THE INTERPRETATION OF SLOGANS:

AN ANTRHOPOLINGUISTIC ANALYSIS

Submitted to the Faculty of Cultural Sciences Hasanuddin University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to obtain Sarjana Degree in English Department

BY:

PUTRI ANANDA SARI SYUKUR F21113006

ENGLISH DEPARTEMENT

FACULTY OF CULTURAL SCIENCES

HASANUDDIN UNIVERSITY

MAKASSAR

2017

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Bismillahirrahmanirrahiim..

This thesis is presented to the English Department of Faculty of Cultural Sciences of Hasanuddin University, Makassar as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for degree of Strata 1 (S1)

The researcher would like to extend the profound gratitude to all those who have assisted her in various forms who cannot be mentioned here one by one. Special gratitude should be addressed to the following persons;

1. Dr. Harlinah Sahib, M.Hum and Drs. Simon Sitoto, M.A as her first and second consultants, for their valuable advice, time, guidance, encouragement, corrections, and comments from the beginning until the very end of this thesis. 2. Special and unlimited gratitude the researcher dedicated to her beloved parents; her late father, Alm. Muhammad Syukur Mustafa and her mother, Hasmawati Bungkeng, for their presence in the researcher’s life, their everlasting love, prayers, countless motivation, and for every single thing they have done to her which cannot be counted. The gratitude is also given to her brothers; Muhammad Syaiful Syukur, Muhammad Taufik Syukur S.Farm, Apt., Dirga Syukur M.Sc, Apt., and Muhammad Sabri Syukur, for their motivations, advices, and inspirations. May Allah SWT bless and give the great award for them. 3. Dr. Kamsinah Darwis, M.Hum and Drs. Abd. Madjid Djuraid, M. Hum as her first and second examiners, for their valuable corrections, opinion, and constructive comments during the examination. 4. Hamsinah Yasin, M.Hum as her academic advisor, for her guidance and encouragement from beginning on until the end of her study. 5. Dr. Abidin Pammu, M.A and Sitty Sahraeny, S.S., M.A as the head and secretary of English Department, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Hasanuddin

ii

University. They have given the writer a lot of guidance and help in completing her study. 6. All Lecturers of English Department, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Hasanuddin University for enhancing the researcher’s knowledge and giving her unforgettable experiences. 7. The Staff of English Department, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Hasanuddin University for the update information and assistances. 8. Etcetera 2013 (Nunu, Wiah, Dilyas, Wiwi, Lilis, Muti, Marce, Sri, Anggi, Rahda, Wakiah, Fenty, Syifa, Ino, Muta, Aija, Wilda, Rini, Tina, Sari, Kiki, Reski, Hasna, Dina, Ilam, Halid, Afdal, Mari, Aman, Dewa, Fajar, Fajri, Nurdin, and etc without exception), for all the memories, laugh, hardship, and everything. 9. Tarbiyah and Tahsin group (Jannah, Inna, Elma, Sari, Tina, Syiar, especially Kak Mia) for their countless support and motivation, and pray. 10. Additional editors of her thesis (Ilam, Afdal, Kak Palla, Kak Anca, Kak Adi, and Kak Aril). They are not asking for money, but are sincere in giving their best for correcting this thesis. 11. Last but not the least is dedicated for Hairil Hamzah Dawi, for his never- ending support, assistance, advice, and valuable guidance toward the completion of this thesis and also for the free printing and driving service. In conclusion, the researcher realizes that this thesis is still far from perfection; therefore, any suggestions and comments will be very much appreciated for the improvement of this writing.

Makassar, November 2017

The Researcher

iii

TABLE OF CONTENT

Title Page ...... i

Acknowledgement...... ii

Table of content...... iv

Abstract ...... vi

Abstrak ...... vii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1. Background ...... 1 1.2. Identification of Problem ...... 2 1.3. Scope of Problem ...... 3 1.4. Research Questions ...... 3 1.5. Objectives of Research ...... 3 1.6. Significant of Research ...... 3 1.6.1. Theoritically ...... 3

1.6.2. Practically ...... 4

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Previous Studies ...... 5 2.2. Anthropolinguistics ...... 6 2.2.1. Language as Social Action ...... 7 2.2.2. Language, Culture, and Cognition ...... 14

2.4. Slogan ...... 16

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1. Research Method ...... 19 3.2. Data Sources...... 19 3.3. Methods of Collecting Data ...... 19

iv

3.4. Methods of Analyzing data ...... 20

CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS AND REASEARCH FINDING

4.1. Data Presentation ...... 21

4.2. Data Analysis ...... 23 1. BlackBerry Curve 9320...... 23 2. Google OnePlus X...... 26 3. HTC 10: Power of 10 ...... 27 4. Lite ...... 29 5 iPhone 5 ...... 30 6. iPhone 6s ...... 32 7. Lenovo P2 ...... 33 8. LG G4...... 36 9. Nokia Lumia 930...... 38 10. Oppo F3 PLus ...... 40

11. Oppo Neo ...... 41

12. ...... 43

13. Sony Experia Z3 Compact ...... 44

14. ...... 46

15. Xiaomi 2 Prime...... 48

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS A. Conclusions ...... 50 B. Suggestions ...... 51

BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………... 52

v

ABSTRACT

PUTRI ANANDA SARI SYUKUR. 2017. The Interpretation of Slogans: Anthropolinguistic Analysis. (supervised by Harlinah Sahib and Simon Sitoto)

The aims of this research were to disclose the textual meanings and the contextual meanings found in smartphone slogans.

To achieve these aims, the researcher used qualitative-descriptive method. This method was used in analyzing the textual and contextual meanings of the slogans by using dictionaries and theory of Six Consecutive Factors in Speech Event by Jakobson. The data of this research were slogans of smartphones. In collecting the data, the researcher looked for smartphone brands and eliminated the brands based on how well-recognized the smartphones, then, finding out the slogans of the chosen smartphones brands. After collecting the data, the researcher analyzed the collected data by 4 steps: 1) the researcher looked for smartphone slogans which were launched from 2012 until 2017, then, picked 15 slogans to be analyzed. 2) the researcher analyzed the textual meaning by translating each word of slogans using dictionary, then the researcher combined all translated words and described them as one unit or as a whole slogan. 3) the researcher analyzed the contextual meanings of the slogans by classifying them to the six consecutive factors theory; expressive, conative, referential, poetic, phatic, and metalinguistic functions. 4) the researcher gave detailed explanations based on the function of each slogan.

The result of this research shows that the textual meanings found in the slogans are all attained from the dictionary. On the other hand, the contextual meanings which are based on the sixth consecutive factors in speech event only have two factors that appear in the slogans: poetic function and referential function. Between those two functions, the referential function appears in every slogan and the poetic function appears in 7 from 15 slogans. The referential function found in each slogan is in the form of index that refers to the product itself, the other products, and the quality of the product. Meanwhile, poetic function discovered in 7 slogans is in the form of parallelism and rhyme. The researcher, therefore, infers that most of the slogans use these two functions in order to emphasize the product and its quality, to compare the product with others, and to attract customers.

Keywords: anthropolinguistic, smartphones slogan, textual and contextual meaning.

vi

ABSTRAK

PUTRI ANANDA SARI SYUKUR. 2017. The Interpretation of Smartphone Slogans: Anthropolinguistic Analysis. (dibimbing oleh Harlinah Sahib dan Simon Sitoto)

Penelitian ini bertujuan mengungkap makna tekstual dan kontekstual yang ditemukan dalam slogan smartphone serta pengaruhnya terhadap konsumen.

Untuk mencapai tujuan tersebut, penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian Kualitatif. Metode kualitatif digunakan untuk menganalisis makna tekstual dan kontekstual pada slogan dengan menggunakan kamus dan teori Six Consecutive Factor in speech event oleh Jakobson. Data dalam penelitian ini adalah slogan smartphone. Untuk mengumpulkan data tersebut, peneliti mencari berbagai merek smartphones dan mengeliminasi merek tersebut berdasarkan seberapa terkenal smartphones tersebut, kemudian, mencari tahu slogan dari smartphones yang telah terpilih tersebut. Setelah mengumpulkan data, peneliti menganalisis data yang telah terkumpul melalui 4 langkah: 1) peneliti mencari slogan smartphone yang diluncurkan dari tahun 2012 hingga 2017, kemudian memilih 15 slogan sebagai data analisis. 2) peneliti menganalisa makna tekstual dengan menerjemahkan tiap kata dari slogan dengan menggunakan kamus, lalu peneliti menggabungkan seluruh kata yang telah diterjemahkan dan menjabarkannya sebagai satu kesatuan atau keseluruhan dari slogan. 3) peneliti menganalisa makna kontekstual slogan dengan mengelompokkannya kedalam teori six consecutive factors in speech event; expressive, conative, referential, poetic, phatic, and metalinguistic functions. 4) peneliti memberikan penjelasan terperinci berdasarkan fungsi yang dimiliki oleh tiap slogan.

Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa seluruh makna tekstual pada slogan diperoleh dari kamus. Sementara itu, makna kontekstual yang berdasarkan dari keenam consecutive factor in speech event tersebut, hanya ada 2 yang ditemukan pada slogan smartphone: poetic function dan referential function. Diantara kedua function tersebut, referential function terdapat diseluruh slogan dan poetic function terdapat pada 7 dari 15 slogan. Referential function yang terdapat dalam tiap slogan dalam bentuk indeks yang merujuk produk itu sendiri, produk lain, dan kualitas dari produk. Sementara itu, poetic function yang ditemukan pada 7 slogan berada dalam bentuk parallelism dan rhyme. Peneliti mendeteksi bahwa slogan yang menggunakan kedua function tersebut adalah untuk menekankan produk dan kualitasnya, membandingkan produk dan produk lainnya, dan untuk menarik perhatian dari konsumen.

Kata kunci: anthropolinguistic, smartphones slogan, textual and contextual meaning.

vii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1.Background

Language has very important roles in our lives since it can be used

to interpret symbols. Symbols are objects, speech sound, or other forms of

writing that give meanings by human. Primary forms of symbolization used

by human are perceived through language, but human can also communicate

using symbols. Human culture uses symbols to express specific ideologies

and social structures and to represent aspects of their specific culture. Thus,

symbols carry meanings that depend upon one’s cultural background; in

other words, the meaning of a symbol is not inherent in the symbol itself but

is culturally learned.

Nowadays, language has been also developed into a commodity to

gain money, such as; advertisement. The term of advertisement is almost in

the every single aspect of human life. When people access the internet,

many advertisements may be found in those electronic devices. Even when

people are on their ways to their destination places, they cannot neglect the

existence of billboard that advertises particular product in every part of the

road. In advertising product, the companies use some strategies and media

such as slogan or taglines, pictures, and audio-visual commercial.

Slogan is the image of a product that cannot be used by others. It has

special characteristics that can distinguish one product from others.

1

Therefore, it can represent the particular product. Slogan aims to persuade

the consumers to buy the company products by its attractive selected words.

The researcher, in this thesis would like to apply anthropolinguistics

to analyze the slogans due to the lack of understanding regarding the slogans

which contain of ambiguous and undefined words. It is also due to the fact

that it is very rare to find the analysis of slogan to the point of analyzing its

contextual meaning, because most of the analyses only focus on analyzing

the textual meaning which sometimes does not represent the full meaning

of the slogan. Since the existence of slogan is undeniably important in

advertising product, the researcher attempts to use the title “The

Interpretation of Smartphone Slogans: Anthropolinguistic Analysis” to ease

people in understanding the meaning of slogans textually and contextually.

1.2.Identification of Problem

The use of English as a slogan, therefore, creates confusion to the

non-native English customers in figuring out the meaning. Due to the lack

of understanding to the textual and contextual meaning of the slogans,

anthropolinguistics is needed to analyze the data of the slogan.

1.3.Scope of Problem

From the identification of the problem, the researcher focuses the

study on the understanding of slogan in the smartphones textually and

contextually. Textual analysis is attained from dictionary. Meanwhile, in

analyzing contextual meanings, the researcher uses theory of Six

Consecutive factors in speech event from Jakobson. Those six consecutive

2

factors are expressive function, conative function, referential function,

poetic function, phatic function, and metalinguistic.

1.4.Research Questions

Based on the previous explanation, the researcher is going to answer the

questions as follows:

1. What are the textual meanings found in the smartphone slogans?

2. What are the contextual meanings found in the smartphone slogans?

1.5. Objectives of Research

1. To explain the textual meanings found in smartphone slogans.

2. To disclose the contextual meanings found in smartphone slogans.

1.6. Significance of Research

1.6.1. Theoretically

Theoretically, this research is beneficial in describing the textual and

contextual meaning in smartphone slogans.

1.6.2. Practically

1. This study may increase students’ awareness of being critical readers

in analyzing the slogans and its persuasive language.

2. The result of this research is expected to enrich students’ awareness

of slogan in textual and contextual meaning.

3. This study is also expected to assist smartphone customers in

understanding the meaning of their phone slogan.

3

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1.Previous Studies

The research about slogan in advertisement has already been done by many researchers with different cases and aims.

Ni’mah (2012) analyzed the slogan in advertisement by pragmatic analysis. She focused on analyzing the linguistic form, textual meaning of linguistic forms and implicative meaning of English slogans that are used in electronic products by utilizing a pragmatic approach.

The second researcher, Sarage (2012) focused her discussion on understanding the meaning of automobile slogans with respect to English language in Indonesia. The author concentrated on semantics of the slogans with the help of multiple types of meaning, such as; textual and grammatical meaning, figurative meaning, and idiomatic and wise words.

Next, Lazfihma (2014) with her thesis title “Analisis gaya bahasa dalam slogan iklan minuman”. She focused her research on the figurative language of slogan in tea and coffee advertisements found on television, such as; SCTV, RCTI, TRANS TV, Indosiar, ANTV, MNC TV, and Global

TV .

The researches above are different from this research because they used different theory from this research. Most of those studies above only focus on describing the textual meaning and revealing the types of linguistic forms (lexical and grammatical meaning, figurative meaning, etc.) in the

4 slogan without expanding their analysis to the contextual meaning of each slogan has.

In relation to this research “The Interpretation of Smartphone

Slogans: Anthropolinguistic Analysis”, the researcher did the analysis by dividing the analysis into two parts, textual and contextual analysis. The textual meaning focused on the word in the text only using dictionary translation, while the contextual ones focuses on the context of where and when do the words are formed.

2.2. Anthropolinguistics

According to Duranti (1997:2), “Language is inherently social. It is not just a means through which we act upon the social world; speaking is itself a form of social action and language is a cultural resource available for people to use”.

Austin (1962:24) states that Even when we speak or write to ourselves, our very choices of words, as well as our underlying intentions and desires, are influenced by the social contexts in which we have seen, heard, or experienced those words, intentions, and desires before. Linguistic anthropologists therefore maintain that the essence of language cannot be understood without reference to the particular social contexts in which it is used. But those contexts do not stand apart from linguistic practices or somehow “contain” them, as a soup bowl would contain soup. Rather, social contexts and linguistic practices mutually constitute each other. For this reason, language should be studied, Duranti (1997:1) writes, “not only as a

5 mode of thinking but, above all, as a cultural practice, that is, as a form of action that both presupposes and at the same time brings about ways of being in the world”.

This approach to language differs from the popular view of language as an empty vehicle that conveys pre-existing meanings about the world.

Language, according to this view, which is held by many members of the general public as well as many linguists and other scholars, is largely a set of labels that can be placed on pre-existing concepts, objects, or relationships. In this mistaken way of thinking, language is defined as a conduit that merely conveys information without adding or changing anything of substance (Reddy 1979:24).

2.2.1. Language as Social Action

Here are some examples of the topics that scholars have chosen and an explanation of how these topics contribute to our understanding of language as a form of social action. These studies illustrate but by no means exhaust the wide-ranging diversity of contemporary linguistic anthropology.

1. Keith Basso

Basso’s (1996) ethnography, Wisdom Sits in Places: Landscape and

Language among the Western Apache, explores “place-making” as a linguistic and cultural activity. In this book, Basso shows how the physical environment is filtered through language to solidify social relations and strengthen Western Apache notions of wisdom and morality.

6

2. Marjorie Harness Goodwin

In her book, He-Said-She-Said: Talk as Social Organization among

Black Children, Marjorie Harness Goodwin (1990) chooses a very different focus: that of a mixed-age and mixed-gender neighborhood group of peers in a Philadelphia neighborhood. By analyzing “situated activities” such as arguments, storytelling, and gossip, Goodwin shows how the children’s relationships and values are reflected in and shaped by their conversation.

3. Alessandro Duranti

Duranti (1994) explores language use in a very different part of the world. He analyzes political rhetoric in the local village council (fono) and shows how speechmakers’ seemingly a political, technical choices of grammatical markers can have important political ramifications.

What those three different ethnographies have in common is their insistence that (1) language must not be studied in isolation from social practices or cultural meanings, and (2) questions about social relations and cultural meanings can best be answered by paying close attention to language.

Ahearn (2012) stated that in order to acknowledge the anthropolinguistics more deeply, there are terms drawing upon an array of theoretical approaches from within the field of anthropolinguistics and beyond. Those are; multifunctional, language and ideologies, practice, and indexicality. These terms are the “key” in doing two ways: first, they are central to the main areas of research in the discipline; second, they can

7 provide readers with important keys to understand the social nature of language because they come from the social and linguistic theories that have had the greatest influence on current scholarship in the field.

Like the terms that are defined in Duranti’s (2001) edited volume, Key

Terms in Linguistic Anthropology, the four terms illustrate some of the features that unify the discipline and will therefore provide common points of reference as we consider specific topics and areas of study within the field. However, out of the four terms, the researcher only focused on multifunctionality, practice and indexicality which defined as follow:

1. Multifunctionality

Ahearn (2012: 34) states, “Linguistic anthropologists use the term

“multifunctional” to refer to all the different kinds. One of the first scholars to analyze the various functions of language was Roman Jakobson, a

Russian linguist who helped form what became known as the “Prague

School” of linguistic theory”. Jakobson (1960:150, 154) had identified six

“constitutive factors” in any speech event, and then attaches a corresponding function to each of these constitutive factors. All functions are always present in each speech event, Jakobson argues, but in certain cases, one function may predominate over the others. Here is all the model of multifunctional by Jakobson:

1) Expression functions, is an utterance (or what Jakobson calls “the

message) which is primarily oriented towards the speaker. Examples

include “wow!” when someone surprise by something, or “I feel so

8

embarrassed!” although this kind of utterances also function in other

ways, but to the degree they mainly express the feeling or opinions

by the speaker. Jakobson considers the predominant function to be

expressive of work that language does.

2) Conative function or an uncommon word Jakobson used to denote

“addressee-oriented” is an utterance that is primarily oriented toward

the addressee. The examples of this function is the principal one

would be questions or commands, as they are mainly focused on the

addressee, or vocatives commands, such as; “Hey, Putri” or “Putri,

can you take care of my cat?”

3) Referential function is an utterance that is oriented largely toward a

third person, toward the context, or toward events. Examples include,

“The Dow Jones plummeted 500 points today,” or, “Mamuju is

sandwiched between Palu and Makassar.” These types of utterances

form the core of the folk model of language mentioned at the outset

of this section; for many people, the referential function is the

assumed main or even sole function of language.

4) Poetic function is the utterance that is oriented primarily toward

itself – when it somehow calls attention to the very sounds and

patterns that are used in its articulation. By poetic, Jakobson does not

mean anything related to literature; instead, he is refereeing to

occurrence in everyday speech that involve rhyme, alliteration,

repetition, parallelism, or other sorts of playing around with the

9

sound or structure of words. Examples of the poetic function being

evident outside of poetry include political slogans such as, “I like

Ike” (i.e., Eisenhower), and grammatical parallelism such as that

which occurs in a statement such as, “I don’t want to hear you, I

don’t want to see you, and I don’t want to know you!” Jakobson has

a great deal more to say about the poetic function, but this will have

to suffice for our purposes.

5) Phatic is the associated function of utterance which is oriented

primarily toward the channel that carries it, whether the channel is

social or physical. An example of this type of utterance would be,

“Testing, 1, 2, 3…,” as it focuses mainly on the physical channel or

mode of contact (a microphone) between the speaker and the

addressee(s). When the channel is a more abstractly conceived social

connection rather than a physical one – a relationship of friendship

or kinship, for example – an utterance that orients itself primarily to

this connection would also be considered mainly phatic in function.

6) Metalinguistic function is predominant when the utterance is

oriented primarily toward language itself. Examples include, “Do

you understand what I just said?”, “How do you spell

‘transformation’?”, or, ‘Metalinguistic’ means ‘language that is

about language.’ For some linguistic anthropologists, the

metalinguistic function of language represents the quintessentially

human ability to be reflexive about one’s own language use – in

10

other words, the ability to use language in reported speech or to

reflect upon linguistic practice, structures, and contexts of use (cf.

Agha 2007; Lucy 1993).

So, language is multifunctional; it accomplishes much more than

simply referring to or labeling items or events. Through language,

people convey nuanced emotions, display or hide judgmental

attitudes about others, reinforce or sever social bonds, and talk about

language itself. It is to this latter function of language that we now

turn.

2. Indexicality

A key concept that assists scholars in pinpointing these intersections

is “indexicality” (Hanks 1999), which, as it is used here, stems from

Charles Sanders Peirce’s semiotics (Peirce 1955; cf. Mertz 2007b).

“Semiotics, the study of signs, can be prohibitively difficult to grasp but

it is well worth going over some of the essentials in order to obtain a

fuller understanding of the term “indexicality.” Semiotics starts with the

definition of the linguistic sign. Perhaps the best-known definition is de

Saussure’s: a sign is the link between a concept (the “signified”) and a

sound pattern (the “signifier”)” (Saussure 1986:66). Thus, in de

Saussure’s famous example, the word “tree” is a sign because it links

the mental concept of a tree with the pattern of sounds that comprises

the word.

11

There are three ways in which a sign can be related to its object, according to Peirce, and it is the second of these ways that leads us to the important concept of indexicality. These three types of signs – icon, index, and symbol – are defined as follows (Peirce 1955:102–115):

1) Icon is a sign that refers to its object by means of similarity.

Examples include photographs, diagrams, or sketches.

Onomatopoeic words (e.g., “choo choo train,” “meow”) have an

iconic dimension because of the similarity in sound to that which

they represent.

2) Index is a sign that refers to its object “because it is in dynamical

(including spatial) connection both with the individual object, on

the one hand, and with the senses or memory of the person for

whom it serves as a sign, on the other hand” (Peirce 1955:107). In

other words, just as an index finger points to an object, an indexical

sign “points to” its object through some connection or contiguity,

that is, a co-occurrence in the same context.

“All of the indexes, signs whose meaning comes from the

context in which in which they are used” (Folley 1997: 66). For

instance; if someone from Java used “Mas” to address a stranger

from Makassar, the pronoun is an index of their social distance.

When Nootka Indians traditionally used special phonologically

altered word forms to address certain classes of people, say for

12

example, hunchbacks or circumcised males, these abnormal speech

forms are indexes of the addressee’s condition (Sapir 1949).

3) Symbol is sign that refers to its object by virtue of convention or habit.

Most words fall primarily into this category (though words can have

iconic, indexical, and/or symbolic aspects simultaneously). The

word “bird,” for example, does not represent its object by virtue of

similarity or any sort of “dynamical connection”; it is simply

conventional in English to call most flying animals with wings

“birds.”

In addition to indexical that refers to specific times, places,

individuals, objects, or concepts, there are also more general ways

in which language can be indexical. In other words, as Jakobson has

already informed us, language can “point to” something social or

contextual without functioning in a referential way. Aspects of

language use such as regional or ethnic “accents” or “dialects,” for

instance, “point to” the speaker’s origins and are therefore examples

of non referential or “pure” indexicality (Silverstein 1976:29).

2.2.2. Language, Culture, and Cognition

“Many researchers both in cognitive anthropology and in language acquisition come up with strong evidence that different cultures use entirely different conceptualizations of space experience and space co-ordinates, thereby giving new credibility to the Whorfian relativity principle, in its

13 classical interpretation: language, understood as a social phenomenon, guides our thoughts and perceptions”. (Lakoff 2001:35)

However, in some cases, like spatial relation concepts, there are universal primitives that combine in different ways in different languages.

“The work in cognitive anthropology tends to ignore research on universal primitives.” (Lakoff 1984:28). But there are also concepts that are just different across cultures, and there are even metaphors that differ across cultures, though as Grady (1997) has observed, the primary metaphors tend to be the same (but are not always).

Lakoff (1948; 31) stated that, “The relationship between concepts and language is certainly a vexed question in metaphor research. However, there is a difference between what we believe and what we talk about. And the reason is this: the things that are physically embodied are easier to study than interpersonal interaction. A child at birth interacts with its parents immediately. There’s personal interaction, physical interaction, every kind of interaction, right away. It’s not that interpersonal interaction is less important. It’s simply that we know less about how to describe it. We know less about how it functions in language and in reason at the present time.”

There is also difference within the framework of cognitive language to trace moral and social concepts back to primitive bodily interactions.

When we write about something we have evidence for and we believe that culture plays a major role in language, although we don’t have a lot of evidence for that. Partly it is because the evidence has not been gathered

14 together in a way that would be empirically adequate for this field. But we have no doubt that interpersonal relationships play a major role in language.

Lakof (2001:39)

2.3. Slogan

1. Definition of slogan

Slogan is image or sign of company. It is a phrase that comes and

goes with particular lines of products on all its adverts whatever the

campaign. Goddard (1998:105)

Goddard (1998: 106) also states, “The slogan used by a company

selling a particular product will tie in closely with the descriptions used

in the advertising copy.”

‘Slogan adalah tag line yang diungkapkan dalam frasa sebuah iklan,

dan bagian terpenting dari sebuah perusahaan.’ Grannat (2003:76). In

addition, he affirms that slogan is tag line that express on phrases of

advertisement and importance item by company.

2. Functions of Slogan in Advertising

Granat (2003:76) assert that a slogan has three functions in the

advertising. They are:

a. Slogan must embrace story that indicated by advertising and the

reader.

b. Slogan is an identity that helps people to consider the enterprise

label.

15

c. Slogan helps to increase image of the enterprise in the audience

target.

3. Characteristic of Slogan in Advertising

Granat (2003:83) affirm that a slogan has AIDA sign in the

advertising, as follows:

a. A ( Attention)

A means that the slogan must have quality attention to public.

b. I ( Interest)

The letter I means that the slogan is interesting to public and easy

to remember.

c. D (Desire)

D means that a slogan draws out the public to choose a product

with consumer’s choice

d. A ( Action)

Letter A means a slogan is exploited by consumer to love goods.

4. Element of Slogan in advertising

According to Granat (2003:84), the element of slogan in advertising

is inclined on NICE method as follows:

a. N (Newsworthy)

N means proper to inform in news.

b. I (interesting)

Letter I means getting a consumer.

c. C ( Credible)

16

C means liable to majority people. d. E ( Entertaining )

E means amusing to public.

17