See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/319057334

Politeness Strategies and Gender Differences in Javanese Indirect Speech Acts

Article · May 2014

DOI: 10.24114/lt.v11i1.2672

CITATIONS READS

0 3,412

3 authors, including:

Putri Ramadhani Berlin Sibarani

STMIK BUDI DARMA State University of Medan
5 PUBLICATIONS   3 CITATIONS    35 PUBLICATIONS   16 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Teaching ESP View project

Teaching English as Foreign Language View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Putri Ramadhani on 11 August 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Linguistik Terapan 11 (1) (2014): 24-33

Jurnal Linguistik Terapan Pascasarjana Unimed

Available online
http://jurnal.unimed.ac.id/2014/index.php/JLT-Unimed
Politeness Strategies and Gender Differences in Javanese Indirect Speech Acts

Putri Ramadhani
Busmin Gurning
Berlin Sibarani

Diterima Januari 2014; Disetujui Maret 2014; Dipublikasikan Mei 2014

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to identify types of politeness strategies, to examine the differences
of politeness patterns used by different gender and to see how the politeness strategies imply in the
culture of “indirectness” a culture of Javanese who avoid being direct to utter something which
were reflected in Javanese indirect speech acts in request. The approach used in this study are
based on politeness theory of Brown & Levinson (1987); Bald-on record, Positive, Negative, and
Off Record. This study employed descriptive qualitative design. The data were the transcription of
recorded observation and interview using audiovisual recorder in Javanese social interaction in
doing business transaction at “PasarRebo”, a traditional market in Deli Serdang, North
Sumatera. The politeness strategies used were bald-on record strategy, positive politeness strategy
and negative politeness strategy. Different strategies were performed by different gender; male
dominantly used bald-on record strategy while female dominantly used positive politeness strategy.
The realization of Javanese indirect speech acts used by female established an indirect correlation
to politeness strategies and the culture of “indirectness” in Javanese. The realization of these
politeness strategies by the speakers were aimed to minimize Face Threatening Acts to endeavor a
harmony in social interaction.

Keywords: Gender; Indirect speech act; Politeness strategiesement if they were taught
by using TBL model.

How to Cite: Ramadhani, Putri. (2014).

Politeness Strategies And Gender Differences In Javanese Indirect Speech Acts. Jurnal
Linguistik Terapan Pascasarjana Unimed. 11 (1): 24-33

*Corresponding author.: ISSN 0216-5139

E-mail: putriramadhani@yahoo.co.id
24
INTRODUCTION politeness strategy is to minimize the threat
to the hearer‟s positive face, to make the
hearer feels good about himself, his
Politeness theory is formulated by
interests or posssessions. It is most usually
Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson in
used in situationswhere the audience knows
1978. They state that politeness theory is
each other very well. It also includes the
the theory that accounts for the redressing
statements of friendship, solidarity, and
of the affronts to face posed by face
compliments and usually attempts to
threatening acts to adressees. Mills (2003)
minimize the distance betwen the speaker
state that politeness is the expression of the
and the hearer. The speaker respects the
speakers‟s intention to mitigate face
hearer‟s need to be liked and understood
threats carried by certain face threatening
(3) Negative politeness strategy is oriented
acts toward another.
towards the hearer‟s negative face and
Goffman was firstly raised the notion
emphasize avoidance of imposition on the
of face from the sociology view in the
hearer. It presumes that the speaker will be
early of 1950's. According to Goffman,
impossing on the listener. It has higher
“face” is a sacred thing for every human
potential for awkwardness or
being, an essential factor communicators
embarassement than in bald on record
all have to pay attention to; face wants are
strategy and positive politeness strategies.
reciprocal. The general notion of „face‟ by
Negative face is the desire to remain
Goffman became much more specific in
autonomous so the speaker is more apt to
Brown and Levinson‟s theory. They define
include an out for the listener, through
„face‟ as the public self-image that every
distancing styles like apologies (4) Off
member wants to claim for himself
record strategy uses indirect language and
(Brown & Levinson, 1987). Brown and
removes the speaker from the potential to
Levinson further distinguish two kinds of
be imposing. It is also called as indirect
face: positive face and negative face. Yule
way of saving something which may cause
(2000) also holds that face means the
a face damaging interpretation. It is usually
public self-image of a person. It refers to
in the form of declarative sentence.
the emotional and social sense of self that
everyone has and expects everyone else to
There are fifteen strategies of
recognize. (Brown & Levinson, 1987),
positive politeness by Brown and
Face is the public self image that every
Levinson, namely: (1) Notice, attend to the
adults tried to project. As a technical term,
hearer (his interests, wants, needs, goods).
face means the public self-image of a
(2) Exaggerate, interest, approval,
person. Politeness in an interaction can be
symphaty with hearer). (3) Intensify,
defined as the mean employed to show
interest to the hearer. The use of directly
awareness of another person‟s face.
quoted speech rahther than indirect
Showing awareness of another person‟s
reported speech is another feature of this
face when that other seems socially distant
strategy,as the use of tag questions or
is often described in terms of friendliness,
expressions that draw hearer as a
camaraderie, or solidarity.
participant into the conversation. (4) Use
in-group identity markers. Speaker can
Brown and Levinson (1987) outline
implicitly claim the common ground with
four main types of politeness strategies; A
the hearer that is carried by that definition
speaker has to follow the performance of
of the group, including in group usages of
face threatening act (FTA) namely; (1)
address forms, of language, or dialect,
Bald on record strategy is to minimize the
jargon, slang and ellipsis. (5) Seek
threat of the hearer‟s face. (2) Positive
agreement. In this strategy, there are two
25
ways to seek agreement, such as “safe
topics” which are used when the speaker
stresses his agrrement with the hearer and
therefore to satisfy hearer‟s desire to be
right, or tobe corroborated in his opinions,
for example talking about the weather, or
the beauty of a garden and “Repetition” by
repeating part or all of what the proceeding
speaker has said, in a conversation and by
using particles that function to indicate
emphatic agreement. (6) Avoid
disagreement. Speaker may do a white lie
in order to hide disagreement, by doing
this, speaker will not damage hearer‟s
positive face. (7) presuppose/raise/assert
common ground. Speaker talks with the
hearer for a while about an unrelated topic
to show that the speaker is interested in
hearer and indicate that speaker has not
come to see hearer imply to do with the
FTA. This strategy is used for softening
request. (8) Joke. Joking is a basic positive
politeness technique, for putting hearer „at
ease‟ or it may minimize an FTA of
requesting. (9) Assert or presuppose
speaker‟s knowledge of and concern for
hearer‟s wants. (10) Offer, promise. Offer
and promieses are the natural outcome of
choosing this strategy; even if they are
false, they demonstartespeaker‟s good
intentions in satisfying hearer‟s positive
face wants. (11) Be Optimistic. The
speaker isvery optimistic that the hearer
will not mind to do the dishes tonight. (12)
Include both the speaker and the hearer in
the activity. (13) Give (or ask for) reason.
In this strategy, speaker gives reasons asto
why she/he wants. (14) Assume or assert
reciprocity. Speaker asks cooperate with
him/her by giving evidence of reciprocal
rights or obligations between speaker and
hearer. Thus, speaker may say, “I‟ll do X if
you do Y for me” or “I gave it to you
yesterday, so you give it to me now” (vise
versa). By pointing to the reprciprocal right
of doing FTAs to each other, speaker may
soften his/her FTA by negating the debt
aspect and/or the face-threatening aspects
sucha s criticism and complaints. (15) Give
26
gifts to hearer (good‟s symphathy,
understanding, cooperation) may satisfy
hearer‟s positive-face want by actually
satisfying some of hearer‟s wants by some
actions like gift-giving not only tagible gift,
but human-relations wants such as the
wants to be liked, admired, cared about,
understood, listened to, and so on.
While negative politeness consists of
ten strategies, namely; (1) be
conventionally indirect. The speaker tries
to be indirect so there can be no
misinterpretation of what he means. In this
case, the speaker uses understandable
indirect speecha acts. (2) Question hedge.
It is used to modify the force of speech
acts. (3) Be pessimistic. It gives redress to
hearer‟s negative face by explicitly
expressing doubt that the condition for the
appropriateness of speaker‟s speech act to
obtain. (4) Minimize the imposition.
Speaker redresses he seriousness of the
FTA to pay hearer deference. (5) Give
deference. There are two sides to the coin
in the realization of the deference: one in
which speaker humbles and abases himself
and another where speaker raises hearer
(pays him positive face of a particular kind,
namely that which satisfies hearer‟s want
to be treated as superior). (6) Apologize.
By apologizing for doing an FTA, the
speaker can indicate his reluctance o
impinge of H‟s negative face an thereby
partially redress that impingement. (7)
Impersonalize speaker and hearer. Speaker
doesn‟t want to impinge on hearer is to
phrase the FTA as if the agent were other
than speaker, or at least possibly not
speaker or not speaker alone, and the
redressee were otherthan hearer, or only
inclusively of hearer. This result in a
variety of ways of avoiding the pronoun „I‟
and „you‟. (8) State the FTA as a general
rule. Speaker doesn‟t want to impinge but
it is merely forced by circumstances, is to
state the FTA as an instance of some
general social rule, regulation, or
obligation. So, we get pronoun avoidance.
(9) Nominalize. It shows formality which is
associated with the noun end of the
continuum. (10) Go on record as incurring
a debt, or as not indebting hearer. Speaker
can redress an FTA by explicitly claiming
his indebtedness to hearer, or by
disclaiming any indebtedness of hearer.
Direct and Indirect speech acts will
be elaborated more to get the point of this
study. Whenever there is a direct
relationship between a structure and a
function, we call direct speech act.
Whenever there is an indirect relationship
between a structure and a function, we call
indirect speech act. Thus, a declarative
used to make a statement is a direct speech
act, but a declarative used to make a
request is an indirect speech act.
The strategies of showing positive
politeness for Javanese also employs
'indirectness' as a strategy of showing
negative politeness. This 'indirectness'
strategy is used to minimise the acts which
can threaten face such as orders and
requests, advice, offers, expression of
hatred, criticism, and disagreement.
In Javanese culture, it is very
sensitive to give orders, advice, show one's
dislike upon the addressee, express
criticism or to show disagreement. These
acts that can threaten face are even more
sensitive if they are done by a younger
person toward elders/superiors. According
to Javanese cultural norm, a younger
person is not expected to give orders,
advice or to express criticism to
elders/superiors. If, however, the younger
person has to give advice to an elder, for
example, he has to express it in a very
polite way, that is, by using 'indirect
language'. In this case, the younger as the
speaker is not expected to express
explicitly what he wants or what he feels,
rather he is expected to say something else
in such a way that the addressee can
understand what the speaker really wants
him to do. This Javanese norm can be
27
illustrated in a cultural script proposed by
Wierzbicka (1991) as follows. I cant't say
to someone : ' I want you to do X' someone
could feel something bad because of this I
have to say something else in Javanese
culture, one must get the rasa ('feeling') of
what the speaker is saying. The hearer will
understand what the speaker means in his
indirect language. Therefore, it is impolite
to say explicitly what the speaker wants or
feels because this will be considered not to
use his rasa 'feeling'. The idea of using
indirectness is, therefore, to avoid a
conflict which may possibly happen
between the speaker and the addressee,
otherwise 'indirectness' is closely related to
'pretence'. These cultural norms are used
by Javanese as a strategy of showing
negative politeness, that is, to minimise the
face threat.
Indirectness is one the Javanese
politeness features in communication.
Geerzt (1965) and Suseno (1984) state that
a polite Javanese generally speak
indirectly. In addition, Gunarwan reports
his research that the Javanese tend to speak
more indirectly compared the Bataks who
tend to speak more directly (1997). In the
Javanese culture, indirectness to show
politeness is mainly conveyed in
conversation. Suseno (1984) and Geertz
(1961) both agree that there are two
principles which motivate Javanese people
to avoid being direct. Those principles are
rukun (harmony) and hormat (respect).
Chusnihadiati (2011), conveys that
Javanese women are still considered as a
subordinate group. Women must avoid
offending men-and they must speak
carefully and politely. There are many
subordinate groups which have their own
set of communicationrules, apart from the
universal rules. The relationship between
the status of Javanese women and the
politeness or formality of their speech
cross-culturally, women will speak more
politely than men as an expression of their
secondary status. Ethnographic research
from East Java reveals that Javanese
women are required to be more polite
within the family where they receive less
polite speech and offer more. In the wider
context of Javanese culture, however, it is
Javanese men who strive to cultivate
politeness for the purpose of expressing
their superior status and authority.
According to Agus & Astri (2009) in
their research, Javanese employs higher
speech levels, which are, Madya and
Krama as a strategy of showing positive
politeness. These higher speech levels are
used to show respect to elders or superiors
as they are the target of positive politeness.
This shows that Javanese people are
expected to show their respect to elders or
superiors are being a referent or the third
person in the conversation. Javanese use
indirectness and pretence as strategies of
showing negative politeness. The idea
behind these cultural norms relates to the
fact that Javanese must get the „rasa‟ or
„feeling‟ of what people are saying. These
indirectness and pretence strategies are
used to show negative politeness, that is to
minimize the face-threatening acts.
FINDINGS
The Types of Politeness Strategy Used
by Male and Female in Javanese
Table. Types of Politeness Strategies Used by Javanese Male and Female Buyers
No. Types of Politeness Strategies Male Buyers Female Buyers
1. Positive Politeness Strategy
2. Bald-on Record Strategy
3. Negative Politeness strategy
Politeness Strategies Differences Used by
Javanese Male and Female
28
The types of politeness strategy used
by male and female in Javanese was
answered after the researcher transcribed
the utterances of request uttered by three
male buyers and three female buyers
recorded from the business transaction. The
result of the research showed that positive
politeness, bald-on record strategy and
negative politeness were used by the
participants. The researcher put the result
of analysis in table 4.3 as shown below to
see the types of politeness strategies used
by male buyers and female buyers to send
request toward the seller. The data showed
that positive politeness strategy was used
the most with the calculation from request
utterances by male and female buyers with
the composition: male buyers used positive
politeness strategy 40.55% and female
buyers used positive politeness strategy
55.55%. Bald on record strategy used by
male buyers 59.45% and female buyers
used bald-on record strategy 40.75%. The
least politeness strategy used was negative
strategy 3.70% which was used only by
female buyers.
The research problem of the types of
politeness strategies used by Javanese male
and female buyers to send request toward
the seller can be placed in order from the
highest frequency to the lowest one as
showed by the table below.
40.55% 55.55%
59.45% 40.75%
- 3.70%
The results of the researched showed
that Javanese male buyers used bald on
record strategy 59.45%, then followed by strategy 55.55% then, the second place was
positive politeness strategy 40.55%. On the followed by bald on record strategy
contrary, Javanese female buyers 40.75%, and the least was negative
dominantly used positive politeness politeness strategy 3.70%

Table. The Percentage of Politeness Strategy in Request by Male Buyer

No. Types of Politeness Strategies Number of Utterances Percent (%)

1. Bald-On Record Strategy 22 59.45%

2. Positive Politeness 15 40.55%

3. Negative Politeness - -

4. Off-Record Strategy - -

Total 37 100%

Table. The Percentage of Politeness Strategy in Request by Female Buyer

No. Types of Politeness Strategies Number of Utterances Percent (%)

1. Bald-On Record Strategy 22 40.75%
2. Positive Politeness 30 55.55%
3. Negative Politeness 2 3.70%
4. Off-Record Strategy - -
Total 54 100%

The reasons why male Javanese
speakers used bald-on record the most
were to make short conversation and to
make the information sent clearly. They
wanted the seller get the point of what they
talked about directly, so that there was no
misunderstanding among them. As we
know that to do shopping activity in
traditional market are dominantly done by
women. Men rarely do shopping in
traditional market. For some people in
Indonesia, male is considered as the
superior, head of family who are working
to raise the money for the family needs so
for activity like shopping in the market is
usually done by the women. This habit has
shaped a culture in partly society that men
do shopping in the traditional market is
something rare, so that is why the reason
for using the strategy of bald on-record is
chosen because they do not want to spend
time longer in the market. Positive
politeness was at the second place of
strategy used by male buyers to request the
seller after bald-on record strategy. The
male buyers implied this strategy in
expressing request as an attempt to make
the seller feel much respected by using
positive politeness strategy number four it
is Use in-group identity markers. Speaker
can implicitly claim the common ground
with the hearer that is carried by that

29
definition of the group, including in group
usages of address forms, of language, or
dialect, jargon, slang and ellipsis. From the
utterances, the male buyers used Mbak, Yu
mean sister and Bu, Bu e mean madam as
in group usages of Javanese address forms.
However, the use of negative politeness
strategy and off-record strategy by male
buyers to request to the seller during the
transaction was none. These strategies
were not used by male buyers because they
wanted to be direct, saved time, avoid the
ambiguous as said by one of male buyers
in interview.
Positive politeness was at the first
place of strategy used by female buyers to
request the seller. The female buyers
implied this strategy in expressing request
as an attempt to make the seller feel much
respected by using positive politeness
strategy number four it is Use in-group
identity markers. Speaker can implicitly
claim the common ground with the hearer
that is carried by that definition of the
group, including in group usages of address
forms, of language, or dialect, jargon, slang
and ellipsis. From the utterances, the male
buyers used Mbak, Yu mean sister and Bu,
Bu e mean madam as in group usages of
Javanese address forms. Positive politeness
strategy chose by female buyers is strategy
number eight of positive politeness strategy,
it is joke. As Brown and Levinson‟s “Joking
is a basic positive politeness technique, for
putting hearer „at ease‟ or it may minimize
an FTA of requesting”. The jokes were
uttered by female buyers to request lower
price from the seller. Another positive
politeness strategy used by female buyer to
request is strategy number thirteen, it is give
(or ask for) reason. In this strategy, buyers
give reasons asto why they want. The seller
as the hearer is led to see the reasonableness
of speaker‟s FTA (or so buyers‟ hopes).
During the process of business transaction,
Javanese female buyers also used
indirectness and pretence as strategies of
showing negative politeness. The idea
30
behind these cultural norms related to the
fact that Javanese must get the „rasa‟ or
„feeling‟ of what people are saying. These
indirectness and pretence strategies were
used to show negative politeness, that was
to minimize the face-threatening acts. The
female buyers used this indirectness to
minimize the face threatening acts toward
the seller. The use of negative politeness by
female buyers to the sellers can be seen
from these utterances. As the conclusion,
the patterns of politeness strategies between
Javanese male buyers and Javanese female
buyers in request stated as different.
Javanese female buyers were more polite to
send request toward the seller than Javanese
male buyer. This analysis was also
strengthened by the interview to one of
male buyers, female buyer, and the seller
which can be seen in page 85, one of male
buyer conveyed that he just go to the point
or be direct to request toward the seller,
while female buyer conveyed that she
applies positive politeness strategies to keep
good relationship with the seller. The seller
also conveyed that male buyers never talks
longer than female buyers in doing
transaction and can be assumed that female
buyers were friendlier than male buyers.
This analysis is also supported by Tannen
(1993), compares gender differences in
language to cultural differences. Comparing
conversational goals, she argues that men
tend to use a "report style," aiming to
communicate factual information, whereas
women more often use a "rapport style,"
which is more concerned with building and
maintaining relationships.
The Elaboration of Politeness Strategies
Imply in Javanese Indirect Speech Acts
as Javanese Culture of “indirectness”
Javanese use indirectness and
pretence as strategies of showing negative
politeness. The idea behind these cultural
norms relates to the fact that Javanese
must get the „rasa‟ or „feeling‟ of what
people are saying. These indirectness and
pretence strategies are used to show
negative politeness, that is to minimize the
face-threatening acts. During the process
of business transaction, it‟s found some
utterances which imply the culture of
Indirectness in Javanese culture. Javanese
female buyers used indirectness and
pretence as strategies of showing negative
politeness. The idea behind these cultural
norms relates to the fact that Javanese
must get the „rasa‟ or „feeling‟ of what
people are saying. These indirectness and
pretence strategies were used to show
negative politeness to minimize the face-
threatening acts. The female buyers used
this indirectness to minimize the face
threatening acts toward the seller. Those
indirect speech acts were also related to
Javanese norm which can be illustrated in
a cultural script proposed by Wierzbicka
(1991) as follows. I cant't say to someone :
' I want you to do X' someone could feel
something bad because of this I have to
say something else In Javanese culture,
one must get the rasa ('feeling') of what the
speaker is saying. The hearer will
understand what the speaker means in his
indirect language. Therefore, it is impolite
to say explicitly what the speaker wants or
feels because this will be considered not to
use his feeling. The idea of using
indirectness is, therefore, to avoid a
conflict which may possibly happen
between the speaker and the addressee.The
idea of using indirectness done by female
buyers to the seller was aimed to avoid a
conflict which may possibly happen
between the seller and the buyers. It
proved that politeness strategies imply in
the culture of indirectness also occurred in
business transaction and differently used
by different gender. The data showed that
female buyers used this strategy while
male buyers did not.
CONCLUSION
1) Not all politeness strategies were used
by male and female buyers to send
31
request toward the seller. The
strategies used were bald-on record
strategy, positive politeness strategy
and negative politeness strategy.
2) The most dominant type of politeness
strategies used by different gender
was not similar. Male buyers
dominantly used bald-on record
strategy while female buyers
dominantly used positive politeness
strategy. Male buyers dominantly used
bald-on record strategy because they
wanted to make short conversation
and to make the information sent
clearly, they wanted the seller get the
point of what they talked about
directly, so that there was no
misunderstanding among them.
Female buyers dominantly used
positive politeness strategy in
expressing request as an attempt to
make the seller feel much respected,
avoid conflict, or to maintain social
harmony and solidarity by
establishing rapport to the seller .
3) The using of some Javanese Indirect
speech acts by female buyers showed
that politeness strategies by different
gender imply in the culture of of
“indirectness” in Javanese culture
which was aimed to maintain social
harmony by minimizing FTA.
REFERENCES
Agus, S. & Astri A.A. 2009. Linguistic
Politeness in Javanese. Browsed on
January 8th, 2013 on
http://buletin.tripod.com/agus/agus1.
htm.
Agustina, Ika. 2012. Politeness Strategies
Used in Javanese Wedding
Ceremony. Unpublished. M. Hum
Thesis. Medan. English Applied
Linguistic Study Program, State
University of Medan.
Bogdan, R & Biklen, S. 1982. Qualitative
Research for Education (2nd ed).
Boston: Allan and Bacon.
Brown, Penelope and Levinson, C.
Stephen. 1987. Politeness: Some
Universals in Language Usage.
United Kingdom: Cambridge
University Press.
Chen, W. 1989. Functional Uncertainty
and Topicalization. National Tsing
Hua University.
Chusnihadiati. 2011. Women and
Linguistic Politeness in Javanese.
Browsed on December 5, 2012 on
file:///D:/JAVA/journals/Chusnihadi
ati.htm.Coates, Jennifer. 1988.
Women in their Speech.
Washington DC. ERIC
Clearinghouse.
Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S.1994.
Handbook of Qualitative research.
Thousand Oaks:Sage Publication.
Elich, Konrad. 1992. “On the historicity of
politeness”. In Politeness in
Language: Studies in its History and
Practice, R. Watts, I. Sachiko and K.
Ehlich (eds), 71-107. Trends
inLinguistics, Studies and
Monographs 59, Berlin: Mouten de
Gruyter.
Endriati, K. S. (2012). Polite Request by
Korean Learners of Indonesian.
Studies in Literature and Language,
5(2), 1-9.
Esther, Kuntjara. 2001. Women and
Politeness: The Hybrid Language
and Culture of Chinese Indonesian
Women in Surabaya, Saarbrücken:
VDM Verlag Dr. Müller,2009, 164
p., ISBN 978-3-639-14421-5.
Geertz,C.1960. The Religion of Java.
Glencoe, IL Free Press. Excerpted in
Geertz, Hilder. 1961. The Javanese
Kindship Family. Glencoe, IL Free
Press. Excerpted inFishman (1968a)
and Pride and Holmes (1972).
Goffman, Erving. 1967. Interactional
Ritual. Chicago: Aldine Publishing
Goffman, Erving. 1981. On Face-Work:
An Analysis of Ritual Elements in
Social
32
Interaction.Psychiatry,18: 213-31. In lever
and Hutcheson (1972).
Hefner,Nancy J. S. (2009). Language
Shift, Gender, and Ideologies of
Modernity in Central Java,
Indonesia. Journal of Linguistics
Anthropology, Vol 19, 57-77.
Hassal, Tim. (1999). Request Strategies in
Indonesian. International Pragmatics
Association, 9:4. 585-606.
Hasibuan, Apriyanti. 2012. Politeness
Strategies of Gender Differences in
BahasaBatakMandailing.
Unpublished. M. Hum Thesis.
Medan. English Applied Linguistic
Study Program, State University of
Medan.
Holmes, Janet. 2001. An Introduction to
Sociolinguistics. Longman: London
and New York.
Hua, Z., Wei, L., & Yuan, Q. 2000. The
sequential organization of gift
offering and acceptance in Chinese.
Journal of Pragmatics 32. 81-103.
Ismadi, Suswanto. (2008). Politeness
Strategies in Javanese Indirect Offer
Used by Prostitutes in Surabaya.
KajianLinguistikdanSastra. Vol. 20,
79-87.
Jiang, W. 2000. The Relationship between
Culture and Language. ELT Journal
Volume 54/4, 328-334: Oxford
university Press.
Koyama, Tetsuharu. 2001. Universal in
Perceived Politeness: Comparasion
of native and non-native speaker of
English. M.A. Thesis. Univ. of
Arizona: Mchihan USA. UMI.
Lakoff, R.1973. Language and Woman's
Place. Cambridge:Cambridge
University Press Stable.
Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of
pragmatics. London: Longman.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Cuba, E.G. 1985.
Naturalistic Inquiry. California:Sage
Publication.
 Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. 1984. University of Minneapolis Press, p.
Qualitative Data Analysis. Beverly 344-69.
Hills, CA: Sage. Sifianou, Maria. 1992. Politeness
Mills, Sarra. 2003. Gender and Politeness. Phenomena in England and Greece;
Cambridge:Cambridge University A Cross-Cultural Perspective.
Press. Sukarno, 2010. The Reflection of the
Poedjosoedarmo, S. 1979. Tingkat Tutur Javanese Cultural Concepts in the
Bahasa Jawa. Jakarta: Pusat Politeness of Javanese. English
Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Department, Faculy of Letters,
Bahasa. Jember University.Journal, vol 12 no.
Rabe‟a Shams. Effects of Culture and 1 (2010).
Gender in Comprehension of Speech Suseno, Franz Magnis.1984. Etika Jawa.
Acts of Jakarta: P.T. Gramedia
Indirect Request. Department of English, Tannen, D.1993. Framing in Discourse.
Khurasgan(Isfahan) Branche, Islamic Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Azad University, Isfahan, Iran Wierzbicka, Anna. 1991. Cross-Cultural
Reiter, Rosina Marquez. 2000. Linguistic Pragmatics : the Semantic of Human
Politeness in Britain and Uruguay: A Interaction. Berlin : Moulton de
Contrastive Study of Request and Gruyter
Apologies. Amsterdam: John Wouk, F. 2001. Solidarity in Indonesia
Benjamins. conversation: The discourse marker
Searle, John R. 1975. A Taxonomy of ya. Journal of Pragmatics 33. 177-
Illocutionary Acts, in: Günderson, K. 191.
(ed.), Language, Mind, and Yule, G. 1996. The Pragmatics of
Knowledge, (Minneapolis Studies in Politeness in Scientific Articles in
the Philosophy of Science, vol. 7), Applied linguistics. New York:
Oxford University.

33

View publication stats