Analisis
Wacana
Asal Kata
Wacana berasal dari
bahasa sansekerta wac/wak/ vak . Kata wac
(kata kerja golongan III parasmaepada(m) artinya berkata/ berujar , sedangkan wacana artinya ‘membendakan’ perkataan/ tuturan.
Wacana dalam bahasa
Inggris discourse berasal dari bahasa latin discursus artinya
lari bolak-balik. Kata Dis (dari/ dalam arah yang berbeda) dan kata currere (lari), sehingga menjadi discursus atau Discourse
lari bolak-balik. Kata Dis (dari/ dalam arah yang berbeda) dan kata currere (lari), sehingga menjadi discursus atau Discourse
Dalam kamus Longhman
Distionary of the English Language disebutkan
bahwa wacana merupakan percakapan yang dapat diungkapkan dalam bentuk lisan dan
tulis.
Kamus Besar
Bahasa Indonesia disebutkan bahwa makna utama wacana
adalah komunikasi verbal
Pengertian
Discourse atau
wacana merupakan konteks bahasa yang ada
dalam sebuah percakapan atau interaksi komunikasi. Discourse juga salah satu
bagian dari kajian pragmatik. Discourse berfisat lisan (spoken) atau di kenal
dengan spoken text. Selain itu pengertian lain dari discourse yaitu:
Discourse is language
in context refer to language in action, while a text is written record of
interaction (communicative event).
Discourse bring
together language, the individual producing the language and context within
which language used.
Dalam memahami
discourse kita harus menganalisis keselurahan teks, tidak hanya satu kalimat,
tetapi beberapa kalimat sehingga keseluruhan kalimat dapat bermakna. "A
text of discourse consist of more than one sentences combine to form a
meaningful whole".
James Deese dalam
karyanya Thought into Speech: the Psychology of a Language (1984:72 dalam
Sumarlam,2009:6) menyatakan bahwa wacana adalah seperangkat proposisi yang
saling berhubungan untuk menghasilkan suatu rasa kepaduan atau rasa kohesi bagi
penyimak atau pembaca. Kohesi atau kepaduan itu sendiri harus muncul dari isi
wacana, tetapi banyak sekali rasa kepaduan yang dirasakan oleh penyimak atau
pembaca harus muncul dari cara pengutaraan, yaitu pengutaraan wacana itu.
Tarigan (1987: 27)
mengemukakan bahwa wacana adalah satuan bahasa yang paling lengkap, lebih
tinggi dari klausa dan kalimat, memiliki kohesi dan koherensi yang baik,
mempunyai awal dan akhir yang jelas, berkesinambungan, dan dapat disampaikan
secara lisan atau tertulis.
Definisi dari Buku
Discourse as a particular way of talking about
and understanding the world (or an aspect of the world). (Wacana merupakan cara
berfikir dan pemahaman tentang sesuatu yang ada) (Jorgensen
dan Phillips, 2002: 1)
Wacana merepresentasikan makna sosial dan bahasa
yang tidak sepenuhnya pasti (Jorgensen dan Phillips, 2002: 7)
Perbedaan situasi akan mempengarhui wacana,
apakah ide akan dapat terampaikan kepada pendengar atau pembicara karena bisa
saja terjadi kesalahpaman(Gee, 1999: 17).
Important
point of discourse (Gee, 1999: 22)
1. Discourses can split into two or more Discourses. For example, medieval “natural philosophy” eventually split into philosophy, physics and other sciences.
Wacana dapat dibagi menjadi dua atau lebih.
2. Two or more Discourses can meld together. For example, after the movie Colors came out some years ago, mixed Latino, African-American, and white gangs emerged. Prior to that, Latinos, African-Americans, and whites had quite separate ways of being and doing gangs, as they still do in the case of segregated gangs.
3. It can be problematic whether a Discourse today is or is not the same as one in the past. For example, modern medicine bears little resemblance to medicine before the nineteenth century, but perhaps enough to draw some important parallels for some purposes, though not for others.
4. New Discourses emerge and old ones die all the time. For example, in Palmdale, California (a desert community outside Los Angeles), and I assume other places as well, an anti-racist skinhead Discourse is dying because people, including the police, tend to confuse its members with a quite separate, but similar looking, racist Neo-Nazi skinhead Discourse.
5. Discourses are always defined in relationships of complicity and contestation with other Discourses, and so they change when other Discourses in a society emerge or die. For example, the emergence of a “new male” Discourse in the 1970s (ways of doing and being a “new male”) happened in response to various genderbased Discourses (e.g. various sorts of feminism) and class-based Discourses (the baby-boom middle class was too big for all young males to stay in it, so those who “made it” needed to mark their difference from
those who did not), and, in turn, changed the meanings and actions of these other Discourses
6. Discourses need, by no means, be “grand’’ or large scale. I used to eat regularly at a restaurant with a long bar. Among the regulars, there were two different Discourses at opposite ends of the bar, that is, ways of being and doing that end of the bar. One involved young men and women and a lot of male-dominated sexual bantering; the other involved older people and lots of hard luck stories. The restaurant assigned different bartenders to each end (always a young female at the young end) and many of the bartenders could fully articulate the Discourse at their end of the bar and their role in it.
Wacana dapat dibagi menjadi dua atau lebih.
2. Two or more Discourses can meld together. For example, after the movie Colors came out some years ago, mixed Latino, African-American, and white gangs emerged. Prior to that, Latinos, African-Americans, and whites had quite separate ways of being and doing gangs, as they still do in the case of segregated gangs.
3. It can be problematic whether a Discourse today is or is not the same as one in the past. For example, modern medicine bears little resemblance to medicine before the nineteenth century, but perhaps enough to draw some important parallels for some purposes, though not for others.
4. New Discourses emerge and old ones die all the time. For example, in Palmdale, California (a desert community outside Los Angeles), and I assume other places as well, an anti-racist skinhead Discourse is dying because people, including the police, tend to confuse its members with a quite separate, but similar looking, racist Neo-Nazi skinhead Discourse.
5. Discourses are always defined in relationships of complicity and contestation with other Discourses, and so they change when other Discourses in a society emerge or die. For example, the emergence of a “new male” Discourse in the 1970s (ways of doing and being a “new male”) happened in response to various genderbased Discourses (e.g. various sorts of feminism) and class-based Discourses (the baby-boom middle class was too big for all young males to stay in it, so those who “made it” needed to mark their difference from
those who did not), and, in turn, changed the meanings and actions of these other Discourses
6. Discourses need, by no means, be “grand’’ or large scale. I used to eat regularly at a restaurant with a long bar. Among the regulars, there were two different Discourses at opposite ends of the bar, that is, ways of being and doing that end of the bar. One involved young men and women and a lot of male-dominated sexual bantering; the other involved older people and lots of hard luck stories. The restaurant assigned different bartenders to each end (always a young female at the young end) and many of the bartenders could fully articulate the Discourse at their end of the bar and their role in it.
7. Discourses can be hybrids of other Discourses. For example, the school
yards of many urban middle and high schools are places where teenagers of
different ethnic groups come together and engage in what I have elsewhere
called a “borderland Discourse” of doing and being urban teenager peers (Gee
1996), when they cannot safely go into each other’s neighborhoods and when they
each have their own neighborhood peerbased Discourses. The borderland Discourse
is quite manifestly a mixture of the various neighborhood peer Discourses, with
some emergent properties of its own.
8. There are limitless Discourses and no way to count them, both because
new ones, even quite non-grand ones, can always emerge and because boundaries
are always contestable.
Reference
·
Jørgensen, Marianne dan Phillips,
Louise. 2002. Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. SAGE Publications
·
Gee, Paul Jems. 1999. An
Introduction to Discourse Analysis. USA: Routledge
Tujuan Wacana
Tujuan wacana yaitu
(1)
menyampaikan informasi,
(2)
menggugah perasaan, dan
(3)
gabungan keduanya
Ketiga tujuan
penuangan wacana itu masing-masing berfungsi informatif, emotif, dan
informatif-emotif
Kedudukan Wacana dalam bahasa
Unsur Wacana
Unsur Internal
·
Kata dan
kalimat
·
Kalimat :
serangkaian kata yang menyatakan pikiran dan gagasan yang lengkap dan logis
·
Kalimat:
ucapan bahasa yang memiliki arti penuh dan batas keseluruhannya ditentukan oleh
intonasi (sempurna)
·
Teks dan
koteks
·
Teks;
bahasa tulis, wacana; bahasa lisan, teks = naskah, analisis teks: objek kajian kata dan kalimat,
analisis wacana melibatkan konteks
tutran. Teks esensi wujud bahasa yang direalisasikan/ diucapkan dalam wacana
·
Koteks
(co-text); teks sejajar, koordinatif, memiliki hubungan teks lain
Unsur eksternal
·
Implikatur
·
Pengertian: Grice; ujaran yang
menyiratkan sesuatu yang berbeda dengan yang diucapkan (maksud/ keinginan. Jenis Implikatur: 1) Implikatur
konvensional ; pengertian yang bersifat umum dan konvensional, bersifat
nontemporer/ tahan lama. 2) Implikatur percakapan; makna dan pengertian bervariasi tergantung
konteks, nonkonvensional
·
Presuposisi. Turunan dari presupposition
‘perkiraan/ persangkaan/praanggapan’ Artinya Pengetahuan bersama, syarat yang diperlukan
bagi benar-tidaknya suatu kalimat. Misalnya: Dheweke dagang, merupakan
presuposisi bagi kebenaran kalimat Dagangane laris
·
Referensi: Hubungan antara referen
dengan lambang yang dipakai untuk mewakilinya. Referen : unsur luar bahasa yang
ditunjuk oleh unsur bahasa
·
Inferensi: Anton m Moeliono: proses
yang harus dilakukan pembaca/pendengar untuk memahami makna yang secara
harafiah tidak terdapat dalam wacana
·
Konteks
•
S: Setting and scene: latar
dan suasana. Latar bersifat fisik (tempat dan waktu) scene bersifat psikis
(suasana psikologis yang menyertai tuturan)
•
P: Partisipants: peserta
tutur (usia, pendidikan, latar sosial)
•
E: Ends: hasil/ tanggapan
yang diharapkan dari penutur, tujuan akhir pembicaraan
•
A: Act sequences: pesan/
amanat (bentuk dan isi pesan) Pragmatig bentuk pesan : lokusi, ilokusi, dan
perlokusi
•
K: Key: cara, nada, sikap
atau semangat dalam melakukan percakapan
•
I: Instrumentalities:
sarana / media percakapan
•
N: Norm: norma/ aturan yang
membatasi percakapan
•
G: Genres: jenis wacana
Ciri – ciri wacana
- satuan gramatikal;
- untaian kalimat-kalimat;
- memiliki hubungan proposisi;
- memiliki hubungan keherensi;
- memiliki hubungan kohesi;
- rekaman kebahasaan utuh dari peristiwa komunikasi
- mediumnya bisa lisan bisa tulisan; dan
- sesuai dengan konteks atau kontekstual.
Perhatikan
contoh berikut.
- Dilarang berjualan di sini (di papan pengumuman)
- Wah, indah benar lukisan yang dibuat olehnya (dalam dialog)
- Awas ada anjing galak (tulisan di atas pintu pagar)
- Bunga itu kukirimkan padanya (dalam sebuah novel)
Di sini tampak bahwa semuanya (a,b,c, dan d) bisa disebut teks, tetapi
hanya (a) dan (c) saja yang bisa disebut wacana, karena (b) dan (d) tidak
menunjukkan satuan makna yang jelas. Bila diperhatikan, “nya” dalam kalimat (b)
dan “ku” dan “nya” dalam kalimat (d) tidak memberi makna sepenuhnya
Post a Comment
Post a Comment