PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF DEIXIS IN THE SPEECHES OF

XANANA GUSMAO-THE FORMER PRIME MINISTER OF TIMOR LESTE

Edmundus Bouk
Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris FIP Universitas Timor
e-mail:edmundbouk@yahoo.com

Abstract
This study aimed at identifying the use of deixis in the speeches of Xanana Gusmao,
the former Prime Minister of Timor Leste. This study also aimed at pointing out Xanana’s
vision or attitude towards Timor Leste and the Timorese people by using particular type
of deixis in his speech. This paper was developed on the basis of the results of a research
conducted in 2013. There were three main problems of this paper, namely: (1) How are deixis
in the speeches classified into person, place and time deixes, (2) How does each type of deixis
reflect Xanana’s vision or attitude towards Timor Leste, and (3) How do ideas in the speeches
reflect Xanana’s visionor attitude through deixes. In this study, I applied a qualitative research
method. To get the data of the study, then four speeches of Xanana Gusmao from the internet
website were chosen to be the samples. The result of the research shows that for person
deixis, Xanana Gusmao used more 1st person plural ‘we’, 202 times or 68%. This shows that
Xanana was an ‘insertive’ leader to introduce the Timorese people as well as he was a part
of Timorese people. For place deixis, 10 times or 67 % which means Xanana Gusmao was
introducing Timor Leste as a new country to the outside world. Meanwhile, for time deixis
expressing present time, 36 times or 61% which means Xanana Gusmao was focusing his
attention on the present situation in Timor Leste. The ideas in the speeches reflected Xanana’s
vision or attitude through deixis by using a particular type of deixis. It means deixis in the
speeches determines or reflects Xanana’s vision or attitude towards Timor Leste and the
Timorese people. It is important to suggest that further research on political speeches can be
done on the basis of pragmatic or discourse analysis. The reason is that the message conveyed
in the speech can be linguistically and/or pragmatically interpreted.

Keywords: pragmatics, deixis, speech, context

Abstrak
Kajian ini bertujuan mengidentifikasi penggunaan deiksis di dalam pidato Xanana
Gusmao, mantan Perdana Menteri Timor Leste. Kajian ini juga bertujuan memahami visi
atau sikap Xanana terhadap Timor Leste dan masyarakat Timor dengan menggunakan
jenis deiksis tertentu di dalam pidatonya. Makalah ini dikembangkan dari hasil sebuah
penelitian yang dilakukan tahun 2013. Ada tiga masalah utama dari makalah ini, yakni:
(1) Bagaimana deiksis di dalam pidato dikelompokan menjadi deiksis person, tempat dan
waktu?, (2) Bagaimana setiap jenis deiksis merefleksikan visi atau sikap Xanana terhadap
Timor Leste?, dan (3) Bagaimana pikiran yang diungkapkan di dalam pidato merefleksikan
visi atau sikap Xanana melalui deiksis? Dalam kajian ini, saya menggunakan metode
penelitian kualitatif. Data penelitian diperoleh dari empat naskah pidato Xanana Gusmao
yang berasal dari internet yang dipilih untuk menjadi sampel. Hasil penelitian menunjukan
bahwa untuk deiksis person, Xanana Gusmao menggunakan lebih banyak kata ganti orang
pertama jamak ‘kami’ sebanyak 202 kali atau 68%. Hal ini menunjukan bahwa Xanana
seorang pemimpin yang ‘insertif’ untuk memperkenalkan masyarakat Timor Leste dan
Xanana merupakan bagian dari masyarakat Timor. Deiksis tempat digunakan 10 kali atau
67% yang bermakna Xanana Gusmao memperkenalkan Timor Leste sebagai sebuah negara
baru kepada masyarakat dunia. Khusus untuk deiksis waktu yang menunjukan saat sekarang,
36 kali atau 61% yang bermakna Xanana Gusmao memusatkan perhatiannya pada situasi
masa kini di Timor Leste. Pikiran – pikiran di dalam pidato merefleksikan visi atau sikap
Xanana melalui deiksis dengan menggunakan jenis deiksis tertentu. Ini berarti deiksis yang
digunakan dalam pidato mencerminkan atau merefleksikan visi atau sikap Xanana terhadap
Timor Leste beserta masyarakatnya. Penting untuk disarankan bahwa penelitian lanjutan
dapat dilakukan terhadap pidato politik berdasarkan kajian pragmatik atau analisis wacana.
Alasannya setiap pesan dalam pidato politik dapat diinterpretasikan atau dikaji secara
41
Vol.2, No.2 Agustus 2016 JURNAL TUTUR ISSN 2442-3475

linguitik dan/atau pragmatik.

Kata kunci: pragmatik, deiksis, pidato, konteks

INTRODUCTION
The main function of a language is to help people communicate with one another,
and it should be used properly in terms of its context. The meaning of any word in an
utterance or in a written text will be interpreted from which its context is called deitic
or deixis. That is why deixis is the single most obvious way in which the relationship
between language and context is reflected (Levinson, 1983: 54). In short, deixis is a word
that its referent moves depending on the time and space of uttering the word, and it is
a part of pragmatics which has a relationship with the words that change because of the
context. Deixis means pointing via language, and it is concerned with the ways in which
language encodes the features of the context of utterance or speech event. It is also stated
that deixis is a domain of pragmatics that has a connection with certain word or sentence
that changes the meaning based on the context. The change of the context is caused by the
change of situation including person, time and place.
Talking about pragmatics will refer to the study of the relationships between
forms of linguistics and the user of it. Levinson (1983:9) defined pragmatics as the study
of those relations between language and the context that are grammaticalized, or encoded
in the structure of a language. From this definition, pragmatics can be defined as the
study of the relationship between language and context that deals with language use.
Kreidler (1998:18) states that pragmatics is a branch of linguistics that is concerned with
the meaning. It means that the meaning of a linguistic form should not be predicted by
linguistic knowledge only but we also should take any concerns about the knowledge of
social world.
One aspect of pragmatics is deixis which refers to linguistic forms used to denote
this pointing is called deictic expression. In linguistics, deixis refers to the phenomenon
wherein understanding the meaning of certain words and phrases in an utterance requires
contextual information. Sometimes any words which have a fixed semantic meaning but
they may have a denotational meaning that constantly changes depending on time and/
or place are deictic forms. A word or phrase whose meaning requires this contextual
information – for instance, English pronouns is said to be deictic.
From my previous experience of teaching English to the English Study Program
of Timor University more than fifteen years, I found out that most students find it difficult
to identify deictic terms to understand a word of a sentence because of the meaning of
the world. Another reason is that there was no pragmatic subject in the S1 curriculum,
except linguistics, semantics, and grammar. Some University students have poor language
capabilities of identifying deixis in certain text analysis. It is sometimes quite difficult for
some English learners, especially for those who are beginners, to understand a sentence
because of the meaning of the word. They frequently find many words in the dictionary
each of which has a meaning. Since a word has various meaning, English as a Foreign
Language (EFL) learners often feel unsure of which meaning they have to use in order to
produce both spoken and written English. To get an appropriate meaning of a word, then
the EFL learners must have recourse something else namely pragmatics. For this, it is not
enough for EFL learners to have knowledge of grammar and structure only.

42
Vol.2, No.2 Agustus 2016 JURNAL TUTUR ISSN 2442-3475

This paper will mainly deal with deixis on the basis of pragmatic perspective
that can contribute to the interdiciplinary efforts of investigating how meanings and
interpretations of deixis in speeches are negotiated. It is sometimes difficult for some EFL
learners, especially those beginners to understand a word or a sentence because of the
meaning of the word. Since the word has various meanings, then the EFL learners often
feel unsure of which meaning of the word they have to use. This paper will try to bridge
the common problem of interpreting the information content of messages and talks into
account the process of adjusting how deixis category in the speech are realized. In short,
based on the background ideas above, then the research problems can be formulated as
follows: (1) How are deixis in the speeches classified into person, place, and time deixis?,
(2) How does each type of deixis reflect Xanana’s vision or attitude Towards Timor Leste,
and (3) How do ideas in the speeches reflect Xanana’s vision or attitude through deixis?

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The purpose of this part is to provide some basic concepts of related theories
which are relevant to this paper in terms of deixis. So, this part will deal with person,
place and time deixis.

Deixis/deictic terms
Yule (1996: 9) states that deixis is actually a technical term (from Greek) which
means ‘pointing’ through language. Any linguistic form used to denote this pointing is
called deictic expression which is used to indicate something in a particular context.
Deictic expressions are sometimes called ‘indexicals’. Deixis is clearly a form of referring
that is tied to the speaker’s context. Besides, Lyons (1977:636) states that the term deixis
is also used in linguistics function of personal and demonstrative pronouns, and of tense in
grammatical and lexical features. Beside this idea, the term deixis is also has prototypical
example of the use of demonstrative, and also personal pronouns (I, you, and he), specific
time and place.
Deixis is closely related to both indexicality and anaphora. It is important to note
that this paper mainly deals with deixis in spoken language, but the same concept can be
applied to written language like speech. Deixis is clearly a form of referring to which it is
tied to the speaker’s context. Levinson (1983:54) acknowledges that deixis concerns the
ways in which languages encode or grammaticalize features of the context of utterance
or speech event. Deixisalso concerns the ways in which the interpretation of utterances
depends on the analysis of the context of the utterance. The facts of deixis should act as
a reminder to theoretical linguists that natural languages are designed , so to speak, and
used in face-to-face interaction, and thus there are limits to the extent to which they can
be analysed without taking this into account.(Lyons,1977a: 589).

Types of Deixis
In the literature, there have been three traditionally recognized categories of deixis
based on three axes, namely spatial-socio-temporal axes. Spatial deixis is based on spatio-
axes (e.g. this, that, here and there). Personal deixis is based on socio-axes (e.g. I and
you). Temporal deixis is based on temporal axes (e.g. now, today, and yesterday) but not
including before or earlier. Levinson (1983) adds to them, social deixis, that is honorific
and discourse (or text) deixis. He further argues that visibility (i.e. visible or invisible)
should also be considered as another deictic category. He argues that, quite a number
43
Vol.2, No.2 Agustus 2016 JURNAL TUTUR ISSN 2442-3475

of languages of different stocks that encode a basic distinction between objects visible
and non-visible to participants. This distinction is often subsumed under place deixis,
as it tends to show up in demonstratives, but it is in fact an independent and parallel
dimension of deictic organization that ought to be added to the major five categories of
deixis (Levinson, 1983: 63).

Person deixis
Traditional categories of deixis are person, place and time. Person deixis concerns
the encoding of the role of participants in the speech event in which the utterance is
delivered. The category of first person is the grammaticalization of the speaker’s reference
to himself, second person refers to the encoding of the speaker’s reference to one or
more addressees, and third person denotes the encoding of neither reference of persons
and entities which are neither speakers nor addressees of the utterance. It is to say that
person deixis is a word that functions as personal pronoun. Person deixis is related to
personal pronoun, if its reference which is used appropriate with the context is being
used. Meanwhile, Levinson (1983:62) states that person deixis concerns the encoding of
the role of participant in the speech event in which the utterance in question is delivered.
Person deixis is a deictic reference to the participant role of reference, such as:
the speaker neither the addressee, the referent that is neither speaker nor addressee. The
criteria of persondeixis are the actor in the event, such as first person, second person, and
third person. In this case, the first person refers to the speaker, and the second person
refers to the audience or addressee and the third person refers to someone or thing which
is not the speaker and not the audience.Although person deixis is reflected directly in the
grammatical categories of person, it may be argued that we need to develop an independent
pragmatic framework of possible participant-roles, so that we can see, how these roles are
grammaticalized in different languages.

Spatial deixis/Place deixis

Spatial deixis or place deixis does not mean in isolation, it is only when you
know where the speaker is standing or what the speaker is indicating that it becomes
truly meaningful (Thomas, 1995: 9). These indexicals, indicated by demonstratives (e.g.
this, those) and place adverbials (e.g here, there) are used by (those, there). The deictic
devises in a language commit a speaker to set up a frame of reference around him/her.
Every language carries an implicit division of the space around the current speaker, a
division of time relative to the act of speaking and via pronouns. The concept of distance
is relevant to spatial deixis, where the relative location of people and things is being
indicated. English makes use of only two adverbs, ‘here’ and ‘there’. The adverbs here
and there pick out places according to their proximity to the location of the speaker; if the
speaker moves, the interpretation of the adverbs will change. When the speaker and his/
her addressee have moved, they can call the shade here and their original place in there.

Time deixis/Temporal deixis

Time or temporal deixis concerns itself with the various times involved in and
referred to in an utterance. This includes time adverbs like ‘now’, ‘then’, ‘soon’ and so
forth, and also different tenses. A good example is the word ‘tomorrow’, which denotes
the consecutive next day after every day. The ‘tomorrow’ of a day last year was a different
day than the ‘tomorrow’ of a day next week. Time adverbs can be relative to the time
44
Vol.2, No.2 Agustus 2016 JURNAL TUTUR ISSN 2442-3475

when an utterance is made (what Fillmore calls the ‘encoding time’, or ET) or when the
utterance is heard (Fillmore’s decoding time or DT). These are frequently the same time;
they can differ, as in the case of pre-recorded broadcasts, or letters.
Temporal indexicals concern the ‘when’ of the utterance. The time of an utterance
is reflected by the verb-tense (present past future) and adverbs of time (e.g then, now).
Deixis is divided into three temporal categories of ‘present’ (at the moment of utterance),
‘past’ (before moment of utterance), and ‘future’ (after the moment of utterance). This
division is more complex than it seems. Since it is at the time of the utterance that we
encounter it, temporal deictic is usually interpreted as ‘present tensed locutions’ applying
this principle.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In doing a research, it is important to design the research in such a way that it can
achieve the goal of the research. This study is a descriptive research by using qualitative
descriptive approach. The data of this study was in form of four speeches taken from
the internet websites as the samples of this study. To analyze data of the research, then
I applied the following stages in the analysis as suggested by Cohen et al. (2007:470),
namely: (1). Generating natural unit of meaning, (2). Classifying, categorizing and
ordering these units of meaning, (3). Structuring narratives to describe the contents of the
speech, and (4). Interpreting the data.

DATA ANALYSIS
The research data were taken from four speeches of Xanana Gusmao, and the data
will be presented in the following tables. On the basis of the tables of data, then it will
be followed by the discussion and/or interpretation of data in order to look at the use of
deixis in Xanana’s speeches. The data is analyzed in order to find out the answers of the
research problems which have been stated before.
Table 1: Person Deixis
No Person Text 1 Text 2 Text 3 Text 4 Total Percentage
Frequency (%)
1. 1st singular 5 10 16 15 46 15
2. 1 plural
st
41 38 70 53 202 68
3. 2 singular
nd
- 2 5 2 9 3
4. 3 singular
rd
6 4 2 1 13 4
5. 3rd plural 7 - 17 5 29 10
Total 59 54 110 76 299 100

From Table (1) it shows that Xanana Gusmao used all types of personal pronouns
in those four texts. The difference was on the frenquencies and distributions of each kind
of personal pronoun. The above table clearly shows that Xanana used more 1st person
plural ‘we’ or ‘us’ as 202 times or 68%, beside that 1st person singular, ‘I’ or ‘me’as 46
times or 15 %. Here are some examples taken from the research data:
1. First, please allow me to thank the government of Indonesia and in particular our
host for the warm welcome. (T.1.1)
2. I would like to express my profound appreciation to be able to take part in this
important initiative. (T.1.2)
3. I welcome you all, in my name and on behalf of the government and people of Timor
45
Vol.2, No.2 Agustus 2016 JURNAL TUTUR ISSN 2442-3475

Leste(T.3.1)
4. We are now ready to start our economic development policy.(T.1.16)
5. We have been able to work together towards a better future for our people.(T.2.7)
6. We feel that many people believe that the Timorese never live in peace that we were
killing each other. (T.3.23)

Data (1-3) show that Xanana Gusmao used less 1st person singular ‘I’ or ‘me’ in
his speeches, 46 times or 15%. Xanana used 1st person singular pronoun to welcome
and thank the audience. It means that Xanana Gusmao did not want to show his ‘power’
to his hearers. This is understandable since a speaker can be influenced by his culture.
Meanwhile, data (4-6) illustrated the used of 1st person plural ‘we’ or ‘us’ distributed in
those four speeches, 202 times or 68%. To support the interpretation of data analysis,
then Table (2) will show the use of 1st person plural ‘we’ which denote Timor Leste as a
country of the Timorese people.

Table 2: Person Deixis (1st Person Plural)

Text Text Text Text Total Percentage
No We
1 2 3 4 Frequency (%)
1. refers to Timor Leste or 24 30 56 46 156 77
Timorese people
2. refers to Timor Leste and 6 - - - 6 3
other countries
3. refers to the speaker and 11 8 14 7 40 20
the audience
Total 41 38 70 53 202 100

Table (2) clearly shows that Xanana Gusmao tended to use more 1st person plural
‘we’ to refer to Timor Leste or Timorese people, the total frequency is 156 times, or 77%.
This indicates Xanana Gusmao is an ‘insertive’ leader to be a part of the Timorese people.
The interpretation is that Xanana did not want to focus his speech on himself as a speaker.
It is also interesting to note that during the delivering of his speech, Xanana Gusmao
also used 1st person plural ‘we’ to denote himself and the audiece as his listeners, the
total frequency is 40 times or 20%.This shows that he treated himself inclusively with
the audience. He positioned himself to be a part of the audience. In political speech, the
speaker tended to use ‘we’ rather than ‘I’ or ‘me’ not for the sake of politeness only.Thre
is something lies behind the linguistic facts. The pragmatic interpretation should be based
on the context.

Table 3: Place Deixis

Text Text Text Text Total Percentage
No Here/there/this/that
1 2 3 4 Frequency (%)
1. refers to places in Timor - 1 4 5 10 67
Leste
2. refers to places outside Timor 4 - 1 - 5 33
Leste
Total 4 1 5 5 15 100

46
Vol.2, No.2 Agustus 2016 JURNAL TUTUR ISSN 2442-3475

Table (3) deals with the use of place deixis which refers to denote Timor Leste
as new born country. To use place deixis, such as ‘here’or ‘this’ indicates that Xanana
Gusmao wanted to introduce his country to the outside world. Here are some examples
taken from the research data:
1. This country needs to accelerate the extension, diversification and
modernization of agriculture. (T.3. 45)
2. This is a responsibility that must be carried out here in this Great House.
(T.4.21)
3. I thank all those who came from a far, crossing oceans to be here. (T.3. 3)
4. We present here different cultures, different political options. (T.1.24)
5. We will also be linking UNESCO to Government Ministers, who have
Responsibilities for education in these areas. (T.2.14)
From those three example, it is clearly seen that the use of ‘this’ and ‘here’ denote
the area of Timor Leste. It means that Xanana was seriously thinking about his country
which is still in the process of developing. Data number (1-5) refer to the area or region
of Timor Leste. The interpretation is that Xanana wanted to focus his attention on Timor
Leste. Besides, he wanted to introduce Timor Leste to the audience who came from other
countries.

Table: 4 Time Deixis

Text Text Text Total Percentage
No Coding Time (CT) Text 1
2 3 4 Frequency (%)
1. expressing Future Time 2 - 5 - 7 12
2. expressing Present Time 7 5 11 13 36 61
3. expressing Past Time 2 2 8 4 16 27
Total 11 7 24 17 59 100

Table (4) shows that Xanana Gusmao used time deixis that is referring to the present
condition during the time of speaking. He used time deixis such as ‘today’, and ‘now’,’this
moment’, to describe a situation which had the interpretation of the time at which he was
producing the utterance, such as in the following examples:
1. ......and today we live in a situation of multi-dimensional threats, which include
the recent economic and financial crisis.(T.1.4)
2. Today we have the normal Development Partners’ meeting. (T.2.6)
3. With embargo now placed our Timor Leste to put us in the list of countries
exporting terrorism. (T.3.41)
4. The Timorese people have trusted in democracy and now expect this to economic
progress and justice. (T.1.1)
5. We assume right from this moment the commitment to contribute to this goal.
(T.1.28)
Xanana Gusmao used time deixis such as ‘now’ (examples 3 and 4) to show to the
audience that he was a realistic leader. It means that he wanted to develop Timor Leste
by looking at the present situation in Timor Leste nowadays. The interpretation is that as
the head of the government, Xanana preferred not to turn back to what had happened in
the past. From historical point of view that from 1975, Timor Leste Leste experienced so
many political and social conflicts among the ethnic groups because of the civil war.

47
Vol.2, No.2 Agustus 2016 JURNAL TUTUR ISSN 2442-3475

CONCLUSION
Based on the data as presented in Tables (1-4), here are the conclusions of this paper,
namely: (1). Deixis in those four speeches can be classified into person, place and time
deixis. The distribution of all types of deixis may varyfrom one speech to another. Person
deixis was most frequently used by Xanana Gusmao in all speeches. First person plural
was dominantly used as the data showed that 156 times or 77% by using 1st person plural
to denote Timor Leste and the Timorese people.(2). Each type of deixis in the speeches,
reflects Xanana’s vision or attitudes towards Timor Leste and the Timorese people, since
it portaits Xanana’s vision or attitudes towards Timor Leste and the Timorese people. By
using more 1st person plural, it shows that Xanana was an ‘insertive’ leader. This means
that he was physically and emotionally being a part of Timorese people. Beside using
person deixis, Xanana also used place deixis which refers to Timor Leste. This also means
Xanana wanted to introduce Timor Leste as a new country to the outside world; and to be
the priority of development. By using time deixis which refers to the present tense, can be
interpreted as Xanana focused his attention on the present situation or present condition
when the speech was conducted. It also means Xanana was optimistic about the future of
Timor Leste without forgetting the terrible exprerience during the civil war since 1975.
(3) The ideas in the speeches reflected Xanana’s vision or attitudes by using deixis in his
speeches; so deixis in his speeches portrait his ideas as a leader to develop Timor Leste
for a brighter future.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Best,J.W.1981. Research in Education.(4th Ed).New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Borg,W.R, & Gall M.D. 1989. Educational Research: An Introduction. (5th ed). New York:Longman.
Buhler, K.1982. The Deictic Field of Language and Deictic Words. In R.J. Jarvella & W.Klein (eds). Speech,
Place and Action (pp.9-30). New York: Wiley.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cummings,Louise. 2005. Pragmatics A Multidiciplinary Perspective. Edinburg:Edinburg University
Press.
Cohen, L . 1997. Handbook Penelitian Kwalitatif. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, L. 2007. Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge.
Davis, Steven (ed).1991. Pragmatics : A Reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Denzin, N.K and Y.S.Lincoln.2009. Handbook of Qualitative Research (translated to Indonesian by
Dariyatno, et al). Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Davis, Steven (ed).1991. Pragmatics : A Reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Denzin, N.K and Y.S.Lincoln.2009. Handbook of Qualitative Research (translated to Indonesian by
Dariyatno, et al). Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Fillmore, Charles.1997. Lectures on Deixis. Stanford CA : CSLI Publications .
Grice,H.Paul.1986. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Grounded Theory. London : Sage publications.
Halliday,M.A.K. 1989. Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in Social SemioticPerspective.
Victoria: Deakin University.
Lyons, J. 1977a. Semantics, Vols 1 & 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Laurence R.Horn and Gregory Ward.2005. The Handbook of Pragmatics.Blackwell.

48
Vol.2, No.2 Agustus 2016 JURNAL TUTUR ISSN 2442-3475

Leech,G.1983. Principles of Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Levinson, Stephen C. 1979. Pragmatics and Social Deixis. Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the
Berkerley Linguistic Society, pp. 206-223.
Levinson,Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lin, G.H.C.2007. The significant of Pragmatics. Mindao Journal, Vol.3, 91-102 ERIC Collection.
Mey, L. Jacob. 1993. Pragmatics an Introduction. Oxford: Cambridge, Massachusetts: Blackwell
Publishers.
Nadar, F.X. 2009. Pragmatik & Penelitian Pragmatik. Yogyakarta; Graha Ilmu.
Saleh, Mursid.2008. Penelitian Pendidikan Bahasa. Semarang: Universitas Negeri Semarang.
Stalnaker, Robert.1999. Context and Context. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Sugiyono.2007. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&D.Bandung: Penerbit Alfabeta.
Sukardi.2003. Metodologi Penelitian Pendidikan.Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara.
Thomas, Jenny.1995. Meaning in Interaction an Introduction to Pragmatics. Essex: Longman.
Yule, G. 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

49