A Contrastive Study of Politeness Strategies Between Arumpone and Batara Wajo Based on Dialogue Discourse in the Lontara Latoa and Sukku'na Wajo Manuscripts

Authors

  • Kamsinah Hasanuddin University
  • Muhammad Darwis Hasanuddin University
  • Ainun Fatimah Hasanuddin University
  • Muhammad Nurahmad Muhammadiyah University of Makassar
  • Muhammad Ali Imran Muhammadiyah University of Makassar

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1311.20

Keywords:

politeness strategy, speech norm, manuscript, Arumpone, Batara Wajo

Abstract

This paper aims to demonstrate the differences in the values of linguistic politeness strategies in the Bugis language inherited by King Bone, Arumpone (abbreviated as AP), and King Wajo, Batara Wajo (abbreviated as BW), respectively through the Latoa Lontara manuscript (Bone) and the Sukku'na Wajo Lontara manuscript. This is very interesting because theoretically (Brown & Levinson, 1978), the dialogue in the two Lontara manuscripts was asymmetrical or hierarchical (the dialogue between the king and the subordinates), so superiors may use the cukuk speech to subordinates. However, this study found that BW used the cukuk speech, while AP did not. The difference in the choice of politeness strategy was that AP chose the type of distance politeness or self-politeness, while BW chose camaraderie politeness. As for subordinates, they should use congaa speech to their superiors in asymmetrical speech situations. However, the facts show that the subordinates of both kings never use the congaa speech to their respective superiors. In this case, Kajaolallido (abbreviated as KL), the AP's subordinate used the sanraa speech as used by AP to him, and even used the cukuk speech to AP when was asked to give moral advice. Meanwhile, BW's subordinates always used the cukuk language to BW. The most important finding here is that the power of the moral advice variable became the determining variable in choosing the politeness strategy and shifts the power of the social status variable.

Author Biographies

Kamsinah, Hasanuddin University

Department of English Literature

Muhammad Darwis, Hasanuddin University

Department of Indonesian Literature

Ainun Fatimah, Hasanuddin University

Department of English Literature

Muhammad Nurahmad, Muhammadiyah University of Makassar

Indonesian Language and Literature Education Department, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education

Muhammad Ali Imran, Muhammadiyah University of Makassar

Indonesian Language and Literature Education Department, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education

References

Brown, P. (1978). “Face saving following experimentally induced embarrassment”. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 6, pp. 255-271.

Brown, P. & S. C. Levinson. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chen, R. (2001). “Self-politeness: A proposal”. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, pp. 87-106.

Darwis, M. (1995). Tingkat tutur dalam bahasa Bugis: Suatu studi sosiolinguistik ["Buginese speech level: a sociolinguistic study]. Journal Linguistik Indonesia. Year 13, No. 1 and 2, June and December 1995. pp. 33-43.

Darwis, M. (2008). “Reorientation of social strata in Buginese community: A sociolinguistic analysis. Buletin Penelitian, Accredited Journal, ISSN: 0215-174X, Akreditasi SK No. 55/DIKTI/Kep/2005, Volume 7, Special edition, Juni 2008.

Darwis, M. (2014). Perilaku morfosintaksis bahasa Bugis [Buginese morphosyntactic behavior]. Article from Proceeding KIMLI 2014: Kongres International Masyarakat Linguistik Indonesia, Bandar Lampung, 19-22 Februari 2014, pp. 367-370.

Farid, A. Z. A. (1979). Wajo pada abad XV- XVI: Suatu penggalan sejarah terpendam Sulawesi Selatan dari Lontara [Wajo in the XV- XVI centuries: A piece of hidden history of South Sulawesi from Lontara]. Ph.D. Dissertation. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia.

Fraser, B & W. Nolen. (1981). “The association of deference with linguistic form”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 27, pp. 93-109.

Fraser, B. (1990). “Perspectives on politeness”. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 2, pp. 219-236.

Grimshaw, A. D. (1978). “Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction”. In Esther N. Goody (ed.). Cambridge Papers in Social Anthropology. Language in Society, Volume 8, Issues 1. pp. v + 324.

Helmbrecht, J. (2013). "Politeness distinctions in pronouns". In Martin Haspelmath; et al. (eds.). The World Atlas of Language Structures, pp. 186-189. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Helmbrecht, J. (2014). “Politeness distinctions in personal pronouns: A case study on competing motivations”. In MacWhinney, Brian (ed.) et al. Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, pp. 315–332. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Helmbrecht, J. (2015). A typology of non-prototypical uses of personal pronouns: synchrony and diachrony. Journal of Pragmatics, 88, pp. 176—189.

Harris, S. (2001). “Being politically impolite: extending politeness theory to adversarial political discourse”. Discourse and Society, 12, Issue 4. pp. 450-470.

Hudson, R.A., (1996). Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ide, S. (1982). “Japanese sociolinguistics: politeness and women’s language”. Lingua, 57, pp. 357-385.

Ide, S. (2001). A Critique of politeness theories. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.

Ide, S, et al. (1984). “Sociolinguistic analysis of women’s use of honorifics - an analysis of a housewife’s natural cj conversation”. In Daily Context. In: Report of National Special Project: Standardization of Language, Tokyo.

Kramer, M. Bi. (2013). “GTFO!! Politeness and stylistic features as means of positioning in MMORPGs” (Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games).

Lakoff, R. T. (1973). “The logic of politeness; or minding your p’s and q’s”. Chicago Linguistic Society, 9, pp. 292–305.

Lakoff, R. T. (1990). Talking power: The politics in language in our lives. Glasgow: Harper Collins.

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

Mattulada. (1985). Latoa: satu lukisan analitis terhadap antropologi politik orang Bugis [Latoa: An analytical description of the political anthropology of the Bugis]. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.

Matsumoto, Y. (1988). “Reexamination of the universality of face: Politeness phenomena in Japanese”. Journal of Pragmatics 12(4), pp. 403-426.

Njuki, E. and H. K. Ireri. (2021). “Positive and negative politeness strategies used by Kenya’s members of national assembly”. Open Access Library Journal, Volume 8: e7690. Chuka, Kenya: Chuka University.

Ogino, T. (1986). “Quantification of politeness based on the usage patterns of honorific Expressions”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 58, pp. 37-58.

Palmer, F. R. (1981). Semantics. (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pizziconi, B. (2006). “Politeness”. In: Mey, J.L., ed., Concise encyclopedia of pragmatics, Elsevier, London.

Rashid, S. Md. and A. N. Abdullah. (2016). “A critical review of prominent theories of politeness”. In Advances in Language and Literary Studies, Vol. 7, No. 6, December 2016, pp. 262-270. Australian International Academic Centre, Australia.

Yule, G. (2010). The study of language. Fourth editions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Downloads

Published

2023-11-01

Issue

Section

Articles