73 Journal of Pragmatics Research Vol. 04, No. 01, pp.73-92 E-ISSN: 2656-8020 Website: http://e-journal.iainsalatiga.ac.id/index.php/jopr/index The Analysis of Impoliteness within Grammar Nazi Context in Twitter Tweets *Eunike Imanuela Soehendro Universitas Dian Nuswantoro, Indonesia E-mail: nikeetomlinson93@gmail.com Jumanto Jumanto Universitas Dian Nuswantoro, Indonesia *Corresponding Author Email: nikeetomlinson93@gmail.com DOI: https://doi.org/10.18326/jopr.v4i1.73-92 Copyright © The Author (s) This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. How to Cite: Soehendro, E., & Jumanto, J. (2022). The Analysis of Impoliteness within Grammar Nazi Context in Twitter Tweets. Journal of Pragmatics Research, 4(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.18326/jopr.v4i1.73-92 Submission Track: Received: 15-02-2022 Final Revision: 01-03--2022 Available online: 03-03-2022 Corresponding Author: nikeetomlinson93@gm ail.com ABSTRACT This research focuses on one of the phenomena namely the Grammar Nazi phenomenon. In the present paper the Grammar Nazi phenomenon was a phenomenon where people did not hesitate to criticize other people's grammatical errors. This phenomenon of Grammar Nazi was associated with the theory of Impoliteness Strategy by Culpeper (1996). This research is a qualitative one, where 100 data employed were processed first using a coding technique. The results obtained from this study were 55% of the data using the Bald on Record strategy, 18% of the data using the Sarcasm or Mock Politeness strategy, 16% of the data using the Negative Impoliteness strategy, 11% of the data using the Positive Impoliteness strategy, while 0% data using the Withhold Politeness strategy. It was also found that 61% of the data of the Grammar Nazi phenomenon used verbal bullying only to attack the face of authors of the posts, while the remaining 39% of the data used verbal bullying with intentions to correct grammatical errors, hence providing benefits for authors of the posts. The Grammar Nazi phenomenon also has a different impact on everyone. It can be seen mailto:nikeetomlinson93@gmail.com mailto:nikeetomlinson93@gmail.com https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ mailto:nikeetomlinson93@gmail.com mailto:nikeetomlinson93@gmail.com 74 from the characteristics of the utterances used by the Grammar Nazi. Keywords: Grammar Nazi, Grammar Nazi Phenomenon, Impoliteness Strategy, Five Strategies, Twitter. INTRODUCTION Language is like a bridge that connects everything so that it becomes clear and can be explained concretely. However, there are some things that are usually called "Can't put it into words". So, what exactly is language? Is language just a collection of alphabets put together? Or maybe a meaningful collection of words? There are different definitions of language. According to Plato, he assumed that the definition of language is a statement contained in a person's mind by using the mediation of Rhemata (speech) and Onomata (name of an object or something) which is a picture of a person's ideas in air currents passing through the media, namely the mouth. In connection with this research, knowledge related to Politeness Principles will be used. Prior to that, the Politeness Principles were also known as Politeness Strategy. Based on Brown & Levinson’s (1987:94-98) the motivation behind why an individual utilizing uncovered on record is the point at which the speaker needs to do the face undermining acts with greatest effectiveness more than to fulfill the listener's face. Politeness strategy by Brown & Levinson (1987) consists of four group, i.e. (1) Bald on record, (2) Positive politeness, (3) Negative politeness, (4) Off record. If there is such a thing as Politeness Strategy, then there will also be Impoliteness Strategy. The Impoliteness Strategy theory was introduced by Professor Jonathan Culpeper (1996), while the Politeness Strategy theory was widely discussed by Brown and Levinson (1987). Culpeper's purpose in making this theory is not known as politeness strategies, as they depend on the context of the utterances. Sometimes utterances tend to be harsh in general contexts, but do not sound harsh in certain contexts. For example, when people say “You fucking cunt”, it sounds offensive for across a wider range of contexts than "you bastard", although that just works in some specific contexts. Then, the theory of impoliteness strategy will be used to analyze a phenomenon called Grammar Nazi. It can be seen from the name of the phenomenon which consists of two words, namely Grammar which means an order in language, and Nazi which is a party led by Adolf Hitler who at that time led Germany. In this context, the Nazis are likened to a party led by Hitler who was very cruel, liked to oppress and had no mercy for those who were deemed to have made mistakes. When combined into one between Grammar and Nazis, it means that a Grammar Nazi is someone who likes to criticize grammatical errors and or typing errors in language, openly with harsh words or expressions, even seeming to mock and insult. In the context of this language, the language used is English. The data to be used or employed here are in form of posts or tweets on the Twitter application, which indicate the Grammar Nazi phenomenon in it. The reason the researcher uses the Impoliteness Strategy is because it is based on the meaning of the Impoliteness 75 Strategy and the purpose of using the Impoliteness Strategy is to create unrest in the listeners and create a face-threatening to the listeners. This is considered suitable with the Grammar Nazi phenomenon which has similar activities. Furthermore, the data will be analyzed using the strategy theory of impoliteness by Culpeper (1996). So as to produce results, namely what impoliteness strategies are most widely used in the Grammar Nazi phenomenon in tweets on Twitter and what are the indications. In addition, know how impoliteness strategies are described in posts of twitter that contain Grammar Nazi phenomenon, and find out the threats and benefits of the Grammar Nazi phenomenon to general people. This research has been done before but with a different pattern of analysis and research motorcycle taxis. As we all know, Grammar Nazi was originally just a simple act, namely an act of criticizing and even making fun of someone who is not fluent in English. In its journey, there is no trace of definite knowledge about when and where this Grammar Nazi expression was created. However, in 1991, precisely on January 18th. There is a track record of a thread on the Usenet newsgroup comp.sys.apple2 , entitled “Extended graphics on the IIg” , saying "I'm a card carrying number of the spelling and Grammar Nazis of America". It was recorded on January 19, 1995 in the alt.gothic thread entitled "Grammar Nazis on the Rampage!”, there are also uploads that one of them mentions Grammar Nazi. Meanwhile, this is just a track record that can be found online only. Another study has been conducted by Soehendro et.al. (2021) with research objectives are (1) Knowing the Grammar-Nazi aspects; (2) Knowing the location where the Grammar-Nazi occurred; (3) Identifying the influence of Grammar Nazi; (4) Knowing the effect of Grammar-Nazi on the learning process of English. The results show that the Grammar Nazi phenomenon among millennials in Indonesia occurs when someone makes a mistake when using English. The activity of criticizing and ridiculing was deliberately carried out with a purpose that is not known for certain, because the data was obtained through the internet using qualitative methods. Objects used as material for criticism and ridicule are errors in the use of Verb as much as 24%, Noun as much as 17%, Singular-Plural Noun as much as 9%, Article as much as 7% and also Preposition as much as 7%, Pronoun as much as 6%, and the last Auxiliary Verbs as much as 1%. The results were obtained from 70 data, taken from social media sources, namely Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. With a span of years from 2015 to 2020. In addition, a statement in the form of 70 data shows that 50% of Grammar Nazi perpetrators only insulted the victim (people who were learning to use English), without providing corrections for the victim's grammatical errors. An example of scorn given by a Grammar Nazi would be "Too early, not to early". While 40% of them indicated that the Grammar Nazi perpetrators only gave blatant corrections without preface or other supporting utterances, for example, in Indonesian, "Grammarnya benerin dulu” (“Correct the grammar first.”). Then, the remaining 10% cannot be identified. There has not been much research on Grammar Nazi, but the phenomenon of Grammar Nazi is closely related to the so-called Grammar Error. Where Grammar Error itself is an error in using good and correct grammar. 76 Research on grammatical errors, especially in English, has been done before. One of them is a study by Recheck et al. (2019) in his research entitled "Grammar matters: The tainting effect of grammar usage errors on judgments of competence and character", resulting in an error in the use of grammar in English, resulting in a negative assessment of the speaker. In addition, people will also have a bad opinion of the character of people who have wrong or bad grammar, it can be said that the more errors what happen, the worse other people judge us. People will also prefer to read writing without grammatical errors than those with many and fatal grammatical errors. The study concludes that the use of correct English grammar is very important, because it can affect other people's judgment of us, especially if the mistake is fatal, especially in the world of work. Another study on Grammar Error was also conducted by Incecay & Dollar (2011), entitled "Foreign language learners' beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction" (2011), who explained that based on their research on English learners that there are some English learners who think that grammar is very important and not only in good language, but its effects can spread to many other things. So, when there is an error in the use of English grammar, they expect the teachers to provide direction and correction as soon as possible. However, others think that grammar is very boring, so they are not too fixated on the correct use of English grammar. In addition, another result of the study said that students who thought that using correct grammar was very important also seemed a bit difficult to justify when they made mistakes, but on the other hand, students who thought that way really appreciated communication. According to Ghabanchi (2011) in a study entitled "The Effect of Grammatical Error Correction on the Development of Learning English Writing as a Foreign Language", resulting in a statement that correct English grammar is very necessary especially in writing. However, it is unfortunate that the teaching of correct English grammar cannot be taught instantly or it can be said that teaching about the use of correct English grammar cannot be taught in the classroom alone. However, it must be followed by self-interest and continuous learning. This seems to support each other with Truscott's theory (1996, 2007, 2008), which states that outside the institution in learning, the teacher does not have any control over the use of English grammar Truscott is also very supportive of the grammar correction in writing classes. Adding to an existing statement, according to Kreitner et al. (2010) in his research entitled "Effects of Spelling Errors on the Perception of Writers", states that grammatical errors and English writing errors make other people doubt our thinking ability and accuracy. So people tend to underestimate people with grammatical errors because they think they can't do small things properly, then what about other things. Considering the results of several studies that have been carried out, it can be concluded that in fact, grammatical errors, especially in English, make other people think negatively about the person who made the mistake. However, this of course causes a different reaction from each person. 77 There are some people who respond more positively, or even some people who respond negatively. In this study, the Impoliteness Strategy theory was used by Culpeper (1996), where the strategy by Culpeper was in complete contrast to the Politeness Strategy theory by Brown & Levinson (1987). The use of the Impoliteness Strategy theory was also used in previous studies. According to Sari & Emmiyati (2019) in their research entitled "IMPOLITENESS STRATEGIES IN PETER RABBIT MOVIE", resulted in a statement that in fact Impoliteness Strategy was used to create unease on the listener's face and seemed to attack the listener th impolite or unkind utterances spoken by the interlocutor. In one of the studies by Rababa’h &Rabab’ah (2021) in a study entitled "The Impact of Culture and Gender on Impoliteness Strategies in Jordanian and American TV Sitcoms", said that at this time there was a habit of using impolite strategies. In fact, the use of impoliteness strategies resulted in a negative assessment of the perpetrators and their use seemed impolite. Based on a similar study entitled "Mock impoliteness, jocular mockery and jocular abuse in Australian and British English" by Haugh & Bousfield (2012) states that impoliteness strategies can also be used in jokes which are divided into two, namely Jocular mockery and Jocular abuse. In its application, impoliteness strategies become inserts in jokes. However, even though it is used in a joke, of course, cause different reactions from each person. So, usually the use of politeness strategies can be considered a good thing if the listener is a close person. But on the other hand, politeness strategies will be bad if used on listeners who do not have close connections with the speaker. RESEARCH METHOD This study utilizes a qualitative technique, because as indicated by the contemplations, this strategy is generally reasonable for the information to be investigated. As indicated by Williams (1995), a subjective examination is the assortment of information in a characteristic setting utilizing logical strategies and done by normally intrigued individuals or analysts. Subjective examination techniques are priceless in giving rich portrayals of mind-boggling peculiarities; track exceptional or startling occasions; enlightening the experience and understanding of occasions by entertainers with totally different stakes and jobs; give voice to those whose perspectives are only occasionally heard; embrace primer investigations to foster speculations and to create and even test theories; and; continue to clarification. Subjective and quantitative strategies can be corresponding, utilized successively or together. The unit of analysis used in this final study are utterances from posts on social media in the form of Twitter, which are indicated to contain the Grammar Nazi phenomenon. Then the data will be analyzed using the theory of impoliteness strategies by Professor Jonathan Culpeper (1996) to obtain results that will produce the results of the type of impoliteness strategy used in Twitter posts 78 containing the Grammar Nazi phenomenon, explaining how to describe each impoliteness strategy in a Twitter post containing the Grammar Nazi phenomenon, and also knowing the threats and benefits to people in general. The source of the data used in this final study is posting on social media in the form of Twitter, which is indicated to contain the Grammar Nazi phenomenon. Posts that are indicated to contain the Grammar Nazi phenomenon will be investigated, but while keeping the original identity of the speaker a secret to maintain privacy and follow the law containing policies on using the internet and social media. RESULTS & DISCUSSION Results The results obtained from a search of a hundred data obtained from the Twitter social media application, have been processed using the impoliteness strategy theory by Culpeper (1996). From this processing, the data are grouped into the same groups according to the specifications of each data, so that the results are as follows which have been packaged in tabular form. Table 4.1 Type of Impoliteness Strategy Type of strategy Occurrence in data Bald on Record Impoliteness 55 data Positive Impoliteness 11 data Negative Impoliteness 16 data Withhold Politeness 0 data Sarcasm or Mock Politeness 18 data In the data grouping table, then the amount of data is collected per each specification, then the percentage of the amount of data for each type of impoliteness strategy is generated by Culpeper. Table 4.2 percentage per-type Type of strategy Frequency Percentage (%) Bald on Record Impoliteness 55 Data 55% Positive Impoliteness 11 Data 11% Negative Impoliteness 16 Data 16% Withhold Politeness 0 Data 0% Sarcasm or Mock Politeness 18 Data 18% Total 100 Data 100% In the table above, there are five types of impoliteness strategies by Culpeper. The first is Bald on Record Impoliteness, it was found that fifty-five data were included in the Bald on Record 79 Impoliteness strategy. The second is Positive Impoliteness, found as many as eleven data that are included in the Positive Impoliteness strategy. The third is Negative Impoliteness, it was found that fifteen data were included in Negative Impoliteness. The fourth is Withhold Politeness, which found zero data included in the Withhold Politeness strategy. The fifth is Sarcasm or Mock Politeness, nineteen data were found that belong to the Sarcasm or Mock Politeness strategy. The results of the amount of data are then presented as: 1). Bald on Record as much as 55%, 2). Positive Impoliteness as much as 11%, 3). Negative Impoliteness as much as 15%, 4). Withhold Politeness as much as 0%, 5). Sarcasm or Mock Politeness as much as 19%. The phenomenon of Grammar Nazi is also divided into 2 (two) main types of objectives according to the content contained therein. The type of Grammar Nazi was to mock or verbally abuse and provide information about errors in the author's English structure. Then from the 2 (two) types, they are further divided into 4 (four) sub-types, namely: (1) bullying and not providing information, (2) not bullying and providing information, (3) bullying and providing information, and (4) not bullying and not providing information. From these sub-types, what is meant by bullying is that the Grammar Nazi uses utterances in the form of impolite utterances and is intended to insult the author who has made mistakes in his English grammar. As for providing information or not, what is meant is whether the Grammar Nazi provides information about the mistakes made by the author or does not provide information at all about the grammatical errors made by the author. Then from the processed data, they are grouped according to their respective types in a table as follows; From the data in the table, the most common type of Grammar Nazi is Bullying and not providing information, with a total of 61 data and a percentage of 61%. While the second most common type is bullying and providing information with a total of 24 data and a percentage of 24%. For the type of Not bullying and providing information, there are 14 data with a percentage of 14%, and the last is Not bullying and don't provide information with a total of 1 data and the percentage is only 15 of 100 data. 80 Apart from being grouped according to type, Grammar Nazi phenomena are also divided into 2 types based on their benefits, including: (1) face threatening with no benefits (ridicule, use harsh words, sarcasm) and (2) face threatening with benefits (joking, reprimanding, giving knowledge). The selection of the Threats type is based on the purpose of using the Impoliteness Strategy while the Benefits, adjusted for the benefits of the Grammar Nazi phenomenon. Table 4.4 Percentage Per-Type Type of Grammar Nazi Total Data Percentage Face threatening with no benefits 61 61% Face threatening with benefits 39 39% Total 100 100% From the table above, it can be seen that the phenomenon of Grammar Nazi when grouped according to the presence or absence of good benefits other than to threaten or damage the listener's face will produce results; as many as 61 data with a percentage of 61% of the Grammar Nazi phenomenon only intended to damage the faces of people who made grammatical errors by using harsh words, mocking and even verbally bullying, and humiliating. While the remaining 39 data with a percentage of 39%, the Grammar Nazi phenomenon was also accompanied by positive goals such as joking, reprimanding, and providing knowledge. DISCUSSION Types of Impoliteness Strategy Bald on Record Excerpt 1 81 Excerpt 1 belongs to the Bald on Record type of impoliteness because it is in accordance with the characteristics of the Bald on Record impoliteness strategy, namely direct, straightforward, and unambiguous. The first, from excerpt 1 it is known that a Grammar Nazi was commenting on someone's post that had someone's grammar error by saying "Can't even use proper grammar drunk ass", which means the author can't use proper grammar. The comments are addressed directly and use sentences that indicate the actual event, namely the author made a grammatical error. Second, the comment is openly aimed at striking the author's face with full force. Third, the language used by the Grammar Nazi does not use sentences that have other meanings or contain certain expressions, but uses literal language and does not contain ambiguous elements. Excerpt 2 Excerpt 2 belongs to the Bald on Record type of impoliteness because it is in accordance with the characteristics of the Bald on Record impoliteness strategy, namely direct, straightforward, and unambiguous. The first, from excerpt 2 it is known that a Grammar Nazi was commenting on someone's post that had someone's grammar error by saying “No one understands this wall of gibberish. Learn basic English, spelling and grammar then come back and talk shit on Twitter”, which means that the Grammar Nazi did not understand the post made by the author and there were also grammatical errors used by the author. The comments are directed directly and use 82 sentences that indicate the actual event, namely the post by the author does not use the correct grammar so that it is difficult to read and understand the meaning. Second, the comment is openly aimed at striking the author's face with full force. Third, the language used by the Grammar Nazi does not use sentences that have other meanings or contain certain expressions, but uses literal language and does not contain ambiguous elements. Positive Impoliteness Excerpt 1 In excerpt 1, it belongs to the Positive Impoliteness type because it is in accordance with the characteristics of the Positive Impoliteness strategy, namely calling by using another name. From excerpt 1 it is known that a Grammar Nazi was commenting on someone's post that had someone's grammatical error by saying "India needs to learn correct grammar followed by an appropriate sentence structures." correct. Where in the comment there is the word "India" which refers to a country, not the name of the author. This is done to damage the positive face of the author who wants social acceptance. Excerpt 2 In excerpt 2, it belongs to the Positive Impoliteness type because it is in accordance with the characteristics of the Positive Impoliteness strategy, namely looking for disapproval and calling using another name. From excerpt 2 it is known that a Grammar Nazi was commenting on someone's post that had someone's grammar error by saying “Cookies and tea. Correct English light fare to avoid upsetting your stomach. A proper gentleman”, which means that the Grammar Nazi is seeking disapproval by saying that it is better for the author to improve his English grammar so as not to disappoint than to nag about being given only cookies and tea. What is meant by the word stomach is only the repetition of words used by the author, but the purpose is only to refer to the self of the author. While the term "Proper Gentleman" is used to call the author to offend the author a little. This is done to damage the positive face of the author who wants social acceptance. 83 Negative Impoliteness Excerpt 1 Excerpt 1 belongs to the Negative Impoliteness type because it is in accordance with the characteristics of the Negative Impoliteness strategy, namely giving ridicule by not being too serious and demeaning others. From excerpt 1 it is known that a Grammar Nazi was commenting on someone's post that had someone's grammar error by saying "Calling someone stupid with such grammar." It means that the author is no better than the person being insulted, because in the post by the author there are still grammatical errors. This is done to damage the negative face of the author, who does not want to get interference from outsiders. Excerpt 2 Excerpt 2 belongs to the Negative Impoliteness type because it is in accordance with the characteristics of the Negative Impoliteness strategy, namely giving ridicule by not being too serious and demeaning others. From excerpt 2 it is known that a Grammar Nazi was commenting on someone's post that had someone's grammar error by saying “Cringe. Can't even use proper grammar.”, which means the Grammar Nazi is mocking the author by saying that the author can't even use proper grammar, with the use of the word “Cringe” used to make the ridicule appear less 84 serious or just as a joke. This is done to damage the negative face of the author, who does not want to get interference from outsiders. Withhold Politeness In the Withhold Politeness impoliteness strategy, no data were found using this impoliteness strategy. Because the use of this strategy is rarely used in written data and in qualifying data selection, no data using this strategy can be found. In this strategy the biggest characteristic is someone who refuses to be polite to others. Like when they come late to class, students are expected to apologize to the teacher, but the application of this strategy is to hold back politeness. So, the student who was late didn't say sorry, but instead just sat down in his seat without doing anything. Sarcasm or Mock Politeness Excerpt 1 Excerpt 1 belongs to the type of impoliteness Sarcasm or Mock Politeness because it is in accordance with the characteristics of the Negative Impoliteness strategy, namely sarcasm or using irony, where the ridicule given is different from ridicule that insults or vilifies someone. From excerpt 1 it is known that a Grammar Nazi was commenting on someone's post that had someone's grammar error by saying "Proper grammar can be very important.”, where this is done intentionally to insinuate grammatical errors made by the author. 85 Excerpt 2 Excerpt 2 belongs to the type of impoliteness Sarcasm or Mock Politeness because it is in accordance with the characteristics of the Negative Impoliteness strategy, namely sarcasm or using irony, where the ridicule given is different from ridicule that insults or vilifies someone. From excerpt 2 it is known that a Grammar Nazi was commenting on someone's post that had someone's grammatical error by saying "Two*.”, where this is done intentionally to insinuate grammatical errors made by the author. Types of Grammar Nazi Phenomenon Bullying and not providing information Excerpt 1 Excerpt 1 is included in the type of Bullying and not providing information. Because the Grammar Nazi just mocked the author by saying that the author couldn't use proper grammar because of a grammatical error. However, the Grammar Nazi did not provide any information regarding where the error lies and or correction of the author's error. 86 Not bullying and providing information Excerpt 1 Excerpt 1 is included in the type of Not bullying and providing information. Because there are no words or sentences intended to ridicule the author, but there is information about correcting grammatical errors that have been made by the author, namely "Patience" to correct "Paytience" Bullying and providing information Excerpt 1 Excerpt 1 is included in the type of Bullying and providing information. Because there are words or sentences intended to ridicule the author, namely the word "Morons". However, there is also information regarding the correction of grammatical errors that have been made by the author, namely "there" to correct "their". 87 Face threatening with no benefits Excerpt 1 Excerpt 1 belongs to the Threats with no benefits type, because the comments written by the Grammar Nazi show that the Grammar Nazi is insulting the author by saying the author uses very bad grammar. This is indicated as an insult that can damage the author's face and there is no positive benefit for the author. Face threatening with benefits Excerpt 1 Excerpt 1 belongs to the Threats with benefits type, because the comments written by the Grammar Nazi show that the Grammar Nazi provides a piece of information which is a correction of the author’s "paytience" writing error. This is indicated as providing information that has positive benefits for the author. The results of this research are in line with as well as a bit distinct from other supporting theories from experts. One of them is, Soehendro et al. (2021) which resulted in a statement that Nazi Grammarists corrected more verb errors with a percentage of 24% of the 70 data, and the content of the corrections contained mere ridicule without any indication to teach grammatical errors by others. Meanwhile, a similar study which is still discussing grammatical errors was also conducted by Recheck (2019), with the result that people with grammatical errors will be given a bad opinion by others. The more grammatical errors you use, the worse other people will judge you. 88 So according to Recheck (2019), criticism of grammatical errors is useful for the good of the person himself, so that he does not continue to make grammatical errors and is considered bad. The same thing was also expressed by Kreitner and Kinick (2010), where a person with poor use of grammar will be considered not to have good ability and accuracy. This can be attributed to why a Grammar Nazi resorted to harsh criticism for someone who made a grammatical error. Meanwhile, according to Ghabanchi (2011), the use of correct grammar cannot be taught in a short time and in an instant. The use of correct grammar requires continuous time to learn it, and besides that it requires a strong desire from each individual to learn the use of correct grammar. This seems to support each other with Truscott's theory (1996), which states that outside all institutions and institutions, a teacher who teaches the use of correct grammar, no longer has the power to regulate someone to use grammar correctly. Thus, the decision to use correct or incorrect grammar depends on each individual. However, Inccay & Dollar (2011) state that correcting grammatical errors is a good thing, but it can have far-reaching and different impacts for everyone. This can be associated with being a Grammar Nazi, where the activity of correcting other people's grammar has positive and negative sides that are different for each person. When the activity of correcting another person's grammatical errors is mostly intended to be insulting, this will result in the emergence of a negative effect, but in vice versa, if the activity of correcting other people's grammatical errors is intended for positive purposes, it is hoped that it will produce positive things as well. CONCLUSION Grammar Nazi is the main topic used in this thesis, in addition that linguistics, more specifically pragmatics, has an important role in processing the data that has been found. The data used in this study was obtained from a well-known social media called "Twitter". The data search also has limitations from the last five years starting in 2021, but the data has been properly filtered for use, with a total number of 100 (one hundred) data. Then, the data is processed using one of the Pragmatic theories introduced by Culpeper which is called Impoliteness Strategy with its sub- strategies, namely Bald on Record, Positive Impoliteness, Negative Impoliteness, Withhold Politeness, and Sarcasm or Mock Politeness. The results of the study show that from 100 data there are 55 data with a percentage of 55% using the Bald on Record strategy. Furthermore, there is Sarcasm or Mock Politeness which is ranked second with 18 data with a percentage of 18%. The third highest ranking is Negative Impoliteness with a total of 16 data with a percentage of 16%. Next is Positive Impoliteness with 11 data points and a percentage of 11%. Meanwhile, the Withhold Politeness strategy is not found in the data, so the percentage is 0%. The result is that as many as 55 data classified using the Bald on Record strategy with the main characteristics of being direct, straightforward, and unambiguous. Then, 18 data classified as using the Sarcasm or Mock 89 Politeness strategy with the main characteristics of insinuating or using irony, where the ridicule given is different from ridicule that insults or vilifies someone. The third is 16 data which is classified as using the Negative Impoliteness theory with the main characteristic of giving ridicule by not being too serious and demeaning others. Next, there are 11 data classified as using the Positive Impoliteness strategy with the main characteristic, namely looking for disapproval and calling using another name. Meanwhile, the number of data classified as using the Withhold Politeness strategy is 0 data, for the main feature of this strategy is to prevent politeness to the other person. In addition, the types of Grammar Nazi phenomena are divided into 4 (four) categories with the results, namely: (1) bullying and not providing information, with a total of 61 data and a percentage of 61%; (2) bullying and providing information with a total of 24 data and a percentage of 24%; (3) not bullying and providing information with 14 data and a percentage of 14%; and (4) not bullying and not providing information with 1 data and a percentage of only 15%. From these results, it can be concluded that the majority of Grammar Nazi bullies others verbally through criticizing their grammatical errors. This can be related to the bad effect of the Grammar Nazi phenomenon which causes people to feel bullied so that it can reduce the desire to learn English. Each strategy on the strategy of impoliteness also certainly has its own characteristics. How to find out the use of impoliteness strategies in posts on twitter containing the Grammar Nazi phenomenon is to know in advance about the characteristics of each strategy from the impoliteness strategy. Only then can it be known that in every comment a Grammar Nazi must have the most prominent features, and these prominent features can be matched with the characteristics of one of the strategies of the strategy of impoliteness. From this we can see that the occurrence of verbal bullying is an inappropriate thing to do because it will damage the mentality of the bullying victim. The effects of bullying itself can vary for each victim. Where this can also affect the mentality of other people who also witnessed the bullying incident. This is categorized as a threat to Twitter readers in general, because it does not provide benefits to readers, in fact it causes losses. However, on the other hand, if the Grammar Nazi phenomenon is intended to provide advice to the person concerned, then this will be used as a reference for learning new things for Twitter readers in general. REFERENCES Aditiawarman, M., & Elba, R. P. (2018). The Politeness Strategies Used in The Movie The Chronicles of Narnia. Jurnal Ilmiah Langue and Parole, 2(1), 32–38. https://doi.org/10.36057/jilp.v2i1.331 Alqarni, M. (2020). Mock impoliteness in Saudi Arabia: Evil eye expressive and responsive strategies. Journal of Pragmatics, 167, 4–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.05.001 90 Amin, N. M., Abdul Rahman, N. A., Sharipudin, M.-N., & Abu Bakar, M. S. (2016). The Practice of “Grammar Naziness” on Facebook in Relation to Generating Grammar Learning: A Motivation or Demotivation in Updating Statuses in English on Facebook. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 52(December), 83–104. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1134677&site=ehost- live Andersson, M. (2021). The climate of climate change: Impoliteness as a hallmark of homophily in YouTube comment threads on Greta Thunberg’s environmental activism. Journal of Pragmatics, 178, 93–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.03.003 Aydınoğlu, N. (2013). Politeness and Impoliteness Strategies: An Analysis of Gender Differences in Geralyn l. Horton’s Plays. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 83, 473–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.093 Bielby, D. D., & Williams, C. L. (1995). Still a Man’s World: Men Who Do “Women’s Work,”. Contemporary Sociology, 24(6), 809. https://doi.org/10.2307/2076713 Bleske-Rechek, A., Paulich, K., Shafer, P., & Kofman, C. (2019). Grammar matters: The tainting effect of grammar usage errors on judgments of competence and character. Personality and Individual Differences, 141(November 2018), 47–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.12.016 Erza, S. (2018). E-Journal of English Language & Literature IMPOLITENESS USED BY HATERS ON INSTAGRAM COMMENTS OF MALE-FEMALE ENTERTAINERS. E-Journal of English Language and Literature, 7(1). http://ejournal.unp.ac.id/index.php/jell Ghabanchi, Z. (2011). The Effect of Grammatical Error Correction on the Development of Learning English Writing as a Foreign Language. World Journal of English Language, 1(2), 37–42. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v1n2p37 Hamilton, A. B., & Finley, E. P. (2020). Reprint of: Qualitative methods in implementation research: An introduction. Psychiatry Research, 283(April 2019), 112629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.112629 Haugh, M., & Bousfield, D. (2012). Mock impoliteness, jocular mockery and jocular abuse in Australian and British English. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(9), 1099–1114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.02.003 Hemamalini, S., Aram, I. A., & Rajan, P. (2011). An Analysis of Violent Content on Chutti TV in Tamil Nadu, India. Media Asia, 38(3), 146–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/01296612.2011.11726894 Horan, G. (2019). Feminazi, breastfeeding nazi, grammar nazi. A critical analysis of nazi insults in contemporary media discourses. Mediazioni, 24, 1–27. Incecay, V., & Dollar, Y. K. (2011). Foreign language learners’ beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3394–3398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.307 Jumanto, J. (2014). Phatic Communication: How English Native Speakers Create Ties of Union. American Journal of Linguistics, 3(1), 9–16. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.linguistics.20140301.02 91 Jumanto, J., Rizal, S. S., & Nugroho, R. A. (2017). Acting the Intangible: Hints of Politeness in Non-Verbal Form. English Language Teaching, 10(11), 111. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n11p111 Junaidi, M., & Hadi, M. J. (2020). Humanitatis Journal of Language and Literature The Effect of Direct-Focused and Unfocused Written Corrective Feedback toward Freshmen Foreign Language Writing. 7(1), 23–34. https://journal.universitasbumigora.ac.id/index.php/humanitatis/ Kamalu, I., & Fasasi, K. (2018). Impoliteness and Face-Threatening Acts as Conversational Strategies among Undergraduates of State Universities in Southwest Nigeria. Language Matters, 49(2), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10228195.2018.1467478 Kantara, A. (2011). Impoliteness Strategies in ‘House M.D.’ Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 6(2), 305– 339. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10016-010-0015-9 Kreiner, D. S., Schnakenberg, S. D., Green, A. G., Costello, M. J., & McClin, A. F. (2002). Effects of spelling errors on the perception of writers. Journal of General Psychology, 129(1), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221300209602029 Methias, N. W. (2011). Impoliteness or underpoliteness: An analysis of a Christmas dinner scene from Dickens’s Great Expectations. Journal of King Saud University - Languages and Translation, 23(1), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksult.2009.12.001 Mojo, J. K., Tulung, G. J., Kalangi, L. M. V., & Imbang, D. (2021). Positive politeness strategies of tonado javaness (jaton) community. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(May), 1100–1109. https://doi.org/10.37028/lingcure.v5nS1.1493 Mugford, G. (2008). How rude! Teaching impoliteness in the second-language classroom. ELT Journal, 62(4), 375–384. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm066 Mulyono, H., Amalia, D. R., & Suryoputro, G. (2019). Politeness strategies in teacher-student whatsapp communication. Pasaa, 58(December), 295–318. Parvaresh, V., & Tayebi, T. (2018). Impoliteness, aggression and the moral order. Journal of Pragmatics, 132, 91–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.05.010 Penyerapan, M., & Pemadanan, D. (2016). "Penguatan Bahasa Indonesia. 2–3. http://kbi.kemdikbud.go.id/kbi_back/file/foto_media/media_detail_1542354728.pdf Permana, L. B., Suwandi, S., & Setiawan, B. (2021). International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding Students’ Impoliteness Strategy During Online Learning in Covid-19 Pandemic. 1973, 87–94. Rababa’h, B. B., & Rabab’ah, G. (2021). The impact of culture and gender on impoliteness strategies in jordanian and american tv sitcoms. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 11(2), 151–163. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1102.06 Rahayuningsih, D., Saleh, M., & Fitriati, S. W. (2020). The realization of politeness strategies in EFL teacher-students classroom interaction. English Education Journal, 10(1), 85–93. Sari, I. P., Emmiyati, N., & Maharani, S. (2019). Impoliteness Strategies in Peter Rabbit Movie. Elite: English and Literature Journal, 6(2), 222–238. 92 Sherman, T., & Švelch, J. (2015). “Grammar Nazis never sleep”: Facebook humor and the management of standard written language. Language Policy, 14(4), 315–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-014-9344-9 Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x Truscott, J., & Hsu, A. Y. ping. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17(4), 292–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003 Yuniarti, N. (2014). Implikatur Percakapan Dalam Percakapan Humor. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa, 3(2), 225–240. https://journal.ikippgriptk.ac.id/index.php/bahasa/article/view/168