TINDAK TUTUR PERLOKUSI: STIMULUS RESPONS KOMENTAR NETIZEN DALAM TIKTOK
(1) * Luthfi Khairul Anam Mail (Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia)
(2) Rofi’h Fajar Wulandari Mail (Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia)
(3) Rahma Asfiyatul Janah Mail (Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia)
*corresponding author

Abstract


This study aims to identify the forms of perlocutionary speech acts in netizens' comments on TikTok, analyze the relationship between digital content stimuli and perlocutionary effects produced based on Leonard Bloomfield's S-r...s-R scheme, and compare positive and negative response patterns arising from identical stimuli. The study employs a descriptive qualitative approach using the observation method with screenshot technique for data collection and the pragmatic equivalence method as the analytical framework. Data consist of 15 comments selected from five TikTok videos on varied themes, with each video represented by three comments containing both positive and negative responses. Findings show that netizens' comments carry varying perlocutionary effects depending on the emotional content of the stimulus: humanitarian content produces coordinative-empathic perlocution, criminal content yields defensive-aggressive perlocution, disinformation content triggers competitive panic perlocution, environmental content produces educative-corrective perlocution, and digital harassment content elicits protective-reflective perlocution. These findings extend the relevance of Bloomfield's behaviorism to contemporary digital linguistics and underscore the importance of language literacy amid the rapid flow of social media information.


Keywords


Keywors: perlocutionary speech act, stimulus-response, netizens' comments, TikTok, linguistic behaviorism.

   

DOI

https://doi.org/10.31604/linguistik.v11i3.%25p 		      

Article metrics

10.31604/linguistik.v11i3.%p Abstract views : 0

   

Cite

How to cite item
   

References


Androutsopoulos, J. (2014). Computer-mediated communication and linguistic landscapes. Dalam J. Androutsopoulos (Ed.), The handbook of language and digital communication (hlm. 1–23). Wiley-Blackwell.

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford University Press.

Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Boeker, M., & Urman, A. (2022). An empirical investigation of personalization factors on TikTok. In Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022 (pp. 2298–2309). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3485447.3512102

Bou-Franch, P., Lorenzo-Dus, N., & Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2012). Social interaction in YouTube text-based polylogues: A study of coherence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(4), 501–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01579.x

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.

Chomsky, N. (1959). A review of B. F. Skinner's verbal behavior. Language, 35(1), 26–58.

Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Herring, S. C. (2007). A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse. Language@Internet, 4(1), 1–37.

Khan, S., Khan, M. R., & Ghauri, M. J. (2023). Hate speech through social media: A systematic review. Global Digital & Print Media Review, VI(II), 175–182. https://doi.org/10.31703/gdpmr.2023(VI-II).11

Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. Longman.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.

Mahsun. (2017). Metode penelitian bahasa: Tahapan, strategi, metode, dan tekniknya (3rd ed.). Rajawali Pers.

Moleong, L. J. (2018). Metodologi penelitian kualitatif (38th ed.). Remaja Rosdakarya.

Saifani, Y., Al-Pansori, M. J., & Nurmayani, E. (2025). Ragam bahasa dalam percakapan dan comment section media sosial di platform TikTok. Indonesian Journal of Education, 2(2), 106–112. https://doi.org/10.71417/ije.v2i2.914

Santos, V. V. V. dos. (2020). Computational affordances, context collapses and other challenges to linguistic studies. Trabalhos em Linguística Aplicada, 59(1), 583–600. https://doi.org/10.1590/01031813686251620200410

Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press.

Siahaan, T. P. C., & Susanto, N. (2023). Digital advocacy for punitive justice and vigilantism: Analyzing citizen dissatisfaction with the Klitih prevention policy. Policy and Governance Review, 7(1), 21–21. https://doi.org/10.30589/pgr.v7i1.628

Suganda, D., Yuliawati, S., & Darmayanti, N. (2022). Expression of emotion as impoliteness markers in Instagram comments section in Indonesia: A pragmatic study. RENTAS: Jurnal Bahasa, Sastera dan Budaya, 1(1), 117–134. https://doi.org/10.32890/rentas2022.1.4

Sugiyono. (2019). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D (2nd ed.). Alfabeta.

Thurlow, C., Lengel, L., & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer mediated communication: Social interaction and the internet. SAGE Publications.

van Krieken, K., Hoeken, H., & Sanders, J. (2015). From reader to mediated witness: The engaging effects of journalistic crime narratives. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92(3), 580–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015586546

Wang, P. (2022). Recommendation algorithm in TikTok: Strengths, dilemmas, and possible directions. International Journal of Social Science Studies, 10(5), 60–66. https://doi.org/10.11114/ijsss.v10i5.5664

Wijana, I. D. P., & Rohmadi, M. (2011). Analisis wacana pragmatik: Kajian teori dan analisis. Yuma Pustaka.

Yus, F. (2011). Cyberpragmatics: Internet-mediated communication in context. John Benjamins Publishing.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Linguistik: Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra

issn online : 2548-9402 | issn cetak : 2541-3775
Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Universitas Muhammadiyah Tapanuli Selatan
Jl.Stn Mhd Arief No 32 Padangsidimpuan, Sumatera Utara
Email: jurnal.linguistik@um-tapsel.ac.id