Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 3 Number 1 March 2018. Page 60-71 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-8478 60 Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning is licensed under A Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International License. CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS ON IDEOLOGY OF FEMINISM IN NAWĀL AL-SA’ADĀWI’S MUDZAKKIRĀT THOBĪBAH Karlina Helmanita 1) , Emzir 2) , Zainal Rafli 3) 1) State University of Jakarta, Indonesia Email: karlina.helmanita@uinjkt.ac.id 2) State University of Jakarta, Indonesia Email: Emzir.unj@gmail.com 3) State University of Jakarta, Indonesia Email: zainal.rafli@gmail.com Abstract. The aim of this research is to carry out a critical discourse analysis on the ideology of feminism in the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah by Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī, through linguistic feature in the symbol of sound, vocabulary and text structure or the dialog contained in the novel. This research utilizes qualitative approach with content analysis method of Philipp Mayring. Data is collected by way of reading the novel, identifying, marking, classifying and interpreting meaning. The findings are 1) patriarchal sound symbols because of the existence of non (nir)-sound in Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī‟s Mudzakkirāt Thobībah linguistic feature. They can be identified as patriarchal because the text is commonly read by men due to minimum access of education for women. Women are illiterate and experience oppression in education. There is almost no information about women figure that become a linguist, scientists and including female scholars. 2) the inequality of antonym and synonym. The word relation and series word by word (word) is ideologically unequal. The words that are used for women are not culturally conditioned as a partner to men. 3) The hegemony of power in the structure of texts in the form of dialog among the characters. In the texts the harmonious and disharmonious dialogs are reciprocal. From the result of this research, the researchers recommend a newly designed curriculum for education to carry out advocacy for the awareness linguistic feminist education with the character of the East and Indonesia. Keywords: Ideology of feminism, sound symbol, sound, antonym-synonym, structure texts, Mudzakkirāt Thobībah I. INTRODUCTION Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) of this research is a continuation of Norman Fairclough (2001), Rebecca Rogers et.al. (2005), Theo van Leeuwen (2009:277), Renée Figuera (2010), and Shenila Khoja-Moolji (2014). According to Fairclough, Critical discourse analysis---henceforth CDA---is a textual study which connects language, power and ideology (Fairclough, 2001:23). According to Leeuwen ( 2009:277), the critical discourse analysis is within the discourse which plays a key role in guarding and legitimizing inequality, injustice and oppression within the society. Figuera (2010) utilizes critical discourse analysis through language to search the identity of white and afro American authors on an anonymous fictional story. Mooji argues the need for a new approach in analyzing texts on feminism, one of them is post- structuralism analysis. From the point of view of linguists above, the critical discourse analysis of this research is a continued effort to read and interpret the textual meaning in a post structural way on the text symbol of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah by Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī (2006). One of the post-structural approaches is the critical discourse analysis, which does not merely expose lingual problems but also the practice of social and cultural discourse. Thus in this http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ mailto:Emzir.unj@gmail.com Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 3 Number 1 March 2018. Page 60-71 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-8478 61 research the critical discourse analysis highlights the ideology of feminism through linguistic features in the symbolic form of sound, vocabulary and text structure by using the knife of socio linguistic analysis and social and cultural practices encompassing the text of the work of literature (Fairclough, 2001: 92-93). Therefore every vocabulary and series of dialogs in this novel becomes representation of language as social construction which positioned women language and men language differently, a social construction that has long been questioned by feminist linguist such as Cameron (1993, 1998), Coates (1998), Hedley (1992), Barzilai (1991), Gallaway and Bernasek (2004). But over the last two decades this discourse and social practices becomes silence, even in Indonesia this area of critical discourse analysis on literature texts becomes less progressive. Thus in this kind of condition, the researchers intend to fill the values of equality and lingual justice in the portrait of literary texts. Coates alerted that feminism has a strong impact in the area of linguistic and sociolinguistic (Coates, 1998: 195). In the area of linguistic, it relates to sexist language, a language which is perceived, uttered and written on the basis of designation of male and female language. While the sociolinguistic area considers that language is related with social class, distribution of jobs including among the sexes where female is classified as the second class. Unlike feminist exegesis and theology which are massive (Hidayatullah, 2009, 2011, 2014, 2016); (Seedat, 2013), (Pritchard, 2009), (Suyoufie, 2008), feminist linguistics which has conducted researches on the ideology of feminism is still a few, let alone linguistic education on feminism. Among the linguists who have conducted researches are Cameron (1993, 1998) on gender construction from discourses, Jennifer Coates (1998: 195-199) perception and personal level speech (linguistics) and social level (sociolinguistics), Sandra M. Gilbert and Susan Gubar (1985: 515-543), and Françoise Lionnet (2013: 219-227). While in Indonesia, it was done by R. Panca Pertiwi Hidayati (2017) on Improving Students‟ Argumentation Style Ability in Writing Essay through Discourse Analysis Model Critical Thinking Map Oriented which utilizes discourse analysis approach with structuralism analysis. Also researches conducted by Saeed Esmaeili (2015) on A Critical Discourse Analysis of Family and Friends Textbooks: Representation of Genderism. But these researches are different to the previous researches. The researchers explore feminist linguistics ideology in the perspective of written language (written discourse) of Arabic literature to social practice interpretation (AWK) from text to inter text Mudzakkirāt Thobībah novel. Besides that, the underlying difference of this research is that it gives an offer towards the concept of feminist linguistic education in Indonesia. Education and feminist linguistics will be framed by the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah with values of feminist linguistic education with eastern and Indonesian characteristic. Thus, the argument of this research combines the theory of Cameron, Coates, Seedat, and Hidayatullah towards Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī‟s ideology of feminism in the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah. II. METHODOLOGY This research uses content analysis method (content analysis) with qualitative approach. Qualitative approach is a research that is based on the belief that the focus of the research is the quality of meanings to see the essence and particular essence by using qualitative interpretation (Alwasilah, 2009: 45). Thus, the data gathering, data analysis and interpretation do not use figures and statistical data (Creswell, 2008:55-56). Thus, Philipp Mayring defines qualitative content analysis method as an empirical approach without using the quantitative aspect. The methodology is used to control the text analysis in the context of communication (Mayring, 2016:1). The data gathering technique is done through documentation. Documents are notes or writings of past events. The procedures of data gathering starts with reading the texts in a heuristically way, giving symbols of sound in the form of harakah, translating the Arabic texts into Indonesian and compares it with the English Indonesian translation, carrying out identification of feminist ideology in the form of linguistic features such as vocabulary and structure of dialog text, performing data sorting (coding), making classification on the ideology of feminism, completing primary data with secondary data, copying all the data, specified it in detail and analyze it in the form of work analysis table. The data analysis uses the combination of deductive analysis Philip Mayring with adjustment with critical discourse analysis of Norman Fairclough through the procedures of linguistic analysis, sociolinguistic, discourse practices up to social-cultural practices III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The domain or use of language refers to a specific place. Cultural domains are categories of cultural meanings that belong to other smaller categories (Spradey, 1980). In the activity of telling who knows the steps are always considered a smooth or rough speech. The speech depends on the person's attitude to the speech situation he is facing. Here is an example of Sundanese speech in the family realm. Conclusion Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 3 Number 1 March 2018. Page 60-71 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-8478 62 Patriarchal Non (Nir)-sound One of the linguistic features found in the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah---like most Arabic texts---is the absence of sound symbols (nir-sound) such as consonant letters, short vocal, long vocal, double vocal and others. Thus, the series of Arabic letters ( hijaiyah letters) below is not perfect because of the absence of sound symbols like the following example (Al-Sa‟adāwī, 2006: 5). ثذأ انصشاع ثُٛٙ ٔثٍٛ إَٔثزٙ يجكشا جذا. قجم أٌ رُجذ إَٔثزٙ ٔقجم أٌ أَػشف شٛئب .كم يب كُذ ػٍ َفسٙ ٔجُسٙ ٔأصهٙ أػشفّ فٙ رنك انٕقذ أَُٙ ثُذ كًب أسًغ يٍ أيٙ. ثُذ ! The series of letters above shows units and series of consonant letters without any vowels letters so the series of letters above cannot be pronounced (read). This is due to the fact that in terms of lingual text, it is not perfect yet. In other words, the sound symbols which are marked by harakat fathah (a), kasrah (i), dan dhommah (u), is not found from the beginning or from the opening to the end of the texts. According to Nasution (2010:1) sound symbols are a necessity to determine the reference of meaning. Words such as بدأ الصراع cannot be pronounced (read), ُ لِصَراعِ بَْدأ (KB+KB), can be pronounced and can be interpreted as “the beginning of conflict”, or pronounced to be ُبََدأَ الِصَراع (Kk+KB) meaning “the conflict begins” or ُُبِدأَ الِصَراع (KK+KB) meaning “the conflict was started”. Thus sound symbols become very important because it determines a particular meaning. The phonetic and phonological elements of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah becomes meaningless (nir- meaning). Culturally, Arabic texts so far can only be pronounced by men. This is because the access of education is more given to them. Therefore, the chances to acquire power are gained by men. Thus the „hegemony‟ of language and power lies in the hands of men. So, ideologically sound symbols is power; from lingual power, economy, politics and culture. (Holes, 1995: 47; Jabal, 2006: 7; Khalaf, 1994: 27-28). The representation of the series of words and sentences as shown above gives an indication of a patriarchal system or a system which is centered on men; in other words “from” and “for” men. (in the context of “from” men” is because the production of texts is generally produced by men. So the speech and writings of language at that time gave the opportunity to the birth of male writers, scientists and ulema (Dhīf, 2000: 5). Therefore, a text such as this novel when it was published can only be read, enjoyed or not enjoyed by limited groups, namely men. In this context, this novel is not from men as it is written by woman; the thoughts, imagination, experience and speech. The presence of woman writer represents the voice of women who were previously silent, voiceless and remained calm then suddenly voiced, chattered and rebelled from what they felt and experienced. They began to voice injustice which was part of the culture of their society. The narration in this novel in the end also caused anger and discomfort among men. This novel is not only for the consumption of men but also women. So the presence of this novel opened a new space for women who had been passive and unable to speak their minds in public space; whether in the form of writing or oral. In other words, the world of linguistic seemed only the world for men. The presence of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah in the original version of the script was written in Arabic letters. The lingual elements contained in the Arabic language should actually be equivalent with the lingual elements of other languages which has to be pronounced, read, understood, interpreted and explained with standard language. In the context of this novel, the most basic symbol of language Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 3 Number 1 March 2018. Page 60-71 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-8478 63 namely sound symbol is not seen in the text of the novel. Thus, this novel has not perfectly represents “the power of language” of Arabic language due to the absence of sound symbols in the text which has to be pronounced by the readers or the general public. The sound symbol is power; from lingual power, economy, politics and culture. Thus, sound symbols also become a picture of the position of language and culture in the eyes of the world. Consequently, the phonetic and phonological elements of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah become meaningless (nir-meaning) except for the group of people who own „hegemony‟ of language naturalistically and or academically. Naturalistically, this novel can be pronounced by native speakers---the Arabs-- -as the first language, especially the middle class groups who master Arabic letters, while academically, this novel can only be pronounced by academicians who possess mastery of Arabic in the advanced level. In descriptive language analysis, the presence of this text only fulfills the morphological, syntactic and semantic level and ignores the phonological level as a meaningful sound system. Especially when it is associated with the study of functional language, then the science of sounds becomes one of the attention in the sociolinguistic study where the structure of sounds is not only become a social aspect like the accent in a standard language versus dialect, but also it becomes a marking aspect from a specific situation like when a person is angry, frightened or falling in love, he or she tends to use different sound of language. (van Dijk, 2008: 159). Hence, the power of Arabic language which is maintained by its writer, Nawāl al- Sa‟adāwī on one hand has preserved the Arabic language in the eyes of the world, but on the other hand, like most other Arabic writers, Nawāl still positioned readers as a single consumer and not variant. The language of power is understood as atmosphere of power of certain language in viewing and using language as standard language which is acknowledged on a larger or global scale. In the context of Arabic language, albeit the acknowledgment of language of this novel up to the forum of the United Nations, with other languages of the world such as English, French, Chinese, Russian, Spain (Holes, 1995:1), Arabic language does not have more strength or power than other languages of other Europeans imperials especially English. Even in the literature world, the quantity of Arabic literal works is not comparable with English literal works. English language still prevails and is recognized as an accepted standard language as in the norms of literature and language which places English texts as the standard of taste, values and universal norms. Thus, English continues to maintain its cultural domination in most post-colonial countries (Ashcroh, 2003: xxx- xxxi), including Egypt. Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī is against and fought the tides. She consistently uses Arabic as the language of all her novels. The novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah is her first work in Arabic and become the inspiration for her other works up to the present. Her efforts at least become Nawāl‟s way in negotiating and positioned the existence of the Arabic language. The ideology of feminism in sound symbols in the text of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah, empirically not found. The sound symbol of this novel is found as the strength of sign of power of a language and can in reality be found in the sound symbol of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah (MT) which is masculine and philosophical---like most Arabic novels. Inequality in Synonym and Antonyim Synonyms is a similarity of words or single word which shows a form of word with another form of word (proverbs) which the same or similar meaning such as beautiful and pretty (Muhammad, 2002: 179). Besides that, synonym is often called as equivalent of words of equation of words. Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 3 Number 1 March 2018. Page 60-71 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-8478 64 While antonyms is a word which has the opposite meaning with another word, such as day and night; men and women, long and short, right and left and so on (Muhammad, 2002: 152-153). But according to Faircllough, Synonym and antonym words will be regarded as relation of meanings which show certain ideology through words that have exsperential values (Fairclough, 2001:92). In the context of this research the relations of synonym and antonym words is directly seen in the text of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah. In experiential values, the antonym and synonym words portrays the ideology of the writer to explain the aspects which is related with the content (content), knowledge, and belief of the writer. In other words, the relation of meaning of synonym and antonym is a sign to represent the writer‟s experience of its social world (Fairclough, 2001:93). Likewise with the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah o text 1 as follows (Al-Sa‟adāwi, 2006:5): ٍَ أُ ْٛ ثَ َٔ ْٙ ْٙ ثَذَأَ انِصَّشاعُ ثَُِْٛ ثَزِ ْٕ ًشا ِجذًّا... َُ ُيجَّكِ ُْجُذَ ٌْ رَ ْٙ قَْجَم أَ ثَزِ ْٕ ْٛئًب أَُُ ٌْ أَْػِشَف َش قَجَْم أَ َٔ ْٙ أَْصِه َٔ ْٙ ُِْس ِج َٔ ْٙ ٍْ ََْفِس .ُكمُّ َيب ُكُُْذ .. َػ ْٙ ِ ْقِذ أَََُّ َٕ ْٙ رَِنَك اْن ُْذ أَْػِشفُُّ فِ ُغ ثِ ًَ ب أَْس ًَ َك . ْٙ ٍْ أُّيِ ُْذ ِي ِخ ! ثِ ًَ ٍْ ِنَكِه نَْى َُٚك ْٙ ثُِْذ َٔ فِ ْٙ نَْسذُ ِ َٕ أَََُّ اِحٍذ... ُْ َٔ ٖ َيْؼًُٗ َٕ ْ٘ ِس َََظِش نَذًا. ْٛئٍ َٔ ... ُكمُّ َش ْٙ َسحٍ .. نَْسُذ ِيثَْم أَِخ ْٕ فِٙ َػ أَََب َُْذ فِٙ انزَبِسؼَخِ ِطفْهَخ َٔ ! َحِض ْ٘ ِش ًْ ٍْ ُػ ِي َجهَْسُذ َٔ َّٙ ْٙ َػهَ .أَْغهَقُْذ ثَبَة ُغْشفَزِ ْٙ َػهَٗ ََْفِس نَٗ فِٙ ْٔ ْٙ اْْلُ ِػ ْٕ ٍْ دُُي ...نَْى رَُك ْ٘ ْحِذ َٔ ْٙ أَْثِك ْٙ ْٔ ِْلََِّ ْٙ أَ ْٙ ِْلََِّٙ فَِشْهُذ فِٙ َيذَْسَسزِ َحَٛبرِ ٍْ ِْلََِّٙ ْ َكسَّ نَِك َٔ ْٛئًب َغبِنًٛب... ُْذ !ْشُد َش ثِ The upheavals among me and my woman‟s nature began very early ... before my woman‟s nature grew and before I know anything about myself, my gender and even my origin...At that time, I only knew that I was a girl, like what I heard from my mother‟s call, "girl"! In my view, the word girl there is no other meaning but only one ... that I‟m not a boy ...I‟m not like my male sibling ... all that is in my body is aurat, While at that time I was a small girl at the age of 9 years. I mourned for myself. I locked the door of my room then I cried...In my life, the first tear was shed not because I failed in my school or because I have broken a valuable good...but it was because I was a “girl”! In the above text the word “woman” is the keyword of the ideology of feminism of Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī in expressing her eksperential values. The series of three synonyms, اُنُْوثَة “becomes feminine words”, mean “girl”. The meaning of ِطْفلَة and بِْنت اَنُثَ as an adjective or a word from verb اَنُْوثَةُ means “to become a girl”, or “woman characteristics”. However, if the word ُاَُنْوثَة becomes a noun then the meaning becomes femininity or womanliness. The three words belong in one meaning that is woman. Although synonymous, the 3 words have specific meaning. If the word اُنُْوثَة becomes a noun then the word woman is related to women‟s physical figure which have a number of attributes which cannot be replaced with those of men. But if the word becomes an adjective, then the women اُنُْوثَة nature can be replaced with a nature that can be constructed by the social society and culture that formed it. The word بِْنت and .”have the same meaning that is “girl ِطْفلَة But specifically, the word بِْنت is related to the nasab, while the word ِطْفلَة means girl in general. The three words are also expressed by the author of Mudzakkirāt Thobībah as a group of weaklings, neglected and discriminated in power. Referring to Fairclough, the series of synonym are not only part of power in the novel discourse but also shows the existence of power behind the discourse. In other words, the ideology of feminism in this novel does not only reflect power in a discourse but also in a hidden power because it does not mention the synonym of the word men. Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 3 Number 1 March 2018. Page 60-71 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-8478 65 Thus, the relation of meaning of the 3 words above also represents the background of the story of the novel. This background then becomes the main idea of the story on the life of women which voices feminism to fight for the value equality through relation of meaning in a lingual (semantic) and social meaning. Besides the synonymous use of the word, the word in the text of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah (MT) also uses antonym to the word girl#boy ( َولَد # بِْنت). The use of antonym explains the differences which occurred in “men” and “women”. In other words, for a novel with the ideology of feminism such as the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah (MT), the 2 antonymous words are two lexemes or words which always stand out in explaining the differences of the two; from the physical, cultural and social structure. One of the examples can be seen from the 2 following texts (Al-Sa‟adāwi, 2006:15): ْْذُ َكِش جِ َٔ ْٔ ْْذُ اْسَى انضَّ َكِش َسائَِحخَ َٔ ُْْذ اْْلَْكِم... َْٛذ َيب َػذَا َكِش ُحْجَشحِ اْنجَ َٔ يَ ... ْٙ ذَْسَسخَ َيب َػذَا ِحصَِّخ أَْحجَْجذُ ْكزَجِ ًَ انْ َٔ ... ِ ّٙ ُِْضِن ًَ أَّٚبَو اْْلُْسجُٕعِ َيب أَْحجَْجذُ انزَّذْثِِٛش انْ ْٙ قَْجَم ثَزِ ْٕ ُْٛذ َػهَٗ أَُُ ِو اْنجًؼِخ ... ثََك ْٕ َػذَا َٚ َٓب... ٌْ أَْػِشفُ أَ I despise the term marriage and I also despise things related with the smell of food... I also despise the house except my study room... I love the school except when there is homework..; I love the days of the week except Friday. I bemoaned by womanhood before I knew it... In text 2 above, the vocabulary that is used by the author‟s narration is the antonym word َأََحب # َكِره meaning despise # love. The experiential values in text 1 and 2 use the words describing the relation of meaning in the form of synonym like the word بِْنت and ِطْفلَة which means “girl” and the antonym on the word بِْنت which means girl and َولَد which means boy, and the word which اََحب which means hate and َكِرهَ means to love. The words that are used by the character “I” in text 1 and 2 above is an expression from the point of view of someone who fight against the social system which is considered by the narrator to be unfair. The synonymous words and sometimes alternately use the antonym words is a way to explain the ideology of feminism in the text of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah (MT). The formal feature of the experiential value in relation of synonyms and antonyms are used by the narrator to explain the differences in physical structure up to the differences in social structure between man and women. The character “I” does not like the two terms in a parallel way namely marriage and the smell of food. The character imagines that the word marriage is always related to serving the husband (men) without being served, and to give food is also a routine activity which has to be done by the wife „without any compromise”. The role of women has been conditioned since a long time ago through the cultural and social structure which has strengthened the position of men. One of the protests which has been carried out by the character “I” is by fighting for the rights of women which are not yet equal to that of men, in the context of the above text is the equality value in education. At the age of 9, the character “I” felt that the education system is unfair and does not take side with women, in terms of interest and learning ability of women can be equivalent to men. Therefore the first tear of the character “I” was shed not because she was unable to complete the tasks that were given to her by the school because she was a woman. Thus the use of the antonymous words which were sued by the writer in the text of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah (MT) also shows inequality in the antonym word. Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 3 Number 1 March 2018. Page 60-71 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-8478 66 Status Quo in the Relational of Words The ideology of feminism in the relational of words which are used by the narrator are the use of vocabulary which is related with social relations among participants or the characters in the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah (MT). The involvement among the characters in an occurrence is by itself has built relations and social relationship both when of likeness, love, hatred, anger and all the conditions which involves the emotions of the characters in the novel in the relations of words as follows (Al-Sa‟adāwi, 2006:11) : ْٙ َََظَشْد َسَكزَْذ َجذَّرِ َٔ ٍْ انثَّْشثََشحِ ُص َػ ْٕ اْنؼَُج ٍِ ْٛ َ زَآِكهَز ًُ َٓب اْن ُْٚذ َػَُْْٛٛ َسأَ َٔ ... ْ٘ إِنَٗ َصذِْس ٍِ ْٚ ٍِ انجَبِسَص ْٚ ْٚذَ ٍِ اْنَجِذ ْٛ ًَ ٌِ اْنجَْشَػ ََل رَزَؤَيَّ ْٙ ُس ِْلُّيِ ًِ ْٓ َٓب رَ ْٚزُ ب... ثُىَّ َسأَ ًَ ُٓ رَِضَُ َٔ ُل نِ ْٕ ْؼُذ أُّيِٙ رَقُ ًِ َس َٔ ٍء... ْٙ ٙ : اْسرَذِّ٘ ثَِش ًِٙ َػهَٗ انضَِّْٛف رََسهَّ َٔ ٌَ انهجُٙ ِنزَذُْخِهٙ اْنفُْسزَب ُذ َسائَِحخً ًْ ًَ َش َٔ ... ٌَ ْٕ ِْٛك فِٙ انَصبنُ انَِّز٘ َيَغ أَثِ ُُْذ أُقَبثُِم ُيؼَْظَى ُك َٔ ... ِ ّٕ ُيَؤاَيَشحً فِٙ اْنَج أَْحَٛبَبً أَْصِذقَبءِ َٔ حَ... َٕ ْٓ ُْٓى اْنقَ أَْقذَُو نَ َٔ ْٙ أَثِ ٍْ ُْٓى َػ ثُ َٕ َُٚحذِّ ُْ َٔ ُغ أَثِٙ ًَ أَْس َٔ ُْٓى أَْجِهُس َيؼَ ْٙ قِ ُّٕ أُِحسُّ رَفَ َٔ ذَْسَسِخ فَؤَْشؼُُش ثِبْنفَْشَحِخ ًَ فِٙ اْن ََْٛب ٍْ دُ ْٙ ِي ُْزَِشهُُِ َٚ ْٙ ِّ ثِزََكبئِ ٌَّ أَثِٙ ثِبْػزَِشافِ أَ َٓب َسائَِحخ اْنجَ ُْ ُح ِي ْٕ ْٛجَِخ انَّزِٙ رَفُ َصِم انَُِّسبِء انَكئِ َْزَا َٓب نَٗ فِْشقَزِ ْٔ َٓب أَ ْٙ : إََِّ قَبَل أَثِ َٔ اجِ... َٔ انّضِ َٔ ُجمَ َّٙ انشَّ َُْٛ نَْى أََس فِٙ َػ َٔ اْنؼَبَو فِٙ اإِْلْثزِذَائَِِّٛخ... َسأَُْٚذ َٔ َكََلِو... َٓزَا انْ ٍْ إِْػَجبٍة ثِ َْٛش َػ َّ٘ رَؼْجِ أَ َل َجسَ ْٕ ُو َح ْٕ ِّ اْنفَبِحَصِخ رَُح ِذَََ٘ظَشارِ قَْفُذ َٕ َٓبَِٚخ َػهَٗ َصذِْس٘ فَ رَْسزَِقشُّ فِٙ اْنُِ َٔ بَ ًَ ٍَ اْنُحْجَشحِ أَْجِشٖ َكؤََّ َخَشْجُذ ِي َٔ َسحَ ْٕ َيزُْػ ْٚذ َُٚطبِسدَُِٙ.. .ِػْفِش My elderly grandmother suddenly became silent from her nagging character and her eyes stared sharply to my chest. I saw that both of her eyes had become shortsighted as she was getting older, she kept looking at my tapered breasts. Then I stared at her, she whispered something to my mother. And I heard my mother said something to me: “Wear your cream dress then come in and meet your father‟s quest who is at the living room”. I felt that the situation was as if had been engineered at that time. I had gotten used to meet most of my father‟s friends and served coffee to them. Sometimes I also sat with them and listened to my father who often praised me on my achievements at school. I certainly felt happy because my father liked to boast about my intelligence. I had hopes that he would free me from the shackles of womanhood which is filled with the smell of onion and marriage. ... Hearing the explanation, I didn‟t see the slightest admiration in the eyes of the man, but his look of curiosity went through all my body until it stopped at my breast. Filled with fear, I stood up and ran outside the room as if I were chased by jinn „Ifrit. The relational of words in text 4 above shows that there is social relationship between the character “I”, “mother”, “grandmother”, “father”, and “friend or my father‟s guest”. The social relationships in the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah (MT) does not use the relational values of words in the form of euphuism words but it uses ordinary language which is full of Arabic culture. Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī uses the word such as ّمِيْ ,”my elderly mother“ َجد تِيْ اْلَعُجْوزُ ُ أ “my mother”, أَبِي “my father”, َصِدْيقُ أَبِي “my father‟s friend ”, َيَ نِ بَ الل اْلُفْسَتانَ “cream dress” َالص الُْون “living room”, and Ifrit”. Vocabulary like “my elderly“ ِعْفِرْيت grandmother”, vocabulary “my mother”, and vocabulary “my father‟s friend” is mentioned by the narrator as they are but they are ideologically opposed with the ideology of the character “I”. The three vocabularies become a symbol of the rejection of the ideology of feminism in the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah (MT). The Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 3 Number 1 March 2018. Page 60-71 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-8478 67 portrait of women depicted in the novel MT also becomes the representation of Egyptian women when the novel was written. The character “grandmother” and “mother” describes the nature of women who “accept” and have to serve men. Both become the images of women who perpetuate “the power of men”. Similarly, the character of “father‟s friend”, traditionally held on thestatus quo and is not interested to talk about the advantages of women. While the character “father” is the opposite and took side in positioning women. He was able to appreciate the ability of women and was aware that women can reach the achievements equal to that of men. Similarly, with the character of “I”, this character often carries out protests to gender injustice which he felt and thought of throughput is activities. The 5 (five) characters in the text above also depicts the Egyptian social phenomenon to the position of women and social relations in the patriarchal system. The words “cream dress”, “living room”, and “Ifrit” are words that contain relational values. The cream dress is a symbol of sexy for a girl reaching teenage age. In front of the dress in the chest to be exact there are wrinkles that accentuate 2 breasts of a teenage girl. While one eye. This word is figuratively used to a person who is very frightened after meeting a man who she doesn‟t want. In the context of the text above, the character “I” felt that the man was looking at her by examining the content of her figure. He watched her entire body which ended at the 2 breast that had become tapered. Thus, the word “ifrit” describes a man with frightening man and the word also describes the great fear for a young woman who meets a male guest who is introduced by her own biological father. One of the natures of the words in the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah (MT) is related with the relational values using formal words (fusha). Although Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī uses formal language, but as a literal text in general, the novel MT also uses conversational language which is used as daily language or regular language. In other words, the words in the novel MT are not framed with aesthetical values of literature or style of language (stilistica). Thus, the novel MT is not too heavy so the speeches of the characters can be understood easily by the readers who come from all levels of the society. Hegemony of Power in Text Structure In the text structure, there are dialogs between participants (speakers and speakers). So, in a dialog there is also a turn- taking system. The arrangement depends on the turn taking that is being applied. The turn-taking is used as a pattern to see the relationship between speakers and speakers, also to see who determines the agenda of conversation or who among them (participants or characters) are more dominant in the dialog (Fairclough, 2001:110-112). But the relationships of two characters in a dialog are influenced by the position where a person feels equal. Formal and or informal conversations among participants also determine the interaction of the dialog during the conversation. For an equivalent communication usually the participant do not feel pressured thus their social interactions occur with both conventional and unconventional agreements. During the conversation, each participant does not feel they are dominating the other. In other words, the participants do not show who is the most dominant or powerful. The condition will be different if the social or social status between the participants has a distance as in text 3. When that happens, the rules of the interaction changes, because the participants who is more dominant will lead the conversation like the text structure of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah (MT) as follows (Al-Sa‟adāwi, 2006:59): Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 3 Number 1 March 2018. Page 60-71 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-8478 68 ُّ٘ ُسْهَطٍخ؟ أَََب : أَ ُج ْٔ ِّ اَنضَّ ْٛ ِْٛذ ثُِكّمِ َيب فِ َْزَا اْنجَ : ُسْهَطخُ ََْذ. َحزَّٗ أَ ... ِّ ْٛ َُٓش َػهَ ِد رَْظ ًَشُّ اِدِس انزَّ َٕ ثِ ُسُِ ْٕ َْقَهََت فِٗ ُشؼُ ثِبنضَّْؼِف أََيبِيٗ اِ َْٛطَشحِ ِّ إِنَٗ َسْغجٍَخ فِٗ انسَّ بقِ ًَ أَْػ ... َّٙ َػهَ ُج ْٔ ٍو. اَنضَّ ْٕ ٌْ رَْخَشِجٗ ُكمَّ َٚ ْٚذُ أَ : ََل أُِس ُم. أَََب ًَ : أَََب أَْخُشُج ِنهَؼَْجٍث... أَََب أَْػ ُج ْٔ ٌْ رَْكَشِفٗ َػهَٗ أَْجَسبِد اَنضَّ ْٚذُ أَ : ََل أُِس َْٚشاِد ْى.نَْسَُب ثَِحبَجٍخ إِنَٗ إِ ِٓ ْٚ رَْؼِش َٔ َجبِل انّشِ اْنِؼَٛبدَحِ. بِل... أَََب أَََب ًَ ٍْ أَْجِم اْن ُم ِي ًَ : أَََب ََل أَْػ ًَِهٗ. أُِحتُّ َػ ُج ْٔ ْٛزَكَ : َِٚجُت أَ اَنضَّ ثَ َٔ ِجَك ْٔ ٌْ رَزَفََشِغٗ ِنَض َيبرَا رَْؼُِٗ؟ : أَََب ُج ْٔ أَْغِهِقٗ اْنِؼَٛبدَحَ. : اَنضَّ Me : So what? Husband : I am responsible. Me : Responsible to what? Husband : Responsible for this house with everything in it including you. With signs of conflicts looming ... his weaknesses in front of me turned into a desire to dominate me ... Husband : I don‟t want you to go out everyday. Me : I go out not to have fun... I work. Husband : I don‟t want you to check out the bodies of men and strip them. We don‟t need the money from your practice. Me : I don‟t work for the money ... I like my job. Husband : You must have time for your husband and household. Me : what do you mean? Husband : Close your practice. The dialog in text 3 above shows the patterns of conversational turns between participants who are not equal. The character “I” as the wife questions her husband statements which show position and power as a man. Every time she gets a turn to talk, the character “I” asks for more explanation, and the character of husband asserts and show the status of men which is patriarchal, dominant, powerful, and determined the interactional convention of the text in the above dialogs. The sentence “I am a man”, “I am the one who is responsible”, “responsible for this house and everything in it including you”, “I don‟t meant you to go out every day”, “I don‟t want you to examine the bodies of men and strip them”, “we don‟t need the money from your practice”, “you must have time for your husband and your household‟, “close your practice” show that there is no negotiation between the participants when the husband shows his power. This ideology is related to the relation among participants who are not equal in terms of ethnicity, age, profession, social class, and others. The pattern of taking turns in a dialog among participants which is not equal will give distance between participants who is weaker to the participant who is more dominant. Therefore, the participant who is lower or weaker is unable to choose his or her conversation turns. This kind of participant will feel a turn in talking which is forced, including the content of the conversation which has to be mentioned by the participants involved. A more dominant participant---as a person in certain power--- will become a more dominant participant during the interaction among the participants. The more dominant participant generally can provide more information or lead the content of the conversation. The more dominant participant can even give orders; evaluate the feedback to weaker interlocutors. Look at text 25 and 26. On the example in text 25 an unequal conversation takes place in terms of the difference of Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 3 Number 1 March 2018. Page 60-71 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-8478 69 social status ---the profession of doctor and patient---and the position of a person within the society. In this context, the more dominant participant can lead or determine the content of the conversation, albeit done in a polite dialog. The pattern of conversation turn in text 3 shows more to the conversation structure which is more tense due to conflict of the content of conversation related to discourse, perspective, knowledge, and social status among participants. Thus, in this dialog, between the two participants there is no point of agreement; on the contrary there are tensions until the end of the conversation. Forced coercion which is used by the side who have the power, generally forces other participants to comply with the wishes of the participants who have power whether on the ground of religion, culture, social even tradition which becomes an unwritten agreement among the speaker and the speaker in the participation of conversation. With the presence of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah, the atmosphere Arabic linguistics is dismantled by Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī. His courage had disturbed the world of men who have the power; male relatives, father, husband, even scholars who don‟t take side with women. According to Michel Foucault (1997: 139-140), power is related with the strategy and does not belong certain people through certain arrangements. Power is power within everyone. Power is also not derived from centralized power namely the state. Power is not understood as a gift from the state. According to Althusser (1984:24) power is the relation among states and state apparatus. While Fairclough (1995: 14) sees that power is a set of ideologies. The ideologies are propositions which depict implicit assumptions in texts, which contribute to the relation of unequal production or reproduction with power, including relations of domination. Therefore, “the power of language” is the ability of a language in determining and directing also forming opinions from certain discourses (Fairclough, 1995: 14). While the “the language of power” is the position of language in influencing and determining various interests to someone or social groups to reach certain goal. IV. CONCLUSIONS From the discussion above, the research concludes that the critical discourse analysis of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah written by Nawāl Al- Sa‟adāwī, in terms of linguistic feature in the form of sound symbol, the text of this novel is not perfect because in essence of the non-sound and non- meaning. Thus this text like most other Arabic is still in the philosophical that is still melangit. Hence, Arabic becomes a language that is not popular and inclusive; because it is melangit, Arabic is one of the heritages of Arabic culture which is patriarchal because it places men to be more superior and become the holder of power in the domestic and public spheres. Although Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī has fought for the rights of women in the education, politics and social sector, but Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī has not fought for the rights of women in the lingual sector which is actually still patriarchal because the Arabic texts was still non (nir) sound. Because the texts are non-sound, it seems that without realizing it, Nawāl still perpetuate the linguistics of “the power of men”. The synonymous and antonymous words of Arabic still become a sexist language, hence the values of equality still needs to be advocated and the education of feminism with character is required for the community, not only to the female member of the society but also for men. Similarly, words that connect relational values in maintaining the status quo which is built by the narrator to fight against an unfair tradition. The text structure of the texts in the dialog of this novel is also filled with the hegemony of power of men, thus room for dialog between the participants (speakers and speakers) has not been opened. The text of the novel Mudzakkirāt Thobībah written by Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī is full with the ideology of feminism. The ideology of feminist of Nawāl Al- Sa‟adāwī already has a basic pattern in fighting for the values of equality, even though conceptualy Nawāl Al-Sa‟adāwī is not transparent in explaining between the differences of gender based on kefitrahan and social reconstruction. Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 3 Number 1 March 2018. Page 60-71 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-8478 70 REFERENCES A. A. Hidayatullah, “Claims to the Sacred”. Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion , Vol. No. 2, Fall 2016. A. A. Hidayatullah, “Feminist Interpretation of the Qur‟an in A Comparative Feminist Setting”, Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion (JFSR), Vol. 30, No. 2, 2014. A. A. Hidayatullah, “Muslim Feminist Birthdays”. Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion, Vol. 27, No. 1, Spring 2011. A. A. Hidayatullah, “Inspiration and Struggle: Muslim Feminist Theology and the Work of Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza”, Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion, Vol. 25, No. 1, Spring 2009. A. Chaedar Alwasilah. Pokoknya Kualitatif: Dasar- dasar Merancang dan Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya, 2009. Ā. Khalaf. Ashwāt Al-Lughah Al-„Arabiyyah, Kairo: Maktabah al-Ādāb, 1994. B. Ashcroh,, Gareth Griffiths, Helen Tiffin, Menelanjangi Kuasa Bahasa: Teori dan Praktik Sastra Postkolonial, Yogyakarta: Penerbit Qalam, 2003. C. Holes, Modern Arabic: Structures, Functions and Varieties. London and New York: Longman, 1995. D. Cameron, “Gender and Language Ideologies”, Janet Holmes and Miriam Meyerhoff, The Handbook of Language and Gender,Victoria: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. D. Cameron. Gender, Language, and Discourse: A Review Essay Author(s): Source: Signs, Vol. 23, No. 4 (Summer, 1998), pp. 945-973 Published by: The University of Chicago Press. D. Cameron.Is There an Anglo-American Feminist Linguistics? Author(s): Source: Tulsa Studies in Women's Literature, Vol. 12, No. 2 (Autumn, 1993) E. Pritchard. “JFSR : A Dissenting View”. Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion, Vol. 25, No. 1, Spring 2009. F. Suyoufie. “The Appropriation of tradition is Selected Works of Contemporary Arab Women Writers”, Journal of Arabic Literature, Vol. 39, No. 2, 2008. F. Lionnet, “Languages, Literatures, Pedagogies: The MLA, Africa, and Diaspora Studies”, Comparative Literature Studies, Vol. 50, No. 2, 2013. J. Coates, “Feminist Future and Linguistics”, Hungarian Journal of English and American Studies (HJEAS), Vol. 4, No. 1/2, 1998. M. Badran,”Between Secular and Islamic Feminism/s: Reflections on the Middle East and Beyond”, Journal of Middle East Women's Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, Winter, 2005. M. Foucault. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977. New York: Pantheon Books, 1977. M. Hasan Hasan Jabal. Al-Mukhtashar fī Ashwāt Al- Lughāh Al-„Arabiyyah. Kairo: Maktabah Al- Adāb, 2006. M. Sa‟ad Muhammad. Fī „Ilm Ad-Dilālah. Kairo: Maktabah Zaharā‟ Asy-Syarq, 2002. N. Fairclough, Media Discourse: Voices. New York: St. Martin‟s Press Inc, 1995. N. Fairclough, Language and Power, Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2001. N. Faiclough, “Discourse and Text: Linguistic and Intertextual Analysis within Discourse Analysis”, Discourse & Society, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1992. N. Fairclough, “The Language of Critical Discourse Analysis: Reply to Michael Billig”, Discourse & Society , Vol. 19, No. 6 (November 2008), hh. 811-819. N. Fairclough, “Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1995. N. Al-Sa‟adāwī,. Mudzakkirāt Thobībah, Kairo: Maktabah Madbūlī, 2006. L. Althusser. Tentang Ideologis:Marxisme Strukturalisme, Psikoanalisis, Culturak Studies. Yogyakarta: Jatayu, 1984. P.Mayring, “Qualitative Content Analyis”, Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum Qualitative Social Research, volume 1, No. 2, Art. 20-June 2000 dalam http:www. Qualitative- research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1089/2 385%3E, (diakses Rabu 27 Januari, 2016. J. Lohfert Jørgensen, “Literature”, The Year's Work in Modern Language Studies, Vol. 70, 2008. J. Blommaert and Chris Bulcaen,”Critical Discourse Analysis”, Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 29 , 2000. J. W. Creswell. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. New Jersey: Pearson MerillPrenice Hall, 2008. F. Seedat Islam, “Feminism, and Islamic Feminism: Between Inadequacy and Inevitability”‟ Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion, Vol. 29, No. 2 (Fall 2013), pp. 25-45 R. Figuera, “Convention, Context, and Critical Discourse Analysis “Jim the Boatman” (1846) and the Early Fiction of Trinidad”, NWIG: New West Indian Guide/Nieuwe West- Indische Gids, Vol. 84, No.3/4, 2010. R. Panca Pertiwi Hidayati, “Improving Students‟ Argumentation Style Ability in Writing Essay through Discourse Analysis Model Critical Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 3 Number 1 March 2018. Page 60-71 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-8478 71 Thinking Map Oriented” Journal of Education and Learning, Vol. 2, No. 1, March 2017. R. Rogers, E. Malancharuvil-Berkes, M. Mosley, D. Hui and G. O‟Garro Joseph, “Critical Discourse Analysing in Education: A Review of the Literature”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 75, No. 3, Autumn 2005. S. Barzilai, “Borders of Language: Kristeva's Critique of Lacan”, PMLA, Vol. 106, No. 2 (Mar., 1991. S. Esmaeili and A. Arabmofrad, “A Critical Discourse Analysis of Family and Friends Texbooks: Representation of Genderism” International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, Vol. 4, No. 4, July 2015. S.M. Gilbert and S.Gubar, “Sexual Linguistics: Gender, Language, Sexuality”, New Literary History, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 515-543, Spring, 1985. S. Khoja-Moolji, “Poststrukturalist Approaches the Teaching about Gender, Islam, and Muslim Societies”, Feminist Teacher, Vol. 24, No. 3, 2014. T. van Leeuwen, “Critical Discourse Analysis” dalam Jan Renkema (eds), Discourse of Course: An Overview of Research in Discourse Studies (Amsterdam:Jhon Benjamins Publishing Company, 2009.