An  ANALYSIS OF DISFLUENCIES FOR DESCRIBING PHENOMENA IN SPONTANEOUS SPEECH AS A DESCRIBING OF SIMPLE RESEARCH FOR QUALITATIVE METHOD

Feri Ferri Susanto

doi:10.55210/attalim.v8i1.726

Feri Ferri Susanto IAIN Bengkulu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.55210/attalim.v8i1.726

Keywords: Disfluencies, Spontaneous Speech

Abstract

This research is motivated by a phenomenon that is often found when students speak English. This phenomenon can be found in spontaneous speech, the researcher wants to know and describe the non-fluency in spontaneous speech used by fourth semester English students at UIN FAS Bengkulu. The form of research is a qualitative descriptive. It has the spontaneous speech object of the fourth semester English students of UIN FAS Bengkulu. Researchers collected data in several steps; first, he gave the topic to the students, the second the students were instructed to speak the given topic, the next time was 5 minutes, the last was recording the students speaking. After that, the researcher analyzed it in several steps; First, he transcribed the students' speech, classified the types of non-fluency, coded the non-fluency, analyzed all the data, interpreted and concluded. The results of this study indicate that there are still many students who make mistakes in speaking spontaneously. Students make more mistakes in repairing, especially in repetition. Paying attention to vocabulary changes in speech is very important to tell them how to speak well. The researcher concludes that in spontaneous speech that the four types of non-fluency (unfilled pause, filled pause, ritual speech unit, and correction) proposed by the fourth semester English students of UIN FAS Bengkulu by sentences in spontaneous speech. 1. There are 28 non-fluency in the unfilled pause, 2. There are 46 non-fluency in the filled pause, 3. There are 2 non-fluency in the ritual speech unit, 4. There are 57 non-fluency in the improvement. The researcher suggested that the students improve their speaking skills to make the right form of their speaking

References

Altmann, G. T. M. and Y. Kamide. 1999. Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting thedomain of subsequent reference. Cognition 73.247-264.

Almor, A. 1999. Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis.Psychological Review, 106.748-765.

Arnold, J. E., M. Fagnano, and M. K. Tanenhaus. 2003. Disfluencies signal theee, um, newinformation. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 32.25-36.

Arnold, J.E., Tanenhaus, M.K., Altmann, R.J., & Fagnano, M. (2004). The old and thee,uh, new: Disfluency and reference resolution. Psychological Science, 15,578-582.

Bailey, K. G. D. & Ferreira, F. (2003). Disfluencies affect the parsing of garden-pathsentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 183-200.

Brennan. S.E. & Schober, M. F. (2001). How listeners compensate for disfluencies inspontaneous speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 274-296.

Brown, Yule. 1983. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge University Press.

Boulakia, G., Deulofeu. J. et Martin, Ph. (2001) « Quand la prosodie bien-forme desénoncés mal formés », Colloque Journées Prosodie 2001, Grenoble, 10-11 octobre 2001.

Barr, D. J. 2001. Trouble in mind: Paralinguistic indices of effort and uncertainty incommunication. Oralité et gestualité, communication multimodale, intéraction, ed. by S.Santi, I. Guaïtella, C. Cave, and G. Konopczynski, 597-600. Paris : L’Harmattan.

Beattie, G. W. 1979. Planning units in spontaneous speech: Some evidence from hesitation inspeech and speaker gaze direction in conversation. Linguistics 17.61-78.

Brennan, Susan E. and Michael F. Schober. 2001. How listeners compensate fordisfluencies in spontaneous speech. Journal of Memory and Language 44: 274-296.

Broen, Patricia A. and Gerald M. Siegel. 1972. Variations in normal speechdisfluencies. Language and Speech 15: 219-231.

B. S., & Gong, P. (2015). Review of business intelligence through data analysis. Benchmarking

Butler-Wall, Brita-Anne. 1986. The frequency and function of disfluencies in nativeand non-native conversational discourse. Doctoral Dissertation, University ofCalifornia, Los Angeles, CA.

Carroll, B. John. 1972. Linguistic: Language and Psychology. The Macmillan. USA

Creswell, John W. 2012. Research Design Pendekatan Kualitatif,
Kuantitatif, dan Mixed. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Clark, H. H. 1996. Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press

Clark, H.H., Tree, F.J.E., (2002). Using uh and um in Spontaneous Speaking: Cognition. 84, 73-111.
Clark, Herbert H. and Thomas Wasow. 1998. Repeating words in spontaneous speech. Cognitive Psychology 37: 201-242.
Carbonell, J.G. and Hayes, P.J. Recovery Strategies for Parsing Extragrammatical Language. Tech. Rept.
CMU-CS-84-107, Carnegie-Mellon University Computer Science Technical Report, 1984.
Cooper, Barry. 2010Challenging the qualitative-quantitative divide: explorations in case-focused causal analysis. A&C Black. ISBN 978-1-4411-0063-4. OCLC 793207861
Davidson, Donald 1997. "Truth and meaning". In Peter Ludlow (ed.). Readings in the Philosophy of Language. MIT Press. pp. 89–107. ISBN 978-0-262-62114-4.
Deese, J. (1980). Pauses, prosody, and the demands of production in language. In H. W. Dechert and M. Raupach (Eds.), Temporal Variables in Speech: Studies in Honour of Frieda Goldman-Eisler. The Hague: Mouton
Grant, A 2017. 3 strategies for superb spontaneous speaking. The bussiness Journal Mar 7, 2017, EST
Hartsuiker, R. J., M. Corley, and H. Martensen. 2005. The lexical bias effect is modulated bycontext, but the standard monitoring account doesn't fly: Related beply to Baars, Motley,

Howell, Peter, and Stevie Sackin. 2001. Function word repetitions emerge whenspeakers are operantly conditioned to reduce frequency of silent pauses. Journal ofPsycholinguistic Research 30: 457-474.

Hayes, P.J. and Carbonell, J.G. Multi-Strategy Parsing and Its Role in Robust Man-Machine Communication.
Tech. Rept. CMU-CS-81-118, Carnegie-Mellon University Computer Science Technical Report, 1981.

Jeremy Cassell and Tom Bird. 2018. co-authors of The Leader’s Guide to Presenting (Pearson, UK Business Book of the year.

Kang Shumin In jack Richards C. and Willy A. Renandya, Methodology In Language Teaching,(USA: Cambrige University Press. 2002)
Leonard William Doob, Pursuing Perfection: People, Groups, and Society (1999), p. 149.
Levelt, Willem J. M. 1989. Speaking. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Niglas, Katrin. 2010, "The Multidimensional Model of Research Methodology: An Integrated Set of Continua", SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research, SAGE Publications, Inc., pp. 215–236
Pilot, D. F., & Hungler, B. P. (1999). Nursing research: principles and methods. Phildelphia: JB Lippincott Company

Price, James H. and Judy Murnan. “Research Limitations and the Necessity of Reporting Them.” American Journal of Health Education 35 (2004): 66-67.
Peri Roberts, Introduction to Political Thought (2012), p. 290.
Pappamihiel, N. Eleni (1 January 2002). "English as a Second Language Students and English Language Anxiety: Issues in the Mainstream Classroom". Research in the Teaching of English. 36 (3): 327–355. JSTOR 4017153
P. A. Heeman. 1997. Speech Repairs, Intonational Boundaries and discourse Markers: Modeling Speakers’ Utterances in Spoken Dialog. PhD thesis. Rochester University,

Robert Barrass, Speaking for Yourself “A guide for students” ( NewYork : Roudledge 2006) p.2

Roger D. Hawkins; Richard Towell (2010). French Grammar and Usage. Routledge. p. x. ISBN 9780340991244

Riggenbach, H., &Lazaraton, A. (1991). Promoting oral skills. Teaching English as a second or foreign language, 125-136.e-Journal.http://tesol.aua.am/tq_digital/TQ_DIGIT/Vol_21_2.pdf#page=64.Accessed on November 17th 2013.

Schiffrin, Deborah. 1992. Discourse Markers. Great Britain: Cambridge University Press.

Syaifuddin.2009. Hesitations Found in the Students Speeches. Thesis,English Letters and Language Department. Faculty of Humanities and Culture. The State Islamic Universityof Malang

Sugiyono. 2019. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, kulaitatif dan R& D. Alfabeta. Bandung

Trask, Robert 1999. Key Concepts in Language and Linguistics. Psychology Press. pp. 27–28. ISBN 978-0-415-15742-1

Trudgill, Peter (2000). Sociolinguistics: An Introduction to Language and Society. Penguin UK. p. 17. ISBN 9780141926308.

Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Moral Skepticism (2007), p. 108.

Ziafati Bafarasat, A. 2021. Collecting and validating data: A simple guide for researchers. Advance. Preprint. https://doi.org/10.31124/advance.13637864.