LINGPOET: Journal of Linguistics and Literary Research.
Vol.
No.
LINGPOET: Journal of Linguistics and Literary Research Journal homepage: https://talenta.
id/lingpoet/ The Use of Speech Act During The 2024 President Candidates Electoral Debate Astrid Clarissa Pintu Batu1 .
Gabriel Zefanya Sembiring2 .
Putri Aziza Muvta Tanjung3 .
Salsalina Cantika Tarigan*4 .
Zihan Afrida5 .
Dian Marisha Putri6
1,2,3,4,5,6
Universitas Sumatera Utara.
Medan.
Indonesia Corresponding Author: salsalinacantika@gmail.
ARTICLE INFO
Article history:
Received 1 April 2024
Revised 10 May 2024
Accepted 23 May 2024
Available online 31 May 2024
E-ISSN: 2745-8296
How to cite:
Batu.
et al.
The Use of Speech Act During The 2024 President Candidates Electoral Debate.
Lingpoet: Journal of Linguistics and Literary Research, 5.
, 117-125.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercialNoDerivatives 4.
0 International.
ABSTRACT
This research aims to examine the use of speech acts carried out during the 2024 President Electoral Debate, using Pragmatic and Grounded theory approaches by analyzing phrases that contain all types of speech acts.
The study analyses all three presidential candidates in the 2024 President Candidates Debate.
Through a systemic analysis, the article sheds light on the linguistic strategies employed by each candidate to convey their messages to the public.
The findings contribute to the understanding of the speech actAos importance in communicating oneAos message, specifically during the Presidential Candidates Debate.
Keywords: Representative.
Directives.
Comissives.
Expressives.
Declaration ABSTRAK Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji penggunaan tindak tutur yang dilakukan pada Debat Pilpres 2024, dengan menggunakan pendekatan Pragmatis dan Grounded theory dengan menganalisis frasa yang mengandung semua jenis tindak Kajian tersebut menganalisis ketiga calon presiden pada Debat Capres 2024.
Melalui analisis yang sistematis, artikel ini menyoroti strategi linguistik yang digunakan masing-masing kandidat untuk menyampaikan pesannya kepada Temuan ini berkontribusi pada pemahaman akan pentingnya tindak tutur dalam mengkomunikasikan pesan seseorang, khususnya pada saat Debat Capres.
Kata Kunci: Representatif.
Direktif.
Komisif.
Ekspresif.
Deklarasi Introduction Pragmatics is a branch of linguistics that studies contextual meaning.
(Yule, 1.
This type of study certainly involves the interpretation of what people mean in a particular context and how it influences what is said and also who they are talking to, when, where, and under what circumstances.
John Searle in Levinson .
3: .
developed the theory of speech acts to explore the function and meaning of language beyond its literal content.
Speech acts are the actions performed by speakers through language.
Searle identified different types of speech acts, such as representatives, directives, commissive, expressive, and declarations.
Speech acts are a fundamental aspect of communication, referring to the intentional use of language to accomplish specific actions, such as making assertions, giving commands, asking questions, or expressing Understanding the strategic deployment of speech acts in political debates provides valuable insights into the candidates' communication strategies and their attempts to shape public opinion.
The theory argues that speech acts are not mere descriptions but have performative power.
Searle's theory has had a significant impact on the philosophy of language, linguistics, pragmatics, and communication studies.
offers a framework for understanding how language is used pragmatically and how speech serves social LINGPOET: Journal of Linguistics and Literary Research.
Vol.
No.
Before this study, other researchers had delved into a similar topic of speech acts.
For example.
Sosrohadi conducted research analyzing speech acts in the 2024 Indonesian Presidential Candidate's speech texts.
But unlike this research.
Sosrohadi focused on the political persuasion within each speech act and its meaning.
This research aims to analyze, solely, the use of speech acts during the highly anticipated 2024 Presidential Candidate Electorate Debate this early 2024 with Anies Baswedan presenting as the first factionAos representative.
Prabowo Subianto presenting as the second factionAos representative, and Ganjar Pranowo presenting the third factionAos representative where the three conduct in a systematic debate to present each factionAos belief, idea and plan regarding about the question that the ModeratorAoll ask of the debate.
Method In this study, the researchers adopt Grounded Theory, employing its reflexive and open approach to comprehensively explore the research subject from multiple perspectives.
The cyclical process involved in Grounded Theory includes iterative data collection, development of theoretical concepts, and literature review.
This process refines emerging theories, ensuring they are grounded in the data and reveals patterns, categories, and relationships within the collected information.
The research is further enriched by incorporating John Searle's theory of Speech Act, which emphasizes the performative nature of language and its influence on actions and social interactions.
This integration enhances the analysis and interpretation of the data, shedding light on the intricate complexities of language use within the research context.
In summary.
Grounded Theory is a qualitative research methodology that embraces a reflexive and open approach, allowing theories to emerge from data.
The inclusion of John Searle's Speech Act theory enriches the research by emphasizing the role of language in actions and social dynamics.
The data for this study were chosen because the researchers wanted each debate to be represented by questions that are most viral and most impactful to society compared to other questions within the debates.
Each questionAos interaction will, later on, be analyzed in great detail in the discussion part.
Results and Discussion Results This research uses live streaming footage videos of the President Candidates Electorate debate from the first, second, and third debates.
After transcribing all three videos from the YouTube platform that streamed the full length of each debate, the researchers analyzed the transcript using the speech acts theory.
Below are the A First Debate Question Answers from the Reaction from the first Reaction from the The last reaction from the third third faction second faction AuApa strategis anda publik yang Au-kebetulan punya pengalaman 10 tahun menangani Kita mengajak mereka berpartisipasi sejak awal, menghadirkan dalam setiap fase Au-Prioritaskan pelayanan pada mereka Penyandang Perempuan terutama ibu hamil, 3.
Anak anak dan lansia, itu di Kemudian Au-1stmenurut kelompok rentan itu juga termasuk para petani dan nelayan.
Dan yg saya dapet, pas saya keliling tengah, pak ganjar, petani petani disitu Au-terimakasih, mas anis sudah betul dan sama Tapi untuk LINGPOET: Journal of Linguistics and Literary Research.
Vol.
No.
rentan yang lain termasuk orang tua.
Kenapa? Agar perduli dengan apa yg mereka rasakan-Ay pelayanannya, buatkan 2ndPelayanan pemerintah itu tidak ada yg baru, semua yg dilayani pemerintah itu hal yg berulang.
Jadi, kalo itu disebut masalah, pasti pernah pasti berulang.
Lalu masyarakat akan tau persis, saya melapor Sekian terima kasih.
Dan kartu tani yang bapak mempersulit mereka Saya mungkin bapak bisa Ay langka terjadi di papua pak, di sumatera utara pak, di ntt, ntb, timur termasuk Mungkin lupa, untu kitu karena bapak pernah menjadi ketua hkti.
Pak, data petani kita petani bisa kita maka harus bisa sampai sasaran.
Pada saat yg boleh dibatasi, maka ini yg saya telpon langsung pada pak wapres saat itu Aupak wapres please, kasi tambahan, kalau tidak tidak cukup dan ini Maka inilah yg Ay Based on the table above, below are contexts that surrounded the conversation chains as well as the type of speech act used according to the theory of Searle in Levinson .
Contexts: The table above consists of a question and multiple responses discussing strategies to enhance the quality of public service with fairness.
The question asks about each factionAos program to improve equitable public service.
This question led to each faction expressing their belief and plan to involve vulnerable groups in decision-making processes and address their specific needs.
Issues concerning farmers' access to fertilizers and the effectiveness of support programs are also mentioned in the table, including the importance of accepting feedback and criticism from the public to improve public services continuously Speech acts used:
LINGPOET: Journal of Linguistics and Literary Research.
Vol.
No.
The bolded sentence of the third factionAos answer uses the declarative type of speech act because the speaker expresses the statement that conveys information about the speaker's intention to invite others to participate.
Therefore, it falls under the category of a declarative speech act.
The first bolded sentence of the first faction reaction uses the declarative type of speech act because the speaker expresses the statement that conveys the intention to prioritize certain groups including disabled individuals, women, elderly individuals, and children.
The second bolded sentence of the first faction reaction uses the representative type of speech act because the speaker expresses the statement that conveys the speakerAos belief and assertion that everything that the government serves is just a recurring matter.
The first bolded sentence of the second factionAos reaction uses the expressive type of speech act because the speaker expresses the statement that contains his view regarding farmers and fishermen being included in the vulnerable groups of society.
The second bolded sentence of the second factionAos reaction uses the expressive type of speech act because the speaker expresses the statement that contains his view regarding his ability to answer the previous question.
In the end, the sentence also expresses polite thanks.
The first bolded sentence of the third factionAos reaction uses the directive type of speech act because the speaker expresses his view of needing to correct the previous factionAos opinion with his own.
The second bolded sentence of the third factionAos reaction uses the commissive type of speech act because the speaker expresses that he will commit to the plans stated before.
Second debate Question Answers from the Reaction from the Reaction from The last reaction from third the first faction first faction second faction AuApa kebijakan guna memperkuat indonesia?Ay Au-1stkita merasakan keluarga-keluarga kita hp komputer tantangan hacking menurut kami, perlu sekali kita membangun satu pertahanan cyber yang serius dan ini tidak cukup dengan memberikan tugas pada sekelompok Satu adalah dengan membangun satu system yang komprehensif-Ay Au-1st berpandangan pak Anies teoritis, semuanya bagus, indah.
Tapi yang nyata tentang masalah cyber dan AI adalah sumber atau awaknya.
Saya begitu jadi Menteri, empat fakultas baru di bidang sains 2ndKita menyiapkan putra putri terbaik untuk menguasai knowhow nya bukan Ay Au-Yang pertama kita BSSN.
Kita penting untuk system yang SDM kecepatan dan harus tinggi.
Maka kalau kita kemudian membuat satu Au-Kalau tadi disebut ada yang teoritis, ada yang kedua yang tidak dilaksanakan.
Jadi selama lima tahun ini apa yang system cyber kita? Justru di situ letak Jadi Ketika uang begitu besar dialokasikan, justru yang hari ini menjadi modern yang terjadi.
Ini adalah ancaman yang paling nyata.
Ay LINGPOET: Journal of Linguistics and Literary Research.
Vol.
No.
yang bagus, dikorupsi-Ay Based on the table above, below are contexts that surrounded the conversation chains as well as the type of speech act used according to the theory of Searle in Levinson .
Contexts: The table above revolves around the need to enhance Indonesia's defense capabilities through technology and cybersecurity measures.
Overall, the interactions centered around the importance of technology access, development, and cybersecurity measures to strengthen Indonesia's defense capabilities.
Different factions express their opinions and proposed strategies, highlighting the need for comprehensive cyber defense structures, investment in human resources, and the prevention of corruption.
Speech acts used:
The first bolded sentence of the first factionAos answer uses the representative type of speech act because the statement expresses the speakerAos view of the world specifically about the matters of current cybercrime that happened within homes and families.
The second bolded sentence of the first factionAos answer uses the commissive type of speech act because the statement expresses how the speaker utters the proposition to build a serious defense cyber system in the future when possible.
The first bolded sentence of the second factionAos reaction uses the expressive type of speech act because the sentence expresses how the speaker uttered a psychological state of the speaker to the previous answer by the first factionAos answer.
The second bolded sentence of the second factionAos reaction uses the commissive type of speech act because the statement expresses how the speaker is committing to a plan of creating bright young generations in the future.
The bolded sentence of the third factionAos reaction uses the declarative type of speech act because the statement expresses the speakerAos emphasized demand that commands the decision to strengthen the BSSN.
National Cyber and Cryptography Agency, in the Indonesian .
The bolded sentence of the first factionAos reaction uses the representative type of speech act because the statement expresses the speakerAos view about the current threat to Indonesia.
LINGPOET: Journal of Linguistics and Literary Research.
Vol.
No.
Third Debate Question Answers from the Reaction from the Reaction from the The last reaction from second faction third faction first faction the second faction AuApa dan sikap budaya dan responsif?Ay AuBudaya membanggakan dan menghormati budaya kehilangan jati diri kita sebagai bangsa.
Sebagai semua bidang harus Kami merencanakan ada dana abadi budaya budaya di semua Sebagai contoh.
Pencak Silat, bela diri warisan nenek moyang kita.
Pemerintah bukan pemerintah di depan pelopor intervensi.
Bila perlu bekerja budaya, pemerintah juga harus di depan melestarikan semua budaya kita di semua bidang, terima kasihAy Au-Apakah itu nyanyi, makers, apakah itu para penulis buku, berikan itu kepada mereka agar mereka Kalau mereka kemudian pemerintah enggak perlu takut, masa Kamu boleh loh pentas tapi enggak pemerintah mesti dikritik-Au Au-karena itu yang harus dikerjakan ekosistem yang sehat sehingga para budayawan ekspresinya dan budaya itu bukan seakan-akan dia lalu saja, budaya terus-menerus karena itu kami kami berencana kebudayaan yang nantinya akan menjadi penyalur sumber daya dari diberikan kepada budayawan-Ay AuSaya respons itu masuk akal, saya bisa menerima Ya kita harus benar-benar memberi ruang untuk inisiatif kreativitas tapi jelas pemerintah harus tidak ragu-ragu berani untuk turun tangan menjaga situssitus, museum-museum, sultan-sultan kita yang banyak sudah mau roboh ini, harus kita bantu warisan budaya sejarah kita.
Hal-hal seperti itu harus kita perhatikan saya juga setuju itu kebudayaan bahwa ide yang baik dari bapak, saya bisa terima dan dukung, terima kasih.
Ay Based on the table above, below are contexts that surrounded the conversation chains as well as the type of speech act used according to the theory of Searle in Levinson .
Context: The table focuses on discussing the need to provide space for initiative and creative innovation in preserving and safeguarding our cultural and historical heritage.
It mentioned the importance of the government's role in protecting historical sites, museums, palaces, and our rich cultural heritage, which are at risk of deterioration or destruction.
Speech acts used:
The bolded sentence of the second factionAos answer uses the declaration type of the speech act because it uses the verb AumerencanakanAy which has the meaning to declare something.
In this context, it is to declare that he wants to make economic financial plans for cultural actors in all fields.
LINGPOET: Journal of Linguistics and Literary Research.
Vol.
No.
The bolded sentence of the third factionAos reaction uses the representative type of speech act because the sentence gives the meaning of an opinion based on the speaker's belief to tell the government to not be scared of any type of criticizing art expression.
The bolded sentence of the first factionAos reaction uses the declaration type of the speech act because it uses the verb AuberencanaAy which has the meaning to declare something.
In this context, it is to declare that he wants the Ministry of Culture will be a distributor for resources from the state to be given to cultural figures so they can grow and develop.
Both the first and second bolded sentence of the second factionAos reaction uses the expressive type of speech act because both sentences above explain the expression of accepting In this context, the sentences embraced toward statements of both parties in the previous reaction in a positive way.
The data listed above showed how each candidate always uses at least one type of speech act during their speaking time within the three debates, with the intention to clarify and emphasize their points, beliefs, and views to the people.
Below are the charts to the how much each candidate uses all types of speech acts:
First Faction Second Faction Representative Commisive Directives Directives Declarative Third Faction Representative Commisive Directives Representative Commisive Expressive 13% 12% Expressive Declarative Figure 1.
Type of speech act Expressive Declarative LINGPOET: Journal of Linguistics and Literary Research.
Vol.
No.
Discussion According to the diagrams above, this study reveals that:
First faction The first faction showed the use of speech act presentation of 43% declarative, 43% directive, and 14% commissive.
This percentage showed that first faction debates calmly, structured by emphasizing the power of systematic rhetoric and communicated by choosing strong diction to sway public opinion.
(Kompas, 2.
A Second faction The second faction showed the use of speech act presentation of 13% declarative, 25% commisive, and 75% expressive.
This showed the persentage that the second faction debates dynamically, straight to the point, and communicates firmly but relatively uncontrolled so that an emotional impression appears.
(Kompas, 2.
A Third faction The third faction showed the use of speech act presentation of 25% declarative, 25% representative, 25% commisive, and 25% directive.
This percentage showed that the third faction debates with popular language which is very close to the people but has not been able to convey clear concepts in answering the questions.
(Tempo.
co, 2.
From the explanation of the diagrams above, the researchers conclude that each candidate has differences in The style of their communication skills in presidential electorate debate could influence public opinion about how they convey their ideas, ensure the society, and talk about important issues firmly as a competent leader so that it has the potential to influence peopleAos thoughts and their decisions during the election day.
Conclusion In conclusion, the study reveals that speech acts were powerful tools for conveying messages, persuading the electorate, and establishing credibility and this paper managed to shed light on the influential role of speech acts in shaping candidates' discourse and communication strategies.
The research highlights a diverse range of speech acts used, including assertions, promises, requests, and subtle attacks, strategically influencing the electorate's perceptions.
It emphasizes the effectiveness of different speech acts and the importance of linguistic strategies in political communication.
This research underscores the significance of speech acts in political debates and their power in shaping public opinion and influencing electoral outcomes.
It calls for further exploration of speech acts as a vital aspect of political communication and continued examination of candidates' linguistic strategies in future electoral References