• RARA ARIFIA KUSUMAWARDHANA Fakultas Ilmu Budaya Universitas Brawijaya


Keywords: ideology, critical discourse analysis, speech actsThis research is aimed to identify the ideological construction behind Gerindra’s broadcasted campaign videos as interpreted by the viewers in the framework of Indonesian general election 2014. There were three problems to be solved in this study, namely: (1) what are the speech acts identified in Gerindra’s broadcasted campaigns; (2) what are the viewers’ interpretations towards Gerindra’s broadcasted campaigns and (3) what is the ideological constructionbehind Gerindra’s broadcasted campaigns as interpreted by viewers.This CDA research uses Fairclough’s model of CDA which comprises text analysis; discursive practice; and social pratice. On the level of text analysis, it is aimed to analyze the speech acts used in the campaign videos. Discursivepractice is aimed to find out the viewers’ interpretation after they watch thecampaign videos; and social practice is aimed to find out the impact toward theviewers and also identify the ideology to be constructed. This study useddescriptive qualitative method and document analysis as the research design. The data were collected from transcription of campaign videos and the result ofquestionnaire.This study reveals that commissive, representative and directive were types of speech acts used in the campaign videos. Based on the viewers’ interpretation Gerindra tried to convey that it is a party which could bring changes in Indonesia, and it tried to construct an ideology that Gerindra, a party which could bring changes for Indonesia especially in food security and the interests of the minority.Further researchers are suggested to choose more interesting objects that are related with real life such as talk show, newspaper, and so on. Besides, it isalso suggested for next researchers to choose other appropriate theories that will be used in the research in order to make it easy in analyzing the data. Moreover, further researchers are suggested to be updated about the recent research about critical discourse analysis. By doing so, further researcher can be triggered or inspired in conducting a research in fields of critical discourse analysis.


Abuya, E. J. (2012). A pragma-stylistic analysis of president goodluck ebele jonathan inaugural speech vol. 5, No. 11. Nigeria. Retrieved on November 8th, 2013 from:

Alverianto, R. (2014). Gerindra paling berideologi Soekarno. Retrieved on May 16th, 2014 from:

Amin Rais Sebut. (2014). Amin rais sebut prabowo anak ideologis soekarno. Retrieved on June 5, 2014 from:

Ayu, Joan Isma. (2013). Female stereotypes presented in Cantiq tabloid. Malang: Faculty of Cultural Studies, Universitas Brawijaya.

Ary, D, Jacobs, Cheser, Lucy, & Sorensen, Chris. (2010). Introduction to research in education 8th edition. California: Wadsworth Group.

Austin, J.L. (1962). How do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Blommaert Jan and Bulcaen Chris. (2000). Critical discourse analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology 29: 447-466.

Choyimah, N. (2012). Discourse Analysis. Malang: Brawijaya University.

Cook, G. (1989). Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cutting, J. (2002). Pragmatics and discourse. London: Routledge.

Dada, S. A. (2004). Introduction to pragmatics. In T. Bamisaye (Eds), An integrated study in language and society. Lagos: Majab publishers.

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. New York: Longman.

Fairclough, N. (1996). Language and power. New York: Longman.

Jati, M. Suluh. (2014). Language styles in meaning construction of wwf (world wildlife fund) advertisements. Malang: Faculty of Culture Studies, Universitas Brawijaya.

Kirkpatrick, R. (1999). Text Analysis at Different Levels: Schema Theory, Genre Analysis, Discourse Relations and Reference vol. 5 No. 1. University of Kumamoto. Retrieved on March 10th, 2014 from:


Levinson, Steven C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nikmah, N. 2013. Indirect promising act performed by the candidates on jakarta memilih : the final round at debate program on Metro TV. Unpublished Thesis. Malang: English Department of Brawijaya.

Ng’ambi, Dick. (2008). A critical discourse analysis of students’ anonymous online postings. Retrieved on March 5th, 2014 from:

Opheibi, B.O. 2009. Discourse, Politics and the 1993 Presidential Election Campaigns in Nigeria. Lagos: Nouvele Communications Limited.

Permana, D. (2014). Konsep ideology prabowo paling jelas. Retrieved on March 25th, 2014 from: ttp://

Phillips, L and Jorgensen, Marianne W. (2002). Discourse analysis as theory and method. London: Sage.

Searle, J.R. (1969). Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Searle, J. R. (1976). A classifiaction of speech acts, language in society, Vol. 5 pp. 1-23. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schiffrin D, Tannen D, and Hamilton, Heidi E. (Eds). (2001). The handbook of discourse analysis. UK: Blackwell Publishers.

Stanford Encyclopedia. (2011). Pragmatics. Retrieved on January 8th, 2014 from:

Trosborg, A.(n.d.) Text typology: register, genre and text type. Retrieved on March 10th, 2014 from:,720,text

Vahid, H and Esma’eli, S. (2012). The power behind images: advertisement discourse in focus. Retrieved on March 6th

, 2014 from:

Van Dijk, Teun A. (nd). 18 Critical discourse analysis. Retrieved on March 5th, 2014 from:

Wibowo, Y. 2013. Act of representative within obama’s speech at interfaith prayer vigil in newtown, connecticut. Unpublished Thesis. Malang: English Department of Brawijaya.

Widdowson, H. G. (2007). Discourse analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Williamson, J. (1978). Decoding advertisements: ideology and meaning in advertising. London: Marion Boyars.

Wodak, R. (1999). The discursive construction of national identity. Edinburgh.

Wodak, R and Meyer, Michael. (2008). Critical discourse analysis: history, agenda, theory, and methodology. Retrieved on March 8th, 2014 from:

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.