Impoliteness Strategies Found in Deddy Corbuzier's Podcast on YouTube
on
e-Journal of Linguistics
Available online at https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol/index
Vol. 16, No. 1, January 2022, pages: 136—144
Print ISSN: 2541-5514 Online ISSN: 2442-7586
https://doi.org/10.24843/e-jl.2022.v16.i01.p14
Impoliteness Strategies Found in Deddy Corbuzier's Podcast on YouTube
1Agnes Novalia
Putera Batam University, Batam, Indonesia [email protected]
2
2Ambalegin
Putera Batam University, Batam, Indonesia
Article info Received Date: 21
September 2021
Accepted Date: 29 September 2021
Published Date: 31 January 2022
Keywords:*
face threatening acts, impoliteness, impoliteness strategies, pragmatic
Abstract*
This study aimed at determining impoliteness strategies in a talk show entitled Deddy Corbuzier podcast on YouTube. In this research, the researchers used a theory from Culpeper (1996). The researcher used qualitative method to analyse the impoliteness strategies in this study. This research used impoliteness strategies. The data source of the research was the talk show Deddy Corbuzier podcast on YouTube. This research contained utterances from the conversational dialogues in the talk show. Each utterance had several types of impoliteness strategies. In collecting data, this research used the non-participatory technique and observation method by Sudaryanto (2015). Next, the data analyzed with the pragmatic identification method. This research found 15 data examined from the type of impoliteness strategy and the results were divided into bald on record impoliteness (5 data), positive impoliteness (4 data), negative impoliteness (3 data), mock politeness or sarcasm (2 data), withhold politeness (1 data). The most common strategy used by Deddy Corbuzier podcast on YouTube was bald on record impoliteness.
Human and language are two inseparable items, without which human language is a statue that cannot carry out activities, where language is also useful for conveying ideas, emotions, and desires that are suddenly or voluntarily carried out by the human being (Sapir, 2004), it means that language has a very strong influence on human life, it can also be said to be very inherent to humans so that through language, the words issued by humans can express themselves. One of the related phenomena can be seen in a video podcast on YouTube the title is Deddy Corbuzier Podcast on June 26, 2021.
Uya( speaker): “Then, why did you say my son, wear a wibu shirt, use deodorant first so he does not smell like onions?”
Denise (hearer): “I remind you; I've never insulted your son smelling of onions?”
Uya (speaker):” but the context of your words, the direction to my son” (00:04:33- 00:05:05).
From the conversation above, it can be concluded that the sentence is impoliteness in language because in the conversation the speaker feels that the listener has mocked his child.
Impoliteness is not only encountered when talking directly to someone, but can also be encountered when watching a movie, in a commercial, or from a religious show on television or YouTube, human will find words that use language that is not polite even when people share messages with someone, friends, sometimes without realizing the language is not polite. According to Culpeper, (1996) there are five strategic points in impoliteness: 1. Bald on record impoliteness, 2. positive impoliteness, 3. negative impoliteness, 4. sarcasm or pretend politeness, and 5. restraining politeness. On the five strategies above, the researchers focused on negative impoliteness to understand and to become a necessity to understand the meaning of the phenomenon to be studied. Language impoliteness is currently being done very deliberately by containing inappropriate words or with unpleasant language so the listener's face uncomfortable.
Research on impoliteness was done by some researchers. Erza & Hamzah, (2018) examined the strategy of impoliteness used by haters on Instagram comment artists using a pragmatic approach which aimed to find the type of impoliteness strategic and the result that the researcher found 200 comments in the artist's comment column, from the analysis of these comments there is 5 strategic impoliteness in it, namely: bald on record impoliteness, positive impoliteness. Negative impoliteness, sarcasm, or mock politeness, withhold politeness. Alias & Yahaya (2019) found 2 problems that occurred. The first, this negative impoliteness was the most dominant type of nasty strategy used in their comments on the issue. The second, dominant type of impoliteness strategy used sarcasm or mock politeness, followed by bald-on record strategy.
From the previous research, there were similarities and differences from the research conducted. The similarities of the two previous research used by Culpeper's (1996) theory to explain impoliteness strategies. The second, this research used an observational qualitative method with a non-participatory technique by Sudaryanto (2015). The difference between the two previous researches used different data sources. Erza & Hamzah (2018) used Instagram comments from male-female entertainers as a data source and Alias & Yahaya (2019) used Malaysian netizens in responding to music videos from drag queens as a data source.
C.Levinson & Steven (1987) explained that the Face Threatening Act (FTA) is an unpleasant action that aims to make inconvenience to the interlocutor. Brown and Levinson in Stockwell (2002 p.23) divided into two types of FTA, namely positive face and negative face. Negative face is a desire that does not want to be limited in the actions taken while a positive face is an act to get along in a community.
Sijabat (2020) stated politeness ought to have a bargain when the speaker conveyed the utterances to the listener who had a diverse course, age, and position.
Strategies impoliteness is a way of listening to a speech that is spoken disrespectfully. This strategy created to let people know and understand how profanity can occur in a way that social interactions do. This strategy can be found in the activities that are done daily because everyone in the interaction association always used this strategy. This strategy is usually characterized by attacking faces first, throwing jokes at others, saying false remarks to others, not answering what others are asking, and saying profanity clearly.
According to Culpeper (1996, p.356) strategic impoliteness is divided into five parts namely; bald on record impoliteness, positive impoliteness, negative impoliteness, sarcasm politeness, and withhold politeness.
The face-threatening act (FTA) FTA is conducted in a direct, clear, unambiguous, and concise manner in circumstances where the face is irrelevant or minimized (Culpeper, 1996). in other words, this strategy is used to attack someone directly by using ambiguous words. Example: “just tie him power pole, the depraved human beings” (Mara, 2018).
“You eat shit” (Chintiabela, 2017).
Positive impoliteness tends to attack the positive face of others especially attacking the face of someone who has a close relationship with them to show disapproval. Such as; Ignore, snub the other fail to acknowledge the other’s presence; Exclude the other from an activity; Use obscure or secretive language; Seek disagreement, like selecting a sensitive topic (Mirhosseini et al., 2017).
Example: teacher: “Have you finished, Akbar, come here‟
Akbar: ”Why it is always me, mam?” (Dani, 2017).
1.3.3 Negative Impoliteness
The use of strategies is designed to damage the negative facial desires of the recipient such as demeaning, scornful, or mocking (Culpeper, 1996).
Example: A: “Beware you fat. You can only cheat. That’s your habit‟ (Dani, 2017).
-
B: “only 1, Bill”.
The FTA conducted using an insincere courtesy strategy, and thus remains a surface realization, or it could also be said to promote disharmony without openly insulting/acting disrespectfully towards the listener (Culpeper, 1996).
Example: “If only the prisoner just the ordinary citizen, law is not fair for its facilities” (Mara, 2018).
The absence of politeness work where it would be expected such as, not giving thanks to what someone gives is an act of intentional impropriety (Culpeper, 1996). These strategies are expected when the speaker does not behave as expected.
Example: Denise: (give a bucket of flowers)
Deddy: (silent)
“when the speaker who should be thanking the listener, but the speaker is reluctant to say it and just stays silent” (Mohammed & Abbas, 2015).
In this research, the researcher used a qualitative descriptive study by Creswell, (2014). The theory of research was impoliteness in Deddy Corbuzier podcast on YouTube. The purpose of this research described the type of strategic impoliteness on the utterances of research. The data collection carried out by the researchers used the observational method (Sudaryanto, 2015). The research used the technique to collect the data required to use non-participatory techniques where researchers was not directly involved in these activities. In analysing the data, the researcher used the pragmatic identity method, which was a method that analysed by Sudaryanto,(2015).
This research found impoliteness strategies in podcast talk shows on YouTube. This research aimed to find out the most common strategies found in interviews. In this research, the researcher determined the strategy proposed by (Culpeper, 1996).
|
No |
Strategies of impoliteness |
Total |
|
1 |
Bald on Record Impoliteness |
5 |
|
2 |
Positive impoliteness |
4 |
|
3 |
Negative impoliteness |
3 |
|
4 |
Off-record impoliteness |
2 |
|
5 |
Withhold Politeness |
1 |
Table 3.1 Strategies of Impoliteness
-
3.2 Discussion
-
3.2.1 Bald On Record Impoliteness
-
Data 1
Deddy (speaker): “You really like making trouble!”
Denise (listener): “why?”
Deddy (speaker): “That's why so many people hate you!”
From the conversation above at 00:01:43 - 00:01:48, the sentence contained the strategy of Bald on Record Impoliteness. The speaker made the hearer uncomfortable. The speaker conveyed these words spontaneously, firmly, and to the point without thinking about the hearer’s feelings.
Data 2
Deddy (speaker): “If you give something, think about it first!”
Denise (listener): “You are unethical, if you are given something, you are grateful instead of complaining!”
From the conversation above at 00:01:56 - 00:02:41, the speaker and the listener used words that make both offended, the sentences issued by the two attack each other with each other. Words that issued clear, unambiguously, and spontaneously attack each other.
Data 3
Deddy(speaker): “I can't hear you, it's not clear what you're saying!”
Denise (listener): “I know you invited me to your event to insult me, right?”
Deddy (speaker): “who said he wanted to keep an eye on you!”
From the conversation above at 00:04:49 - 00:04:55, the listener felt he was not appreciated as a guest star in the event, because the speaker did not seem serious when talking to the listener that was why the listener directly said it.
Data 4
Denise (listener): “if I really don't have any work, you should guide me, don't say I don't deserve to be in the entertainment world!”
Deddy (speaker): “oh that’s right.”
From the conversation above at 00:26:00 - 00:26:10, the listener conveyed his frustration towards someone to the speaker here the listener stroked his opponent's face firmly, clearly, and unambiguously.
Data 5
Denise: on TV, you look small you know.
Deddy: your small TV maybe! Yes, everything on television must be small
Denise: oh yeah, don't be mad
From conversation above at 00:22:26-00:22:29, in this sentence contained a bald on record strategy where the sentence contained words that satirize the interlocutor.
The use of this positive impoliteness strategy designed to weaken the recipient's desire for positive faces. Positive rudeness is also the act of focusing on you and ignoring others, avoiding crowds, and being indifferent.
Data 1
Denise (listener): “You, as a senior, must guide me! Don’t say that in public!”
Deddy (speaker): “Ha-ha, I've been whispering but there's a microphone here so a lot of people are listening.”
From the conversation above at 00:04:59 - 00:05:05, the sentence spoken by the listener referred to as positive impoliteness because the listener felt uncomfortable by the speaker.
Data 2
Deddy (speaker): “You're not sad? they say you're like that?”
Denise (listener): “Why am I sad, I'm not what they say!”
From the conversation above at 00:09:19 - 00:09:53, this sentence was positive impoliteness because the listener stated that she did not care what people say about him. Because she did not feel like she was doing that.
Data 3
Deddy (speaker): “why the device doesn't fall on you”
Denise (listener): “you’re bad boy!”
From the conversation above at 00:18:44 - 00:18:50, this sentence was also referred to as positive politeness because the listener stated that she was not comfortable with what the speaker previously said to the listener.
Data 4
Deddy (speaker): “You don't think like that when you insult people?”
Denise (listener): “no, because I feel like they started it first”
From the conversation above at 00:26:22 - 00:26:26, in this sentence also called positive politeness because the listener stated that she did not care because the listener was not the one who started it first.
The use of negative politeness strategies was designed to damage the negative face of the other person. Negative face refers to the need not to be coerced or harassed by others but negative impoliteness can also be shown, teasing the opponent's face.
Data 1
Denise (listener): “maybe worried at first”
Deddy (speaker): “worried why?”
Denise (listener): “every day they call me a bitch in my social media comments”
From the conversation above at 00:09:11 – 00:09:20, there was a sentence that humiliates the listener, people underestimate and ridicule the listener it gone into negative impoliteness.
Data 2
Deddy (speaker): “Why are you looking for a fuss with the artist?”
Denise (listener): “if I make a fuss with a celebgram, there's no profit with me”
From the conversation above at 00:05:22 - 00:05:24, a sentence where the listeners looked down on someone and think they were not on the same level and that gone into the strategy of negative impoliteness.
Data 3
Denise (listener): “This is a problem with Indonesian artists. Telling people to make works, it's my turn to make works, they just laugh at me.”
Deddy (speaker): “uh I didn't ask you to make a masterpiece!”
From the conversation above at 00:30:01 - 00:30:24, the listener felt belittled because when the listener made work, but the work was not appreciated and even laughed at. From this, it can be said that the sentence was classified as negative impoliteness.
This strategy is an impoliteness that is intentionally not carried out or the absence of courtesy to work in the expected place.
Data 1
Denise: “You're wrong, if you give something, say thank you, not complain.”
Deddy: “you are wrong, look who you wrote then who did you give it to”
Denise: “technical error”
From the conversation above at 00:02:38 - 00:02:46, the listener was annoyed with the speaker because at that time the listener gave the speaker a flower but he did not thank him, instead complained because there was an error in printing the name but the listener had already said that it was a technical error from the sentence above was grouped as withhold politeness.
This strategy is used to aim at satirizing the listener's face.
Data 1
Denise: “what do you think?”
Deddy: “is that a song?”
Denise: “yes, song that's what I just sang”
From the conversation above at 00:28:37 - 00:28:38, it led to the strategy of Sarcasm or mock politeness because from these words it contained a satire that refered to the listener.
Data 2
Denis: (plays his song)
Deddy: Wait a minute, please turn off the song!
Denise: why did you turn it off?
Deddy: Autotunes clearly visible!
From the conversation above at 00:29:12 - 00:29:20, there were words that had strategic meaning sarcasm politeness, where the speaker had a purpose which is to insinuate the listener with the words he uttered.
In this research it can be concluded that impoliteness is an activity carried out for the purpose of damaging a person's face or identity and this study also analyzed insolence based on five strategies, namely bald on record, positive impoliteness, negative impoliteness, withhold politeness and sarcasm or mock politeness, where the strategy. This research used to analyze the insolence in the reality show entitled Deddy Corbuzier podcast on YouTube. From this research, five strategies were found in Deddy Corbuzier's podcast on YouTube. This research found 15 data examined from the type of impoliteness strategy and the results were divided into bald on record impoliteness (5 data), positive impoliteness (4 data), negative impoliteness (3 data), mock politeness or sarcasm (2 data), withhold politeness (1 data). The most common strategy used by Deddy Corbuzier podcast on YouTube was bald on record impoliteness.
References
Alias, A., & Yahaya, M. Q. A. (2019). Impoliteness strategies used by Malaysian netizens in response to the music videos of drag queen. International Journal of Social Science Research, 1(2).
C.Levinson, & Steven, P. B. &. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University pres.
Chintiabela, G. (2017). a pragmatic analysis of impoliteness strategies in carrie movie. Sastra Inggris - Quill, 6(1).
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. 20.
Dani, E. P. (2017). Impoliteness strategies used by male and female student in classroom interaction. Jurnal Mantik Penusa, 1(2).
Erza, S., & Hamzah. (2018). Impoliteness used by haters on instagram comments of male-female entertainers. E-Journal of English Language & Literature, 7(1).
Mara, V. S. (2018). Impoliteness strategies used by supporters and detractors of Ahok in their online comments by gender. E-Journal of English Language & Literature, 7(1).
Mirhosseini, M., Mardanshahi, M., & Dowlatabadi, H. (2017). Impoliteness strategies based on Culpaper’s model: an analysis of gender differences between two characters in the movie
mother. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 4(3).
Mohammed, H. N., & Abbas, N. F. (2015). Pragmatics of impoliteness and rudeness. American International Journal of Social Science, 4(6).
Sapir, E. (2004). Language an introduction to the study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace& Co.
Sijabat, M., & Ambalegin, A. (2020). The strategies of positive and negative politeness reflected in “ the last song” novel by Nicholas Sparks. Science Humanity Journal, 1(1).
Stockwell, P. (2002). Sociolinguistics: a resource book for students. Routledge.
Sudaryanto. (2015). Metode dan teknik analisis bahasa. Sanata Darma University Press.
Biography of Authors
|
© Al |
Agnes Novalia was born in Batam on August, 23th 1999. She is an undergraduate student in English Literature Departement Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities in Putera Batam University. Email: [email protected] |
|
O |
Ambalegin, S.Pd., M.Pd. is an active lecturer in English Literature Departement Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities in Putera Batam University. Email: [email protected] |
Discussion and feedback