Garuda - Garba Rujukan Digital

Conflict Analysis in Denis Villeneuve’s film Prisoners Syamsul Bahri; Putri Naira; Fitra Aulia Simatupang; Farid Rizaldi
BLAZE : Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra dalam Pendidikan Linguistik dan Pengembangan Vol. 3 No. 2 (2025): BLAZE : Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra dalam Pendidikan Linguistik dan Pengembangan
Publisher : STIKes Ibnu Sina Ajibarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59841/blaze.v3i2.2794

The film Prisoners (2013), directed by Denis Villeneuve, presents a complex portrayal of emotional intensity, moral ambiguity, and psychological struggle in the aftermath of a child kidnapping. Conflict becomes the central element that shapes the characters, drives the storyline, and raises important questions about justice, resilience, and ethical boundaries. This study aims to explore the internal and external conflicts found in Prisoners, and how these tensions reflect challenges often encountered in real life. Using a descriptive qualitative method and based on William Kenney’s theory of conflict, the research closely analyzes key scenes and character interactions to identify patterns of tension and confrontation. The results show that Prisoners features 15 conflict events: internal conflict (26.67%), man vs. man (33.33%),man vs. society (26.67%), and man vs. nature (13.33%), with with man vs. man emerging as the most dominant, emphasizing the focus on intense personal struggles and confrontations between characters. The findings suggest that Prisoners (2013) uses conflict not just as a narrative device, but also as a way to invite the audience to reflect on moral choices, human limits, and the emotional cost of seeking justice in moments of crisis.

Sarcasm in William Shakespeare’s Drama Much Ado About Nothing Syamsul Bahri; Putri Naira; Farid Rizaldi; Yolanda Marchella; Fitra Aulia Simatupang
International Journal of Multilingual Education and Applied Linguistics Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): International Journal of Multilingual Education and Applied Linguistics
Publisher : Asosiasi Periset Bahasa Sastra Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61132/ijmeal.v3i1.424

Sarcasm is a literary device and one of the most expressive forms of figurative language, often used to convey humor, criticism, or emotional tension in both daily conversation and literature. This study explores the use of sarcasm in William Shakespeare‟s Much Ado About Nothing by applying Elizabeth Camp‟s (2011) typology, which classifies sarcasm into four types: propositional, lexical, illocutionary, and like-prefixed sarcasm. Using a qualitative descriptive method, the researchers collected all sarcastic utterances from the play, classified them according to Camp‟s framework, and analyzed their pragmatic functions in the dramatic context. The findings reveal a total of 50 sarcastic utterances, with propositional sarcasm being the most frequent (42%), followed by illocutionary sarcasm (28%), lexical sarcasm (24%), and like-prefixed sarcasm (6%). These results indicate that sarcasm serves as both a comedic and dramatic device, shaping character interactions, driving conflicts, and reinforcing Elizabethan cultural norms. Beatrice and Benedick‟s witty verbal duels exemplify how sarcasm fosters humor and intimacy, while Claudio‟s sarcasm highlights themes of honor and social tension. Overall, the study demonstrates that sarcasm in Shakespeare‟s play is not merely humorous banter but a sophisticated rhetorical strategy that enhances characterization, thematic depth, and audience engagement.

Sarcasm in William Shakespeare’s Drama Much Ado About Nothing Syamsul Bahri; Putri Naira; Farid Rizaldi; Yolanda Marchella; Fitra Aulia Simatupang
Sintaksis : Publikasi Para ahli Bahasa dan Sastra Inggris Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): Sintaksis : Publikasi Para ahli Bahasa dan Sastra Inggris
Publisher : Asosiasi Periset Bahasa Sastra Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61132/sintaksis.v4i1.2410

Sarcasm is a literary device and one of the most expressive forms of figurative language, often used to convey humor, criticism, or emotional tension in both daily conversation and literature. This study explores the use of sarcasm in William Shakespeare‟s Much Ado About Nothing by applying Elizabeth Camp‟s (2011) typology, which classifies sarcasm into four types: propositional, lexical, illocutionary, and like-prefixed sarcasm. Using a qualitative descriptive method, the researchers collected all sarcastic utterances from the play, classified them according to Camp‟s framework, and analyzed their pragmatic functions in the dramatic context. The findings reveal a total of 50 sarcastic utterances, with propositional sarcasm being the most frequent (42%), followed by illocutionary sarcasm (28%), lexical sarcasm (24%), and like-prefixed sarcasm (6%). These results indicate that sarcasm serves as both a comedic and dramatic device, shaping character interactions, driving conflicts, and reinforcing Elizabethan cultural norms. Beatrice and Benedick‟s witty verbal duels exemplify how sarcasm fosters humor and intimacy, while Claudio‟s sarcasm highlights themes of honor and social tension. Overall, the study demonstrates that sarcasm in Shakespeare‟s play is not merely humorous banter but a sophisticated rhetorical strategy that enhances characterization, thematic depth, and audience engagement.

AI Tools for Academic Integrity: A Student Response to Chat GPT and Jenni AI in Citation Accuracy Fitra Aulia Simatupang; Indi Azizah Nailah; Rita Hartati
Sintaksis : Publikasi Para ahli Bahasa dan Sastra Inggris Vol. 4 No. 2 (2026): Sintaksis : Publikasi Para ahli Bahasa dan Sastra Inggris
Publisher : Asosiasi Periset Bahasa Sastra Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61132/sintaksis.v4i2.2607

This study investigates the role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, specifically ChatGPT and Jenni AI, in supporting academic integrity through accurate citation generation. Employing a descriptive qualitative method, the research involved 30 undergraduate students who evaluated AI-generated citations using Fishman’s (2014) Academic Integrity Theory and Smith’s (2020) Citation Accuracy Framework. Data were collected through questionnaires assessing students’ perceptions of reliability, ethical responsibility, and accuracy in AI-assisted citation practices. Quantitative analysis revealed that Honesty and Accountability were the most dominant values (22.58% each), followed by Fairness and Respect (19.35% each), Trust (12.90%), and Courage (3.23%). Qualitative findings showed that students recognized AI’s potential to enhance writing efficiency but emphasized the need for human verification to ensure factual correctness and ethical compliance. Comparatively, Jenni AI demonstrated greater consistency and citation verification than ChatGPT, which exhibited more frequent fabrication and inaccuracy. The study concludes that while AI tools can enhance academic productivity, maintaining academic integrity still requires critical human oversight, ethical awareness, and adherence to scholarly honesty and accountability.

Critical Discourse Analysis of International Media Framing of the Iran–United States Conflict Nabila Shaini Putri; Farid Rizaldi; Fitra Aulia Simatupang; Indi Azizah Nailah; Muhammad Natsir
International Journal of Education and Literature Vol. 5 No. 1 (2026): International Journal of Education and Literature
Publisher : Lembaga Pengembangan Kinerja Dosen

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55606/ijel.v5i1.362

A single paragraph, maximum 250 words. Abstract content must contain (1) an overview of the object of research, (2) problems, and research objectives, (3) proposed methods, (4) main findings and results and synthesis of main ideas, and (5) conclusions. In recent years, the Iran–United States conflict has not only unfolded within the geopolitical arena but has also been intensively constructed through international media framing that shapes how global audiences understand this reality. In the context of the digital information overflow, media no longer function merely as conveyors of facts; rather, they act as agents that construct meaning, evoke emotions, and shape the social perceptions of audiences. This study aims to analyze how international media framing constructs representations of the Iran–United States conflict and how audiences interpret such discourse within their social experiences. This research adopts a qualitative approach with a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) design. Data were collected through document analysis of 25 news articles from both Western and non-Western media, as well as exploratory interviews with nine participants from academic backgrounds. Data analysis was conducted using a thematic approach based on Norman Fairclough’s three-dimensional model. The findings reveal three main patterns: the construction of threat through media language, moral polarization that produces a dichotomy of “us versus them,” and the negotiation of meaning by audiences, which is reflective and not always linear. These findings indicate that audiences are not entirely passive; rather, they actively interpret and, at times, question media framing. Theoretically, this study extends Critical Discourse Analysis by incorporating the dimension of audience experience into the discursive process. Practically, it underscores the importance of critical media literacy in navigating the complexity of global information and opens avenues for further exploration of the relationship between discourse, power, and social experience.

Title

Found 5 Documents
Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title Search

Found 5 Documents Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title

Found 5 Documents
Search