shaped, it was obtained through several steps such as observation and data recording then it was analyzed trough data reduction, and data display, data validation, and drawing conclusion. The findings indicated that there were three rules used by the teacher and the students in their utterances namely ‘Do Not Impose’, ‘Give Option’, and ‘Make the Hearer Feel Good’.

References

Carter, N., at all. (2014). The Use of Triangulation in Qualitative Research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 1.

Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed). London: Sage Publications

Denzin, N.K. (1978). The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological

Elisdawati, Y., Rahmad, H., & SetiA, E. (2018). Teachers’ Politeness Strategies in Motivating Students to Learn English. Annual International Conference on Language and Literature. 964-975.

Ellen, G. (2001). A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.

Fauziati, E. (2013). Linguistic Politenesss Theory.UniversitasMuhammadiyah Surakarta.

Kurniatin. (2018). An Analysis of Politeness Strategies used by Teacher and Students in English Class at MTs NU Assalam Kudus. 1-107.

Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.

Macbeth, D. (2003). Hugh Mehan’s Learning Lessons reconsidered: On the differences between the naturalistic and critical analysis of classroom discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 40(1), 239–280.

Marimba, A. D. (1981). PengantarFilsafatPendidikan Islam. Bandung: Al Ma’arif.

Morris, M. (2007). An International to the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: New York University Press.

Muhtar, H. J. (2008). Fiqih Pendidikan. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosda Karya.

Olsen, W. (2004). Developments in Sociology. Ormskirk: Causeway Pers.

Park, J. (2008). Linguistic Politeness and Face-Work in Computer-Mediated Communication, Part 1: A Theoretical Framework. Journal of American and Society Information Science and Technology, 59(13), 2051-2059.

Patton, M.Q. (1987). Qualitative Evaluation Methods. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

Ratri, Ratih, & Margetan. (2014). Robin Lakoff Politeness Principle. Satya Wacana Christian University.

Reiter, R. M. (1984). Linguistic Politeness in Britain and Uruguay: A Contrastive Study of Requests and Apologies. Germany: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Rustandi, A. (2018). The University Students’ Expressions of Politeness Strategies on Students’ Request in Classroom Interaction in Indonesian Context. International Journal of English and Education. 7(1), 11-21.

Schauer, G.A. (2009). Interlanguage Pragmatic Development; The Study Abroad Context. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.

Syrova, J. (2013). Politeness Markers in Spoken Language. Brno: Masaryk University Brno, Faculty of Education, Department of English Langauge and Literature.

Watts, R.J. (2003). Politeness: Key Topics in Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

White, J.J. 1989). The Power of Politeness in The Classroom: Cultural Codes that Create and Constrain Knowledge Construction. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision. 4 (4), 298-321.

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press.