SOCIO-PRACTICAL FACTORS REFLECTED IN THE USE OF INDONESIAN IN MULTIETHNIC COMMUNICATION

 

Dian Eka Chandra Wardhana ¹, Muhamad Ali ², Wiwin Erni Siti Nurlina ³, Catur Wulandari ²

 

¹ Doctoral Program in Applied Linguistics, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, University of Bengkulu, Indonesia

² Master of Indonesian Language Program, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, University of Bengkulu, Indonesia

³ National Research and Innovation Agency, Indonesia

 

1. INTRODUCTION

Sociopragmatic factors reflected in the use of language in multiethnic communication are built on the characteristics of the speaker's speech when representing a speech act, particularly directive speech acts (hereinafter abbreviated as DSA). Directive speech actions (DSA) are a type of DSA that is prone to conflict in lingua franca communication. This is due to the fact that the traits of DSA necessitate a specific action from the speech partner (henceforth abbreviated to Sp) when speech is delivered by the speaker (from now on abbreviated to Sr). Another phenomenon is that the form of DSA experiences decay. This is because Sr wants to give special meaning to his speech, provide a form of qualification to the message conveyed, emphasize the message, and provide personification and objectivity to the message Alsola (2023), Karim et al. (2023), Nurdiana (2023).

Over the past five years, socio-practical factors have prompted sustained efforts from the Language Agency and Indonesian language stakeholders to advocate for Indonesian as an international language, culminating in its recognition in 2023 and its use in UNESCO conferences. The language's evolution since 1928 highlights its dynamic and creative nature in unifying Indonesia's diverse ethnicities. Recent developments demonstrate its ability to generate new dynamic vocabularies, creatively blending foreign, regional (e.g., Javanese, Sundanese), and digital/internet languages. Moreover, these vocabularies are crafted with politeness and consideration Alsaadi (2021).

The passage underscores Indonesian's significance as a global communication tool, particularly evident in internet chats, where it ranks third worldwide. With over 278 million speakers and 340 language centers across 35 countries, Indonesian has been promoted internationally since 2009. Translanguaging and digital discourse are encouraged through educational programs and scholarships despite a publication decline in 2022 due to Malaysia's prominence. The UKBI test evaluates proficiency, aiming to unify diverse cultures. Additionally, since 1955, Indonesian stereotypes have been recognized, and a commitment to leadership has been demonstrated in international forums like G20 and ASEAN (dialogue Oemar, M. RI). Oemar highlights Indonesia's efforts to enhance global connectivity and cultural development through collaboration with UNESCO and the introduction of Indonesian as an official language at the UN General Conference, aligning with Article 44 (paragraph 1) of Law No. 24 of 2009.

Another evidence that it has its rules organized based on modern linguistic rules is that this language can absorb various global thoughts (Kaswanti PB dialogue, 2021) so that speakers can create their vocabulary by combining (mix code) regional vocabulary and foreign vocabulary with Indonesian vocabulary to create new ones (Wardhana et al., 2006). Benchmarks of new vocabulary are often used to create creativity in the speaker's thoughts when writing essays so that Indonesian becomes a scientific language. For example, srawung akademik (Javanese and Indonesian), parameter teori (English and Indonesian), manuscript publish (English-English), distilasi data (English-Indonesian), norma subjective (Indonesian-English), the principles teori (English-Indonesian), desain penelitian (English-Indonesian), konsistensi internal (English-English), but has been absorbed into BInd), koreksi lintas korektor (Indonesian-English), validator eksternal (English-English), konstruk komplek (English -Indonesia), konstruksi tema (English-Indonesian), populist ideology, visual analysis, sigma stereotypes, computational virality, test professionalism, test diagnostics, differentiated learning and considerable other examples that can be represented.

The development of translinguistic vocabulary is reinforced through language usage in internet chats, mirroring people's everyday practices. The use of Indonesian in chats varies based on community conventions, akin to wearing specific attire for different occasions. Similarly, internet language reflects informal chat norms. Despite differing manifestations, the essence remains consistent. This language embodies Indonesian philosophy as a futuristic, technology-driven tool for national unity, with meanings contextualized accordingly. In line with this phenomenon, a sociopragmatic factor model was formulated, which is used when speakers communicate with interlocutors in a region in Indonesia. In this area, eight tribes live with a variety of more than ten dialects, so this research topic was investigated. Therefore, what sociopragmatic factors emerge when the communication involves a directive act of speech?

This is reinforced by the findings of Chintawidy & Sartini (2022), who highlight various socio-practical factors influencing linguistic politeness. Initial observations conducted between 1999 and 2003 in Bengkulu shed light on social distance, language power dynamics, cultural values, and situational variables affecting participants' roles in communication within multiethnic communities. For instance, the use of abbreviated demonstrative words like "tu" and "itu" serves specific purposes, reflecting solidarity between speech participants Yusra (2023). Shorter utterances indicate closer familiarity, while longer ones suggest a more distant relationship among participants (Cuaya et al. (2022)). The research contributes theoretically by enhancing understanding of situational contexts and cultural values, aiding in the promotion of politeness in language styles among participants, particularly in multiethnic societies. Practically, the findings inform the development of sociolinguistic lecture materials tailored for studying multilingualism, which is crucial for mitigating culture shock in multiethnic communication settings.

 

2. Literature Review

Language reflects culture, so language use becomes essential and complicated when people from more than one culture live together (Ahtif & Gandhi (2022)). Culture includes the way people behave and the beliefs, values, and habits held by people in a community or society (Chen (2023)). Communication and culture are inseparable because communication cannot be achieved unless it is shared and understood by others. In a given culture, people learn to communicate with whom and, more importantly, how to do so. In contrast, culture is transmitted and developed by means of spoken or unspoken language in communication (Zhou & Burhanudeen (2013)).

The presence of a multicultural environment has become a fundamental characteristic of the contemporary global world (Ovsiienko et al. (2023)). In this era of globalization, cross-cultural communication is becoming increasingly relevant (Zakiyah (2023)). By researching cross-cultural communication and learning how to apply it in everyday conversations, a person acquires intercultural skills (Langaas & Mujtaba (2023)). Communication is influenced by cultural differences, which must be taken into consideration when interacting with foreigners. Being aware of and sensitive to cultural differences can help cross-cultural communication (Vlasov et al. (2023)).

The fact that language has existed since evolutionary times shows how important it is for humans to be able to talk to each other at various levels of society. Language becomes a tool for psychological and social thinking Lacina & Griffith (2021). Therefore, language politeness is part of the attitude that contains values of politeness in everyday interactions. Politeness is always reflected at the speech (language) level (Tobing & Pranowo (2023)). However, in cross-cultural communication, language politeness is influenced by social factors such as social distance, language strength, cultural principles, and situational factors (Masdar & Harifuddin (2023)).

In analyzing speech behavior, social distance is an essential sociolinguistic factor (Chang & Ren (2020)). This concept, in its simplest form, refers to how close and intimate the interlocutor is (Loewen et al. (2020)). Social distance is one of the main factors that determines how interlocutors converse because social distance is a critical determinant of the level of comfort or politeness/respect in verbal conversations (Saleem et al. (2021)). Power can change the way people act, the way they think, the actions, and the policies they follow. People can reflect on their strengths through the use of politeness strategies in their speech (Amalia et al.  (2023)).

On the other hand, situational variables play an essential role in choosing politeness strategies. These situational variables influence the distribution of power and social distance between the speaker and the recipient. The speaker may be indebted to the person he is speaking to when interacting with specific audiences. This results in increased power of the target party in subsequent communications between them (Yaqin et al. (2022)).

 

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

The location of this research was in Kandang Limun, Kandang Limun Village; (b) Lingkar Timur Village, Lingkar Timur sub-district. A qualitative design with an ethnographic approach to communication and pragmatics were used. The quality design has been applied due to the importance of research data in people's lives. There is no manipulation or special treatment; it can be found in everyday life. Moreover, eight ethnicities were included in this study. This research data consists of two types, namely, speech data and field notes. Both types of data were collected through recording, observation and interview techniques which analyzed using an interactive model.

Meanwhile, communication ethnography was used because the researcher observes various symptoms of communication culture in society by describing the communication patterns which depend on the participant's patterns used. This approach is based on the nature of the data derived from the researcher's interpretation of the language situation of the subject and the development of the results in the context of communication events. The data on research has been analysed in detail over the last few years. Reliable and relevant data were required to interpret existing data. Interpretation of research data was carried out intensively over a long period. Therefore, it takes a long time to collect data from various data sources, and it is recorded in detail in field notes, interview notes, and tape recorders. The analysis was based on inductive analysis and reflective notes. Data analysis was carried out using the interactive principles of the  Miles and Huberman theory (1994, 2014). This was done to understand the speech behavior of Sr's directive speech acts, which are reflected verbally so that various socio-practical models that influence when Sr communicates with Sp in Bengkulu can be studied.

 

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. Result

Research findings are based on the results of interactive data analysis. This model was developed by (Miles et al. (2014)). The findings were social distance, language power, cultural values and situational variables. A detailed description of the research findings can be read in the following description.

1)    Social Distancing

Based on the results of the study, the first utterance (1) represents speech with a lower social status than Sp. The situation in which the speech is represented is a situation that is used to add information so that it is understood that Sr's speech act, which Sp rejects as reflected in utterance (2), is a speech act caused by the broad social distance between them. This occurred due to cultural mismatches and significant age differences between participants. Sr's culture is in the context of "abstaining from eating a lot at the house of a friend who is in trouble." At the same time, Sp still needs to understand this culture because he is still young. The implication is that he needs to know what habits he can and cannot eat in a particular situation. Cultural differences between participants cause the gap between them to widen.

 Cultural differences have caused a low level of solidarity among participants, based on this illustration. Sp's order to drink was rejected due to differences in habits at the event or situation of the child's death, which resulted in widening social distance between the participants, the status, and the role of the participants at that time. The social distance scale between participants refers to the relative status and role when the speech act is represented. As a result, the presence of participants in the situation is differentiated on the basis of their social role. As seen in statements (1) and (2), Sr's social role causes Sr not to accept Sp's orders because Sr's concept of eating at a friend's house who is having difficulties shows a different understanding of habits from Sp's understanding.

Meanwhile, it is the concept of social status which provides us with a clue as to who these participants are. In other words, the role is different from the status from a sociological point of view. Status is a person's place or position in a social group, while role refers to the rights and obligations of a person's status. Roles relate to functional roles, which explain the functions of the participants in the community in the context of the multiethnic dialogue. Example (223/052/Cl10/180303)

[A]/PJPB        : (1) Ciciplah Buk! (Please try it, mam!)

[B]/PRL         : (2) Gak… (No)

[A]/PJPB        : (3) (Keep quiet and enjoy continuing her meal)

 

Context: PJPB's speech during a meal together in preparation for the 7-day anniversary of the death of the child Sp. Sp younger age and high social status. At that time PJPB ate little even though there were a lot of dishes available.

In multiethnic communication, Sr's identity is related to norms (N) and mood (M) Sp, the choice of style or level of politeness used by Sr is related to politeness strategies, while the use of Bengkulu Malay language and culture characterizes conversations involving N or M. Mixed codes or code-switching characterizes a person involved as a participant in a multiethnic conversation. Depending on the number of participants, using Bengkulu Malay and mixed or codeswitching languages is considered politeness ethics in the general politeness category. Because impoliteness is caused by the choice of the wrong code and the use of language levels, using Bengkulu Malay in conversations involving participants will give the impression of being rude because the participants' chosen language is peer style. Sometimes, the use of combinations or codeswitching is saccharic in that it implies exclusivity. In actions that do not burden face, the choice of speech is a choice of narration as it is, so it can be said that politeness is false.

Example (858/153/CL.15/240303)

[A]/Sr              : (1) Yuk ado anak aku! (Have you seen my daughter?)

[B]/Sp             : (2) kalau nak setom…! (Maybe in the car)

[A]/Sr              : (3) Panggil Nyo...! (Call her!)

[B]/Sp             : (4) (shut up and carry out A's request!)

 

Context: Sr's words were in the midst of his busy schedule helping prepare village thanksgivings at the village head's house, but suddenly he remembered the toddler who was no longer beside him.

The conversation above occurred during Sr's visit to the house of the village head of his acquaintance and old friend in the village of Air Meles Atas. Sr chatted on the veranda with several friends, mainly of Rejang ethnicity. The directive speech act in utterance (3) is an impolite expression because it was expressed directly without politeness tools, specifically since it was hot and many people and Sr had just arrived. This speech is expressed in Bengkulu Malay, addressed to Sp, and suggests a close social relationship with Sp. However, this speech burdened Sp's face because it was delivered at the wrong time (it was hot, the car park was quite far away, and the speaker was in the middle of a crowd).

 

2)    Power

Based on the results of the analysis, it is shown that there are three possible uses of greeting words that influence the level of command restriction and the nature of the power represented. The three types of greetings are (a) first person singular greetings, ambo “I”, uwak “uncle/aunt”,  ayuk/yuk “sister”, dan ko “brother”, (b) first person plural address, kito “we”, kami, kau “single mention of the name O2”, name of the person, dan (c) second person singular or plural kau “kamu (you/they)”, mention of names. This research indicates that using second-person greetings, namely, saying names and you, tends to increase the level of restriction in a speech act expressed in the command mode. The example of speech used to explain the description above can be seen below.

 

Example (002/01/CL.01/100901)

[A]/Sp             :              (1) Apo iko? (What is this?)

[B]/ Sr            :              (2) Bawalah, bawa karung iko.. Nur! (Bring it, bring this sack... Nur!)

[A]/ Sp            : (3) Male..(I dont want to bring it) (pass away!)

 

Context of Sr's speech when Sp was busy cleaning his yard which was filled with used sandbags to stop rainwater from entering the house.

The mention of greetings (by saying the name of Sp "Nur") as in utterance (2) increases the level of power distribution between participants because the appearance of Sr's role in communication becomes clear in terms of age and social status. However, if Sr does not use greetings by saying names (using other greetings), then the distribution of power between them decreases.

 

3)    Level of Imposition on the Face of Sp

Differences in power, social distance, and situational variables between participants cause the burden on face to be determined by the naturalness of face threats, whether general or applied in a specific culture. For example, directive speech acts expressed in a commanding mode are universally considered more expensive than those expressed in the request mode. In Brown and Lavinson's (1987) concept, threats to a negative face are more expensive than threats to a cheerful face. Hence, the value given to negative politeness is higher than positive politeness. To get a more detailed explanation, see the explanation below.

Example (305/064/CL13/210303)

[A]/Sr              : (1) Ayuk..apa gak sebaiknya ditaruh disini bae? (Sis... wouldn't it be better to just put it here?)

[B]/Sp             : (2) Ehm..salah, ambo letakkan bae  disiko? (Am I wrong if I put it here?)

[A]/Sr              : (3) Idak..ambo pikirkan lagi yo!( No...I'll think about it again!)

[B]/Sp             : (4) diam (walked away while making an angry face)

[C]/Sp             : (5) Apo dio Buk! (What is wrong?)

[A]/Sr              : (6) Idak…nak ambik piring bae (No...just want to get a plate)       

 

Context: Sr's speech when helping with preparations in the kitchen for the village clean-up event in Kandang village

The first utterance (1) is a speech expressing itself verbally with a request mode conveyed indirectly. The price of a request in utterance (1) is descending because Sp is more tolerant of open criticism. This is reflected in speech (2), made clear by the supportive move as seen in speech (4). Speech (4) is used to avoid conflict by doing nothing (silence and leaving). In Sp culture, open criticism is seen as a high level of impoliteness. However, if delivered correctly based on the interview results, Sp can accept the criticism gracefully. Expressing a directive speech act with a requesting mode verbally, as seen in speech (1), is naturally more expensive because it is the PJPB's prerogative to consider all contextual variables, including the disclosure of the action that should be carried out Sp. For example, conveying a request in the communication context above is a request to hit using a 'nglulu' tool. Nglulu is a positive politeness strategy because it forces Gunung to agree to Sr's request, but Gunung maintains his face.

The problem above preference becomes a new issue if a request or command is more expensive than criticism because expressing a directive speech act using the request mode can naturally be more costly. This is because the directive speech act in the mode above is a right inherent (by natural law) to a civil servant. For example, conveying requests in different communication contexts can save face for Sp.

Example of utterance (002/01/CL.01/100901)

[A]/Sr             : (1) Pak..ambo buka ya...! (Sir, i will open this)

: (2) diluar lah banyak yang nunggu (There were many people waiting outside)

                          : (3) Tengoklah...banyak yang nunggu...! (look, there are already people waiting!)

                          : (4) Jam berapo nak dibuka Pak..? (What time will it open sir?..!)     

[B]/Sp             : (5) Kelak..sebentar lagi! (Later, wait a moment!)

                          : (6) Kito samo-samo..tunggu banyak dulu (We're all together, wait a lot of people first!)

[A]/Sr             : (7) (silent) leave and go down towards the courtyard to join the rest of the community.

 

Context: Sr's statement when there was a Raskin rice distribution event in the village hall and the residents who were entitled to it were waiting to take their share, while the committee was still sitting in the village hall.

 

The first utterance (1) is a directive speech expressed indirectly requesting Sp to open the warehouse. The directive speech act defined in the above mode uses 'saying to find a reason' as seen in the following utterance (speech 2). Speech (1) is a discourse that uses a positive politeness strategy. It indirectly forces Sp to act above to save Sp's face because many people are already waiting outside to take Raskin rice. The act of request that is forced in utterance (1) is emphasized with a fence (in the form of the syntactic device "see") and the affirmative device "lah" so that Sp acts as desired by Sr.

Further evidence of force can observed in speech (3). This speech is a request for action and involves an expression that provides quotation marks to Sp to provide certainty about the right 'time' so that the crowd in the village hall yard quickly disperses. Based on Brown & Levinson's (1987) politeness hierarchy, the request in utterance (3) is a positive politeness strategy because Sr carries out his assessment so that utterance (3) is the lowest request utterance, while utterance (4) is the most severe. In other words, utterance (4) is the most expensive utterance towards Sp and is corrected with the politeness strategy that it is.

 

4)    Situation Variables

The purpose of observing situation variables (Hymes, 1972; Saville-Troike, 1982) becomes significantly dominant at specific periods. For example, for people who are carrying out tarawih during the fasting month (in the mosque), Sp is usually commanded with loud voice expressions by the imam, but fellow Makmum who are resting in between their tarawih services sometimes speak with directive speech acts and express themselves verbally with whispering way. This is done so as not to disturb the solemnity of worship in the mosque. The hands and body posture are perfect for facing the Qibla (it does not matter whether Takmir A has a high social status or the social status of the one in charge of leading the terawih worship). The performance of the worship is all in a (perfect) manner. The order is directed to everyone (the community who is performing worship) to take part in tarawih, regardless of the status of the participants, if the rows are not straight or the distance between the participants needs to be tight. They only obey the orders given by the imam and do not care whether they are new arrivals in the mosque or whether fellow Makmums know each other. In cases like this, power and social distance could be more relevant.

 In contrast, the imam usually conveys directive speech acts expressed in a particular mode at a loud speech level because of the distance between Sr and Sp and the background, which increases the distance between participants or orders to straighten the rows. Less straight or less tight with a soft voice. In this case, the purpose of communication is to carry out worship. The purpose of using DSA appropriately and efficiently without damaging the face and the purpose of communication is achieved. The importance of dominating communication goals in detail can be observed in the following conversation. This conversation occurred between Sr and his neighbor, carried out in whispers because his child was fussy that night.

Example (502/086/CL13/210303)

           [A]/Sr   : (1) Basuh mukanyo kek air matang ko..(Wash your face with boiled water)

           (while staring at the boiled water that Sp)

           [B]/Sp  : (2) Pak De ajolah (Mr De please do it)

           [A]/Sr   : (3) Kau ajolah... semua orang biso! (You can do that!)

Context: The words of a female teacher while calming a fussy toddler late at night

          

5)    Culture value

Based on the results of the analysis, it is shown that there are speech (4) in the following data example is a speech that occurs just before breaking the fast in Ramadan. It only exists in Islamic culture. The meaning of speech or speech acts in the context of the following speech is determined by the cultural situation, so the Sr directive speech act expressed verbally in a particular way is speech that considers politeness mode at a certain level. The use of the politeness mode, when interpreted in the situation The cultural atmosphere of Ramadan at that time was beneficial to Sr and Sp (mutual respect) because the participants were fasting. When breaking the fast, they needed warm drinking water, to break their fast. In this case, logically, there is a relationship between speech or speech acts and the cultural situation as a habit or convention. In this relationship, the cultural situation is a cultural value that limits Sr's behavior.

           Example (023/008/CL10/101001)

 [A]/Sr            : (1) kito angkek dulu ...?!(Lets pick it up first...!)

 [B]/Sp            : (2) lah...mano air panasnyo... (Where's the hot water?)

 [A]/Sr            : (3) di dalam termos dak..!(In that bottle, you can check it ...!)

 [B]/Sp      : (4) Salen sich.. (Move it to another place)

 (5) salen tremos sich , Nur! (Replace that bottle first)

           Context: Sp's words when helping prepare for breaking the fast together at Sr's house          

The fourth utterance (4) represents DSA, which is mutually respectful because it is expressed in Javanese mixed with Curup sich Malay dialect. The expression of the directive speech act in utterance (4) contains nuances of politeness because Sp knows that the person being spoken to is a Sr who is very happy if he can speak Javanese. The result of this nuance of politeness is that each participant gives a face to Sp to feel they benefit from each other (mutual cost-benefit). Sr knows that Sp can speak Javanese, but Sr needs to have the attitude to position himself to be spoken to in Javanese because Sp's attitude is aimed at familiarizing himself with Sr. The representation of directive speech acts in utterance (4) has cultural values linked to the values possessed by Sp. Sp has value as a participant who behaves politely and impolitely.

 

4.2. Discusstion

The analysis identifies five reflections of multicultural communication, with the first being Social Distancing. In multiethnic dialogues, individuals assume distinct roles based on their characteristics, involvement in communication, status, and institutional roles. Törngren & Sato (2021) and Cao et al. (2023) further emphasize that social distance in such communication contexts is influenced by participants' roles within culturally diverse communities. Role disparities arise from interactions between participants, impacting solidarity levels: closer relationships exhibit higher solidarity. However, increased social distance corresponds to diminished solidarity.

Additionally, social distance influences top-down power dynamics, with greater distance correlating to higher power dynamics. The participant's role holds significant meaning in speech acts, reflecting social dimensions and solidarity levels. These dynamics are exemplified in the speech example provided.

The second reflection of multicultural communication is Power, which plays a vital role in understanding how directive speech acts are represented. Power is inherent in our interactions and represents the ability to influence others, regardless of whether it is perceived positively or negatively. It is neither inherently good nor bad but can be used for both constructive and oppressive purposes. Power is distributed through social networks and is not monopolized by individuals, and Power operates at multiple levels in the social structure. This is not entirely top-down and can manifest in various forms in social life, from the oppressive to the productive. Thus, individuals engage with power dynamics at varying levels in social contexts.

The relationship between Power and the representation of the speaker's directive speech act is influenced by the mode chosen by the speaker, thereby influencing the illocutionary Power of the directive speech act. Directive speech acts, which are designed to encourage the speech partner to take action, often fall into competitive categories such as commanding, requesting, and demanding Widodo & Retma (2023). Through these actions, the speaker can exert influence or domination over the thoughts, feelings, or behavior of the speaker. Power dynamics between participants are very significant in carrying out these speech acts, with dominance usually seen in communication (Widyastuti & Sartika (2023)). The verbal expression of speakers' speech acts, primarily through greetings, carries implications for Power and solidarity, as highlighted by (Sibdow et al. (2022)) The choice of greeting words has an impact on the level of command limitation and the nature of the Power represented, so it requires careful consideration in multiethnic discourse based on participant components.

The Level of Facial Imposition represents how actions may impact Sp's positive or negative face. Higher face-saving burdens increase costs for Sp and heighten Sr's obligation to address them. Politeness investment varies based on Sp's facial impact, affecting the Level of Facial Imposition parameters in threat assessment. Social factors like Power, social distance, and level of imposition on the face, jointly developed by PJPB, gauge threat severity as changes in one factor affect others, determining threat magnitude to Sp. Damaging politeness discourse excerpts weaken power effects, reducing face threats for Sp through strategies like affirmation and softening, as noted by (Borris & Zecho (2018); Dewanti (2022); Hilal (2023)). Situational variables, like communication goals, are crucial, as seen in conversations aiming to address a child's pickiness, where politeness may take a backseat (Daulay et al. (2022)).

Cultural values are the fifth reflection of multicultural communication, which guides verbal behavior in social interactions and influences the expression of politeness. Cultural value systems shape social and linguistic behavior and can even limit speech behavior. Simplicity, as a cultural value, impacts the way individuals communicate with others. In addition, cultural values significantly influence facial threats, which form the basis of directive speech acts. Differences in cultural values, such as the expression "congratulations," originate from various influential social factors. (Ammari et al. (2023)) emphasized that three cultural values underlie directive expressions based on facial threat factors. These include personal ideologies, pragmatic interpretations of meaning, and cross-cultural cognitive tendencies, as highlighted by (Zheng et al. (2021)). Cultural situations authentically influence communication, shaping polite and impolite behavior. In Bengkulu Malay culture, the implications of polite and impolite behavior may differ from the host's perspective, indicating respect for cultural differences. Speakers strive for relationships that respect cultural diversity in themselves and their speech partners, realizing that guests may behave differently than the hosts' house (Luo (2022); Setiawan (2023)).

 

5. CONCLUSION

The implications of multiethnic communication in Bengkulu are influenced by the social norms of language use that involve multiethnic life by controlling the noble values of the moral and ethical pedagogy of each ethnic group. This is reflected when Sr represents DSA when communicating with Sp. This reflection on Sr's speech is influenced by various influential social factors, such that Sr's speech appears polite and fulfills the intended social rules. The social factors that influence communication are (1) social distance, (2) power, (3) feeling, (4) situational variables, and (5) the cultural values of the speech participants.

 

6. Implication

The interrelationship of the mixed values of several inter-ethnic cultures can be reconciled both in terms of similarities and differences. This is necessary so that the identity of each ethnic group can enrich the sociolinguistic nature of social language. The cultural identity of each ethnic group needs to be maintained by its speakers to strengthen their cultural values so that these cultural values are verbally more oriented towards something literal or formal to develop arguments for the stability of the speaker's use of language and culture. This needs to be done to ensure insight into the discourse analysis that has been carried out by researchers, which is the key to understanding culture when there are differences in ethnic values that persist in cross-cultural communication patterns.

 

7. Limitation

This research has limitations, namely that observations, interviews, and recordings were constructed at the time of data collection in Bengkulu City. One of the cities in Indonesia (involving participants from 8 of the 778 ethnicities in Indonesia). The eight ethnic groups referred to are Javanese, Sundanese, South Sumatran, Padang, Batak, Balinese, Madurese and Lampung. When communicating with Sp Bengkulu, these eight ethnic groups use everyday Indonesian mixed with regional dialects typical of each ethnic group so that their language is very distinctive. However, their interactions are full of tolerance and unity.

 

8. Sugesstion

The suggested further research topic is the development of sociopragmatic theory in multiethnic communication when Sr and Sp use different politeness modes. This opinion is based on the fact that a shift in language and culture can occur if a society's model of intercultural interaction uses specific patterns or modes of politeness due to different cultural aspects. For example, the model of politeness for directive actions that exist in a Western community is different from the politeness that exists in an Eastern community due to cultural differences. Suppose these two cultures meet in a society. In that case, a new mode of communication will be created so that their communication becomes effective, colored by the richness of cultural diversity due to the interaction of the two different cultures. The diversity of politeness modes with different cultural backgrounds in a society is fascinating to study because this is evidence that the use of language in a society is dynamic, so the practical aspects that influence it are very dynamic.

 

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

None. 

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

None.

 

REFERENCES

Ahtif, M. H., & Gandhi, N. (2022). The Role of Language in Cross Cultural Bonds. Journal of Asian Multicultural Research for Social Sciences Study, 3(4), 7-16. https://doi.org/10.47616/jamrsss.v3i4.321

Alsaadi, H. M. A. (2021). Dynamic Assessment in Language Learning; An Overview and the Impact of Using Social Media. English Language Teaching, 14(8), 73. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v14n8p73

Alsola, M. C. (2023). Literature Review on Multicultural Business Communication. American Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Innovation, 2(5), 47-54. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajmri.v2i5.1952

Amalia, N. I., Indah, R. N., & Bahtiar, J. Y. (2023). Representation of Power through Politeness Strategies in Bridgerton Season 1 Movie. Elsya : Journal of English Language Studies, 5(3), 385-397. https://doi.org/10.31849/elsya.v5i3.14131

Ammari, R. M. G., Al-Mahameed, Y. S., Al Bataineh, K. B., & Al Ahmad, W. R. (2023). Congratulation! A Case Study of Social Media Users in Jordan. International Journal of Arabic-English Studies. https://doi.org/10.33806/ijaes.v24i1.564

Borris, D., & Zecho, C. (2018). The linguistic Politeness having seen on the Current Study Issue. Linguistics and Culture Review, 2(1), 32-44. https://doi.org/10.37028/lingcure.v2n1.10

Cao, Y., Hou, Y., Dong, Z., & Ji, L.-J. (2023). The Impact of Culture and Social Distance on Humor Appreciation, Sharing, and Production. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 14(2), 207-217.  https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211065938  

Chang, Y.-F., & Ren, W. (2020). Sociopragmatic Competence in American and Chinese children's realization of apology and refusal. Journal of Pragmatics, 164, 27-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.04.013 

Chen, T. Y. (2023). The Chinese Intercultural Competence Scale and the External Factors of Spanish as a Foreign Language. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 43-55.  https://doi.org/10.36923/jicc.v23i3.240

Chintawidy, P. A., & Sartini, N. W. (2022). A Cross-Cultural Pragmatics Study of Request Strategies and Politeness in Javanese and Sundanese. Journal of Pragmatics Research, 4(1), 152-166. https://doi.org/10.18326/jopr.v4i2.152-166

Cuaya, L. V., Hernández-Pérez, R., Boros, M., Deme, A., & Andics, A. (2022). Speech naturalness detection and language representation in the dog brain. NeuroImage, 248, 118811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118811

Daulay, S. H., Azmi, N., & Pratiwi, T. (2022). The Importance of Expressing Politeness: English Education Student's Perspectives. Tarling : Journal of Language Education, 6(1), 49-68. https://doi.org/10.24090/tarling.v6i1.5158

Dewanti, M. P. (2022). Politeness Strategies of the Main Characters in the Fault in Our Stars Novel. UC Journal: ELT, Linguistics and Literature Journal, 3(1), 72-89. https://doi.org/10.24071/uc.v3i1.4804

Hilal, M. A. (2023). The Use of Politeness Strategies in Academic Conversations as Represented in a Corpus Linguistics MOOC. Journal of Pragmatics Research, 5(1), 85-106. https://doi.org/10.18326/jopr.v5i1.85-106   

Karim, D., Gustomo, A., & Wisesa, A. (2023). The Emergence of Multicultural Characteristics in Virtual Team. Jurnal Manajemen Indonesia, 23(1), 94. https://doi.org/10.25124/jmi.v23i1.4457

Lacina, J., & Griffith, R. (2021). The Power of Language. The Reading Teacher, 74(5), 481-482. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1996

Langaas, M., & Mujtaba, B. G. (2023). Communication across Cultures in the Workplace: Swimming in Scandinavian Waters. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 11(04), 174-192. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2023.114014

Loewen, S., Gönülal, T., Isbell, D. R., Ballard, L., Crowther, D., Lim, J., Maloney, J., & Tigchelaar, M. (2020). How knowledgeable are applied linguistics and SLA researchers about basic statistics?: Data from North America and Europe. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(4), 871-890. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000548

Luo, Y. (2022). The Role of Language and Cultural Commodification in Tourism. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.220706.002

Masdar, M., & Harifuddin, H. (2023). Stereotype, Prejudice And Social Distance In Multiethnic Society. International Journal of Educational Research & Social Sciences, 4(5), 929-936. https://doi.org/10.51601/ijersc.v4i5.729

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Source Book. Sage Publication.

Nurdiana, N. N. (2023). A Sociopragmatic Analysis of the Speech Act Of Requesting in Local English Coursebooks. Journal of English Language and Culture, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.30813/jelc.v13i2.4237

Ovsiienko, L., Rakityanska, L., Kulyk, O., Pet'ko, L., Turchynova, G., & Zavadska, T. (2023). Development of Multicultural Education: Tasks, Tools and Project Solutions. TEM Journal, 1451-1461. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM123-25

Saleem, T., Unjum, U., Ahmed, M. I., & Qadeer, A. (2021). Social distance and speech behavior: A case of Pakistani English speakers' apology responses. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2021.1890410

Setiawan, A. R. (2023). Tourism and Intercultural Communication: A Theoretical Study. Jurnal Komunikasi, 17(2), 186-195. https://doi.org/10.21107/ilkom.v17i2.22733

Sibdow, I. A., Yekple, S. L. K., Dorleku, F., & Immorrow, M. A.-R. (2022). A Sociolinguistic Explorative Study of Interactional Discourse in Dagbani and Ewe. European Journal of Language and Culture Studies, 1(6), 9-23. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejlang.2022.1.6.41

Tobing, R. L., & Pranowo, D. D. (2023). Language politeness in French. FRANCISOLA, 8(1), 22-31. https://doi.org/10.17509/francisola.v8i1.60895

Törngren, S. O., & Sato, Y. (2021). Beyond being either-or: identification of multiracial and multiethnic Japanese. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 47(4), 802-820.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2019.1654155

Vlasov, M., Polbitsyn, S. N., Olumekor, M., & Haddad, H. (2023). Exploring the Role of Socio-Cultural Factors on the Development of Human Capital in Multi-Ethnic Regions. Sustainability, 15(21), 15438. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152115438

Widodo, P., & Retma Sari. (2023). Pragmatic Role of Speech Act Communication Pragmatic Role of Speech Act Communication Among Non-English Department Students. Indonesian Journal of Education and Learning, 6(2), 14-25. https://doi.org/10.31002/ijel.v6i2.728 

Widyastuti, W., & Sartika, E. (2023). Directive Speech Acts in Mark Twain's The Adventure of Huckleberry Finn. Journal of Pragmatics Research, 5(1), 59-84. https://doi.org/10.18326/jopr.v5i1.59-84

Yaqin, L. N., Shanmuganathan, T., Fauzanna, W., Mohzana, M., & Jaya, A. (2022). Sociopragmatic parameters of politeness strategies among the Sasak in the post elopement rituals. Studies in English Language and Education, 9(2), 797-811. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v9i2.22569

Yusra, K. (2023). English and Co-Construction of Solidarity between Language Agents and Tourists in Tourism Information Service. Languages, 8(2), 126. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages8020126

Zakiyah, N. H. (2023). Analyzing Communication Strategies in Polyglot Indonesia National Gathering Chapter Semarang: Ethnography of Communication Study. Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Science, 2(12), 4119-4131. https://doi.org/10.55324/ijoms.v2i12.656

Zheng, S., Masuda, T., Matsunaga, M., Noguchi, Y., Ohtsubo, Y., Yamasue, H., & Ishii, K. (2021). Cultural differences in social support seeking: The mediating role of empathic concern. PLOS ONE, 16(12), e0262001. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262001

Zhou, Y., & Burhanudeen, H. (2013). Sustaining Intercultural Contact: Developing the Intercultural Communicative Competence of EFL Undergraduates in China. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 13-26. https://doi.org/10.36923/jicc.v23i4.281