The Study of Contrastive Analysis of American English and Acehnese Forms of Address

The Study of Contrastive Analysis of American English and Acehnese

Forms of Address

Second Language Acquisition

Submitted by:

Kamarullah

Student’s Reg. No: 1409200080050

POSTGRADUATE PROGRAM OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

UNIVERSITY OF SYIAH KUALA

2015

i

PREFACE

First of all, praise to Allah, the lord of the world, who has given us chance to life in order

to obey, to pray Him and be His caliph; leader in this world. And also by His mercy and love, the

writer can accomplish this paperwork. Peace and salutation be upon Prophet Muhammad MPBUH;

a figure who illuminate our life by love, behaviour, knowledge and freedom from worshiping God

but Allah SWT.

Thanks are also presented for Dr. Usman Kasim, M.Ed, who have taught me knowledge

and also science, especially subject of Second Language Acquisition. His comments, suggestions,

support and also encouragements are the indirect reason why the writer had done this task. Finally,

it is realized that this paperwork also has not perfect yet. So critics, suggestions and also advices

are really needed in order to make it better. May us always be in His Blessing forever.

Banda Aceh, 12 January 2015

The Writer

Kamarullah, S.Pd.I

ii

List of Contents

Page

Preface .................................................................................................................................. i

List of Contents .................................................................................................................... ii

Chapter I : INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1

1. Background of Study ................................................................................ 1

2. Statement of Problems .............................................................................. 2

3. Objective of Study .................................................................................... 2

4. Significances ............................................................................................. 3

Chapter 2 : DISCUSSION ............................................................................................ 4

1. Contrastive Analysis ................................................................................. 4

2. Social Context in Language Use ............................................................... 5

3. Terms of Address ...................................................................................... 6

4. Forms of Address ...................................................................................... 7

4.1 Pronouns of Address Used in American English .............................. 7

4.1.1 Inconsistency of Forms of Address Used

in American English............................................................... 9

4.2 Pronouns of Address Used in Acehnese ........................................... 10

4.2.1 Inconsistency of Forms of Address Used in Acehnese .......... 11

Chapter 3 : CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ..................................................... 12

1. Conclusion ................................................................................................ 12

2. Suggestion ................................................................................................. 12

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 13

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1. Background of Study

Language as a tool of communication plays such a role to interact with

other humans. The communication which appeared between interlocutors have

insightful meaning in their utterance, including the way of addressing one. When

one addresses someone’s name, the conversation will begin. The addressed name

might be the first or the last name of ones or even the titles’.

The forms of address remark about how the speakers mention the name

of the interlocutor. From the way of ones’ forms of address in a conversation, it

will depict the interlocutor who starts the conversation. As Fasold’s statement

(Fasold, 1994) which told that the interlocutor applied words of address form in

order to label person in a conversation. The forms of address also describe the

social position and cultural background of someone. Brown and Gilman (Brown

& Gilman, 1960) asserted that the use of forms of address are functioned to

identify the power of position and solidarity of any interlocutors. Furthermore,

communication which produced by interlocutors will pinpoint their statues and

manners (Keshavarz, 2001). In other words, according to those experts, it can be

concluded that forms of address act as the variable in measuring the social

characteristic, the position, and solidarity of interlocutors in a conversation.

2

The forms of address pop out towards in many languages, including

English and Acehnese. Acehnese as an Austronesian language which used in the

Province of Aceh in northern Sumatra, Indonesia, has rich lexical items and

systematic structure of the grammar (Asyik, 1987). Meanwhile, English as the

official international language has its own characteristics as well as Acehnese.

Both of features in that languages can be compared to easier the learner to

acquire the language. The comparison which known as Contrastive Analysis will

be deployed in order to investigate any distinctive elements in both of languages

(Lado, 1957). In this case, forms of address, one of features in American English

and Acehnese, will be compared through Contrastive Analysis due to find the

clear description of usage of the feature.

2. Statement of Problems

Based on the above background, it can be asserted that the problem of

this study, namely:

a. How is the pronouns of address used in American English and Acehnese?

b. Is there any inconsistency of forms of address used in American English and

Acehnese?

3. Objectives of Study

a. To describe the pronouns of address used in American English and Acehnese.

b. To determine whether any inconsistency of forms of address used in

American English and Acehnese.

3

4. Significances

There are quite a few significances of the study, they are:

a. Aiding the people in understanding the use of forms of address in Acehnese

and English.

b. Affirming there are rules in addressing someone in every language in the

world.

4

CHAPTER II

DISCUSSION

1. Contrastive Analysis

Contrastive Analysis is used to compare languages to discover the

similarities and differences (Wardhaugh, 1974). In addition, as previous

explanation, Lado stated that Contrastive Analysis is applied due to investigate

any distinctive elements in both of languages (Lado, 1957). Thus, it can be

asserted that Contrastive Analysis is a term in linguistics in differencing the

features of a language, it starts with the one who really distinguishes the meaning

in a language.

Whitman classified Contrastive Analysis into some procedures, namely

(Whitman, 1970):

a. Describe

In this stage, the expert or teacher takes the two languages which

wanted to contrast, first language (L1) and second language (L2). Then, the

expert or teacher writes formal descriptions of them or choose descriptions of

them.

b. Pick

The expert or teacher picks forms from the descriptions in order to

contrast them since it practically impossible to contrast every potential

features of two languages.

5

c. Contrast

The expert or teacher makes a contrast of the forms chosen. It can be

concluded as tables, clustered descriptions, et cetera.

d. Predict

The expert or teacher attempts to formulate a prediction of difficulty

through the chosen contrast.

From the explained definition, contrastive analysis plays its role to

predict the differences between two languages either for the difficulties or

similarities through the series of procedure. In the end, the prediction can be

studied further to aid the learner avoid the errors and mistakes in uttering the

verbal performance of the languages.

2. Social Context in Language Use

Context in language use is very essential, for linguistic and social

behaviour not merely has to be proper to the individual and his socio-economic

background, but it also necessities to be meet for certain occurrences and

conditions. In other words, language varies not only agreeing to the social

characteristics of the utterer but also agreeing to the social context in which he

discovers himself.

Levinson (Levinson, 1983) emphasizes that the single most observable

way in which the correlation between language and context is mirrored in the

6

structure of languages themselves is through the phenomenon of deixis. It is

known as the aspects of a communication whose interpretation depends on

knowledge of the context in which the communication occurs (Princeton

University, 2013). Among the classifications of deixis, one that is in a straight

line linked to this study is social deixis, which refers to social roles played by an

individual in a speech event. Social deixis comprises terms of address and

honorifics. The former will be described further below.

3. Terms of Address

The one of linguistic forms, addressing one’s name, is used to attract

one’s attention in the course of a conversation. Murphy (Murphy, 1988)

sophisticatedly state that address forms are socially driven phenomenon. In

addition, Akhmanova (Akhmanova, 1966) affirms that terms of address signifies

the use of nouns, pronouns, substantivized adjectives and their equivalents to

name the subjects and objects to whom speech is focused. Moreover, linguistic

forms which are uttered to address someone can reflect the complex social

relations of ones in a speech community (Chaika, 1982). It is also preserved that

the finest place to seek a correspondence between language and society in

grammatical rule of a language is in the pronouns and forms of address. Hence,

it can be assumed that the terms of address is one of linguistic term which used

to attract someone to speak considering each interlocutors’ social status.

Address forms have been of great concern to sociolinguists,

anthropologists, and social psychologists because these forms can noticeably

7

manifest the correlation between language and society. Brown and Yule (Brown

& Yule, 1989) claim that in different social contexts different terms of address

will be uttered. As Lyons’s statement (Lyons, 1977), the terms of address uttered

by a low-grade social status to a high-grade social status probably changed from

those between peers, as in vocative terms like “Sir” or “Doctor” or “My Lord”

(in the courtroom).

4. Forms of Address

4. 1. Pronouns of Address Used in American English

The significant study of address forms and the social relationship is

already held to describe the present-day English by Brown & Gilman. (Brown

& Gilman, 1960). They affirmed that social change is removed in term of the

usage of pronouns in the English. It makes the currently English is becoming

worse. In general, what pronouns have been left are those for many persons

such as “you”, “we”, and “they”. Or those for specifying one person like

“you”, she”, “he”, or “I”. In the earlier time, in dialoging to one person, as an

alternate use of “you”, English had “thou” which is used in Shakespeare’s

plays (Fanego, 1996). It also believed that Indo-European languages have

their own forms of second-person pronoun, at last two different forms, which

refer to the degree of politeness and familiarity between interlocutors.

The address forms of American English which analyzed by Brown

and Ford, the middle-class Americans, in addressing person, can choose their

options by picking the first name only, or by title and last name of the

8

interlocutor. Those are believed as the model of indicating the reciprocal and

nonreciprocal of the mentioned subjects (Brown & Ford, 1964). In doing their

investigation, they analyzed a variety of data which are collected from

American literacy sources, 82 speakers and addresses of Boston business

executives, and 56 children in the American Midwest.

In addition, the dimension of solidarity has been more known over

that of power recently (Brown & Gilman, 1960). People use reciprocal forms

of address more often. Similarly, the same principle of showing reciprocals

of American English is set to address the first name between interlocutors. In

other words, when Americans have become close friends, they will use

familiar terms towards each other. They will call each other by his first name.

Hence, it can be assumed that when Americans have become close friends,

they will use familiar terms towards each other. Likewise, there are two

believed rules in addressing someone’s name in American (Hwang & Huang,

n.d.). The first, one who has higher occupational status gets the honour of

being addressed with title or last name while addressing the other person

which has the lower occupational status with the first name. The second one,

showing the respect and politeness, the younger person will address the older

person by his title or last name while they will be called with the first name

in response.

From those studies, it can be implicitly concluded that the mutual

exchange of first name or the mutual exchange of title and last name became

dominant. For instance, people in America call their close friends by first

9

name. On the other hand, they will call stranger or unacquaintant person by

his title or last name. They also hoped to have the same addressing form in

return.

4.1.1. Inconsistency of Forms of Address Used in American English

As same as the study which had applied by Brown and Ford, the

inconsistency of forms of address used in English can also be seen from

the study which had done by Ervin-Tripp. He asserted that American

English has been transformed bit by bit in the direction between

strangers. It also has been reformed between people of asymmetrical age

and status. Speech community is considered manifestation that there is

no difference in social status. The result of study affirmed that the use of

first name is considered much friendly and simply than title or last name

in any interactions. The participants in the interaction often address first

name in addressing each other reciprocally. Additionally, Brown and

Ford (Brown & Ford, 1964) affirmed that the movement from a title or

last name relationship to a first name of person spends less than 5

minutes’ conversation between talkers. The believed system in

addressing someone’s name is slowly changed for period of times.

Hence, the phenomenon is progressively accepted among

interlocutors in America. Ultimately, inconsistency of forms of address

used in America is appeared to the surface.

10

4.2. Pronouns of Address in Acehnese

As same as the American English which has explained above,

Acehnese pronouns also has the differences in age and politeness.

According to Asyik (Asyik, 1987), level of politeness in Acehnese pronouns

has to do with age and respect. For instance, for older or respected people,

they will be addresses by the younger people with “droeneuh” or “raneuh”

(you; respected or older person). In return, the older or respected people will

address someone with “gata” (you; younger adult) or “kah” (you; children).

In the intervening time, Asyik reported that the Acehnese in

addressing person, is considered to call on older respected person by his title

than mention his name (Asyik, 1987). They concerns about the effect if they

call the name of older or respected person by his name, they will be assumed

as a rude one. Therefore, they will mention the name of the interlocutor if

they are at the same age and status.

Meanwhile, level of politeness in addressing someone’s name in

Acehnese is regarding the interlocutor’s status, occupation or place (Asyik,

1987). For example, the use of title such as “si” which is concerned as “jih”

(he or she), can be used if the interlocutors at the same age and status. For

the example of addressing based on the place of interlocutor, it can be shoen

by the use of “Teungku” (religious scholar) is used for a religious scholar or

cleric while a teacher and a person with a position in the government is being

titled “Bapak” (Mister) or “Ibuk” (Mistress or Miss). And the others status

such as “Tuwangku” (title for male descendants of Aceh Kings), “Pocut”

11

(title for female descendants of Aceh Kings), and Panglima (commander),

are also used in addressing someone concerning their position in a

community or society.

4.2.1. Inconsistency of Forms of Address Used in Acehnese

From the descriptions above, it is clear that in addressing

someone’s name in Acehnese, the interlocutors should recognize the

status, age, or occupation of each other due to avoid being a rude person.

On the other hand, the inconsistency is happened in some cases. For

instance, “kée” (I) and “kah” (you) which have vulgar function are

dominantly used in area of Acehnese like in Peureulak, Aceh Timur.

Contrarily, those forms of address is avoided by some Acehnese people

outside the Eastern Acehnese. They rather use “loen” (I) and “gata” than

“kée” and “kah” concerning the politeness and respect. If one keeps to call

someone with “kée” outside that area, the interlocutor must be presumed

as impolite person. Nonetheless, people in Peureulak do not really care the

politeness concerning the form of address of the mentioned ones because

they get used to it.

12

CHAPTER III

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

1. Conclusion

Forms of address is one of linguistic term which used to attract someone

to speak considering each interlocutors’ social status. Two of languages in the

world, American English and Acehnese are compared in detailing the forms of

address through the contrastive analysis study which had deployed by experts.

Both American English and Acehnese, in addressing someone’s name,

notices the status, age, or occupation of the interlocutor considering the

politeness and respect. The inconsistency also occurs in both languages.

Nowadays, American English changes the rules in addressing someone, by

calling the first name before the tile or last name in a 5 minutes conversation.

Equally with that one, Acehnese also has inconsistency in addressing someone

which remarked by the difference forms of address at some areas in Aceh.

2. Suggestion

Based on the discussion, several suggestions in avoiding the

inconsistency of forms of address used in American English and Acehnese are:

a. It is obvious that every language has its own characteristics and we should

aware and respect about that.

b. The study of inconsistency of any features in a language, especially forms of

address should be conducted more and more.

13

REFERENCES

Akhmanova, O. S., 1966. Slovar' Lingvisticheskikh Terminov [Dictionary of

Linguistic Terms]. Moskva: Sovetskaya Encyclopedia.

Asyik, A. G., 1987. A Contextual Grammar of Acehnese Sentences, Michigan: The

University of Michigan.

Brown, R. & Ford, M., 1964. Address in American English. In: D. Hymes, ed.

Language in Culture and Society. New York: Harper & Row, pp. 234-44.

Brown, R. & Gilman, A., 1960. The Pronouns of Power and Solidarity. American

Anthropologist, Volume 46, pp. 24-9.

Brown, R. & Yule, G., 1989. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge

University.

Chaika, E., 1982. Language the Social Mirror. Rowley: Newbury House

Publishers.

Fanego, T., 1996. English in Transition 1500-1700: On Variation in Second Person

Singular Pronoun Usage. Sederi, Volume 5.

Hwang, Y.-L. & Huang, P.-W., n.d. The Study of Contrastive Analysis of Chinese

and English Forms of Address. Volume 94, pp. 153-159.

Lado, R., 1957. Linguistics Across Cultures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan

Press.

Levinson, S. C., 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lyons, J., 1977. Semantics. London: Cambridge University Press.

Murphy, G. L., 1988. Personal Reference in English. Language in Society, Volume

17, pp. 317-349.

Paulston, C. B., 1976. Pronouns of Address in Swedish: Social Class Semantics and

a Changing System. Language in Society, Volume 5, pp. 359-386.

Princeton University, 2013. Advanced English Dictionary. Princeton: Princeton

University.

Trudgill, P., 1983. Sociolinguistics: An Introduction to Language and Society.

Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Wardhaugh, R., 1974. The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis. In: J. H. Schumann &

N. Stenson, eds. New Frontiers in Second Language Learning. Michigan:

Newbury House Publishers.

Whitman, R. L., 1970. Contrastive Analysis: Problems and Procedures. Language

Learning, Volume 20, pp. 191-197.