CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background

The objective of the English teaching program is to equip students with the

four basic language skill, listening, speaking, reading, and writing. To achieve the

objective, it is necessary to consider the English discourse anlysis and its

contribution to the teaching of English.

The practical treatment of Enlish discourse analysis will help us attain the

competence of perception and production of English in real use, both in the

classroom and out of it.

The practical discussion cover four basic concept, they are:

1. The basic concept of discourse in relation to its theoritical linguistic

background.

2. The relation between discourse analysis concept and language, particulary

second and first language teching- learning activities.

3. The relation between discourse and language function in their social

contexts

4. The application of the theoritical principles and practical procedures to the

various kind of discourse.

English is taught from yunior high school up to university that is known as

tertiarry level as compulsory subject. This means that the students have had

opportunities to learn English for many years and some still beyond informal

classes, but they still perform low ability in analyzing it. Some researches have

Page | 1

found that English students that dedicated much time foer English could not

analyze English discourse as well as expected. It means that students learning out

come is still considered as unsecsessfull teaching of English in Indonesia

So, in this case, it is important to discuss the practical aspect of discourse.

The practical aspect of discourse will make us competent enough to pick up some

example of discourse from the real life around us and analyze systimatically. We

have, of course, to apply the teoritical principle we have learned from the

teoritical treatment of discourse.

The practical experiences that stand on the background of their theoritical

basis will become very significant for us because in this special mode of human

interaction, we must need to comprehended perfectly when we communicate wth

our fellow native speakers or foreign counterparts. Also we must need to catch

clearly and correctly when somebody means something to us with his his

utterence or discourse.

English teachers have many handicaps. One of them is the students low

ability in English discourse analysis. It means that the mastery of English

discourse analysis needs much time to practice it. Realizing such condition in

English class, English teachers should be more creatively look for the best way for

communicative activities that urge and motivate the students to improve their

ability to master English discourse.

We are not supposed to forget our prospective profession. In this sphere, a

touch from concept of discourse in the study of language teaching learning

Page | 2

processes is very significant. This is why a discussion on this writing becomes

inevitable. Ashort and compact deal with it organized a bit early.

This study, with the name “ discourse analysis of an English narrative

discourse”, is a final assigment of discourse analysis lecture. It has a very close

relationship to some courses. They are:

1. Introduction to linguistics

2. Sosiolinguistics

3. Advance listening

4. Advance speaking

5. Advance reading

6. Advance writing

7. Cross-culture understanding

English language teaching should be targeted at developing students’ ability to

understans and express meanings. In understanding and expressing meaning of

course use the form of linguistic units. The forms of linguistic units may have

meaning only if they meet certain rules.

This study will lead us to the ability of identifying the main characteristics of a

discourse. Beside, it will also gves us the capability of identifying the similarities

and dissimilarties between discourse as a structured ofunit and a unit consisting of

ununfied sentences in terms of those main characteristis.

A discourse is claimed to be unit of language in a real

communication( Widiati, et. Al 2006). In connection with it, this study will also

Page | 3

provide us with a chance to observe how a discourse plays its important role in the

reals verbal communication.

In using sentences in speaking and writing, we are concerned with language

use at the discouse level which involve form, meaning, and language function.

Thus, language learning would be meaningfull if the students learn expression at

the discourse level as opposed to words in isolation. In using sentences in speaking

and writing, the mastery of structure and focabulary are very important to support

the process of the meaningfulness of the English communication. Thus, the mastery

of using sentences in speaking and writing must take discourse analysis into

consideration.

The study of discourse lies on the bacground of the broarde field of the study

of language, i.e. theoritical linguistics. To achieve a well-grounded compregension

of this study, we would better start from the overview of language.

Language is a system of signs (Chaer;1994). The key word in this

identifcation is the term sign. A sign is understood as something that stands for

something. The first something is the formal aspect of sign,whereas the second one

is the meaning aspect.

The professional English teacher has to prossess the adequacy of system of

signs competence in English. He should be able to use the result of linguistic

studies into the language teaching models. Some of the result linguistic studies talk

about English discourse analysis.

In this case, it is important to consider the formal aspect of sign. The formal

aspect is physical so that we will have to use our sensories to sense it. We use our

Page | 4

ayes if it is visual, our ears if auditive, our feelings if tactile, and our nose if

elfactory,

It is also important to consider the meaning aspect of signs. The meaning

aspect is psychological. It is an image of thing, or a state, or an activity that

underlies the formal aspect. It is also social in the sense that the relation between

the formal aspect and its underlying meaning is determined by the agreement from

the society.

In linguistic studies we study on phonems, syllable, morphemes, allomorph,

lexicon, words, phrases, clauses, sentences, and discourse. (Ba’dulu 2003 ) they are

related to the cases of discourse analysis. In the proficiency of discource analysis

garantees to produce sentences in speaking and wrting.

Bse on the desccription above, the writer wants to caarry out a study entitled

The Discourse Analysis of anEnglish Narrative Discourse.

B. Problem Statement

Based on the background above, the writer formulated the research question as

follow:

1. How English narrative discourse is analyzed based on Thurman chart.

2. Are there anykinds of information in the English narrative discourse.

C. Objective of the Research

The objective of this reseach are as follows:

1. To discribe The English narrative discourse based on Thurman chart.

2. To discribe that kind of information in the English narrative discourse.

Page | 5

D. Significance of the Research

The result of the research is expected to give:

1. The input to language teachers, especially English teachers, in adding their

comprehension on one of the linguistics features, that is in this case

English narrative discourse baesd on the Thurman chart.

2. The input to the English instuctor to create their course in leading the

English teacher training.

3. The concept of English narrative discourse based on the Thurman chart as

well as its contibution to English teaching

4. The input for further reseaches related to English discourse analysis.

Page | 6

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

A. Theoretical Framework

1. The Meaning of Discourse Analysis

According to Keith Johnson and Helen (1999:99-105) cited in Ba’dulu

(2007), discouse analysis is the study of how streches of language used in

communication assume meaning, purpose and unity for their users: the quality of

coherence. There is now a general consensus that coherence doesn’t derivr

solely from the linguistic forms and propositional content of a text, though these

may contribute to it. Coherencederives from an interaction of text with given

participants, and is thus not an absolute property, but relative to context. Context

includes participants’ knowledge and perception of paralangue, other text, the

situation, the culture, the world in general and role, intensions and relationships

of participants Early attempts to find linguistic rule operating across sentences

boundaries, or to create text grammars specifying rules for generating possible

sequences of propositionhave generally been replaced or supplemented by

theories and techniques allowing the examination for text in context. Prominent

among such theories and techniques are functional analysis, Pragmatic theories

of speech acts and converational principles, conversatio analysis, schema

theories, genre theory and critical discourse analysis.

Discourse may be define as language that is doing some job in some

context, i.e. in some contextof social situation (Nuryanto, 20006). Thus,

discourse anlysis is essential attempt to analyze and describe how language

Page | 7

performs its role in various contexts of social situation, i.e. in various social

activities. As the role of language cannot be separated from its context of social

situation.

There are a number of different approches to discourse analysis and there

is often some of disagreement and confusion about the meaning of both terms “

discourse” and “ discourse analysis”. The approach describe above may be

characterized as the British- American School, and has been the most significant

in applied linguistics and language teaching. It is, broadly speaking, an approach

which has merge from detailed study of language. Confonted with the absence of

lingustic or semantic explanations for coherence, it has sought help from other

diciplines. Historiclly, it has moved from consideration of most local textual

phenomena, such as cohesion, towards more global concepts such schemata and

genre.

From the difinition of discourse as language doing some job in some

context ( of social situation) we can draw the conclution that a discourse is a of

language use that fulfills a certain fuction in acertain social activity. In

practically of all our social activities we involve language to fulfill a certain

function. In performing such social activities as education, bussiness

transections, scientifie investigation, religious services, or even in playing games

we have to use language. Each of these social activities can be accomplished

only by involving language.

Page | 8

2. Historical Background of Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis is both and old and a new dicipline. Its origin can be

traced back in the study of language, public speech, and literature more than 2000

years ago (Ba’dulu.2007). One major historical undoubtly classical rhethoric, the

art of good speaking. Whereas the gramatical antecedent of linguistic, was

concened with the normative rules correct language use, its sister dicipline of

rhetorica dealt with the concept for the planning, organization, specific operatons,

and performances of public speech in political and legal settings. Its crucial

concern, therefore, was persuasive effectiveness. In this sense, classical rhetoric

both anticipates contemporary stylistic and structural analysis of discourse and

contain intuitive cognitive and social psychlogical notions about memory

organization and attitude change in communicative contest.

Discourse in communicative contest implieds that discourse is primarily

language; however, it is language that exist independently, apart from the daily

life of its speakers. Discourse is language that is functional in some context of

social activity. Indeed, discourse may be viewed as the VERBAL. EXPRESSION

OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY

Whereas the 1960s had brought various scattered attempts to apply

semiotic or linguistic methodes to the study of texts and communicative events,

the early 1970s say the publication of the first monographs and collections wholly

and explicitly daling with systimatic discourse analysis as an independent

orientation or research within and across several diciplines.

Page | 9

3. Discourse-Level Structure

According to Cristal (1980) cited in Ba’dulu (2007 ) discourse is a term in

linguistic to refer to a countinous stretch of ( especially spoken) language larger

than a sentences- but within this broard notion, seveal different applictions may be

found. At this most general, a discourse is a behavioral unit which has a pre-

theoritical status in linguistic; it is a set of uttarances which constitute any

recognizable speech events (viz. Reference being made to its linguistic structuring

if any); e.g. a conversation. A joke, a sermon, an interview. A clasification of

discourse functions, with particular refrence to type of subject – matter, the

situation, and behavior of the speaker, is often carried out in sociolinguistic

studies ( of permitive societies in particular), e.g.,distinguishing dialogues, or

morespecially, oratory, ritual, insults, narrative, and so on. In recent years, several

linguistic have attempted to discover linguistic regularities in discourse (discourse

analysis), using gramatical, phonological, and semantic criteria ( e.g. cohesion,

anaphora, inter- sentences connectivity ). It is now plain that there exist important

linguistic dependences between sentences, but it is less clear how far these

dependences between sentences are systimatic to anable linguistic units higher

than the sentences to be estabilished.

Some linguistics would like to use the termtext and discourse

intechangeble. Some use text consistenly including the idea of discpurse. Some

others would like to make distiction between text and discourse,. Cook(1989),

forinstance defines a discourse” stretch of language precieved to meaningful,

unified, and purposive.

Page | 10

Longacre (1981 ) cited in Ba’dulu (2007) state that the term” discourse” as

currently used, covers two areas of linguistic concern: the analysis of dialogue

especially of live conversation- and the analysis monologue. In the parlance of

many, discourse covers the former, and with at least some of us, discourse covers

thel latter. Actually, the two matters- analysis of monologue are sepeable but

related concerns. Dialogue analysis can properly be applied to both.

4. Discourse Typology in National and Surface Stuctures

We can classify all possible discourses according to two basic parameter:

Contingent temporal succession and Agent orientation. Contngent temporal

succession ( hanceforth contingent conteporal) refers to a framework of temporal

succession in which some ( often most) of the events of doings are contingent on

previous events or doings. Agent orientation refers to orientation towards agents

with at least a partial identity of agents refrence running through the discourse.

These two prameters intersect so as to give us a four way classification of

discourse type; narrative discourse ( how to do it, how it was done, how it takes

place) is in respect to contingent succession ( the steps of a procedure are orderd)

but minus in respect to the agent orientation ( attention is on what is done, or

made, not on who does it). Behavioral discourse ( a broard category including

exhortation, eulogy and political speeches of candidates) is minus in regard

contingent succession, but plus in regard to agent orientation ( it deals with how

people did or should behave). Expository discourse in minus in respect to both

parmeters.

Page | 11

For the purposes of surface stuctute classification, the two parameters can

be redifined. Thus, rather than speaking in the abstract of contingent succession,

we can speak more concretly of chronological linkage as characteristics of all sort

of narrative and procedural discourse, but non- characteristics of behavioral and

expository discourse which have instead logical( including topical) linkage.

Likewise, we can look to narrative and behavioral discourse for lines of agent

refrence( or, to speak more broadly). Participant refrence while in procediral and

expository discourse this feature is absent. ( Procedural discourse is goal or

activity focused, while expository discourse has theme rather than participants)

5. Narrative Discourse

Bal ( 1997) cited in Fairclough(2003 ) approaches the analysis of narrative

in terms of an anlysitical distiction between: The faula, story ( this distiction

originates in Russian formalism). And narrative text. The fabula is the material or

content that is worked into a story, a series of logically and chronologically

related events. The story is a fabula that is presented in a certain manner, this

involves for instance the arrangement of events in in asequence which can be

different from their actual chronological order, providing the social agents of

actual events with distict traits which transform them into characters and

focalizing the story in terms of partcular points of view. The same stoy can appear

in a range of narrative text, texts in which a narrator realated the story in particular

medium for instance a story in coversation, a radio news story, a documentary, or

a film.

Page | 12

Narrative discourse is the easiest discourse to acquire. A narrative

discourse is a stotry told to entertain the listeners, and sometimes to teach social

mores ( Ba’dulu, 2007)

There are at least three varieties of narrative discourse. The easiest one to

find is legendary narratives, folktales told; tales told so often that everyone known

them. The second kind of narrative, and the most valuable kind of, is the narration

of past events in the speaker’s life or family. Here we get account of the time I

(someone) get lost or hurt badly, or got denounced before the law; what happened

when we moved o got married, or went to school, etc. The third kind of narrative

is an episodic narrative; the story of a tip, for example, where there is not one

ovearall plot but a series of scenes, each with descriptive materal and a few

events. After one scene, the action goes on another palced and another scene

Contenwise, narrative discourse do not consist of only narratio. Most

culture like to have the narration broken up by quoted convesation. The array of a

culture lof a narrative discourse is follow:

Narrative discourse = + Title + Aperture: sent/par/cl + stage:

Par/dise/sent + Narrative episode: par/ dise/sent +

Narrative peak: par/disc/sent + Narrative Post Peak:

Par/ disc/sent + Closure: sent/par + Finis: cl/sent

phr.

: Read: A narrative discourse consist of the opotional title shot filled by a clause,

sentence, or phrase followed by the optional aperture slot filled by sentence,

paragraph, or clause, the optional stage slot filled by a paragraph, discourse, or

Page | 13

sentence, the obligatory narrative peak slot filled by paragraph, discourse, or

sentence, the optional closure slot filled by a sentence or paragrph, and the

optional finish slot filled by aclause, sentence, or phrase.

6. Paragraph-Level Structures

A paragraph is a cluster of sentences held together by a single

theme or setting and organized according to some pattern ( Ba’dulu, 2007). Or,

looking at a paragraph, from the larger perspective of discourse level, it is a small

chink of discourse that function as a single consituent, Paragraph in written

English are usually set up on ortographfic- appereance criteria as such as on

structure. In fact, some writers can write without forming structurally well-formed

paragraph, and have their text broken into paragraphs two or three inches a long,

rather arbitrarily.

Paragrpah boundaries in narrative discourse are marked by a change of

activity, time, place, and cast of participants. They may be marked also by special

sentence introducers, recapitulation, sentence time margin, location margins, and

sentence topics. Some times, in the absence of clear gramatical signals, paragraph

boundaries have to be ditermined by the patterens of inter sentence relationship,

the scripts or frame of paragraph structure.

7. Narrative Paragraph

Narrative paragrphs are similar to narrative discourse and to the narrative

sequence sentence. They encode sequences of events in narrative time ordering.

The stucture of a narrative paragraph is given below:

Page | 14

Narrative paragraph = + setting sent/ par + buildup(s): sent/par + buildup-

p: sent/par + terminus: sent/ par

Read: A narrative paragraph consist of the optional setting slot filled by a sentence

of paragraph followed by the obligatory buildup(s) slot filled by a sentence or

paragraph, the obligatory buildup- peak slot filled by a sentence or paragraph, and

the optional terminus slot filled by a sentence or paragraph.

The component of setting is usually a sentence or paragraph containing

descriptive clauses, action clauses, existence clauses and the like. The exponent of

the setting is not a pat of the story line and doesn’t encode any action of the

narrative. The exponent of the buildups are narrative or sentence or compound,

alternative, or repetation sentences or paragraphs. They endoce events in the story

line. Buildup-p is the climatic, peak bulidup. Since it is on paragraph level, it is ot

as high a climax as in the climax at a narrative discourse. The teminus is

conclution to the paragraph and is usually brief or absent. It encode evaluation

material, subsequent secondary events.

Quatation sentences may expound narrative build- ups. Such quotation

sentence may be quite important an narrative structure, or important to narrative

style.

In narrative paragraph, some of the build-ups may be expounded by an

explanatory paragraph. The text of explanatory paragraph would expound the

buildup by itself, but it has some explonatory sentence following it, so the would-

be exponent of the buildup plus the explanatory sentence constitute an explanatory

paragaph that expounds the buildup. And some times, an exposition tagmeme in

Page | 15

an explanatory paragraph is expounded by a narrative parragraph which served to

reinforce the text of the paragraph.

8. Events and Participants in Discourse

To analyze discourse from a linguistic point of view reuires a starting

point. The work of Gleason and his group has provided such an entering wedge.

The distiction among different kinds of information is most obvious in narrative

discourse as opposed to the procedures, explanation, exhortations of Longacre’s

typology. Procedure, which like narrative are based on the nation of temporal

sequence, are the next most productive.

a. Events

The first distiction made in the analysis of discourse events and non

events. In Garner, the halfback, made six yard aaround end we are told two kinds

of things: a particular persson is named Garner and is a halfback( neither of which

is an event). Some times entire paragraph are devoted to non- events, as in the

description of a scane or a person. Gleason, who pionered in explaining the

difference between events and non events, pointed out that different languages

approach the time sequences between neigboring events in different ways. In

Kate, for example, events that are continguous in time are distinguished from

those that are separated by lapse may be long or short; but if it is noticable in

terms of the steam of notion of the narrative, it must be mentioned.

We can envinsion logical possibilities for temporal relation between two

events that are reported as a siquence. If we take A as the earlier of the two events

and B as the later, we can distinguish several cases: A finishes significantly long

Page | 16

before B begins. A finishes by the time B begins, A finishes just as B begins, and

A does not finish by the time B begins. In the last case we mibht have to spcify

further whether A ends during B, A ends when B ends or A contains all of B and

continues on after B is finished.

Robert Litteral applied the matematical notion of topology the linguistic

treatment of time. He notes first that when time is handled by language, it is

measured only rarely. It is also characteristic of the linguistic handling of time that

the boundaries between events ae rarely clear cut. Litteral takes the events as su-

bas for the topology of the time line. This means that each events that is in the

narrative is presented by an open set are a base for the topology that expresses the

linguistic organization of time.

Another kind of sequences between events is what Roland Husman has

characterized as tigh vs. In Angaataha, a language of the eastern Highlands of

Papua New Guinea, Huisman reported two kinds of sequencing temporal and

logical ech of which may be tigh or loose. The time sequence of a narrative is

rarely expressed as though events simply followed one another like beads on

astring. Instead, There is usually a grouping of events into smaller sequences; then

each of these smaller sequence as unit is put together with pther sub- sequences

from the herarchical groupng of linguistic elements, Litteral has eliminated the

nation of temporal sequences as one of several rhetorical relations. Instead he has

moved temporal sequences into the area of refrences.

Another grouping principle that partition events in a single temporal

sequence could called the principle of common orientation. A sequence of events

Page | 17

in distinguish from a later part of the same time sequence in that all the actions in

each part involve uniform relation among their participants. Beside common

setting and orientation, some event sequences appear to be grouped together by

the law that relate to plot structures. Not all events, or course, are sequence.

Language is capable of communicating of fork action as in you take the high road

and I’ll take the law road, which is not a descriptive of sequence of event. In other

cases a language may mark certain stretch within which sequence is irrelevant.

b. Participants

The information that identifies the participants in an event not only links

participants to event, but also links one mention of a participant with other

mention of the same participants. It obeys rule of its own in addition to combining

wit event information.

The role ranking gives a scale of relative involvement in an action, from

deliberate involvement expressed by the agent, to being acted upon in the patient

and instrument, and from there on down to zero involvement. This ranking might

make it possible to divide the things mentioned in a text into those that never

appear in the more active semantic role, the props, and those that do, the

participants. The distinction between participants and props does seem to be

related to plot, possibly in the sense just mentioned. That is, even if activity is not

relative to the role system as such, yet it take place.

A forth possibility for distinguishing between participant and props is

suggested by the study of orientation system. If we assume that changes in the

orientation of participants to ward sections are systematic than any elements that

Page | 18

would break the regularity of orientation patterns if considered as participants are

probably props. This notion combines two things; the relative involvement in the

more comprehensive categories, and relative involvement in the more

comprehensive categories of plot.

Reference to whom and what is involved in an event is particularly

independent of the means used to identify each referent. Participants are referred

to as individuals or groups. Reference to individuals presents relatively few

problems. Group reference, on the other hand, take a number of forms. Sometimes

reference shift during the course of a text. There are three kind of shift:

introduction and deletion. recombination, and scope change. Introduction and

deletion involve expanding and contracting reference by adding or subtracting

individuals from a group.

Where there is a shift in the spatial view point from which events are

reported there may also be a shift reference. When a narrator has been speaking as

though he was omniscient and knows everything that goes on both inside and

outside the heads of the participants, he may shift, for example, to presenting

events as a certain one of the participants sees them, or vice versa. When he shifts,

what at first he had treated as reference to individuals may change to reference to

groups or one pattern of grouping may be replaced by another through margin and

splitting.

The basic problems in identification are first, establishing reference

sufficiently well that the hearer is clear about who is being talked about, and

Page | 19

second, informing or maintaining it sufficiently well to keep the hearer from

becoming confused.

From this point of view of discourse studies the striking thing about the

identification information that goes with participants in events is the different

grammatical forms that are used to communicate that different kind of

information. Whereas events tend to be communicated by independent verbs in

most languages, transform from underlying predicate whose role sets include

nearly anything, identification tend to involve the embedding of sentences.

Identification is also maintained through the use of anaphoric elements.

Pronouns are common of maintaining identification. How efficient they

are depends on the richness of categories off the categories of appropriateness of

reference that are available within the pronominal system. Identification reference

is closely enough related to pronouns that the two are sometimes discussed

together. From the point of view identification, however, it is important to notice

that the categories that appropriateness of reference for inflectional system are

never more finely divided than those of the pronouns with which they may stand

in cross reference.

9. Non-Event in Discourse

a. Setting

Where, when, and under what circumstance take place a separate kind of

information constitute called setting. Setting is important in the study of discourse

not only because it characteristically involve distinctive grammatical construction

Page | 20

like locative, but also because it is a common basis for segmentation of sequential

text into their component part.

It is tricky to distinguish setting from the range role. Either may, for example,

take the form of a locative like a prepositional phrase. One text that seems to work

in a number of languages is the test of spare ability

Setting in space is frequently distinguished from settings in time. All

languages probably have the capability for defining a spatial setting by

description. Spatial setting may redefined during the course of a text either by

describing where each new setting is located, as seems normal in English, or by a

relative redefinition that takes the most recent settings as its point of departure.

The scope of a spatial setting may be broad or narrow.

Settings in time are equally important. Temporal properties inherent in

particular action. Whether an action follow it predecessor immediately or after a

lapse, whether its effects are said to persist, all are dependent of general time

frame work of narrative, just as the place where as action happens is independent

of those elements of location ( rang) that are an integral part of the definition of

the action.

Descriptive definition of time usually with reference to some kind of calendar

reference.

Another kind of time definition makes use of reference to memorable events.

This can shade off into a calendar system of its own in the case of dynastic or

definitions of years by outstanding events.

Page | 21

b. Background

Some of information in narrative is not part of the narrative themselves,

but stand outside them and clarifies them. Event, participant, and setting are

normally the primary components of narrative, while explanation and comments

about what happens have a secondary role that may be reflected in the use of

grammatical patters

Much of the secondary information that is used to clarify a narrative

(called background for convenience, even though, the form may be misleading for

non- consequential texts when explanatory information could be thought of as

being the foreground) has a logical sounding structure, frequently tied together

with words like because and there. It is an attempt to explain. It has this

explanatory from even when the logic in it invalid or when it falls a short of really

explaining what it purports to explain. Explanations, either as secondary part of

narrative or as a central theme of text, often involve premises that the speaker

feels are generally accepted and there for can be left unsaid. Some times what is

unstated brings concentrations to linguists from another culture who is not yet in a

position to supply the missing pieces of the argument

The handling the structure of explanations actually sheds light on the

depth and sensitivity of the speaker’s of who hear estimate who hearer is. Because

even in cultures where nearly all parts of an explanation or argument are assumed,

if the hearer make it sufficiently clear that he doesn’t follow, most speakers will

restate themselves in an attempt to make up for his lack of understanding. This is

less likely o hold in relatively homogeneous and isolated cultures, where many of

Page | 22

life’s activities depend upon the assumption that everyone shares the same fund of

information.

c. Evaluation

Not only do speakers report the state of the word: they also tell they feel

about it. The addition internal feeling to other information (which is not the same

as a simple reporting of what one’s internal feeling are ) involves specific modes

of linguistic expression.

Often evaluation are imputed to hearer or to the other people referred to in

the discourse. Any participant in a discourse can be assumed to have his own

opinion of things, and the speaker may feel that he knows what those opinions are

sufficiently well to include them. There is, however, a restriction that is pointed

out in manuals of short story writing.

Another kind of evaluation is that of the culture within which the speaker

is speaking, the conversation of the society he represents. Not everything in a

discourse has to be evaluated. For this reason, it is useful to recognize that scope

of an evaluation statement. It may be global, embracing an entire discourse, if so,

it is likely to be found either at he beginning as an introductory statement that tells

why the rest of the discourse is being told, or at the end as a moral to be story of

the tag line in table. Evaluation bring the hearer more closely into the narrative;

they communicate information about feelings to him that goes beyond the bare

cognitive structure of what happened or what deduction is to be made. In

conversation, and even monologues, the hearer may be pressed to give his own

evaluation: what do you suppose they took that?

Page | 23

Evaluative information shades off into background or even into setting in

cases where it serves to build up the psychological tone of series of events.

d. Collateral

Some information in narrative, instead of telling what did happen, tells

what did not happen. It ranges over possible events and in so doing sets off what

actually does happen against what might have happened.

Collateral information, simply stated, relates non-events, By providing a

range of no-events that might take place. It heightens the significance of the real

events.

The information about what actually does happen, then, may take several

forms. If none of the collateral expressions give what really happened as one of

the alternatives it must be stated as distinct event. If it was mentioned ahead of

time, however, then it is not necessary to repeat the content that was mentioned as

part of the collateral, but only to affirm which of the possibilities took place.

10. The Speaker and Hearer in Discourse

Both the form and the content of any discourse are influenced by who is

speaking and who is listening. The speaker-hearer-situation factors can be

represented in linguistic theory of performative information

There are, however, restrictions on per formative utterances. They must be

in the first person and present tense. Certain per formative are quite common and

are free of special limitation on their use. The recognition of implicit per

formatives behind commands, question, and statements, as well as explicit per

formatives, paves the way for linguistic handling of situational factors in

Page | 24

discourse. Specially, it gives a place in linguistic analysis for what are

conventionally known as deictic (pointing) elements like” this” and “that” or

“here” and “ there”, and for person categories like ”one” and “ you”.

In the case of persons ( and for that matter, object ) the recognition of the

speaker-hearer axis in communication is the basis for assignment of person

categories. This seems trivial or obvious for a discourse that has a single per

formative. Per formative are pertinent in the identification of participants in other

cases besides direct discourse, but in a different way. Indirect discourse, person

assignments are taken from some per formative more remote than the one that

dominates the statement immediately; that is, the one that constitutes the nearest

verb saying that dominates direct discourse higher up the three of questions. This

show up if we paraphrase the example just given in such a way as to show the per

formative elements.

In addition to the identification that relates to performatives, the there are

other less easily recognizable factors whose effect can be seen in the outer from of

language and that find their place in the conceptual scheme of linguistics by virtue

of their relation to per formative. Here, first of all, is where the speaker’s entire

image of himself as a person is accessible to the linguistic system. The per

formative element not only serves to relate persons to the discourse, but also sets

the zero point for time reference.

Page | 25

11. Kinds of Information in Discourse

a. A Work Sheet

The idea of different kind of information in a text is ore easily put to use if

there can be a display of text that lay out each kind of information in a way that

can be seen at glance.

Event

Figure. 11. 1. A Blank Thurman Chart

The vertical columns on the chart correspond to the various kinds of

information distinguished in the text: events, identifications setting, background

( which to save space includes both explanations and evaluation), collateral, and

per formative. To keep the chart from being crowded, we can use the conversation

that information of particular kind begins under the corresponding heading, but

Page | 26

may be carried as far to the right as needed; this is more convenient that trying to

squeeze everything into narrow vertical columns

The parallel vertical lines are for the participant, one line per participant.

For each event in line is drawn from the lexical elements that represent the event

to the vertical lines that represent the participants in the event. Where

identification is given for the participant lines are also drawn from the other side

to show which identification belongs with which participant.

The most comfortable working format is to match a Thurman chart with a

page of text. The text is written out, double spaced, at about one clause per line.

Some clause more than one line, and it may not be clear exactly what clause is

until after the analysis is finished; but in general the clause is convenient chunk to

work with. The next page is fastened to the Thurman chart with the text on the left

and the chart on the right.

b. Span Analysis

From the Thurman chart is possible to go on to another level of abstraction

further removed the text itself, namely the plotting of spans. Spans represent

stretches of text within which there is some kind of uniformity. Certain kind of

uniformity have already tured out to be useful for characterizing discourse

structure in several languages.

If we take a page and write clause numbers on the Thurman chart, though

more closely spaced, we have a framework for a plot of the spans in a text. Each

span is represented by a vertical line, Sometime broken by a horizontal line or

Page | 27

interspersed by symbols. This representation makes it possible to put many spans

on a single page so that they can be compared with one another.

Setting spans are the most obvious ones for to look for in narratives. One

vertical line indicates all the actions that take place in a single spatial location, and

another vertical line indicates all the actions that take place in a single time

sequence. A horizontal line that shows where a spans is broken is useful for

matching spans across the page, If a time index back up to repeat a sequence. Or if

there is a resetting of the time of an action in terms of another hour o day, this

starts a new time span.

B. Conceptual Framework

Discourse analysis is the study of how stretch of language used in

communication meaning, purpose and unity for their users: the quality of

coherence. Whereas discourse itself may be defined as language that is doing

some job in some context, i.e., in some context of social situation. Discourse in

communicative context implies that discourse is primarily language; however, it is

not language that exist independently, apart from the daily life of its speakers.

Discourse is term in linguistic to revert a continuous stretch of ( especially

spoken) language larger than a sentence- but within this broad nation, several

different applications may be found.

A narrative, discourse is a story told to entertain the listeners, and

sometimes to teach social mores. Paragraph boundaries in narrative discourse are

marked by change of activity, time, place, and cast of participants.

Page | 28

A narrative discourse consist of seven important components: events,

identification, setting, background (which to save space includes both

explanations and evaluation), collateral, and per formative.

The first distinction made in the analysis of discourse events and no-

events. The information that identifies the participants in an event not only link

participants to event, but also links one mention of participants with other mention

of the same participants. From the point of view of discourse studies the striking

thing about thing about the identification information that goes with participations

in events is the different grammatical form that are used to communicate the

different kinds of information.

Where, when, and under what circumstance called setting. The component

of the setting is usually a sentence or paragraph containing descriptive clauses,

existence clauses and the like.

Background is some of information in narrative which is not part of the

narratives themselves, but stands outside them and clarifies them.

Often evaluation are imputed to the hearer or to the other people referred

to in the discourse. Another kind of evaluation is that of the culture within which

the speaker is speaking, the conversation of the society he represents.

Some information in narrative, instead of telling what did happen.

Collateral information, simply stated, relates non-events to events.

Both the form and the content of any discourse are influenced by who is

speaking and who is listening. The speaker-hearer-situation factors can be

represented in linguistic theory of performative information.

Page | 29

The idea of different kind of information in narrative text is more easily

put to use if there can be display of text that lays out each kind of information in a

way that can be seen at a glance. From the Thurman chart it is possible to go on to

another level of abstraction further removed from the text itself, namely the

plotting of spans.

The conceptual framework of this research as follows:

Page | 30

Narrative Discourse(Text/written Form

Analyzing the Main Part of the Story

Analyzing Kinds of Information in the text through a work sheet

(Thurman Chart)

Analyzing the Structure of the text

CHAPTER III

METHOD OF THE RESEARCH

A. Research Design

The design of this research uses qualitative research (Marshal and

Rosman, 1995). Qualitative research method have become increasingly important

modes of inquire for the social science and applied field.

Qualitative research is the collection data, analysis, and interpretation

of comprehensive narrative and visual data in order to gain insight into a

particular phenomenon of interest.

The purpose of qualitative research are to analyze feel of story with

finding or to know setting background, event, collateral, performative, evaluation

and to identify dependent clause and independent clause

B. Sources of Data

Talking about source of data, this data is taken from the book of More

Favourite Stories from Indonesia, that is the story of The Clever Pottala. The

author this book is Marguerite Siek and the second printing in 2005, and

published by PT. Rosda Jayaputra .

C. Data collection

The procedures of collecting data in this research is observation the

book where the writer look for the book that is suitable to be analyzed and making

Page | 31

fieldwork. Fieldwork includes field note, the writer will collect writing several

note that relate to this analyzing, besides, the book that relate to this analyzing.

D. Data analysis

Data is taken from the story of The Clever Pottala by observation. The

data is analyzed based on the story, to find or to know dependent clause and

independent clause in sentence, setting, background, evaluation, event, collateral

and performative.

Page | 32

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

A. Findings

1. The Narrative Text

The Clever Pottala

Once upon a time there was a headman lent a sum of money to a peasant

called Pottala. When the time came to return the money, the headman came to

visit Pottala and asked him for the money. Pottala had no money. He said to the

headman, “I haven’t got the money yet. Somebody else has borrowed it from me.

Please wait a few more days, so that I will have time to collect what people owe

me.”

The headman agreed and said that he would return in four day’s time. But

when the fourth day came, Pottala still did not have the money. He decided to

treat the headman. Early in the morning, he went to the river and caught a fish. He

boiled the fish in a pot of water and when the soup was ready, he took out the fish

and put an iron axe into the pot instead. When the headman arrived, Pottala

politely invited him into the house and served him a bowl of the delicious fish

soup.

“Hm, that’s very nice,” said the headman. “What did you make the soup

with, Pottala?”

“Oh, just this axe,” Pottala said pointing to the axe in the pot. “Just…this

axe? Nothing else?”

Page | 33

“Nothing else. This is a soup-axe. Would you like another bowl? I made

plenty of soup.” After the two men had finished the soup, the headman asked for

his money. “I haven’t got the money. Please give me some more time, sir,” said

Pottala. “You know what,” said the headman, just pay me with that soup-axe.”

Pottala agreed, and the headman went happily home with the axe. He gave the axe

to his wife and told her to make soup with it for the evening meal. His wife

obeyed, but although the axe was boiled for hours and hours, the water remained

just water.

The next day, the headman returned the axe to Pottala. “You lied to me,

Pottala,” he said angrily. “This is an ordinary axe. It can’t make soup.”

“But sir, you saw yourself that there was only this axe in the pot yesterday,

and you liked my soup,” said Pottala. “I don’t want your axe anymore, Pottala.

Give me back my money,” said the angry headman. “I haven’t got your money

yet, sir. Please give me some more time,” answered Pottala. The headman agreed

to give him another three days.

After three days he came back to Pottala’s house. “Where’s my money,

Pottala?” he asked. “Please sir, come in. I’m just going to prepare my lunch. Why

don’t you eat with me?” said Pottala. The headman agreed and climbed up onto

the verandah. Then Pottala took a blowpipe and pointed it to the sky. “What are

you doing?” asked the headman. “I’m shooting a wild duck for our lunch, sir,”

answered Pottala. “But there’s no wild duck to be seen,” said the headman.

“They’re flying over the sea, sir. This blowpipe can shoot as far as the sea,” said

Page | 34

Pottala. He pointed it once more at the sky and blew as hard as he could. “Let’s go

into the kitchen now. The duck will be on the table,” Pottala said to the headman.

Together they entered the kitchen and sure enough, there was a wild duck

lying on the kitchen table. “There she is,” said Pottala. “This is a special

blowpipe. Not only can it hit a duck far away, but it brings it back to the kitchen,

too.”

“Oh, let me have that pipe, Pottala,” said the headman. “Give me the

blowpipe and you need not give me back the money.”

“Well, if that’s what you wish, sir, of course you may have the blowpipe,”

said Pottala. The excited headman went home with his blowpipe. He was so

impatient to try it out that he did not want to wait for Pottala to cook the wild

duck. As soon as he arrived home, the headman aimed the blowpipe at the sky and

blew in it. Then he ran to the kitchen. But to his great disappointment, there was

no duck on the table. He ran back to the verandah and blew and blew till he was

red in the face. But still no duck appeared. The whole day, the poor man ran to

and from his verandah to the kitchen, until he fell exhausted on the floor. And still

no duck appeared on the kitchen table. Then the headman understood that again

he had been cheated by Pottala.

The next day, he went back to the peasant and demanded his money. “But

sir, I’ve paid you with the blowpipe,” said pottala innocently. “Here’s your

blowpipe. I don’t want it. Give me my money!” shouted the headman angrily.

“You’ve cheated me Pottala!”

Page | 35

“But sir, you saw yourself that I killed a duck with it yesterday,” answered

Pottala. “Give me back my money!”

“Please sir, I haven’t got the money yet. Can you give me some more

time?” Although he was angry, the headman agreed to give Pottala another two

days to find the money. This time, Pottala caught a dog and put a silver coin under

its tail. When the headman came and asked for his money, he said, “Sir, I haven’t

got the money yet. The people who bought my rice and fruit have not paid me yet.

But I was given a rather special dog who might be able to help a bit. Would you

like to see this dog, sir?”

“Yes,” said the headman, “just bring him here.”

Pottala took the dog out of the house and put him on a mat. He stroked the animal

and said, “Come now, give me a coin.” The dog wagged his tail and Pottala took

the silver coin from it.

“There you are, sir,” he said, offering the coin to the headman. “Can I give

this coin to you? The dog only gives a coin at a time.” The headman was

delighted. “Oh, Pottala,” he said, “give me that dog and you need not pay me the

rest of the money.”

“As you wish, sir,” said Pottala obediently.

So the headman took the dog home. At home, he tied the dog under his

bed and waited impatiently for several hours. Then, when he thought the dog had

rested long enough, he stroked his back and said, “Come now, give me a coin.”

The dog wagged his tail happily, but that’s all it did. And again the headman

understood that he had been tricked by the clever peasant.

Page | 36

“That’s it! Now I’m going to arrest him!” he shouted. He ordered two

guardsmen to go to Pottala, put him in the bag, and throw him into the river. The

men went to Pottala’s hut and carried out his orders. Fortunately, Pottala had his

knife with him, and he was thrown into the river, he cut a hole in the bag and

swam to safety. He left his village and went into the forest where he opened a new

field. After some time, when his field had grown some sweet potatoes, he went

back to the village to sell them. At the market, he met the headman who stared at

him at amazement.

“Pottala! I thought my guardsmen threw you into the river,” he called out.

“Yes, sir, I was thrown into the river,” answered Pottala, “but when I reached the

bottom, the water folk rescued me. I lived with them for a while, but I got

homesick for my village, so I asked them to take me back up to land.”

“Is it beautiful down there?” asked the headman curiously. “Oh, it’s the

most beautiful place one could ever see,” answered Pottala. “Then put me in a bag

and throw me into the river, because I want to see the place where the water folk

live,” said the headman. “As you wish, sir,” said Pottala. He put the headman in a

bag and threw the bag into the river, where the headman drowned. Pottala went

back to his field in the forest and lived peacefully for the rest of his life.

Page | 37