The particular dialect or language that a person chooses to use on any occasion is called a code 2697 Copyright © 2024 The Author IDEAS is licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0 License Issued by English study program of IAIN Palopo IDEAS Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) Volume 12, Number 2, December 2024 pp. 2697 - 2723 Frames, Perspectives, and Mental Spaces in the Case of Criminal Humiliation on Social Media (Complaint-Based Offense) within the Legal Jurisdiction of South Sulawesi: A Forensic Linguistics Investigation Deni Ferdiansa1, Sailal Arimi2 E-mail: deniperdiansyah2000@mail.ugm.ac.id , sailal_arimi@mail.ugm.ac.id 1,2 Master of Linguistics, University of Gadjah Mada, Sleman, Special Region of Yogyakarta Received: 2024-09-30 Accepted:2024-12-31 DOI: 10.2456/ideas. v12i2.5637 Abstract This study is based on the linguistic expressions used by (NH) addressed to (NA) which allegedly contain insult-type hate speech on Instagram. These linguistic expressions were brought into the legal domain and reported to the Directorate of Special Criminal Investigations, Sub-Directorate V of Cybercrime, Regional Police of South Sulawesi and categorized as a complaint-based offense. This study employs forensic linguistic investigation with the support of cognitive linguistics, aiming to analyze the framing, perspectives, and mental spaces within the linguistic expressions of the reported party (NH) and to determine whether these expressions constitute hate speech in the form of insults. This is a descriptive qualitative study using secondary data obtained from Evidence (E) and Investigation and Interrogation Reports from investigators at the Directorate of Special Criminal Investigations (Ditreskrimsus) of the Regional Police of South Sulawesi, Makassar City. This study reveals six types of frames used by NH to insult NA, including the frame of Islam, sin, prostitute, insult, threat, and insinuation. Based on perspective analysis, three viewpoints were identified: the perspective of the reported party (NH), the complainant (NA), and the investigators (police). The reported party (NH) engaged in hate speech in the form of insults by utilizing perspectives based on identity (religious and personal identity), accusations, and comparisons. Mental space analysis was conducted on four linguistic expressions, yielding two concepts from the blending of mental spaces: the concept of a prostitute and the concept of contradiction. Based on these analyses along with the utterances of seven pieces of evidence with (14) linguistic expressions, it is http://u.lipi.go.id/1457703302 mailto:deniperdiansyah2000@mail.ugm.ac.id mailto:sailal_arimi@mail.ugm.ac.id Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2698 concluded that the linguistic expressions used by (NH) against (NA) have been proven to violate the Electronic Information and Transaction (ITE) Law No. (19) of 2016, Article 27 Paragraph (3) and the Indonesian Criminal Code on defamation as stipulated in article (310) and article (311). Keywords: frame, perspective, mental space, humiliation, forensic linguistic Introduction In such a digital era, language usage is rapidly expanded and massively distributed through social media. As an open, free, and flexible interactive space, social media holds great potential for fostering various criminal activities. One such activity that can be disseminated through language is a language crime. Language crime can be understood as a form of criminal activity, conducted either orally or in writing, that can damage someone's reputation or attack their dignity, potentially inciting unrest, commotion, and widespread hatred (Ferdiansa 2022). One form of language crime that can spread through social media is hate speech. The phenomenon of hate speech is viewed as a linguistic expression stemming from the mind of the speaker. Human linguistic expression can be manifested in various forms, such as conveying praise, happiness, disappointment, sadness, or even anger which can manifest as hate speech. Linguistic expressions in the form of hate speech represent one type of language crime. (Sholihatin 2019) classifies hate speech into five categories including fake news (hoaxes), incitement, threats, insults, and defamation. All these actions have specific intentions, leading to discrimination, violence, loss of life, and/or social conflict. From a legal perspective, the Indonesian government has regulated cases of hate speech, as outlined in Laws No. 19 of 2016 concerning Electronic Information and Transaction (ITE), particularly in Articles 27(3) and (4), Article 28, Article 29, and in the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP). One of the most common forms of hate speech on social media is insults. In Indonesia's Criminal Code, offenses related to insults are regulated in Articles 310– 321 (Moeljatno 2007). All crimes listed under these provisions are considered report-based crimes (Soesilo 1995). According to (Maryanto, Agus, and Juliana 2021) the aspects of insults can be proven through lexical features such as words with harsh connotations, references to human genitalia or any body parts considered sensitive, comparisons to animals, curse words, or any terms carrying negative meanings. A branch of linguistics that has the ability to contribute to the handling of insult cases on social media is forensic linguistics. In forensic linguistic analysis, language can be used as evidence of crime (language as legal evidence) (Susanto and Nanda 2020). Forensic linguistics is a branch of applied linguistics that examines material related to legal cases. It applies IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2699 linguistic expertise to legal language data (Mahsun 2018). This definition aligns with (McMenamin and Choi 2002) view that forensic linguistics is the scientific study of language applied to forensic purposes and legal statements. Similarly (Olsson 2008) notes that forensic linguistics, as a discipline, applies linguistic knowledge—such as grammar, conversation, discourse analysis, cognitive linguistics, and speech acts—to analyze linguistic evidence, employing techniques like descriptive linguistics, including phonetics, phonology, lexicon, syntax, and semantics. From these definitions, it is concluded that forensic linguistic analysis requires the support of other linguistic subfields, both micro-linguistic and macro- linguistic. In the investigation and resolution of language-related criminal cases, forensic linguistic analysis is considered more effective than traditional legal approaches. The discipline of forensic linguistics is capable of thoroughly analyzing and exploring language used as evidence in a crime (Tis’ah 2022). Neither the ITE Law nor the Indonesian Criminal Code specifically outline the linguistic elements that can be categorized as criminal acts of defamation. Through the application of scientific linguistic methods, forensic linguistics is expected to assist in the investigation and resolution of legal cases involving language as evidence (Sholihatin 2019). Therefore, through detailed linguistic analysis, legal cases can achieve greater legal certainty. One branch of linguistics that can contribute to the application of forensic linguistic analysis is cognitive linguistics. This field studies language in relation to the human mind. From the perspective of cognitive linguistics, language does not emerge in a vacuum. Linguistic expressions are the primary focus of cognitive linguistic studies. These expressions reflect the cognition of the speaker or a group of speakers. Cognitive linguistics focuses on how language interacts with human mental processes. This approach seeks to understand how knowledge, perception, and experience influence the way humans use and understand language. Simply put, cognitive linguistics can be understood as a branch of linguistics that examines language in relation to the mind of its speaker or the society in which it is spoken (Arimi 2015). One of the subfields of cognitive linguistics includes frame, perspective, and mental spaces analysis. These three analyses can assist in the investigation and resolution of cases involving linguistic expressions as evidence. Below is an explanation of the concepts of frame, perspective, and mental spaces. According to Fillmore (Evans & Green, 2009), a frame is a schematic representation or framing. Terminologically, a frame is the amalgamation of various experiences (knowledge structures) that are represented at an individual’s level of understanding and remain in memory for a long time. Simply put, a frame can be referred to as background knowledge, which plays a role in shaping an individual’s way of thinking (Lakoff, 2010). This frame connects elements and Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2700 entities associated with a scene or concept that is culturally embedded in human experience. Moreover, (Lee, 2005) states that linguistic expressions do not occur in isolation but are always underpinned by background knowledge. (Lee, 2005) explains that the concept of a frame does not focus on the meaning of a word but on the concept behind the word to understand it. For example, the word ‘uncle’ only makes sense in the context of general kinship relations. Specifically, the word ‘uncle’ is associated with terms such as father, mother, aunt, and so on. These terms share the same framework, but they have different meanings. This universal framework is what is referred to as the frame that encapsulates certain words. The concept of a frame has implications for language selection. When a new frame emerges, existing words are often transferred into new domains, leading to changes in meaning (Lee, 2005). Therefore, frames significantly influence human thought processes. Perspective can be simply understood as a viewpoint or outlook. Perspective refers to how one views an event or incident with an emphasis on the participants involved. Langacker, as cited in (Musayyab & Arimi, 2020), states that the concept of perspective has two inseparable aspects: opinion and orientation. Opinion refers to the viewpoint from which something is represented, while orientation is the specific representation of a particular object. (Arimi, 2015) also adds that one of the features that helps interpret the meaning of a sentence is perspective. Perspective focuses on prioritizing one particular element. Not all linguistic constructions can be restructured or reversed from the perspective view. Mental space refers to a non-visual space encoded through linguistic indicators such as metonymy, presupposition, imagery, estimation, and hypothesis. This concept of mental space exists in every language, but the encoding of its construction is specific to the culture and collective mindset that influence it (Arimi, 2015). Similarly, (Fauconnier & Turner, 2003) argue that mental space is a set of conceptual domains built as a person thinks and speaks, serving as a foundation for understanding and acting. Thus, there are source domains, target domains, and blended domains communicated through linguistic indicators. To clarify this, consider the following examples of linguistic expressions: (1) Chairil Anwar is on the top bookshelf (2) Melbourne refuses to apologize to Jakarta for the wiretapping incident. In expression (1), Chairil Anwar does not represent the physical human being, but rather the concept (representation) of his books. Entity X is represented by entity Y, a phenomenon known as metonymy. Similarly, in expression (2), the city of Melbourne represents the country of Australia, and Jakarta represents the concept of Indonesia. These examples show how text is treated as a text, which is IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2701 then connected to the reality imagined in the minds of the speaker and listener (Arimi, 2015). In the legal jurisdiction of South Sulawesi, reports of defamation cases on social media have significantly increased. Based on data obtained from the Directorate of Special Criminal Investigations Sub-Directorate V Cybercrime, South Sulawesi Police, Makassar, indicate that over the past two years specifically in 2022 and 2023, the number of reported insult or defamation cases has continued to rise. In 2022, 86 cases were received by investigators. This year considered to be the one with the highest number of reported insult cases compared to previous years. In 2019, there were 16 reports; in 2020, 37 reports; in 2021, 56 reports; and in 2023, 59 reports. Moreover, for the first time in 2022, some cases were resolved through restorative justice. Restorative justice is an alternative approach to resolving criminal cases, shifting the focus from punishment to dialogue and mediation involving the perpetrator, victim, their families, and other related parties. This approach aims to find a fair resolution and restore the situation to its original states (Arafat 2017). According to data from the Directorate of Special Criminal Investigations Sub- Directorate V Cybercrime, South Sulawesi Police (2024), the number of insult or defamation cases handled through restorative justice in 2022 was 16 cases, and in 2023, there were 24 cases. In this study, the author selected one case as a research sample, analyzed using forensic linguistics and cognitive linguistics. The case analyzed is one that was reported in 2022 and resolved through restorative justice. The case involved a complaint filed by the plaintiff (NA) against the defendant (NH). This case occurred on the social media platform Instagram, where NH, the reported party, made insulting statements toward NA, the complainant. The case was reported under the violation of the ITE Law Article 27(3) of 2016 (Pemerintah 2016). Based on the previous explanation, the concepts of frame, perspective, and mental space are three key frameworks used to uncover the meaning behind linguistic expressions in the field of cognitive linguistics. These concepts can be applied to reveal the criminal motives behind the linguistic expressions uttered by (NH). Frame analysis will identify the underlying knowledge structures that influenced (NH) in forming and conveying the defamatory message. The concept of perspective consists of two inseparable aspects: opinion and orientation. Opinion refers to the viewpoint from which something is represented, while orientation refers to the specific representation of a particular object. Additionally, the concept of mental space functions to decode language indicators by identifying the source domain, target domain, and blended domain that the reported party (NH) attempted to convey in the defamatory statement directed at (NA). By employing forensic linguistic investigation with the aid of Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2702 cognitive linguistic analysis, this study will analyze the linguistic expressions from the evidence (BB) in the form of defamatory statements made by (NH), as the reported party, towards NA, the complainant. The following are several studies referenced by the author in this research. First, the study conducted by (Musyayyab and Arimi 2020), which examined perspectives and frames in expressions of apology in the discussion of Indonesia Lawyers Club "50 Years of G30S/PKI: Should the State Apologize?" using a cognitive linguistic approach. The results of the study showed that the perspective on the discourse of apology was realized by prioritizing the subject of linguistic expressions, including perspectives with the subject being the families and alleged PKI members, the Indonesian Army (TNI AD), and the organizations of NU and Muhammadiyah. Second, the study on frames conducted by (Priambodo 2021), which examined frames and ideal cognitive models in the dialogue between Bu Tejo and Yu Ning in the film Tilik. Third, research conducted by (Warami 2022) which used a forensic linguistic approach, focused on the legal jurisdiction of West Papua. The data in question were linguistic data, including Investigation and Interrogation Report (BAP) and physical evidence obtained from Teluk Bintuni Police, West Papua. The results of the analysis revealed that forensic linguistics served as strong evidence in legal decisions, considering linguistic features and their alignment with legal facts to unravel the types of crimes in texts, contexts, and interactions between two or more parties in language-related offenses. Fourth, (Warami 2021) also conducted a similar study which analyzing language crimes occurring on Facebook within the legal jurisdiction of Monokowari. Fifth, (Arimi and Adelawati 2024) analyzed the legal case involving Ahmad Dhani for defamation using a forensic linguistic approach. Sixth, research conducted by (Nurhidayah 2019) which focused on data regarding insults, specifically analyzing the case of an insult against General Gatot Nurmantyo, Commander of the Indonesian National Military (TNI), by the actress Nikita Mirzani on Twitter. Based on the background and literature review above, the following are the research questions proposed in this study. First, how can the frame of the linguistic expressions of the reported party (NH) be analyzed? Second, how can the perspective of the linguistic expressions of the reported party (NH) be analyzed? Third, how can the mental space of the linguistic expressions of the reported party (NH) be analyzed? The objectives of this study are to determine the results of the frame, perspective, and mental space analysis of the linguistic expressions of the reported party (NH). The theoretical contribution of this research is to provide new knowledge in the field of linguistics, particularly in cognitive linguistics, as a supporting tool in analyzing disputed language cases in the legal domain. Practically, this study can strengthen legal efforts to handle language crimes in the IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2703 legal jurisdiction of South Sulawesi. Additionally, this research is expected to benefit legal professionals, such as investigators, lawyers, judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement officers, by facilitating the implementation of laws or regulations related to criminal insults on social media. Based on the literature review and the research questions posed, this study offers several novel contributions. First, no previous research has utilized linguistic expressions or disputed linguistic data as legal material (complaint offense) in the field of cognitive linguistics. Second, most forensic linguistic research typically employs semantics and pragmatics as auxiliary sciences in the analysis of language- related criminal cases. Therefore, the novelty of this research lies in the application of a different approach by using cognitive linguistics as the auxiliary science. This new paradigm offers a fresh perspective in understanding language- related criminal cases, an area that has not been explored in prior research. Cognitive linguistic analysis allows us to comprehend that language is deeply influenced by the speaker’s cognition. By employing cognitive linguistics as an analytical tool, this study can delve deeper into the meaning formed and processed in an individual's mind. This approach goes beyond traditional semantic and pragmatic analysis, which tends to focus on explicit meaning or immediate context. By incorporating elements of cognitive frames and the conceptualization of mental spaces, this research provides a more powerful tool for understanding the speaker’s intent. This paradigm allows for the identification of hidden motives from the reported party, which are manifested through defamatory language. Such motives can be identified in a linguistic event and its expressions. The novelty of this method not only enriches the body of forensic linguistic studies but also provides deeper and more specific insights for judges, investigators, and lawyers in handling future language-related criminal cases. Method This research is categorized as descriptive qualitative research, employing a case study approach with language as legal evidence. The data used in this research are secondary data, which are obtained indirectly by the researcher through intermediaries such as other people, institutions, or document (Sugiyono 2019). The secondary data in this study consist of physical evidence submitted by NA (the plaintiff) to the investigators in Sub-Directorate V of Cyber Crime, the Directorate of Special Criminal Investigations (Ditreskrimsus) of the South Sulawesi Regional Police. Additionally, the documents provided by the investigators include the chronology of events and the Investigation and Interrogation Report (BAP). The data collection technique used in this study is the Simak Bebas Libat Cakap (TSBLC) technique. This technique was chosen because the researcher did not participate directly in the formation or emergence of the data (Sudaryanto Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2704 2015). The process involves observing the evidence presented by the investigators, with the researcher playing no role in the creation of the data. In this technique, the researcher is only involved as an observer of the linguistic event, without direct involvement in the data formation (Kesuma 2007). The linguistic data observed consists of written sources. The follow-up technique employed is the note-taking technique. This technique involves capturing data by recording the results of the observations on data cards (Kesuma 2007). The researcher records or transcribes all utterances from the reported party that have been submitted as evidence by the complainant. The transcription is done precisely, without any additions or omissions, ensuring that the data faithfully reflects the real evidence and the Investigation and Interrogation Report (BAP) as presented by the investigators. This process adheres to the ethical guidelines set by Sub-directorate V of Cyber Crime, Directorate of Special Criminal Investigations (Ditreskrimsus) of the South Sulawesi Provincial Police. Below is a description of the case to be analyzed. Table 1. Case Identity Case Status Year The Plaintiff The Accused Investigator (Restorative Justice) 2022 NA NH KOMPOL ABDUL RASJAK, S.Sos., M.H. IPDA RUSMIN NURYADIN, S. Sos. The case was reported to the South Sulawesi Police on September 20, 2022, at 13:00 (WITA), with the incident occurring on September 19, 2022. In the case to be analyzed, there are nine pieces of evidence submitted by the plaintiff (NA) and handed over to the investigators. Out of these nine pieces of evidence, seven contain utterances suspected of defamation directed by NH (the accused) towards NA (the plaintiff). Therefore, the data analyzed in this study is taken from seven pieces of evidence. Each of these seven pieces of evidence contains linguistic expressions. To facilitate data identification and recognition, the author has coded the pieces of evidence as E1 to E7 (Evidence 1–7) and the Linguistic Expressions as LE. The steps of data analysis in this study are as follows: (1) reviewing and observing the data presented by the investigators from the case involving (NA); (2) recording or transcribing the utterances of the accused (NH) taken from the evidence (E) IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2705 submitted by (NA) to the investigators; (3) transcribing or identifying the data; (4) classifying the data based on frame, perspective, and mental space; (5) analyzing and describing the data according to the research questions established; (6) concluding the results of the analysis. The classification of a frame is based on determining the underlying concept of a word. A word is believed to have larger key components, and it is this concept that is explored and referred to as a frame. The identification of a frame does not focus on the meaning of the word itself, but rather the underlying concept behind it. Furthermore, perspective classification is divided into three categories: the reported party or subject (NH), the reporting party or object (NA), and the investigator (police). The perspective analysis is focused on the reported party or subject (NH). Lastly, mental space analysis uses a system of conceptualization involving three domains within a linguistic coding: the source domain (X), the target domain (Y), and the blended domain (Z). By examining the combination of the target and source domains, the blended concept that the speaker attempts to communicate through linguistic expression becomes apparent Results Analysis of Frame, Perspective, and Mental Space Frame From the seven pieces of evidence analyzed, consisting of fourteen (14) linguistic expressions uttered by the accused (NH) to the plaintiff (NA), which allegedly contain defamatory elements. Out of the fourteen (14) linguistic expressions, six types of frames were identified in NH's utterances: the frame of Islam, the frame of sin, the frame of prostitute, the frame of insult, the frame of threat, and the frame of insinuation. The following is the description and analysis of the six types of frames identified. The Frame of Islam Table 2. The Frame of Islam Data Code Linguistic Expression Translation E1, LE1 “Itu to saya heranka sm orang skrng Tidak pernah di pusingi tp ya allah sembarang mami na pusingiki. Drpd prgko pusingi orang mending pergimo sholat nah berhijab jko tu e Hijab di luar dalam nya aw” “I’m confused by people nowadays. I never interfere in their business, yet they still trouble themselves over me. Instead of worrying about me, why don’t you go pray? After all, you wear a hijab. You wear a hijab for show, but inside, a Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2706 whole different story” E3, LE3 “Berhijab+pendiam,Tapi aslinya NAUDZUBILLAH” “Wears a hijab and acts reserved, but the reality, NAUDZUBILLAH (May God protect us from this)” E4, LE1 “Kalau sama2 jki pendosa jgn mko urusi urusannya orang!” ”If we are both sinners, don’t meddle in other people's business” E4, LE2 “Setidaknya tidak pernahka minta makan di kau di cantik klara Yang paling berhijab yg anak kuliahan tapi dalam nya seperti iblis” ”At least I’ve never asked you for food, oh lovely Klara. The one who’s always in a hijab, a university student, but inside, like the devil” Chart 1 (The Frame of Islam) Based on Table (1), four linguistic expressions with the frame of Islam were found, and Chart (1) identified six lexemes as indicators of this frame. These linguistic expressions were uttered by (NH) as statements containing hate speech, a type of defamation. The frame of Islam used by (NH) incorporates words such as (Allah, prayer, hijab, wearing hijab, Na'udzubillah, sinner). The word "Allah" refers to the name of the deity believed in by adherents of Islam. The word "shalat" (prayer) refers to the obligatory worship carried out by Muslims. The word "hijab" refers to a cloth worn to cover the face or head of Muslim women, thereby concealing their bodily features (aurat). "Na'udzubillah" is a prayer said by Muslims, meaning "we/I seek refuge in Allah from evil things." According to the sixth edition of the online KBBI, the word pendosa (sinner) refers to someone who The Frame of Islam Allah Shalat Hijab Wearing a Hijab Naudzubillah Pendosa IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2707 commits sin. In this case, the accused (NH) acknowledged that both he and the plaintiff (NA) are equally sinful before religion and God. Therefore, out of the four linguistic expressions uttered by (NH), the frame of Islam was used as a basis of knowledge to defame (NA) by attacking the religious identity held by the plaintiff. The Frame of Sin Table 3. The Frame of Sin Data Code Linguistic Expression Translation E3, LE1 “Lebih parah kyknya aib mu deh tapi cukup orang2 dkt sj tau” “It seems like your disgrace is worse, but it’s only known by those closest to you” E3, LE2 “Ress dong cantik. Masa bisaki ceritai aibnya orang tp tdk bisaki balas sgku! Mau gre melapor di polisi hahaha Kau ga yg malu atau saya! Fikir2 mmg i si cantik klara”. “Relax, darling. You can expose other people’s secrets, but you don't respond to my Snapgram! Are you reporting me to the police, hahaha? Who’s embarrassed here—you or me? Think about it, darling Klara” The table above shows two linguistic expressions framed using the frame of sin. The word used to represent "sin" is aib (disgrace). Aib refers to a sense of shame stemming from mistakes, flaws, or blemishes. It occurs when someone's actions or behavior contradict the social or moral norms prevalent in society. Aib can arise from a variety of behaviors, ranging from minor errors to serious transgressions, and often elicits deep feelings of shame or regret in the person experiencing it. The Frame of Prostitute Table 4. The Frame of Prostitute Data Code Linguistic Expression Translation E1, LE3 “PIALA BERGILIR JKO ZAY SI CANTIK KLARA” ”You’re just a ‘revolving trophy,’ aren’t you, lovely Klara?” E5, LE1 “Makanya jadi cewe jangan terlalu salimara! Semua org nah cht! Nah adaji je nmrku di kau @andinunuu_ “ ”That’s why, as a girl, you shouldn’t go around too much. You chat with everyone. You have my number, don’t you? @andinunuu_” Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2708 Chart 2 (The Frame of Prostitute) From the table and chart above, two linguistic expressions were uttered by the accused (NH) towards the plaintiff (NA). The frame used by NA is "prostitute." This is evidenced by two linguistic units employed by NA, including the phrases piala bergilir and salimara. Piala bergilir (rotating trophy) is a conceptual metonymy used by NA to label NH as a woman who is passed around like a rotating trophy. The concept of a rotating trophy, which is possessed or obtained for a certain period, is equated with the concept of a prostitute, who is shared or used by multiple men in succession for a certain duration. The second linguistic unit used as a frame for the prostitute concept is the word salimara. Salimara is a term in the Makassar language meaning a wild woman or a woman who frequently roams around. Based on these two linguistic expressions, it is evident that the accused (NH) defamed the plaintiff (NA) by using the prostitute frame. The Frame of Insult Table 5. The Frame of Insult Data Code Linguistic Expression Translation E2, LE1 “We sundala @andinunuu_ Temanan wa jki to. Knp sembarang skali mu cht orang. Terlalu munafikko zay. Lebih hancur jko aslinya!!!! Sok caperko sm org lain nah adaji nmrku di kau setan!!!” “Hey, sundala @andinunuu_, we’re WhatsApp friends. Why are you carelessly chatting with others? You’re such a hypocrite, zay. You’re even worse in real life! Always seeking attention from others when you already have my phone number, you devil!!!” E5, LE2 “Diam2 di luar dalamnya seperti anu bussu! “ “Appears calm on the outside, but inside, rotten to the core” E7, LE1 “Assue sok cantikmu deh telang eja, bussunya itu sombongmu. eww” “You bitch think you’re pretty, huh? Red vagina, rotten smell. Eww.” E4, LE2 “Setidaknya tidak pernahka minta makan di kau di cantik klara Yang paling berhijab yg ” At least I’ve never asked you for food, oh lovely Klara. The one who’s always in a hijab, a Prostitute Piala Bergilir Salimara IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2709 anak kuliahan tapi dalam nya seperti iblis” university student, but inside, like the devil” Chart 3. The Frame of Insult According to the table and chart above, three linguistic expressions were uttered by the accused (NH) towards the plaintiff (NA). The frame used by NA is "insult." (Wijana 2004) explains that, in terms of reference, the system of insults in Indonesian can be classified into various categories: state of being, animals, objects, body parts, kinship, supernatural beings, activities, professions, and exclamations. Several words were identified from these three linguistic expressions that represent insults, which include sundala, munafik, hancur, setan, caper, assue, telang eja, sombongmu, bussu, and iblis. According to their references, the words that represent "state of being" are munafik (hypocrite), hancur (destroyed), and bussu (rotten). "Profession" is represented by the word sundala, which in the Makassar language derives from sundal, meaning prostitute or a woman who offers her body to men. "Body parts" are represented by the linguistic units telang eja and sombongmu. The phrase telang eja consists of two words, telang and eja. In the Makassar language, telang means a woman’s genitalia, and eja means red. Thus, this phrase refers to "a woman’s red genitalia." "Animals" are The Frame of Insult Sundala Profession Munafik State of Being Hancur State of Being Setan Supernatural Beings Iblis Supernatural Beings Caper Activities Assue Animals Telang Eja Body Parts Sombongmu Body Parts Bussu State of Being Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2710 represented by the word assue, derived from asu, meaning dog or puppy. Lastly, "supernatural beings" are represented by the words setan (devil) and iblis (Satan). Based on the analysis and classification of the insult frame, it can be concluded that the accused (NH) used an insult frame to defame the plaintiff (NA) on social media. The Frame of Threat Table 6. The Frame of Threat Code Linguistic Expression Translation E1, LE2 ”mau melapor di polda? Silhkan sayang. Samaji blng mu jerumuskan dirimu jg” ”You’re going to report to the police? Go ahead, sweetheart. You’re just digging your own grave.” From the table and chart above, there is one linguistic expression uttered by the accused (NH) towards the plaintiff (NA). The frame used by NA is the frame of threat. This threat was issued by the accused (NH) to intimidate the plaintiff (NA). The threat frame is conveyed through the use of the word Polda (Regional Police). Additionally, NH also stated the consequences of this threat, implying that if NH files a report with the Polda, it would mean implicating themselves. The Frame of Insinuation Table.7 The Frame of Insinuation Code Linguistic Expression Translation E6, LE1 “Lucunya ini anak.” “This one’s funny” E6, LE2 “Dia ceritai orang giliran di kobbik kembali prg melapor. Mulut singa mental kerupuk” “She talks about others, but when it’s thrown back at her, she runs to report it. A lion’s mouth, but a brittle mentality” Based on the table above, two linguistic expressions were uttered by the accused (NH) towards the plaintiff (NA). These linguistic expressions were derived from Evidence Item 6. The frame used by NA is that of an insinuation. The insinuation is conveyed through the word lucunya (funny). Here, NH expressed the insinuation in the form of an illocutionary act. What NA implied by saying NH was funny did not genuinely mean so; rather, NA was mocking NH’s behavior, subtly ridiculing it. Moreover, the second linguistic expression was also derived from Evidence Item (6), where NH used an insinuation by employing the idiom mulut singa mental kerupuk (lion’s mouth, brittle mentality) and the negative statement "Dia ceritai orang, giliran di kobbik kembali, dia pergi melapor” (She talks about IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2711 others, but when it’s thrown back at her, she runs to report it). Perspective Perspective of the Accused (NH) a. Revealing the Identity of the Object (Plaintiff) Table. 8 Perspective of the Accused Highlighting the Identity of the Plaintiff Code Linguistic Expression Translation E4, LE1 “Kalau sama2 jki pendosa jgn mko urusi urusannya orang!” ”If we are both sinners, don’t meddle in other people's business” E7, LE1 “Assue sok cantikmu deh telang eja, bussunya itu sombongmu. eww” “You bitch think you’re pretty, huh? Red vagina, rotten smell. Eww” From the table above, two linguistic expressions can be identified that reveal the identity of the object of NH’s utterances as the accused. The object in this case is the victim (the plaintiff), namely NA. From NH’s perspective as the accused, the identity of NA as the plaintiff can be inferred from these two linguistic expressions. NH seems to suggest that, as fellow sinners, NA has no right to interfere in NH’s matters. This utterance presents the perspective that NH acknowledges being a sinner and advises NA not to meddle in NH’s affairs. Furthermore, in the second piece of data, NH attempts to attack NA’s personal identity, as evidenced by the emphasis on the object through the use of the enclitic -mu in the words cantikmu (your beauty) and sombongmu (your arrogance). NH’s perspective is highly subjective and not supported by strong arguments, rendering these utterances vulnerable to legal scrutiny. b. Accusation Table. 9 Perspective of the Accused in the Form of Accusation Code Linguistic Expression Translation E2, LE1 “We sundala @andinunuu_ Temanan wa jki to. Knp sembarang skali mu cht orang. Terlalu munafikko zay. Lebih hancur jko aslinya!!!! Sok caperko sm org lain nah adaji nmrku di kau setan!!!” “Hey, sundala @andinunuu_, we’re WhatsApp friends. Why are you carelessly chatting with others? You’re such a hypocrite, zay. You’re even worse in real life! Always seeking attention from others when you already have my phone Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2712 number, you devil!!!” E3, LE3 “Berhijab+pendiam, Tapi aslinya NAUDZUBILLAH” “Wears a hijab and acts reserved, but the reality, NAUDZUBILLAH (May God protect us from this)” E3, LE1 “Lebih parah kyknya aib mu deh tapi cukup orang2 dkt sj tau” “It seems like your disgrace is worse, but it’s only known by those closest to you” E4, LE2 “Setidaknya tidak pernahka minta makan di kau di cantik klara Yang paling berhijab yg anak kuliahan tapi dalam nya seperti iblis” ” At least I’ve never asked you for food, oh lovely Klara. The one who’s always in a hijab, a university student, but inside, like the devil.” According to the table above, four linguistic expressions are identified that illustrate the accusations made by NH towards NA. In (E2, LE1), NH accuses NA of being a prostitute, a hypocrite, and like a demon. In (E3, LE3), NH accuses NA of behaving poorly and not acting in accordance with the norms of a Muslim woman wearing a hijab. In (E3, LE1), NH accuses NA of having a disgrace worse than NH’s. In (E4, LE2), NH accuses NA of behaving like a demon. As a sample analysis in (E3, LE3), the utterance “Lebih parah kyknya aib mu deh tapi cukup orang2 dkt sj tau “(Your disgrace is probably worse, but it’s only known by those closest to you) can be found. In this sentence, two main structures contribute to the overall meaning: the comparison of disgrace and the limitation on the dissemination of information. The use of the word "Sepertinya" (Probably) indicates uncertainty or the speaker's subjective opinion, suggesting that the statement is relative rather than absolute. The clause "aib milikmu lebih parah" (your disgrace is worse) implies an evaluative scale in which “aib” (disgrace) is perceived as a negative attribute, with “lebih parah” (worse) emphasizing a higher degree of severity. The conjunction “tetapi” (but) connects two contrasting propositions, namely the acknowledgment of the severity of the disgrace with the limitation of the information to only “close people.” IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2713 c. Comparison Table. 10 Perspective of the Accused in the Form of Comparison Code Linguistic Expression Translation E5, LE2 “Diam2 di luar dalamnya seperti anu bussu! “ “Appears calm on the outside, but inside, rotten to the core” From the table above, four linguistic expressions illustrate a comparison made by NH about NA. NH holds the perspective that NA’s true nature differs from the outward appearance. According to NH, NA may seem quiet on the outside, but this does not reflect their true character. The Perspective of the Plaintiff (Object) From the perspective of NA as the plaintiff (object), they object to all linguistic expressions that have been distributed on the Instagram social media account of (NH). Therefore, (NA) brought this case to the legal realm and submitted it to the police. The Perspective of the Investigator (Police) This case falls under the category of a complaint-based offense, which means it can only be prosecuted if there is a complaint from the interested party. The legal formulation of complaint-based offenses can be found in several articles of the Indonesian Criminal Code and the 2016 ITE Law. Therefore, the police are obligated to handle this case objectively. Mental Space The mental space analysis in this study involves mapping concepts between the target domain (Y), the source domain (X), and the blended space (Z), which represents the integration of elements from both domains (target and source). Out of the fourteen Linguistic Expressions (LE) obtained from the evidence (E), only four could be analyzed using the mental space framework from a cognitive linguistic perspective. Below is the mental space analysis of these five Linguistic Expressions. Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2714 Table.11 Linguistic Expression in the Analysis of Mental Space Code Utterance Translation E1, LE1 “Hijab di luar dalamnya aw” “Wears a hijab for show, but inside, a whole different story” The utterance above is taken from Evidence 1 (E1) and Linguistic Expression 1 (LE1). Below is the analysis of the source domain, target domain, and blended space (the combination of the two domains). Blended Space In the blended space, the concept of "menggunakan hijab di luar" (wearing a hijab externally) and "berkelakuan buruk di dalam" (behaving badly internally) is represented by an insinuation using the interjection "aww." When these two domains are combined, they form a new understanding that reveals the contradiction between a person's outward appearance and their internal behavior. The hijab, which usually symbolizes morality and purity in the source domain, when brought into the target domain, demonstrates that a good outward appearance does not always reflect good inner behavior. This blended space highlights the duality or inconsistency between a person's public image and private actions. Blended Space Target Domain (behaving badly) Source Domain (behaving well, devout, and polite) IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2715 Table.12 Linguistic Expression in the Analysis of Mental Space Code Utterance Translation (E1, LE3) “PIALA BERGILIR JKO ZAY SI CANTIK KLARA” “You’re just a ‘revolving trophy,’ aren’t you, lovely Klara?” The utterance above is taken from Evidence (1) and Linguistic Expression (3). Below is the analysis of the source domain, target domain, and blended space (the combination of the two domains). Blended Space The blended space between the source domain "piala bergilir" (a revolving trophy) and the target domain "pelacur" (prostitute) combines elements from both concepts to create a new meaning that critiques or describes a social phenomenon. In the source domain, "piala bergilir" (a revolving trophy) refers to a prize or award that is passed from one winner to another, symbolizing something that is competed for or shared by multiple parties. Meanwhile, in the target domain, "pelacur" (prostitute) refers to an individual, typically a woman, who provides sexual services to various clients. When these two domains are blended, the image of a prostitute treated like a revolving trophy emerges, someone who is "shared" or "used" by many people in turn. Furthermore, like a revolving trophy that is held for a set period, the concept of a prostitute also involves being "used" for a specific duration. Blended Space Target Domain (prostitute) Source Domain (a revolving trophy) Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2716 Table.13 Linguistic Expression in the Analysis of Mental Space Code Utterance Translation E6, LE2 “Dia ceritai orang giliran di kobbik kembali prg melapor. Mulut singa mental kerupuk” “She talks about others, but when people talk about her, she runs to report it. A lion’s mouth, but a brittle mentality” The utterance above is taken from Evidence (6) and Linguistic Expression (2). The mental space analyzed in the linguistic expression above involves the phrase” mulut singa, mental kerupuk” (lion's mouth, brittle mentality). Below is the breakdown of the target domain, source domain, and blended space from the utterance. Blended Space The idiom "mulut singa” (lion's mouth) adopts the concept of a lion roaring loudly in the forest, often being noisy when hunting its prey. "Mental kerupuk” (Brittle mentality) adopts the concept of a cracker that easily breaks or becomes stale. The understanding derived from combining these two concepts is that the accused (NH) is conveying that the plaintiff (NA) is merely noisy like a lion, but in reality, they possess a cowardly, weak, and fragile mentality, much like the nature of a cracker. Blended Space Target Domain (cowardly/weak/fragile mentality) Source Domain (talks a lot) IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2717 Table.14 Linguistic Expression in the Analysis of Mental Space Code Utterance Translation E3, LE3 “Berhijab+pendiam, Tapi aslinya NAUDZUBILLAH” “Wears a hijab and acts reserved, but the reality, NAUDZUBILLAH (May God protect us from this)” The utterance above is taken from Evidence (3) and Linguistic Expression (3). Below is the analysis of the source domain, target domain, and blended space (the combination of the two domains). Blended Space By integrating elements from the target and source domains, the blended space in this case creates an image of an individual whose appearance (wearing a hijab and reserved) evokes expectations of piety and gentleness. However, the behavior of the reported party sharply contrasts with this public image. This is evidenced by the use of the phrase naudzubillah, which in Islamic teachings is employed to indicate something highly negative or shocking, contradicting the initial expectations of the reporting party. Legal Implications Based on the analysis of frames, perspectives, and mental spaces through the examination of seven pieces of evidence containing 14 linguistic expressions, it can be concluded that the utterances made by (NH) against (NA) clearly have legal implications. The linguistic expressions used by (NH) have violated Law No. 19 of 2016 on Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE), particularly Article 27, Paragraph 3. The reported party (NH) has openly transmitted or distributed a written statement or electronic document containing elements of defamation Blended Space Target Domain (behaving badly) Source Domain (the true character or personality of someone who is veiled and reserved) Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2718 and/or slander. The elements of hate speech are met since the defamation was carried out on Instagram; a social media platform witnessed by others. Additionally, the evidence also shows a violation of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP) regarding Defamation (Chapter XVI), particularly Articles 310 and 311, which are categorized as complaint offenses. It is important to emphasize that forensic linguistic analysis does not determine guilt or innocence in a trial or investigation process; it merely assesses the involvement and roles of the parties in a case involving the use of language. The determination of guilt is solely the decision of the judge in the judicial process (Tis’ah 2022). Discussion The presence of forensic linguistics can serve as both a consideration and a supporting instrument in analyzing criminal cases related to linguistic offenses. Linguistic analysis can assist investigators in resolving and concluding cases of defamation and slander. This is due to the limitations of investigators or law enforcement officers in identifying and interpreting hate speech on social media, as they lack linguistic expertise. Forensic linguistics applies scientific studies and linguistic methodologies to analyze linguistic data as evidence in legal contexts. Various aspects can serve as paradigms in case analysis, such as internal and external language factors. One branch of linguistics that can be applied is cognitive linguistics. In this research, cognitive linguistic studies focused on frame analysis, perspective, and mental space offer a comprehensive understanding of the linguistic expressions of the reported party. Through frame analysis, we can discern the underlying knowledge structure or framework that informs the production of the utterance. The analysis can reveal the subjective viewpoint and position of NH in conveying the insult, including how NH positions both themselves and NA in the interaction. Mental space theory aids in mapping various elements of the utterance within NH’s mind, both from the target domain and the source domain used. These three concepts can be applied by examining the linguistic expressions of the reported party. Therefore, this analysis offers an alternative approach or methodology for examining other cases of linguistic offenses This analytical model can provide deeper insights into linguistic expressions in digital spaces that have legal implications. For investigators, this type of analysis can be used to identify the background knowledge of the reported party, which can be traced through word choice, sentence structure, and spelling patterns. This helps narrow down the motives of the reported party and reveals the perspective used. For judges, analyzing evidence from a linguistic perspective can offer a more comprehensive and systematic explanation. Judges can consider the presence of this analysis as a basis for making or delivering a verdict. For lawyers, this analysis IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2719 can serve as a supporting component to either challenge or validate the authenticity and legality of linguistic evidence in the digital space. Furthermore, the presence of linguists or forensic linguistic experts is essential to educate and provide structured outreach to professionals working in the legal field. This can be achieved by introducing the forensic linguistic methodology in analyzing crimes, with a focus on language crimes both in and outside of the digital space. The forensic linguistic framework, supported by cognitive linguistics, can also be applied to other types of language-related crimes occurring in digital spaces, such as verbal abuse in the form of cyberbullying or harassment cases. In the future, forensic linguistic analysis can be expanded with the aid of technology. For example, a hate speech detection algorithm could be developed for application across various social media platforms. This algorithm would include linguistic identifiers (words, phrases, clauses, sentences) with legal implications and educational features that could provide netizens with insights into regulations governing language-related crimes in the digital space. Conclusion Based on the three research questions proposed including frame analysis, perspective, and mental space in the defamation case against NA by analyzing seven pieces of Evidence (E) and fourteen (14) Linguistic Expressions (LE), several conclusions can be drawn as follows. First, based on frame analysis, by examining the linguistic expressions uttered by the reported party (NH) toward the plaintiff (NA), which allegedly contain elements of defamation, six types of frames were identified in NH’s utterances which including The Frame of Islam, The Frame of Sin, The Frame of Prostitute, The Frame of Insult, The Frame of Threat, and The Frame of Insinuation. The Frame of Islam is represented by the linguistic units including Allah (god), shalat (prayer), hijab, wearing a hijab, and Naudzubillah. The Frame of Sin is represented by the word aib (shame). The Frame of Prostitute is represented by the linguistic units including piala bergirilir (revolving trophy) and salimara. The Frame of Insult is represented by the linguistic units including sundala, munafik (hypocrite), hancur (destroyed), setan (devil), caper (attention seeker), assue, telang eja, sombongmu (your arrogance), bussu, and iblis (demon). The Frame of Threat is represented by the word Polda (Regional Police). The Frame of Insinuation is represented by the idioms mulut singa, mental kerupuk (lion’s mouth, brittle mentality). Second, based on the perspective analysis of the case, three viewpoints were identified: the accused or subject (NH), the plaintiff or object (NA), and the investigator (police). The analyzed data were from the perspective of the accused Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2720 (NH), and various perspectives were used by NH to engage in hate speech, particularly insults, including identity perspective (religion and personal identity), accusation, and comparison. Third, based on the mental space analysis of four linguistic expressions, two concepts emerged from the blended space: the prostitute concept and the contradiction concept. The prostitute concept was conveyed through conceptual metonymy, equating it with piala bergilir (a revolving trophy). The contradiction concept was conveyed in two ways: (1) by highlighting the concept of a veiled and reserved woman who behaves poorly or immorally, and (2) by using the idiom "lion’s mouth, brittle mentality," which describes someone who is noisy like a lion but in reality, possesses a cowardly, weak, and fragile mentality, akin to a brittle cracker. Based on these three analyses—frame, perspective, and mental space— and by analyzing the utterances from seven pieces of evidence containing fourteen linguistic expressions through cognitive linguistic analysis, it can be concluded that the utterances made by (NH) toward (NA) violated the ITE Law, Article 27, Paragraph (3) of 2016, as well as the Indonesian Criminal Code concerning defamation under Article (310) and Article (311). Acknowledgement This article is a dissemination of Deni Ferdiansa’s thesis plan entitled "Criminal Acts of Defamation on Social Media in Complaint-Based Offenses in the Legal Jurisdiction of Sulawesi during 2022 and 2023: A Forensic Linguistic Study." The research was directly supervised by Dr. Sailal Arimi, M.Hum. In this opportunity, the author would like to express gratitude to Dr. Sailal Arimi, M.Hum., the lecturer of Cognitive Linguistics, who provided significant input, guidance, and supervision, allowing this article to be completed. He also posed different challenges to the author by encouraging the application of various approaches to analyze disputed language in legal cases using cognitive linguistic analysis. The author would also like to extend thanks to the LPDP (Lembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan) under the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia, which provided material support in the form of a scholarship and research funding for the thesis, enabling the author to successfully complete this research. Special thanks are also addressed to the investigators at Subdirectorate V Tipidisiber, Special Criminal Investigation Directorate (Ditreskrimsus) of the South Sulawesi Provincial Police, Makassar City, for their assistance in data collection. IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2721 References Arafat, Yasser. 2017. “PENYELESAIAN PERKARA DELIK ADUAN DENGAN PERSPEKTIF RESTORATIVE JUSTICE.” Borneo Law Review 1(2). doi: https://doi.org/10.35334/bolrev.v1i2.714. Arimi, Sailal. 2015. Linguistik kognitif: sebuah pengantar. Yogyakarta: Jurusan Sastra Indonesia, Fakultas Ilmu Budaya, Universitas Gadjah Mada : A.Com Press. Ar, N. A. E., & Syam, A. T. (2024). Increasing Students' Reading Skills Using Reading Box in Junior High School. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 12(2), 1249-1260. Arimi, Sailal, dan Munzila Adelawati. 2024. “Ahmad Dhani’s Legal Case: a Forensic Linguistic Study of Defamation.” SUAR BETANG 19(1):127–39. doi: 10.26499/surbet.v19i1.14995. Ferdiansa, Deni. 2022. “Jenis Ujaran Kebencian (Hate Speech) dalam Kolom Komentar Instagram Jokowi pada Masa PPKM: Analisis Linguistik Forensik.” Universitas Hasanuddin, Makassar. Ismayanti, D., Said, Y. R., Usman, N., & Nur, M. I. (2024). The Students Ability in Translating Newspaper Headlines into English A Case Study. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 12(1), 108-131. Kesuma, Tri Mastoyo Jati. 2007. Pengantar (Metode) Penelitian Bahasa. Yogyakarta: Carasvatibooks. Mahsun. 2018. Linguistik Forensik: Memahami Forensik Berbasis Teks dengan Analogi DNA. Depok: PT RajaGrafindo Persada. Masruddin, M., Amir, F., Langaji, A., & Rusdiansyah, R. (2023). Conceptualizing linguistic politeness in light of age. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 11(3), 41-55. Masruddin, Hartina, S., Arifin, M. A., & Langaji, A. (2024). Flipped learning: facilitating student engagement through repeated instruction and direct feedback. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2412500. Maryanto, B. H. Agus, dan Juliana. 2021. “ANTARA UJARAN KEBENCIAN DAN RESOLUSI DAMAI FORENSIK KEBAHASAAN ATAS KONFLIK SOSIAL DALAM MEDIA DARING.” Jurnal Forensik Kebahasaan 1(1):92–115. McMenamin, Gerald R., dan Dongdoo Choi, ed. 2002. Forensic linguistics: advances in forensic stylistics. Boca Raton, Fla: CRC Press. Ketut Setia Dewi, Komang Dian Puspita Candra The Illocutionary Acts Found in Main Characters’ Conversation of the Maleficent Movie 2722 Moeljatno. 2007. KUHP: Kitab undang-undang hukum pidana. Cetakan kedua puluh enam. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara. Musyayyab, Imam, dan Sailal Arimi. 2020. “Perspektif dan Frame Ekspresi Permintaan Maaf dalam Diskusi Indonesian Lawyers Club ‘50 Tahun G30S/PKI, Perlukah Negara Minta Maaf?’: Kajian Linguistik Kognitif.” Jurnal Bastrindo 1(2):124–39. doi: 10.29303/jb.v1i2.48. Nurhidayah, Nofika. 2019. “LINGUISTIK FORENSIK: KASUS PENGHINAAN PERHADAP PANGLIMA TNI JENDRAL GATOT NUR MANTOYO OLEH ARTIS NIKITA MIRZANI DI MEDIA SOSIAL TWITTER.” Prosiding Seminar Literasi IV 4(1):238–45. Olsson, John. 2008. Forensic linguistics. 2nd ed. London ; New York: Continuum. Pemerintah, Republik Indonesia. 2016. “Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 19 Tahun 2016 Tetang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 Tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik.” Priambodo, Marcelinus Justian. 2021. “Frame dan Model Kognitif Ideal Dialog antara Bu Tejo dan Yu Ning dalam Film Tilik.” Jurnal Bastrindo 2(1):35–44. doi: 10.29303/jb.v2i1.135. Sholihatin, Endang. 2019. Linguistik Forensik dan Kejahatan Berbahasa. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar. Soesilo, R. 1995. Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP) Serta Komentar- Komentarnya Lengkap Pasal Demi Pasal. Bogor: Politea. Sudaryanto. 2015. Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press. Sugiyono, Sugiyono. 2019. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta. Susanto, dan Deri Sis Nanda. 2020. “Dimensi Analisis Bahasa dalam Linguistik Forensik.” IJFL (International Journal of Forensic Linguistics) 1(1):17–22. doi: https://doi.org/10.22225/ijfl.1.1.1327.17-22. Subdit V Tipidisiber, Direktorat Reserse Kriminal Khusus (Ditreskrimsus) Polda Provinsi Sulawesi Selatan (2024). Tis’ah, Anhar Rabi Hamsah. 2022. Kejahatan Berbahasa (Language Crime). Tasikmalaya: Langgam Pustaka. Warami, Hugo. 2021. “KEJAHATAN BAHASA DI MEDIA SOSIAL PADA WILAYAH HUKUM MANOKWARI: KAJIAN LINGUISTIK FORENSIK.” IJFL (International IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2723 Journal of Forensic Linguistics) 2(1):19–26. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.22225/ijfl.2.1.2263.1-8. Warami, Hugo. 2022. “Kejahatan Bahasa di Wilayah Hukum Papua Barat: Kajian Linguistik Forensik.” Ranah: Jurnal Kajian Bahasa 11(1):76. doi: 10.26499/rnh.v11i1.2699. Wijana, I. Dewa Putu. 2004. “Makian Dalam Bahasa Indonesia: Studi tentang Bentuk dan Referensinya.” 16(3):242–51. doi: https://doi.org/10.22146/jh.1304.