POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN REFUSAL

USED BY THE CHARACTERS OF THE INDONESIA LAWAK

KLUB (ILK) IN THE EPISODE OF KOALISI CAPRES

a mini-research assignment

submitted as a requirement to fulfill the final test of

Pragmatics class

Lecturer: Drs. Ahmad Sofwan, Ph.D.

Dr. Issy Yuliasri, M.Pd.

by

Fachri Ali

0203513039

Rombel 01 (Monday, 4 p.m.)

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

POST-GRADUATE PROGRAM

SEMARANG STATE UNIVERSITY

2014

POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN REFUSAL

USED BY THE CHARACTERS OF THE INDONESIA LAWAK

KLUB (ILK) IN THE EPISODE OF KOALISI CAPRES

Fachri Ali1

1 Post-Graduate Program of Semarang State

University/English Education Study Program, Indonesia

fachriali89@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

When a speaker performs face threatening acts (FTAs), he or shemay employ five super-strategies of politeness as proposed Brown andLevinson (1987), including bald on-record, positive politeness, negativepoliteness, off-record, and do not do the FTAs. Relating to the FTAs, one ofthe potential miscommunication in social interaction may occur whenperforming refusal. This study aims to analyze politeness strategies usedby the characters of the Indonesia Lawak Klub (ILK) in the episode ofKoalisi Capres in performing refusal. The data of this research resultedfrom a video of the ILK in the episode of Koalisi Capres that wasdownloaded from YouTube. A descriptive qualitative method was used toanalyze the data of this study. The data were analyzed by using the refusalstrategies proposed by Peng-liang and Min (2013) to identify what kind of

1

politeness strategies used in refusal that were performed by thecharacters of the ILK in the episode of Koalisi Capres. Based on thefindings and discussion, it can be concluded that there were ten refusalstrategies used by the characters of the ILK in the episode of KoalisiCapres. Most of them were in the form of off-record politeness strategies.

Keywords: Politeness strategies, Face threatening acts, Refusal

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

The study of politeness theory, as suggested by

Brown and Levinson (1987), has been primarily concerned

with three basic notions in terms of ‘face’, ‘face

threatening acts’ (FTAs), and politeness strategies.

Relating to this theory, Yule (1996: 60) defines face

as the public self-image of a person. It refers to that

emotional and social sense of self that everyone has

and expects everyone else to recognize. Likewise, the

concept of face has two aspects including ‘positive

face’ and ‘negative face’. In the Thomas’ (1995: 169)

point of view, an individual’s positive face is

reflected in his or her desire to be liked, approved

of, respected, and appreciated by others. Meanwhile, an

individual’s negative face is reflected in the desire

not to be impeded or put upon, to have the freedom to

act as one chooses.

If a speaker says something that represents a

threat to another individual’s expectations regarding

2

self-image, it is described as a face threatening act

(Yule, 1996: 61). When the speaker performs FTAs, he or

she may employ five super-strategies of politeness as

proposed Brown and Levinson (1987). The five strategies

include bald on-record, positive politeness, negative

politeness, off-record, and do not do the FTAs.

Relating to the FTAs, in social interaction, we

may find that our communication does not always run

smoothly. One of the potential miscommunication in the

interaction may occur in performing refusal. It can be

noticed when the speaker utters appropriate words,

phrases, or sentences in refusing the hearer’s request,

invitation, offer, suggestion, and so on.

In various situations, it is often difficult to do

such kind of refusal appropriately since it deals with

not only linguistic knowledge, but also pragmatic

knowledge. Sattar et al. (2011: 70) argue that one may

have a wide range of vocabulary and a sound knowledge

of grammar, but misunderstandings may still arise if

one does not apply pragmatic knowledge. Furthermore,

Gass and Houck (1999: 2) describe that refusals are

complex speech acts that require not only long

sequences negotiation and cooperative achievements, but

also “face-saving maneuvers” to accommodate the

noncompliant nature of the act (Félix-Brasdefer, 2008:

43).

3

Refusal, like other speech acts, may occur in our

daily lives. Conversation in films or movies or

television programs is an example of communications

which we can easily find in a real life situation. In

this study, conversations among the characters of the

Indonesia Lawak Klub (ILK) in the episode of Koalisi Capres

were chosen to be analyzed. There were some reasons in

deciding the ILK in the episode of Koalisi Capres as the

media of this study. Firstly, a humor program sometimes

tends to use politeness strategies as well. Secondly,

there were lots of refusal expressions used in this

program. The refusal expressions were analyzed to find

out refusal strategies used in terms of what politeness

strategies they belong to.

For those reasons, this present study was

organized to analyze politeness strategies used by the

characters of the ILK in the episode of Koalisi Capres in

performing refusal.

1.2 Review of the Previous Studies

There has been interesting studies deal with the

use of politeness strategies in refusal. One study was

Wijayanto et al. (2013) who investigated politeness in

interlanguage pragmatics of complaints by Indonesian

learners of English. Their study proposed that bald on-

record and positive politeness were the most pervasive

4

strategies used across status levels and social

distances. Negative politeness was comparatively high,

but it was not as high as bald on-record and positive

politeness. Meanwhile, off-record was rarely phrased

across status levels and social distances.

Another study was Xiaoning (2004) who analyzed

politeness strategies used in English requests and

refusals by Chinese college EFL learners. The result

revealed that learners have yet not fully acquired

native-like politeness in performing speech acts. They

encounter problems both pragma-linguistically and

socio-pragmatically.

Likewise, Sattar et al. (2011) investigated

refusal strategies in English by Malay University

students. The result showed that participants differ in

the ways they perform refusals. Regret or saying

‘sorry’, and giving excuses or explanations were the

preferred formulas used in refusing requests. The

choice of these semantic formulas suggests the

influence of Malay culture in respondents’ realizations

of refusals in English.

1.3 The Classification of Politeness Strategies in

Refusal

Studies commonly differentiate between direct and

indirect refusals. As quoted by Sattar et al. (2011:

5

74-75), Beebe et al. (1990) propose a modified

classification of refusal strategies, including direct

and indirect refusals, and adjuncts to refusals.

On the one hand, the direct refusals are in the

form of flat ‘No’, and negative ability such as ‘I

can’t. On the other hand, the indirect refusals are in

the form of mitigated refusal such as ‘I don’t think

it’s possible.’, regret as ‘I’m very sorry.’, wish

such as ‘I wish I can do it...’, excuse/explanation as

‘I want to leave now.’, alternatives; e.g. ‘I will find

somebody to help you carrying your things.’, future

acceptance; e.g. ‘I can help you tomorrow after final

exam.’, principle; e.g. ‘I don’t like lazy students who

like easy notes taking.’ Philosophy; e.g. ‘Excuse is

worse than sin.’ Self-defense; e.g. ‘You should have

attended class.’

Meanwhile, Peng-liang and Min (2013: 921-923)

introduced the classification of politeness strategies

in refusal, including positive politeness, negative

politeness/bald on-record, and off-record. Positive

politeness strategies cover some refusal strategies,

including claim common ground and solidarity, offer of

repair/new solution, use excuses, promise, and show

sympathy and consideration first. Negative

politeness/bald on-record strategies deal with explicit

and direct expression of refusal and expression of

6

refusal in a less coercive way to minimize the

impingement on the hearer. Then, off-record strategies

involve give hints, be ambiguous or vague, and be

evasive, transfer to another topic.

1.4 Indonesia Lawak Klub (ILK)

Indonesia Lawak Klub (ILK) is a comedy program which

is broadcast by one of private television channels in

Indonesia, Trans7, from Monday to Friday. It starts

from 8.45 p.m. to In fact, ILK is the parody of

‘Indonesia Lawyers Club’ that is broadcast by TV One.

The concept of this program is gathering comedians to

join such a discussion forum and discuss a hot, current

issue in the country of ILK. In addition, there are

Denny Chandra as the host, Komeng as the “komengtator”

(a twist of “commentator”), and Cak Lontong as the

expert of absurd data. They are the main actors of this

program. Moreover, this comedy program has a jargon of

“solving problems without any solutions”.

2.0 METHODOLOGY

This study was a descriptive qualitative method

because the data described by providing the description

of natural phenomena. In this section, I present

methodology of the study, including participants,

7

source of the data, data collection techniques, and

data analysis.

2.1 Source of the Data

The data of this research resulted from a video of

the ILK in the episode of Koalisi Capres. The episode of

this comedy program was broadcast on June 13th, 2014.

Likewise, the data were in the form of conversations

among all characters of the ILK in the episode of Koalisi

Capres that contain politeness strategies in refusal

which use Indonesian as the language.

2.2 Data Collection Techniques

The data was collected through taking notes. The

steps of data collection were downloading a video from

YouTube, identifying conversations which contain

politeness strategies in refusal, and transcribing them

into notes.

2.3 Data Analysis

The data of this study were analyzed by using the

refusal strategies proposed by Peng-liang and Min

(2013) to identify what kind of politeness strategies

used in refusal that were performed by the characters

of the ILK in the episode of Koalisi Capres.

8

3.0 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

Based on the classification system which was

proposed by Peng-liang and Min (2013), there were ten

refusal strategies in the form of politeness strategies

used by the characters of the ILK in the episode of

Koalisi Capres. They are presented in the following

examples:

Positive Politeness Strategies

In positive politeness strategies, there were five

refusal strategies used by the characters of the ILK in

the episode of Koalisi Capres, including claim common

ground and solidarity, offer of repair/new solution,

use excuses, promise, and show sympathy and

consideration first. These five strategies can be

demonstrated as follows:

Strategy 1: Claim common ground, solidarity

Example (1)

Akbarajaka : “Nggak boleh saya menambahkan?”

(“May I give additional information?”)

Denny :“Saya senang, tapi Anda terlalu banyak menambahkan.”

(“I feel happy you say that, but you’ve done

it so many times.”)

In this example, Denny refuses Akbarajaka’s asking

for permission by claiming ground and showing his

9

solidarity. By using this strategy, the speaker seeks

agreement to the hearer. The example (1), moreover,

shows us that frequently, a solidarity strategy will be

marked with specific terms such as you, we, or even

let’s.

Strategy 2: Offer of repair/new solution

Example (2)

Denny :“Silakan perkenalkan diri dulu, Pak.”

(“Please introduce yourself, Sir.”)

Jokodin :“Emm.. Karena ada yang lebih tua, Bapak dulu aja deh,

Pak.”

(“Emm.. Because there’s someone who’s older

than me, you’re first, Sir.”)

Example (3)

Qomar :“Pak Jokodin kan usianya lebih muda dari Pak JK. Apa nggak

malu punya cawapres seperti itu?”

(“Mr. Jokodin, your age is younger than Mr.

JK, isn’t it? Don’t you feel embarrassed to

have a candidate of vice president like

him?”)

Jokodin :“Tenang, Pak. Biar saya yang menjawab.”

(“Calm down, Sir. Let me answer the

question.”)

10

In the example (2), Jokodin refuses Denny’s

imperative utterance by offering another option or

solution. The same is true as the example (3), Jokodin

tries to refuse Qomar’s question by giving Jarwo Kwat

an offer to let him respond the Qomar’s question. These

examples demonstrate that an offer of repair/new

solution is appropriate for mitigating the impact to

the hearer when the actual face threatening acts which

has been caused by refusal.

Strategy 3: Use excuses

Example (4)

Denny : “Silakan perkenalkan diri.”

(“Please introduce yourself.”)

Jarwo Kwat : “Maaf, tadi kan udah.”

(“Sorry, we have introduced ourselves

beforehand.”)

Example (5)

Denny : “Tema kita adalah ekonomi.”

(“Our topic is economy.”)

Akbarajaka : “Maaf, Pak. Kemarin kita malah belajar sejarah.”

(“Sorry, Sir. Instead of dealing with

economy, we studied history yesterday.”)

In the example (4), Jarwo Kwat shows his refusal

not to introduce themselves to the audience again and

again since they have introduced themselves beforehand.

11

In the example (5), meanwhile, Akbarajaka tries to

refuse Denny’s imperative not to discuss economy more.

These examples illustrate that by applying this

strategy, it implies that one is unwilling to do or

accept or accept something.

Strategy 4: Promise

Example (6)

Akbarajaka : “Tolong, Pak. Panelnya itu bisa dikeluarkan?”

(“Please have the panelist get out of this

room.”)

Denny : “Oke, nanti. Saya akan panggil terlebih dahulu calon

yang lain.”

(“Okay, I’ll do it later. Now, please

welcome the next candidate.”)

Example (7)

Komeng : “Warga kita kan lebih banyak miskinnya. Kalau

diekspor, nanti sepi dong.”

(“Mostly, our society is poor. If we export

them, there will be few people in this

country.”)

Cak Lontong : “Tapi nanti kita janji bisa mencetak

kemiskinan yang baru.”

(“But, we guarantee that we can create new

poverty.”)

12

In the example (6), Denny implies his refusal by

promising to do what Akbarajaka asks, but he intends to

do other tasks beforehand. The same is true as the

example (7), Cak Lontong refuses Komeng’s opinion by

promising that he will do what Komeng worries. In other

words, these examples indicate that promising is used

to show the speaker’s good intention in satisfying the

hearer’s request or face wants. However, as a strategy,

the promise made may be real or not.

Strategy 5: Show sympathy and consideration first

Example (8)

Boris : “Akankah supir-supir metromini diangkat menjadi

supir-supir menteri? Karena mereka sudah melalui fit and

proper test seumur hidup.”

(“Are bus drivers going to be ministers’

drivers since they have joined a lifelong

fit and proper test?”)

Jarwo Kwat : “Saya paham sih. Tapi, saya khawatirnya, kalau nanti

diangkat menjadi supir menteri atau presiden atau wapres,

yang dikhawatirkan, pasti akan terlambat kalo ada rapat

kabinet. Mereka pasti ngetem dulu.”

(“I understand their current position, but

what I’m getting afraid is that if they

become a driver of ministers or president or

vice president, they will be late to do

13

their jobs. They’ll look for lots of

passengers.”)

In the example (8), Jarwo Kwat mitigates his

refusal by showing his sympathy and consideration that

he cares about Boris’ problems at first. Afterwards, he

states his arguments that contain refusal. This example

proposes that showing sympathy and consideration at

first can be considered as a mitigating device in

refusal. Not to mention, it functions to soften the

refusal given.

Negative Politeness Strategies/Bald On-record

Strategies

In the negative politeness strategies/bald on-

record strategies, we may find two refusal strategies

used by the characters of the ILK in the episode of

Koalisi Capres, including explicit and direct expression

of refusal and expression of refusal in a less coercive

way to minimize the impingement on the hearer. For more

clear interpretation, they are described in the

following:

Strategy 6: Explicit and direct expression of refusal

Example (9)

Denny : “Berapa lama Bapak menempuh di akademi keperawatan?”

14

(“How long did you study at nursing academy,

Sir?”)

Prabayar : “Maaf, saya bukan.”

(“Sorry, I didn’t.”)

Example (10)

Jokodin : “Karena saya udah yakin kita yang bakal memimpin

negeri ILK. Bukan begitu, Pak?”

(“It’s because I’m really sure that my

partner and I will be the leader of ILK. Am I

right, Sir?”)

Jarwo Kwat : “Bukan.”

(“No, you aren’t.”)

Example (11)

Komeng : “Negara Kuba. Jadi, masjid melulu tuh negaranya.

Gitu ya, Pak?”

(“The country is Cuba. It seems that there

are so many mosques in the country, aren’t

there?”)

Jarwo Kwat : “Bukan. Plis dong ah.”

(“No, please don’t say so.”)

Example (12)

Cici Panda : “Tapi, maksudnya apakah Bapak Jokodin tidak takut

kalau dalam masa pemerintahan nanti emosinya lebih

kuat?”

15

(“But, what I mean is whether you feel worry

due to his temper in your next position or

not.”)

Jarwo Kwat : “Emm.. Enggak takut tuh.”

(“Emm.. No, you have wrong perspective. ”)

In the example (9), Prabayar directly refuses

Denny’s question. He shows his refusal by saying that

he has never studied in the department. Then, in the

example (10), Jarwo Kwat is explicitly unwilling to

agree with what Jokodin states by saying “No, you

aren’t”. In the example (11), meanwhile, Jarwo Kwat

also explicitly refuses what Komeng states. He conveys

his refusal by saying “No, please don’t say so”

directly. The same is true as the example (12), Jarwo

Kwat directly says that what Cici Panda asks is wrong

by adding little bit pause “Emm..” to strengthen his

refusal.

Based on these four examples, they suggest that

the speaker explicitly says that he or she is unwilling

to do or admit what the hearer asks, requests, states,

or offers by showing explicit and direct expressions of

refusal.

Strategy 7: Expression of refusal in a less coercive

way to minimize the impingement on the hearer

Example (13)

16

Komeng : “Bapak berdua mengatakan akan meningkatkan

ekonomi dan bisnis demi kemajuan negeri ILK. Bagaimana

caranya kalo saya punya tiket ekonomi mau pindah ke

bisnis?”

(“You said that you will increase the

economy and business of ILK for the sake of

the country’s progress.”)

Jarwo Kwat : “Maaf, kita cawapres apa agen tiket sih? Ya nggak

bisa. Masa capres dan cawapres ngurusin tiket.”

(“Sorry, I’m a candidate of vice president,

aren’t I? It can’t be so. I think a

candidate of president and vice president

don’t manage a ticket system, do we?”)

Example (14)

Cak Lontong : “Anda sepertinya ketakutan. Saya kira Anda

nggak perlu takut.”

(“It seems that you’re getting worry. I

think that you don’t need to do it.”)

Akbarajasa : “Enggak. Kita nggak akan takut memimpin negara

ILK.”

(“No, we won’t get afraid of leading ILK.”)

Example (15)

Cak Lontong : “Semuanya gara-gara kamu nih. ‘Lebih

edannya’, Kata Bang Yos.”

17

(“This chaos is because of you. Bang Yos

said that we are in the crazy

conversations.”)

Komeng : “Nggak. Bang Yos pura-pura.”

(“No, I don’t think so. Bang Yos pretended

to say it.”)

In the example (13), Jarwo Kwat shows his refusal

by saying “sorry” before giving his argument. The

utterance “sorry” is used to minimize conflicts with

Komeng. The same is true as the example (14),

Akbarajasa provides his argument as an attempt to

refuse what Cak Lontong says in order to mitigate

conflicts between both of them. Meanwhile, the example

(15) shows us how Komeng refuses Cak Lontong’s

statement by saying “No, I don’t think so. Bang Yos

pretended to say it.” in order to erode impingement

appears.

It can be said that these three examples promote

that politeness serves a strategy for making the hearer

has a good mood so as to minimize conflicts or

impingements to the hearer.

Off-record strategies

In the off-record strategies, meanwhile, we may

consider three refusal strategies used by the

characters of the ILK in the episode of Koalisi Capres,

18

involving give hints, be ambiguous or vague, and be

evasive, transfer to another topic. They can be

presented in the following:

Strategy 8: Give hints

Example (16)

Komeng : “Bapak kan sekarang lebih tua. Udah tujuh tujuh.”

(“You’re getting older, Sir. You’re seventy

seven years old now.”)

Jarwo Kwat : “Yaelah. Tinggal dipoles ilang.”

(“Yeah. I can make over more money for my

face.”)

Example (17)

Cak Lontong : “Terserah dia dong. Dia maunya dibandingin

dengan kakek saya kok.”

(“It’s up to him. He wants to be compared

with my grandfather.”)

Jarwo Kwat : “Err.. saya ngantuk nih.”

(“Err.. I’m getting sleepy now.”)

Example (18)

Komeng : “Satu pertanyaan lima belas ribu. Oke?”

(“One question, fifteen thousand rupiahs.

Okay?”)

Cak Lontong : “Gimana sih kamu. Bikin malu saya saja.”

19

(“How come? You make me embarrassed, you

know.”)

In the example (16), Jarwo Kwat gives Komeng hint

“Yaelah. Tinggal dipoles ilang.” (“Yeah. I can make over more

money for my face.”) means “I’m still young.”

Meanwhile, in the example (17), Jarwo Kwat also shows

his hint by saying “Err.. saya ngantuk nih.” (“Err.. I’m

getting sleepy now.”). It means “You’re wrong. I know

whom you mean.” Furthermore, we may also find such

hints in the example (18). Cak Lontong shows his hint

“Gimana sih kamu. Bikin malu saya saja.” (“How come? You make

me embarrassed, you know.”). It means “You don’t need

to say that.”

These examples point out that one of refusal

strategies used to show politeness is giving hints to

hearer. Primarily, every single off-record strategy

demonstrates the indirectness of showing refusal; in

this case, the speaker gives hints to the hearer. The

hints, as a result, serve to mitigate threats of the

FTA.

Strategy 9: Be ambiguous or vague

Example (19)

Komeng : “Ini pasangan pengantin, Pak?”

(Are they a bride and bridegroom?”)

Denny : “Mungkin memperlihatkan kedekatan mereka.”

20

(“Perhaps, they want to show their

friendliness.”)

Example (20)

Komeng : “Itu peci Bapak nomer berapa?”

(“What size is your cap, Sir?”)

Jarwo Kwat : “Hubungannya ga ada.”

(“There’s no relation to the topic.”)

Example (21)

Jarwo Kwat : “Meng, bantu.”

(“Please help me, Meng.”)

Komeng : “Kan saya mau ambil wajik.”

(“I want to take some wajik.”)

Example (22)

Cak Lontong : “Saya kan menilai seseorang bukan hanya

dari raut muka, tapi usia mempengaruhi.”

(“I respect others not only from their

facial appearance, but also their ages.”)

Komeng : “Kalau dibandingkan dengan pasangannya dong.

Jangan sama kakek lu.”

(“You may compare him to his partner, not

your grandfather.”)

Example (23)

Cak Lontong : “Kamu kayak antre mandi di toilet umum, Pak.

Di samping dong biar beribawa.”

21

(“You look like people who are in the queue

for public toilet, Sir. Please stand next to

me so as to be wise.”)

Komeng : “Banyak aturannya ini Bapak.”

(“I’m under the control of this man.”)

We may have a look at the example (19). Denny

shows his refusal by saying “Mungkin memperlihatkan

kedekatan mereka.” (“Perhaps, they want to show their

friendliness.”). It means “They’re very close friends.”

Another ambiguity is as in the example (20), Jarwo Kwat

says “Hubungannya ga ada.” (“There’s no relation to the

topic.”) that means “I think I don’t have to answer

it.” The same is true as the example (21), Komeng shows

his refusal by uttering “Kan saya mau ambil wajik.” (“I want

to take some wajik.”). It means “I don’t think I’ll help

you.” Meanwhile, in the example (22), Komeng’s

utterance “Kalau dibandingkan dengan pasangannya dong. Jangan

sama kakek lu.” (“You may compare him to his partner, not

your grandfather.”) is used to show his refusal. It

means “I don’t think I agree with your statement.”

In line with the previous strategy, these examples

also propose the indirectness of refusal strategy by

using ambiguity. In other words, they create an

ambiguity sense between the literal meaning of an

utterance and its possible implicatures. Thus, it also

22

functions to minimize conflicts between the speaker and

the hearer.

Strategy 10: Be evasive, transfer to another topic

Example (24)

Cak Lontong : “Selain itu saya akan konsen pada masalah

kemiskinan dan perekonomian.”

(“Likewise, I’m going to concentrate on

various problems of poverty and economy.”)

Komeng : “Kan kita masih miskin berdua. Kita ngomongin yang

lain aja deh. ”

(“Our finance is getting poor. I offer you

another topic.”)

In the example (24), Komeng shows his refusal by

uttering “Kan kita masih miskin berdua. Kita ngomongin yang lain aja

deh.” (“Our finance is getting poor. I offer you another

topic.”). In other words, the speaker attempts to

interrupt the hearer’s topic and change into another

topic. This last example indicates that the speaker

mitigates a FTA to the hearer rather than shows his

explicit and direct expression of refusal.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, this study on the politeness

strategies in refusal agrees with what extent they have

been proposed by Peng-liang and Min (2013), and is

23

under the umbrella of Brown and Levinson (1987) in

terms of the politeness theory. It is not easy to

explain politeness strategies in refusal presented in

this paper, especially in differentiating the refusal

strategy ‘give hints’ from the refusal strategy ‘be

ambiguous or vague’ which can be classified into the

use of off-record strategies in politeness.

As previously mentioned in the previous section,

refusal strategies which were more frequently performed

by the characters of the ILK in the episode of Koalisi

Capres were in the form of off-record strategies.

Nevertheless, other politeness strategies in refusal,

including positive politeness, bald on-record, and

negative politeness strategies were also commonly used

in the television program. Hopefully, this study

provides more insights to the readers related to the

use of politeness strategies in refusal, especially in

a comedy program and inspires other researchers to

investigate politeness strategies of refusal in

different real life situations.

REFERENCES

24

Brown, P. and. Levinson, S. C. 1987. Politeness: SomeUniversals in Language Use. New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2008). Politeness in Mexico and theUnited Sates. Philadelphia: John BenjaminsPublishing Company.

Indonesia Lawak Klub (ILK). (2014). Koalisi Capres. Available

at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdB_yNIpNj0[Accessed 06/25/14]

Peng-liang and Min (2013). Politeness Strategies inRefusal. Journal of Sino-US English Teaching, ISSN 1539-8072,Vol. 10, No. 12, pp. 920-924.

Sattar et al. (2011). Refusal Strategies In English ByMalay University Students. GEMA Online™ Journal ofLanguage Studies Volume 11(3), pp. 69-81.

Thomas, J. (1995). Meaning in Interaction. Harlow: Longman.

Wijayanto et al. (2013). Politeness in InterlanguagePragmatics of Complaints by Indonesian Learners ofEnglish. Journal of English Language Teaching; Vol. 6, No. 10,pp. 188- 201.

Xiaoning, Z. (2004). Politeness Strategies Used inEnglish Requests and Refusals by Chinese CollegeEFL Learners. Thesis. Nanjing University.

Yule, G. (2003). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.

25