<![CDATA[Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian deskriptif kualitatif yang bertujuan untuk menganalisis dan menjelaskan penggunaan kohesi leksikal dan gramatikal dalam percakapan berbahasa Jawa di jejaring sosial facebook. Subjek penelitian ini ialah seluruh percakapan berbahasa Jawa di dinding facebook peneliti, sedangkan objek penelitian yaitu kohesi leksikal dan gramatikalnya. Untuk menganalisis hal tersebut digunakan teori Halliday dan Hassan (1992). Dalam pengumpulan data digunakan teknik simak dan catat. Selanjutnya, data dianalisis dengan menggunakan metode distribusional dan teknik bagi unsur langsung. Hasilnya dapat disimpulkan bahwa keutuhan wacana ditandai oleh unsur-unsur kohesi gramatikal dan leksikal. Kohesi gramatikal meliputi (1) pengacuan 53,7%, (2) penyulihan 4,8%, (3) pelepasan 12,2%, dan (4) perangkaian 29,3 %. Sedangkan kohesi leksikal meliputi (1) repetisi 42,1%, (2) sinonim 70,5 %, (3) antonim 10,5 %, (4) kolokasi 31,6 %, dan (5) ekuivalensi 5,3%. This study is a descriptive qualitative one which aims at analyzing and describing the use of lexical and grammatical cohesions in Javanese conversation on facebook social network. The subject of the research is all Javanese conversation displayed on the researcher's facebook wall, while the objects of the research are lexical and grammatical cohesions of Javanese conversation discourse on facebook social network. To analysis use Halliday and Hassan theory (1,992). The data collection technique used in this research are listening and writing techniques. The data is then analyzed by using distribution method and direct element division technique. Based on the analysis of Javanese conversation discourse on facebook social network, it can be concluded that there are elements of grammatical and lexical cohesions in the Javanese conversion discourse on facebook social network. The grammatical cohesion includes (1) reference 53.7%, (2) substitution 4.8%, G) ellipsis 12.2%, and (4) conjunction 29.3%, whereas the lexical cohesion includes (1) repetition 42.1%, (2) synonym 10.5%, (3) antonym 10.5%, (4) collocation 31.6%, and (5) equivalence 5.3%.]]>
Copyrights © 2012
