Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMahmud, Murni
dc.date.accessioned2012-12-08T07:55:26Z
dc.date.available2012-12-08T07:55:26Z
dc.date.issued2011-06
dc.identifier.citationAbdullah, Hamid. 1985. Manusia Bugis Makassar: Suatu Tinjauan Historis Terhadap Pola Tingkah Laku dan Pandangan Hidup Manusia Bugis Makassar. Jakarta: Inti Idayu Press. Berman, Laine. 1998. Speaking Through the Silence: Narrative, Social Conventions, and Power in Java. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bonvillain, Nancy. 1993. Language, Culture, and Communication: The Meaning of Messages. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Brown, Penelope and Stephen Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. Brown, Roger, and Albert Gilman. 1972. ‘The Pronouns of Power and Solidarity.’ In Giglioli, Pier Paolo (ed.). Language and Social Context. Great Britain: Cox & Wyman Ltd, Reading, pp 252-282. Errington, J. Joseph. 1985. Language and Social Change in Java: Linguistic Reflexes of Modernization in a Traditional Royal Polity. Ohio, USA: Center for International Studies, Ohio University. Errington, J. Joseph. 1986. ‘Continuity and Change in Indonesian Language Development’, The Journal of Asian Studies, 45(2): 329-353. Errington, J. Joseph. 1988. Structure and Style in Javanese: A Semiotic View of Linguistic Etiquette. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Errington, J. Joseph. 1998. Shifting Languages: Interaction and Identity in Javanese Indonesian. UK: Cambridge University Press. Galbraith, John Kenneth. 1984. The Anatomy of Power. London: Hamilton Geertz, Clifford. 1960. The Religion of Java. Illinois: The Free Press of Glencoe. Goffman, Erving. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, Doubleday and Company, Inc. Holmes, Janet. 1995. Women, Men, and Politeness. London and New York: Longman. Kartomiharjo, Soeseno. 1981. Ethnography of Communicative Codes in East Java. Ph.D Thesis. Canberra: Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, the Australian National University. Kummer, Manfred. 1992. ‘Politeness in Thai.’ In Richard J. Watts, Sachiko Ide and Konrad Ehlich (eds.), Politeness in Language: Studies in its History, Theory, and Practice. New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp 326-336. Mahmud, Murni. 2008a. Politeness in Bugis. A Ph.D Thesis. Canberra, Australia: The Australian National University. Mahmud, Murni. 2008b. ‘Speaking Bugis and Speaking Indonesian in Bugis Society’. RIMA (Review of Indonesia and Malay Affairs), Volume 42, number 2 2008, pp: 67-92. Mahyuni. 2003. Speech Styles and Cultural Perspectives in Sasak Community. Ph.D Thesis. Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne. Mizutani, Ozamu, and Nobuko Mizutani. 1987. How to be Polite in Japanese. Tokyo, Japan: The Japan Times, Ltd. Ossowski, Stanislaw. 1963. Class Structure in the Social Consciousness. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Pizziconi, Barbara. 2003. ‘Re-examining Politeness, Face, and the Japanese Language’ Journal of Pragmatics, 35: 1471-1506. Speer, Susan A. 2002. ‘Sexist Talk: gender Categories, Participant’ Orientations and Irony’, Journal of Sociolinguistics, 6(3): 347-377. Turner, Bryan. S. 1988. Status. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Speer, Susan A. 2002. ‘Sexist Talk: gender Categories, Participant’ Orientations and Irony’, Journal of Sociolinguistics, 6(3): 347-377. Watts, Richard J., Sachiko Ide, and Konrad Ehlich (eds.). 1992. Politeness in Language: Studies in its History, Theory, and Practice. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter Wouk, Fay. 2001. ‘Solidarity in Indonesian Conversation: The Discourse Marker ya’, Journal of Pragmatics, 33: 171-191. Zhan, Kaidi. 1992. The Strategies of Politeness in the Chinese Language. California, USA: The Regents of the University of California.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0852-9604
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11617/2206
dc.description.abstractMakalah ini membahas praktek kesantunan sebagai salah satu aspek budaya masyarakat Bugis. Fokus utama adalah melihat faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi praktek kesantunan masyarakat Bugis seperti status sosial, umur, gender, dan familiaritas. Makalah ini merupakan bagian dari studi kesantunan yang telah dilakukan oleh penulis di dua kelompok masyarakat Bugis pada tahun 2005, yaitu di daerah pedesaan, Awangpone dan di daerah perkotaan, Parepare. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa faktor-faktor di atas mempengaruhi tingkat kesantunan masyarakat Bugis. Faktor yang paling menonjol adalah status sosial. Meskipun demikian faktor lain seperti umur, gender, dan familiaritas juga saling mempengaruhi.en_US
dc.publisherlppmumsen_US
dc.subjectKesantunanen_US
dc.subjectstatus sosialen_US
dc.subjectumuren_US
dc.subjectgenderen_US
dc.subjectfamiliaritasen_US
dc.subjectmasyarakat Bugisen_US
dc.titlePOLITENESS PRACTICES IN BUGIS SOCIETYen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record