Indexicality in EFL Classroom Learning: A Critical Classroom Discourse Analysis
Abstract
This study examined dialogues between a lecturer and his students in an EFL classroom learning to find out indexicality. It employed a qualitative technique. The data were dialogues by the lecturer and his students at English Department of the higher education institution in Jombang when they were involved the learning process of the Classroom Discourse class. There were two instruments in this study, they were the researcher himself and documentation. In terms of indexicality, the participants used personal deixis o strengthen his position on the issues faced by the lecturer when the utterance is addressed and forces the audience to accept his views. In addition, the shift in deixis "I" to "We" throughout the classroom learning interaction could also be an attempt to ensure that students were persuaded. The use of the sign "We" which is predominantly indexical by the lecturer convinces students to believe that the learning delivered in class is a collective statement and not a personal statement. Furthermore, the lecturer employed politeness to keep his relationship with his students well. Thus, it could be concluded that indexicality in this study had two kinds of relations, they were equal and unequal relations. Equal relations were represented using positive deixis and positive politeness, whereas unequal relations were represented by negative deixis and negative politeness.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Babaii, E., Parsazadeh, A., & Moradi, H. (2018). The question of power in language classes from a critical discourse analysis perspective once a student, always a student? Pragmatics and Society, 8(4), 542–570. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.8.4.04bab
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness; Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/highereducation/books/politeness/89113EE2FB4A1D254D4A8D2011E542E4
Cutting, J. (2002). Pragmatics and discourse; A resource book for students. Routledge. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203994597
Darong, H. C. (2024). Conversational analysis: Types and function of speech acts in EFL classroom interactions. JOLLT (Journal of Languages and Language Teaching), 12(3), 1191–1206. https://doi.org/https://dx.doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v12i3.11001
Dylgjeri, A., & Kazazi, L. (2013). Deixis in modern linguistics and outside. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2(4), 87–96. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5901/ajis.2012.v2n4p87
Fairclough, N. (2010). Analysing discourse: textual analysis for social researchNo Title. Routledge.
Fatmawati, F., & Ningsih, R. (2024). Politeness in expressive speech acts: A cyber pragmatics approach. JOLLT (Journal of Languages and Language Teaching), 12(4), 1721–1738. https://doi.org/DOI:https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v12i4.12620
Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (Q. Hoare & G. N. Smith (eds.)). International Publishers. https://ia600506.us.archive.org/19/items/AntonioGramsciSelectionsFromThePrisonNotebooks/Antonio-Gramsci-Selections-from-the-Prison-Notebooks.pdf
Josiah, U. E., & Oghenerho, G. (2015). Pragmatic analyses of Martin Luther King (Jr)’s speech:” I have a dream”–An introspective prognosis. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(17), 43–52. https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/23587
Kumaravadivelu, B. (1999). Critical classroom discourse analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 33(3), 453–484. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0039-8322%28199923%2933%3A3%3C453%3ACCDA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-
Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813313
Litosseliti, L. (2010). Research methods in linguistics. Continum. https://books.google.co.id/books?hl=en&lr=&id=efQlEQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Litosseliti,+Lia.+(2010).+Research+methods+in+linguistics.+London:+Continuum.&ots=WJcnq9wdTn&sig=J0AG1a-Lhr2EexEz27VaczjvJxw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Litosseliti%2C Lia. (2010). Re
Malinowski, B. (1999). On phatic communion. In A. Jaworski & N. Coupland (Eds.), The Discourse Reader (pp. 302–305). Routledge. http://www.phil.muni.cz/angl/thepes/thepes_01_03.pdf
Silverstein, M. (2003). Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life. Language and Communication, 23, 193–229. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0271530903000132. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0271-5309(03)00013-2
Van Dijk, T. (2004). Critical discourse analysis. In Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 466–485). Blackwell. https://discourses.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Teun-A.-van-Dijk-2015-Critical-discourse-Analysis.pdf
Wardaugh, R. (2006). An introduction to Sociolinguistics (Fifth Edit). BlackWell Publisher. https://lmsspada.kemdiktisaintek.go.id/pluginfile.php/549225/mod_resource/content/1/1006648_82038_wardhaugh_r_an_introduction_to_sociolinguistics.pdf
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford University Press. https://www.academia.edu/60254109/Yule_George_Pragmatics
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21043/jetli.v8i1.31267
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2025 Journal of English Teaching and Learning Issues






