Communication literacy in podcast media: An inferential-ostentive discursive pragmatics perspective

Authors

  • R. Kunjana Rahardi
  • Kristina Marta Noviance Universitas Sanata Dharma

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26555/bs.v45i1.1374

Abstract

This study describes the pragmatic meanings of phatic communication in podcast media from a discursive pragmatic perspective based on inferential-ostentive intent. The data source comes from seven episodes of the Agak Laen podcast titled "Didn't Get Angry Even After Crashing a Pajero? 'Habib, I'm Just Happy'" featuring Habib Husein Ja'far Al-Hadar and hosts Boris Bokir, Oki Rengga, Bene Dion, and Indra Jegel. Data collection employed the listening method with note-taking techniques, followed by data reduction and classification. Data analysis used the contextual analysis method involving conventional and virtual contexts, with multimodality-based cybertextual context being the most dominant, along with social, societal, situational, and cultural contexts. Research steps included identification, reduction, interpretation, and presentation of data analysis results. The results of this study are: (1) The pragmatic meaning of the phatic communication of greetings, (2) The pragmatic meaning of the phatic communication of jokes, and (3) The pragmatic meaning of the phatic communication of affirmations. Among the total data analyzed, greetings accounted for 41%, jokes for 36%, and affirmations for 23%, indicating that greetings were the most dominant form of phatic communication found in the podcast. The results of this study are believed to be very useful in developing the science of pragmatics, especially integrative pragmatics which is the integration of discursive pragmatics and multimodality in its five dimensions, namely visual, spatial, gestural, aural, and linguistic.

References

Blakemore, D. (2002a). Relevance and linguistic meaning: The semantics and pragmatics of discourse markers (1st ed.). Cambrige University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486456

___________. (2002b). Relevance and linguistic meaning: The semantics and pragmatics of discourse markers. Microfossils. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118685440.oth2

Carston, R. (2005). Relevance theory, grice, and the neo-Griceans: A response to Laurence Horn’s “Current issues in neo-Gricean pragmatics.” Intercultural Pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2005.2.3.303

Crandall, E., & Basturkmen, H. (2004). Evaluating pragmatics-focused materials. ELT Journal, 58(1), 38-49. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/58.1.38

Giordano, C. (2016). Pragmatic Competence and Relevance. System, 56, 144-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.12.009

Harley, D. (2013). Scholarly communication: Cultural contexts, evolving models. Science, 342(6154), 80-82. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1243622

Haugh, M. (2003). Japanese and non-Japanese perceptions of Japanese communication. New Zealand Journal of Asian Studies, 5(1).

___________. (2006). Emic perspectives on the positive-negative politeness distinction. Culture, Language and Representation, 3(October).

___________. (2015). Impoliteness and taking offence in initial interactions. Journal of Pragmatics, 86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.018

Haugh, M., & Hinze, C. (2003). A metalinguistic approach to deconstructing the concepts of “face” and “politeness” in Chinese, English, and Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(10–11), 1581-1611. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(03)00049-3

Hay, J. (2001). The pragmatics of humor support. Humor–International Journal of Humor Research. https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.14.1.55

Hickey, C., & Roderick, M. (2022). When jokes aren’t funny: Banter and abuse in the everyday work environments of professional football. European Sport Management Quarterly, 383-403. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2022.2124299

Jia, Y., & Wu, L. (2019). Jonathan Culpeper Michael Haugh Dániel Z. Kádár: The palgrave handbook of linguistic (Im)politeness. Intercultural Pragmatics, 16(4). https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2019- 0025

Kridalaksana, H. (1993). Kamus linguistic (Edisi Ketiga). Gramedia Pustaka Umum.

Ledin, P., & Machin, D. (2019). Doing critical discourse studies with multimodality: From metafunctions to materiality. Critical Discourse Studies, 16(5). https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2018.1468789

Leech, G. (2014). The pragmatics of politeness (1st ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001

Mahsun. (2007). Metode penelitian bahasa: Tahapan strategi, metode, dan tekniknya (Edisi Revisi). Raja Grafindo Persada.

Malinowski, B. (1935). Coral gardens and their magic: a study of the methods of tilling the soil and of agricultural rites in the Trobriand Islands. In Discourse & Society, 27(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.10.001

___________. (1939). The group and the individual in functional analysis. The American Journal of Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1086/218181

Marchiori, M., & Latora, V. (2000). Harmony in the small-world. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 285(3-4), 539-546. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4371(00)00311-3

McCready, E. (n.d.). Formal approaches to semantics and pragmatics (E. McCready & K. Yoshimoto, Eds.; 1st ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8813-7_17

Meyer, C. F., Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (2006). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. TESOL Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586740

Nicolle, S., & Clark, B. (1998). Phatic interpretations: Standarisation and conventionalisation. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, (11), 183-191. https://doi.org/10.14198/raei.1998.11.14

Norrick, N., & Haugh, M. (2015). Interdisciplinary perspectives on pragmatics: A festschrift for Jonathan Culpeper. In Journal of Pragmatics, 86, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.07.007

Rafieyan, V., Sharafi-nejad, M., Khavari, Z., Damavand, A., & Eng, L. S. (2014). Relationship between cultural distance and pragmatic comprehension, 7(2), 103–109. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v7n2p103

Rahardi, K. (2019a). Contexts as the determining roles of Javanese phatic ‘Monggo’: Culture-specific pragmatics perspective. Indonesian Language Education and Literature, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.24235/ileal.v5i1.5035

___________. (2019b). Contexts as the determining roles of Javanese phatic ‘Monggo’: Culture-specific pragmatics perspective. Indonesian Language Education and Literature, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.24235/ileal.v5i1.5035

___________. (2019c). Extralinguistic context roles in determining meanings of Javanese phatic expression mboten : A sociopragmatic perspective. International Journal of Humanity Studies (IJHS), 3(1). https://doi.org/10.24071/ijhs.v3i1.1898

___________. (2019d). Integrating social, societal, cultural, and situational context to develop pragmatics course learning materials: Preliminary study. Jurnal Gramatika: Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, 5(2).

___________. (2020). Cultural contexts as determinants of speaker’s meaning in culture-specific pragmatics. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.12-10-2019.2292181

___________. (2022). Triadicities of Indonesian phatic functions. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 12(12), 2641–2650. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1212.22

Rahardi, R. K., & Budhiono, R. H. (2024). Information layers of ostentive communication of hoaxes in the perspective of relevance theory of Sperber & Wilson. SUAR BETANG, 19(2), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.26499/surbet.v19i2.23484

Rahardi, R. K., Setyaningsih, Yulia., Dewi, R. P. (2016). Kefatisan berbahasa dalam perspektif linguistik ekologi metaforis. Seminar Tahunan Linguisitk UPI, 1–6.

Rasmussen, G. (2003). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 28(2), 253-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(97)84203-8

Rooij, R. van. (2004). Formal pragmatics: Semantics, pragmatics, presupposition, and focus. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(5), 749-755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.04.009

Sanz, M. J. P. (2015). Multimodality and cognitive linguistics. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.78.01pin

Senft, G. (2012). Phatic communion: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. https://doi.org/10.1075/hoph.2.20sen

Schneider, K. P. (1987). Topic selection in phatic communication. Multilingua. https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.1987.6.3.247

Schwartz, S. H., & Sagiv, L. (1995). Identifying culture-specifics in the content and structure of values. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022195261007

Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (2012). Pragmatics, modularity, and mindreading. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139028370.016

Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (2015). Beyond speaker’s meaning. Croatian Journal Philosophy, 15(44), 117-149.

Tomasello, M. (2000). The social-pragmatic theory of word learning. Pragmatics, 10(4), 401-413. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.10.4.01tom

van Poppel, L. (2020). The relevance of metaphor in argumentation. Uniting pragma-dialectics and deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics, 170, 245-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.09.007

Verschueren, J. (1997). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. Pragmatics, 28(2), 253-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)84203-8

Wearing, C. J. (2015). Relevance theory: Pragmatics and cognition. In Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 6(2), 87-95. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1331

Yus, F. (2021). Relevance theory, internet pragmatics, and cyberpragmatics: Smartphone Communication. Taylor and Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003200574-3

Žegarac, V., & Clark, B. (1999). Phatic interpretations and phatic communication. Journal of Linguistics, 35(2), 321-346. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226799007628

Downloads

Published

2025-04-10

Issue

Vol. 45 No. 1 (2025): BAHASTRA

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 R. Kunjana Rahardi, Kristina Marta Noviance

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.