THE PRINCIPLE OF LANGUAGE POLITENESS ON STATUS AND COMMENT ON TWITTER

Abstrak

The language politeness in a communication needs to be considered. The polite language makes communication went smoothly and established good relationships among the peoples. The language politeness in using Twitter is also about to be applied, because Twitter as a forum for communication, hopes that the speech partner is able to understanding and accept the conversation well. The issue of the politeness language is one of the factors that has caused controversy on Twitter. Twitter is used for cornering, dropping, insinuating, and spread hoax news. One of the abuse of the Twitter is not regard to the language politeness can be seen on the Twitter account of the President of the Republic of Indonesia. The language politeness has been by several researchers but it is still different in the researched object. Researcher is interested in researching the language politeness in entitled "The Principle of Language Politeness on Status and Comments on the Twitter". The purpose of this research is to describing the principle of language politeness on status and comments in Joko Widodo Twitter.

             Politeness is everything that is felt, actions, and behavior that expressed in an ethical way (Nurjamily, 2015: 5). While language politeness according to Syahrul (2008: 14) is connecting life aspects of social structure, codes of behavior, and ethics in life. The principle of language politeness is inseparable from the opinions of experts are Lakoft, Fraser, Levinson and Brown, Pranowo, and Leech (Chaer, 2010: 45). All of them the same to discuss the language politeness, but there are differences of opinion and Leech is a refinement of opinions that copy them. Leech divided the principle language politeness to be six maxims, namely: (1) policy maxim, (2) acceptance maxim, (3) generosity maxim, (4) humility maxim, (5) compatibility maxim, and (6) sympathy maxim ( Chaer, 2010: 67). According to Chaer (2010: 69-70) the factors that influence the impoliteness of one's speech are: (1) emotional impulse, (2) accuse, (3) protective to ward opinions people, (4) direct criticims, and (5) discredit.

             This research’s type is a qualitative research with descriptive methods. According to Moleong (2010: 6) that qualitative research is research used to understanding a phenomena about what experienced by research subjects with paying attention to their context and relevance. The source of research data is Joko Widodo's twitter account. The research data is the status and comments on Joko Widodo's account during one month from 1 to April 30, 2019 with the amount of data as many as 124 that consist of 15 statuses and 109 comments that categorized into 15 category. The research instruments are cellphones and stationery. Data is collected by screensooting status and comments. Testing the validity of the data is perseverance of observation and triangulation. The data were analyzed by classifying, describing, interpreting, and concluding of the data based on the maxims in politeness theory.

             Based on data analysis was found that the use of all politeness maxims, and the most dominant maxim used is the generosity maxim of  37 utterances (4 among them were classified polite and 33 were classified impolite). Other maxims used were the compatibility maxim of 35 utterances (8 utterances classified polite and 27 utterances classified as impolite). Acceptance maxim 34 utterances (3 utterances classified polite and 31 utterances classified impolite). The sympathy 21 utterances (5 utterances classified polite and 16 utterances classified impolite). The policy maxim were 16 utterances (13 utterances classified polite and 3 utterances classified impolite). Next, the use humility maxim as much 5 utterances (3 utterances classified polite and 2 utterances classified impolite). Based on the results of findings and discussion were concluded that language politeness of followers on Joko Widodo's Twitter account was classified as impolite. Impoliteness is partly due to the disappointment of the speaker with the speech partner, the difference in the distance between the speaker and the speech partner, the lack of understanding of the speaker in to getting the speech partner, negative thinking to wards the speech partner, the speaker`s education, and the speaker habit of the speaker in using abusive language.