A STUDY ON GENDER-BASED DIFFERENCES IN APOLOGY STRATEGIES OF ENGLISH DEPARTMENT STUDENTS IN CAMPUS SETTING
AbstractKey words: speech act, apology strategies, gender This study is aimed to find out the apology strategies used by students ofEnglish Department Universitas Brawijaya. There were two problems of thestudy: (1) what are the types of apology strategies used by male and femalestudents of English Department Universitas Brawijaya and (2) what are the factors that facilitate the differences of apology strategies used by male and female students of English Department Universitas Brawijaya.This study used qualitative approach since the data collected are in the form of sentences. This research design was content analysis since this study analyzed the utterances of male and female students. Ten students consisting of 5 male and 5 female students are chosen with certain criteria.This study found there are four strategies used by male students namely (1)explanation or account of situation, (2) expression of apology, (3) offer of repair, and (4) acknowledgement of responsibility. Female students use six strategies namely (1) expression of apology, (2) explanation or account of situation, (3) offer of repair, (4) acknowledgement of responsibility, (5) promise for forbearance and (6) concern for hearer. The result reveals that male and female students tend to use different strategies in making apology. Male students tend to use explanation or account of situation strategy while female students tend to use expression of apology strategy. Female students use acknowledgement of responsibility strategy toward friends more while male students only use this strategy toward lecturers. Direct offer of repair are mostly used by male students.The factors that facilitate the use of different apology strategies are femaleusually involves personal feeling, emphasizes in intimacy and solidarity andapologizes for light offences whereas male uses logical thinking, emphasizes inpower and status and prefer getting or giving solution rather than to sympathy.The writer suggests the next researcher investigate apology strategies fromdifferent aspects: ages, social status and so on. The next researcher mayinvestigate the differences in apology responses especially in using BahasaIndonesia. Last, the next researcher can use other theories about apology strategiesclassification.
Ary, D. Jacobs, L. C. Sorensen, C. Razavieh, A. (2010). Introduction to research in education. Eight edition. California: Wadsworth Group.
Bataineh, F. R. Bataineh, F. R. (2005). American university studentsâ€™ apology strategies: an intercultural analysis of the effect of gender. Journal of Intercultural Communication, issue 9. ISSN: 14014-1634. http://www.immi.se/intercultural/nr9/bataineh.htm
Chunlin, Y. (2013). Males and females in making apologies in chinese daily conversation the differences and the similarities?. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Volume 3-No.3. :268-273. ISSN:20103646.
Cutting, J. (2002). Pragmatics and discourse. London: Routledge.
Green, W. D. (2010). You just donâ€™t understand: women and men in conversation. Retrieved March, 3, 2014 from http://www.drdouggreen.com/2010/youjust-dont-understand-book-summary/
Fromkin, V. Rodman, R. Hyams, N. (1996). An introduction to language. Third Edition. Australia: Harcourt Brace & Company.
Holmes, J. (1990). Apologies in new zealand english. Language in Society, Volume 1: 155-199.
Holmes, J. (1995). Women, men, and politeness. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.
Holmes, J. (1989). Sex differences and apologies: one of aspects of communicative competenece. Applied Linguistics, Volume 10-No.2. Oxford University Press.
Jankowsky, K.R. (Ed.). (1985). Comparing apologies across language. Scientific and Humanistic Dimensions of Language. pp. 175-184. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lakoff, R. (1973). Language and womanâ€™s place. Language in Society, Volume 2-No.2, pp. 45-80.
Ogiermann, E. (2009). On apologising in negative and positive politeness cultures. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Olshtain, E. Cohen, D. A. (1983). Apology: a speech act set. Sosiolinguistics and language acquisition, pp 18-35. Rowley, MA: Newburry House.
Olshtain, E. Cohen, D. A. (1984). Request and apologies: a cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics. Volume 5, No.3.
Pratama, F. A. (2014). Strategies in apologizing among writers in pembaca menulis column at jawa pos newspaper. Unpublished Thesis. Faculty of Cultural Studies. Malang: Universitas Brawijaya.
Pratiwi, D. (2013) Gender-based differences in compliments and respective responses between teachers and students at ILP Kediri. Published Thesis. Faculty of Cultural Studies. Malang: Universitas Brawijaya.
Roronjawi, W. (2014). Apology strategies used by kevin rudd in his stolen generation speech. Unpublished Thesis. Faculty of Cultural Studies. Malang: Universitas Brawijaya.
Sudaryanto. (1993). Metode dan aneka tehnik analisis bahasa (pengantar penelitian wahana kebudayaan secara linguistik). Yogyakarta : Duta Wacana University Press.
Sugimoto, N. (1995). A Japan-U.S. comparison of apology styles. Communication Research, 24, 4, 349-370.
Suryadi, F. (2007). Apology strategies used by students of petra christian university based on relationship and degree of offense. Skripsi, Surabaya, Faculty of letters, Petra Christian University.
Tannen, D. (1990). You just donâ€™t understand: women and men in conversation. New York: William Morow.
Todey, E. (2011). Apology strategies as used by native & non-native speakers of english. United States: Iouwa State University.
Trosborg, A. (1987). Apology strategies in natives/non-natives. Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 144- 67.
Trosborg, A. (1995). Interlanguage pragmatics: request, complaint, and apologies. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Wardhaugh, R. (1986). Introduction to sociolinguistics. First Edition. United Kingdom: Basil Blackwell.
Wardhaugh, R. (2006). Introduction to sociolinguistics. Fifth Edition. United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yule, G. (2006). The study of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LicenseAuthors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under aÂ Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (SeeÂ The Effect of Open Access).