118 EEJ 13 (1) (2023) 118-127 English Education Journal http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej The Implementation of Politeness Strategies in Showing Disagreement Among the Communicative Members Anis ‘Azzah, Januarius Mujiyanto Universitas Negeri Semarang Article Info ______________ Article History: Accepted 20 September 2022 Approved 11 January 2023 Published 15 March 2023 ______________ Keywords: Politeness, politeness strategies, disagreement ______________ Abstract _______________________________________________________ Politeness is an essential aspect of interlanguage pragmatic study used to create a harmonious relationship among people who engage in specific interactions. Politeness is implemented differently in showing disagreement regardless of cultural background. This study was used to analyze the implementation of politeness strategies in showing disagreement by the students. In this study, the researchers applied descriptive qualitative research. The subjects in this study were 20 students, all non-native speakers, who joined the CEC club at UIN Salatiga. The data was taken from the students’ utterances of the politeness strategies used to show disagreement. Also, the data was analyzed using the theory of politeness strategies by Brown and Levinson (1987) In collecting the data, the researchers used a discourse completion test (DCT) questionnaire, which gave 5 (five) topics. The results showed that the students applied all politeness strategies with different percentages. Positive politeness is implemented for 73%, bald on record 18%, negative politeness for 5%, and off record 2%. Positive politeness is the most dominant strategy in showing disagreement. Besides, the sub-strategy in positive politeness also applied by the students are exaggerating, intensifying interest in the hearer, avoiding disagreement, presupposing, offering, being optimistic, including both the speaker and the hearer, giving or (asking for reason) and assuming or asserting reciprocity. In conclusion, politeness strategies are essential to convey a different opinion from the interlocutors. Correspondence Address: Kampus Pascasarjana unnes, semarang, Jl. Kelud Utara III Semarang 50237 Indonesia E-mail: azzahanis1996@gmail.com p-ISSN 2087-0108 e-ISSN 2502-4566 Anis ‘Azzah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 118-127 119 INTRODUCTION Politeness is an essential aspect in interlanguage pragmatic study used as an interpersonal relation system to reduce friction in interaction (Yule, 1996). It means that politeness creates a harmonious relationship among people who engage in specific interactions. Therefore, politeness must be learned and practiced in communication to minimize potential conflict and confrontation. Most studies have characterized politeness as carefully avoiding conflict or creating harmonious social bonds (Watts, 2003). Politeness plays an essential role in creating good social interactions. Politeness has an impact on communication. A pleasant conversation can be facilitated by being attentive to the other person's face. A negative face is a desire to be free or independent from others, whereas a cheerful face is a desire to be desired by others. Face- threatening activities (FTA), sometimes referred to as improper etiquette, should be avoided by the speaker and hearer by using appropriate strategies, including positive politeness (addressing other people's cheerful face), negative politeness (addressing other people's negative face), bald on record (going without redress), off the record (going indirectly) (Brown & Levinson, 1987). According to Lakoff (1973), politeness is a set of socially constructed behaviors that evolved to ease conflict in interpersonal interactions. It can be interpreted that politeness is a control in acting and speech act in communication. Yule (1996) said politeness is the technique used to demonstrate awareness of another person's face. In this sense, being polite is possible at a social distance and closeness. Politeness helps us to avoid conflict that happens in daily life. Indeed, every person with a regional multicultural background has different strategies when communicating with others (Surjowati, 2021; Muhlenbernd et al., 2020). Therefore, it is essential to understand the norm of politeness and apply it well when talking with others. Referring to Brown and Levinson (1987), Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) can endanger both positive and negative faces when they occur in communication. Every group member has the desire for at least some of the things he desires to be appealing to others. Brown and Levinson (1987) also mention four strategies the speakers use when encountering Threatening Acts (FTA) to the hearer: first, baldly on record. Second, positive politeness, an appeal to solidarity towards others, is how to make the hearer feel good about values shared by people. Next, there is negative politeness, which is an effort to demonstrate awareness without being forced, i.e., to avoid interfering with the interlocutor's freedom of action by utilizing, among other things, hedges and apologies. Fourth, off-record is the use of utterances not directly addressed to another. Concerning politeness strategies, people communicate with each other with different purposes, and they use politeness strategy in specific contexts and contain. In the conversation, people use language depending on the interlocutors and situations. Politeness strategies positively increase the speaker and the hearer's interaction. Unfortunately, not all the speakers and the hearers positively respond when they argue about something in the conversation. In casual conversation, people sometimes need to realize what politeness strategies they use in communicating with the interlocutor. Several studies have been conducted on politeness strategies in EFL classrooms focused on classroom interaction. The research by Khusnia (2017), Rejeki et al. (2019), and Rahayuningsih et al. (2020), one of the research showed that the use of politeness strategies gives good value in the EFL classroom. They investigated politeness strategies used by the students and teachers in EFL and their effect after applying this strategy. The result explained that implementing politeness strategies in the EFL classroom build positive values for the students, such as positive utterances in giving opinion and students avoiding the direct expression of disagreement. Applying politeness strategies in the classroom can form a positive character for students. Anis ‘Azzah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 118-127 120 Next, the previous study conducted by Sulistyaningsih et al. (2021) investigated negative politeness in casual student conversations. They found that the students used negative politeness to redress the addressee's negative face. So, when the speaker wants to say something, they use negative politeness to avoid and minimize the threat to the hearer's negative face. It is different from this study because it focuses on all of the politeness strategies. Then, a previous study by Nurrahmah et al. (2020) analyzed types of politeness strategies realized between Indonesian student debaters and Malaysian student debaters in delivering their arguments from a YouTube debate competition. The study stated that most student debaters used a positive politeness strategy and sub-strategy of positive politeness in delivering their argument. They explained that positive politeness is a more appropriate strategy for giving opinions. Another study by Sibarani and Marlina (2018) found that positive politeness is the most popular positive politeness strategy in YouTube videos. It means that positive politeness is also applied in presidential debates without considering the power status of the interlocutor. Then, when we build to communicate with others, we may be interested in something other than the interlocutor's opinion or ideas. We will disagree if we do not justify the interlocutor's words. A disagreement indicates the different points of view between the speaker and the hearer. Disagreement threatens the hearers' cheerful face, defined as the need to be accepted and liked by others because the speaker neglects the hearers' feelings and wants. Sornig (1977) asserted that utterances and claims are how disagreement manifests itself. Disagreement expression is an expression that can threaten the hearer's face. The speaker uses it if the speaker does not agree or is not interested in an argument or point of view from others. According to Wu (2006), as cited in Liew (2016), disagreement expresses opposition to an initiator explicitly or implicitly. It means that disagreement expression can also be defined as the hearers' responses about something they have an idea or opinion different from the speakers. Based on Brown and Levinson's theory, power, distance, and rank of imposition (severity) are three characteristics that influence the choice of linguistic markers of dispute. Then, there were several studies have been conducted on disagreement. First, the study by Farrokhi et al. (2017), using the speech act of disagreement in English and Farsi novels, looked into how face-saving strategies suggested by Brown and Levinson (1987) were used by interlocutors with differing power relations. They analyzed English and Farsi novels to find an act of disagreement and were categorized using the taxonomy proposed by Rees-Miller (2000). The result showed that bald-on-record strategies were the most frequently employed when disagreeing in English novels. They explained that the power status of the interlocutors will decide the choice of politeness strategies. Studies by Luo et al. (2021) explore gender differences in Chinese senior high school students' use of disagreement strategies. Then, study by Khammari (2021) explored the strategies of disagreement and hedging devices used by native speakers of English. This study found that positive politeness was dominant with higher and equal-status interlocutors (father, teacher, and friends). The respondents also saved the cheerful faces of their interlocutors, regardless of their social distance and power. Other studies investigated speech act in disagreement strategies used by a non-native speaker of English delivered by Sharqawi et al. (2019) and Kristian et al. (2022). This study explored some differences that might appear between cross-sex conversations (male-female) in power status. The results indicated that male and female were concerned about the power status of the interlocutor and tried to apply the appropriate strategies while expressing their disagreement; the female was more cautious and used different strategies than males. Studies by Khammari (2021) also investigated the speech act of disagreement among Tunisian non-native students and American native speakers. This study compares the acts of non-native informants and native Anis ‘Azzah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 118-127 121 informants. It proved that there were significant differences between native and non-native speakers of English in the frequency of direct and indirect strategies of disagreement. As we know, disagreement is one of the most exciting speech acts in the EFL context since speakers can express the opposite view to the interlocutors (Song, 2020). There are several reasons for choosing this topic. First, in reality, some people use the act of disagreement without paying attention to the hierarchical status. Second, some people assume that disagreement shows a negative expression because the act of disagreement threatens the interlocutor's face (Xu, 2017). Generally, disagreements are seen as undesired and disliked reactions and may cause discomfort. Therefore, we as speakers or interlocutors need to avoid or mitigate disagreement in interaction. Based on the description above, according to the researchers, knowing and analyzing the politeness strategies in showing disagreement without seeing the power status during conversations such as with friends is necessary. From the explanation above, there are several benefits expected from this research. First, this study explains the members of the CEC support the implementation of bald-on-record strategies in showing disagreement. Theoretically, it can be helpful for the speakers to say their argument or idea without minimizing the threat to their interlocutor's face. Pedagogically, the result of this study will provide an overview to educators about bald-on-record strategies and help speakers create good communication with others. It also helps the reader gain an understanding of bald-on-record strategies. Practically, this study can help the speakers provide clear directions in showing their disagreeing. Second, this recent study explains that the members of CEC support the implementation of positive politeness in showing disagreement during the conversation. Theoretically, the findings showed that this strategy creates a good relationship, although the speakers have different ideas. Pedagogically, this strategy builds a closer relationship between the students without seeing the power status. This research showed that this strategy makes students confident to express their disagreement. Third, this recent study explains that the members of the CEC support the implementation of negative politeness during conversation. The findings help to make the students aware that politeness strategies are essential in communicating and interacting with others to avoid friction and to save the interlocutor's face to build closeness. Pedagogically, this study may help the speaker to keep distance in showing disagreement. Practically, this research can help the speaker minimize coercion when conversing with their interlocutors. Fourth, this recent study explains that the members of CEC support implementing off- record strategies during conversations. The findings are expected to increase the linguistic knowledge of the pragmatic field in general and give an understanding of the off-record strategies. This strategy may help the interlocutors give more than one interpretation of the speaker's utterances. Practically, this study can help the speakers avoid some potential to threaten the interlocutor's face when showing disagreement. METHOD The study was descriptive qualitative research. It aims to determine the implementation of politeness strategies used by the students in showing disagreement. The student's utterances were the object of this study. The statistics on student conversations that demonstrated disagreement were included in the transcription. It means that the data was presented as words rather than numbers. As a result, they were included in the qualitative data category. The research participants were 20 students, all non-native speakers of the CEC club from UIN Salatiga. The transcriptions of the recorded conversations between the students served as the study's data. Meanwhile, the object of this research was the types of politeness strategies implemented by the students during the conversation. Anis ‘Azzah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 118-127 122 There were several stages in collecting the data, including recording the peer students' conversations in which the researchers provided five topics and took turns asking for opinions on the topics provided. There are 5 (five) topics in DCT questionnaires about childfree, high rank in class, juvenile delinquency, government in Indonesia, and beauty privilege. Every conversation was recorded for more or fewer than fifteen minutes. Then, the researchers transcribed the data based on the conversation. In making the theoretical transcription, the students and the interiors using codes (S1), (S2), and the students' utterances in showing disagreement were replaced by using codes such as S2.1.1 (it means the students as the speakers (S2) used bald on record strategy as strategy 1 and non- minimization of the FTA as sub-strategy 1. Furthermore, the step in analyzing the data was that the researchers initially transcribed the conversation's audio recording before beginning to analyze the data. Then, classified the data according to Brown and Levinson's (1987) politeness strategies to identify it. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS This section presents the findings and discussion of the present study. Specifically, it presents the implementation of politeness strategies used by students to show disagreement. Several differences were found in the students' politeness strategies in the use of politeness strategies in showing disagreement. The differences in using politeness strategies can be seen in the table below: According to Figure 1, the bald on record strategy got 18%, positive politeness at 73%, negative politeness at 5%, and off the record at 2%. It shows that 73% of all topics were dominated by positive politeness. According to Brown and Levinson (1987: 66), "positive politeness should be the most important value in showing disagreement" since "disagreement threatens the positive face of the hearer." Positive Politeness In showing disagreement, positive politeness is utilized in 73% percent of conversations. The interaction between those with close relationships with their friends, relatives, and parents represented as students made this percentage the greatest. Then, several strategies are used to develop positive politeness. The findings about the dominance of positive politeness usage support the results of previous investigations. Nurrahmah, Rukmini, and Yuliasri (2020) report that they mainly used positive politeness in delivering arguments between Indonesian and Malaysian debaters in the 2018 World Schools Debating Championship (WSDC). They tried to make harmony in their utterances. Table 1. Distribution of the Strategies in the Implementation of Positive Politeness Strategy TOPIC 1 2 3 4 5 F f f f f Exaggerate 0 2 1 0 0 Intensify interest to the hearer 0 1 0 0 1 Avoid disagreement 1 2 3 0 1 Presuppose 2 3 4 1 2 Offering 0 0 1 0 1 Be optimistic 5 1 3 4 1 Include both the speaker and the hearer 1 0 2 0 1 18% 73% 5% 2% Politeness strategies in showing disagreement Bald on record Positive politeness Negative politeness Off-record Figure 1. The Implementation of Politeness Strategies Anis ‘Azzah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 118-127 123 Strategy TOPIC 1 2 3 4 5 F f f f f Give (or ask) reasons 4 2 7 8 4 Assume or assert reciprocity 3 3 0 3 0 TOTAL 26 14 21 16 11 The table above shows that the students used eight sub-strategies for each of the topics in the DCT questionnaires. The first topic used a total of sub-strategy 26 times, the second used 14 times, the third used 21 times, then four topics 16 times, and the last used 11 times. Giving (or asking) for reasons becomes the most popular strategy to show their argument. An example is given below: S1: Childfree is interpreted as a choice to live without having children after marriage. Some people decide not to have a child because they believe child-free is an effective way to suppress overpopulation. So what do you think about it? S2: Ok Umar. So I think it is childfree; I do not agree because it can reduce the population if someone decides to be a childfree. (Recording 4) (S2.2.13) The utterances above in the utterance ‘So I think is the childfree, I don’t agree with childfree because if someone decide to be a childfree, it can reduce population’ included in give (or ask for) reasons. The speaker explained the disapproval of childfree. The speakers chose this strategy because they want to do FTA through criticism. For showing disagreement, this sub- strategy is needed between the speaker and the interlocutor because a refutation must be accompanied by supporting reasons so that the interlocutor can return to provide feedback. Close relationships reduce dangers to other people's faces and make it easier for people to communicate. Bald on record Bald on record is the second strategy used by the students in showing disagreement, 18% in total. Bald on record is implemented through non-minimization of the FTA. This strategy indicates that the face is neglected in situations with urgency or desperation and channel noise because the speaker and the listener are focused on things other than the face. It means that the speaker shows disagreement without noticing the interlocutor's faces because the speaker wants to emphasize that what the interlocutor conveys is invalid. Table 2. Distribution of the Strategies in the Implementation of Bald on record Strategy TOPIC 1 2 3 4 5 F F f f F Without minimizing the FTA 1 6 5 0 8 TOTAL 1 6 5 0 8 From the tables above, only topic 4 uses this strategy. An example is given below: S1: Do you agree that childfree is interpreted as a choice to live without having children after marriage? S2: Disagree because, in marriage, one of the purposes is to have children and renew offspring. (Recording 2) (S2.1.1) The utterances of disagreement by speaker 2 (S2) in 'marriage one of the purpose is to have children’ emphasizes that speakers take action without minimizing FTA because they want to give maximum efficiency to their speech. The utterance also has the potential to threaten the opposing face of the interlocutor. In this strategy, FTA is often carried out by giving attention through advice or warnings. A bald on record is the most direct form of etiquette and sends a clear message. When redemptive action is not required, it happens. Interactions between those in higher social positions and those in lower social positions, as Anis ‘Azzah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 118-127 124 well as between those in really close relationships, typically entail this. Negative Politeness Negative politeness is found in 5 % of total conversations. State the FTA as the most frequent strategy in the first topic. Both the speaker and the hearer use this strategy to show disagreement by stating some general social rules, regulations, or obligations that apply in their environment. It is stated emphatically that the opinion conveyed has objective evidence (Brown & Levinson, 1987). Table 3. Distribution of the Strategies in the Implementation of Negative Politeness Strategy TOPIC 1 2 3 4 5 F F F f f State general the FTA 4 0 0 0 0 Hedges 0 0 0 2 0 TOTAL 4 0 0 2 0 From the table above, it can be seen that there were two topics used in this strategy by the students. An example expression is given below: S1: "are you agree childfree is interpreted as a choice to live without having children after marriage?" S2: ”I disagree because in Islam, it is Sunnah to have sex with his wife seeking a reward from Allah” (Recording 1) (S2.3.8) From the utterance of disagreeing underlined above, the speaker (S2) is using this sub-strategy because he/she wants to fight against the interlocutor by declaring FTA as an applicable social rule. The utterance 'because in islam, it is Sunnah to have sex with his wife seeking a reward from Allah’ can also keep the negative face of the interlocutor said. Negative politeness, as opposed to positive politeness, aims to satisfy the harmful desires of the other person. This civility makes very few assumptions about the needs or desires of the listener. This politeness in showing disagreement between the speaker and the hearer is expressed by saving interlocutors (negative or positive) by reducing face-threatening acts (FTA). Off-record The least frequent is off-record. It is subtly found that 2% showed disagreement with the speakers. Off- record is considered the most deceptive strategy, leaving the listener to infer its true meaning. Table 4. Distribution of the Strategies in the Implementation of Off-Record Strategy TOPIC 1 2 3 4 5 f f f f f Overstate 1 0 0 0 0 Use metaphor 0 1 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 1 0 0 0 From the table above, two topics were used in this strategy, and two sub-strategies included overstating and using metaphors. An example is given below: S1: Ok Umar. How about childfree? It is interpreted as a choice to live without having children after marriage. Some people decide not to have a child because they believe child-free is an effective way to suppress overpopulation. How about you, Umar? S2: I disagree with this statement. Because if there is can be like last year, we have COVID-19, and that will eliminate most people on the earth, and then if have no generation, it will be the end of humans. (Recording 9) (S2.4.5) From the utterance above, the speaker disagrees with the interlocutor's statement about child freedom. In the utterance 'if there is can be like last year we have covid and that will be eliminating some most people of the earth and then if have no generation, it will be the end of the human’ the speaker expresses an opinion excessively by exaggerating the situation from the truth. The most evasive and vague form of courtesy is off the record. If someone both the speakers or the interlocutors show disagreement Anis ‘Azzah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 118-127 125 but they want to do the FTA and avoid responsibility, they can do this politeness. From the data above, the researchers tries to compare her findings with the previous studies by Asghar et al. (2021) entitled "EFL learners politeness strategies in the expression of disagreement." The findings reveal that EFL learners and native speakers apply the same types of politeness devices but with varying frequency. EFL learners are more direct in the expression of disagreement as compared to British speakers. Native speakers use more mitigating devices to soften the impact of disagreement. By applying Brown and Levinson’s (1987) model of politeness in this study, it has been found that native speakers performed FTA off the record. Natives are more indirect in their expression than EFL learners. They use more implicit expressions than EFL learners, who are more inclined towards the bald-on-record strategy, which is the most direct strategy of disagreeing. Second, Nurrahmah et al. (2020) conducted research entitled “The use of politeness strategies by Indonesian VS Malaysian student debaters in the 2018 World Schools Debating Championship (WDBC)”. They discovered that most student debaters delivered their points well using positive politeness. The debaters identified four different types of politeness tactics. The majority of Indonesian debaters employed sub-strategies of positive politeness. This study used sub-strategies of positive strategies to persuade the opposing team to agree with their understanding, safeguard opinions when the opposition team presented arguments clearly, and keep the listener's disposition upbeat. This research has a similar final finding to Nurrahmah, Rukmini, and Yuliasri (2020), which shows that positive politeness is the most used by the student debater. Third, by analyzing positive politeness used in Republican Debate by Donald Trump, Sibarani and Marlina (2018) found that Donald Trump only employed three politeness strategies during the Republican debate. Positive politeness is the most well-known politeness strategy. This study concluded that Donald Trump primarily employs positive politeness strategies when he speaks in Republican Party debates. In other words, Donald Trump wants to show closeness to the interlocutors and the audience. This research has a similar final finding to Sibarani and Marlina (2018), which shows that positive politeness is the most used by Trump in the Republican debate. Fourth, Windika (2019) stated that the most common politeness strategy is negative politeness. This study found that female and male respondents tended to use negative politeness strategies when expressing disagreement. This research is similar in topic and theory used in analyzing data. This study also analyzes politeness strategies and disagreement using the theory by Brown and Levinson (1987). In other words, negative politeness is used to show disagreement in the Indonesian context. Fifth, Sembiring and Sianturi (2019), entitled "Politeness strategies in EFL classroom context: avoiding future conflict and maintaining Diversity Harmony."The outcome demonstrates that the students used the four categories of politeness methods in their responses to situations involving averting conflict and maintaining harmony. The four categories are the bald on-record strategy, positive strategy, negative strategy, and off-record strategy. According to this study, it is often used to state things clearly and briefly. Both words and deeds should be courteous. In other words, politeness is a form of building character. This research is similar in analysis and politeness strategies, although different strategies. According to the explanation above, the researchers support Nurrahmah, Rukmini, and Yuliasri's and Sibarani and Marlina's research final results. The researchers concurred with other studies that politeness is the most successful and polite method. It can be connected to Brown and Levinson's theory. Brown and Levinson (1987, p. 70) said that positive politeness is centered on the hearer's positive face, self-image, and persistent desire that his wants (or the action, acquisition, value, or result resulting from them) should be considered desirable. As a result, people use positive politeness the most frequently in their daily interactions to maintain their self- Anis ‘Azzah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 118-127 126 image. Positive politeness is not just for people who are well acquainted but also for new acquaintances or strangers. In other words, positive politeness is a strategy to become closer between the speaker and the interlocutor in communication. CONCLUSION The study's findings and analysis lead to the conclusion that students employ all of Brown and Levinson's (1987) civility techniques to express their disagreement. There were four types of politeness: bald on record (18%), positive politeness (73%), negative politeness (5%), and off-record (2%). Then, this study discovered the majority of students displayed positive politeness strategies in showing disagreement. The majority of the students also used sub-strategies of positive politeness such as exaggerating, intensifying interest in the hearer, avoiding disagreement, presupposing, offering, being optimistic, including both the speaker and the hearer, giving (or asking) for reasons, and assuming or assert reciprocity. Future research may also draw on the findings of this study by repeating a similar study with different speech acts, such as observing politeness strategies when expressing regret, agreement, and request. REFERENCES Asghar, S. A., Ranjha, M. I., & Yasmin, S. (2021). EFL learners ' politeness strategies in the expression of disagreement. Palarch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt. Brown, P., Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language use. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3(8), 597–606. Farrokhi, F., & Arghami, M. (2017). A contrastive study of politeness strategies in disagreement among characters with different power relations in English and Farsi novels. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7(8), 657–669. Khammari, H. (2021). Disagreeing in Tunisian Arabic: A Politeness and Pragmatic Study. International Journal of Linguistics and Translation. Khammari, H. (2021). Strategies and mitigation devices in the speech act of disagreement in American English. Studies in Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis, 2(1), 26 – 39. 10.48185/spda.v2i1.243 Khusnia, A.N. (2017). Politeness strategies in EFL classroom: building positive values in students. Advances in Social Science, Education, and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), 109. Kristiyanti, R., Ratnadewi, D., & Wijaya, A. (2022). Disagreement Strategies of Madurese Senior High School and College Graduates. New Language Dimensions, 3(1), ISSN: 2746-8968. Lakoff, R. (1973). The logic of politeness in J.D. Johansen and H. Sonne, (Ed.), Pragmatics and Linguistics. Odense: Odense University Press. Liew, T.S. (2016). Comparison of agreement and disagreement expressions between Malaysian and new headway course books. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 12(1), 20–36. Luo, W., & He, H. (2021). Gender differences in Chinese Senior High School students’ use of disagreement strategies. International Conference on Education, Humanity and Language, Art. ISBN: 978-1-60595-137-9. Muhlenbernd, R., Wacewicz, S., & Zywiczy’nski1, P. (2020). Politeness and reputation in cultural evolution. Linguistics and Philosophy, 44, 1181–1213. Nurrahmah., Rukmini, D., & Yuliasri, I. (2020). The use of politeness strategies by Indoensian vs Malaysian student debates in the 2018 World Schools Debating Championship (WSDC). English Education Journal, 10(3), 282 – 291. Rahayuningsih, D., Saleh, M., & ... (2020). The realization of politeness strategies in EFL teacher-student classroom interaction. English Education Journal. Rees-Miller. J. (2000). Power, severity, and context in disagreement. Journal of Pragmatic, 32(8), 1087. Anis ‘Azzah & Januarius Mujiyanto./ English Education Journal 13 (1) (2023) 118-127 127 Rejeki, S. (2019). Politeness strategies performed by EFL learners with English native speakers in medical students. Humaniora, 10(1), 41-46. Sibarani, J.G., & Marlina, L. (2018). Politeness strategy used in Republican debate by Donald Trump. E-Journal of English Language and Literature, 7(4). Sulistyaningsih, E.F., Mujiyanto, J., & Widhiyanto, W. (2021). The use of negative politeness strategies in casual conversation among the Graduate program students. English Education Journal, 11(2), 228-236. Surjowati, R. (2021). Politeness strategies are used by students with regional multicultural backgrounds. Journal of Literature and Language Teaching, 12(1), 112-135. DOI: 10.15642/NOBEL.2021.12.1.112-135 Sembiring, E.M., & Sianturi, S. (2019). Politeness strategies in EFL classroom context: avoiding future conflict and maintaining the harmony of diversity. The Journal of Ultimate Research and Trends in Education, 1(3), 105-111. Song, P. (2020). Disagreement: A speech act analysis and classroom implications. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, 6(6), 24-35, ISSN: 2455-8028. Sornig, K. (1977). Disagreement and contradiction as communicative acts. Journal of Pragmatics, 347–374. Sharqawi, M.A., & Anthony, E.M. (2019). Analyzing the speech act of disagreement produced by Iraqi EFL learners: a gender study. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, 7(2), 118-131. Watts. R. J. 2003. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Windika, W. (2019). An analysis of politeness strategies of disagreement: The case of students of English Education Study Program in one state Islamic University in Sumatera. Edukasi: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pengajaran. Xu, L. (2017). Disagreement studies reviewed and my coy disagreements. Studies in English Language Teaching, 5(4), 2372-9740. Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics.Oxford: Oxford. University Press.