1

OVERLAPPING AND AGGRESSIVITY

IN “BUKAN EMPAT MATA SHOW”

(CONVERSATIONAL ANALYSIS)

A Thesis

Submitted in partial fullfillment to obtain sarjana degree

In English Department, Faculty of Letters

Hasanuddin University

ADIRAH ANDI AMIRUDDIN

F 211 08 374

MAKASSAR

2012

OVERLAPPING AND AGGRESSIVITY IN

(CONVERSATIONAL A

ADIRAH

Telah dipertahankan di depandinyatakan

Ketua,

Dra. Hj. Hamsinah Yasin, M.HNIP. 1954 1201 198703 2 001 Dekan Fakultas Sastra Universitas Hasanuddin, Prof.Drs.BurhanuddinNIP. 19650303 199002 1001 NIP. 19611028 198703 1003

ii

SKRIPSI

AND AGGRESSIVITY IN BUKAN EMPAT MATA SHOW

(CONVERSATIONAL ANALYSIS)

Disusun dan Diajukan oleh:

ADIRAH ANDI AMIRUDDIN

No. Pokok : F21108374

di depan panitia ujian skripsi pada tanggal 24 Mei 2012 dandinyatakan telah memenuhi syarat.

Menyetujui

Komisi Pembimbing:

Sekretaris,

Dra. Hj. Hamsinah Yasin, M.Hum Dra. Fransisca E. Kapoyos. M. Hum. 1954 1201 198703 2 001 NIP. 1955 0502 198703 001

Ketua Jurusan Sastra Inggris,Universitas Hasanuddin,

Prof.Drs.Burhanuddin Arafah.M.Hum.Ph.D. Drs.Husain Hasyim.M,Hum19650303 199002 1001 NIP. 19611028 198703 1003

BUKAN EMPAT MATA

Mei 2012 dan

E. Kapoyos. M. Hum NIP. 1955 0502 198703 001

Sastra Inggris,

Hasyim.M,Hum 19650303 199002 1001 NIP. 19611028 198703 1003

iii

UNIVERSITAS HASANUDDIN

FAKULTAS SASTRA

Sesuai dengan Surat Tugas Dekan Fakultas Sastra Universitas Hasanuddin

Nomor : 1159/UN.4.10.1/PP.27/2012 tanggal 07 Maret 2012, kami menyatakan

menerima dan menyetujui skripsi ini untuk dirumuskan ke panitia ujian skripsi

Jurusan Sastra Inggris Fakultas Sastra Universitas Hasanuddin

Makassar, 10 Mei 2012

Konsultan 1 Konsultan II

Dra. Hj. Hamsinah Yasin, M. hum Dra. Fransisca E. Kapoyos. M. Hum

NIP. 1954 1201 198703 2 001 NIP. 1955 0502 198703 2 001

Menyetujui :

a.n. Dekan

Ketua Jurusan Sastra Inggris

Drs.Husain Hasyim, M.Hum NIP. 1961 1028 1987 03 1003

iv

FAKULTAS ILMU BUDAYA

UNIVERSITAS HASANUDDIN

Pada hari Kamis Tanggal 24 Mei 2012, Panitia Ujian Skripsi menerima

dengan baik skripsi yang berjudul:

OVERLAPPING AND AGGRESSIVITY IN

BUKAN EMPAT MATA SHOW

(CONVERSATIONAL ANALYSIS)

Yang diajukan dalam rangka memenuhi salah satu syarat ujian guna

memperoleh gelar Sarjana Sastra, Jurusan Sastra Inggris pada Fakultas Ilmu

Budaya Universitas Hasanuddin.

Makassar, 24 Mei 2012

Panitia Ujian Skripsi :

1. Dra. Hj. Hamsinah Yasin, M.Hum Ketua .......................

2. Dra. Fransisca E. Kapoyos , M.Hum Sekretaris .......................

3. Drs. H. Fathu Rahman, M.Hum Penguji 1 .......................

4. Drs. H. Sudarmin Harun,M.Hum Penguji 2 .......................

5. Dra. Hj. Hamsinah Yasin, M.Hum Konsultan 1 .......................

6. Dra. Fransisca E. Kapoyos , M.Hum Konsultan 2 .......................

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Alhamdulillahirabbilalamin. First of all, the writer would like to express

her greatest praise to Allah SWT who has given the ways, spirit, strength, chance,

health to her in completing and finishing this thesis. Then, Salam and Shalawat to

Prophet Muhammad SAW, the greatest leader for all the human being.

The writer wants to convey her greatest and deepest thanks to her beloved

parents; Andi Amiruddin and Rahmah, to her brothers and sisters; kak Mallo, kak

Am , kak Annang, kak Accha, to her brothers and sister in law; kak Majid, kak

Mia, and kak Buhari, to her nephews and nieces, to her cousin A. Sukri and

family and also to her big family for their unlimited contributions, supports,

prayers, and everlasting loves for her. We are a happy family.

The writer also expressed her great appreciation and unlimited thanks to

her first consultant Dra. Hj. Hamsinah Yasin, M. Hum and to her second

consultant Dra. Fransisca E. Kapoyos, M. Hum for their great guidance,

suggestion, unlimited patience, and correction in finishing this thesis.

The writer also would like to extend her high appreciations to:

1. Prof.Drs. H. Burhanuddin Arafah.M.Hum.Ph.D, the dean of Letters Faculty,

Hasanuddin University, Drs. Husein Hasyim. M,Hum and Drs. Simon

vi

Sitoto,M.A, the head and the secretary, to all the lecturers who have given the

writer much knowledge and to all academic staff of English Department.

2. To dearest “Z” Sri, Yani, Ayu, Evy, Ummy, Indra, Alim, Huke, Zemha, mba

Desty and Nuzul. For their help, kindness, togetherness and supports. We are

one guys.

3. To pondok Terapung crew especially for Anna, Fira, kak Rani and zaztri for

their supports and loves and the times we shared.

4. To Pratiwi Sakti as her third consultant and to all members of Grotesque 08,

for supports and helps.

May Allah SWT rewards all of them with his mercy.

The writer realizes this thesis may be not perfect but the writer hopes this

thesis would be useful.

Makassar, Mei 2012

Adirah A. Amiruddin

vii

ABSTRAK

Adirah Andi Amiruddin. 2012. “Overlapping and Aggressivity in Bukan Empat Mata show” (Conversational Analysis), di bimbing oleh Hamsinah Yasin dan Fransisca E. Kapoyos.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui dan menentukan alasan-alasan yang menjadikan seseorang agresif dalam mengambil giliran berbicara. Mereka berbicara sebelum gilirannya tiba, sehingga mengakibatkan banyak overlapping terjadi antara host, co.host dan bintang tamu. Selain itu, penelitian ini juga bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan seberapa jauh pengaruh keagresifan partisipan dalam menghasilkan overlapping dalam talkshow ini.

Dalam penelitian ini, penulis menggunakan metode deskriptif kualitatif dalam mengelola data. Penulis juga melakukan study pustaka dan observasi dalam pengumpulan data. Pengumpulan data ini menggunakan beberapa tahapan, tahapan-tahapan tersebut mulai dari mendownload video dari www.youtube.com episode 12 Januari 2012, membuat script percakapannya, kemudian menganalisis overlappingnya dan mengungkap alasan yang mendasari penggunaannya.

Dari hasil penelitian, penulis menemukan bahwa ada tujuh alasan mengapa orang saling menyerang tanpa memperhatikan gilirannya untuk berbicara dalam talkshow ini, antara lain waktu yang terbatas, situasi, topik, hubungan partisipan, berbagi pengetahuan, membela diri dan rasa keingintahuan. Dari ketujuh alasan tersebut, alasan yang paling banyak digunakan oleh partisipan adalah saling berbagi pengetahuan untuk menambah informasi, menjawab pertanyaan atau sekedar memberi minimal respon. Penulis juga menyimpulkan bahwa perilaku agresif partisipan dalam mengambil giliran untuk berbicara benar-benar mempengaruhi banyaknya overlapping yang terjadi dalam talkshow bukan empat mata.

viii

ABSTRACT

Adirah Andi Amiruddin. 2012. “Overlapping and Aggressivity in Bukan Empat Mata Show” (Conversational Analysis), supervised by Hamsinah Yasin and Fransisca E. Kapoyos.

This research aims to identify and determine the reasons that make participants aggressive in turn taking. The participants speak before their turn, resulting some overlapping occuring between host, co.host and guest stars. This research also aims to describe the influence of aggressiveness of the participants in producing overlapping in this talkshow.

In this research, the writer used descriptive qualitative in analyzing data. The writer also took library research and observation in collecting data. The writer used some steps in collecting data, these steps were started by downloading the video from www.youtube.com broadcasted at 12th January 2012. After that, making the transcription of the conversation. Then, the writer analyzed the overlapping and dislosing the reasons of it is usage.

From the research, the writer finds that there are seven reasons why poeple are aggressive to take their turn to communicate in this talkshow such as limited time, situation, topic, speaker relation, shared knowledge, self defense and curiousity. From these seven reasons, the reason that participants always use is shared knowledge to add the information, answer the questions, or just give a minimal response. The writer also concludes that aggressive behaviour of the participants in speaking surely make overlapping occured in talkshow Bukan Empat Mata.

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITTLE ................................................................................................................... i

LEGITIMACY ...................................................................................................... ii

AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... iii

APPROVAL ......................................................................................................... iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ..................................................................................... v

ABSTRAK .......................................................................................................... vii

ABSTRACT........................................................................................................ viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... ix

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background ................................................................................................ 1

1.2. Identification of the problems ................................................................... 3

1.3. Scope of the problems ................................................................................ 3

1.4. Research questions ..................................................................................... 4

1.5. Objective of the writing ............................................................................ 4

1.6. Significance of the writing ......................................................................... 4

x

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Previous study ................................................................................................. 5

2.2. Review of literature ......................................................................................... 6

2.2.1. Discourse and discourse analysis ..................................................... 6

2.2.2. Conversation and conversational analysis ...................................... 7

2.2.3. Turn taking mechanism .................................................................. 10

2.2.4. Overlapping ................................................................................... 15

2.2.5. Agression ........................................................................................ 18

2.2.6. Talkshow ........................................................................................ 20

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY

3.1. Method of collecting data ............................................................................. 22

3.2. Method of analysing data ............................................................................. 22

3.3. Population and sample ...................................................................................23

3.3.1. Population ...................................................................................... 23

3.3.2. Sample ........................................................................................... 23

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. First scene ...................................................................................................... 27

4.2. Second scene ................................................................................................. 36

xi

4.3. Third scene .................................................................................................... 43

4.4. Fourth scene .................................................................................................. 51

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1. Conclusion .................................................................................................... 59

5.2. Suggestion .................................................................................................... 60

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................ 61

APPENDIX

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

As the social creature, humans live through interacting and communicating

with others. In interacting and communicating, they use language in spoken,

written and sign forms as a medium of communication in order to convey their

intentions, ideas and feelings. Everybody wants to make a good communication,

however sometimes a communication is not going along smoothly, particularly

the communication that happens between two people which each of them has

different mother tongue. According to Noam Chomsky (2000: 4), language

defines as a particular set of sentences that can be generated from a particular set

of rules. In this progressive era we are forced to run with all the advances of

science and technology.

Nowadays, the use of foreign languages is usual. There have been many

people who use foreign languages in daily lives. Maximum support is the use of

English in the daily life of our society and as we know that English is

international language in the world. So, it is very important to know and learn

English, although it is not our mother language. We need English to make

competitions with people in over the world, but English is not our primary

language. So, it is tolerated if we find some difficulties or some errors in using it.

There are two of the most problems in communication, these are written

and spoken, usually the mistakes in written communication are usually caused by

grammatical rules in written English and in spoken sometimes caused by speech

2

error or speech features on it. In this study, the writer explains the spoken

communication. The writer adds together two theories those are about

conversation and more specially turn taking mechanism and aggressivity. The

writer shows an aspect of turn taking mechanism that occurs when someone

makes a conversation, that is overlapping and how the participants make

overlapping because of aggressivity (behavioral aspect) . Guy Cook (1989:52) in

his book”discourse” said that:

Turn taking is the way in which speakers hold or pass the floor. Commonly turn taking must be done by more than one person, a process by which interaction allocates the right or obligation to participate in an interaction activity.

In a communication, the speakers or the listeners make some unsures of

conversation happen, but they are not conscious of these. They make some

overlapping, self initiations, back channels and etc in their conversation.

Furthermore, McCarthy in his book “discourse analysis for language

teacher”199:6 said that :

In conversational analysis, the emphasis is not upon building structural models but on the close observation of the behaviour of participants in talk and on patterns which recur over a wide range of natural data.

In creating a fluent conversation, the speakers need successfully negotiate

and signal turn taking. It is because turn- taking is considered as the machine that

can run the conversation smoothly. Thus, turn taking is very important in

conversation either formal or less formal conversation. However, in conversation,

sometimes there are irregularities occur, they are overlap and interruption

(Zimmerman and West, 1957 in Coates, 2004).

3

Based on explanation above, in this thesis the writer is interested in

analyzing spoken interaction or conversation. The writer focuses on the turn

taking as the reference of theory of the analysis. Turn taking is used to analyse the

conversation on movie, talk show, etc, in which conversation can be conducted by

two people or more. In this research, the data were taken from a talk show that is

Bukan Empat Mata Show. The writer analyzes how relationship between

overlapping and aggressivity of participants in their conversation, how

overlapping occur because of aggressivity. The writer chooses this talk show

because it is famous talk show to people in Indonesia. The writer is also sure in

this talk show there are many overlapping occur because of aggressivity.

1.2.Identification of Problem

The turn taking is used to analyze the conversation in which the people

take their turn in conversation. The writer is sure that people do not concern with

turn taking in their conversation, do not realize with the use of turn types in their

conversation and they do not know why the error in communication are happen.

In this case, the writer identifies the application of turn taking mechanism in

conversation of “Bukan Empat Mata show”. The writer finds out overlapping and

it is relationship to aggressivity (part of behaviour knowledge) that is produced by

participants.

1.3. Scope of Problem

In this research, conversational analysis is used as one analysis in language

teaching. In this writing, the writer focuses on turn taking mechanism. It becomes

one of many important aspects in conversation. In this research, the writer wants

4

to find out one of the turn taking mechanism aspect, it is overlapping and it is

relation to aggressivity in Bukan Empat Mata show during the conversation.

1.4. Research Questions

There are two research questions in this study, they are:

1. Why are the aggressivity effects overlapping occured in “Bukan Empat

Mata Show” ?

2. What is the influence of aggressivity of host and guests in producing

overlapping in “Bukan Empat Mata Show”?

1.5. Objectives of Writing.

Based on the research questions above, the objectives of writing in this

research are:

1. To disclose the reasons of aggressivity effects overlapping occured in

“Bukan Empat Mata Show”.

2. To show the influence of aggresivity of host and guests in producing

overlapping in “Bukan Empat Mata Show”.

1.6. Significance of Writing

Theoretically, the writer hopes this research gives additional knowledge to

readers about what kind of interesting things in aspects of conversation especially

in turn taking mechanism. Practically, the writer hopes this research gives any

contributions to the better understanding of turn taking and relationship between

overlapping with aggressivity for them who are interested in studying about it and

being more specific at linguistic academy. The writer also expects for this study as

a stepping stone for further researches.

5

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Previous Studies

In S1 program of English Department of Hasanuddin University, there are

many researches related to this study, but every research has difference with

others. They are:

1. Andi Yulianti Indah (2004) on her thesis “Turn Taking Mechanism

and adjacency pairs in situational series comedy Ally Mc. Beal. She

concentrates on two terms “turn taking and adjacency pairs “. The

purpose of her research is to discover and explain analysis of turn

taking mechanism in the dialogue of a situational serial comedy and

the use of types of adjacency pairs among the characters in the serial.

2. Haryani Ismail (2004) on her thesis “Turn taking mechanism in meet

Joe Black”. She focuses on self selection and gesture of body of turn

taking. She finds that in Meet and Joe Black movie, turn taking

mechanism is dominated by self selection.

3. Muhammad Fachruddin (2009) with title “turn taking mechanism in

Dorce Gamalama Show. He focuses on overlaps and interruption

occurs in Dorce show and what is the reason of it.

4. Nurul Chamsyany Hafid (2011). On her thesis “Turn Taking

Mechanism in Modern Family”Her research focuses on gender as

external of taking turn mechanism.

6

Those all the researches have related to this study, but there are some

differences with them, not only the sample but also the writer tries to focus on

overlapping and aggressivity during the conversation.

2.2. Review of Literature

2.2.1. Discourse and discourse analysis

The definition of discourse (from Latin discursus, meaning "running to

and from") generally refers to "written or spoken communication". In the first

sense is studied in corpus linguistics. Analysis of discourse in the second and third

senses is carried out within a variety of traditions that investigate the relations

between language, structure and agency, including sociology, feminist studies,

anthropology, ethnography, cultural studies, literary theory, and the philosophy of

science. Within these fields, the notion of "discourse" is itself subject to discourse

that is debated on the basis of specialized knowledge. Discourse can be observed

in multimedia forms of communication including the use of spoken, written and

signed language in contexts spanning from oral history to instant message

conversations to textbooks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discourse).

In his book “Discourse”, cook said that:

Discourse is analyze examines how stretches of language, consider on their full textual, social, and psychological context, become meaningful and unified for their users. It is rapidly expanding field, providing insights into the problems and processes of language use and language learning, and it is therefore of great importance to language teachers. Traditionally, language teaching has concentrated on pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary and while these remain the basis of foreign language knowledge, discourse analysis can draw attention to the skills needed to put his knowledge into action and to achieve successful communication

7

and discourse divided into two forms as spoken and written communication.

McCarthy also said, that “discourse analysis is concerned with the study

relationship between language and the context in which it is used”. Furthermore,

Cook (1990:6) also defines that :

Discourse as a study of the rules which used for communication as the language which is used for communication , discourse may consists of well formed grammatical sentences but it does not meant that discourse has follow the grammatical rules. Because the most important point is that the people who interact could understand each other. They should be able to relate what they are speaking or writing in a meaningful and united one. The quality of being meaningful and signified is known as Coherence (Cook: 1994; 4).

2.2.2. Conversation and conversational analysis

According to Miller (1999 : 2), the English word “conversation” is made up

of a combination of two latin roots “con” and “vers”. “con” means : with,

together, “vers” means : to turn about in a given direction. Thus, to engage in

conversation literally means to turn about with others.

Conversations follow rules of etiquette because conversations are social

interactions, and therefore it depends on social convention. Conversations are

sometimes the ideal form of communication, it depends on the participants

intended ends. Conversations may be ideal when for examples, each party desires

a relatively equal exchange of information, or when one party desires to question

the others. On the other hand, if permanency or the ability to review such

information is important, written communication may be ideal or if time

efficiency is most important, a speech may be preferable.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversation).

8

Based on Guy Cook (1990:51), the terms of conversation has some

characteristics as follow:

a. It is primarily necessity by a practical task.

b. Any unequal power of participants is partially suspended.

c. The number of participants is small.

d. Turns are quite short.

e. Talks are primarily for the participants and not for an outside audience.

According to Dobson (1997: 17), conversation as an informal interchange

of though and information by spoken words. He gives some elements of

conversation as follow:

a. Quality and Answer

Quality and answer are major elements in natural conversation which

become the backbone of directed conversation session. Example:

A: do you have a novel?

B: yes, I do. Will you borrow ?

b. Comments

Comments here are additional ingredients in all conversation, either in the

form of rejoinders (yes, right).

c. Exclamation

Exclamation is a reaction of participants in a conversation to unexpected

circumstances from linguistic or non-linguistic environment.

9

These are the elements of conversation, these like the patterns of

conversation. The people do these when they are talking with others, although

sometimes they are not conscious that they are arranging these steps.

Conversation analysis (commonly abbreviated as CA) is an approach to

the study of social interaction, embracing both verbal and non-verbal conduct, in

situations of everyday life. As its name implies, conversational analysis begins

with a focus on casual conversation, but its methods were subsequently adapted to

embrace more task and institution centred interactions, such as those occurring in

doctors' offices, courts, law enforcement, educational settings, and the mass

media. As a consequence, the term 'conversation analysis' has become something

of a misnomer, but it has continued as a term for a distinctive and successful

approach to the analysis of social interaction. It is a branch of sociology which

studies the structure and organization of human interaction, with a more specific

focus on conversational interaction.

Conversation analysis also regarded as distinct from discourse analysis is

branch of study which is set out to discover what method people use to participate

in and make sense of interaction. It also describes how participant in interaction

handle a conversation how they judge how can speak and when. According to

Levinson (1983: 212) in Cook 1989:52 conversational analysis is a branch of

study which set out to discover what order there might be in this apparent chaos.

10

According to Cheepen and Monaghan I1990: 3-4) conversation can be

classified into two kinds, transactional and interactional conversation, depending

on the way in approaching the goal it has weather it is external or internal to the

encounter they said that a goal that is concerned with having an effect of some

kind on the outside world. So, the participants who involves in this conversation

event may possibly try to find out , for example the subject of the discussion by

asking questions because it intimately bound up with the perceived goal such as to

make decision, to achieve an understanding and to initiate action. Having an

external goal to the encounter, this kind of conversational event is called

transactional conversation. The most obvious transactional events involing speech

include thing such as buying a ticket in a travel agency, conversation with doctor,

etc. In their conversation there are some purposes and interactional conversation

has as it is primary functions of lubrication of the social wheels, establishing

roles, and relationship with another person prior to the interactional conversation,

conforming and consolidating relationship, there is no special purpose.

2.2.3. Turn taking mechanism

Turn taking as a basic unit of conversation. Thus, in a conversation, there

is always turn taking and it means that there is always a shift of speakers.

According to Sacks, Schegloff , & Jefferson, 1974, turn taking is a process by

which interaction allocate the right or obligation to participate in an interactional

activity. Another expert, Wooffitt (2005: 26) points turn taking is ordinary

conversation is a remarkable achievement. At the start of any period of

interaction, neither party knows in advance how many turns they take, what the

11

topic will be or the order in which they will addressed, how long each turn may be

whether or not someone else will join in, and if they do, how turn are to be

allocated among the respective parties, and so on.

Turn taking as the basic form of the organization for conversations

presupposes the exchange of participants role as speakers and listeners. The

organization for establishing who speaks first and who speaks next is performed

according to rules or conventions. In the other hand, Levinson (1983:296), said

that Turn taking of talk across two participants in A-B-A-B-A-B model. In this

model one participant, A talks, stops, another B, start talks, stops. The starting

point about Turn Taking seems simple enough one person talks, and then another.

The possibly for another speaker to start speaking explain in the rules below:

1. If the current speaker selects another speaker, that speaker must speak next.

2. If the current speaker does not select another speaker, someone may self-select

as next speaker.

3. If nobody self selects, the current speaker may continue.

Sacks, Schegloffm, and Jefferson call it as the local management system.

In addition, turn taking deals with single transitions at time, between only two

individuals (current speaker and next speaker).

Turn taking mostly occurs in conversation that takes into consideration

become interaction between the speakers and hearers. In many formal situations,

such as committee meetings and debates, there are often explicit markers showing

that a speaker is about to hold and pass the floor and indicating who speaks next.

12

This can happen in informal situation too, but there taking cues are usually more

subtle. Example:

These vary greatly in level of formality and appropriacy to different

situation (if I may, Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I might say something’, can I just

come here,’, Hang on a minute’ and ’shut up will you, I can’t get a word in

edgewise’).

Discourse analysis have observed how participants organise themselves to

take turns at talk. In any piece of natural English discourse, turns occur smoothly,

with only little overlap and interruption, and only very brief silences between

turns (on averages, less than a second). Example of turn taking occurs in a natural

data take from Bukan Empat Mata Show:

A : Bapakmu jualan balon dulu yah?

B : kok tau?

A: Nah ini tabung gasnya disini,,hahaha

B: hahaha...diama gitu gak enak ahh gak enakk, jangan

gitu dong yang bener

A : loh katanya d suruh ngerayu..

B: yang enak dong.

13

That conversation shows the turn taking mechanism, some overlapping

and self initiation occur. Aspects of turn taking mechanism needed to make a

good communication. When participants speak, they need some responses from

the listeners, these parts explain in the following:

1. Overlapping or interrupting is a term which is used in conversation

analysis to describe a face-to-face interaction in which two or more person

talk in same time as another speaker to demonstrate an interest in the

conversation.

2. Initiation, sometimes realized in an utterance, or simply the writer makes a

definition that initiation is starter of a conversation. If no one is selected,

they may speak of their own accord, then initiation or utterance may

creates a negative or positive response, or a follow up these parts also

known as answering question.

3. Back channel or minimal response. It is no meaning response and short,

usually consists of vocalisations such as mm, ah-ha, and short words or

phrases such as yeah, right, sure. Minimal responses usually depend on

culture of the speaker, some languages have back channels vocalisation

that sound odd in other language.

4. Response, response is other important thing of turn taking. Response can

be interpreted as answering question,it is used to construct turn taking

which is presented in the form of phrases, simple sentences, and long

sentences consisting of several clauses, to respond the speaker to keep the

flow of conversation going. Furthermore, that makes participants are able

14

to understand and share roles in conversation as speakers and hearers in a

good way.

Then, according to Sternstorm (1994) the utterance of a speaker in a

conversation are not isolated phenomena but depend on entire context for their

interpretation. She further explains that exactly whether speaker means by saying

something must be interpreted not only in relation to the immediate context

referring to what the previous speaker, just uttered, but also in relation to the

wider context, which includes the speech situation, the topics, the speaker and

their relationship to each other, and the knowledge. They share about the world

(Sternstrom, 1994 :26).

a. Speech situation

Speech situation in which a conversation takes place can very

according to various different ways, such as: it can be a formal/informal

situation, it can involve talking about every day matters or highly technical

or ones, it can involve speakers who are very intimate or those who have

never met before, it can be private or public nature.

b. Topic

Topic is the subject or the theme in a conversation as the material of

discussion. Common topic becomes more easy to discuss in a

conversation. If the participants are close about the topic, include the

vocabulary, they make that conversation easy. In the other hand, if the

vocabulary of that topic is not familiar for them, the topic becomes more

difficult to discuss.

15

c. Speaker relation

The way we talk depends on not only on what we are talking about

but probably even more on who we are talking to. Therefore the level of

formality does not have to chage as a result of the choice of the topic.

Even a scientific topic can be discussed in a relaxed way.

d. Shared knowledge

Shared knowledge is the knowledge that speakers have in common,

the participants share their knowledge to other participants, if a participant

has wider knowledge than others about the topic or matters of their

conversation.

2.2.4. Overlapping

Overlapping is a term which is used in conversation analysis to describe a

face to face interaction in which two or more person talk in the same time as

another speaker to demonstrate an interest in the conversation, it occurs in only

about five percents of conversation or less, strongly suggesting that speaker

somehow know exactly when and where to enter. Overlap happens when there is

more than one voice heard together. It sometimes happens when someone

misunderstands about the end of the turns and starts speaking too soon. (Deborah

Tannen, Gender and Discourse. Oxford Univ. Press, 1994).

16

In the other hand, cooperative overlap can occur when one interlocutor is

showing her enthusiastic support and agreement with another, when the speakers

view silence between turns as impolite or as a sign of a lack of rapport. While an

overlap may be construed as cooperative in a conversation between two friends, it

may be construed as an interruption when between boss and employee. Overlaps

and interrogative have different meanings, it depends on the speaker’s ethnicity,

gender, and relative status differences. For example, when a teacher a (person of

higher status) overlaps with her student (a person of lower status), typically the

overlap is interpreted as an interruption.

This study describes what happens when more than one person talk at the

same time in conversation. It undertakes to specify when such occurrences are

problematic for the participants and for the organization of interaction, what the

features of such overlapping talk are, and what constraints an account of

overlapping talk should meet. It describes the practices employed by participants

to deal with such simultaneous talk, and how they are forming an organization of

practices which is related to the turn-taking organization previously described by

Sacks et al. 1974. This “overlap resolution device” constitutes a previously

unexplicated component of that turn-taking organization, and one that provides

solutions to underspecified features of the previous account.

Overlapping in conversation are perceived differently according to culture

differences. Deborah Tannen and Roger abrahams, as reported in Miller

(1999:5-6) .

17

According to Wardhaugh (1985), the reasons of overlapping occur are:

a. Asking for help

Wardhaugh states that asking for help or directions to stranger

when they are doing something is also to interrupt their activity. In such

condition, they have to state briefly their purpose of interupting them.

b. Breaking up

Wardhaugh states the breaking up happens when the topic of

conversation changes and shifts into another related topic unpredictably.

c. Completing

Whardhaugh says completing is one way of turn taking

irregularities which is less offensive is by trying to complete he/she is

saying there is also a time when the interlocuter is interupting the speaker

by trying to complete something he/she is saying and trying to use that

opportunity to lead the conversation straightly using his or her own

sentence.

d. Correcting

Whardaugh states that interupting and overlapping for the sake of

correcting as opposed to seeking clarification is a much more delicate

matter.

18

e. Disagreeing

Words like wait a minute, hold down, that’s no right and I do not

agree you have got that wrong are the options of words that the speaker

can use to deny or reject some points that another speaker makes.

Discourse happens when the first speaker hears which he/she sharply

disagree with what the interlocuter is saying and that is way he/she tries to

interrupt of overlapping him.

f. Seeking clarification

It means that the speaker wants to get a clear understanding. There

are many words that can be used to request a repetition and or clarification

in the conversation, such as excuse me, pardon me and I beg your pardon.

2.2.5. Aggression

Psichology can be defined as the science of the activities of the individual.

The word activity is used here in very brood sense. It indicates not only motor

activities like walking and speaking, but also cognitive (knowledge getting)

activities like seeing, hearing, remembering and thinking and emotional activities

like lauhing and crying and feeling of sad ( Woodworth and Margvis, 1957 : 30).

Psychology also definited by Drever (1960,227) he said that psichology as a

branch of science, psichology has been defined in various way, according to the

particular method of approach adapted or field of study proposed by the individual

psichologist.

19

The term aggression comes from the Latin aggressio, meaning attack. The

Latin was itself a joining of ad- and gradi-, which meant to step or to go. The first

known use dates back to 1611, in the sense of an unprovoked attack. A

psychological sense of 'hostile or destructive behavior' dates back to 1912, in an

English translation of the writing of Sigmund Freud. Alfred Adler had theorized

about an 'aggressive drive' in 1908. Child raising experts began to refer to

aggression rather than anger from the 1930s. In narrower definitions that are

commonly used in psychology and other social and behavioral sciences,

aggression involves an intention to cause harm, even if only as a means to an end.

It has alternatively been defined as acts intended to increase relative social

dominance. One person to another may not be considered aggression in the same

sense. Aggression can take a variety of forms and can be physical or be

communicated verbally or non-verbally. Aggressive communication also definited

as a style in which individuals express their feelings and opinions and advocate

for their needs in a way that violates the rights of others. Thus, aggressive

communicators are verbally and/or physically abusive.

Overlapping are correlated with aggressiveness to escalate confrontations

(McGregoret al. 1992b; Dabelsteen et al. 1997), suggesting that matching and

overlapping are honest signals of aggressive intent. Furthermore, those individuals

producing overlapping signals are perceived as more serious rivals (Naguib et al.

1999) and seem to be preferred by females as extrapair mates (Otter et al. 1999).

Writer is sure that when someone makes some overlappings, it demonstrates

whether there is aggressiveness aspect as booster in a communication. We may be

20

passive and not advocate for ourselves, aggressive and attempt to run roughshod

over others, or passive-aggressive and smile while sabotaging others behind their

backs. No wonder we have so many problematic relationships and feel so isolated.

In order to build healthy relationships, we must learn to be assertive - that is, to be

clear, direct, and respectful in how we communicate.

2.2.6. Talk show

Talk show is a television program or radio program where one people (or

group of people) discuss various topics put forth by a talk show host. Sometimes,

talk shows feature a panel of guests, usually consisting of a group of people who

are learned or who have great experience in relation to whatever issue is being

discussed on the show for that episode. In Indonesia, talk show is one of TV

programs that has the biggest income.

According to Timberg (1994:274) in (Van Son, Ludwina, 2004), the

genres of the talk shows refer to at least two types: the personality centred shows

and the more issues centred ones. In the first category we observe primarily about

more personnel and noncontroversial topic. The second is the letter displays a

kind of group discussion about topics that are socially oriented and often

controversial. Bukan Empat Mata Show belongs to the first category.

Comedy talk show Bukan Empat Mata is a talk show which uses comedy

perspective. Hosted by Tukul Arwana, this program is broadcasted every Monday

to Friday in a week on 21:00 up to 22:30 WIB. Bukan Empat Mata talk show is

21

not only gives some information but also fresh comedy and contain other

entertainment such as music. Each broadcast of this event is always inviting actor

and actress as the guest stars. The host always takes an interesting and lively topic

as a mater to discuss with guests. This is going a long conversation between the

guest and the host. This talk show becomes famous to the people because its host,

Tukul Arwana. He could make this program become interesting with his special

jargon “Kembali ke Laptop”, what the interesting and timeless talk show. The

writer’s task here is to analyze the turn taking mechanism in their conversation.

22

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

3.1. METHOD OF COLLECTING DATA

The writer did an observation on internet, television and some books

which related to the study in collecting the data.

To get the data needed, the writer downloaded data from

www.youtube.com and have been presented by Indonesian Television program,

Trans 7. Then, the writer wrote down the transcription of the conversation in

“Bukan Empat Mata Show”.

The writer also took library research in collecting data, the writer

completed data in the libraries (Centre of library of Hasanuddin University and

Library faculty of Letters of Hasanuddin University), and the writer read books

which have relation to this study, browsing from internet (articles, books and

blogs) and from the previous studies.

3.2. METHOD OF ANALYSING DATA

The writer used descriptive qualitative method to analyze the data. In this

case, the writer took several steps as method of analyzing data: firstly, the writer

made the transcription of data that have been downloaded and the writer used the

mark (*) for overlapping. Then, the writer identified overlapping and the reason of

aggressivity of their conversation. Finally, the writer analyzed data using

23

descriptive qualitative, according to the occurences in the dialogue and the result

is presented descriptively.

3.3. POPULATION AND SAMPLE

3.3.1. Population:

The population of this study was the episode from June 2011 to

March 2012 of the talk show “Bukan Empat Mata” that was broadcasted

from Monday to Friday in Indonesian channel, Trans 7.

3.3.2. Sample:

The writer chosen one episode, it was presented on 12th January

2012 and the topic was “Mendadak Komedi” that contained exclusive part.

The episode consisted of six scenes. The writer chosen four scenes of

those, (1,2,3, and 4) as samples of this research and the duration of the

video was about 49: 03 minutes.

24

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter, the writer shows and explains the analysis of data from

Bukan Empat Mata Show and all at once the writer answers the research

questions. After using the steps of analyzing data, the writer tries to find out the

answer of these questions.

For the question number one “why are the aggressivity effects overlapping

occured in “Bukan Empat Mata Show”? In a conversation, the participants can be

very aggressive to utter what they want to say or their idea and disobeidently the

rules of turn taking mechanism, they take their turn incorrectly and sometimes

they can be more aggressive influenced by some following reasons:

a. Limited time

The limited time of a broadcasting (talkshow) can become a factor why are

the participants so aggressive, there is not enough time to utter their idea. They

take the turn incorrectly, they attact to join in that conversation although the other

participants are speaking in that time. They are afraid if they do not get their turn

to speak because of show time is limited. So, they speak aggressively and produce

some overlapping.

25

b. Speech Situation

The situation of conversation in this talkshow is informal, the participants

fell free to utter what they want to say without nominating by the previous

speaker, they have the right to join in that conversation because they are

participants (host or guests) but they attack aggressively. They are not aware that

it is not their turn and this situation runs the chance to overlapping happens. When

two or more participants make a conversation. In an other side, there are two

partipants who also make a conversation too in the same time. So, overlapping

can happen because of the situation of show is informal.

c. Topic

The talkshow is discussing some topics and these topics are very familiar

for the participants. As we know that the real topic of that episode is “Mendadak

Komedi”. The participants come from the entertainment and the basic of their

profession as comedian. That’s why the topic of this talkshow is very familiar for

them. They would not find the difficult idea or vocabulary to discuss this topic. It

makes them aggressively express their idea, they spare for their idea and finally

produce overlapping unconsciously.

d. Speaker Relation

The relation can be a determining of aggressivity in a conversation. The

relation of host, co. Host and guests are intimate, friends and come from the same

background of occupation. That is why they fell free to express their idea. They

26

communicate aggressively to each others. So, overlapping happens and

sometimes they are not conscious of these.

e. Shared knowledge

When they are discussing about a topic, then a participant knows about

that topic, he/she really wants to add the information. Though, they just give some

agreements expressed by minimal respon without repeating what the current

speaker says or just answer the question. It indicates that the participants know

about the conversation. The second possibility is the other participants do not

know about the topic and she/he tries to make understanding by giving the

addition of information, but sometimes he/ she express their knowledge

aggressively. They are not pay attention to the other participant’s turn, so

overlapping can happen.

f. Self defense

In a conversation, sometimes a participant receives something unpleasure

words from the other participants, to refuse those words she/he does self defense.

She/he comes to the conversation aggressively to tell their self defense, in that

situation an overlapping probably can happen.

g. Curiousity

When the participants (guest or host) talk about something, but she/he

does not know about the topic, she/he becomes anxious to find out the meaning or

27

the information. She/he joins in that conversation to asks the others aggressively.

Overlapping can happen in this situation too.

The examples of these reasons are showing in the following :

4.1. First Scene

a. Limited Time

Line 161-163

Cintyasari : *Yaaaa

Oki : *Yang ini, tolong yang satu ini sampah masyarakat

dibersihkan pak, tolong *pak.

Tukul : *Baik, tema kita pada malam ini, temanya

adalah Mendadak Komedi

The host overlaps Oki aggressively and tries to cut oki’s sentence by

telling the topic of the show and it means that they have to change their topic and

make self initiation to save the time.

b. Speech Situation

Line 3-5

Tukul: kamu makin seksi aja

Oki: ahh udah banyak yang sering ngomong *gitu mas

Tukul: *aduh

28

In this conversation, the informal situation makes the host and guest fell

free to overlap each other. Tukul overlaps Oki with a minimal response.

Line 77-81

Tukul : Susi itu flexible, boleh kamu nyari istri lagi dengan 3 syarat: satu

harus lebih muda,harus lebih cantik dan ketiga langkahi dulu

* mayat saya looohh

Vega : *Tunggu,tunggu mas

Cintyasari : Ihhh...kayak berani *aja

Vega : *oh, berarti

Tukul : *oh iya dong, di balik keberhasilan

suami ada istri yang sangat luar biasa

In the first conversation, Vega asks Tukul to discuss about another topic

and tries to stop him, but Tukul does not stop to talk. Next, Cintyasari seemingly

consentrates to Tukul’s topic but Vega tries to stop her again. The conclusion here

is Tukul and Cintyasari try to discuss and defend a topic. In the same time ,Vega

always tries to join and asks them to discuss another topic.

Line 84-89

Vega :kek gini gak suaranya ?

Oki : Tapi di luar di kafe *tadi ada di kafe, siapa tuh ?

Cintyasari: *Haloo

Vega : *Itu rok pendek tapi kumisan

29

Tukul : Saya herbivora loh, * pemakan segalanya juga

In this case, the conversation shows that the situation of talk show is

informal. We can see that evidence when in the same situation the participants are

divided into two groups and discussing different topic. Cintya answers a phone

from mba Susi ( Tukul’s wife) but in the other hand, Oki, Vega and Tukul are

discussing a different topic, they are discussing about a man who Oki thinks as

Tukul’s girlfriend.

Line 100-102

Tukul : *Ngapain sih susi ikut-ikutan?

Mba susi : *Iyah ?

Vega : *Ituu

Tukul does not end his sentence yet but mba Susi overlaps him to answer

Cintya’s question, then Vega makes overlapping to give information that mba

Susi is accepting the phone.

c. Topic

Line 37-39

Vega: Girl band, *girl band

Cintyasari : *girl band

Tukul : *Luar biasa

This case shows the reason why the topic of conversation is a reason of

aggressivity. The topic of what the writer means here is “girl band”. As we know

30

that in Indonesia now, these words “girl band” are familiar words for the

participants. In the same time, Vega and Cintya race to say these words, one of

them tries to speak faster than others. Finally, they become aggressive to speak

although the time is not their turn. In that time, overlapping happen.

Line 72-74

Tukul :Jangan sekali- sekali ngomong tebel, *aku tersinggung loh

Oki : *Tuh, bubar aja *girl band

kita, bubar yah

Cintyasari : *Jangan dong,

jangan dong

The topic here is “tebal” and “girl band” these words are very familiar for

them, they express these words easily.

Line 185-188

Tukul: di suruh ngelenong itu, buat orang melucu, gimana itu?

Oki : Kan waktu itu masih kecil ya mas, *jadi gak kepikiran

Tukul : *Pernah kecil yah?

Oki : Heeee’emm

The topic here is “pernah kecil”, as we know that Oki’s body is fat, her

sentence “Kan waktu itu masih kecil ya mas, jadi gak kepikiran (I was a child)”

makes Tukul aggressively overlaps her to give comments.

31

d. Speaker Relation

Line 33-34

Vega & Cintyasari: *ehh okiii

Oki : * Ipin Upin datang, Upin – Ipin

Their relation is best friends, when Vega and Cintyasari are coming, Oki

with aggressiveness calls them as Ipin and Upin.

Line 125-127

Cintyasari: Aduh oki *suaramu

Tukul : *Kamu itu manusia apa raksasa? Huaa huaaa

Vega : Ngagetin

In this case, Cintya and Tukul insult Oki’s voice because her voice is too

loud, then Tukul says that her voice is like a giant’s voice. The writer concludes

that the relation of poeple is one of the reasons why poeple become aggressive in

a communication.

e. Shared Knowledge

Line 18-30

Oki : iya kan *romantis

Tukul: *iyaa

Tukul : bapak kamu dulu pedagang bunga ya ?

Oki : ehmm,,,engga sih, enggak pernah

Tukul ; ya udah kalo gitu balikin pot nya yoww..yaaaaaaa..luar biasa tapi

saya bangga *dengan dirimu,kamu punya wawasan yang luas

32

Oki : *coba kuli, kuli apa yang kuat?

Tukul : kuliah ?

Oki: kulihat kau terlalu *mencintaiku.

Tukul : *yeaaa tau aja kalo selera *saya seperti ini

Oki : *yang romantis dong,

coba yang *romantis

Tukul : *iya iya

We can see in this part, Oki overlaps Tukul because she wants to share her

knowledge about a pantun. She asks Tukul “ kuli apa yang kuat?“ but tukul’s

answer is wrong and Oki tells to him the correct answer. Then, before Oki ends

her sentence, Tukul spontaniously overlaps her by adding the new information

that his willing is someone like her. Oki aggressively overlaps Tukul again when

she asks him to be a romantic person.

Line 58-61

Vega : Kok pake kaos kaki *sih mas?

Tukul : *Loh baunya mpe gini loh ?

Vega : Kelelawar lewat sini aja kepeleset *mas,

oki & Cintyasari: *Huaaaa Licin

Tukul overlaps Vega and gives an additional information. In the next

conversation, Oki and Cintyasari overlap Vega in the same time.

33

Line 112-114

Cintyasari :Mba Susi, selamat malam mba

Vega : *Mba

Cintyasari : *yah di matikan

Vega : Yaaa..dimatiin, mbaa

Cintyasari overlaps Vega just to give information that the phone turns off

and she says it aggressively till overlapping occurs.

Line 130-158

Tukul : Okee,,Vega, sapa bapak2 yang ada di sebelah sini yang sangat

*luar biasa beserta ibunya ini

Vega : *Iyahh bapak-bapak dan ibu-ibu yang sangat luar biasa, ini

menjaga NKRI mas ya?

Tukul :Kopassus ini adalah miniaturnya bangsa Indonesia *yang terdiri

dari semua bangsa yang ada di Indonesia

Cintyasari : *betul

Cintyasari: Jadi bener sekali kopasus ini adalah miniatur terbaik

nusantara artinya jadi kopasus ini pernah dinobatkan sebagai pasukan

khusus terbaik *ketiga didunia..

Tukul: *Waw amazing

Vega and Cintyasari overlap Tukul for many times. They overlap him to

show their agreements. We can see that they express their agreements only by

giving short answer or repeating what the previous speaker says. They know what

the previous speaker means and it makes them aggressive to take the turn till they

produce overlapping.

34

f. Self Defense

Line 11-13

Tukul: ah ini tabung gasnya *ada disini,,hahaha

Oki: *ahhhhh, diama gitu gak enak ahh *gak

enak, jangan gitu dong yang bener

Tukul : *loh

katanya d suruh ngerayu

In this case, the host (Tukul) makes self defense by saying “*loh katanya

di suruh ngerayu” because Oki complains what he was saying.

Line52-56

Vega : Hehe mau *ngomong apa?

Tukul : *Itu kaki apa *tangan sih itu ?

Vega : *Tangan

Tukul : Tapi rasa *kaki

Vega : *Yaaaailaaa

In this case, Vega tries to make self defense and refuses all of Tukul’s statements.

Line75-76

Vega : Tar dulu, ntar dulu, Oki jangan ganggu mas Tukul dong, kan dia

sudah punya si Susi *semelikiti weleh-weleh

Oki : *Iyah iyah

Oki aggressively overlaps Vega to make self defense, surely she will never

disturb Mr.Tukul anymore.

35

g. Curiousity

Line 62-64

Tukul : Luarr biasa *apa, mau ngomong apa?

Cintyasari: *Mas gini pasti hobinya suka nembak *yah?

Oki : *Kok tau kok

tau ?

Oki overlaps Cintyasari because she wants to know about Cintyasari’s

sentence, she asks Cintyasari aggressively and makes overlapping.

Line141-12

Tukul : Dari kopassus luar biasa. Kopassus ini miniaturnya *NKRI

bermacam-macam, ada dari Aceh, yg mana dari Aceh, dari Dayak

Kalimantan, dari Papua? Dari Ambon. Dari Jawa?

Cintyasari : *Artinya mas

Cintyasari’s curiousity makes her aggressive to ask and makes overlapping

happen.

Line152-153

Vega : Bapak-bapak ini punya *motto,

Tukul : *Mottonya apa?

Tukul wants to know about kopassus’s motto. He asks about it to Vega,

but he makes overlapping happen because Vega still speak in that time.

36

4.2. Second Scene

a. Limited Time

Line 274-251

Oki : Dagang jagung mungkin,

Vega : Dagang *jagung tapi ke pabrik-pabriknya

Cintyasari : *Yaaa

Tukul : *Untuk Okki Lukman, ni. Talk about shocking

funny *nih walau dikenal dengan imej yang lucu dan jago

membuat orang tertawa namun sampai sekarang gak mau disebut

sebagai pelawak, emang imej yang gimana sih yang

menggambarkan sosok seorang Okki Lukman,monggo nih?

Cintyasari : *Ohhh, shocking funny

Vega and Cintyasari want to discuss more about corn, but Tukul

aggressively overlaps them and makes self initiation to start a new topic.

Line 290-292

Cintyasari : *kirain model

Tukul : * kembali ke laptop, jadi nanti ya di JCC ?

In this session, Cintyasari wants to add the previous conversation, but the

show must change the topic because the time is limited. Finally, the host (Tukul)

does not care of what Cintyasari says and he makes self initiation by saying his

technical term of this show “kembali ke laptop” to close or to end the previous

topic of conversation.

37

b. Speech Situation

Line 223-230

Cintyasari : Iya, ya ampun, *gimana yah?

Oki : *Musik musik, coba lebih anggun lagi,

*lebih elegan

Cintysari : *Ohh lebih anggun

Oki : Saya mau tanya ini ceritanya bajunya pakaian apa?*Karena setiap

membawakan baju tuh beda2, harus ada yang jutek. Elegan,cantik

Cintyasari : *Malam, malam

Tukul : Pakean ini modelnya pakean pocong bagusnya

Vega : Ahh,, horor mas, *malam jumat loh

Cintyasari : *Ini busana malam

In this conversation, Oki and Cintya are discussing about Fashion Show,

but in same time Tukul and Vega are discussing about the mystic of Thursday

night. They make some overlapping because of it.

c. Speaker Relation

Line 374-377

Tukul : *Thank you, thank you

Vega : *Halo mas,

Oki : *Apa kabar mas

Tukul : Give a plause for Dicky Chandra

38

Their relation makes them so aggressive to greet Mr. Dicky Chandra. We

can see the conversation, there are Vega and Oki in the same time to greet him.

d. Shared Knowledge

Line 194-208

Tukul : Oke masih di Bukan Empat Mata,,masih semangat?

Audience : Masih

Tukul : Mana suaranya?

Audience : Uhhhhh

Tukul : Luar biasa kopasus ya, saya bangga sekali dengan pasukan elit kopassus, *luar biasa

Vega : *Iya

Tukul : iya, saya sebagai rakyat Indonesia bangga *sekali

Vega : *iyap

Tukul : iya, *dan pokoknya yah udah gak bisa di ungkapkan dengan kata-kata

Vega : *apa mas, ya betul sekali

Tukul : karena kopassus ini ada bermacam-macam suku *ada disini

Vega : *iyap

Vega : miniatur *Indonesia dan ber

Tukul : *iya, miniatur Indonesia dan beragam agama aja ada di kopassus ini

Vega : iya

In this case, we can see that Vega overlaps Tukul for many times just to

show her agreements of what Tukul said about kopassus. She gives a response

aggressively, although only short responses or minimal responses.

39

Line 261-263

Oki : Iya kan, harus lucu, iya kan, harus kreatif sekali, bagaimana caranya

bisa membuat orang membangkitkan suasana, bisa menjadi lebih ceria iya

kan? Kalo saya sih sebenarnya tetap menjadi diri saya aja sendiri,

kalaupun itu bisa membuat diri saya melucu yah alhamdulillah itu bonus

aja buat saya mas, gitu

Tukul : *iyaahh

Vega : *Iya iya

Tukul and Vega give agreements for Oki’s statements. Although, they just

give some short responses but not minimal responses. They say their agreements

before Oki ends the statements, so overlapping happen.

Line 267-270

Tukul : Ini namanya model madul yah *kayaknya gini yah?

Cintyasari : *Model madul

Oki : Gak percaya, gak percaya? Jangan sembarangan loh tgl 29 Januari

ini saya fashion show baju Ivan Gunawan loh pake pakean

penganting loh, *di JCC

Vega : *Iya iya

Cintyasari : *Ohhh

Cintyasari and Vega make some overlapping to respond the host’s topic,

they just give addition information and minimal responses.

40

Line 279-281

Tukul : Nah, ini bapak kopassus tanggal 14 melakukan pembagian pohon

kepada sekitarnya *penghijauan

Vega : *Iyaa..banyak pohon banyak rejeki

Oki : *Mungkin bapak pas bagi-bagi pohon bisa

mengundang saya, saya inikan melambangkan pohon yang sangat

besar yang ada di Jakarta.

In this case, Vega knows about the topic that is discussed by Tukul. In

same time, Vega wants to add something that has relation to that topic, but before

Tukul ends his statement, Vega speaks and follows the conversation. Finally, she

makes overlapping.

Line 284-287

Tukul: Iya betul,, ini model-model trembesi *kek gini,

Oki : *Nahhhh

Tukul : Trembesi, warudoyo, ya kan nah ini baru

Oki : Apa?

Tukul : *Pohon bambu, bambu runcingnya disini

Oki : *Kecipir

In this part, we can see that overlapping happen for many times, first case

is when Vega and Oki overlap Tukul to give addition of information. The second

is when Oki overlaps Tukul twice to answer the questions.

41

Line 346-356

Oki : Kalau orang fashion show jalannya maju, * saya mundur

Cintyasari : *Sekali lagi

Tukul : *Vega, vega, vega coba jalan vega

Tukul : Model kok model pasrah ngono yah?

Vega : Tanya oki deh

Oki : * Itu model ?

Tukul : * Ini tinggal kasi lagu iwak peyek

Vega : Iwak peyek

Oki : Kalo model

Cintyasari : Oki *lagi

Tukul : *Kasi contoh, one more

In the beginning of the conversation, Cintyasari and Tukul in the same

time overlap Oki, they ask her to retry and also invite Vega to do it. Next, Vega’s

style when she does fashion show is so bad. It makes Oki and Tukul comment

spontanously. In the last of the conversation, Tukul overlaps Cintyasari because

he wants to ask Oki to do it again.

e. Self Defense

Line 302-303

Cintyasari : Maksudnya apa? Papannya *di atas gitu?

Oki : *Gak tau

Before Cintyasari ends her sentence, Oki aggressively takes the turn to

make defense by saying “ gak tau (I do not know).

42

f. Curiousity

Line 210-213

Vega : cita-citakan kan mas *dulu mas,

Tukul : *iya, pokoknya jangan duduknya kayak

orang dipotong uang koperasinya, ceria yah, duduknya seperti orang yang

langsung keluar remundrasinya, *luar biasa

Vega : *amin, naik gaji yah?

Cintyasari : *Mas, mas

In this case, Vega overlaps Tukul to ensure that the meaning of Tukul’s

sentence is “naik gaji (get higher salary)”.

Line 245-246

Cintyasari : *Pengusaha apa?

Vega : *Pengusaha apa kalo boleh tau bu?

Vega and Cintyasari overlap Oki because they aggressively ask that they

want to know the people are enterpreneur of what ?

Line 311-313

Tukul : Saya juga pernah fashion show loh pakean alakadarnya

Vega : *Di mana?

Cintyasari : *Desaignernya siapa?

Vega and Cintyasari are anxious to know what Tukul is talking about.

Their aggressiveness of asking makes some overlapping.

Line 361-369

Oki : Mas Tukul harusnya ngerti maksud *kreatifnya kamera

goyang-goyang, semua orang goyang, ini mau jatuhin gue

ceritanya ini acara nih.

43

Tukul : *Iya iya

Oki : Biar lucu ni *biar lucu

Cintyasari : *Biar lucu yah?

Cintyasari becomes anxious to know Oki’s sentences. She takes the turn

and makes overlapping aggressively.

4.3. Third Scene

a. Topic

Line 476-478

Tukul : Masih Kang Dicky nih, selain berkomedi nih, sekarang pun

merambah kedunia tarik suara, kurang kerjaannya, suara

*ditarik-tarik loh

Cintyasari and vega : **Nyanyi, nyanyi

The topic here is “tarik suara” Tukul’s sentence makes Cintyasari and

Vega aggressively give response that ” tarik suara” is ‘nyanyi’ (singing).

b. Shared Knowledge

Line 400-405

Dicky : Eee.tergantung kita melihat dari sisi mana, jadi *kalau

Tukul : *Si susi juga

gitu tergantung dari mana ngeliatnya, *kalo dari Indramayu, lebih

cantik lagi

44

Vega : *walahhh

Oki : *parahh, parahh

Tukul : Maksudnya itu kalau dari Indramayu aja cantik, *apalagi dari

deket

Cintyasari : *tambah

cantik

In this case, we can see that before Dicky ends his sentence, Tukul takes

the turn and interrupts him to give a new information, but his sentence precisely

makes Vega and Oki give comments in the same time, then in the end of

conversation, Cintyasari overlaps Tukul to give an agreement.

Line 411-412

Dicky : Masyarakatnya juga alhamdulillah, *saya sempat bikin lagu untuk

mereka lagunya kurang lebih seperti ini (singing)

Cintyasari : *iya, betul

Cintyasari knows about Dicky’s sentence and she gives agreements

aggressively without realising that it is not her time to talk.

Line 414-416

Dicky : *Bogor itu pak, Bogor

Oki : * ya ampunn

vega : * Ihh, pengetahuannya kurang banget,,

Tukul’s sentence spontaneously makes Dicky, Oki and Vega give

responses in the same time, they give new knowledge and some comments.

45

Line 422-425

Dicky : Kalo dari sisi masyarakat, teman-teman birokrasi saya sebenarnya

sangat betah dan sangat tidak ingin meninggalkan, Cuma kalau dari sisi

sistem, saya kayaknya lebih baik tidak disitu, itu dari segi sistemya, tapi

potensi lain-lainnya, bahkan teman-teman dari Garut sudah ada disini

Vega : *Waw, selamat datang

Dicky : *Alhamdulilah, alhamdulilah,*alhamdulilah

oki : *Semua cinta kang Dicky yah,

Dicky’s information makes Vega become aggressive to greet the

audiences, but Dicky overlaps her again to express his fulness. Next, Oki comes

and overlaps Dicky too, she wants to give a new information and respond about

Dicky’s statements.

Line 429-435

Cintyasari : *Halaa

Oki : *Songong,,

Tukul : Kembali ke laptop

Tukul : Bener, bener yah

Oki : *Bener bener

Vega : *Norak

Cintyasari : *Bener-benar ngarang,,

46

Tukul makes Cintyasari and Oki make overlapping aggressively. They

give responses for Tukul’s sentence. In the end of the conversation, Oki and

Cintyasari also give responses in same time and overlap Tukul.

Line 435-445

Tukul : Saya itu benar yah yang dikatakan *Cintyasari, aku kalo syuting

diluar kota liat anak kecil rasanya tuh kayak kangen anak, begitu nyampe

rumah samperin anak, terus ngajak jalan-jalan.

Cintyasari: *iyahhh

Oki : Ngarap

Tukul : Maksudnya liat anak ingin ajak istri juga

Oki : Ohh

Vega :Jalan-jalan mas,*Jalan-jalan

Cintyasari: * Jalan-jalan

Before Tukul ends his sentence, Cintyasari overlaps by giving an

agreement “iyah (yes)” because her name is nominated In Tukul’s sentence. It

makes her spontaneously give a response, then Cintyasari overlaps Vega again

because she also knows what Vega means. So, she repeats that sentence.

Line 449-452

Cintyasari : Eh mas, kayak ibu–ibu ini dong *cantik-cantik

Tukul : *Iya pasti

Cintyasari : *Mendukung suami

47

Tukul : * Ngedukung suaminya, Suaminya kalo lagi tugas di mana

saja, beliau-beliau ini selalu mendoakan

Tukul overlaps Cintyasari to give any agreements and gives addition of

Cintya’s sentence.

Line 479-484

Oki : Ohh diungkapakan *dengan lagu?

Cintyasari : *dengan lagu

Oki : Yahh,, itu sih langsung masuk rumah sakit biasanya

cintyasari : Kagak, gini (singing)

Dicky : Di bantu musik yah,, main G mas *C G atau apa mas?

Tukul : *pake nada dasar, C mayor

In the beginning of conversation, Oki and Cintyasari make overlapping

just to express that Cintyasari agrees what Oki said, she overlaps Oki by making

repetition of Oki’s sentence. In the end of the conversation, Tukul overlaps Dicky

to answer his question.

Line 504-506

Vega : Hidungnya,,eh ntar dulu, Ibu, mancugan aku dikit yah?

*Coba dari samping

Rina : *Nggak ahh

Cintyasari : *siluet

Cintyasari aggressively gives a short comment about Vega and Rina’s

nose. She overlaps Rina’s answer.

48

Line 525-528

Tukul : Silahkan, silahkan. Luar biasa, bintang tamu saya malam ini yah

aduh, mudah-mudahan pemirsa di rumah TV nya gak rusak *yah,

Vega : *Yah

nggak lah mas

Tukul : Kembali ke laptop, Aduh biasanya bintang tamu bidadari-

bidadari, *model-model ini mau bikin pilem atau apa gitu yah?

Oki and rina : *Wahhh

Vega interrupts Tukul’s sentence to give some responses, then Tukul tells

about guests, but his statements make Oki and Rina aggressively make responses

and overlap Tukul.

Line 554-555

Tukul : Selamat malam kembaran saya, Vega*eh kembaran vega

Vega : *Kembaran? ogah banget

kembaran ama dodol Cimahi,

Vega overlaps Tukul and gives a new information as a response about Tukul’s

sentence.

Line 564-566

Rina : Enggak,, kita gak temenan *lagi yah

Oki : * kita kan temenan

Cintyasari : * Rina, maaf yah masa idung dibilang

jerawat, tega banget

Cintyasari adds the information and tries to make Rina got annoyed to Oki.

49

c. Self Defense

Line 459-460

Oki : *Sialan

Vega : *Seragammnya kan bagus-bagus

Vega overlaps Oki aggressively to make self defense.

Line462-466

Oki : Gue gak demen disini gak enak acaranya

Tukul : Si vega, *bukan saya

Vega : *Ini nih si neo si neo

Cintyasari : Oki,gak *papa nanti

Oki : *Sama aja lu berdua

Tukul and Vega make self defense to refuse Oki’s statement. First, Tukul

makes defense and blames Vega, but Vega disagrees and makes defense

aggressively. She does not want Oki or Tukul to blame her. In the same time,

tukul also speaks. Thus, overlapping happen unconsciously.

Line 507-509

Rina : Vega, *vega,,

Vega : *Mohon maaf nih mas, hidung kita bukan pesek tapi

menurut konstruksi muka, *hidung kita sebenarnya mancung tapi pipi

kita kedepan jadi hidungnya agak kebelakang.

Rina : *ohh bener

50

Rina overlaps Vega to give agreements and gives defense from Tukul

statements. They convince all participants that their nose are not really flat.

Line 517-520

Rina : Astagfirullah *Yah gak enak ahh

Tukul : *Pake nanya otak yah disini

Tukul : *Emang aku gak punya otak apa?

Rina : *Ahh,, gak enak ahh

Tukul and Rina overlap each others, Tukul refuses Rina’s statements

which say that he does not have brain and Rina overlaps him to give persuasion.

d. Curiousity

Line 419-421

Tukul : *Iy gimana sih

Dicky : *Iya dan kalau di lihat

Vega : *Terus mas

Vega becomes curious till overlaps Dicky. She wants to know the follow

up of Dicky’s sentence but she makes it before Dicky ends his sentence. So

overlapping happens.

Line 530-532

Tukul: Mau bikin pilem horor, ada genset, ada..

Oki : *Yang mana dong?

Rina : *Yang mana genset?

51

Tukul says that “there is a generator” these words make Rina and Oki

anxious to know which one of them is a generator.

Line 544-546

Oki : Dengar dulu, dengar dulu, *denger..Ini bukan kakak gue,

Vega : *iya Siapa ki?

Oki : Mantan gue

The statements of Oki “the man was not her brother” makes Vega

becomes aggressive to know who the man is.

4.4. Fourth Scene

a. Limited Time

Line 728-729

Cintyasari : *Tapi itu emang tri..

Tukul : *Kembali ke laptop, Pemirsa, malam ini saya kedatangan

seorang pria yang serius berwajah gahar dan saat ini dalam kehidupannya,

selalu mendapatkan tawaran acting sebagai orang jahat malah

membawanya ke entertaint komedi, penasaran bagaimana kisahnya give

applause for Ruhut Sitompul.

Before Cintyasari ends her sentence, Tukul overlaps her to make self

initiation or a new topic because the time is limited and that time is time for

commercial break.

52

b. Shared Knowledge

Line 571-576

Tukul : Saya sangat mendukung sekali, salam hormat kami untuk gank-gank

kopassus ini, luar biasa dan knkp, bapak Jend. Pramono Adiwibowo, luar

biasa ,dari 81 ke 85, luar biasa.Kembali ke laptop. Untuk Rina Nose ini*yah,

talk about tema kita, mendadak komedi banyak orang yang suka melihat

dirimu menirukan suara berbagai karakter kalo boleh tau itu belajarnya dari

mana? Coba jawabnya dengan menggunakan suara doraemon.

Rina : *yah

Tukul and oki : Doraemon

Vega : *Bisa-bisa

Rina : *Nanti musik teng-teng yah

Tukul : *Iya, nti disana

In the beginning of the conversation, Tukul tells about a topic and he

nominates Rina in his sentence. Rina aggressively takes the turn and makes

overlapping. Then Vega, Rina and Tukul overlap each other to add information.

Line 623-628

Oki and rina : Suara wakil rakyat

Dicky : Suara rakyat gimana *yah?

Oki : *Suara rakyat gimana? Tadi suara wakil

rakyat sekarang suara rakyat

Dicky :Pokoknya begini, semua yang ade, kalo kayak begini

rina : Itu kayaknya *komeng,

53

vega : *Kayak suaranya bang Komeng

In the beginning, Oki and Rina overlap Dicky because they know and

agree with Dicky’s answer. That’s why they repeat what Dicky says in the same

time. Next, Vega and Rina also know that Dicky’s voice is like Mr. Komeng. It

makes them overlap Dicky aggressively.

Line 635-639

Cintyasari : ohh oki mungkin *salah apa ki?

Tukul : * Gak papa jawab dulu nanti

pertanyaannya belakangan

Tukul : For all my *guests, apa

Vega : *Mas satu lagu nih, suaranya mas ebiet G Ade

Oki : Nahh

Tukul overlaps Cintya to explain to Oki, then before Tukul ends his

sentence, Vega interrupts him aggressively. Vega makes interuption in order to

give information that Rina also can sing like Ebiet G. Ade.

Line 653-658

Dicky : Dari tadi gak ada yang belain soal hidung mas, jadi

Oki : *Iya

Rina and vega : *Yee,di belain ama abangnya

Dicky: Beli kesek di kota Bandung walaupun mereka pesek tapi kan

mereka tetap gak punya idung mas.

Oki : *nah

Vega : *dibelain

54

Oki overlaps Dicky to say her agreement, then Rina and Vega overlap Oki

to give addition. Next, Dicky tries to defense Oki but he gets overlapping from

Oki and Vega. They shock of Dicky’s statements, it makes them become

aggressive to respond Mr. Dicky’s sentence.

Line 668-671

Tukul : Kerja gak ni saya nih? *Cenganga cengongo

Oki : *aduh

Vega : *malu

Tukul : Kerja-kerja

Tukul gets overlapping from Oki and Vega. In the same time, Oki and

Vega give any minimal reponses and short responses, then Tukul overlaps Oki

and tries to give a new topic.

Line 695-698

Oki : Bantuin pantung *dong

Vega : *Bantuin

Dicky :Biar badut di gunung *gede

Oki : *Gue gak deman yang badut didepan tuh

Vega persuades Dicky to help Oki by pantun, but she overlaps Oki

unsconciously. Then, Oki overlaps Dicky because she is uncomfortable about

Dicky’s pantun for her.

Line 706-707

Dicky : Dan ternyata pendekatan komedi ini sangat bagus untuk

*sosialisasi, luar biasa

Tukul : *sosialisasi

Tukul knows what Dicky said, he repeats half of Dicky’s sentence and

makes overlapping.

55

Line716-718

Cintyasari : Ehh, apa jawabannya

Vega : Pernah *gak lucu gak

Rina : *oh Iya, kalo masalah lucu, itu proses mas Tukul

Rina tries to answer Tukul’s question without caring of Vega, Vega does

not end her sentence yet, but Rina overlaps her. She just gets the point of Tukul’s

question.

Line720-724

Rina : jadi untuk lucu itu sebuah proses, jadi yang dari awalnya kita gak

lucu karena sering, berkumpul sama teman yang lucu *makin gak

lucu, makin lucu dong oki.

Oki : *Makin gak

*lucu Ohh, makin lucu

Vega : * lucu

Rina:Kayak saya kalau sering bergabung sama mas Tukul bisa kebawa

*mancung, lucu

Oki : *mancungnya Lucu

Oki overlaps Rina by giving some completings, then Vega overlaps them

by giving stressing of “lucu (funny)”. Next, Oki overlaps Rina to give stressing

about “mancung (pointed nose)”.

56

c. Self Defense

Line 648-651

Oki : Ehh, beli idung-idungan begini di mana sih?* Biar suaranya lain-lain?

Rina : *Oki ahh,oki ahh

Vega : *Ya ampun oki

Oki : *Kasih tau dong

Rina becomes mope because of Oki’s sentence. She makes defense and overlaps

Oki.

Line 690-692

Tukul : Gak, ini yang duluin, *sayang banget saya, sayang

Vega : *apaan sih

Rina : * Friend friend

Rina tries to persuade oki and makes self defense. She is not aware that

Vega is speaking and she takes the turn aggressively, so overlapping happen.

d. Curiousity

Line 578-580

Rina : Teng-teng teng

Vega : *Mana?

Rina : *Ahh lama-lama

Rina becomes curious and she can not to wait for the music. It makes her overlaps

Vega.

57

Line 607-609

Vega : Gak kedengaran yah mas?

Vega : *Gak usahh

Cintyasari : *Ayo dong yah lama

In this part, Cintyasari becomes impatient to hear Rina’s voice. It makes

her aggressively to overlap Vega.

Line 683-684

Oki : Kan saya model jadi pembawa *acara gitu, ya elu gak percaya

Rina : *Model apa, karung semen?

Rina does not believe (she is curious) that Oki was a model, she overlaps Oki

aggressively.

58

The next is the analysis of the second question, the question is “what is

the influence of aggressivity of host and guests in producing overlapping in

“Bukan Empat Mata Show”? after watching, reading the script and analyzing the

data, the writer finds out the answer of this question. The writer finds out that

when poeple communicate aggressively, it can make poeple produce some

overlapping, because when someone makes conversation and speaks aggressively,

she/ he went blind to take her/his turn to speak. The participants of Bukan Empat

Mata attack each others until overlapping occur and sometimes they are not aware

of these. Bukan Empat Mata Show also proves that Sacks, Schegloffm, and

Jefferson’s theory which explain the three rules in turn taking, these are:

1. If the current speaker selects another speaker, that speaker must speak next.

2. If the current speaker does not select another speaker, someone may self-select

as the next speaker.

3. If nobody self selects, the current speaker may continue.

The writer is sure that these rules are not used, that’s why some

overlapping occur in conversation of Bukan Empat Mata Show. There are no rules

who takes the turn first and next. So, the communication does not run smoothly.

59

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1. Conclusion

After analyzing the result of the data which are taken from Bukan Empat

Mata Show broadcasted on Thursday 12th January 2012, the writer draws the

conclusions that can be seen below :

a. The writer finds out the reasons why people are aggressive in a

conversation. In fact, these reasons have the relationship with Sternstorm’s

theory, which said that the utterance of a speaker in a conversation is not

isolated phenomena, but depend on entire context for their interpretation,

such as speech situation, topic, speaker relation and shared knowledge. In

this research, the writer also finds out three reasons beside the theory,

these are limited time, self defense and curiousity. So, the writer finds

seven reasons why people are aggressive in a communication. Shared

knowledge is a reason that the most occurence in their conversation. The

participants produce overlapping because they want to share their

knowledge. The writer also finds that four reasons such as speech

situation, topic, speaker relation and limited time are generally occur.

These reasons almost contain in all overlapping in their conversation, but

there are overlapping cases that most represent a reason of these four

reasons. Therefore, these cases take as examples of these. Next, shared

60

knowledge, self defense and curiousity are generally do not occur, these

only contain in some overlapping.

b. The writer also concludes that, the participants disturb the other

participants when they are overlapping in taking the turn to speak

aggressively. It is also proves that Sacks, Schegloffm, and Jefferson’s

theory which explain three rules in turn taking that do not used. There is

no rule who takes the turn first and next. Thus, the communication does

not run smoothly in Bukan Empat Mata show.

5.2. Suggestion

Through this study, the writer intends to give some suggestions as follows:

a. The other researches can be extended by analyzing the relation between

aggressivity and gender.

b. The writer hopes for the next researches to open mind about Turn Taking

Mechanism and hold the next research deeper about this topic.

61

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Conversation, Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversation (13th February 2012).

Cook, Guy. Discourse (a scheme for teacher education). Oxford: Oxford University press, 1989. 52- 56.

Deborah Tannen, Gender and Discourse. Oxford Univ. Press, 1994.

Http://grammar.about.com/od/c/g/cooperativeoverlapterm.htm Grammar &

Composition (2nd February 2012).

Discourse, Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discourse (3rd February 2012). Fachruddin, Muhammad. 2009. “Turn Taking Mechanism in Dorce Gamalama

Show” (Conversational Analysis). Thesis S1. Makassar: Faculty of Letters, Hasanuddin University.

Hafid, Nurul Chamsyany. 2011. “Turn Taking Mechanism In Modern Family (Conversational Analysis)”. Thesis S1. Makassar: Faculty of Letters,

Hasanuddin University.

Indah, Andi Yulianti. 2003.” Turn Taking And Adjacency Pairs In Situational Serial Comedy Alley Mc Beal” (Conversational Analysis). Thesis S1. Makassar: Faculty of Letters, Hasanuddin University.

Ismail, Haryani. 2004. “Turn Taking Mechanism In Meet Joe Black” (Conversational analysis). Thesis S1. Makassar: Faculty of Letters, Hasanuddin University.

McCarthy, Michael. Discourse analysis for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University press, 1990. 127- 130.

62

Rahman, A. Qashas. 2005. ” A Pragmatic Study Of Indonesian Speakers Use of Turn Taking Mechanism In English Conversation”. Hasanuddin University.

Sugiono, prof, Dr. 1978. Analisa Bahasa “memahami bahasa secara ilmiah”. Jakarta : Erlangga.

Van Son, Ludwina. “Grab that Mike” Communicative issues in French talk show.

University of Antwerp UFSIA, 2004. Http://www.scielo.br/pdf/delta/v20n2/24267.pdf. (18th December 2012).

Walgito, Bimo. 1980. “pengantar psikologi umum” Yogyakarta :Penerbit Andi.

Woffitt, Robin. 2005. Conversational Analysis and Discourse Analysis. Sage publication. http://www.Pdf-search-engine.com/conversational analysis pdf.Html (18th December 2012).

Zimmerman and West, 1957. Interruption and Turn Taking Compability Model ppt (2nd February 2012).