Publication Search

This study examines sarcastic implicatures in the 2024 United States presidential debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump, with a particular focus on Donald Trump’s utterances. The study aims to identify the forms and types of sarcastic implicatures employed in political discourse during the debate. A qualitative descriptive method with a pragmatic approach was used to analyze how implied meanings are constructed and interpreted within the context of political communication. The data consisted of debate transcripts and video recordings broadcast by CNN, selected based on utterances containing elements of sarcasm. Data analysis was conducted through four stages: identification, classification, coding, and interpretation. The findings reveal that sarcastic implicatures are realized in two main forms, namely indirect non-literal utterances and direct non-literal utterances. In addition, several types of sarcastic implicatures were identified, including undermining, mockery, insult, criticism, and threat. The most dominant type was undermining, which was used to weaken the image and credibility of political opponents. These findings indicate that sarcastic implicatures function as an effective rhetorical strategy in political communication to influence public opinion, shape audience perceptions, and strengthen the speaker’s political position in televised political debates.

This study aims to identify and determine the conversational implicatures that arise in the comment section of Instagram @kementeriankegelapan, which discusses the issue of poisoning related to the “Makanan Bergizi Gratis” (Free Nutritious Food) program. The research method used is qualitative with a pragmatic approach, which not only examines the surface meaning but also considers the context of the utterances. The theory applied in this study is the theory of implicature, specifically conversational implicatures. The data were obtained from the comment section of Instagram @kementeriankegelapan on posts concerning the poisoning issue of MBG (Free Nutritious Food). Data collection was conducted using the listening method (Simak) and the advanced technique of listening-without-participating in speech (simak libat bebas cakap). Data analysis used the referential identity method (padan referensial) with the advanced technique of selecting defining elements (pilah unsur penentu). The findings show that there are eight pieces of data in the form of conversations, each containing an idea or topic that specifically responds to the satirical post uploaded on the @kementeriankegelapan account regarding the MBG food-poisoning issue. The topics include: Azab (punishment), Tunggangan di Akhirat (conveyance/punishment in the afterlife), shouting “Long live Jokowi!”, MBG as a way to alleviate poverty, color codes, preventing fights/gang fights, maggots, and “licking”/being servile. Each of these topics has its own implicature.

Education is important because it provides knowledge and skills that are essential for self-development, character building, improving people's lives, and contributing to the progress of the nation and state. YouTube is a platform used by many people for entertainment and to relieve boredom. YouTube also offers a wide variety of videos and content, ranging from video blogs, entertainment videos, music, to educational videos. Pragmatics is a study that focuses more on what the speaker wants to convey through their speech, not just studying the meaning of words or phrases separately. In pragmatics, there are several terms of speech act analysis, implicature, deictics, presupposition, and politeness. In this study, the researcher analyzed the pragmatics of deictics. The research is titled “Pragmatic Deixis in the Booklist Playlist on Maudy Ayunda's YouTube Channel.” The researcher found three types of deixis, including 163 instances of personal deixis, 5 instances of place deixis, and 2 instances of time deixis. The research method used was qualitative description.

This study aims to examine pragmatic aspects, particularly speech acts and implicatures, in the lyrics of the song “Sedia Aku Sebelum Hujan” by Idgitaf. By applying a qualitative descriptive method through pragmatic content analysis techniques, this study examines locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary speech acts based on Austin's theory, as well as conversational implicatures based on Grice's framework. The results show that the song lyrics are dominated by expressive and commissive illocutionary acts that serve to express sacrifice, vulnerability, and unconditional commitment. Locutionary acts play a role in constructing a literal narrative about protection and relationship inequality, while perlocutionary acts are aimed at evoking feelings of security and gratitude in the listener. Furthermore, the study of implicature reveals deeper implied meanings related to self-sacrifice, acceptance of inequality in relationships, and anticipatory commitment, which are often conveyed through the metaphors of “rain” and “war”. This study concludes that the power of lyrics lies not only in explicit romantic expressions, but also in the strategic use of language to perform actions and convey implicit values of devotion, reflecting the complex dynamics of human relationships, even when they are unbalanced. These findings emphasize the importance of pragmatic analysis in fully understanding the communicative and artistic impact of song lyrics.