FACTUAL AND EXISTENTIAL PRESUPPOSITIONS IN INTERACTION AMONG LECTURERS AND STUDENTS OF INDONESIAN LANGUAGE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT AT UNIVERSITAS SEBELAS MARET

Ria Dwi Puspita Sari; Sarwiji Suwandi; St. Y Slamet

doi:10.24036/humanus.v16i2.7975

FACTUAL AND EXISTENTIAL PRESUPPOSITIONS IN INTERACTION AMONG LECTURERS AND STUDENTS OF INDONESIAN LANGUAGE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT AT UNIVERSITAS SEBELAS MARET

Ria Dwi Puspita Sari⁽¹⁾, Sarwiji Suwandi⁽²⁾, St. Y Slamet⁽³⁾,
(1) Universitas Sebelas Maret

Indonesia
(2) Universitas Sebelas Maret

Indonesia
(3) Universitas Sebelas Maret

Iran, Islamic Republic of

Corresponding Author
Copyright (c) 2017 Humanus

DOI : https://doi.org/10.24036/humanus.v16i2.7975

Full Text:

Language : en

Abstract

The same presupposition in the interaction among lecturers and students become important in order to achieve the goals and create a conducive learning environment. This study aims to describe and explain factual and existential presuppositions in the interaction among lecturers and students of Indonesian Language Education, Sebelas Maret University. This research is a qualitative research by using pragmatic approach. Sources of data are in the form of speech events in the classroom, as well as informants ie lecturers and sixth-semester students. Data collection techniques are observations, interviews, listening without getting involved in the conversation, record and note. Validation of data use triangulation of data sources, methods and theories. The data analysis used extralingual equivalent technique with an advanced connecting and comparing technique. The results of this study indicate that the factual presuppositions are manifested in several contexts, they are (1) the lecturer apologies for coming late; (2) the lecturer give assessment; (3) the lecturer answer student's questions; (4) the lecturer explain the course material; (5) students answer questions; (6) students apologize for mistyped in lesson plan; (7) students describe material during microteaching practice. Existential awareness can be manifested in (1) the lecturer commented on the students' appearances microteaching practices; (2) the lecturer explained the material; (3) the lecturer suggest learning references; (4) the lecturer provide an example.

Keywords: factual presupposition, existential presupposition, classroom interaction, lecture

PRAANGGAPAN FAKTUAL DAN EKSISTENSIAL DALAM INTERAKSI DOSEN DAN MAHASISWA PENDIDIKAN BAHASA INDONESIA UNIVERSITAS SEBELAS MARET

Abstrak

Praanggapan yang sama dalam interaksi antara dosen dan mahasiswa menjadi hal penting agar tercapai tujuan dan terwujud suasana pembelajaran yang kondusif. Penelitian ini bertujuan mendeskripsikan dan menjelaskan praanggapan faktual dan eksistensial dalam interaksi antara dosen dan mahasiswa Pendidikan Bahasa Indonesia (PBI) Universitas Sebelas Maret (UNS). Penelitian ini adalah kualitatif dengan pendekatan pragmatik. Sumber data berupa peristiwa tutur dalam pembelajaran di kelas, serta informan yakni dosen dan mahasiswa PBI UNS. Teknik pengumpulan data adalah observasi, wawancara, simak bebas libat cakap, rekam dan catat. Validasi data menggunakan trianggulasi sumber data, metode dan teori. Analisis data menggunakan teknik padan ekstralingual dengan teknik lanjutan Hubung Banding Menyamakan (HBS). Hasil Penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa praanggapan faktual berwujud dalam beberapa konteks, yakni (1) dosen meminta maaf karena datang terlambat; (2) dosen memberikan nilai untuk jawaban mahasiswa; (3) dosen menjawab pertanyaan mahasiswa; (4) dosen menjelaskan materi perkuliahan; (5) mahasiswa menjawab pertanyaan dari dosen; (6) mahasiswa meminta maaf karena kesalahan di RPP; (7) mahasiswa menjelaskan materi saat praktik microteaching. Praanggapan eksistensial dapat berwujud dalam (1) dosen mengomentari penampilan mahasiswa ketika praktik microteaching: (2) dosen menjelaskan materi pada mahasiswa; (3) dosen menyarankan referensi belajar; (4) dosen memberikan contoh.

Kata Kunci: praanggapan faktual, praanggapan eksistensial, interaksi kelas, perkuliahan

Keywords

factual presupposition, existential presupposition, classroom interaction, lecture

References

Abry, T., Kaufman, S.E.R., & Curby, T.W. (2016). Are all program elements created equal? relations between specific social and emotional learning components and teacher–ttudent classroom interaction quality. Society for Prevention Research, 18 (2), 193–203.

Achmad, H.P & Abdullah, A. (2012). Linguistik umum. Jakarta: Erlangga

Asfina, R & Ovilia,R. (2016). Be proud of Indonesian cultural heritage richness and be alert of its preservation efforts in the global world. Humanus: Jurnal ilmiah Ilmu-ilmu Humaniora, XV (2), 195-206.

Bonyadi, A. & Samuel, M. (2011). Linguistic nature of presupposition in american andpersian newspaper editorials. International Journal of Linguistics, 3(1), 1-16.

Cui, Y. & Zhao, Y. (2014). A contextual Perspective on Presupposition, with Reference to Translation Studies. Journal Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics Plus, 43, 31-42.

Cummings, L. (2007). Pragmatik sebuah perspektif multidisipliner. Ed Abdul Syukur Ibrahim, Terj. Eti Setiawati dkk. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Grundy, P. (2000) Doing pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press.

Karmana. I. W. (2011). Strategi Pembelajaran, Kemampuan Akademik, Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah, dan Hasil Belajar Biologi. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 17(5), 378-386.

Khaleel, L.M. (2010). An analysis of presupposition triggers in english journalistic texts, J. Of College Of Education For Women, 21(2), 523-551.

Lee, Y, A. & Takahashi, A. (2011). Lesson plans and the contingency of classroom interactions. Human Studies, 34(2), 209–227.

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

Mahsun. (2006). Metode penelitian bahasa tahapan strategi, metode, dan tekniknya. Jakarta: Rajagrafindo Persada.

Meseth, W. & Proske, M. (2010). Mind the gap: holocaust education in Germany, between pedagogical intentions and classroom interactions. Prospects, 40(2). 201–222.

Ray, M & Biswas C. (2011). A study on ethnography of communication: a discourse analysis with hymes ‘speaking model’. Journal of Education and Practice, 2(6), 33-40.

Safar, M. (2016). Directive act in the transaction sale at central market of watampone. Humanus: Jurnal ilmiah Ilmu-ilmu Humaniora, XV (2), 167-176.

Subanji. (2015). Peningkatan pedagogical content knowledge guru matematika dan praktiknya dalam pembelajaran melalui model pelatihan teqip. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 21(1), 71-79.

Sugiyono. (2016). Memahami penelitian kualitatif. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Tainio, L. & Laine, A. (2015). Emotion work and affective stance in the mathematics classroom: the case of ire sequences in finnish classroom interaction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 89, 67–87.

Thamrin. M. (2010). Ekspresi tindak direktif dalam interaksi kelas bengkel jurusan teknik mesin Politeknik Negeri Malang. LITERA, 9(1), 91-101.

Yao, J. & Han, J. (2013). Bilingual beginning mandarin teachers’ classroom english in sydney schools: Linguistic implications for teacher education. Asia-Pacific Education Reseacher, 22(2), 127–136.

Yingfang, W. (2007). Analysis of presupposition and its function in advertisement, Canadian Social Science 3(4), 55-60.

Yule, G. (2006). Pragmatik. terj. indah fajar wahyuni.Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Zare, J, Abbaspour, E & Nia M.R. (2012). Presupposition trigger-a comparative analysis of broadcast news discourse. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(3), 734-743.