THE USE OF HEDGES IN THE FIRST CLINTON-TRUMP PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE

Dina Mentari, English Literature Study Program, Faculty of Languages and Arts, Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia

Abstract


Abstract

This research investigated the use of hedges in the first Clinton-Trump presidential debate in 2016. The objectives of this research were 1) to identify the linguistic features of hedges, and 2) to scrutinize the functions of hedges. Since this research is explanatory in nature, the qualitative method is applied. The results revealed that seven linguistic features of hedges, i.e. modal auxiliary verb; modal lexical verb; adjectival, adverbial, and nominal modal phrases; approximators of degree, quantity, frequency and time; introductory phrase; “if” clause; and compound hedges were employed by both candidates. In addition, all of the five pragmatic functions of hedges, i.e. mitigating claims by showing some kind of uncertainty, expressing a lack of full commitment, searching for acceptance as well as expressing  politeness,  avoiding  direct  criticism  especially  when  predicting  future  events  or  consequences,  and requesting the listeners’ involvement were manifested.

 

Keywords: pragmatics, hedge, presidential debate

 

Abstrak

Penelitian ini menganalisis penggunaan hedges dalam debat kepresidenan pertama antara Clinton dan Trump pada tahun 2016. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah 1) untuk mengidentifikasi ciri linguistik penggunaan hedges, dan 2) untuk menginvestigasi fungsi penggunaan hedges. Metode yang digunakan adalah metode kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa tujuh macam ciri linguistik penggunaan hedges yaitu kata kerja bantu modal; kata kerja leksikal modal; perkiraan derajat, kuantitas, frekuensi, dan waktu; frasa modal ajektiva, adverbia, dan nominasi; frasa pengantar; klausa if; dan gabungan hedges. Semua fungsi pragmatis penggunaan hedges juga ditemukan dalam penelitian ini. Fungsi-fungsi tersebut adalah memitigasi klaim dengan menunjukkan ketidakpastian, menyatakan kurangnya komitmen, mencari persetujuan dari pendengar dan untuk menyatakan kesopanan, menghindari kritik langsung terutama ketika memprediksi kejadian atau konsekuensi di masa mendatang, dan meminta keterlibatan pendengar.

 

Kata kunci: pragmatik, hedges, debat kepresidenan

Full Text:

PDF

References


A. Printed Sources

Anggraini, K. 2014. ”The Use of Hedging in Political Discourse: The Third U.S. Presidential Debate Barack Obama vs. Mitt Romney in 2012”. Undergraduate Thesis. Bandung: Faculty of Languages and Arts Education, Indonesia University of Education.

Arifianto, Z. and Widyastuti. 2004. “Hedges Used in the Conversation between Obama and Bill Clinton at Clinton Global Initiative”. Language Horizon. Vol. 02, No. 03, pp. 45-51. Surabaya: State University of Surabaya.

Bloomer, M. and Bloomer, T. 2007. The Practice of Critical Discourse Analysis: An Introduction. London: Hodder Arnold.

Borda-Bahm, K. et. al. 2004. Arguments and Audience: Presenting Debates in Public Settings New York: The International Debate Education Association.

Clemen, G. 1997. “The Concept of Hedging: Origins, Approaches, and Definitions”. In R. Markkanen (Ed.). et. al., Hedging and Discourse. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co.

Creswell, J. W. 1998. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Traditions. London: Sage Publications. Cutting, J. 2002. Pragmatics and Discourse. New York: Routledge.

Fraser, B. 2010. “Pragmatic Competence: The Case of Hedging”. In G. Kaltenbock (Ed.) et. al., New Approaches to Hedging, pp. 15-34. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Freely, A.J. and Steinberg, D. L. 2009. Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making (12thed.). Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Holtgraves, T. M. 2008. Language as Social Action: Social Psychology and Language Use. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbowm Associates, Inc. Publisher.

Horn, L. R. and Ward, G. 2006. The Handbook of Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Jones, J. and Peccei, J.S. 2004. “Language and Politics”. In Thomas, L (Ed.). Language, Society and Power. New York: Routledge.

Leech, G. N. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman Group Limited.

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

Majeed, A. R. 2010. “Analysis of Grammatical Forms and Semantic Functions of Hedging in Political Discourse: American Presidential Debate”. Journal of College of Education for Women, 21, 3, pp. 750-770.

Mey, J. L. 2001. Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

-------1993. Pragmatics: An Introduction. New Jersey: Blackwell Publishing.

Moleong, L. J. 2010. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif (Edisi Revisi). Bamdung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.

-------2001. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: PT. Pemuda Rosdakarya.

Nunan, D. 1993. Introducing Discourse Analysis. London: Penguin Group.

Orwell, G. 1946. “Politics and the English Language”. Horizon, Vol. 13, Issue 76, pp. 252-265. London: Horizon.

Rabab’ah, G. and Rumman, R. A. 2015. “Hedging in Political Discourse: Evidence from the Speeches of King Abdullah II of Jordan”. Prague Journal of English Studies, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp.157-185.

Salager-Meyer, F. 1997. Í Think That Perhaps You Should: A Study of Hedges in Written ScientificDiscourse. In Tom Miller (Ed)., Functional Approaches to Written Text: Classroom Applications. Washington: English Language Programs.

Thomas, J. 1995. Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. London: Longman.

Vanderstoep, S. W. and Johnston, D. D. 2009. Research Method for Everyday Life: Blending Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Wahyuniati, I. 2017. “The Use of Hedges in the Second Obama-Romney Presidential Debate”. Undergraduate Thesis. Yogyakarta: Faculty of Languages and Arts, State University of Yogyakarta.

Wardaugh, R. 2006. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. New Jersey: Blackwell Publishing.

Widyaka, Z. F. 2017. “Penggunaan Hedging dalam Pidato Calon Presiden Amerika Serikat Tahun 2016”. Postgraduate Thesis. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University.

Yule, G. 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

B. Online Sources

CCC Foundation. “Helping and Modal Auxiliary Verbs”.

http://grammar.ccc.comment.edu/grammar/auxiliary. htm. Retrieved on 4th March 2018.

NPR. 2016. “Who Came Out Ahead In The First Clinton-Trump Debate?”. https://www.npr.org/2016/09/27/495539022/w ho-got-what-they-wanted-from-the-first-clinton-trump-debate. Retrieved on 4th March 2018.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.