Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
2.863
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE) Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn) Cendekia IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education) JURNAL ILMU PENDIDIKAN (JIP) KARSA: Jurnal Sosial dan Budaya Keislaman (Journal of Social and Islamic Culture) IJoLE: International Journal of Language Education SOSIOHUMANIKA Educatio Voices of English Language Education Society GANEC SWARA JIIP (Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Pendidikan) Jo-ELT (Journal of English Language Teaching) Fakultas Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris IKIP JOLLT Journal of Languages and Language Teaching Jurnal Jendela Pendidikan Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Nusantara Journal of Language and Literature Studies Stilistika
Iwan Jazadi
STKIP Paracendekia N W Sumbawa
Religion Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Arts Humanities Education Engineering Health Professions Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Mathematics Social Sciences Other

Published : 26 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search
Journal : Voices of English Language Education Society

 1 
COMPARATIVE STUDY ON REFUSAL STRATEGY BETWEEN AMERICAN ENGLISH NATIVE SPEAKERS AND INDONESIAN EFL LEARNERS Sartika, Sartika; Fauziati, Endang; Marmanto, Sri; Jazadi, Iwan
VELES Voices of English Language Education Society Vol 4, No 1 (2020): VELES Voices of English Language Education Society
Publisher : Universitas Hamzanwadi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (331.51 KB)

Abstract

This article analyses refusal strategies applied by American speakers of English and Indonesian students of English as a foreign language. This study is descriptive qualitative research. Twenty participants contributed in this study. Furthermore, the data were gathered from Discourse Completion Test and interview. In order to get trustworthiness of the data, source of triangulation, member checking and external audit were applied. Then, Miles and Huberman?s flowchart was used to analyze the data. The result show that: (1) both of the groups use fourteen refusal strategies namely direct no, inability, avoidance, hedging, excuse, wish, statement of alternative, promise of future acceptance, statement of regret, acceptance that function as refusal, set condition for past acceptance, gratitude/appreciation, pause fillers and statement of positive feeling/opinion; (2) some similarities and differences of strategies were found being used by both groups. Eleven strategies were found to be similar, namely, direct no, inability, postponement, excuse, statement of alternative, statement of regret, wish, lack of enthusiasm, gratitude/appreciation, pause fillers and statement of positive feeling. Meanwhile, the different refusal strategies used by those groups were hedging, promise of future acceptance and set condition for past acceptance.
Comparative Study on Refusal Strategy between American English Native Speakers and Indonesian EFL Learners Sartika Sartika; Endang Fauziati; Sri Marmanto; Iwan Jazadi
VELES Voices of English Language Education Society Vol 4, No 1 (2020): VELES Voices of English Language Education Society
Publisher : Universitas Hamzanwadi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29408/veles journal.v4i1.2006

Abstract

This article analyses refusal strategies applied by American speakers of English and Indonesian students of English as a foreign language. This study is descriptive qualitative research. Twenty participants contributed in this study. Furthermore, the data were gathered from Discourse Completion Test and interview. In order to get trustworthiness of the data, source of triangulation, member checking and external audit were applied. Then, Miles and Huberman’s flowchart was used to analyze the data. The result show that: (1) both of the groups use fourteen refusal strategies namely direct no, inability, avoidance, hedging, excuse, wish, statement of alternative, promise of future acceptance, statement of regret, acceptance that function as refusal, set condition for past acceptance, gratitude/appreciation, pause fillers and statement of positive feeling/opinion; (2) some similarities and differences of strategies were found being used by both groups. Eleven strategies were found to be similar, namely, direct no, inability, postponement, excuse, statement of alternative, statement of regret, wish, lack of enthusiasm, gratitude/appreciation, pause fillers and statement of positive feeling. Meanwhile, the different refusal strategies used by those groups were hedging, promise of future acceptance and set condition for past acceptance.
Co-Authors ., Jalaluddin Andi Haris, Andi Ardiyansyah Aris Dwi Intan Aprianti Arisanti, Ivon Asmi, Nurul Dirgahayu Pratiwi Dita Rezkia Utami ELLI MARLIANA Endang Fauziati Fadjar Indra Kurniawan Haerani, Aditiya Jalaluddin . jalaluddin Jalaluddin JAZADI, FAIZ UNISA Ladita, Safira Marmanto, Sri Mukti, Mukti Sartika, Sartika SATRIYAS ILYAS Solihin Solihin Solihin Solihin Sri Marmanto SUWARNI SUWARNI Syaifuddin Iskandar, Syaifuddin Tarihoran, Irfan Hamonangan Widari, IGA Zuhri, Lahmuddin