Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Jurnal

A Comparison Between Trump’s and Clinton’s Commissive Speech Act in America’s Presidential Campaign Speech

English Education Journal · Vol. 8 No. 2 (2018) · hlm. 221–228

DOI
10.15294/eej.v8i3.21391
ISSN
2087-0108, 2502-4566
Terbit
2018-03-22
Penerbit
Universitas Negeri Semarang
Bahasa
eng

Abstrak

This study aims to compare Trump’s and Clinton’s commissive speech act which include its types and functions. Descriptive qualitative method is applied in this study. The data were analyzed by using commissive speech act instrument adapted from Searle and Vandervecken. The result shows that there are six types of commissive speech act used by Trump. They are promising, threatening, pledging, offering, refusing, and assuring, the functions of which are to give solution, to insult, to show care, to threaten, to encourage, and to convince. Meanwhile Clinton only used two types of commissives; promise and assure. These types have the functions to give solution, to show care, and to convince. Regarding their similarities, it is found that both of them used two similar commissives; promising and assuring. In addition, promising becomes the most dominant type found. They also use these speech acts to give solution, show care, and convince the audience. Meanwhile as for the differences, it is found that Trump used more types of commissive speech act rather than Clinton did. They are threatening, pledging, offering, and refusing. Trump also used more functions of his commissive speech act that are as threatening, insulting, and encouraging.

Jaringan kolaborasi para penulis

40 penulis · 141 tautan kepenulisan bersama · 1 lintas organisasi · menampilkan 40 yang paling banyak terhubung

Arahkan kursor atau ketuk sebuah nama untuk menyorot rekan penulisnya. Klik dua kali untuk membuka halaman penulis.

  • Lampung University
  • Politeknik Negeri Malang
  • University of Brawijaya
  • Afiliasi tidak diketahui
  • Organisasi berbeda
  • Organisasi sama
  • Afiliasi tidak diketahui
  • Garis lebih tebal = lebih banyak artikel bersama · lingkaran lebih besar = lebih banyak artikel
Tampilkan sebagai tabel
Rekan penulisOrganisasiArtikel bersama
Januarius MujiyantoAfiliasi tidak diketahui16
Dwi RukminiAfiliasi tidak diketahui10
Mursid SalehAfiliasi tidak diketahui6
Sri Wuli FitriatiAfiliasi tidak diketahui5
Abdurrahman FaridiAfiliasi tidak diketahui5
Issy YuliasriAfiliasi tidak diketahui5
Rudi HartonoAfiliasi tidak diketahui4
Dwi Anggani Linggar BharatiAfiliasi tidak diketahui4
Dwi Anggani Linggar BharatiAfiliasi tidak diketahui3
Widhiyanto WidhiyantoAfiliasi tidak diketahui3
Abdurrachman FaridiAfiliasi tidak diketahui3
Sri Wuli FitriatiAfiliasi tidak diketahui2
Mudyawati KamaruddinAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Rasheed AhmadAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Rizki Agung WibowoAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Khoirin NisaAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Hilda VeneliaAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Dian KurniasariLampung University1
Zaenal MukhlisinAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Wamiliana WamilianaAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Wahyu Nur HidayatPoliteknik Negeri Malang1
Rahmana Ilmi HakimUniversity of Brawijaya1
Ellvina Pramitadewi PramitadewiAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Fauziyatur RohmahAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Aldhy Sigma Lintang PamungkasAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Heri CahyonoAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Moh. AsroriAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Dzulkifli AbdullahAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Moh. Ilhami HakimAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Dwi AngganiAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
M. Syaeful Rizki UAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Amalia RahmawatiAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Daniela Elivas HastunarAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Ahmad SofwanAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Bambang Ruby SugiartoAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Hendro KuncoroAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Arina YuliartiAfiliasi tidak diketahui1

Afiliasi berasal dari OpenAlex; metadata OAI-PMH jurnal tidak memuatnya. Penulis tanpa ID OpenAlex dicocokkan berdasarkan nama, sehingga dua orang bisa tergabung atau satu orang bisa terpisah.

Sumber metadata: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eej/oai, pertama di-harvest 5 Nov 2026, terakhir terlihat 5 Nov 2026.
Metadata asli (oai_dc)
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en-US">A Comparison Between Trump’s and Clinton’s Commissive Speech Act in America’s Presidential Campaign Speech</dc:title>
	<dc:creator>Ulum, Miftakhul</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator>Sutopo, Djoko</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator>Warsono, Warsono</dc:creator>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en-US">This study aims to compare Trump’s and Clinton’s commissive speech act which include its types and functions. Descriptive qualitative method is applied in this study. The data were analyzed by using commissive speech act instrument adapted from Searle and Vandervecken. The result shows that there are six types of commissive speech act used by Trump. They are promising, threatening, pledging, offering, refusing, and assuring, the functions of which are to give solution, to insult, to show care, to threaten, to encourage, and to convince. Meanwhile Clinton only used two types of commissives; promise and assure. These types have the functions to give solution, to show care, and to convince. Regarding their similarities, it is found that both of them used two similar commissives; promising and assuring. In addition, promising becomes the most dominant type found. They also use these speech acts to give solution, show care, and convince the audience. Meanwhile as for the differences, it is found that Trump used more types of commissive speech act rather than Clinton did. They are threatening, pledging, offering, and refusing. Trump also used more functions of his commissive speech act that are as threatening, insulting, and encouraging.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en-US">Universitas Negeri Semarang</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2018-03-22</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:type xml:lang="en-US">Peer-reviewed Article</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/eej/article/view/21391</dc:identifier>
	<dc:identifier>10.15294/eej.v8i3.21391</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en-US">English Education Journal; Vol 8 No 2 (2018): June 2018; 221-228</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2087-0108</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2502-4566</dc:source>
	<dc:source>10.15294/eej.v8i3</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/eej/article/view/21391/10648</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en-US">Copyright (c) 2018 English Education Journal</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>