Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

LANGUAGE AND COMMUNICATION WITH A SPECIAL REFERENCE TO REGISTERS AMONG WORKERS AT PT. PETROKIMIA GRESIK

Aliva Rosdiana Fakultas Tarbiyah dan Ilmu Keguruan, UNISNU Jepara [email protected]

ABSTRAK

Studi ini meneliti bahasa dan komunikasi dengan bahasa khusus yang disebut register oleh para pekerja di PT Petrokimia Gresik. Penelitian ini mengenai bahasa khusus (register) dalam bentuk kode yang sudah dibakukan sebagai bahasa Inggris teknis maupun proses komunikasi sehingga komunikasi dapat berjalan dengan lancar. Pengaruh campur kode mengungkapkan alat kohesif dalam bentuk taksis bahasa Jawa atau bahasa Indonesia. Di dalam penggunaannya menunjukkan bahwa penggunaan bahasa Jawa paling dominan dibandingkan bahasa Inggris dan bahasa Indonesia. Bahasa Jawa sering digunakan karena mayoritas pekerja PT Petrokimia Gresik berasal dari budaya yang sama yaitu budaya Jawa. Pada akhirnya, alasan mengapa kode khusus atau register digunakan oleh para pekerja di PT Petrokimia Gresik karena bahasa yang digunakan sudah dibakukan bahkan menginternasional. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan menghubungkan dan menemukan hubungan antara linguistic, cara bagaimana kata-kata, ucapan sesungguhnya terhubung dan diterapkan di dalam komunitas kerja. Selain itu, dengan menganalisis ucapan dialog, makna dan penemuan register dapat dicapai dalam bahasa komunikasi sehingga komunikasi oleh para pekerja menjadi akurat.

Kata kunci : Petrokimia, Gresik, register, kode

ABSTRACT

This study investigates the and communication with a special reference to registers among workers at PT. Petrokimia Gresik. It deals with special reference (register) in a form of code that has been standardized as technical English as well as the communication process of how the communication can run well without obstacle among workers. By conditioning of code-mixing, it revealed cohesive device in a form of Javaneses taxis or Indonesian taxis. In the use of language also shows that the use of Javanese language is very dominant, while the second is English and Indonesian. Javanese language was often used due to the people at PT. Petrokimia Gresik came from the same culture that is Javanese culture. Finally, the reason why a special code or register used among the workers at PT. Petrokimia Gresik because the language has been standardized even internationalized. This is done by connecting and finding the relationship between linguistic, this is how , literally connected and applied to work community. In addition, by analyzing utterances of the dialog, the meaning or even finding registers can be achieved to make the communicative language among workers become accurate.

Keywords: Petrokimia, Gresik, register, code

Introduction Code is used to engage in purposeful Communication always has the basic communication. Thus, processing a language important role in society. It has meaning in as code will be analyzed in context to identify form of code in context. Both code and clues to the pragmatic meaning of its use. context are related to in ways that At the work place, the workers at PT. meaning can be understood as a process in Petrokimia Gresik besides use formal constructing models for communication. language, they also use informal language in

29 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

official atmosphere. Such can be seen a. To describe register used by the workers as forms of sign. By signing, it enables of PT. Petrokimia Gresik. speaker and the hearer to take account of b. To describe code-switching and code- meaning. Consider the following mixing uttered by workers of PT. conversation between two groups of Petrokimia Gresik operator: 2. To find out the reasons of the use such a Group A: Tadi malam trestle conveyor code in code-switching and code-mixing 03M602 trip overload. Setengah jam lagi conducted by workers of PT. Petrokimia shuttle conveyor 02M606 pindah curah. Gresik Sebentar lagi ada kapal acid datang. Group B: Line-nya apa sudah press test? Significance of the Study Group A: Oke, kemarin sudah di-inspect. Through the study, the researcher The efficiency that the workers use expects to have more knowledge the of code language is to achieve or accomplish the of register in occupational community at PT. target of time. Koester (2006:9) argues that Petrokimia Gresik. There are three if, for example, talk among co- workers, or significance of the study that the researchers between service providers and customers, is can formulate, they are: not always goal- oriented, the boundaries 1. Theoretically, it is hoped that the study will between casual conversation and institutional enrich the study of registers among talk become blurred. Efficiency but workers at PT. Petrokimia Gresik. communicative is the workers conduct to 2. Pedagogically, it is expected the study of work. It means how the workers abbreviate the registers will be useful for the the words and arrange that code. Besides English teaching material. For students, knowing the meaning of code or technical they can create coherent discourse. By term used, context still has an important creating discourse, then, they know the factor how to interpret the meaning of words. technique guessing . Finally, by studying , discourse and Research Question its methodological applications set the Based on the background of the aim of enhancing students’ awareness problem, the researcher formulates four of the functionality of language from problems. They are as follows: social, cultural and cognitive 1. How does the communication among the perspectives. workers at PT. Petrokimia Gresik run? 3. Practically, the researcher will have more a. How the workers use the registers at PT. knowledge in the use of registers in the Petrokimia Gresik? workplace. It is alo expected that the b. How are code-switching and code-mixing reader would have knowledge about the uttered by the workers at PT. Petrokimia registers used in a workplace. Gresik? 2. Why do the workers at PT. Petrokimia Scope and Limitation Gresik use code-switching and code-mixing? The scope of this study is discourse which discusses language code derived from Objective of the Study technical term including equipment terms Based on the background of the (registers) used by workers at PT. Petrokimia problem, the researcher formulates four Gresik specifically in the harbor. The port of problems. They are as follows: PT. Petrokimia Gresik was taken to be the 1. To describe how the communication observation because many interesting code among the workers of PT. Petrokimia that seems unique for other people outside Gresik run.

30 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

the community used by the workers are formulation of discovery procedure to make it found here. easily to be understood. “Discovery Participants were members of the procedure”, that one might imagine it as a workers who worked at PT. Petrokimia machine automatically give a complete and Gresik specifically in the port who worked in true description of language as follows: loading and unloading department focused on the item of conveyor and the use of Discovery Linguistic technical term itself used in English. The data procedures description social context is needed to get an understanding about the meaning of words or Linguistic code. However, this study is limited to the theory language code (register) used by the workers at PT. Petrokimia Gresik especially in loading Fig. 2.1: A simplification of linguistic theory and unloading department located on the (Hammarström and Jernudd, 1972:3) port of PT. Petrokimia Gresik. Figure 2.1 might be considered as an Review Of The Related Literature ideal, but Figure 2.2 might be a truer Related Theories representation of contemporary . Language and Communication: As a matter of fact, when describing a Linguistics language, the linguist relies largely on his Linguistics, or linguistic theory, is the intuition for the discovery of relevant features of language (Hammarström and of the language that he is studying, although Jernudd, 1972:3). It provides a framework for more explicit discovery procedures are, to the description of any language and for the some extent, used:

Discovery procedures

data Linguistic Intuitive description discovery

Brain Vocal Sound Ear Brain tract 4 waves Linguistic theory

Fig 2.2: A contemporary linguistics (Hammarström and Jernudd, 1972:3)

In study of language, the fundamental Communication has a big influence problem in this aspect of communication in social life where people exist in theory is the measurement of the efficiency community. In business, school, of a given communication channel (Carroll, entertainment, market, job, etc, people do 1953, 198). The reason of this statement is communication with different language that because efficiency must be evaluated by they use in a particular context. The seeing how much information gets through language here is a code. Every situation or from the source to the destination. The word context must have different code. Below is a information is used here in a special sense. figure of communication model will give a The special sense involves a given symbol of clearer description: message as function of code to convey large amount information to receiver.

31 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

SOURCE  ENCODER CHANNEL  DECODER  DESTINATION 1) motor nerves: the motor nerves transmit nerve pulses that produce movements of Fig. 2.3: A communication model muscles Source: a mental process gives rise to a 2) sensory nerves: the sensory nerves message to be transmitted transmit perceived stimuli 3) feedback: information about the signal Encoder (sender) : and information about articulatory the message is encoded into a signal movements are sent back to the source (elements in the code are selected and 4) vocal tract: the pharynx and the nasal corresponding sounds or letters brought into and oral cavities. the channel) It concludes then, communication Channel : theory concentrates its attention on the the signal is transmitted through the channel receiving end of a communication channel. It Decoder (receiver) : pays attention to the analysis of a message the signal is decoded (identifies) only in order to measure the efficiency of the Destination : communication channel in terms of how the message is received and understood much of the message get through to the receiving end (Carroll, 1953:203). It says The communication model above nothing about how the message got selected occurs on all communication either spoken or at the sending end, nor does it care. written. This process requires a particular Linguistic analysis (Carroll, 1953:203-204), type of code, a particular language, shared on the other hand, is very much concerned by the communicators. The code must with the selection of messages at the necessarily remain the same during the act sending end of communication channel. It is of communication or otherwise the concerned not only with the nature of the communication will be disturbed. The symbols which were selected, but also with persons involved in a act “agree” on the sets of formal rules inherent in the a code, in other words, they choose a structuring of those symbols. particular language. Fig.3 is very general and Referring to the Communicative simple representation. To get a specific Competence can be described as consisting communication by speech, the figure can be of both knowledge or competence, and the drawn as follow: capacity for using or implementing the SPEAKER competence appropriately in communicative HEARER language use. It is stated in a model of SOURCE ENCODER CHANNEL communicative competence by Badib A DECODER DESTINATION (2007), includes four components: language

Motor nerves 1 competence, strategic competence,

sensory nerves 2 discourse competence, and Sensory nerves psychophysiological mechanism. This can be

Feedback 3 seen in the fig. 2.5 as follow: Fig.2.4:A communication model high speech (Hammarstrom & Jernudd, 1972:15)

32 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

Communicative Competence

Language Strategic Discourse Psychophysiological mechanism Competence Competence Competence

Organizational Pragmatic competence competence

Grammatical Textual Illocutionary Sociolinguistic competence competence competence competence

vocabulary Cohesion Functional Dialect abilities

Morphology Rhetorical Register Organization

Syntax Cultural references

Phonology

graphology Fig. 2.5: Adapted from a model of Communicative Competence by Badib A., (2007) (see also in O’ Grady et al, 508)

It is important to consider that register language above and beyond the : is involved in communicative competence as how people use language in texts and a part of sociolinguistic competence; hence contexts; while, pragmatics is concerned with this factor can identify ways of describing and the study of meaning as communicated by explaining the relationship between language speaker (or writer) and interpreted by a and the social context in which is used. By listener (or reader) (Yule, 1996:3). In the understanding register used, ones must used definition, pragmatics is the study of speaker pragmatics competence to explore the basic meaning, the study of contextual meaning, knowledge toward certain situation. and the study of the expression of relative distance (Yule, 1996:3). It means that how Pragmatics and Discourse listener interpret the speaker meaning in a Pragmatics and Discourse are two particular context to get the speaker’s theories inseparable constitute text, context, intended meaning and how close or distant and the function in discourse. Pragmatics the listener is, speaker determine how much concerns to the relevance of the contexts in needs to be said. discourse, and discourse underlies the emphasizes the coherence of the language use. Schiffrin meaning of ‘discourse’ within linguistics, by (2006:169) defines discourse is the use of contrasting it to the use of the term ‘text’. It is

33 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

not clear-cut distinction between ‘text’ and Regarded to the categorization of text, ‘discourse’ if it stands alone. But in Titscher et al further distinguish three opposition discourse includes text, sentence, fundamentally different functions of text (see and ideology whereby each have differential fig. 2.6): text has a function as text in the to mark out meaning of discourse. Let’s take of research. It means from the a look at Hawthorn’s written cited by Geofrey researcher’s viewpoint, there is nothing else Leech and Micheal Short (in Mills, 2004:3): behind the text. The second is text as representation of feature of the groups Discourse is linguistic communication investigated or situation investigated. She seen as a transaction between speaker explains text as that manifests and hearer, as an interpersonal activity components of communication from the whose form is determined by its social selected groups of people who produced the purpose. Text is linguistic text. Then, it can be considered whether text communication (either spoken or is stand alone in the investigation or whether written) seen simply as a message they represent something as reflection of coded in its auditory or visual medium. communication (2000:32).

Text and Context As text The Halliday and Hasan (1985, in Nunan, text Of features of the 1991:45) suggest that text and context can groups investigated be related through a consideration of field, As tenor, and mode. The field of discourse representation refers to ‘what is going on’, tenor to ‘who is taking part’, and mode to the ‘role assigned Of features of the situations to language’. investigated Fig. 2.6: Functions of text material Text (Titscher et al, 2000:32) Text, Hasan writes (Halliday in Halliday and Hasan, 1985:52), is “language Context that is functional; that is doing some job in The study of context actually leads on some context of situation.” In other words, the analysis of situation types and of the text and context are so intimately related. In uses of language (Halliday et al, 1964: 75). addition, Hasan (Halliday and Hasan, The context itself can be spoken or written 1985:94) says a text is not a unit of form but language. The descriptive distinction into of meaning. It is harmony because it spoken and written language is naturally harmonises the output of two involves in a consideration of the different macrofunctions: the textual and the varieties of language they represent. experential. In the other hand, a text, Halliday Nevertheless, the point of attention is now on (Titscher et al, 2000:29) states, is everything users of language, and the uses they make that is meaningful in a particular situation: ‘By of it. text, then, we understand a continuous Fig 2.7 (Schiffrin, 2006:192) presents process of semantic choice’. Hence, a text six function of language. Jacobson’s model must be understood from knowledge or of language functions represents the speech schemata that people have in mind. situation as a multidimensional set of Stubbs (1983:9) describes discourse relationships, a bit like multifaceted diamond. as implying interactive discourse, whereas The arrows in fig. 2.7 indicate the text implies non-interactive monologue, relationship between speech situation and whether intended to be spoken aloud or not. function, and suggest how different aspects

34 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

of the speech situation – and different that CONTEXT pervades the ADDRESSOR functions – are related to one another. The and ADRESSEE speak, as well as the unbroken arrows indicate paths by which circumstances of their CONTACT. The ADDRESSOR and ADDRESSEE are dotted arrow from CODE to MESSAGE connected – back and forth through highlights the contribution of language to the CONTACT or unidirectionally through a MESSAGE. MESSAGE. The arrows in dashes indicate

CONTEXT [referential]

ADDRESSOR CONTACT ADDRESSEE [emotive] [phatic] [conative] expressive social, interpersonal recipient-design

MESSAGE [register]

CODE [metalinguistic]

Fig. 2.7. (Speech situation and functions. Adapted from Jacobson’s model cited by Schiffrin, 2006:193)

There are three features of the context speech role that they are taking on in the as Haliday writes (Halliday and Hasan, 1985: dialogue and the whole cluster of socially 12) as the concepts serve to interpret the significant relationships in which they are social context of a text: involved? The tenor of discourse is 1) the field of discourse refers to what is concerned with the personal relationship happening, to the nature of the social involved: who are the participants in this action that is taking place: what is it that text. It can be called the people who are the participants are engaged in, in which holding on the topic. the language figures as some essential 3) the mode of discourse refers to what part component?. It can be called the topic of the language is playing. It is concerned discourse. the particular part that the language is 2) the tenor of discourse refers to who is playing in the interactive process taking part, to the nature of the whether in spoken or written. participants, their statuses and roles: what kinds of role relationship obtain Text and Context Relationship among the participants, including The relation between text and context permanent and temporary relationships of situation can be drawn as follow: of one kind or another, both the types of

35 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

SITUATION: (realised by) TEXT: Feature of the context Functional component of semantic system

Field of discourse Experiential meanings (transitivity, naming, etc) (what is going on)

Tenor of discourse Interpersonal meanings (who are taking part) (mood, modality, person, etc)

Mode of discourse Textual meanings (role assigned to (theme, information, cohesive relation) language)

Fig. 2.8: Relation of the text to the context of situation

Speech Act and Cooperative Principle speaker says or mentions about a particular : an action performed by thing that is not trying to mislead the listener. one person through speech. The speaker According to Grice, conversation can be intends to perform the act and that intention successful if ones are able to converse with is recognized by the recipient (Schiffrin in other people because they have recognize Fassold and Connor-Linton, 2006:172; see common goals in conversation and specific also Yule, 1996:47). When ones talk, they ways of achieving goals (Wardaugh, produce utterances which perform actions. 1986:281). Therefore, ones should govern What they perform is their thoughts in which cooperative principle in conversation. Grice consists of ideas, intentions, directions, and (Wardaugh, 1986: 281; Yule, 1996:37; information. One general classification Portner, 2006:160) lists four maxims that system lists five types of general functions follow from the cooperative principle: performed by speech acts: declarations, quantity, quality, relation, and manner. The representatives, expressives, directives, and maxim of quantity requires you to make your commissives (Yule, 1996:53). There also contribution as informative as is required. three general types of speech acts (Yule, The maxim of quality requires you not to say 1996:54) is provided by the three basic what you believe to be false or that for which sentence types, they are the three structural you lack adequate evidence. Relation is the forms (declarative, interrogative, imperative) simple injunction: be relevant. Manner and the three general communicative requires you to avoid obscurity of expression functions (statement, question, command/ and ambiguity, and to be brief and orderly. request). Above all, conversation is a However, besides they use institutional cooperative activity, in the Gricean sense, talk, casual conversation is also needed to one that depends on speakers and listeners keep cooperative principle between workers who are sharing a set of assumptions about at workplace. Koester (2006: 9) argues that what is happening (Wardaugh, 1986:284). although small talk and issues such as politeness and relationship, building in Discourse and Education workplace talk are now receiving more One very important aspect of attention. It can be assumed that speakers education is the production of coherent and listeners involved in conversation are discourse. According to Hasan (Halliday and generally cooperating with each other. In Hasan, 1985: 95), by creating a coherent accepting speaker’s , discourse, in turn, implies by understanding listeners normally have to assume what a meaning relations between the concepts of

36 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

the chosen field. Then, it will demand communication to a pedagogical context teachers (or authors) to produce coherent and to the genre of advertising. discourse. Moreover, the world, and h) From the perspective of the global particularly the world of education, is made spread of English, analyse different up of talk. The success of talk is not from types of pedagogy, with special assumption but what properties of talk must emphasis on heteroglossia as an have in order to be successful (Hasan in interactional strategy in a pedagogical Halliday and Hasan, 1985: 95). setting. Pragmatics, discourse and its However, for this study, students are methodological applications set the aim of expected to recognize Pragmatics and enhancing students’ awareness of the Discourse theoretically based on context. functionality of language from social, cultural and cognitive perspectives. It will be shown Register that pragmatic concepts, theories and Language varies according to its uses frameworks increase our understanding of as well as its users, according to where it is language in use and consequently the ability used and to whom, as well as according to to analyze language in all kinds of context. who is using it. Language variation according Prof. Consuelo Montes Granado in University to the situation in which it is used called Salamanca recommends (WWW), when register variation, and varieties of a language students have successfully completed this that are typical of a particular situation of use course (pragmatics and discourse), they will are called registers (Schiffrin, 2006:190). It is be able to: particularly important to define ‘variety’ as a a) Understand what is meant by specific set of ‘linguistic items’ or ‘human Pragmatics as the study of the speech patterns’ (presumably, sounds, functionality of language use. words, grammatical features) which people b) Appreciate basic insights of language can uniquely associate with some external use coming from pragmatic theories: factor (presumably, a geographical area or a , language as action: social group) (Wardaugh, 1986:22). speech acts, conversational A register, basically, is a concept of . semantic. It can be defined as a configuration c) Develop a thorough understanding of of meanings that are typically associated with post-Gricean pragmatics, which includes a particular situational configuration of field, two main lines of research: politeness mode, and tenor (Halliday in Halliday and and relevance. Hasan, 1985:38-39, 42). The term ‘register’ d) Connect the notion of systems of (Holmes, 1992:276; Holmes, 2001:246) more politeness with other dimensions in narrowly to describe the specific vocabulary communication: gender and cross- associated with different occupational group. cultural interaction. In other words, the term ‘register’ here e) Analyse the interconnection of describes the language of groups of people politeness with the axes of power and with common interests or jobs, or the solidarity in the genre of advertising. language used in situations associated with f) Apply politeness insights to improve the such groups. In addition, Wardaugh learning process in a pedagogical (1986:48) also defines registers are sets of context. vocabulary items associated with discrete g) Analyse processes of communication occupational or social groups. Surgeons, from the perspective of Relevance airline pilots, bank managers, sales clerks, theory. Apply this model of jazz fans, and pimps use different .

37 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

1) Register and Genre schema for application to ‘typical repetitive Within , the events in the social process’. They are: concept of genre (Nunan, 1991:43) has been a) The participants: persons, personalities proposed as a useful one for helping people and relevant features of these to understand the nature of language in use, (i) The verbal action of the including the issue of predictability. He also participants. adds, the term ‘genre’ refers to a purposeful, (ii) The non-verbal action of the socially-constructed, communicative event. participants. Examples of genre are: prayers, sermons, b) The relevant objects and non-verbal and conversations, songs, , poems, non-personal events. letters, and novels. c) The effect of the verbal action In addition, Firth (in van Dijk (Ed.), 1998:238) describes genres as a provisional

Context (level 2) : genre

- Above and beyond

metafunction Genre

Mode Context (level 1) : register Field Organized by metafunction

Ideational Textual

Language organized by

Interpersonal metafunction Tenor

Fig. 2.9: Genre in relation to register and language (Martin’s model, in van Dijk (Ed.), 1998:243)

Analysis of context level has concentrated in stages or steps (ibid, 236). Realization then making explicit just which combinations of is the relationship between the language field, tenor, and mode variables a culture components (ideational, interpersonal and enables, and how these are mapped out as textual metafunctions) and context variables staged, goal-oriented social processes (in (field, tenor and mode). van Dijk (Ed.), 1998:243). The concept of Register and Genre Theory (R>) is, register is a theoretical explanation of the (based on van Dijk (Ed), 1998:236), a theory commom-sense observation that ones use of functional variation: of how texts are language differently in different situation (in different, and the contextual motivations for van Dijk (Ed.), 1998: 234). While genre those differences. A useful R> is one will theory suggests that texts which are doing allow for both textual deduction and different jobs in the culture will unfold in contextual prediction (ibid). different ways, working through different

38 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

Left side Right side Context Language Type of meaning ‘at Register Discourse-semantic Lexico-grammatical patterns risk’ variable patterns (cohesion) Field Ideational Lexical cohesion Transitivity (case) Conjunctive relations Logico-semantic relations (taxis)

Tenor Interpersonal Speech function Mood, modality, vocation, Exchange structure attitude.

Mode Textual Reference (participant Theme, Information structure tracking) Nominalization

Fig.2.10: Halidayan’s systemic functional model of relationship between context, strata, and systems in the systemic functional model.

This model more or less the same with select a particular code whenever they Martin’s model but it is more detail and choose to speak, and they may also decide complete. The way to describe this model to switch from one code to another or to mix can be the left side, which may mean a code. contextual prediction, and also the right side There are two kinds of code-switching: which means textual deduction. When one situational and metaphorical (Wardaugh, starts to analyze by having a piece of 1986:102-3). Situational code-switching discourse, it means that the model is used in occurs when the used change textual deduction. This will continue to the according to the situations in which the analysis of discourse-semantic and lexico- conversants find themselves: they speak one . Being completed in having textual language in one situation and another in a analysis, the deductive analyst should different one. In this case, no topic change is continue it to the contextual analysis which involved. However, when a change of topic consist of register variable including field, requires a change in the language used, one tenor, and mode. Given a description of the has metaphorical code-switching. The context, it should be possible to predict the process of changing the codes has meanings that will be at risk and the linguistic connections with the social value and status features likely to be used to encode them. of speakers. Since, they are deciding the Alternatively, given a text, it should be codes to be selected. Code-mixing occurs possible to deduce the context in which it when the speakers use two or more was produced, as the linguistic features languages together and mix them in a single selected in a text will encode contextual utterance or in their communicative act. For dimensions, both of its immediate context of example, a person speaking to an educated production and of its generic identity, what person or to an honored person in the task the text is achieving in the culture. society, he uses a standard variety. At the same time, when he speaks to the person Code-Switching and Code-Mixing who is socially lower in status, he uses a low The particular language one chooses variety. But, when he speaks with his family, to use on any occasion is a code, a system friends, or other related persons, he mixes used for communication between two or both the high and low varieties of the more parties. People are usually forced to languages. In casual conversational

39 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

situation, there will be a mixture of both the style, register, or variety –that is, a particular codes. code. Thompson (2003:55) states that code Borrowing other language in code- refers to either a language, a dialect or some switching is commonly used especially in job other linguistic form such as a register. community. Both code switching and Particularly in a workplace, it has code borrowing are based on principled choice they used as an agreement used by combination of elements of the monolingual people in that community. Koester (2006:4) vernaculars of the bilingual community states that the institutional context and the (Poplack, 2004:www). Therefore, the data of constraints it imposes can also be reflected code-switching are relevant both to in lexical choice, most obviously when evaluating theories and to understanding the technical or professional jargon is used social role of code-switching within the (Koester, 2006:4) community (Poplack, 2004:www). Research Design Code This research is descriptive qualitative, A language consists of a large number because the data were taken in the forms of of words and each of these words has a daily conversation at the workplace. The direct correlation with something outside of research concludes phenomenological language, which is its meaning. Therefore, if research in which the researcher identifies one communicates with one another through the “essence’ of human experiences language, it must be that we all have the concerning a phenomenon as described by same idea o concept associated with each participants in a study (Creswell, 2003:15). word. Ogden and Richards (1923) elaborated Bogdan and Biklen (1982:27-30) describes this view to develop a mentalistic theory five characteristics of qualitative research about meaning, an attempt to explain such as 1) it focuses on setting as the source meaning in terms of what is in people’s of data, 2) it is descriptive, 3) it considers minds. Their explanation centers in this more on the process, 4) the analysis is figure: inductively and 5) the meaning is essential. This means that the data are gathered and concept grouped from some data available to meet the purpose of the analysis. This theory supported Miles and Huberman (1986:15) they state that qualitative data, in the form of object words rather than number, have always been word the staple of certain social . They add that qualitative data are attractive, Fig. 2.11: Triangle of because they are a source of well-grounded, (Kreidler, 1998:43) rich descriptions and explanations of process occurring in local contexts. With qualitative Ogden and Richards called this scheme data, one can preserve chronological flow, (Kreidler, 1998:43) as the bond between assess local causality, and derive fruitful word and concept an ‘association’, the bond explanations. between concept and object ‘reference’, and the bond between object and word ‘meaning’. Object of the Research People are always faced with code The object of the research is register choices when they speak. In general, used by the workers at PT. Petrokimia however, when you open your mouth, you Gresik. The register used is technical must choose a particular language, dialect, English. Object of the research is the use of

40 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

code (register) used by the workers at PT. data recording. The first is direct Petrokimia Gresik. Muhadjir (1992:49) cited conversations, the second is the in Soekemi et al. (2000:80) state that the conversation over the phone from the field object which is observed, used as the data operational room (sometimes using handy (descriptive process, private note, field note, talky), and conversation in the field of the photograph, people’s words, documents or harbor.The data does not only consist of other notes). interviews and conversations but also includes documents, films or videotapes (see of the Research Strauss and Corbin, 1998:11). The subjects of the research were the workers at PT. Petrokimia Gresik who work Analysis And Discussion at loading and unloading area. In this case Analysis the workers were carrying conversation with Communication References Analysis their business partners of PT. Petrokimia Data 1 Gresik. The dialog happened after CSU already repaired. The topic of the Setting conversation is the activity of unloading The data is elicited in PT. Petrokimia phosphate rock and the condition of CSU Gresik. The address is on Gedung PT. after unloading. Petrokimia Gresik Jl. Jenderal Ahmad Yani, The conversation begins when pak T Gresik. For the observation, the researcher asked pak A to command pak M to open took at PT. Petrokimia’s port. palka five. Then, pak A gave information to pak M that the condition of palka was safe. It The Source of Data means that there was no obstacle for him to The sources of data of this study are operate CSU to be parked so that the the conversations between the workers of technician could conduct greasing to CSU. PT. Petrokimia Gresik and their partners workers and clients. There are three kinds of

Table 4.5. Communication reference analysis of data 1 Context No. Utterances Interpretation Field Tenor Mode 1. Dialog 1 Event: The 1.T (as palka lima, Oil lubrication T: Pak A, langsung activity of supervisor in dicommandeer, in gear box has bongkar palka lima dan unloading panel) swing kiri, low content tolong dibantu phosphate 2. M (CSU gearbox CSU, based on dicommandeer. rock. operator low-level oil, stick/controller A: Pak M, kondisi Setting: After PG) limit low (low stuck on gear dalam palka aman langsung CSU (ship imit) box. It means swing kiri supaya lebih unloading) that oil must be aman already filled it up to karena dekat anjungan repaired. gearbox. kapal. Dialog 2 M: Pak T, gearbox CSU nampaknya mendekati low- level oil karena dilihat dari stick nampak limit low. T: Nanti aja tambah oilnya setelah mekanik melakukan greasing.

41 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

Classification of the use of code between from Indonesian structure such as gearbox code switching-mixing CSU that must be gearbox of CSU and limit Data 1 low must be low limit. However, that structure Dialog 1 was still accepted in communication among T: (1.1) Pak A, langsung bongkar palka lima PT. Petrokimia Gresik. dan tolong dibantu dicommandeer. (1.4) “Nanti aja tambah oilnya setelah A: (1.2) Pak M, kondisi dalam palka aman mekanik melakukan greasing.” langsung swing kiri supaya lebih By uttering Nanti aja tambah oilnya aman karena dekat anjungan kapal. setelah mekanik melakukan greasing, T responded by giving information that the oil Dialog 2 will be filled up when the technician M: (1.3) Pak T, gearbox CSU nampaknya conducting greasing. In this utterance, T mendekati low-level oil karena dilihat used code-mixing of English oil and greasing dari stick nampak limit low. into Indonesian eventhough the structure T: (1.4) Nanti aja tambah oilnya setelah followed Indonesian structure. There is also mekanik melakukan greasing. code-mixing happens in the word oilnya, namely oil and suffix /-nya/. Classification of the Utterances (1.1) “Pak A, langsung bongkar palka lima Discussion dan tolong dibantu dicommandeer.” First of all, the researcher discusses By uttering Pak A, langsung bongkar the registers used by the workers at PT. palka lima dan tolong dibantu Petrokimia Gresik. Secondly, the topic which dicommandeer, T asked A to unload palka is discussed is the things that communication five and to command M operating CSU. In can run well among workers at PT. this utterance, T used code-mixing of English Petrokimia Gresik. Thirdly, the reasons will commandeer into Indonesian. be discussed about why the workers at PT. (1.2) “Pak M, kondisi dalam palka aman Petrokimia Gresik use code-switching and langsung swing kiri supaya lebih aman code-mixing. karena dekat anjungan kapal.” 1) Registers used by the workers at PT. By uttering Pak M, kondisi dalam Petrokimia Gresik: the explanation of palka aman langsung swing kiri supaya lebih the terms used aman karena dekat anjungan kapal, A a. Swing commands M as an order from T. In this It is a technical language used in utterance, A used code-mixing of English English. The meaning of this word is to swing into Indonesian. move or to make the arm of CSU to (1.3) “Pak T, gearbox CSU nampaknya move backwards and forwards or round mendekati low-level oil karena dilihat and round while hanging or supported dari stick nampak limit low.” phosphate rock. By uttering Pak T, gearbox CSU b. Palka lima nampaknya mendekati low-level oil karena The utterance of the word dilihat dari stick nampak limit low, M informed of “palka lima” can be found and traced to T about the condition of CSU that gearbox in the utterance (5.1) that is of CSU appeared in low level oil when it was represented by T’s utterance “Pak A, checked by stick it seemed low limit. In this langsung bongkar palka lima dan utterance, M used code-mixing of English tolong dibantu dicommendir.” The word gearbox CSU, low-level oil, stick, limit low of “palka” can be translated in English into Indonesian. Eventhough he used code- means the hold; that is the hollow part mixing in his utterance, it cannot be escaped of a ship where cargo is stored. Then,

42 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

the compound word of “palka lima” Communicative competence refers to the hold of a ship number five. c. Gearbox Textual competence The utterance of the word of ‘gearbox’ can be found in the utterance (5.3) that is represented by M’s utterance “Pak Register T, gearbox CSU nampaknya (in the context of sociolinguistic mendekati low-level oil karena dilihat competence) dari stick nampak limit low.” The word of “gearbox” means the metal case that Communicative competence can run encloses a vehicle’s gear mechanism. well if the workers have the textual From that utterance, the word of competence to comprehend discourse ‘gearbox’ refers to gearbox of CSU. whether the communication is coherent and d. Limit low cohesive. By knowing the textual The utterance of the compound word competence, it is expected to understand the ‘limit low’ that should be ‘low limit’ can register in the context of sociolinguistic be found and traced in the utterance competence based on pragmatic (5.3). The workers was usually used competence or the basic knowledge that the that technical English to describe the workers have. Besides, the communication condition of gearbox of CSU that among the workers at PT. Petrokimia Gresik looked low limit when it was checked is only be understood by those who have by stick. been trained and involved in factory. e. Low level From the analysis, it can be captured The utterance of the compound word that communication can be run well since of “low level” can be found in the among the workers involved are cooperate utterance “Koyoke mendekati low level each other, therefore they occupied Grice’s iki, rodo’ cendak anune iki, stick iku cooperative principle four maxims, namely lho, Pak.” From this utterance, the quantity, quality, relation, and manner. From compound word of “low level” was the table of Grice’s classification in interpreted as the level of oil box of cooperative principle, the workers of PT. CSU was in low when it was checked Petrokimia occupied relation as the most by stick; therefore, it was needed to be maxim that they used in communication. It lubricated. can be seen from the total of the data that f. Greasing relation occupies at the highest position. It The word of “greasing” is actually the means that in communication, when a verb continuous word means to put or speaker is asking or giving statement, the rub grease on or in CSU. receiver is answering and responding relevantly. But sometimes what a speaker 2) Communication can run well among says is not responded by a receiver due to workers at PT. Petrokimia the noise of environment or other reasons Gresik without diminishes meaning of context. Then, By understanding the context of it is followed by quantity as the second high discourse, the workers can communicate position. It means that in answering without any difficulty. It means they have questions or responding statement, the sufficient communicative competence receiver actualizes his contribution as because there is no communication informative as is required. He never breakdown happens between them. answered or repeated an utterance by

43 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

adding an utterance in word, , or context; and Pragmatics and discourse. sentence. Pragmatics and discourse can be captured with the analysis of speech act and 3) The use of code-switching and code- cooperative principle, register, and mixing used by the workers at PT. coherence and cohesion; while text and Petrokimia Gresik. context can be identified by the Hallidayan’s In communication, the workers at PT. systemic model. Petrokimia Gresik usually use code-switching In carrying out communication, it seem or code-mixing. It is used because in that the workers use the Hallidayan’s conversation they have to mix or switch the systemic model to explore the meaning of language whereas the activity that they use context namely, field, tenor, and mode. By contains of technical language, chemical comprehending the context, it can be language, and English that have been interpreted about the condition happened at standardized or internationalized to get the PT. Petrokimia Gresik accord to speech communication efficient and effective. community and register they used. Technical term that the workers used cannot The speech act and cooperative be changed due to highly codified that it is principle which are used by the workers commonly only known by the workers around among PT. Petrokimia Gresik are the use of the world. Therefore, they are trying how to four maxims: quantity, quality, relation, and avoid misunderstanding in the process manner. First of all, to get good communication among workers who have communication, people must be cooperative different nationality. Besides, by using the each other. Therefore, Grice lists for maxims: highly codified form of communication, it is quantity, quality, relation, and manner. expected the workers can achieve the goal Furthermore, in accepting speaker’s and work faster as limit time. presuppositions, listener normally have to In the table 4.5, the use of code- assume what a speaker says or mentions mixing is often used mix in Indonesian- about a particular thing that is not trying to English. In the work place, the workers mix a mislead the listener. Beyond the code in Indonesian-English such as, swing, conversation, the participants must be able gear box, limit (that is) low, low level, and to recognize the utterances whether it is greasing. Most of the technical language that coherence and cohesive by understanding the workers used was English that was the context or situation. standardized. Therefore, they mixed the The use of code-mixing or code- technical language that was English switching automatically happened in standardized with Indonesian since in communication among workers at PT. communication they used Indonesian. Petrokimia Gresik. It was regarded to register Last, between the workers of PT. and dialect used at that community. The Petrokimia Gresik and ship crews used register with a highly special language is . The differences language found as a technical language in English that that they used is related to status scale that has been codified. The word of registers are concerned with participant relationships swing, gearbox, greasing. By researching, among the workers at the workplace. there are code-mixing between Indonesian- English Conclusion Finally, the workers have carried out After having done the analysis of registers in the workplace in order to communication among workers at PT communicate among others well. The Petrokimia Gresik, it can be concluded that discourse which contains of registers which the analysis has used two devices: text and are used by the workers are technical

44 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

English that has been standardized and it Introduced by Anwar S. Dil. Stanford has agreement among them. Besides, it is University Press: USA. also difficult to understand by people ouside Halliday, M.A.K, Angus McIntosh, Peter community since the code used in Strevens. 1964. “Chapter 4: The communication. Hence, to understand the users and uses of language”, The meaning of register used by the workers at Linguistic Sciences and Language the workplace, the Hallidayan systemic Teaching. Longman Ltd: London. functional model must be applied to find out Halliday, M.A.K and Ruqaiyya Hasan. 1985. context, strata, and systems in the systemic Language, Context, and Text: Aspects functional model. of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Victoria: Deakin University. References Hammarström, Göran & Björn Jernudd. Bogdan, Robert C and Sari Kopp Bilen. 1972. Outline of Linguistics. Monash 1982. Qualitative Research for University. Education: An Introduction to Theory Hines, Chad (writes on winter 2003). Code. and Methods. USA: Allyn and Bacon, Accessed March 15, 2008 Inc. http://csmt.uchicago.edu/glossary2004/code. Brown, Gillian and George Yule. 1983. htm. . Cambridge Holmes, Janet. 1992. An Introduction to University Press. . London and New Carroll, John B. 1953. Chapter 7: York: Longman. Communication Engineering and the Huong, Le Pham Hoai. 2006. Learning Study of Speech, The study of Vocabulary in Group Work in Language. Harvard University Press: . London: Sage Publication USA. Ltd. Cresswell, John W. 2003. Research Design: http://RELC.sagepub.com. Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Koester, Almut. 2006. Investigating Methods Approaches. 2nd Edition. Workplace Discourse. Rouledge: London; SAGE Publications. London and New York. Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Critical Discourse Kreidler, Charles W. 1998. Introducing Analysis. Harlow: Pearson Education English Semantics. NY: Routledge. Ltd. Miles Matthew B and A. Michael Huberman. Gee, James Paul. 1999. An Introduction to 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis. Discourse Analysis: Theory and London: Sage Publications. Method. London and New York: Mills, Sara. 2004. Discourse. London: Routledge. Routledge. Goodenough, Ward H. 1981. Culture, Language, and Society. California: Nasr, Raja T. 1985. The Essentials of The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Linguistic Science. England: Company, Inc. Longman. Grabowski, Ian. 2007. “Consumed by Nilep, Chad. June, 2006. Colorado Research consumerism: the persuasive in Linguistics. Vol. 19. “Code discourse of Switching” in Sociocultural financial institutions”, In Language & Linguistics. Chad Nilep. Boulder: Ecology vol.2 no.2. University of Colorado. Accessed Gumperz, John L. 1971. Language in Social March 15, 2008. Groups, Essays. Selected and http://ucsu.colorado.edu//~nilep/NILEP2005_ Code_Switching.pdf.

45 Jurnal DISPROTEK Volume 7 No. 1 Januari 2016

Nunan, David. 1991. Language Teaching Techniques and Procedures for . Prentice Hall (UK): Developing Grounded Theory. USA: New York. Sage Publications. Portner, Paul. Meaning, in An Introduction to Stubb, Michael. 1983. Discourse Analysis: Language and Linguistics. Fasold The Sociolinguistic Analysis of Ralph and Jeff Connor-Linton (Ed.). . The University of 2006. Cambridge University Press. Chicago Press. Patrick, Peter L. The Speech Community. Thao Lê. 2005. Communicative Strategies in UK: University of Essex. Accessed Interlanguage. Australia: University April 17, 2008. of Tasmania, Faculty of Education. http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~patrickp/pape Accessed April 15, 2008. rs/SpeechCommunity.pdf. www.aare.edu.au/05pap/le056661.pdf. Poplack, Shana. 2004. “Code-switching”. Titscher, Stefan, Michael Meyer, Ruth Sociolinguistics. An international Wodak and Eva Vetter. 2000. handbook of the science of Methods of Text and Discourse language,2nd edition,ed. By U. Analysis. London: SAGE Ammon, N. Dittmar, K.J, Mattheier & Publications. P. Trudgill. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Thompson, Neil. 2003. Communication and Accessed March 15, 2008. Language. New York: Palgrave www.kcl.ac.uk/content/1/c6/01/93/59/105- macmillan. 106.pdf. van Dijk, Teun A. 1977. Text and Context. Richards, Jack, John Platt, and Heidi Weber. London and New York: Longman. 1985. Longman Dictionary of Applied van Dijk, Teun A (Ed.). 1998. Discourse as Linguistics. Longman. Structure and Process. Sage Schiffrin, Deborah. 2006. ‘Discourse’, in Publication Ltd: London. Fasold, Ralph and Jeff Connor- Wardaugh, Ronald. 1986. An Introduction to Linton (Ed.). 2006. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. UK: Basil Blackwell. Language and Linguistics. Yule, George. 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford: Cambridge: Cambridge University Oxford University Press. Press. Soekemi, Kem. 2000. Semantics: A Work Book. 2nd Edition. Unesa University Press. Strauss, Anselm & Juliet Corbin. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research:

46