Bahasa Demokratis Di Dalam Media Televisi Indonesia

Abstract

This research attempts to depicts the language used in Indonesian television, especially in news, editorial, and talk show in post reform era. The main issue in this research is the language used in Indonesian television contributes to the formation of democracy in this country. To answer the question, this research applies Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) that is able to portray the social processes and the language that is representation of the social processes, including their genres and registers. The results show that news exploits recount whereas editorial and talk show employ discussion genre. The recount and discussion genres in news and editorial and talk show accelerate the atmosphere of democratization in Indonesia. News provides facts and phenomena whereas editorial and talk show discusses them. However, in the level of register, editorial and talk show exploit the use of more raised evaluation that a number of communication experts believe that Indonesian editorial and talk show go beyond the democracy level or are still provocative.<br />Keywords: Bahasa Demokratis, Genre, Register, Appraisal<br /><br />

The Correlation between Community Engagement and Capability Building Through Outbound Activities of Karang Taruna Members at Bencireng Kebontunggul, Mojokerto, Indonesia

“…Karang Taruna empowerment is considered as the empowerment of the members of the youth village organization, or Karang Taruna, on the role of work, in attachment, people use and show themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally while playing work activities [10]. The cognitive aspect of engagement members is paying attention to employees' beliefs about the organization, for example, leaders and working conditions.…”

Internal continuatives and logical metaphors: A development of classifying conjunctive relation

“…Basically, the forms and meanings are constructed and determined from both processes in syntactic and paradigmatic resources in discourse semantics. Different from structural, cognitive linguistics' concepts on conjunction (Santosa et al, 2011), and functional grammar's concepts of conjunctions and conjunctive adjuncts (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2013), CR does not only work between clauses but it also operates above clauses and groups of clauses in a discourse semantic level. It is realized in three different linguistics units that involve conjunction, continuative, and logical metaphors.…”

“…Structural linguists, for example, perceive conjunction as unit of linguistics that connect groups, clauses, and sentences. They have only a little concern on the operation of conjunction beyond clauses and sentences in a discourse level, since their highest level of linguistic data is sentence (Santosa et al, 2011). Meanwhile, cognitive linguists focus on how forms and meanings of conjunction cognitively link two units of clauses, sentences, and units of discourses.…”

“…Meanwhile, cognitive linguists focus on how forms and meanings of conjunction cognitively link two units of clauses, sentences, and units of discourses. They still ignore their discussion on the role of conjunction in building up higher units of linguistics such as activity sequences in the field of discourse (Santosa et al, 2011). Expanding Halliday's ideas of logico-semantic relation in clause complexes, (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2013) development of further categories of elaborating, extending, and enhancing ends at the level clause complex analyses and conjunctive adjunct connecting different sentences.…”

“…The discourse logical markers includes conjunction, continuative, and logical metaphor (James R . By such devices, SFL can demonstrate how clauses are knitted into phases and stages; and they can also identify certain patterns of stages of a particular activity sequence reflecting a genre (Santosa et al, 2011). However, problems still arise particularly in how the conjunctive relation devices function and operate in a field of discourse since claim that only conjunction can connect externally and internally in the field of discourse and no continuative and logical metaphors are said to have the same function as that of conjunction .…”