THOUGHT PATTERN OF INDONESIAN RHETORIC IN KOMPAS
BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
The relation of language, culture, and thought has become an intricating issue among the scholars for many years. It was Edward Sapir (1974) who firstly claimed that the content of every culture was brought about by its language. Culture as the result of human's creative power, intention, and feeling in the form of experiences is reflected in social behavior which is constructed by individuals' behavior. Those human experiences are then expressed by symbols in the form of a language. Sapir in Blount (1974:51) perceives the fact that language is a perfect symbolism of experience, that in the actual context of behavior, it cannot be divorced from action and that it is the carrier of a nuanced expressiveness are universally valid psychological facts.
Moreover, language, as Benjamin Whorf (1974) states, is not merely an instrument for expressing ideas or reflecting experiences but more than that it shapes the ideas. This is to response to Sapir's assertion (in Blount, 1974) that language is a "tyrant that not only reflects experiences, but defines it, imposing upon us particulars and ideas about the world". So it is true if some Indonesian columnists who wrote in some newspapers say that language is the mirror of personality. Then Sapir (1974) and Whorf (1974) hypothesize that the forms of a person's thought are controlled by inexorable laws of pattern of which he is unconscious". These laws are the 'unperceived intricate systematization of the person's language.
These ideas are in line with the view that later becomes the underlying concept or principle of Relativism claiming that comprehending upon meaning is the result of mental process (Wahab, 1991:96). While "Relativism" or "Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis" itself asserts that the particular language we speak determines the way we think and that language influences, directs, or biases our thinking rather that determining it (Cohen, 1977). The idea is supported by another linguist, Boas in Blount (1974) in Wahab (1991) who perceives that "the conciseness and clearness of thought of a people depend to a great extent upon their language". Such view indicates that there must be a reciprocal relation between thought as the reflection of culture and of social behavior and language. Even, Boas adds that such relation causes dynamic mutual-influences not only between language and thought, but also language and culture, language and social group behavior, language and changes in a culture. There is no human society that does not depend upon, is not shaped by, and does not itself shape language (Chaika, 1982:1). Simply speaking, language shapes thought and culture society and vice versa.
However, the reflection of culture in language does not only exist in its formal aspect as it is found in the above examples. The reflection of culture, as Wahab (1991) believes, also appears in rhetoric as the supra-sentential aspect of language, and it is different from culture to culture. According to Wahab (1991) rhetoric as the manifestation of thought pattern which is bound with logic should not be universal. This opinion is introduced by the Empirism followers , especially Johan Gotfreed Herder (1744-1803), who do not believe in language universals. They base this theory on the premise that human thought is different from one to another depending on the surrounding culture. It is contradicted by Chomsky (1974) who claims that there are language universals since all languages have universal properties which make them possible to be linguistic universal such as the potential of every language to convey infinite utterances and meaning by using finite words. It seems that he does not realize that in some cases the system and features of some languages are not universals. It happens in Sanskrit which has syntactical systems different from those of languages which recognize 'SVO' word order (Wahab, 1991:121). The factual phenomenon, especially in communication, is that each language has its own characteristics especially concerning with pattern of logical flow when it is expressed in the form of text or discourse. The construction of the discourse is called rhetoric. Basically, classical rhetoric is epitomized by the work of Aristotle, whose rhetoric contains acute observation about the structure of discourse aimed at changing other people's behavior, and later by that of Quintilian and Cicero (Grimes, 1975:13). Now days, this is carried out more fully in creative writing and advanced composition that it is in speech.
Based on his contrastive studies, Kaplan (1966), who claims that the society and culture transcend and control individuals, concludes that there is a close relationship between rhetoric and culture. In addition, he finds out that there are four types of rhetoric patterns throughout the world according to the different background cultures. Those thought patterns are 1) Anglo-Saxon model, which is usually employed by western people and has typical characteristics of being linear, 2) Semitic model used by Arabs and Persians who have the tendency to manifest their ideas in an excessive parallel construction instead of coordination, 3) Oriental model which also becomes that of Asian people who often use indirect style in their written expression, 4) Franco-Italian model, including Spanish, employed by those who are in favor of excessive digression instead of a linear flow of thought.
The researcher believes that there has been a tendency of transition or change from circular to linear since Indonesian is a living language. E. B. White in Jordan states that a living language changes to reflect circumstances. It is like a cow path which shifts to suit the whim of the cows. Social behavior changes in several dimensions-most obviously with time, geographical location, and specific situation. Language also changes in time (1965: 7). The change is accompanied by those of other aspects such as cultural and political as a result of modernity and education which in the next turn may accelerate the process.
Based on the background, this study tries to investigate the thought pattern of Indonesian in Indonesian discourse. The general question of this study is “What type of thought pattern of Indonesian rhetoric is manifested in Indonesian written discourse?” Specifically, the questions of this study are (1) How do Indonesian writers establish their argumentative essays in Kompas? (2) What is the type of the thought pattern of Indonesian rhetoric manifested in the argumentative essays in Kompas?
In accordance with the above questions, this study is intended to investigate the type of thought patterns manifested in the rhetorical convention of Indonesian written texts especially argumentative discourse written by Indonesian writers in Indonesian contexts. This study, specifically analyzes the issues: (1) How Indonesian writers establish their argumentative essays; (2) What types of thought patterns manifested in Indonesian argumentative essays.
This study is conducted on the basis that culture as the element of society is intermingled with language. This interrelationship, as Kaplan (1981) later calls it rhetoric, is not only manifested in terms of linguistic aspects but also in terms of supra-sentential aspects of language. Therefore, in discourse, especially written discourse, people of different countries tend to arrange their ideas on the same subject in very different ways because of the influence of the pattern of thinking which varies from culture to culture and it is then, according to Bander (1981) in Ngadiman (1998) called thought pattern. Ngadiman (1998) depicts the connection between culture, thought pattern, and discourse in the following diagram :
written discourse;
| |
- 
political development
|
- 
modernity
modernity - 
cultural contact
cultural contact- 
etc. language discourse behavior t
|
Diagram of the Connection
between culture, thought pattern, and discourse
However, culture is moderately changing from time to time. Kaplan in Ngadiman (1998) states that rhetoric is based on logic and logic is based on culture. Logic is not universal nor is it static. It evolves out of time. Some aspects stimulating the change are politics, religious development and education. Therefore, the cultural change will be followed by a change in the language thought pattern.
In a study of contrastive rhetoric, Kaplan (1980) analyzed six hundreds compositions written by foreign students in the United States. This study reveals that each language and each culture has its preference or taste in organizing ideas. He found that there were four types of rhetoric throughout the world according to their different cultures. They are 1) Anglo-Saxon model which is used by western people who have typical characteristics of being linear, 2) Semitic model used by Arabs and Persians who have tendency to manifest excessive parallel construction instead of coordination, 3) Oriental model whose followers are Asian people who often use indirect style, and 4) Franco-Italian model including Spanish who are in favor of excessive digression instead of a linear flow of thought.
METHODOLOGY
This study is conducted by using a qualitative approach. While the design of this study is descriptive as it tries to describe narrative data represented in the form of words. Specifically, this study used content analysis (Holsti, 1968:42-43) that aimed at analyzing the corpus of written discourse. Content analysis was appropriate in this study for it described the characteristics of content and made inferences about the cause of content and the effect of content. This technique was used to determine rhetoric and linguistic features of the essays (Krippendorf, K, 1980; Miles and Huberman, 1994). The objective analysis of the essays is accomplished by means of explicit rules called criteria of selection which must be formally esrablished before the actual analysis of data (Berg, 1989). This concept conforms with the principle and the nature of this study.
The descriptive design is applied because it is relevant to the aim of the study. It is to describe Indonesian argumentative discourse taken from Kompas, in which the researcher sets out the study by posing himself as the key instrument, working out by analyzing the data himself until drawing the inferences to substantiate theory.
While the procedure of the research performed in this study are 1) selecting argumentative essays taken from Kompas; 2) investigating the organization of the composition including identifying thesis statement, topic sentence, the relationship of the ideas between paragraphs and within paragraph of each selected essay or text; 3) drawing inferences about thought patterns manifested in those essays. However, the researcher does those steps repeatedly or by several re-checks before cross-checking with other colleagues who are experts in that matter.
The source of data of this study are those articles in Kompas that are classified into the argumentative discourses. The discourses chosen are mainly in the form of article since the organization of such kind of writing is developed in essay whether it is written through chronological, logical division, cause-effect, or contrast and comparison methods.
In this study, the data are the constituents used in the discourse such as sentence, paragraph, and the global organization of the discourse. The data also comprise the threads of discourse in the form of pattern used by the writer in paraphrasing the idea or information within the sentence, paragraph, and the composition.
Considering that this study is qualitative, the key instrument of the research, as Bogdan and Biklen (1992:29) proposed is the researcher himself with his knowledge of Discourse Analysis, text Analysis, Sociolinguistics, and Pragmatics. The instrument is employed because the source of the data is merely in the form of discourse properties. Therefore, this study might be categorized into textual one. While the main focus of this investigation is the rhetoric and the linguistic features of argumentative esays.
There are two techniques applied in collecting the data of this study, namely, documentation and text analysis (Silverman, 1993). The use of these methods is described in the following steps. First, all articles in Kompas were collected. Second, from the collection of the articles, only those were written by Indonesian writers were selected. Third, the reduction of the articles was done by selecting only the argumentative ones.
Data analysis in this study is conducted in two phases. First, the data analysis is done during the activities of data collection. Second, data analysis is conducted after collecting data. Data analysis during the activities of data collection is aimed at anticipating the possibilities of data exaggeration. This analysis also helps the researcher to analyze the data step by step. Furthermore, data analysis during and after collecting data is conducted in three stages: reducing data, displaying the data, and drawing conclusion or verifying the data (Miles and Huberman, 1992).
However, before doing the analysis, the researcher tried to confirm the originality of the articles whether there had been editors' interferences by cross-checking them to the editors. So far, there had never been the editors' interferences as they were controlled by UU Pers Year 2000, Kode Etik PWI, and Kode Etik AJI which concerned with the ethic code of journalism. The editors' interferences was only due to the mechanic matters of the writing such as collocation and structure.
The parameter of thought pattern applied in this study is one that is adapted from Ngadiman (1998).
Thought Pattern | Mode of Development |
Linear | Deductive Inductive Quasi-inductive |
Non-linear | Circular Digressing In parallel construction |
Table of Parameter
The criteria of argumentative article used in this study are those used by Warnick and Inch (1994) and Keraf (1980). In their opinion, the argumentative article should be (1) a claim (an opinion or conclusion), (2) an issue which is controversial (3) supports which are offered for a claim (4) "attempt to influence" (there must be a recipient or arguee to whom the argumentative article is addressed).
FINDINGS
On the basis of research methodology and with reference to the research problems, this chapter presents findings and discussions of this research. To that end, this chapter is divided into two sub-ordinate parts. The first sub-division is about the description, discussion, and analysis of the features of argumentative discourse in Kompas articles which comprise those at the composition level and the paragraph level. While the second sub-division concerns with the analysis and the discussion of thought patterns which are extracted and inferred from the description of the discourse features previously presented.
As it has been mentioned above, the triangulation is done in order to get the trustworthiness of data. The triangulation is conducted reapetedly and respective-ly, first to the researcher’s colleagues and then to the advisors. During the triangulation process, identification, classification, reduction, note-taking, and coding are done tangibly.
The Features of the Argumentative Discourse of 'Kompas' Articles
The presentation of the argumentative discourse of Kompas articles will be given after the analysis of the features of the composition and paragraph levels has been done elaborately and respectively. The features of the composition level will be discussed first.
The Features of the Compositon Level
In order to obtain the concrete profile of the whole composition, the points analyzed must comprise: 1) thesis statement formulation; 2) coherence between the paragraphs of the articles.
Thesis Statement Formulation
From academic point of view, a writer should state the subject that s/he wants to write and indicates aspects s/he intends to concern by posing a thesis statement which covers all the information in the composition (Keraf, 1980 and Irmscher, 1988). It is done in order to determine the unit or scope of discussion and to give the readers a notion and framework of what to expect from the rest of the composition.
As Smalley and Reutten (1986) underscore, the four important matters should be taken into account in formulating the thesis statement are 1) a thesis statement should be expressd in a complete sentence, 2) a thesis statement should express an opinion, attitude, or idea, and not simply announce the topic to be developed in the essay, 3) a thesis statement should express an opinion not express a fact, and 4) a thesis statement should express only one idea toward one topic; if the thesis statement contains two or more ideas; the essay will run the risk of lacking unity and coherence.
After investigating and analyzing the data, it can be summarized that there are four types of thesis statement formulation developed by Indonesian writer who wrote articles in Kompas i.e., 1) deductive pattern; 2) inductice pattern; 3) the mid-located patter; and 4) unclearly-formulated pattern. The summary of those four types of thesis statement is as follows.
1. Type I : Ground + thesis + supporting ideas + conclusion
2. Type II : Ground + supporting ideas + thesis
3. Type III : Ground + supporting ideas + thesis + supporting ideas + conclusion
4. Type IV : Ground + supporting ideas + thesis 1 + supporting ideas + thesis 2
Ground + thesis 1 + supporting ideas + thesis 2 + supporting ideas
Ground + topic 1 + topic 2 + topic 3.
Coherence between Paragraphs
Some argumentative articles written in selected data in Kompas are coherent because the paragraphs within them are logically and closely joined together. Besides, the paragraphs of those compositions are related to their topics. An example of the pattern is article # 27 written by Arif Rachman entitled "Menimbang UMPTN" (Assesing State University Entrance Test).
Nevertheless, the argumentative articles in the selected data are mostly incoherent (most Indonesian writers writing argumentative articles in Kompas write incoherently). The paragraphs in those articles in the selected data mostly wander off the main topic. An example of such pattern can be found in article # 63, entitled "Sakralitas Teks-teks Agama" (The Sacredness of Religious Texts).
In conclusion, some of the writers in the selected data have written their paragraphs coherently and smoothly to keep the continuity of thought. However, most of them have not written their compositions so smoothly that their paragraphs are said to be closely and logically joined.
The Feature at Paragraph Level
A paragraph is a basic or logical unit of organization in writing in which a series of closely related sentences supply the readers with detailed information, explore, develop, and support a single main idea (Keraf, 1980; Saraka, 1981). It implies that the main idea which sometimes is stated in the form of a topic sentence does not merely name the topic of the paragraph, but also limits the topic to one or two areas that can be appropriately discussed in the space of a single paragraph. While to be effective, a paragraph must possess unity, coherence, and completeness.
Topic Sentence Formulation
Sullivan (1976) underlines that a topic sentence can be formulated in two different ways, explicitly that is the topic sentence stated in the initial, middle, or final position of the paragraph; and implicitly, which means that the topic sentence is stated neither in the initial, middle, nor final position but it is just implied within the paragraph.
In formulating the paragraph, there have been variations among the writers who wrote the articles in Kompas in the selected data in locating the topic sentence. It may be located at the initial position of the paragraph. The other pattern is that the topic sentence is formulated in the final position or at the end of paragraph. The third pattern is the topic sentence which is formulated in the middle of the paragraph. In addition, there is also a pattern developed by those writers in which the topic sentence is expressed implicitly.
Then, there is a tendency that a paragraph is developed without any clear or even implied topic sentence.
It can be summarized that there are five types or patterns the writers developed in formulating the topic sentence in argumentative articles in Kompas. Those five patterns are 1) the topic sentence is formulated in the initial position, 2) the topic sentence is formulated in the final position, 3) the topic sentence is formulated in the middle position, 4) the topic sentence is stated implicitly, and 5) the topic sentence is formulated unclearly both implicitly and explicitly or more than one.
Paragraph Unity
A paragraph is supposed to have a unity when the main idea of a paragraph is stated in the topic sentence and each and every supporting sentence evolves from and relates to the idea. Saraka (1988) claims that unity is the "oneness" that a paragraph has derived from the development of one single idea.
The paragraph unity might be violated in three ways. First, the paragraph lacks its unity in that it includes other central ideas. Second, the inclusion of one idea or more sentences of details that are not related to the central idea of the paragraph can make that paragraph lacks its unity. In addition, a paragraph can also lack its unity when the central idea is not present in it.
Some paragraphs developed by Indonesian writer who wrote their articles in Kompas do not fulfil the requirements. They lack the unity.
Paragraph Coherence
Paragraph is claimed to be coherent when the ideas and thouhgt in it adhere to each othre so that the thought flows smoothly to perform logical relationship. In achieving such relationship, Saraka (1988: 98) suggests that a variety of logical signals, words or phrases which indicate meaning relationship between and within sentences are employed in the paragraph.
It has been found that some paragraphs employed by the article writers in Kompas in the selected data lack coherence.
Paragraph Completeness
Paragraph is considered to be complete if the controlling idea is thoroughly developed by the use of particular or specific information. Its completeness is then related to how complex and general its topic sentence is. Saraka (1988: 74) explains that such a paragraph leaves no confusion to the readers mind about what is intended, about how the reader is supposed to respond and about why such response is both necessary and appropriate.
The paragraphs of the selected articles written by Indonesian writers in Kompas do not all fulfil the requirements of completeness. Such a kind of paragraph can be seen in the article # 6.
Thought Pattern of Indonesian Rhetoric in Kompas
The presentation of the existence of thought patterns of Indonesian rhetoric in Kompas based on the discourse features discussed in the previous section is given in the following section.
Development of Thought
As it has been discussed above, rhetoric concerns with factors of analysis, data gathering, interpretation, and synthesis, what goes in mind which, in the process of writing, a writer employs to produce a desired text (Kaplan, 1980). Simply, a rhetoric which a writer intends to produce in the form of a text is nothing but the development of the writer's thought.
With the reference of the profile of discourse investigated, it is found that there are three kinds of thought pattern reflected in the articles of Kompas; 1) deductive-linear development of thought, 2) inductive -linear development of thought, and 3) non-linear development of thought with variations of circular and digressive patterns.
Linear Development of Thought Pattern
After analyzing the data deliberately, it is found that there are 26 articles (34 %) which have been established in the deductive-linear pattern and 14 articles (18 %) which have been established in inductive-linear pattern. Totally, there are 40 articles (52 %) of the whole articles in the selected data (77 articles) which have been established in linear thought pattern of composition development.
From the description above, it is found that ore than half of Indonesian writers who wrote their articles in Kompas use linear-model in developing their rhetorics. This model varies in two forms of fashion i.e., 1) deductive-linear, and 2) inductive-linear. The first form of fashion is marked by the following identifications: 1) the thesis statement is placed in the introductory paragraph, and it is preceded by a general statement as a background, 2) the thesis statement contains a sries of subdivsions, 3) each of those subdivisions employed, is related to all other ideas and developed by examples and illustrations to prove and argue something.
Article # 71 entitled "Kualitas Guru dan Dosen di Indonesia" (The Quality of Teachers in Indonesia) is an example of deductive-linear pattern. In this article, the writer opens his composition by general statement that the performance of the national education is becoming worse. Then, he proposes his thesis that the quality of our educators in very dissapointing. Afterwards, he employs the thesis by proposing the subdivisions each of which is supported by examples and illustrations.
While the second form of fashion is identified by the following characteristics: 1) the thesis statement is put in the last paragraph as the conclusion, 2) it is preceded by examples and illustration which are related to the thesis statement.
The example of this form can be seen in article # 29 entitled "Apakah Bahasa Jawa dan Bahasa Daerah Masih Punya Masa Depan?" (Do Javanese and the Vernaculars Still Have a Prospect?). The writer begins the article with illustrations and examples following the introductory paragraphs. Those illustrations and examples are preceded by subdivisions of thesis, which are mentioned respectively.
While many Indonesian writers who wrote their articles in Kompas employ linear model in developing their rhetorics, some of others propose non-linear model. Such model also varies in two forms of fashion i.e., the circular type which is found in 8 articles (10 %) and 2) the digressive type which is found in 29 articles (38 %).
This table describes that some writers employ a non-linear pattern in developing their rhetorics. It also describes that those writers who employ circilar pattern in developing the rhetorics are fewer than those who employ digressive pattern.
Th circular type is marked by the following identifications: 1) the composition is provided with peripheral discussion; the point (thesis statement) is stated in the centre or the middle of the composition. While the second form of non-linear fashion i.e., digressive type is identified by the following marks: 1) the discussion of the materials wanders off the main topic, 2) the thesis statement is unclearly stated, and 3) there are more than one topic developed in the composition.
While at the paragraph level, the paragraph lacking the three characteristics of an effective paragraph can be categorized into that which has a non-linear pattern of development. While the paragraph that fulfils the three criteria of an effective paragraph is categorized as having a linear pattern of development. From the analysis result, it is found that there are 28 (49 %) paragraphs which are categorized to have a non-linear pattern of development with the tendency of neglecting the use of explicit topic sentence both in the initial and the final position. Meanwhile, 49 (61 %) paragraphs have linear pattern of development.
DISCUSSION
Based on the description in the section above, it is identified that most Indonesian writers (52 %) who wrote their articles in Kompas develop linear thought pattern in their rhetoric. The linear thought pattern they develop varies both in deductive and inductive types. The linear pattern of the former type is developed by 34 % of the writers. In such type, those writers begin their compositions with general statements as ground which then are followed by thesis statements. Those thesis statements comprise a series of sub-divisions each of which is supported by illustrations and examples. Then the subdivisions are employed related to all other ideas, and in their proper relationships to other ideas prove and argue something.
While inductive type is developed by 18 % of the writers. In this second type of linear thought pattern, the writers start their compositions with general statements as ground but delay their thesis statement until the composition come to the end.
On the other side, some Indonesian writers (49 %) who wrote their articles in Kompas apply the non-linear thought pattern which varies in two forms i.e., circular and digressive. In the first variation, the writers (10 %) begin their composition with peripheral materials and state the supporting ideas repeatedly before they put their thesis statement in the middle of the compositions.
While in the digressive variation, some of those writers (39 %) often wrote in the paragraph sentences which really do not support significant materials to the basic thought of the paragraphs in which those biased sentences are included and they have potential to create a new topic.
From the whole discussion above, it can be inferred that the writers who wrote their articles in Kompas employ a linear-thought of rhetoric are greater in number than those who apply a non-linear thought of rhetoric.
As stated by Kaplan (1980), rhetoric is based on logic and logic is based on culture. Logic is not universal nor is it static. It evolves with time. Some aspects stimulating the change are politics, religious development, education and so on. That cultural change then must be followed by the language thought pattern change. In relation with this data, it has been investigated that the writers who wrote their articles in Kompas have different thought patterns of rhetoric.
Based on the investigation, there are 42 articles written by Professors from various professional background such as academicians, ministers, rectors etc. Besides, some articles (9 articles) are written by public figures such as Abdurrahman Wahid, Sholahudin Wahid, Yusuf Hasyim, and the military figures such as Rudini, General Endriartono Sutarto, Hendropriyono. The rest of those articles (16 articles) have been written by the figures who pursued their educations and got PhD degrees in Eng;ish speaking countries, such as Ace Suryadi (from State University of New York at Albany) and some others.
CONCLUSION
Based on the result of the discussion and the finding presented in those previous chapters, the researcher draws the conclusion:
1. In Indonesian discourse, there is still periphrasis
2. In the paragraph of Indonesian discourse, there is still periphrasis
3. There is tendency to use linear thought of pattern or to leave periphrasis in Indonesian discourse
4. There is tendency, in paragraph level, to develop effective paragraph
5. This study confirms the theory of Relativity claiming that the language the people speak influences, directs, or biases their thinking (Sapir, 1974). Some Indonesian writers in Kompas develop periphrasis or non-linear pattern thought as the influence of the language they use.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the result of the research, the following recommendation offered due to:
1. EFL lecturers or teachers should be aware of the rhetorical pattern difference between English and Indonesia. Then they should teach the students to contrast the rhetorical types of both languages. This effort helps them in finding the appropriate method and strategy for teaching English to Indonesian students.
2. Students who learn English should also learn rhetorical types in the world especially Indonesian (source language/native language) and English (target language/foreign language). The students' knowledge of rhetorical pattern of English and Indonesian will help them in mastering language they learn, especially writing.
3. Other researchers who interested in the topic are suggested to employ larger and wider data to convince the issue.
REFERENCES
Baldauff, R. and Jernudd, B. 1983. Language of Publication as a Variable in Scientific Communication. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. 6. (1).
Benedict, R. 1983. Patterns of Culture. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Berg, Bruce L. 1989. Qualitative Research Methods for Social Sciences. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Bernardo, R. 1980. Cognitive, Cultural and Linguistic Aspect of Narrative Production. In Chafe, W.L. (ed.). 1980. Advanced Discourse Process. Norwood: Ablex.
Blount, Ben G. (ed.). 1974. Language, Culture, and Society. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Winthrop Publisher, Inc.
Bogdan, Robert C. and Sari Knopp Biklen. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education. Boston: Allyn Bacon.
Brislin, Richard W. 1981. Cros-Cultural Encounters. New York: PergamonPress.
Candlin, C. N. and K.L. Saedi. 1983. Process of Discourse. Journal of Applied Language Study. 1. 1-5.
Casson, Ronald W. 1981. Language, Culture, and Cognition. New York: macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.
Chaika, Elaine. 1982. Language the Social Mirror. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.
Chomsky, Noam. 1972. Language and Mind. New York: harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
Cohen, Gillian. 1977. The Psychology of Cognition. New York: harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
Conrad, Charles. 1989. Strategic Oganizational Communication. 2nd ed. Forth Worth: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Darley, John. et al. 1981. Psychology. New jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.
Descartes, Tr. John Veitch. 1981. Discourse and Method. London; Everyman's Library.
Encyclopedia Americana. International Edition. 1977. Vol. 23. New York: Encyclopedia Americana Corporation.
Encyclopedia Britanica. A New Survey of Universal knowledge. 1956, Vol. 19. London: Encyclopaedis Britanica, Inc.
Gere, Anne Ruggles. 1992. Writing and Learning. New York: Macmillan publishing Company.
Golden, James L. Goodwin F. Berquist and William E. Goleman. 1984. The Rhetoric of Western Thought. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt publishing Company.
Greenberg, J.H. 1957. Essays in linguistics. In Bell, Roger T. 1978. Sociuolinguistics: Goals, Approaches and Problems. London: BT Batsford Ltd.
Grimes, Joseph E. 1975. The Thread of Discourse. New York: Norton Publishing.
Harjanto, Ignatius. 1999. English Academic Writing Features by Indonesia Learners of English. Malang: Unpublished Dissertations, PPS IKIP Malang.
Hoijer, Harry (ed.) 1945. Language in Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago press.
Holsti. Ole R. 1968. Content Analysis for Social Science and Humanities. Donn Mill: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Hymes, D. 1974. Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Hyland, ken. 1996. Scientific English: Hedging in a Foreign Culture. In James, Joyces E. 1996. (ed.) The language-Culture Connection. An Anthology Series 37. Singapore: SEAMEO RELC.
Irmscher, William F. et al. 1983. English Language and Writing. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Publishers.
Jordan, John E. 1965. Using Rhetoric. New York: Harpe & Roe, publishers.
Jasper, David. 1993. Rhetoric, Power, and Community. London: The Macmillan Press.
Kaplan, Robert B. 1980. Cultural Patterns Thought in inter-Cultural Education. In Croft, Kenneth. 2nd Ed. 1980. Readings on English as a Second language for Teachers and Teacher Trainees. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Winthrop Publishers, Inc.
Kaplan, Robert B. 1992. The Anatomy of Rhetoric, Prolegomena to a Functional Theory of Rhetoric in Language and the Teacher: A Series in Applied Linguistics. Philadelphia: The Center for Curriculum Development.
Keraf, Gorys. 1980. Komposisi. Ende, Flores: PT Nusa Indah.
Keraf, Gorys. 1987. Argumentasi dan Narasi. Jakarta: PT Gramedia.
Kharma, Nayef. 1986. Composition Problem: Diagnostic and Remedy. English Teaching Forum Journal. Vo. XXIV. July.
Kinneavy, James L. 1971. Theory of Discourse. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Krippendorff, K, 1980. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. London: Sage Publications.
Ngadiman, Agustinus. 1998. Javanesse Cultural Thought Patterns as Manifested in Expository Discourse. Malang: Unpublished Dissertation, PPS IKIP Malang.
Mile, Mathew B. and A Michael Huberman. 1984. Qualitative Data Analysis. London: Heinemann Educational Book.
Ornstein, Allan C. and Levine Daniel U. 1985. An Introduction to the Foundation of Education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Renkema, J. 1993. Discourse Studies: An Introductory Textbook. Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing Company.
Saraka, 1988. From Paragraph to Essay: Concepts and Practices. Jakarta: Depdikbud.
Smalley, Regina L. and Mary Ruetten. 1986. Refining Composition Skills, Rhetoric and Grammar for ESL Students. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Strauss A. and Corbin J. 1990. Basic Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. London: Sage Publication.
Sullivan, Kathleen E. 1976. Paragraph Practice. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Wahab, Abdul. 1992. Cermin Budaya dalam Bahasa: Kasus Retorika Indonesia. Pellba. 5:147-176.
Wahab, Abdul. 1995. Isu Linguistik. Pengajaran Bahasa dan Sastra. Surabaya: Airlangga University Press.
Warnick, Barbara and Edward S. Inch. 1994. Critical thinking and Communication. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar