IMPRESSION IN “I WANDERED LONELY AS A CLOUD” e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 11 e-Journal of Linguistics Hospitality Language In Tourism Field: Facework Yohanes Kristianto e-mail: inselbali@yahoo.com Faculty of Tourism, Udayana University Made Budiarsa e-mail: made_budiarsa@yahoo.com Study Program of Linguistics, School of Postgraduate Studies, Udayana University I Wayan Simpen e-mail: wayan_simpen@yahoo.com Study Program of Linguistics, School of Postgraduate Studies, Udayana University I Made Netra e-mail: dektih@yahoo.com Study Program of Linguistics, School of Postgraduate Studies, Udayana University ABSTRACT This study aims to uncover, analyze, and interpret the reality of hospitality language in tourism from the perspective of the duality. The underlying assumption that language is an action in social practices. This is shown by the practice of the English language in the service interaction. The structure of the English language is like schemata of principles for service interaction and at the same time empowering service provider to perform service interaction To uncover and interpret hospitality language practice, the theory of structuration is applied. Theory of pragmatics is used to analyze the linguistic phenomena. Based on the frame of structuration, this research is identified in four issues, namely (1) the structure of hospitality language, (2) the system of hospitality language, and (3) hospitality language as a representation facework. Problem (1) and (2) are analyzed by ethnography of communication. Problem (3) is analyzed using speech act theory and politeness theory. This study is a qualitative research, due to explore, pattern, interpreting the language practices, so it does not use statistical analysis to generalize the results. Population is not in large quantities, but using purposive sample to determine the number of informants based on the criteria and representativeness in service encounter. In addition, language behavior in general is homogeneous. Data collected by the ethnography of communication methods, e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 12 observation, and recording. The data selected are English due to English as the main foreign language in the service interaction. The findings of this study are: (1) the structure of the hospitality language, namely (a) the structure of significance in the form of setting or scene of service encounter, (b) the structure of domination, namely participants (tourism practitioners and tourists), (2) the system of hospitality language in the form of (a) the schemata interpretation of act sequences and keys, (b) the schemata of facility is instrumentality, and (c) schemes of norm are in the form of interpretation and interaction norms, (3) facework, namely: (a ) communication practices in the form of expressive speech acts, directive, representative, and commissive, (b) the exercise of power in the form of face threatening acts, (c) the practice of sanctions in the form of face-saving or redressive actions. Empirically, facework is realized in the entity to be free (negative face) and received (positive face). Based on the results of the study can be suggested(1) the structure of the hospitality language can be used by the tourism practitioners in increasing competence and performance language, (3) the system of hospitality language can be used tourism practitioners to understand modalities of language, and (3) facework in the concepts of positive and negative hospitality, can be used as strategy of tourism practices for local community, government, and investors. Keywords: hospitality language, tourism field, facework, duality, structuration 1. Introduction Balinese people as speakers of the local language (Balinese), especially those living in tourist areas or those working in tourism, in addition to Bahasa Indonesia, are also required to communicate in English with the tourists (foreigners), especially with English- speaking tourists ( Bawa, 1994; Beratha, 1999). The reality of the use of English as the main foreign language in a tourist area in Bali shows the relationship between language as a structure (langue) and speakers (actor) to conduct social practices, namely language (parole) in the field of tourism as space and time (Giddens, 1984). On the internal side speakers, especially the Balinese people working in the tourism field using English to communicate with tourists is a language awareness in inviting or accepting foreigners. Acceptance attitude towards tourists (guests) 'the reception of guests' and the generosity of strangers 'generosity toward strangers' This is nature's Hospitality (Derrida, 1999). Therefore, this study uses language terminology's Hospitality as the concept of consciousness units use lingual (tongue) to receive foreigners or tourists (Blue and Aaron, 2003: 74). e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 13 Basis of this study that language is action (social practices) in space and time (tourism practices). As a social practice, language has a central theme, namely those language structures with speakers (actor) and space-time where repeated practices of the language. In other words, this study looked at the relationship between the duality of language structure and language speakers (actor). Language as structure (rules) not only set the speakers but it also empowers consciousness of the speaker in the practice speaking. In line with the formulation of the theory of Structuration Giddens (1984), the researchers assume that no structure of language without speakers (actors), as there is no practice the language without grammar (Priyono, 2016: x). This study tried to assess the hospitality language practice in the field of tourism from the perspective of duality, ie the relation of language structure and language speakers in practice the language at a certain time space (tourism field) rather than separating langue and parole in the binary opposition as in the study of structural linguistics. Perspective duality of structure and speakers of the hospitality hospitality language (tourism practitioners) will be studied with the concept of language awareness, language as structure, language as a system, and practice the language as a representation of the practice of advance. 2. Theoretical Basis Language Research's Hospitality in Tourism Field: Facework using transdisciplinary perspective, namely sociology (the theory of structuration), Linguistic Anthropology and Sociolinguistics (ethnography of communication), and pragmatics (speech act theory and human decency or tokens 'model person'). Structuration theory is used as a frame of research problems with the perspective of duality of structure (language) and actor (speakers) in social practices (language) are repeated and patterned in space-time (the field of) tourism. Theory ethnography of communication are used to identify, describe, analyze, and memolakan service interaction in the form of units of ethnographic analysis. Speech act theory of pragmatics and pragmatic man of the e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 14 sample used to analyze the use of language as an act of verbal practice's Hospitality language as the language of the service together with the effect of such measures in the field of tourism. Based on the principle of Structuration , then the problem of this research has three focus of study. The focus of the first studies are structures (language) includes three groups large structures, namely (a) the structure marking or the significance of the language concerning the schemata symbols, meanings, and discourse, (b) the structure of domination or domination that includes the schemata of control over the (political ) and goods / thing (economy), and (c) the structure of justification or legitimacy concerning the normative schema in the form of legal order. The second focus of study is the language system as a means-between or modalities for the continuity of the service interaction in the field of tourism which includes three groups, namely (a) schemata of interpretation or interpretation, (b) the schemata facilities, and (c) the schemata norm. The third focus is the practice of advance in the field of tourism are realized in the form of interaction that includes three major groups, namely (a) communications, (b) the power, and (c) sanctions. The focus of the problems (1) and (2) were examined using ethnography of communication theory to describe and analyze patterns of communication by identifying the communication events that occur repeatedly, communication components, then find a relationship between components. Meanwhile, the focus of the problem (3) were examined using pragmatic speech act theory and the theory of pragmatic human decency tokens to identify, describe, analyze, and pattern the faceworks that are represented in speech acts and pragmatic effects illocutionary acts of verbal or power. 3. Research Methodology Research of Hospitality Language in Tourism Field: Facework using a qualitative approach. A qualitative approach was used to explore and understand and describe the meaning of individual and group social interaction problems (Creswell, 2009: 4, 13). This research method is also included descriptive method because the research is conducted solely based on the fact the practice of speaking of existing or phenomenon empirically live in speakers-speakers, so that the resulting form of perian language what is (Sudaryanto, 1992: 62) , Language Research's Hospitality in the field of Tourism conducted in the tourist areas of Bali, namely (1) Denpasar (Sanur), (2) Badung (Nusa Dua, Seminyak, Kuta), (3) Gianyar (Ubud), (4) Karangasem (Virgin Beach) , (5) Buleleng (Lovina), and (6) Tabanan e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 15 (Tanah Lot). The type of data in this study is qualitative data or language data in the form of words, phrases, sentences, and discourse that is spoken by tourism practitioners in the service interaction. These data all be classified as primary data as taken directly from the source. Sources of data obtained from stakeholders in tourism and tourists in the service interaction (good and service or service encounter) both in airports, hotels, restaurants, cafes, travel agencies, tourist attraction, livery, art shops, markets, as well as the beach. This study uses the recording devices, computers, sheets transcription of conversations, and the corpus of service interaction. Recording device used to record the interaction of services in accordance with a predetermined sample. Computers are used to store and play back the recording service interaction data obtained in the field. This research data collection method using ethnographic methods of communication and supported by the recording technique, observe and record. Ethnography of communication method used to observe verbal interaction in tourism services, said events, narrative style, and how to speak, and so on. Furthermore, the speech act is used as the unit of analysis (Hymes, 1962). Data ethnographic speech acts are used to interpret the structure of the hospitality language, the language system's Hospitality and tourism practitioners facework in the service interaction. The results of the data analysis are presented formally in the form of a chart, pattern, flow, frequency tabulation of data lingual and non-lingual about the phenomenon of hospitality language in the field of tourism. Data are also presented in accordance with the advice Lofland (1974; 2001) and Miles and Huberman (1988) on an informal basis in the form of a narrative description and in-depth exploration (in Creswell, 2007: 200). 4. Discussion 4.1 Structure of Hospitality Language in Tourism Field The structure of the hospitality language in the field of tourism can be seen that the hospitality language is a language service that is used as a rule by tourism practitioners in the service interaction in the field of tourism. Hospitality language as a social practice e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 16 repeatedly and continuously to form certain structures or rules that guide the service interaction. The process of forming the structure of the hospitality language can be shown by the ethnography of communication units within each service interaction in the field of tourism. Based on the ethnography of communication units, the structure of the hospitality language in the field of tourism can be identified as follows. First, the structure of signification. The structure of signification in hospitality language practice is found in the form of setting. Each hospitality language have a setting of space and time of the event said in a service interaction in the field of tourism. As for the setting of the hospitality language practice can be divided into two, namely (1) a formal setting and (2) informal setting. Formal setting includes airports, hotels, restaurants, bars, travel agencies, tourist attraction, and travel information outlets. Formal setting marked by a formal or official institutions to support tourism practices and procedures patterned reference standard. Setting includes informal market, beach, shops, art / souvenirs, transport bases, and a motorcycle rental. Informal setting characterized by the absence of a reference standard procedure in a service interaction patterned setting as well as formal. Second, the structure of domination. The structure of domination that is found in the practice of the hospitality language is a participant. Each hospitality language practice involving at least two patisipan, namely tourism actors as service providers and tourists as customers or service users. Practice can be referred to as the hospitality language practice language services. Kata's Hospitality refers to the attitude of stakeholders in tourism as the host in the welcome, receive, or invite strangers or tourists as guests. If visits by participants, e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 17 language practice's Hospitality show host-guest relations. Based on the analysis unit ethnography of communication, participants in the setting of formal include participants officer apron and passengers, officers outlets admission and passengers, the clerk front office and tourists, room attendant and tourists, the restaurant waiters and tourists, bar terder and tourists, guides and tourists , the official travel agents and tourists, and travel and tourist information officer. Meanwhile, participants in the informal setting includes traders and tourists, shopkeepers by-by and tourists, surfing guide and tourist, drivers and tourists, and guard motorbike rental place and tourists. Third, the structure of legitimacy. The structure of the legitimacy of the practice of the language found in the form of interest says. Each hospitality language practice aims to support services in the field of tourism. Based on the hospitality language practice can be identified two destination hospitality language practice. In a formal setting, the hospitality language practice aims to help technical services between service providers (tourism practitioners) and customers (tourists). Meanwhile, in the setting of informal language practice aims or economically motivated like to offer goods or services to the tourists. The findings of the significance of language structure's Hospitality can provide information about the use of the hospitality language facts and rules of the language or languages barrel prevailing in the field of tourism. The findings of the concept of structure of hospitality language can be shown on the following chart. e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 18 Figure 1 Structure of Hospitality Language in Tourism Field 4.2 System of Hospitality Language in Tourism Field System of hospitality language as a means-between practice the hospitality language in the field of tourism are found three things, namely (1) a scheme of interpretation in the form of a sequence of actions and how to take action, (2) scheme of the facility in the form of means of speech in a service interaction, and (3) schemes norm form interaction norms and norms of interpretation services in the field of tourism. First, the schematic interpretation. To practise hospitality language, tourism practitioners require interpretation scheme that frames the service interaction. Based on the analysis units ethnography of communication, discovered components action sequences and e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 19 how to perform actions by tourism practitioners in the service interaction. In general, the action sequences are indicated by a sequence of speech acts tourism practitioners in the service interaction is expressive speech acts, directive, representative, and commissive. Expressive speech acts are used in the service interaction when the tourists come and go. Representative speech acts and directives are used when handling rating. The order of the speech act shows the sequence of how to perform the service in the field of tourism. This is in line with the results of the Blue and Harun (2003) on cluster of hospitality language competence which includes: (1) welcomes tourists' how to address the person ', (2) to pay tribute and provide important information' how to solicit and give the necessary information ', (3) respond to inquiries and requests' how to respond questions or requests', (4) the use of language accurately' how to use prompts', (5) the use of bodily gestures' how to use gestures', (6) to handle customer difficult 'how to deal with difficult, customers', and (7) to handle objections by customers 'how to appease complaints'. Based on how to perform actions, were found two action sequences in the service interaction, namely (1) the order of formal act performed by the clerk apron, attendant booth registration, the clerk front office, room attendant, the laundry man, waiters, bar tender, guides, and officer information outlets travel and (2) the sequence of actions performed by the informal traders, shopkeepers souvenirs, surf guides, taxi driver or a freelance driver, and guards motorcycle rental place. Formal action sequences refer to the reference standard procedure in the service interaction, while informal action sequence based on the habits of tourism practitioners in their interaction. Findings action sequences formal and informal in e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 20 line with the findings of the Blue and Harun (2003) on the cycle at which the service interaction in the field of tourism which includes service activities ranging from tourists come (arrival), the approach to tourists (famiarization), handling rating (engagement), to travelers departing to return to their country of origin (departure). Second, the scheme of hospitality language facilities. Schemes facilities can be aligned with said vehicle unit that includes the channels and forms of speech. In general, tourism practitioners using spoken language in the interaction of tourism services, because the service interaction takes place in a face to face communication. The concept of face to face communication refers to nature's Hospitality, the attitude of accepting foreigners or tourists. Shape's Hospitality said language can be classified into English barrel tourism demonstrated by tourism specialized lexicons. Basically, both formal and informal tourism practitioners practising the hospitality to travelers are identified by the reference procedure. Third, the hospitality language norm. Norms of hospitality language is found in the form of interpretation of norms and norms of interaction. Norms of hospitality language interpretation concerning general knowledge, values, attitudes, and beliefs as a reference in performing the services. In general, the formal tourism practitioners have a standard reference procedures in the service interaction. More informal tourism practitioners refer to habits or attitudes and values of local interaction. Norma interaction is determined by ethical tourism practitioners to communicate that in a tourism context refers to the hospitality values. Formal tourism practitioners have a reference standard of hospitality, whereas tourism practitioners informally refer to the general ethical interact. Findings concept of e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 21 hospitality language system as a means of interaction-between practices in the field of tourism services can be presented in the following chart. Bagan 2 System of Hospitality Language 4.3 Facework in Tourism Field Hospitality language as a representation of the facework in the service interaction in the field of tourism found three groups of faceworks represented in the hospitality language in the field of tourism, namely (1) the practice of communication in the form of speech acts, (2) the exercise of power in the form of the capacity of tourism practitioners in the service interaction in the form of face threatening acts, and (3) the practice of sanctions in the form of face-saving acts e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 22 First, the communication practices. To know a hospitality language communication practices in the field of tourism, communication practices analyzed by searching communication component in the service interaction. The analysis showed that the main component of communication is speech act. Speech act formal and informal tourism practitioners can be identified in the form of expressive speech acts, directive, representative, and commissive. Identification of speech acts do not by counting the frequency of occurrence in a service interaction, but the pattern different types of speech acts based on the sequence of actions in the service interaction. Findings types of speech acts reinforce the results of previous research carried out by Solon (2013). Solon find their order, the context of the interaction, and special linguistic features that build service interaction seller Mexico and tourists. Findings types of speech acts in language research study in hospitality also supported by Lind and Solomonson (2013) entitled Using pragmatic concepts for exploring interactivity in service encounter that appeared in An International Journal on Information Technology, Action, Communication, and Workpratices vol.7 ( 2013) No. 2 pages 205-226. Second, the exercise of power. To determine the exercise of power to do the analysis of speech acts or threats against the face, because power is inherent in an individual capacity. Exercising powers with regard to the capacity of tourism practitioners displayed through speech acts, the ability, the role of stakeholders in tourism development and institutional contexts, as well as beliefs, values, and attitudes. The results of the analysis of speech acts found four types of speech acts that risk threatening action advance. Fourth speech acts include expressive speech act, directive, representative, and commissive. e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 23 Expressive speech acts tourism practitioners have a risk rating or threats to advance. Intrinsically, expressive speech acts threaten positive face rating, because tourism practitioners make assumptions about the wishes, preferences or even the needs of travelers. In addition, the expressive speech acts also threatened to face negative rating, as tourists with tourism practitioners impose their own judgments, that tourists are expected to be grateful or thankful to tourism actors. Directive speech acts tourism practitioners also have the potential to threaten the face of negative and positive rating. Speech acts threaten tourism practitioners advance directive positive rating, because it makes assumptions about the capacity of the social status even tourists, while said to be threatening to face negative rating, because tourism practitioners to charge tourists to do something. Representative speech acts tourism practitioners showed positive and negative face of the threat rating. The threat rating resulting positive advance has selected and presented information in a certain way. Information and atmofield given tourism actors probably not worthwhile for travelers. Meanwhile, negative face threats due to tourism agents to charge something to the traveler. . Commissive speech acts tourism practitioners also showed the risks or threats to advance travelers. Commissive speech acts threaten positive face rating, because tourism practitioners make assumptions about the wishes, preferences or even the needs of travelers. In addition, the speech act commissive tourism practitioners also considered a threat to face negative rating, because tourism practitioners to impose themselves in the future to perform certain actions that will affect travelers. Third, the practice of sanctions. To determine the language of sanctions's Hospitality practice of analyzing the follow-threatening face, because virtually every speech acts or threats pose a risk to advance. Analysis of language sanctions of hospitality practice is based on the proposition of speech acts to acts threatening advance. Empirically, sanctions of hospitality language indicated e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 24 by the impression (gaze) rating of the speech act in the service interaction as speech acts rude or impolite or unfriendly (hospitable), even aggressive. In contrast, informal tourism practitioners tend to follow patterns of face-saving positive. This shows the awareness of tourism practitioners have a positive face face against the wishes of tourists. Tourism practitioners use hospitality to show awareness of the positive face in order to be able to accept each other travelers. Awareness-face with committing a face-saving positive interaction of hospitality service is called positive hospitality. In practice, tourism practitioners have the awareness to reduce the threat advance. To find ways (strategies) to reduce the threat advance tourism agents, done by analyzing lingual units tourism practitioners in the speech related to a face-saving. The analysis showed that the formal tourism practitioners tend to follow patterns of negative face-saving. This shows the formal tourism practitioners tend to use face of hospitality as awareness of the negative rating. In other words, tourism practitioners want to give freedom to the travelers to obtain the services according to the wishes or needs. Advance awareness of tourism actors to commit acts of rescue in the face of negative interactions of hospitality service is called negative hospitality. The study's findings about the hospitality language in the field of tourism support research Purnomo (2011) entitled Politeness Strategies and Levels in Tourism-Service Language in Surakarta Residency. Previous research only describe the phenomenon of language tourism services in tourist guiding, whereas this research in addition to describe, e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 25 pattern, and gave new concept, to study a specific politeness in the discipline of linguistics and tourism study. The findings advance the concept of practice in the field of tourism are presented in the following chart. Bagan 3 Facework in Tourism Field Conclusions Based on the results of research, discussion, and the findings presented in the previous chapter, the language of the study of hospitality language in the field of tourism: facework, we can conclude three things. 1) The structure of the hospitality language in the field of tourism includes three cluster structures, namely (1) the structure of significance in the form of setting (2) the structure of domination be participants in the form of control over people and of the goods or the economy, and (3) the structure of legitimacy in the form of interest said; 2) The system hospitality language in the field of tourism includes three cluster system is the means-between include (1) the schemata of interpretation in the form of a e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 26 sequence of actions and how to take action, (2) the schemata facilities such as means of speech, and (3) the scheme norms form norms of interpretation and norms of interaction; 3) Practice advance in the field of tourism is represented in three groups of interaction, namely: (1) the practice of communication in the form of speech acts expressive, directive, representative, and commissive, (2) the exercise of power in the form of follow-threatening face (3) practices sanctioned acts of rescue advance. Empirically, facework realized in the entity wishes to be free (negative face) and received (positive face). In essence, the companies are more aware of hospitality to travelers face. The new finding of this study is the concept of positive hospitality indicates a positive awareness of tourism practitioners to tourists’ positive face and awareness of tourism practitioners to tourists’s negative face called positive hospitality. e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 27 References Austin, J. 1975. How to Do Things with Words (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Bargiela-Chiappini, F dan Haugh, M. 2009. Face, Communication and Social Interaction. London: Equinox _______________. 2003. Face and politeness: New (insights) for old (concepts). Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1453–1469. Brown, P. dan S. Levinson. 1978. Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena. Dalam Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction. Ester N Goody: Cambridge University Press. _____________________. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. New York: Cambridge University Press Bublitz, W & Norrick, N.R. 2011. Foundations of Pragmatics. Berlin/Boston : Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG Creswell, J.W.2009. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Third Edition. London: SAGE Cummings, L.2009. Pragmatik. Sebuah Perspektif Multidisipliner. Terj. Eti Setiawati dkk. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar Derrida, J. 2000. Of Hospitality, Anne Dufourmantelle invites Jacques Derrida to respond. Stanford: Stanford University Press Gil, J.M. 2012. Face-Threatening Speech Acts and Face-Invading Speech Acts: An Interpretation of Politeness Phenomena. International Journal of Linguistics. ISSN 1948-5425 2012, Vol. 4, No. 2400 www.macrothink.org/ijl 70 2012. [cited 2012 Nov.15]. Available from URL: www.pasosonline.org Goffman, E. 1955. On facework: an analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. Psychiatry: Journal for the Study of Interpersonal Processes, 18, 213-231. _________. 1967. Ritual Interaction. Essay on Face-To-Face Interaction. Penguin Book http://www.macrothink.org/ijl http://www.pasosonline.org/ e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 28 _________. 1995. On the face work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction. Face to Face Interaction. Middlesex: Penguin Giddens, Antony. 1984.The Constitution of Society, Berkley: University of California Press Gunarwan, Asim. 2004. Dari Pragmatik ke Pengajaran Bahasa (Makalah Seminar Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia dan Daerah). IKIP Singaraja Hymes, D. 1996. Ethnography, Linguistics, Narative Inequality: Towards an Understanding of Voice. London: Routledge Lubis, A.Y. 2014. Postmodernisme: Teori dan Metode.Jakarta: PT RajaGrafindo Persada Levinson, C. 1983. Pragmatics. London:Cambridge University Press. Lofland, J., dkk. 2001. Handbook of Ethnography. London: Sage Lind dan Solomonson . 2013. Using pragmatic concepts for exploring interactivity in service encounter. An International Journal on Information Technology, Action, Communication, and Workpratices Vol.7 (2013) No. 2 halaman 205- 226 Mahsun. 2005. Metode Penelitian Bahasa: Tahapan Strategi, Metode, dan Tekniknya.Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada. Milroy, L dan Gordon, M. 2008. Sociolinguistics: Method and Interpretation. Willey- Blackwel. Miles, M.B., dan Huberman, A.M. 1994. Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Nadar, F.X. 2009. Pragmatik dan Penelitian Pragmatik. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu Purnomo, B. 2010. Politeness Strategies and Levels In Tourism-Service Language in Surakarta Residency. Register, 3 (2). pp. 65-101. ISSN 1979-8903 Priyono, B. Herry. 2003.Anthony Giddens: suatu pengantar. Cetakan kedua. Jakarta:Kepustakaan Populer Gramedia Ritzer, G dan Douglas, G.2008 Teori Sosiologi: Dari Teori Sosiologi Klasik Sampai Perkembangan Mutakhir, terjemahan Nurhadi. Yogyakarta: Kreasi Wacana. Rahardi, Kunjana. 2009. Sosiopragmatik.. Jakarta: PT Gelora Aksara Pratama http://eprints.stainsalatiga.ac.id/15/ http://eprints.stainsalatiga.ac.id/15/ e-Journal of Linguistics Support DOAJ Directory Open Access Journal http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol Vol. 11. No. 1. January 2017 ISSN: 2442-7586 (Online) ISSN: 2541-5514 (Print) Page: 11--29 Accreditation:-- 29 Spradley, J.P. 1997. Metode Etnografi.Pent. Misbah Zulfa Elisabeth. Yogyakarta: Tiara Wacana Searle, J. R. 1965. What is a speech act?, in Philosophy in America, M. Black (ed),221- 239.118 Srisuruk, P. 2011. Politeness and Pragmatic Competence in Thai Speakers of English Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Education, Communication and Language Sciences Newcastle University Solon, dkk. 2013. Cross-Cultural Negotiation: Touristic Service Encounters in Yucatán, Mexico dalam Proceedings of the 15th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium. Cascadilla Proceedings Project. Yule, G. 1996. Pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press