Main Article Content

Abstract

This study aims to: (1) explain the lingual form of inciting Ribka Tjiptaning on social media and (2) explain the meaning of denotation and the incitement connotation of Ribka Tjiptaning on social media. The data in this study are language that contains the crime of incitement by Ribka Tjiptaning on the social media YouTube. While the source of data in this study is the social media youtube. The method used in this research is descriptive with qualitative approach, data collection techniques in the form of look-see and take notes. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis (qualitative content analysis). The results of this study indicate that: the data containing denotative and connotative meanings in Ribka Tjiptaning's utterances on social media YouTube amounted to 7 denotative meanings and 5 connotative meanings. Ribka Tjiptaning's speech contained rejection and accusations that the government was playing with the Covid 19 vaccine. This speech is an act against the law by disseminating information that can provoke / incite.

Keywords

Provocative Speech Social Media Forensic Linguistics

Article Details

How to Cite
Kamaruddin, S., Maknun, T., & Iswary, E. (2021). Ribka Tjiptaning’s Provocative Speaking Action in Social Media: Forensic Linguistic Study. Sang Pencerah: Jurnal Ilmiah Universitas Muhammadiyah Buton, 7(4), 670–678. https://doi.org/10.35326/pencerah.v7i4.1588

References

  1. Atfalusoleh, S. (2017). Analisi Makna Denotatif dan Konotatif Teks Biografi Presiden Soekarno dan Impilkasinya sebagai Bahan Ajar di SMP Kelas VIII. Publikasi Ilmiah.
  2. Chaer, A. (2014). Linguistik Umum Edisi Revisi. Rineka Cipta.
  3. Hamuddin, B., Rahman, F., Pammu, A., Sanusi Baso, Y., & Derin, T. (2020). Cyberbullying Among EFL Students’blogging Activities: Motives And Proposed Solutions. Teaching English with Technology, 20(2), 3–20.
  4. Hamuddin, B., Syahdan, S., Rahman, F., Rianita, D., & Derin, T. (2019). Do They Truly Intend to Harm Their Friends?: The Motives Beyond Cyberbullying among University Students. International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning (IJCBPL), 9(4), 32–44.
  5. Kridalaksana, H. (2011). Kamus Linguistik. Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
  6. McMenamin. (2002). Forensic Stylistics. Elsevier.
  7. Olsson, J. (2004). Forensic Linguistics (second edition). Continuum International Publishing Group.
  8. Parera. (2004). Teori Semantik. Erlangga Group.
  9. Rahman, F., Abbas, A., & Hasyim, M. (2019). Facebook Group as Media of Learning Writing in ESP Context: A Case Study at Hasanuddin University. Asian EFL Journal Research Articles, 26(6.1), 153–167.
  10. Santoso, I. (2013). Mengenal Linguistik Forensik: Linguis sebagai Saksi Ahli. Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.
  11. Sholihatin, E. (2019). Linguistik Forensik dan Kejahatan Berbahasa. Pustaka Pelajar.
  12. Subyantoro. (2019). Linguistik Forensik: Sumbangsih Kajian Bahasa dalam Penegakan Hukum. ADIL Indonesia Jurnal, 1(1), 36–50.
  13. Suhariyanto. (2011). Komunikasi dalam Media Massa. Simbiosa Rekatama Media.
  14. Tarigan. (2014). Pengajaran Semantik. Angkasa.